0.5" is not worth $1300. I'm sure I'm not in the minority with my opinion here. 2.5" thick is a bit large I agree; 1.5" is not.
Fortunately, Apple do not sell to the "majority" in their business model. Fortunately as well, there are plenty for whom that 0.5" and OSX is well worth that $1300.
0.5" is not worth $1300. I'm sure I'm not in the minority with my opinion here. 2.5" thick is a bit large I agree; 1.5" is not.
the Macbook pro's slimmer form factor comes from a few things:
1: Quanta and Apple decided to use a low profile optical drive. This was a major drawback in the original Macbook Pros because it significantly increased the price of the drive and the original Macbook Pro could not burn DL media (MAJOR drawback). Newer slim-line 9mm drives however burn DL media just fine, though the drive is much more expensive than the standard 12mm drives.
2: Battery is soldered/not easily replaceable
3: CPU is soldered (saves height of the cpu socket, maybe allows for a slimmer heatsink
4: no Expresscard/54 slot (/34 only)
5: no easy replaceable parts (DVD Drive, wifi card and especially hard disk)
6: theoretically the aluminum enclosure makes heat dissipation better, which allows a slimmer notebook. THe Macbook Pro gets hot, just like a standard PC notebook. Same CPU, same GPU, same Chipset.
There are many laptop manufacturers who make slim notebooks. I personally think the whole slim argument is dumb, as $1300 is not worth 0.5" of thickness, some aluminum and a magsafe power connector. Apple seriously needs to do something about their prices of their machines, they are way out of line with the rest of the industry. The only really cool feature I like about the MBPs is the backlit keyboard. This is worth $50 or $100 to me, not $1300.
Considering everything, I would say the Macbook Pro in a 17" should retail for $1699, not $2799.
The 15" should be around $1200.
Keep in mind these prices are still way more than an ASUS with the same or better parts.
Apple has never been about value for the dollar. Their machines are grossly overpriced and are of excessive profit margin. They artificially limit their products (solder batteries, solder cpus, require 20 screws to replace hard disk) to achieve this goal of locking in customers into higher margin products.
I mean why do I need to pay $1000 more to get a ExpressCard/34 slot and FW, which is not fouund on the normal Macbook? This is even on cheap $400 PC notebooks.
This discussion always appear to be reduced to the ridiculous.
You make three main points: 1) Value, 2) Customization, 3) Peripherals.
Each of these three are subjective according to the needs of the consumer.
1) A part of this is objective. If you spec out a PC with the same components as a Mac, the difference isn't $1,300. The subjective part is whether a couple hundred dollars extra for a Mac is "value for the dollar." For some people it is, for some people it is not.
2) The HP notebook that I replaced with a MacBook Pro is no more customizable than the MacBook Pro. Now that I think about it, why are you even talking about customization of notebooks?
What notebook has easily replaceable optical drives? The battery was certainly easily replaceable on my HP, it had a habit of falling out and dropping on my feet. And who replaces notebook CPUs? Who even replaces the hard drive on their notebook? I replaced the one in my HP, and the process was a bit advanced for the average computer customer. I had to format, clone, partition, none of which most people know how to do. The only easily replaceable thing was the DDR RAM.
When you talk about value, you talk about appealing to a broad market. And then you start talking about customization, some of which is nonsense and the rest is the exclusive province of people who work with computers professionally.
3) Who the hell uses an Express Card slot in the first place? Seriously. AT&T peddles a 3G network card, and the only other thing I can find on Amazon are devices that are already commonly available on USB or firewire.
_____
Okay, so what you want in a notebook is a cheap price, has the imaginary feature of full customization down to the CPU, and an express card slot that virtually no one uses.
I think your entire argument is a non sequitur. You deride Apple by contriving a litany of standards not met by any notebook manufacturer. Even the ACUS you mention does not meet the standards you lay in this post. Even though it is a close match, it certainly doesn't "kick the shit out of" the MBP by ay standard other than the size of the screen for the price.
Now if we're talking about desktops, then the discussion is entirely different. I'd probably build my own hackintosh.
Carrying around weight is a cumulative effect. Something can feel light when you first pick it up. If you have to hold or carry an object long enough your muscles and body will eventually experience fatigue. It has nothing to do with being in or out of shape.
If weight did not matter then why don't people typically buy 10 pound notebooks? Why are smaller and lighter notebooks more popular than the heavier ones?
Please don't twist my words. I never said weight did not matter. My response was to the notion that a single pound can make a world of difference on your back.
I could see there being a "world of difference" between a large heavy laptop, and a small notebook, yes, but if it gets to the point where you're on the edge of hurting your back, and that single pound puts you over that edge, maybe it's time to look at what else you're carrying. I could see a pound being a slight difference, but not a "world of difference." I know what a truly strained back feels like. Maybe my definition of a "world of difference" is simply different from yours lol.
Apple seriously needs to do something about their prices of their machines, they are way out of line with the rest of the industry.
Considering how much money Apple makes (and just made this last quarter) and that they have something like $28 billion cash in the bank, I would say your statement is meaningless.
Oh you want to parse the meaning of "world of difference", which doesn't really have a meaning its just a saying.
In real world terms. I used to carry around a PowerBook now I carry around a MacBook Pro. When carrying them around in a bag for a couple of hours, yes I can feel the difference by the end of the day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iStink
Please don't twist my words. I never said weight did not matter. My response was to the notion that a single pound can make a world of difference on your back.
I could see there being a "world of difference" between a large heavy laptop, and a small notebook, yes, but if it gets to the point where you're on the edge of hurting your back, and that single pound puts you over that edge, maybe it's time to look at what else you're carrying. I could see a pound being a slight difference, but not a "world of difference." I know what a truly strained back feels like. Maybe my definition of a "world of difference" is simply different from yours lol.
Considering how much money Apple makes (and just made this last quarter) and that they have something like $28 billion cash in the bank, I would say your statement is meaningless.
Apple's profits are up, yes, but their profits are greatly influenced by things like their ipods and the iphone. These things are cheap to make, expensive to buy, and fun to own. People want them and they'll pay the premium on them. Apple knows this so it only makes sense to squeeze as much profit from them until a competitor steps up. Makes sense from a business perspective.
Now, in terms of being taken seriously as a computer company by the majority of the market, they'll need to connect to far more people. Their products are grossly overpriced and the fact that they are making profits doesn't speak too much in defense of this.
From a business perspective, they aren't doing anything wrong. If I were an investor I'd be very pleased with everything they do. But as a wee little consumer, just trying to find a product that's cost equals the value, I'll go with a PC.
So ok, why would I care if Apple's stuff is overpriced if I'm a PC person? Well if Apple actually offered things at a competitive price point, they would draw in more customers away from PCs, and that would drive competition. The competition would bring better products to my end. Everyone would be happy. Instead they continue to let PC dominate, and show that they don't care about "revolutionizing" anything, but rather making money.
