The point about the pricing of Apple products can be discussed ad nauseam. Apple's goal is NOT to be the #1 computer maker by VOLUME, thus it's products are not targeted towards the consumer whose ONLY factor in making a purchase decision is the price of the product. Apple's target audience is a well-defined subpopulation of consumers who can afford to pay Apple's higher prices. A similar situation can be found in the watch industry. You can buy a Swatch for about $50, and it will tell you the time correctly. However, you can also buy a Patek Philippe watch for $10'000, if you can afford it and it makes you happy. Now Patek Philippe sells about 15'000 watches worldwide per year, has a great following among watch lovers, has been around for more than 100 years, and it's market share is a fraction of one percent. Same thing with Apple, market share is not the determining factor for a company's success, but satisfaction of its customer base is. Thus, as long as Apple can maintain a base of customer who will continue to buy its products, Apple can lead a pretty comfortable life. Thus, it is not in Apple's best interest to compete with the sub-$500 PC makers, as it would divert R&D and marketing resources, dilute the product range, resulting in an overall decrease in revenue generation efficiency.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes but software development by 3rd parties is based on the bieng able to sell enough to offset the cost of development, plus some profit. Apple HAS to have enough of an install base in each market that they are trying to sell computers in to make this worth while to programers, or they CANT be successfull in selling machines in that market.
Apple could do better than they are now, they have the brand recognition, a quality hardware product base (even if some of it is a bit underpowered), a quality software product base. They have holes in thier product base that they could fill, say by keeping the current bottom line around for another product cycle, but lowering the cost ($1299 would be ideal) to cover this. The development of this unit is already paid for, so there is no R&D cost. They dont have to make a lot of these lower cost units, in fact it would be best to just keep the channel barely full.
Another possibility is for Apple to keep the simplified product matrix, complete with its holes, and lower thier margin. This definatly wont happen.
I sticked with a 5200 for 3 years. Of those 3 years, 2.5 were simply waiting.
Then I got a Beige G3...I still have that machine, and have been waiting for about 1.5 years now.
Waiting for the G5 is childs play. Even if it's released at MWSF 2003, which is the latest date I can imagine (or the public and I will tolerate), I'll wait.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Since your G3 is good enough for you I would like to know what you need a G5 for - other than bragging?
If you earn money using your Mac and you need speed, several G4s could've visited your desk and payed for by the time you save.
I think this rumor about new powermacs early next week is total BS. It's too pathetic, and furthermore it doesn't fit with any of the other rumors going around. All of the other rumors agree on new motherboards, updated ram and agp graphics, and then the question is either a G5 or an apollo CPU. Now this rumor comes out, purportedly leaked by an Apple rep, that consists of ultra-lame Powermacs with only a 133 MHz speed bump. The G4 hasn't been speedbumped since MWNY, and all Motorola can muster up is 133 MHz? I don't believe it.
Also, I clearly remember an Apple rep posting here to say that he does not get informed about new products AT ALL. A rep may know when a new product is due, if it's real soon, but as far as specs go, they don't know sh!t. They probably know less than anyone who regularly follows rumor sites. So I don't believe that an Apple rep is a credible source.
Finally, when the 867 G4 began shipping, people were successfuly overclocking them to 1 GHz. This is 6 months ago, with 7450 G4s. So a speed bump of 133 MHz, up to 1 GHz, would be the result of virtually no progress at all on G4 development at motorola. It would mean that moto refined the 7450 fab process slightly, nothing more.
I don't believe Motorola is in such a bad situation right now. They've been working onthe G5 for a long-ass time, and the Apollo is a farily old project as well. For us to believe this rumor, we would have to accept that Moto has made no progress at all on these other chips...that their engineers just sit on their asses all day eating donuts, sipping coffee, smoking dope, whatever. Yet other rumors suggest that Apple has even been infusing the PPC development team with cash.
If this rumor is true, then wow, how lame. It would be best if Apple quietly updated the powermacs at the Apple store, without even making a press release.
At the current rate of PPC development, I figure that in 2-3 years when I'm looking to buy a new computer, I'll be faced with deciding between a 7 GHz, $999 Wintel, or a 2.1 GHz powermac for $4000. WTF Apple? This is BS!!!
