The PC industry understands that people who pay for cheap machines can generally get by with lower performance. At every update, Apple pushes the latest hardware at the same or higher pricing and seems to ignore people's needs.
It does seem a little strange that Apple refuses to sell lower performing hardware at lower prices. It forces people who can get by with less than a premium machine to buy either a used Mac or a PC, neither of which puts a penny into Apple's pocket. On the other hand, the difference between a machine built around a 2.0GHz processor and DDR2 isn't really all that much lower than one built around a 2.8GHz processor and DDR3. Having lower performing Macs in the lineup might convince a large number of people that they could live with less and that would really hurt Apple's bottom line.
On the topic of Apple pushing the latest technology...
Latest architecture: yes
Latest RAM: yes
Latest CPU: yes
Latest graphics: you're kidding right?
Apple consistently sells premium priced computers with entry level graphics. The GT120 is really just a rebranded 9500GT, which is nothing more than an 8600GS made on a smaller process. Thus it's a crippled version of a two year old chip that was widely regarded as the weakest performing (relative to the high end) mid-range entry in nVidia history.
Today that chip, paired with 512MB of RAM is worth no more than $50 yet Apple put that POS into their $3,299 Mac Pro. They should be embarrassed to be shipping such junk in a workstation whose owners are the most likely of all to need the power of Cuda and OpenCL, but they're obviously too busy counting their profits to care. Forcing any Mac Pro buyer with a brain to spend another $200 to get a real video card must seem like a good strategy. Just like the $100 adapter to use a dual link DVI display on mini DisplayPort, it's a blatant cash grab. That's one of the things I truly hate about Apple.
All this talk about graphics processors is the fundamental point in the current war between Intel and nVidia. In the near future your graphics chip will be able to handle many of the tasks currently managed by the main CPU. In a growing number of fields the power of your GPU will become more important than your CPU. This scares Intel to death because they know nVidia and AMD (thanks to their purchase of ATI) are years ahead of them in stream processing.
By refusing to let anyone else build chipsets for Intel Nehalem processors, Intel is trying to hold back their competitors long enough to get graphics embedded into all their processors. If they succeed with that strategy Intel will own both the chipset and entry level graphics market. nVidia and ATI will be left with only the mid-high end graphics market that they already own.
---
Overall I like hearing that Apple may be getting more aggressive on pricing. It's time for them to make a big push to move as many people as possible to a single hardware platform and single version of the OS. That would allow both Apple and 3rd party developers to move ahead more quickly and with lower risk of incompatibilities.
Give me Snow Leopard on an iMac with serious OpenCL graphics and a case I can open up to change the hard drive and I'll stop complaining that there's no consumer tower.
I was totally happy with the price I paid for the two white MB's I bought my kids, but hopefully the price drops happen later rather than sooner.
I hear you - its a great little machine. I was going to buy one today (the deadline) for the Macmall/AppleInside price of $899. But to get that price you have to mail in rebates, etc (I hate those things) and now I'll just wait a month or 2 and get it-direct from Apple.
I don't see why Apple would ever get into the low margin netbook market. Let the other companies make them and fight for those meager margins. They have to sell millions just to make any money on them anyway. I can understand why Apple would choose to focus on the much more profitable mid and high end products.
If Apple wants move to the next level, they have to lower their prices. Perhaps, they have convinced 10 to 15% of Americans and 5-10% of the world to have a Mac, but if they keep the same prices they will never dominate the computer market. They'll keep doing well, but slowly. Furthermore, linux and Apple had a chance to break Microsoft during the Vista period. It is going to be a lot more difficult for some people to go mac when they can have Windows 7, which is very good, by the way.
I suspect that new lower priced Macs have nothing to do with recession and lower prices but rather a perceived opportunity to gain market share by offering a lower priced system, recession or not.
I don't know why they don't just throw in a cheap 17 or 20" monitor and flog a mini package for less than a grand.
I thought this guy was banned not too long ago for seriously shooting his mouth off? Guess he didn't use that time wisely to think things through has he?
Kasper.... are you catching wind of this?
Are you the thought police coming to arrest me for speaking my mind? Well fuck you too, buddy.
If I hurt your feelings telling Apple off then, you should be absolutely devastated now. I took that time to bone your mom.
Look, I'm typing this on a Samsung NC-10 that cost $399. I upped the RAM from 1 to 2 GB for something like $12. I am very happy with this netbook for what it is and it certainly isn't the proverbial "a piece of crap" Steve Jobs was talking about.
a lot of people were happy with their crappy smartphones until apple introduced iphone. then everyone suddenly realized the right way to do smartphones and suddenly people weren't bragging about their budget, wonder, do-it-all phones because they realized those phones only offered a lower price point and nothing else. the netbook market is the exact same thing so apple is taking their time to do it right.