So, while PC makers are trying to bring computing to everyone, Apple reserve's their mediocre products for the richer consumers, and fails to connect to the average person, especially in economic times like these. All the meanwhile there are plenty of Mac owners who will defend Apple until their face is blue, all so they can really just assure themselves that they didn't pay that inflated premium in vain.
btw i'm not this way with everything. I don't complain that there aren't affordable cadillacs for everyone, but then again, there aren't only two car companies.
Oh you want to parse the meaning of "world of difference", which doesn't really have a meaning its just a saying.
In real world terms. I used to carry around a PowerBook now I carry around a MacBook Pro. When carrying them around in a bag for a couple of hours, yes I can feel the difference by the end of the day.
It's a saying that shouldn't be thrown around for every little thing though. "There's a world of difference between pizza hut and dominos!" makes no sense while "There's a world of difference between a row boat and a speedboat" does.
nvm, lets ignore the world of difference and chock that up to you using the phrase too often.
The point was, walking around all day with one extra pound doesn't translate to large amounts of pain. You may feel it, or it may be a placebo effect. Either way if you're walking THAT much, then you'd be looking at more things than the notebook.
Is it OK is I say their is a world of difference between Pizza Hut and Anne Marie's Pizzeria on Bedford and 7th in Brooklyn?
I wouldn't call it pain, more like fatigue. Yes the average New Yorker walks about 2 miles a day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iStink
It's a saying that shouldn't be thrown around for every little thing though. "There's a world of difference between pizza hut and dominos!" makes no sense.
The point was, walking around all day with one extra pound doesn't translate to large amounts of pain. You may feel it, or it may be a placebo effect. Either way if you're walking THAT much, then you'd be looking at more things than the notebook.
The point was, walking around all day with one extra pound doesn't translate to large amounts of pain. You may feel it, or it may be a placebo effect. Either way if you're walking THAT much, then you'd be looking at more things than the notebook.
A pound of difference for just one object isn't much, but if you're carrying several things, a pound for each object can add up. I don't think that alone is worth $2000, but it is worth something to some people.
People carrying around a 17" computer probably shouldn't complain that much though, it gets to be an awkward size. This week, I opted to just leave my 14" notebook in the hotel room rather than carry it around all day.
Now, in terms of being taken seriously as a computer company by the majority of the market, they'll need to connect to far more people. Their products are grossly overpriced and the fact that they are making profits doesn't speak too much in defense of this.
What does "taken seriously" mean? You keep saying "grossly overpriced" - how would you know? Do you work for Apple and have information about how much they pay for parts and assembly services? Do you have insider information about how much their development costs are? A MacPro is almost the same price as an HP specified with the same components. How is that overpriced? Many here have posted comparisons showing that Apple laptops are similar in price when fairly compared to equivalent competitor's models. Grossly overpriced is a gross overstatement.
Quote:
From a business perspective, they aren't doing anything wrong. If I were an investor I'd be very pleased with everything they do. But as a wee little consumer, just trying to find a product that's cost equals the value, I'll go with a PC.
Value is in the eye of the beholder. Macs fulfill my value expectations and those of millions of people around the world. Where is the problem?
Quote:
So ok, why would I care if Apple's stuff is overpriced if I'm a PC person? Well if Apple actually offered things at a competitive price point, they would draw in more customers away from PCs, and that would drive competition. The competition would bring better products to my end. Everyone would be happy. Instead they continue to let PC dominate, and show that they don't care about "revolutionizing" anything, but rather making money.
??!!!??!! Why would they "care about revolutionizing". They strike me as a company that really wants to make money AND simultaneously make a product that is of a certain level of quality and design. I think they do that pretty well.
Quote:
So, while PC makers are trying to bring computing to everyone, Apple reserve's their mediocre products for the richer consumers, and fails to connect to the average person, especially in economic times like these. All the meanwhile there are plenty of Mac owners who will defend Apple until their face is blue, all so they can really just assure themselves that they didn't pay that inflated premium in vain.
First I don't believe for a moment that anyone in any PC company (including Apple) thinks or espouses that they are "trying to bring computing to everyone". They are not idealists. Rather competition has inexorably destroyed the quality of most computers by commoditizing them. I think Apple chooses very carefully to not do that. So in many ways they avoid competing. Do you really think anyone runs around here doggedly defending Apple because they are trying to deal with feelings of buyers remorse. Really? You are reaching. Fail.
Your entire argument seems to be based on the idea that every business has as it's primary goal to become a huge, market dominating purveyor of cheap commodity goods. I have never heard anything from Apple management that would lead us to believe that is their goal.
Oh you want to parse the meaning of "world of difference", which doesn't really have a meaning its just a saying.
In real world terms. I used to carry around a PowerBook now I carry around a MacBook Pro. When carrying them around in a bag for a couple of hours, yes I can feel the difference by the end of the day.
Also, the bag you carry your MacBook Pro in makes a big difference.
If it's a shoulder/messenger type bag, they're simply not efficient in terms of carrying and distributing the weight. They may be more fashionable in some eyes, but ergonomically, they're a disaster. They're great for causing neck and back pain.
A backpack is a preferable solution, in terms of efficient load distribution and carrying capacity. But not simply a bulky "bookbag" with a padded sleeve, where everything you stuff into the pack clumps down at the bottom. They can be nearly as bad as a shoulder bag.
Think about a low-profile mountaineering/climbing pack that keeps the load (MBP) close to your back and higher up and also has more separate compartments to contain items and allow you to organize things and distribute weight more evenly.
One thing about packs: no matter what size it is or what you're doing, it WILL be FULL! As an ex-mountaineer, rock and ice climber it's ALWAYS the case!
I purposely found a very low-profile pack for my MacBook Pro 15" with lots of separate compartments and pared down what I carry. USB charging cables, etc..
Arcteryx Blade 15. I have the previous Blade 13 pack.
What does "taken seriously" mean? You keep saying "grossly overpriced" - how would you know? Do you work for Apple and have information about how much they pay for parts and assembly services? Do you have insider information about how much their development costs are? A MacPro is almost the same price as an HP specified with the same components. How is that overpriced? Many here have posted comparisons showing that Apple laptops are similar in price when fairly compared to equivalent competitor's models. Grossly overpriced is a gross overstatement.
Value is in the eye of the beholder. Macs fulfill my value expectations and those of millions of people around the world. Where is the problem?
??!!!??!! Why would they "care about revolutionizing". They strike me as a company that really wants to make money AND simultaneously make a product that is of a certain level of quality and design. I think they do that pretty well.
