Jobs claimed that it was to make it look good, but it's pretty much impossible to tell that the iMac has glass on it; it just looks shiny. He also claimed that the glass is highly recyclable (which I'm sure was to please the nature-protection groups).
I personally think that Apple getting hammered for not having as high of a recycling rate at other computer companies is ridiculous because I know that a ton of Mac users keep their old computers, they don't just throw them away. I have a Macintosh Classic II sitting on my bookshelf that I never use, but I'm not going to throw it away. I don't know any PC users that put their old Windows boxes on their bookshelves to look at on a daily basis.
And with the mirrored Apple logo... I have an eMac that has a mirrored Apple logo in the same place that it would be on the iMacs, and when using the computer, I cannot see myself in the mirror. Maybe it would be possible to see your reflection on the iMacs, but in order to see myself on the eMac, I have to slouch over and look directly at it.
Sooner or later, all Macs will get thrown out, except for a very few that some people will keep as a historical memento, if they have room. That's what I do.
But, at some point almost all Macs are disposed of. It just takes longer for the first wave to be thrown out. After that, the rest are gotten rid of with regularity, just as PC's are.
Otherwise, Apple wouldn't have a recycling program, and problem.
Very cute yourself, but to each his own and we each may have our reasons for not caring for a glossy screen.
That's fine, but it doesn't have anything to do with the reflections.
Quote:
However, his Steveness and crew seemed to have made that decision for us all!
Kinda like the founder of Ford cars and trucks, Henry Ford told is customers regarding his first car, "You can have any color your want, as long as it's black!"
Well, the MacBook is doing better than any other model Apple has ever had. Would it do better if there was choice? Maybe, maybe not.
Exactly! I considered "rip the inset from the living flesh of the aluminum" and "cast an inset from the molten aluminums of creation" but decided to tone it down.
Yeah, but that would at least have been closer to the truth!
The more SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost. If Apple offer both, then it migh have raised the price by $50.
Why do you think Apple puts cheap gpu's in its machines? To save a few bucks.
So instead of the $200.00 and $300.00 price break you'd be getting a $150.00 or $250.00 price break instead?!
More SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost??? Apple started out with the iPod SKU, then the Mini iPod SKU, then the Shuffle SKU, then the... you get my point... Apple already has a limited product line MacBooks & MacBook Pros for laptops and The Mac Mini, iMac, PowerMac for Desktops... adding screen options for production runs can be managed effectively without creating havoc for their inventory control. There are some brilliant minds over at Apple, this shouldn't stump them or present a problem. It is more of the attitude of what Apple puts out is what you wil get. Love it or leave it type thing. And in certain circumstances, I'm sure some people will pass on this new iMac design until Apple either offers them a choice or the person gives in to Apple's conformity.
So instead of the $200.00 and $300.00 price break you'd be getting a $150.00 or $250.00 price break instead?!
More SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost??? Apple started out with the iPod SKU, then the Mini iPod SKU, then the Shuffle SKU, then the... you get my point... Aplle already has a limited product line MacBooks & MacBook Pros for laptops and The Mac Mini, iMac, PowerMac for Desktops... adding screen options for production runs can be managed effectively without creating havoc for their inventory control. There are some brilliant minds over at Apple, this shouldn't stump them or present a problem. It is more of the attitude of what Apple puts out is what you wil get. Love it or leave it type thing. And in certain circumstances, I'm sure some people will pass on this new iMac design until Apple either offers them a choice or the person gives in to Apple's conformity.
Yes, as hard as it may be for you to believe, it does add to the cost. You just don't want to think it through. It's a joke to you. But, if you do think of what happens, from the first designs, to the stocking of the stores, you would understand that the more SKU's the higher the price.
That doesn't mean that prices won't come down with new designs. Technology moves ahead, and so prices do come down. But multiple SKU's prevent it from coming down to what it might.
Remember that with the new iPods, Apple kept removing more accessories with each new iteration, to keep that price down. People noticed, and complained about each time it happened. I'm sure people here remember.
I'm not saying that I don't think Apple should have offered two screens. I've said the opposite.
I'm just giving you one reason why Apple may not be offering it.
But, the easily removable screen does offer a way to replace them without taking the machine apart. Interesting.
That's fine, but it doesn't have anything to do with the reflections.