Furthermore, linux and Apple had a chance to break Microsoft during the Vista period. It is going to be a lot more difficult for some people to go mac when they can have Windows 7, which is very good, by the way.
microsoft had a chance to break themselves with vista and they did. they just had their first quarterly loss in something like 20 years.
If Apple wants move to the next level, they have to lower their prices. Perhaps, they have convinced 10 to 15% of Americans and 5-10% of the world to have a Mac, but if they keep the same prices they will never dominate the computer market. They'll keep doing well, but slowly.
Maybe domination was never the plan. Maybe making more money every year was the plan.
Quote:
Furthermore, linux and Apple had a chance to break Microsoft during the Vista period.
Not a chance. The same was said with virtually every new Windows release over the last 20 years, all of which had problems. Microsoft will continue to dominate if only by inertia. Apple offers consumers a choice, not a New World Order.
Apple can start by lopping off $100 off of their Mac Mini offerings and boosting the low-end to 2Gb RAM. No Apple system should have less than 2Gb RAM.
Maybe domination was never the plan. Maybe making more money every year was the plan.
Not a chance. The same was said with virtually every new Windows release over the last 20 years, all of which had problems. Microsoft will continue to dominate if only by inertia. Apple offers consumers a choice, not a New World Order.
There is a easy way to get OSX and not pay allot.
It's Called EFI-X. Build a Core2 system with EFI-X for like $600. Kills the Mac Mini and the iMac in performance and allows complete expandability and upgradability.
With EFI-X I could care less what Apple charges, except on the laptops. Though I just use Boot 132 on my ASUS A8J and it works just fine.
Why does everybody keep trashing Net Books on here? They are for the PC masses who just need to surf the internet and get mail. That's all- nothing more
Yes, but why were Blackberries and even more so the iPhone so popular? Because they gave people e-mail everywhere (Blackberries) and internet everywhere. Everywhere because they use the cell network for internet access and because they fit into a pocket, ie, you could take them everywhere.
Netbooks to a large degree do the same, e-mail and internet everywhere. Sure they are bigger than a smartphone but they are smaller and also cheaper than a 13" notebook. If somebody wants internet everywhere but on a larger screen the iPhone but in a smaller, lighter and cheaper package than a 13" MBA or MB, Apple has nothing to offer currently (but they definitely are working on something).
There are a lot things Apple does not offer, they cannot offer everything and neither should they. But if there is a fast growing market (8-10" internet everywhere devices) than it probably makes sense for them to offer something.
Please don't misinterpret my article. Apple isn't going to make cheap PCs. That's not what this is about. It's about marginal yet noticeably more affordable Macs on par with the company's current standards. It could be as simple as taking the current models and lopping $100 - $150 off in a few months.
I was very conscience of using the term "more affordable" rather than "cheap." I did this for a reason.
K
me and a few others here thought that the loss last month might do it combined with the new MSFT ads, however, remember that Apple is painted into a corner by themselves. Many know the apple profit margin can be from 80% to 400% (at least what I have read online) with the Mac Pro actually being the fairest of them all price wise, however, also note that it uses PREMIUM EEC RAM as well as higher end CPU's, Apple could have used CHEAPER MEMORY and CHEAPER CPU and had a machine that is faster, then it's present offerings, again, this is by Apple design.
With regard to netbook, without shooting themself in the foot with Macbook and Air, I don't know how they can do it.
The logical step would be to refresh with 4 core laptops, same prices and reduce the 2 cores down by 25% or more, that would move these machines and the higher end can be the faster GPU and CPU, problem is, the 4 cores aren't really out there yet for mobile computing. They could also offer a i7 desktop and laptop configs in a desktop - that would reduce price too, and more so once they get the OS on a chip design completed, if ever.
I would not worry though, apple will figure out a way to make it profitable as well as make a machine that is limited, you will not be able to do everything you want without paying for it. In other words, they could release a macbook pro for example (cheaper than ever as the unibody is cheaper to produce), that is faster and for less money then the machines out now.
Its all good from a consumer point of view and stops with the APPLE making CHEAP stuff comments, as the MACBOOKS for example, some say the real cost can be seen in the APPLE CARE PRICE as this covers the motherboard, CPU, memory, hard drive, or close to it.
If that's the case, Apple already makes cheap but since their profit margins are so high, we don't see it as so.
It's amazing to me to see how many of you think this isn't good news.
Anyone who thinks this is bad news is only worried that owning a mac will no longer represent whatever kind of status symbol you cling to.
Seriously, the article didn't say they were bringing cheaper parts to the higher end computers so get over it. There's absolutely no reason to get worried over Apple trying to become affordable to more people.