First I don't believe for a moment that anyone in any PC company (including Apple) thinks or espouses that they are "trying to bring computing to everyone". They are not idealists. Rather competition has inexorably destroyed the quality of most computers by commoditizing them. I think Apple chooses very carefully to not do that. So in many ways they avoid competing. Do you really think anyone runs around here doggedly defending Apple because they are trying to deal with feelings of buyers remorse. Really? You are reaching. Fail.
Your entire argument seems to be based on the idea that every business has as it's primary goal to become a huge, market dominating purveyor of cheap commodity goods. I have never heard anything from Apple management that would lead us to believe that is their goal.
I'll try and keep this brief instead of writing a book
1.) An example of what I mean by taken seriously is the project I'm working on. I won't tell you what it is so don't ask, but I work for a government contractor who is putting out free software. I once asked in a conference call why we are programming this to the .net framework, and not creating a Mac version. People actually laughed. The response made sense: If a facility can't afford to buy paid versions of the software, what makes you think they will own an expensive Mac that will do exactly what the PC does?
2.) It's already been shown here what we mean by grossly overpriced. It's becoming a matter of opinion at this point. What you'll spend an extra 1300 on I might not want to, and what's worth 2700 to you might be worth only 1700 to me. If Macs fulfill your value expectations, then that's good for you. I hope they would with as much as they cost. Nobody is debating that Macs are good computers mind you.
3.) Almost every Apple conference I've seen Jobs speak at, he says absurdly arrogant things like "Apple continues to revolutionize and push the boundaries of computing." You're right about them being a company only out to make money, good job. The problem is they are in an industry with not much competition. Like I said earlier, we're not talking about cars here. Microsoft got in trouble for having a Monopoly, but who's fault was that? They simply didn't have any competition.
4.) You don't think companies are trying to bring computing to everyone? Explain that to the companies that contributed to the One Laptop Per Child mission. Fail.
Finally, don't take offense to my statement and write it off as "buyers remorse." It's ok to be this way, I've seen it many times. I worked at a home theater place for a year, and in that time I saw countless rich dudes come in and see something far cheaper than what they bought and decide it was amazing. Inevitably they always end with, "But I'm still very happy with what I have, it's got this this this and this." Even when you show how the other item (like a large LCD vs rear projector for instance) was more practical, they would always assure themselves they made the right choice. Wasn't my problem, I was meant to sell the most expensive thing I could. Point is, it wasn't buyers remorse, more like "decision assurance."
You're entire misconception of my argument makes this conversation annoying and dull. All I want is for Apple to make a bigger dent in the market and give competitors a REAL run for the money in the computing field. They have already done so with the iphone and ipod, why not do the same in the field of laptops and desktops?
You are right the messenger bag is all the rage these days. I carry a backpack. You are right my bag hangs low which does cause strain on my shoulders after some time.
Ok I'll look into that bag, not the cheapest though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffharris
Also, the bag you carry your MacBook Pro in makes a big difference.
I purposely found a very low-profile pack for my MacBook Pro 15" with lots of separate compartments and pared down what I carry. USB charging cables, etc..
Arcteryx Blade 15. I have the previous Blade 13 pack.
Is it OK is I say their is a world of difference between Pizza Hut and Anne Marie's Pizzeria on Bedford and 7th in Brooklyn?
OK, genuine new york pizza vs pizza hut. Ya that's a world of difference LOL!
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
You are right the messenger bag is all the rage these days. I carry a backpack. You are right my bag hangs low which does cause strain on my shoulders after some time.
Ok I'll look into that bag, not the cheapest though.
backpacks are designed to fit snug. If you put yours on and tightened the straps I bet you'd feel very comfy. Wouldn't look as hip as the guy carrying it on one shoulder though
I'll try and keep this brief instead of writing a book
1.) An example of what I mean by taken seriously is the project I'm working on. I won't tell you what it is so don't ask, but I work for a government contractor who is putting out free software. I once asked in a conference call why we are programming this to the .net framework, and not creating a Mac version. People actually laughed. The response made sense: If a facility can't afford to buy paid versions of the software, what makes you think they will own an expensive Mac that will do exactly what the PC does?
That's just a matter of opinion and perception in that work environment. In my work environment the opinion and perception are the exact opposite. Where I work everyone has Macs, any one with a PC is the odd man in the room. People feel what you get is worth what you've paid for.
Quote:
3.) Almost every Apple conference I've seen Jobs speak at, he says absurdly arrogant things like "Apple continues to revolutionize and push the boundaries of computing." You're right about them being a company only out to make money, good job. The problem is they are in an industry with not much competition. Like I said earlier, we're not talking about cars here. Microsoft got in trouble for having a Monopoly, but who's fault was that? They simply didn't have any competition. They both have been disruptive to the larger market and have forced their competitors to change the way they think about product design and marketing.
In many ways Apple does push the boundaries of computing. Apple was the first company to make USB, Firewire, and WiFi standard on all of its machines. Their are numerous examples of what Apple has brought to the computer industry. Apple has helped the industry move away from dull beige boxes and create lightweight and sleek machines that are easier for consumers to use.
How is Apple in an industry without much competition? Apple is competing against Microsoft which holds 90% of the computer market.
Microsoft did have competition. MS did not get into trouble for being a monopoly, monopolies is not illegal. MS got into trouble for abusing its monopolistic position and playing under handed games to limit and destroy its competition.
Quote:
Finally, don't take offense to my statement and write it off as "buyers remorse." It's ok to be this way, I've seen it many times. I worked at a home theater place for a year, and in that time I saw countless rich dudes come in and see something far cheaper than what they bought and decide it was amazing. Inevitably they always end with, "But I'm still very happy with what I have, it's got this this this and this." Even when you show how the other item (like a large LCD vs rear projector for instance) was more practical, they would always assure themselves they made the right choice. Wasn't my problem, I was meant to sell the most expensive thing I could. Point is, it wasn't buyers remorse, more like "decision assurance."
Apple could not grow its company based on people who simply wanted to buy something expensive because its expensive. Their products have to perform its job and be reliable.
Quote:
You're entire misconception of my argument makes this conversation annoying and dull. All I want is for Apple to make a bigger dent in the market and give competitors a REAL run for the money in the computing field. They have already done so with the iphone and ipod, why not do the same in the field of laptops and desktops?
I would argue that Apple uses basically the same philosophy for both Macs and iPhones. They both use the same basic vertical business model. They both are premium products in the respective markets and both hold roughly the same amount of market share.
I'll try and keep this brief instead of writing a book
Quote:
1.) An example of what I mean by taken seriously is the project I'm working on. I won't tell you what it is so don't ask, but I work for a government contractor who is putting out free software. I once asked in a conference call why we are programming this to the .net framework, and not creating a Mac version. People actually laughed. The response made sense: If a facility can't afford to buy paid versions of the software, what makes you think they will own an expensive Mac that will do exactly what the PC does?
And thus they choose to ignore a significant number of potential users simply because they have Macs. That is a pretty simplistic assumption to make that facilities won't have Macs because they cost more.