<strong>If this is to be true I will say "Wow Apple. Still can't give me a reason to upgrade from my broken beige G3 tower". This is bull.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Comments
<strong>
The point about the pricing of Apple products can be discussed ad nauseam. Apple's goal is NOT to be the #1 computer maker by VOLUME, thus it's products are not targeted towards the consumer whose ONLY factor in making a purchase decision is the price of the product. Apple's target audience is a well-defined subpopulation of consumers who can afford to pay Apple's higher prices. A similar situation can be found in the watch industry. You can buy a Swatch for about $50, and it will tell you the time correctly. However, you can also buy a Patek Philippe watch for $10'000, if you can afford it and it makes you happy. Now Patek Philippe sells about 15'000 watches worldwide per year, has a great following among watch lovers, has been around for more than 100 years, and it's market share is a fraction of one percent. Same thing with Apple, market share is not the determining factor for a company's success, but satisfaction of its customer base is. Thus, as long as Apple can maintain a base of customer who will continue to buy its products, Apple can lead a pretty comfortable life. Thus, it is not in Apple's best interest to compete with the sub-$500 PC makers, as it would divert R&D and marketing resources, dilute the product range, resulting in an overall decrease in revenue generation efficiency.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes but software development by 3rd parties is based on the bieng able to sell enough to offset the cost of development, plus some profit. Apple HAS to have enough of an install base in each market that they are trying to sell computers in to make this worth while to programers, or they CANT be successfull in selling machines in that market.
Apple could do better than they are now, they have the brand recognition, a quality hardware product base (even if some of it is a bit underpowered), a quality software product base. They have holes in thier product base that they could fill, say by keeping the current bottom line around for another product cycle, but lowering the cost ($1299 would be ideal) to cover this. The development of this unit is already paid for, so there is no R&D cost. They dont have to make a lot of these lower cost units, in fact it would be best to just keep the channel barely full.
Another possibility is for Apple to keep the simplified product matrix, complete with its holes, and lower thier margin. This definatly wont happen.
<strong>That is not true...
I sticked with a 5200 for 3 years. Of those 3 years, 2.5 were simply waiting.
Then I got a Beige G3...I still have that machine, and have been waiting for about 1.5 years now.
Waiting for the G5 is childs play. Even if it's released at MWSF 2003, which is the latest date I can imagine (or the public and I will tolerate), I'll wait.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Since your G3 is good enough for you I would like to know what you need a G5 for - other than bragging?
If you earn money using your Mac and you need speed, several G4s could've visited your desk and payed for by the time you save.
Also, I clearly remember an Apple rep posting here to say that he does not get informed about new products AT ALL. A rep may know when a new product is due, if it's real soon, but as far as specs go, they don't know sh!t. They probably know less than anyone who regularly follows rumor sites. So I don't believe that an Apple rep is a credible source.
Finally, when the 867 G4 began shipping, people were successfuly overclocking them to 1 GHz. This is 6 months ago, with 7450 G4s. So a speed bump of 133 MHz, up to 1 GHz, would be the result of virtually no progress at all on G4 development at motorola. It would mean that moto refined the 7450 fab process slightly, nothing more.
I don't believe Motorola is in such a bad situation right now. They've been working onthe G5 for a long-ass time, and the Apollo is a farily old project as well. For us to believe this rumor, we would have to accept that Moto has made no progress at all on these other chips...that their engineers just sit on their asses all day eating donuts, sipping coffee, smoking dope, whatever. Yet other rumors suggest that Apple has even been infusing the PPC development team with cash.
If this rumor is true, then wow, how lame. It would be best if Apple quietly updated the powermacs at the Apple store, without even making a press release.
At the current rate of PPC development, I figure that in 2-3 years when I'm looking to buy a new computer, I'll be faced with deciding between a 7 GHz, $999 Wintel, or a 2.1 GHz powermac for $4000. WTF Apple? This is BS!!!
<strong>If this is to be true I will say "Wow Apple. Still can't give me a reason to upgrade from my broken beige G3 tower". This is bull.</strong><hr></blockquote>
or your broken english