Well, the MacBook is doing better than any other model Apple has ever had. Would it do better if there was choice? Maybe, maybe not.
It would be a better argument if you were to give the breakdown of Matte finish MacBook Pro's sales vs. Glossy MacBook Pros.
MacBooks may be doing well by virtue of price point then having to do with a glossy screen.
It would also be interesting if Apple did have a glossy screen iMac and a matte finish iMac on display at their Apple Stores to see which one the public would go for, then they can base their production runs ratio on that and not be paying for warehousing slow moving inventory.
It would be a better argument if you were to give the breakdown of Matte finish MacBook Pro's sales vs. Glossy MacBook Pros.
MacBooks may be doing well by virtue of price point then having to do with a glossy screen.
It would also be interesting if Apple did have a glossy screen iMac and a matte finish iMac on display at their Apple Stores to see which one the public would go for, then they can base their production runs ratio on that and not be paying for warehousing slow moving inventory.
I don't have those numbers. Possibility one of the companies that analyse sales has estimates, because Apple doesn't break those figures out. The argument would be better for either one of us, depending on how it went.
But the audience for the MBP is mostly different from most of the iMac audience. I'm not sure we could compare a laptop customer to a desktop cone that directly, or one buying a much more expensive device.
I can say that by going from those here who have bought the new iMac, at least those who have posted, the glossy screen isn't a problem. The only review that had a problem was MacWorld in their brightly lit offices, though even they said that the glossy models images looked better.
You guys argue and bicker like little old ladies. I like the glossy. All our macs in the office are glossy. Fluorescents arent too huge of a deal... i dunno.
Yes, as hard as it may be for you to believe, it does add to the cost. You just don't want to think it through. It's a joke to you. But, if you do think of what happens, from the first designs, to the stocking of the stores, you would understand that the more SKU's the higher the price.
That doesn't mean that prices won't come down with new designs. Technology moves ahead, and so prices do come down. But multiple SKU's prevent it from coming down to what it might.
Remember that with the new iPods, Apple kept removing more accessories with each new iteration, to keep that price down. People noticed, and complained about each time it happened. I'm sure people here remember.
I'm not saying that I don't think Apple should have offered two screens. I've said the opposite.
I'm just giving you one reason why Apple may not be offering it.
But, the easily removable screen does offer a way to replace them without taking the machine apart. Interesting.
I use to work for a small education company (small as in "Cottage Industry") that was the sole distributor of both a professional and consumer line of educational teaching materials of a product line well over 100 items - teacher manuals, workbooks, audio, software, consumables and the like, of a product used to teach English through storyline characters versus the American way of rules like "i before e except after c". This product, produced in England, authored by a woman named Lyn, was a success in the UK - used in 80% of the schools.
We were the sole outlet here in the states selling to school districts, private schools and parents. Although I have no idea as to the "going on" of intellect and artistic creation, design, print, publish, and marketing of the materials, I do know all about inventory, exchange rates and inventory control and having precious shelf space occupied, especially when it's YOU who is laying out money before ever recouping those monies from the profits realized in sales of said materials. So what I say is not based on a joke!
Also, being the sole outlet in the states but not the "authors" of the materials we had to fight tooth and nail for them to create an "Americanized" version of their product so American students would learn the "American' version of words like 'color' not 'colour' etc. We never won out, though. Also, like Steve Jobs, they too thought they new what was best for the market here, much to our chagrin, some of the materials we pruchased just languished, while other materials could have had greater potential if only expanded upon. But the American way versus what worked in the UK and "we've been at it longer" was all we ever heard from them. We also learned about inventory control the hard way, by pre-ordering in bulk, but a lot of items were left on the shelf and a big bill was left to us to pay. We soon changed our ways by extending delivery times and by keeping smaller quantities on hand and increased frequency of orders placed to England.
In the end, being the bunch of novices we were, we paid off our huge business debt, worked our inventory down to managable levels of what sold great and what didn't and had a smoother operation then our inital growing pains. Apple is no "Cottage Industry" and I am sure their inventory and production has been worked down to a science of what serves them best. Having two versions of the iMac, even if one requires BTO, would not be the ruin of Apple! Trust me, they invented, manufactured, warehoused and store shelved "The Cube" for Heaven's sake!
But the audience for the MBP is mostly different from most of the iMac audience. I'm not sure we could compare a laptop customer to a desktop cone that directly, or one buying a much more expensive device..