Quote:
2.) It's already been shown here what we mean by grossly overpriced. It's becoming a matter of opinion at this point. What you'll spend an extra 1300 on I might not want to, and what's worth 2700 to you might be worth only 1700 to me. If Macs fulfill your value expectations, then that's good for you. I hope they would with as much as they cost. Nobody is debating that Macs are good computers mind you.
People have said his thousands of times - it means nothing unless it it Apples to Apples and Oranges to Oranges, and the majority of the price comparisons are not. I still don't buy the overpriced argument.
Quote:
3.) Almost every Apple conference I've seen Jobs speak at, he says absurdly arrogant things like "Apple continues to revolutionize and push the boundaries of computing." You're right about them being a company only out to make money, good job. The problem is they are in an industry with not much competition. Like I said earlier, we're not talking about cars here. Microsoft got in trouble for having a Monopoly, but who's fault was that? They simply didn't have any competition.
Marketing hype and bull. Apple refines things, but they call it revolution. Whatever. Yes they are in a market without much competition. They like it that way. Why would they seek to change it?
Quote:
4.) You don't think companies are trying to bring computing to everyone? Explain that to the companies that contributed to the One Laptop Per Child mission. Fail.
P.R. bull - those guys don't care. They contributed to get P.R. brownie points. We are talking about people who are no different than the absurd bankers who have brought us economic armageddon. These are hard core capitalists.
Quote:
Finally, don't take offense to my statement and write it off as "buyers remorse." It's ok to be this way, I've seen it many times. I worked at a home theater place for a year, and in that time I saw countless rich dudes come in and see something far cheaper than what they bought and decide it was amazing. Inevitably they always end with, "But I'm still very happy with what I have, it's got this this this and this." Even when you show how the other item (like a large LCD vs rear projector for instance) was more practical, they would always assure themselves they made the right choice. Wasn't my problem, I was meant to sell the most expensive thing I could. Point is, it wasn't buyers remorse, more like "decision assurance."
Yeah I don't really have that issue. i use both platforms - picking whichever one does the job. I've got Boxx computers for one of my 3d/Compisting guys and Macs for all the FCP/After Effects systems and an IBM on Red Hat for the Autodesk Smoke/Flame. Personally I don't engage in that kind of mental second guessing. After I buy a product I use it and don't spend a lot of time worrying about the choice I made.
Quote:
You're entire misconception of my argument makes this conversation annoying and dull. All I want is for Apple to make a bigger dent in the market and give competitors a REAL run for the money in the computing field. They have already done so with the iphone and ipod, why not do the same in the field of laptops and desktops?
I'll bite, why do you want that? I don't believe Apple can do what you say and still have their products be a Mac. It would be a computer, but it wouldn't be a Mac.
That's just a matter of opinion and perception in that work environment. In my work environment the opinion and perception are the exact opposite. Where I work everyone has Macs, any one with a PC is the odd man in the room. People feel what you get is worth what you've paid for.
Yeah I understand that concept. Macs and PCs are tools and each are used differently. All I'm saying is, the facilities I'm making the best possible software I can for don't even consider Macs because of how much they can spend. It's like this for many many people, not just the facilities I'm speaking of. It's not fair when you think of it. Why should only the wealthy have a choice?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
In many ways Apple does push the boundaries of computing. Apple was the first company to make USB, Firewire, and WiFi standard on all of its machines. Their are numerous examples of what Apple has brought to the computer industry. Apple has helped the industry move away from dull beige boxes and create lightweight and sleek machines that are easier for consumers to use.
Ok look at what I was responding to. You missed my point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
How is Apple in an industry without much competition? Apple is competing against Microsoft which holds 90% of the computer market.
Microsoft and who else? One competitor = not much competition. I wish it were like the automotive industry where not only do you have many competitors, but you even have companies in other countries people have never heard of.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
Microsoft did have competition. MS did not get into trouble for being a monopoly, monopolies is not illegal. MS got into trouble for abusing its monopolistic position and playing under handed games to limit and destroy its competition.
this is a quote from the judge in the case:
"Microsoft enjoys so much power in the market for Intel-compatible PC operating systems that if it wished to exercise this power solely in terms of price, it could charge a price for Windows substantially above that which could be charged in a competitive market," Jackson wrote.
"Moreover, it could do so for a significant period of time without losing an unacceptable amount of business to competitors," he added. "In other words, Microsoft enjoys monopoly power in the relevant market."
So really it was a matter of Microsoft doing too well and the idea that they could be charging whatever they wanted without anyone knowing it was too much is what got them in trouble.
If I remember correctly, it all started with companies complaining that internet explorer was shipped with the os, and it was even an integral part of the os. From there the whole thing spun into this big frenzy over their hold on the market. Where was Apple in all of this? I remember it was pointed out many times that Microsoft legally ran business in accordance with the law and then got in trouble for doing well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
Apple could not grow its company based on people who simply wanted to buy something expensive because its expensive. Their products have to perform its job and be reliable.
I haven't seen anyone say people bought Apple products because they are expensive. What I have seen is people say they are happy with their products, but for the amount Apple charges, they damn well better be happy.
Even I do the same thing. For instance, I bought a 400 dollar video card (gtx280) now I'm eyeballing a $250 card, the gtx275. While reading reviews I always find myself thinking the same thing those richies at the home theater place did. It's perfectly natural. I'm not saying I'm unhappy with what I have in any way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
I would argue that Apple uses basically the same philosophy for both Macs and iPhones. They both use the same basic vertical business model. They both are premium products in the respective markets and both hold roughly the same amount of market share.
When I mention the iphone, I'm not speaking about phones in general. I'm talking about the smartphone/PPC market. They may not be number one, but they sure did put a dent in and will remain to be this way for years to come. I have only apple to thanks for products like the touch pro 2. And look at the mp3 player market. People call mp3 players ipods, even when they aren't ipods.
And thus they choose to ignore a significant number of potential users simply because they have Macs. That is a pretty simplistic assumption to make that facilities won't have Macs because they cost more.
Well, it's the unfortunate truth. For instance, a lot of the facilities are the "bottom of the totem poll" nursing homes housing people who couldn't afford retirement village condos. These types of places actually have to bring workers in from other countries like Africa to do the work people here wouldn't do (for the amount they are getting paid.) I do the best I possibly can to make sure the people who work at these facilities have software that runs smoothly and without error. That's why I asked about Macs at a conference call, to make sure they all have access to the software. They have never had anyone call in and ask for a Mac version of the software. We're currently debating on releasing a java version for Linux platforms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog
I'll bite, why do you want that? I don't believe Apple can do what you say and still have their products be a Mac. It would be a computer, but it wouldn't be a Mac.
I believe they can. I think there are a lot of innovative smart people working for Apple, and they can use their profits to expand into the lower price range while offering quality products.