Comments
The PC industry understands that people who pay for cheap machines can generally get by with lower performance. At every update, Apple pushes the latest hardware at the same or higher pricing and seems to ignore people's needs.
It does seem a little strange that Apple refuses to sell lower performing hardware at lower prices. It forces people who can get by with less than a premium machine to buy either a used Mac or a PC, neither of which puts a penny into Apple's pocket. On the other hand, the difference between a machine built around a 2.0GHz processor and DDR2 isn't really all that much lower than one built around a 2.8GHz processor and DDR3. Having lower performing Macs in the lineup might convince a large number of people that they could live with less and that would really hurt Apple's bottom line.
On the topic of Apple pushing the latest technology...
Latest architecture: yes
Latest RAM: yes
Latest CPU: yes
Latest graphics: you're kidding right?
Apple consistently sells premium priced computers with entry level graphics. The GT120 is really just a rebranded 9500GT, which is nothing more than an 8600GS made on a smaller process. Thus it's a crippled version of a two year old chip that was widely regarded as the weakest performing (relative to the high end) mid-range entry in nVidia history.
Today that chip, paired with 512MB of RAM is worth no more than $50 yet Apple put that POS into their $3,299 Mac Pro. They should be embarrassed to be shipping such junk in a workstation whose owners are the most likely of all to need the power of Cuda and OpenCL, but they're obviously too busy counting their profits to care. Forcing any Mac Pro buyer with a brain to spend another $200 to get a real video card must seem like a good strategy. Just like the $100 adapter to use a dual link DVI display on mini DisplayPort, it's a blatant cash grab. That's one of the things I truly hate about Apple.
All this talk about graphics processors is the fundamental point in the current war between Intel and nVidia. In the near future your graphics chip will be able to handle many of the tasks currently managed by the main CPU. In a growing number of fields the power of your GPU will become more important than your CPU. This scares Intel to death because they know nVidia and AMD (thanks to their purchase of ATI) are years ahead of them in stream processing.
By refusing to let anyone else build chipsets for Intel Nehalem processors, Intel is trying to hold back their competitors long enough to get graphics embedded into all their processors. If they succeed with that strategy Intel will own both the chipset and entry level graphics market. nVidia and ATI will be left with only the mid-high end graphics market that they already own.
---
Overall I like hearing that Apple may be getting more aggressive on pricing. It's time for them to make a big push to move as many people as possible to a single hardware platform and single version of the OS. That would allow both Apple and 3rd party developers to move ahead more quickly and with lower risk of incompatibilities.
Give me Snow Leopard on an iMac with serious OpenCL graphics and a case I can open up to change the hard drive and I'll stop complaining that there's no consumer tower.
I was totally happy with the price I paid for the two white MB's I bought my kids, but hopefully the price drops happen later rather than sooner.
I hear you - its a great little machine. I was going to buy one today (the deadline) for the Macmall/AppleInside price of $899. But to get that price you have to mail in rebates, etc (I hate those things) and now I'll just wait a month or 2 and get it-direct from Apple.
I was gonna buy a white MacBook this weekend but now I'll wait. It's only worth $899 tops anyway.
I hope the MacMini drops to where it should be too- $500.
Sorry MacMall- you just lost my April 30th deadline sale.
To all of those who paid the higher prices- I feel your pain.
To all of those enjoying your Macs that get the job done, and do it well, I feel your joy.
I would pay iMac prices for something that's 1/2 a base-level Mac Pro.
-Just don't need to buy/get rid of a perfectly good monitor every 3 years.
1 optical, 2 hd bays, 1 double-wide graphics, 3 pciE, coupla ports
I don't know why they don't just throw in a cheap 17 or 20" monitor and flog a mini package for less than a grand.
I thought this guy was banned not too long ago for seriously shooting his mouth off? Guess he didn't use that time wisely to think things through has he?
Kasper.... are you catching wind of this?
Are you the thought police coming to arrest me for speaking my mind? Well fuck you too, buddy.
If I hurt your feelings telling Apple off then, you should be absolutely devastated now. I took that time to bone your mom.
Look, I'm typing this on a Samsung NC-10 that cost $399. I upped the RAM from 1 to 2 GB for something like $12. I am very happy with this netbook for what it is and it certainly isn't the proverbial "a piece of crap" Steve Jobs was talking about.
a lot of people were happy with their crappy smartphones until apple introduced iphone. then everyone suddenly realized the right way to do smartphones and suddenly people weren't bragging about their budget, wonder, do-it-all phones because they realized those phones only offered a lower price point and nothing else. the netbook market is the exact same thing so apple is taking their time to do it right.
