I would say that the netbooks fit into normal PCs rather than in a segment with ipod touch.
Sure my ipod touch is a fantastic thing and I would not want to give it up for anything, but it can in no way shape or form even come close to the useability of the netbooks.
The touch falls into a completely different segment.
I agree - netbooks don't hurt Apple's profit at all.
Apple hurts Apples sales when they don't listen to the public and fail to put out a small formed laptop by April 2009, stubborn on glossy screens, no blu-ray. strip out firewire, and don't reduce their pricing-read MacMini.
I've always heard the iPod Touch and iPhone counted as part of OS percentages so I really don't understand the gripe.
Also, while netbooks may be considered a PC remember the iPhone itself was touted as the best iPod ever made- remember? Part of the confusion stems from Apple itself.
Some people may include them in installed base calculations but I have never seen them reported as PC sales. You hit my point: iPod Touches are not counted as PC's and neither should these ultra cheap and just as limited netbooks. They are both hamstrung but in different ways and neither device is a fully functional personal computer aka PC.
Apple hurts Apples sales when they don't listen to the public and fail to put out a small formed laptop by April 2009, stubborn on glossy screens, no blu-ray. strip out firewire, and don't reduce their pricing-read MacMini.
Here we go again with Teckstudian logic.
When sales are down, you'll whine that it's because Apple is ignoring the customer and screwing everyone with high prices.
Yet when revenue is up, customer satisfaction is high, and they are doing better then their competitors like HP & Dell, you'll whine that Apple could be doing even better if they stopped screwing the customer and stop ripping everyone off.
What's the matter Teckstud? That medicated Kool-aid you've been drinking wear off?
Apple hasn't even announced their quarter results yet and you're already shooting from the hip based on an analysts conclusion? Oops.. sorry.. I keep forgetting that you're known for doing that.
Sorry, I just disagree. I've used both PCs and Macs in abundance, and Apple's hardware and OS is just better, in my opinion. Most PC's do ship with more RAM, but they need it because windows memory utilization is so bad.
But even so, let's compare. HP touchPro, with a 22 inch display, 4GB Ram, 880MHZ bus, 500GB HD, and 2.0ghz duo intros at $1299. iMac with 4GB ram, 1066MHZ bus, 640GB HD, and 2.66GHZ duo is $1499. You get a larger display, faster bus, bigger hard drive, and faster CPU for $200. In fact, the iMac most comparable is the 20 inch model, which still has a faster CPU and a faster bus, but is $100 less.
And, these are just hardware comparisons - they say nothing about performance, which is just much better on the mac.
WHy is it always HP comparisons on here?
J&R NYC has a Sony Vaio 15.4" Notebook PC for $650 with these specs:
Intel Core 2 Duo T5800 2.00 GHz Processor
2MB L2 Cache, 800MHz Bus speed
3072 MB DDR2 (PC2-6400) RAM Max: 4GB
250 GB (5400RPM) SATA Hard Drive
15.4" WXGA (1280 x 800) LCD XBRITE-ECO Display
Built-in 1.3 Megapixel Webcamera and Microphone
Mobile Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 4500MHD with up to 1340MB shared Video Memory
DVD±R/RW Drive with Double Layer
Intel WiFi Link 5100AGN 802.11a/b/g/n
10/100/1000 Base-T Ethernet LAN
Built-in Memory Stick® Standard/Duo with MagicGate™ Card Reader
Built-in Secure Digital (SD) memory card slot
ExpressCard 34 Slot
4 x USB 2.0, Headphone out; Microphone-in, VGA, IEEE 1394, RJ-11 (Modem), RJ-45
We know the OS sucks but where is an Apple comparable product? Where?
What's the matter Teckstud? That medicated Kool-aid you've been drinking wear off?
Apple hasn't even announced their quarter results yet and you're already shooting from the hip based on an analysts conclusion? Oops.. sorry.. I keep forgetting that you're known for doing that.
Who is the analyst stating sales figures? These are actual sales figures comparisons- can you actually read?
Pull out your Kool-aid drip and face the fact that it's stated in AI's thread title, not mine.
I know what you are saying, and plus Sony as a company is doing so well. They are making tons of money and growing every quarter. Why can't Apple follow their example
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
J&R NYC has a Sony Vaio 15.4" Notebook PC for $650 with these specs:
We know the OS sucks but where is an Apple comparable product? Where?