Comments
EFI-X is an awesome thing for computer users. Mac OS X without as much of the Apple Tax (you still have to pay $150 to get the dongle though).
And Mac OS X.
0.5" is not worth $1300. I'm sure I'm not in the minority with my opinion here. 2.5" thick is a bit large I agree; 1.5" is not.
Fortunately, Apple do not sell to the "majority" in their business model. Fortunately as well, there are plenty for whom that 0.5" and OSX is well worth that $1300.
0.5" is not worth $1300. I'm sure I'm not in the minority with my opinion here. 2.5" thick is a bit large I agree; 1.5" is not.
the Macbook pro's slimmer form factor comes from a few things:
1: Quanta and Apple decided to use a low profile optical drive. This was a major drawback in the original Macbook Pros because it significantly increased the price of the drive and the original Macbook Pro could not burn DL media (MAJOR drawback). Newer slim-line 9mm drives however burn DL media just fine, though the drive is much more expensive than the standard 12mm drives.
2: Battery is soldered/not easily replaceable
3: CPU is soldered (saves height of the cpu socket, maybe allows for a slimmer heatsink
4: no Expresscard/54 slot (/34 only)
5: no easy replaceable parts (DVD Drive, wifi card and especially hard disk)
6: theoretically the aluminum enclosure makes heat dissipation better, which allows a slimmer notebook. THe Macbook Pro gets hot, just like a standard PC notebook. Same CPU, same GPU, same Chipset.
There are many laptop manufacturers who make slim notebooks. I personally think the whole slim argument is dumb, as $1300 is not worth 0.5" of thickness, some aluminum and a magsafe power connector. Apple seriously needs to do something about their prices of their machines, they are way out of line with the rest of the industry. The only really cool feature I like about the MBPs is the backlit keyboard. This is worth $50 or $100 to me, not $1300.
Considering everything, I would say the Macbook Pro in a 17" should retail for $1699, not $2799.
The 15" should be around $1200.
Keep in mind these prices are still way more than an ASUS with the same or better parts.
Apple has never been about value for the dollar. Their machines are grossly overpriced and are of excessive profit margin. They artificially limit their products (solder batteries, solder cpus, require 20 screws to replace hard disk) to achieve this goal of locking in customers into higher margin products.
I mean why do I need to pay $1000 more to get a ExpressCard/34 slot and FW, which is not fouund on the normal Macbook? This is even on cheap $400 PC notebooks.
This discussion always appear to be reduced to the ridiculous.
You make three main points: 1) Value, 2) Customization, 3) Peripherals.
Each of these three are subjective according to the needs of the consumer.
1) A part of this is objective. If you spec out a PC with the same components as a Mac, the difference isn't $1,300. The subjective part is whether a couple hundred dollars extra for a Mac is "value for the dollar." For some people it is, for some people it is not.
2) The HP notebook that I replaced with a MacBook Pro is no more customizable than the MacBook Pro. Now that I think about it, why are you even talking about customization of notebooks?
What notebook has easily replaceable optical drives? The battery was certainly easily replaceable on my HP, it had a habit of falling out and dropping on my feet. And who replaces notebook CPUs? Who even replaces the hard drive on their notebook? I replaced the one in my HP, and the process was a bit advanced for the average computer customer. I had to format, clone, partition, none of which most people know how to do. The only easily replaceable thing was the DDR RAM.
When you talk about value, you talk about appealing to a broad market. And then you start talking about customization, some of which is nonsense and the rest is the exclusive province of people who work with computers professionally.
3) Who the hell uses an Express Card slot in the first place? Seriously. AT&T peddles a 3G network card, and the only other thing I can find on Amazon are devices that are already commonly available on USB or firewire.
_____
Okay, so what you want in a notebook is a cheap price, has the imaginary feature of full customization down to the CPU, and an express card slot that virtually no one uses.
I think your entire argument is a non sequitur. You deride Apple by contriving a litany of standards not met by any notebook manufacturer. Even the ACUS you mention does not meet the standards you lay in this post. Even though it is a close match, it certainly doesn't "kick the shit out of" the MBP by ay standard other than the size of the screen for the price.
Now if we're talking about desktops, then the discussion is entirely different. I'd probably build my own hackintosh.
Carrying around weight is a cumulative effect. Something can feel light when you first pick it up. If you have to hold or carry an object long enough your muscles and body will eventually experience fatigue. It has nothing to do with being in or out of shape.
If weight did not matter then why don't people typically buy 10 pound notebooks? Why are smaller and lighter notebooks more popular than the heavier ones?
Please don't twist my words. I never said weight did not matter. My response was to the notion that a single pound can make a world of difference on your back.
I could see there being a "world of difference" between a large heavy laptop, and a small notebook, yes, but if it gets to the point where you're on the edge of hurting your back, and that single pound puts you over that edge, maybe it's time to look at what else you're carrying. I could see a pound being a slight difference, but not a "world of difference." I know what a truly strained back feels like. Maybe my definition of a "world of difference" is simply different from yours lol.
Apple seriously needs to do something about their prices of their machines, they are way out of line with the rest of the industry.
Considering how much money Apple makes (and just made this last quarter) and that they have something like $28 billion cash in the bank, I would say your statement is meaningless.
In real world terms. I used to carry around a PowerBook now I carry around a MacBook Pro. When carrying them around in a bag for a couple of hours, yes I can feel the difference by the end of the day.
Please don't twist my words. I never said weight did not matter. My response was to the notion that a single pound can make a world of difference on your back.
I could see there being a "world of difference" between a large heavy laptop, and a small notebook, yes, but if it gets to the point where you're on the edge of hurting your back, and that single pound puts you over that edge, maybe it's time to look at what else you're carrying. I could see a pound being a slight difference, but not a "world of difference." I know what a truly strained back feels like. Maybe my definition of a "world of difference" is simply different from yours lol.
Considering how much money Apple makes (and just made this last quarter) and that they have something like $28 billion cash in the bank, I would say your statement is meaningless.
Apple's profits are up, yes, but their profits are greatly influenced by things like their ipods and the iphone. These things are cheap to make, expensive to buy, and fun to own. People want them and they'll pay the premium on them. Apple knows this so it only makes sense to squeeze as much profit from them until a competitor steps up. Makes sense from a business perspective.
Now, in terms of being taken seriously as a computer company by the majority of the market, they'll need to connect to far more people. Their products are grossly overpriced and the fact that they are making profits doesn't speak too much in defense of this.
From a business perspective, they aren't doing anything wrong. If I were an investor I'd be very pleased with everything they do. But as a wee little consumer, just trying to find a product that's cost equals the value, I'll go with a PC.