It may be true that the audience may be different for the MBP versus the MB or iMac, it's just that the MBP is the only line that gives the consumer the chocie of matte or glossy.
AND...
Melgross, are we arguing and bickering like a bunch of old ladies? I thought we were having a point - counterpoint conversation?
To those who say Glossy is not bad, I am not debating regarding that issue. I am however, griping, bickering like an old lady, if you care, with regards to the loss of what once was and no freedom of choice. What if Ford put a 4 cylinder, no make that 2 cylinder in their "muscle" car the Mustang and said it's what the people want, a greener environment and no car enthusiast was given the choice to BTO with a V-8! Bet you'd hear a bunch of old ladies bickering on some muscle car auto enthusiast board!
Personally, I dislike the black Apple logo. If the body is made from aluminum, why color the Apple logo at all? Just leave the logo as an impression made in aluminum. It will stand out just fine. That last iMac did this using the white plastic case.
Speaking of black, not only do I dislike the black logo, I really dislike the black back. Truly ugly.
I use to work for a small education company (small as in "Cottage Industry") that was the sole distributor of both a professional and consumer line of educational teaching materials of a product line well over 100 items - teacher manuals, workbooks, audio, software, consumables and the like, of a product used to teach English through storyline characters versus the American way of rules like "i before e except after c". This product, produced in England, authored by a woman named Lyn, was a success in the UK - used in 80% of the schools.
We were the sole outlet here in the states selling to school districts, private schools and parents. Although I have no idea as to the "going on" of intellect and artistic creation, design, print, publish, and marketing of the materials, I do know all about inventory, exchange rates and inventory control and having precious shelf space occupied, especially when it's YOU who is laying out money before ever recouping those monies from the profits realized in sales of said materials. So what I say is not based on a joke!
Also, being the sole outlet in the states but not the "authors" of the materials we had to fight tooth and nail for them to create an "Americanized" version of their product so American students would learn the "American' version of words like 'color' not 'colour' etc. We never won out, though. Also, like Steve Jobs, they too thought they new what was best for the market here, much to our chagrin, some of the materials we pruchased just languished, while other materials could have had greater potential if only expanded upon. But the American way versus what worked in the UK and "we've been at it longer" was all we ever heard from them. We also learned about inventory control the hard way, by pre-ordering in bulk, but a lot of items were left on the shelf and a big bill was left to us to pay. We soon changed our ways by extending delivery times and by keeping smaller quantities on hand and increased frequency of orders placed to England.
In the end, being the bunch of novices we were, we paid off our huge business debt, worked our inventory down to managable levels of what sold great and what didn't and had a smoother operation then our inital growing pains. Apple is no "Cottage Industry" and I am sure their inventory and production has been worked down to a science of what serves them best. Having two versions of the iMac, even if one requires BTO, would not be the ruin of Apple! Trust me, they invented, manufactured, warehoused and store shelved "The Cube" for Heaven's sake!
I never said that it would be the ruin of them. Just that the products would have some added cost.
You found out that for yourself.
But, I'll relate a short bit of my history, which the older members her already have heard.
I was a partner in an audio manufacturing company Magnum Opus, in the '70's through the end of '82, when we sold it. In designing products I always had to take care to try to use components that could be used within other products, to keep the complexity of ordering and inventory down. This was for professional products costing mucho bucks. It was impossible to keep different versions of products for different needs of customers because that would lessen the production run of everything, driving up costs.
As a compromise, we designed a chassis for our studio preamplifier/control unit. That way, the chassis and power supply was always the same, and modules could be bought to make the unit into whatever the customer needed.
It was still expensive to do that way, but had advantages. It did cost far less than coming out with several models, each one just a bit different than the next.
It's how computer companies work today.
Apple has the same problem, don't think they can avoid it by being larger.
Other computer companies have several more lines of computers than Apple has, and it shows in their margins.
One would get sick and tired of seeing yourself all day with the mirrored one.
Well I have two of the old plastic Cinema displays from the G4 era, and both of them have the shiny chrome silver Apple logo..
To be honest, in the past three years, I have never once looked at my reflection in the logo until today after reading this article.. Oh yeah, I can see myself in there..
It may be true that the audience may be different for the MBP versus the MB or iMac, it's just that the MBP is the only line that gives the consumer the chocie of matte or glossy.