Some people may include them in installed base calculations but I have never seen them reported as PC sales. You hit my point: iPod Touches are not counted as PC's and neither should these ultra cheap and just as limited netbooks. They are both hamstrung but in different ways and neither device is a fully functional personal computer aka PC.
So then you agree that iPhones and iPod Touches should likewise not be included in percentage of OS comparisons?
What's interesting is that everyone's sales are down, the other computer makers are in much worse shape than Apple. Apple is actually doing alright, they just aren't growing as quickly year over year, but they are not loosing as badly as many others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal
When sales are down, you'll whine that it's because Apple is ignoring the customer and screwing everyone with high prices.
So then you agree that iPhones and iPod Touches should likewise not be included in percentage of OS comparisons?
I think you are intentionally misconstruing my words. We are talking market share which by definition is the amount sold, hence market - an area or arena in which commercial dealings are conducted . This metric measures the quantity sold not installed.
The originators of this report have decided what is included and the iPod touch is not included in this report but the netbooks are. This is the only point I am arguing which is that netbooks should not be in this metric.
The PC market share category should be for personal computers and should not include any device that is not a PC. To include netbooks is highly disingenuous. It does not tell the story of cannibalization. Is it really good news that a company is selling more widgets, but the new widgets only generate 50% of the gross income of the widget they replaced. Hey it is great news. We've added 25% more support requirements, warranty obligations but we've made a lot less money. It just seems suspect to add netbooks as it hides something important.
As to the straw man you keep building, I merely acknowledged that some people include the iPod Touch in the installed OS numbers. When AI has an article discussing the os installed base I will be happy to argue that point with you.
I hope Apple doesn't get into the Netbook business and here is why:
When the Macbook Air came out all people did was complain about what it couldn't do and what components it did not have. If Apple does a netbook everyone will complain that it can't do everything a Macbook Pro can do in a ten inch form factor.
As far as market share is concerned, if you are with Apple as an investor, you are concerned. If you are with Apple for the experience, you want OS X to have a small share so it will be left alone by the hackers and pirates. Either way, Apple is still worth millions and are not going anywhere.
This game is all about profits and margins, and delivering a Premium experience to the Premium end of the market, which is small to begin with. Yet Apple owns about 70% of it.
Apple hurts Apples sales when they don't listen to the public and fail to put out a small formed laptop by April 2009, stubborn on glossy screens, no blu-ray. strip out firewire, and don't reduce their pricing-read MacMini.
I think the glossy screen thing may not be quite the consumer issue you think it to be. Most manufacturers produce exactly the same kind of screens now on higher end products, and consumers seem to like them.
None of this worries me. Everyone's market share is down.
From the article, that isn't true. Though I would wager that the ones with the increased marketshare are probably down in profits over this time last year. Partly from cutting prices in this economic downturn to stay competitive on the low end and from the relative lack of profits that are gained with the netbooks that are pushing their marketshare. However, I think that HP may be pulling a fair share of its PC marketshare increase from Dell again which would be financially beneficial to HP, but to what extent I don't know.
I think Apple may be a near break even with their Mac line for this 1st calendar year quarter. When is the quarterly earning call?
For the 1,000,000th time already, MID SIZE TOWER... sub $1,000
I'm surprised it took 27 posts for the xMac to make its appearance.
Anyone who expects a sub-$1000 midsize tower is wasting their time, but Apple does need to get something done with its pro pricing.
The gap between the highest-end iMac and the low-end Mac Pro and 24" screen combo is way too big. The Mac Pro starts at $2899 in Canada. It used to be $2399 and the low-end should be $2199 in this market. The Pro machine sales are likely where Apple is losing marketshare if anywhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Fred 1
None of this worries me. Everyone's market share is down.
Typical reaction, but way off. Recessions are where marketshare advances matter.
If Apple can gain marketshare at the expense of the others in this market, they might hit 20-25% once growth takes off again.
Some people may include them in installed base calculations but I have never seen them reported as PC sales. You hit my point: iPod Touches are not counted as PC's and neither should these ultra cheap and just as limited netbooks. They are both hamstrung but in different ways and neither device is a fully functional personal computer aka PC.
can you explain how a netbook is not a fully functional personal computer?
As to the straw man you keep building, I merely acknowledged that some people include the iPod Touch in the installed OS numbers. When AI has an article discussing the os installed base I will be happy to argue that point with you.
do you have evidence about the profit margins of netbooks, or is that your own personal strawman?
I think the glossy screen thing may not be quite the consumer issue you think it to be. Most manufacturers produce exactly the same kind of screens now on higher end products, and consumers seem to like them.