So ok, why would I care if Apple's stuff is overpriced if I'm a PC person? Well if Apple actually offered things at a competitive price point, they would draw in more customers away from PCs, and that would drive competition. The competition would bring better products to my end. Everyone would be happy. Instead they continue to let PC dominate, and show that they don't care about "revolutionizing" anything, but rather making money.
So, while PC makers are trying to bring computing to everyone, Apple reserve's their mediocre products for the richer consumers, and fails to connect to the average person, especially in economic times like these. All the meanwhile there are plenty of Mac owners who will defend Apple until their face is blue, all so they can really just assure themselves that they didn't pay that inflated premium in vain.
btw i'm not this way with everything. I don't complain that there aren't affordable cadillacs for everyone, but then again, there aren't only two car companies.
Oh you want to parse the meaning of "world of difference", which doesn't really have a meaning its just a saying.
In real world terms. I used to carry around a PowerBook now I carry around a MacBook Pro. When carrying them around in a bag for a couple of hours, yes I can feel the difference by the end of the day.
It's a saying that shouldn't be thrown around for every little thing though. "There's a world of difference between pizza hut and dominos!" makes no sense while "There's a world of difference between a row boat and a speedboat" does.
nvm, lets ignore the world of difference and chock that up to you using the phrase too often.
The point was, walking around all day with one extra pound doesn't translate to large amounts of pain. You may feel it, or it may be a placebo effect. Either way if you're walking THAT much, then you'd be looking at more things than the notebook.
I wouldn't call it pain, more like fatigue. Yes the average New Yorker walks about 2 miles a day.
It's a saying that shouldn't be thrown around for every little thing though. "There's a world of difference between pizza hut and dominos!" makes no sense.
The point was, walking around all day with one extra pound doesn't translate to large amounts of pain. You may feel it, or it may be a placebo effect. Either way if you're walking THAT much, then you'd be looking at more things than the notebook.
The point was, walking around all day with one extra pound doesn't translate to large amounts of pain. You may feel it, or it may be a placebo effect. Either way if you're walking THAT much, then you'd be looking at more things than the notebook.
A pound of difference for just one object isn't much, but if you're carrying several things, a pound for each object can add up. I don't think that alone is worth $2000, but it is worth something to some people.
People carrying around a 17" computer probably shouldn't complain that much though, it gets to be an awkward size. This week, I opted to just leave my 14" notebook in the hotel room rather than carry it around all day.
Now, in terms of being taken seriously as a computer company by the majority of the market, they'll need to connect to far more people. Their products are grossly overpriced and the fact that they are making profits doesn't speak too much in defense of this.
What does "taken seriously" mean? You keep saying "grossly overpriced" - how would you know? Do you work for Apple and have information about how much they pay for parts and assembly services? Do you have insider information about how much their development costs are? A MacPro is almost the same price as an HP specified with the same components. How is that overpriced? Many here have posted comparisons showing that Apple laptops are similar in price when fairly compared to equivalent competitor's models. Grossly overpriced is a gross overstatement.
From a business perspective, they aren't doing anything wrong. If I were an investor I'd be very pleased with everything they do. But as a wee little consumer, just trying to find a product that's cost equals the value, I'll go with a PC.
Value is in the eye of the beholder. Macs fulfill my value expectations and those of millions of people around the world. Where is the problem?
So ok, why would I care if Apple's stuff is overpriced if I'm a PC person? Well if Apple actually offered things at a competitive price point, they would draw in more customers away from PCs, and that would drive competition. The competition would bring better products to my end. Everyone would be happy. Instead they continue to let PC dominate, and show that they don't care about "revolutionizing" anything, but rather making money.
??!!!??!! Why would they "care about revolutionizing". They strike me as a company that really wants to make money AND simultaneously make a product that is of a certain level of quality and design. I think they do that pretty well.
So, while PC makers are trying to bring computing to everyone, Apple reserve's their mediocre products for the richer consumers, and fails to connect to the average person, especially in economic times like these. All the meanwhile there are plenty of Mac owners who will defend Apple until their face is blue, all so they can really just assure themselves that they didn't pay that inflated premium in vain.
First I don't believe for a moment that anyone in any PC company (including Apple) thinks or espouses that they are "trying to bring computing to everyone". They are not idealists. Rather competition has inexorably destroyed the quality of most computers by commoditizing them. I think Apple chooses very carefully to not do that. So in many ways they avoid competing. Do you really think anyone runs around here doggedly defending Apple because they are trying to deal with feelings of buyers remorse. Really? You are reaching. Fail.
Your entire argument seems to be based on the idea that every business has as it's primary goal to become a huge, market dominating purveyor of cheap commodity goods. I have never heard anything from Apple management that would lead us to believe that is their goal.
Oh you want to parse the meaning of "world of difference", which doesn't really have a meaning its just a saying.
In real world terms. I used to carry around a PowerBook now I carry around a MacBook Pro. When carrying them around in a bag for a couple of hours, yes I can feel the difference by the end of the day.
Also, the bag you carry your MacBook Pro in makes a big difference.
If it's a shoulder/messenger type bag, they're simply not efficient in terms of carrying and distributing the weight. They may be more fashionable in some eyes, but ergonomically, they're a disaster. They're great for causing neck and back pain.
A backpack is a preferable solution, in terms of efficient load distribution and carrying capacity. But not simply a bulky "bookbag" with a padded sleeve, where everything you stuff into the pack clumps down at the bottom. They can be nearly as bad as a shoulder bag.
Think about a low-profile mountaineering/climbing pack that keeps the load (MBP) close to your back and higher up and also has more separate compartments to contain items and allow you to organize things and distribute weight more evenly.
One thing about packs: no matter what size it is or what you're doing, it WILL be FULL! As an ex-mountaineer, rock and ice climber it's ALWAYS the case!
I purposely found a very low-profile pack for my MacBook Pro 15" with lots of separate compartments and pared down what I carry. USB charging cables, etc..
Arcteryx Blade 15. I have the previous Blade 13 pack.
http://www.arcteryx.com/Product.aspx...Packs/Blade-15
What does "taken seriously" mean? You keep saying "grossly overpriced" - how would you know? Do you work for Apple and have information about how much they pay for parts and assembly services? Do you have insider information about how much their development costs are? A MacPro is almost the same price as an HP specified with the same components. How is that overpriced? Many here have posted comparisons showing that Apple laptops are similar in price when fairly compared to equivalent competitor's models. Grossly overpriced is a gross overstatement.
Value is in the eye of the beholder. Macs fulfill my value expectations and those of millions of people around the world. Where is the problem?
??!!!??!! Why would they "care about revolutionizing". They strike me as a company that really wants to make money AND simultaneously make a product that is of a certain level of quality and design. I think they do that pretty well.