Furthermore, linux and Apple had a chance to break Microsoft during the Vista period. It is going to be a lot more difficult for some people to go mac when they can have Windows 7, which is very good, by the way.
microsoft had a chance to break themselves with vista and they did. they just had their first quarterly loss in something like 20 years.
If Apple wants move to the next level, they have to lower their prices. Perhaps, they have convinced 10 to 15% of Americans and 5-10% of the world to have a Mac, but if they keep the same prices they will never dominate the computer market. They'll keep doing well, but slowly.
Maybe domination was never the plan. Maybe making more money every year was the plan.
Furthermore, linux and Apple had a chance to break Microsoft during the Vista period.
Not a chance. The same was said with virtually every new Windows release over the last 20 years, all of which had problems. Microsoft will continue to dominate if only by inertia. Apple offers consumers a choice, not a New World Order.
Maybe domination was never the plan. Maybe making more money every year was the plan.
Not a chance. The same was said with virtually every new Windows release over the last 20 years, all of which had problems. Microsoft will continue to dominate if only by inertia. Apple offers consumers a choice, not a New World Order.
There is a easy way to get OSX and not pay allot.
It's Called EFI-X. Build a Core2 system with EFI-X for like $600. Kills the Mac Mini and the iMac in performance and allows complete expandability and upgradability.
With EFI-X I could care less what Apple charges, except on the laptops. Though I just use Boot 132 on my ASUS A8J and it works just fine.
Why does everybody keep trashing Net Books on here? They are for the PC masses who just need to surf the internet and get mail. That's all- nothing more
Yes, but why were Blackberries and even more so the iPhone so popular? Because they gave people e-mail everywhere (Blackberries) and internet everywhere. Everywhere because they use the cell network for internet access and because they fit into a pocket, ie, you could take them everywhere.
Netbooks to a large degree do the same, e-mail and internet everywhere. Sure they are bigger than a smartphone but they are smaller and also cheaper than a 13" notebook. If somebody wants internet everywhere but on a larger screen the iPhone but in a smaller, lighter and cheaper package than a 13" MBA or MB, Apple has nothing to offer currently (but they definitely are working on something).
There are a lot things Apple does not offer, they cannot offer everything and neither should they. But if there is a fast growing market (8-10" internet everywhere devices) than it probably makes sense for them to offer something.
microsoft had a chance to break themselves with vista and they did. they just had their first quarterly loss in something like 20 years.
Might this be also referred to as shooting one's self in one's own foot?
Please don't misinterpret my article. Apple isn't going to make cheap PCs. That's not what this is about. It's about marginal yet noticeably more affordable Macs on par with the company's current standards. It could be as simple as taking the current models and lopping $100 - $150 off in a few months.
I was very conscience of using the term "more affordable" rather than "cheap." I did this for a reason.
K
me and a few others here thought that the loss last month might do it combined with the new MSFT ads, however, remember that Apple is painted into a corner by themselves. Many know the apple profit margin can be from 80% to 400% (at least what I have read online) with the Mac Pro actually being the fairest of them all price wise, however, also note that it uses PREMIUM EEC RAM as well as higher end CPU's, Apple could have used CHEAPER MEMORY and CHEAPER CPU and had a machine that is faster, then it's present offerings, again, this is by Apple design.
With regard to netbook, without shooting themself in the foot with Macbook and Air, I don't know how they can do it.
The logical step would be to refresh with 4 core laptops, same prices and reduce the 2 cores down by 25% or more, that would move these machines and the higher end can be the faster GPU and CPU, problem is, the 4 cores aren't really out there yet for mobile computing. They could also offer a i7 desktop and laptop configs in a desktop - that would reduce price too, and more so once they get the OS on a chip design completed, if ever.
I would not worry though, apple will figure out a way to make it profitable as well as make a machine that is limited, you will not be able to do everything you want without paying for it. In other words, they could release a macbook pro for example (cheaper than ever as the unibody is cheaper to produce), that is faster and for less money then the machines out now.
Its all good from a consumer point of view and stops with the APPLE making CHEAP stuff comments, as the MACBOOKS for example, some say the real cost can be seen in the APPLE CARE PRICE as this covers the motherboard, CPU, memory, hard drive, or close to it.
If that's the case, Apple already makes cheap but since their profit margins are so high, we don't see it as so.
microsoft had a chance to break themselves with vista and they did. they just had their first quarterly loss in something like 20 years.
that is right they reported a $2.3 billion profit. How is that a loss???
Perhaps you meant it was their first quarter where their profits dipped
Anyone who thinks this is bad news is only worried that owning a mac will no longer represent whatever kind of status symbol you cling to.
Seriously, the article didn't say they were bringing cheaper parts to the higher end computers so get over it. There's absolutely no reason to get worried over Apple trying to become affordable to more people.