True. It's really only an issue for publishers and higher-end photographers.
Comments
Sure my ipod touch is a fantastic thing and I would not want to give it up for anything, but it can in no way shape or form even come close to the useability of the netbooks.
The touch falls into a completely different segment.
I agree - netbooks don't hurt Apple's profit at all.
Apple hurts Apples sales when they don't listen to the public and fail to put out a small formed laptop by April 2009, stubborn on glossy screens, no blu-ray. strip out firewire, and don't reduce their pricing-read MacMini.
I've always heard the iPod Touch and iPhone counted as part of OS percentages so I really don't understand the gripe.
Also, while netbooks may be considered a PC remember the iPhone itself was touted as the best iPod ever made- remember? Part of the confusion stems from Apple itself.
Some people may include them in installed base calculations but I have never seen them reported as PC sales. You hit my point: iPod Touches are not counted as PC's and neither should these ultra cheap and just as limited netbooks. They are both hamstrung but in different ways and neither device is a fully functional personal computer aka PC.
Apple hurts Apples sales when they don't listen to the public and fail to put out a small formed laptop by April 2009, stubborn on glossy screens, no blu-ray. strip out firewire, and don't reduce their pricing-read MacMini.
Here we go again with Teckstudian logic.
When sales are down, you'll whine that it's because Apple is ignoring the customer and screwing everyone with high prices.
Yet when revenue is up, customer satisfaction is high, and they are doing better then their competitors like HP & Dell, you'll whine that Apple could be doing even better if they stopped screwing the customer and stop ripping everyone off.
What's the matter Teckstud? That medicated Kool-aid you've been drinking wear off?
Apple hasn't even announced their quarter results yet and you're already shooting from the hip based on an analysts conclusion? Oops.. sorry.. I keep forgetting that you're known for doing that.
Sorry, I just disagree. I've used both PCs and Macs in abundance, and Apple's hardware and OS is just better, in my opinion. Most PC's do ship with more RAM, but they need it because windows memory utilization is so bad.
But even so, let's compare. HP touchPro, with a 22 inch display, 4GB Ram, 880MHZ bus, 500GB HD, and 2.0ghz duo intros at $1299. iMac with 4GB ram, 1066MHZ bus, 640GB HD, and 2.66GHZ duo is $1499. You get a larger display, faster bus, bigger hard drive, and faster CPU for $200. In fact, the iMac most comparable is the 20 inch model, which still has a faster CPU and a faster bus, but is $100 less.
And, these are just hardware comparisons - they say nothing about performance, which is just much better on the mac.
WHy is it always HP comparisons on here?
J&R NYC has a Sony Vaio 15.4" Notebook PC for $650 with these specs:
Intel Core 2 Duo T5800 2.00 GHz Processor
2MB L2 Cache, 800MHz Bus speed
3072 MB DDR2 (PC2-6400) RAM Max: 4GB
250 GB (5400RPM) SATA Hard Drive
15.4" WXGA (1280 x 800) LCD XBRITE-ECO Display
Built-in 1.3 Megapixel Webcamera and Microphone
Mobile Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 4500MHD with up to 1340MB shared Video Memory
DVD±R/RW Drive with Double Layer
Intel WiFi Link 5100AGN 802.11a/b/g/n
10/100/1000 Base-T Ethernet LAN
Built-in Memory Stick® Standard/Duo with MagicGate™ Card Reader
Built-in Secure Digital (SD) memory card slot
ExpressCard 34 Slot
4 x USB 2.0, Headphone out; Microphone-in, VGA, IEEE 1394, RJ-11 (Modem), RJ-45
We know the OS sucks but where is an Apple comparable product? Where?
Not an white iBook for $1000- Where?
What's the matter Teckstud? That medicated Kool-aid you've been drinking wear off?
Apple hasn't even announced their quarter results yet and you're already shooting from the hip based on an analysts conclusion? Oops.. sorry.. I keep forgetting that you're known for doing that.
Who is the analyst stating sales figures? These are actual sales figures comparisons- can you actually read?
Pull out your Kool-aid drip and face the fact that it's stated in AI's thread title, not mine.
J&R NYC has a Sony Vaio 15.4" Notebook PC for $650 with these specs:
We know the OS sucks but where is an Apple comparable product? Where?
Not an white iBook for $1000- Where?