First I don't believe for a moment that anyone in any PC company (including Apple) thinks or espouses that they are "trying to bring computing to everyone". They are not idealists. Rather competition has inexorably destroyed the quality of most computers by commoditizing them. I think Apple chooses very carefully to not do that. So in many ways they avoid competing. Do you really think anyone runs around here doggedly defending Apple because they are trying to deal with feelings of buyers remorse. Really? You are reaching. Fail.
Your entire argument seems to be based on the idea that every business has as it's primary goal to become a huge, market dominating purveyor of cheap commodity goods. I have never heard anything from Apple management that would lead us to believe that is their goal.
I'll try and keep this brief instead of writing a book
1.) An example of what I mean by taken seriously is the project I'm working on. I won't tell you what it is so don't ask, but I work for a government contractor who is putting out free software. I once asked in a conference call why we are programming this to the .net framework, and not creating a Mac version. People actually laughed. The response made sense: If a facility can't afford to buy paid versions of the software, what makes you think they will own an expensive Mac that will do exactly what the PC does?
2.) It's already been shown here what we mean by grossly overpriced. It's becoming a matter of opinion at this point. What you'll spend an extra 1300 on I might not want to, and what's worth 2700 to you might be worth only 1700 to me. If Macs fulfill your value expectations, then that's good for you. I hope they would with as much as they cost. Nobody is debating that Macs are good computers mind you.
3.) Almost every Apple conference I've seen Jobs speak at, he says absurdly arrogant things like "Apple continues to revolutionize and push the boundaries of computing." You're right about them being a company only out to make money, good job. The problem is they are in an industry with not much competition. Like I said earlier, we're not talking about cars here. Microsoft got in trouble for having a Monopoly, but who's fault was that? They simply didn't have any competition.
4.) You don't think companies are trying to bring computing to everyone? Explain that to the companies that contributed to the One Laptop Per Child mission. Fail.
Finally, don't take offense to my statement and write it off as "buyers remorse." It's ok to be this way, I've seen it many times. I worked at a home theater place for a year, and in that time I saw countless rich dudes come in and see something far cheaper than what they bought and decide it was amazing. Inevitably they always end with, "But I'm still very happy with what I have, it's got this this this and this." Even when you show how the other item (like a large LCD vs rear projector for instance) was more practical, they would always assure themselves they made the right choice. Wasn't my problem, I was meant to sell the most expensive thing I could. Point is, it wasn't buyers remorse, more like "decision assurance."
You're entire misconception of my argument makes this conversation annoying and dull. All I want is for Apple to make a bigger dent in the market and give competitors a REAL run for the money in the computing field. They have already done so with the iphone and ipod, why not do the same in the field of laptops and desktops?
oh look at that i wrote a book >:/
Ok I'll look into that bag, not the cheapest though.
Also, the bag you carry your MacBook Pro in makes a big difference.
I purposely found a very low-profile pack for my MacBook Pro 15" with lots of separate compartments and pared down what I carry. USB charging cables, etc..
Arcteryx Blade 15. I have the previous Blade 13 pack.
http://www.arcteryx.com/Product.aspx...Packs/Blade-15
Is it OK is I say their is a world of difference between Pizza Hut and Anne Marie's Pizzeria on Bedford and 7th in Brooklyn?
OK, genuine new york pizza vs pizza hut. Ya that's a world of difference LOL!
You are right the messenger bag is all the rage these days. I carry a backpack. You are right my bag hangs low which does cause strain on my shoulders after some time.
Ok I'll look into that bag, not the cheapest though.
backpacks are designed to fit snug. If you put yours on and tightened the straps I bet you'd feel very comfy. Wouldn't look as hip as the guy carrying it on one shoulder though
I'll try and keep this brief instead of writing a book
1.) An example of what I mean by taken seriously is the project I'm working on. I won't tell you what it is so don't ask, but I work for a government contractor who is putting out free software. I once asked in a conference call why we are programming this to the .net framework, and not creating a Mac version. People actually laughed. The response made sense: If a facility can't afford to buy paid versions of the software, what makes you think they will own an expensive Mac that will do exactly what the PC does?
That's just a matter of opinion and perception in that work environment. In my work environment the opinion and perception are the exact opposite. Where I work everyone has Macs, any one with a PC is the odd man in the room. People feel what you get is worth what you've paid for.
3.) Almost every Apple conference I've seen Jobs speak at, he says absurdly arrogant things like "Apple continues to revolutionize and push the boundaries of computing." You're right about them being a company only out to make money, good job. The problem is they are in an industry with not much competition. Like I said earlier, we're not talking about cars here. Microsoft got in trouble for having a Monopoly, but who's fault was that? They simply didn't have any competition. They both have been disruptive to the larger market and have forced their competitors to change the way they think about product design and marketing.
In many ways Apple does push the boundaries of computing. Apple was the first company to make USB, Firewire, and WiFi standard on all of its machines. Their are numerous examples of what Apple has brought to the computer industry. Apple has helped the industry move away from dull beige boxes and create lightweight and sleek machines that are easier for consumers to use.
How is Apple in an industry without much competition? Apple is competing against Microsoft which holds 90% of the computer market.
Microsoft did have competition. MS did not get into trouble for being a monopoly, monopolies is not illegal. MS got into trouble for abusing its monopolistic position and playing under handed games to limit and destroy its competition.
Finally, don't take offense to my statement and write it off as "buyers remorse." It's ok to be this way, I've seen it many times. I worked at a home theater place for a year, and in that time I saw countless rich dudes come in and see something far cheaper than what they bought and decide it was amazing. Inevitably they always end with, "But I'm still very happy with what I have, it's got this this this and this." Even when you show how the other item (like a large LCD vs rear projector for instance) was more practical, they would always assure themselves they made the right choice. Wasn't my problem, I was meant to sell the most expensive thing I could. Point is, it wasn't buyers remorse, more like "decision assurance."
Apple could not grow its company based on people who simply wanted to buy something expensive because its expensive. Their products have to perform its job and be reliable.
You're entire misconception of my argument makes this conversation annoying and dull. All I want is for Apple to make a bigger dent in the market and give competitors a REAL run for the money in the computing field. They have already done so with the iphone and ipod, why not do the same in the field of laptops and desktops?
I would argue that Apple uses basically the same philosophy for both Macs and iPhones. They both use the same basic vertical business model. They both are premium products in the respective markets and both hold roughly the same amount of market share.
OK, genuine new york pizza vs pizza hut. Ya that's a world of difference LOL!
I'll try and keep this brief instead of writing a book
1.) An example of what I mean by taken seriously is the project I'm working on. I won't tell you what it is so don't ask, but I work for a government contractor who is putting out free software. I once asked in a conference call why we are programming this to the .net framework, and not creating a Mac version. People actually laughed. The response made sense: If a facility can't afford to buy paid versions of the software, what makes you think they will own an expensive Mac that will do exactly what the PC does?
And thus they choose to ignore a significant number of potential users simply because they have Macs. That is a pretty simplistic assumption to make that facilities won't have Macs because they cost more.