AND...
Melgross, are we arguing and bickering like a bunch of old ladies? I thought we were having a point - counterpoint conversation?
To those who say Glossy is not bad, I am not debating regarding that issue. I am however, griping, bickering like an old lady, if you care, with regards to the loss of what once was and no freedom of choice. What if Ford put a 4 cylinder, no make that 2 cylinder in their "muscle" car the Mustang and said it's what the people want, a greener environment and no car enthusiast was given the choice to BTO with a V-8! Bet you'd hear a bunch of old ladies bickering on some muscle car auto enthusiast board!
It's getting late ya'll, Good night!
I guess you can read this tomorrow.
Bickering is a way of life here. Imagine how boring it would be if everyone said, "Yes, you're right", and then the other said, "Yes, you're right too" all the time.
Well, we can look at it this way, we didn't have a choice before, it's no different now. Except that those who may have preferred glossy had no choice. Now those who may prefer matte have no choice.
Comments
Jobs claimed that it was to make it look good, but it's pretty much impossible to tell that the iMac has glass on it; it just looks shiny. He also claimed that the glass is highly recyclable (which I'm sure was to please the nature-protection groups).
I personally think that Apple getting hammered for not having as high of a recycling rate at other computer companies is ridiculous because I know that a ton of Mac users keep their old computers, they don't just throw them away. I have a Macintosh Classic II sitting on my bookshelf that I never use, but I'm not going to throw it away. I don't know any PC users that put their old Windows boxes on their bookshelves to look at on a daily basis.
And with the mirrored Apple logo... I have an eMac that has a mirrored Apple logo in the same place that it would be on the iMacs, and when using the computer, I cannot see myself in the mirror. Maybe it would be possible to see your reflection on the iMacs, but in order to see myself on the eMac, I have to slouch over and look directly at it.
Sooner or later, all Macs will get thrown out, except for a very few that some people will keep as a historical memento, if they have room. That's what I do.
But, at some point almost all Macs are disposed of. It just takes longer for the first wave to be thrown out. After that, the rest are gotten rid of with regularity, just as PC's are.
Otherwise, Apple wouldn't have a recycling program, and problem.
Very cute yourself, but to each his own and we each may have our reasons for not caring for a glossy screen.
That's fine, but it doesn't have anything to do with the reflections.
However, his Steveness and crew seemed to have made that decision for us all!
Kinda like the founder of Ford cars and trucks, Henry Ford told is customers regarding his first car, "You can have any color your want, as long as it's black!"
Well, the MacBook is doing better than any other model Apple has ever had. Would it do better if there was choice? Maybe, maybe not.
Exactly! I considered "rip the inset from the living flesh of the aluminum" and "cast an inset from the molten aluminums of creation" but decided to tone it down.
Yeah, but that would at least have been closer to the truth!
That's not it at all, as you should know.
The more SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost. If Apple offer both, then it migh have raised the price by $50.
Why do you think Apple puts cheap gpu's in its machines? To save a few bucks.
So instead of the $200.00 and $300.00 price break you'd be getting a $150.00 or $250.00 price break instead?!
More SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost??? Apple started out with the iPod SKU, then the Mini iPod SKU, then the Shuffle SKU, then the... you get my point... Apple already has a limited product line MacBooks & MacBook Pros for laptops and The Mac Mini, iMac, PowerMac for Desktops... adding screen options for production runs can be managed effectively without creating havoc for their inventory control. There are some brilliant minds over at Apple, this shouldn't stump them or present a problem. It is more of the attitude of what Apple puts out is what you wil get. Love it or leave it type thing. And in certain circumstances, I'm sure some people will pass on this new iMac design until Apple either offers them a choice or the person gives in to Apple's conformity.
Yeah, but that would at least have been closer to the truth!
The truth is more like ripped the inset from the...... Nevermind.
At any rate, I think it's pretty clear that the controversial black border is an artifact of how the glass is inset into the case.
So instead of the $200.00 and $300.00 price break you'd be getting a $150.00 or $250.00 price break instead?!