Some people may include them in installed base calculations but I have never seen them reported as PC sales. You hit my point: iPod Touches are not counted as PC's and neither should these ultra cheap and just as limited netbooks. They are both hamstrung but in different ways and neither device is a fully functional personal computer aka PC.
So then you agree that iPhones and iPod Touches should likewise not be included in percentage of OS comparisons?
When sales are down, you'll whine that it's because Apple is ignoring the customer and screwing everyone with high prices.
So then you agree that iPhones and iPod Touches should likewise not be included in percentage of OS comparisons?
I think you are intentionally misconstruing my words. We are talking market share which by definition is the amount sold, hence market - an area or arena in which commercial dealings are conducted . This metric measures the quantity sold not installed.
The originators of this report have decided what is included and the iPod touch is not included in this report but the netbooks are. This is the only point I am arguing which is that netbooks should not be in this metric.
The PC market share category should be for personal computers and should not include any device that is not a PC. To include netbooks is highly disingenuous. It does not tell the story of cannibalization. Is it really good news that a company is selling more widgets, but the new widgets only generate 50% of the gross income of the widget they replaced. Hey it is great news. We've added 25% more support requirements, warranty obligations but we've made a lot less money. It just seems suspect to add netbooks as it hides something important.
As to the straw man you keep building, I merely acknowledged that some people include the iPod Touch in the installed OS numbers. When AI has an article discussing the os installed base I will be happy to argue that point with you.
When the Macbook Air came out all people did was complain about what it couldn't do and what components it did not have. If Apple does a netbook everyone will complain that it can't do everything a Macbook Pro can do in a ten inch form factor.
As far as market share is concerned, if you are with Apple as an investor, you are concerned. If you are with Apple for the experience, you want OS X to have a small share so it will be left alone by the hackers and pirates. Either way, Apple is still worth millions and are not going anywhere.
Don't fall into the market-share myth, people.
This game is all about profits and margins, and delivering a Premium experience to the Premium end of the market, which is small to begin with. Yet Apple owns about 70% of it.
Apple hurts Apples sales when they don't listen to the public and fail to put out a small formed laptop by April 2009, stubborn on glossy screens, no blu-ray. strip out firewire, and don't reduce their pricing-read MacMini.
I think the glossy screen thing may not be quite the consumer issue you think it to be. Most manufacturers produce exactly the same kind of screens now on higher end products, and consumers seem to like them.
None of this worries me. Everyone's market share is down.
From the article, that isn't true. Though I would wager that the ones with the increased marketshare are probably down in profits over this time last year. Partly from cutting prices in this economic downturn to stay competitive on the low end and from the relative lack of profits that are gained with the netbooks that are pushing their marketshare. However, I think that HP may be pulling a fair share of its PC marketshare increase from Dell again which would be financially beneficial to HP, but to what extent I don't know.
I think Apple may be a near break even with their Mac line for this 1st calendar year quarter. When is the quarterly earning call?
For the 1,000,000th time already, MID SIZE TOWER... sub $1,000
I'm surprised it took 27 posts for the xMac to make its appearance.
Anyone who expects a sub-$1000 midsize tower is wasting their time, but Apple does need to get something done with its pro pricing.
The gap between the highest-end iMac and the low-end Mac Pro and 24" screen combo is way too big. The Mac Pro starts at $2899 in Canada. It used to be $2399 and the low-end should be $2199 in this market. The Pro machine sales are likely where Apple is losing marketshare if anywhere.
None of this worries me. Everyone's market share is down.
Typical reaction, but way off. Recessions are where marketshare advances matter.
If Apple can gain marketshare at the expense of the others in this market, they might hit 20-25% once growth takes off again.
Some people may include them in installed base calculations but I have never seen them reported as PC sales. You hit my point: iPod Touches are not counted as PC's and neither should these ultra cheap and just as limited netbooks. They are both hamstrung but in different ways and neither device is a fully functional personal computer aka PC.
can you explain how a netbook is not a fully functional personal computer?
None of this worries me. Everyone's market share is down.
how can everyones share of the market come down?
As to the straw man you keep building, I merely acknowledged that some people include the iPod Touch in the installed OS numbers. When AI has an article discussing the os installed base I will be happy to argue that point with you.
do you have evidence about the profit margins of netbooks, or is that your own personal strawman?
I think the glossy screen thing may not be quite the consumer issue you think it to be. Most manufacturers produce exactly the same kind of screens now on higher end products, and consumers seem to like them.
True. It's really only an issue for publishers and higher-end photographers.
how can everyones share of the market come down?