2.) It's already been shown here what we mean by grossly overpriced. It's becoming a matter of opinion at this point. What you'll spend an extra 1300 on I might not want to, and what's worth 2700 to you might be worth only 1700 to me. If Macs fulfill your value expectations, then that's good for you. I hope they would with as much as they cost. Nobody is debating that Macs are good computers mind you.
People have said his thousands of times - it means nothing unless it it Apples to Apples and Oranges to Oranges, and the majority of the price comparisons are not. I still don't buy the overpriced argument.
3.) Almost every Apple conference I've seen Jobs speak at, he says absurdly arrogant things like "Apple continues to revolutionize and push the boundaries of computing." You're right about them being a company only out to make money, good job. The problem is they are in an industry with not much competition. Like I said earlier, we're not talking about cars here. Microsoft got in trouble for having a Monopoly, but who's fault was that? They simply didn't have any competition.
Marketing hype and bull. Apple refines things, but they call it revolution. Whatever. Yes they are in a market without much competition. They like it that way. Why would they seek to change it?
4.) You don't think companies are trying to bring computing to everyone? Explain that to the companies that contributed to the One Laptop Per Child mission. Fail.
P.R. bull - those guys don't care. They contributed to get P.R. brownie points. We are talking about people who are no different than the absurd bankers who have brought us economic armageddon. These are hard core capitalists.
Finally, don't take offense to my statement and write it off as "buyers remorse." It's ok to be this way, I've seen it many times. I worked at a home theater place for a year, and in that time I saw countless rich dudes come in and see something far cheaper than what they bought and decide it was amazing. Inevitably they always end with, "But I'm still very happy with what I have, it's got this this this and this." Even when you show how the other item (like a large LCD vs rear projector for instance) was more practical, they would always assure themselves they made the right choice. Wasn't my problem, I was meant to sell the most expensive thing I could. Point is, it wasn't buyers remorse, more like "decision assurance."
Yeah I don't really have that issue. i use both platforms - picking whichever one does the job. I've got Boxx computers for one of my 3d/Compisting guys and Macs for all the FCP/After Effects systems and an IBM on Red Hat for the Autodesk Smoke/Flame. Personally I don't engage in that kind of mental second guessing. After I buy a product I use it and don't spend a lot of time worrying about the choice I made.
You're entire misconception of my argument makes this conversation annoying and dull. All I want is for Apple to make a bigger dent in the market and give competitors a REAL run for the money in the computing field. They have already done so with the iphone and ipod, why not do the same in the field of laptops and desktops?
I'll bite, why do you want that? I don't believe Apple can do what you say and still have their products be a Mac. It would be a computer, but it wouldn't be a Mac.
That's just a matter of opinion and perception in that work environment. In my work environment the opinion and perception are the exact opposite. Where I work everyone has Macs, any one with a PC is the odd man in the room. People feel what you get is worth what you've paid for.
Yeah I understand that concept. Macs and PCs are tools and each are used differently. All I'm saying is, the facilities I'm making the best possible software I can for don't even consider Macs because of how much they can spend. It's like this for many many people, not just the facilities I'm speaking of. It's not fair when you think of it. Why should only the wealthy have a choice?
In many ways Apple does push the boundaries of computing. Apple was the first company to make USB, Firewire, and WiFi standard on all of its machines. Their are numerous examples of what Apple has brought to the computer industry. Apple has helped the industry move away from dull beige boxes and create lightweight and sleek machines that are easier for consumers to use.
Ok look at what I was responding to. You missed my point.
How is Apple in an industry without much competition? Apple is competing against Microsoft which holds 90% of the computer market.
Microsoft and who else? One competitor = not much competition. I wish it were like the automotive industry where not only do you have many competitors, but you even have companies in other countries people have never heard of.
Microsoft did have competition. MS did not get into trouble for being a monopoly, monopolies is not illegal. MS got into trouble for abusing its monopolistic position and playing under handed games to limit and destroy its competition.
this is a quote from the judge in the case:
"Microsoft enjoys so much power in the market for Intel-compatible PC operating systems that if it wished to exercise this power solely in terms of price, it could charge a price for Windows substantially above that which could be charged in a competitive market," Jackson wrote.
"Moreover, it could do so for a significant period of time without losing an unacceptable amount of business to competitors," he added. "In other words, Microsoft enjoys monopoly power in the relevant market."
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1040-232565.html
So really it was a matter of Microsoft doing too well and the idea that they could be charging whatever they wanted without anyone knowing it was too much is what got them in trouble.
If I remember correctly, it all started with companies complaining that internet explorer was shipped with the os, and it was even an integral part of the os. From there the whole thing spun into this big frenzy over their hold on the market. Where was Apple in all of this? I remember it was pointed out many times that Microsoft legally ran business in accordance with the law and then got in trouble for doing well.
Apple could not grow its company based on people who simply wanted to buy something expensive because its expensive. Their products have to perform its job and be reliable.
I haven't seen anyone say people bought Apple products because they are expensive. What I have seen is people say they are happy with their products, but for the amount Apple charges, they damn well better be happy.
Even I do the same thing. For instance, I bought a 400 dollar video card (gtx280) now I'm eyeballing a $250 card, the gtx275. While reading reviews I always find myself thinking the same thing those richies at the home theater place did. It's perfectly natural. I'm not saying I'm unhappy with what I have in any way.
I would argue that Apple uses basically the same philosophy for both Macs and iPhones. They both use the same basic vertical business model. They both are premium products in the respective markets and both hold roughly the same amount of market share.
When I mention the iphone, I'm not speaking about phones in general. I'm talking about the smartphone/PPC market. They may not be number one, but they sure did put a dent in and will remain to be this way for years to come. I have only apple to thanks for products like the touch pro 2. And look at the mp3 player market. People call mp3 players ipods, even when they aren't ipods.
And thus they choose to ignore a significant number of potential users simply because they have Macs. That is a pretty simplistic assumption to make that facilities won't have Macs because they cost more.
Well, it's the unfortunate truth. For instance, a lot of the facilities are the "bottom of the totem poll" nursing homes housing people who couldn't afford retirement village condos. These types of places actually have to bring workers in from other countries like Africa to do the work people here wouldn't do (for the amount they are getting paid.) I do the best I possibly can to make sure the people who work at these facilities have software that runs smoothly and without error. That's why I asked about Macs at a conference call, to make sure they all have access to the software. They have never had anyone call in and ask for a Mac version of the software. We're currently debating on releasing a java version for Linux platforms.
I'll bite, why do you want that? I don't believe Apple can do what you say and still have their products be a Mac. It would be a computer, but it wouldn't be a Mac.
I believe they can. I think there are a lot of innovative smart people working for Apple, and they can use their profits to expand into the lower price range while offering quality products.