More SKU's Apple has, the more it add to the cost??? Apple started out with the iPod SKU, then the Mini iPod SKU, then the Shuffle SKU, then the... you get my point... Aplle already has a limited product line MacBooks & MacBook Pros for laptops and The Mac Mini, iMac, PowerMac for Desktops... adding screen options for production runs can be managed effectively without creating havoc for their inventory control. There are some brilliant minds over at Apple, this shouldn't stump them or present a problem. It is more of the attitude of what Apple puts out is what you wil get. Love it or leave it type thing. And in certain circumstances, I'm sure some people will pass on this new iMac design until Apple either offers them a choice or the person gives in to Apple's conformity.
Yes, as hard as it may be for you to believe, it does add to the cost. You just don't want to think it through. It's a joke to you. But, if you do think of what happens, from the first designs, to the stocking of the stores, you would understand that the more SKU's the higher the price.
That doesn't mean that prices won't come down with new designs. Technology moves ahead, and so prices do come down. But multiple SKU's prevent it from coming down to what it might.
Remember that with the new iPods, Apple kept removing more accessories with each new iteration, to keep that price down. People noticed, and complained about each time it happened. I'm sure people here remember.
I'm not saying that I don't think Apple should have offered two screens. I've said the opposite.
I'm just giving you one reason why Apple may not be offering it.
But, the easily removable screen does offer a way to replace them without taking the machine apart. Interesting.
The truth is more like ripped the inset from the...... Nevermind.
At any rate, I think it's pretty clear that the controversial black border is an artifact of how the glass is inset into the case.
Yes, it serves a dual purpose.
That's fine, but it doesn't have anything to do with the reflections.
Well, the MacBook is doing better than any other model Apple has ever had. Would it do better if there was choice? Maybe, maybe not.
It would be a better argument if you were to give the breakdown of Matte finish MacBook Pro's sales vs. Glossy MacBook Pros.
MacBooks may be doing well by virtue of price point then having to do with a glossy screen.
It would also be interesting if Apple did have a glossy screen iMac and a matte finish iMac on display at their Apple Stores to see which one the public would go for, then they can base their production runs ratio on that and not be paying for warehousing slow moving inventory.
It would be a better argument if you were to give the breakdown of Matte finish MacBook Pro's sales vs. Glossy MacBook Pros.
MacBooks may be doing well by virtue of price point then having to do with a glossy screen.
It would also be interesting if Apple did have a glossy screen iMac and a matte finish iMac on display at their Apple Stores to see which one the public would go for, then they can base their production runs ratio on that and not be paying for warehousing slow moving inventory.
I don't have those numbers. Possibility one of the companies that analyse sales has estimates, because Apple doesn't break those figures out. The argument would be better for either one of us, depending on how it went.
But the audience for the MBP is mostly different from most of the iMac audience. I'm not sure we could compare a laptop customer to a desktop cone that directly, or one buying a much more expensive device.
I can say that by going from those here who have bought the new iMac, at least those who have posted, the glossy screen isn't a problem. The only review that had a problem was MacWorld in their brightly lit offices, though even they said that the glossy models images looked better.
You guys argue and bicker like little old ladies.
hehehe...
You guys argue and bicker like little old ladies.
You laugh like a little old lady. Har har.
Oh shit, I laugh like a monkey.
EEEEEE!!!! EEEEEE!!!!! EEEEEEE!!!!!
Oh shit, I laugh like a monkey.
At least you type better.
Yes, as hard as it may be for you to believe, it does add to the cost. You just don't want to think it through. It's a joke to you. But, if you do think of what happens, from the first designs, to the stocking of the stores, you would understand that the more SKU's the higher the price.
That doesn't mean that prices won't come down with new designs. Technology moves ahead, and so prices do come down. But multiple SKU's prevent it from coming down to what it might.
Remember that with the new iPods, Apple kept removing more accessories with each new iteration, to keep that price down. People noticed, and complained about each time it happened. I'm sure people here remember.
I'm not saying that I don't think Apple should have offered two screens. I've said the opposite.
I'm just giving you one reason why Apple may not be offering it.
But, the easily removable screen does offer a way to replace them without taking the machine apart. Interesting.
I use to work for a small education company (small as in "Cottage Industry") that was the sole distributor of both a professional and consumer line of educational teaching materials of a product line well over 100 items - teacher manuals, workbooks, audio, software, consumables and the like, of a product used to teach English through storyline characters versus the American way of rules like "i before e except after c". This product, produced in England, authored by a woman named Lyn, was a success in the UK - used in 80% of the schools.
We were the sole outlet here in the states selling to school districts, private schools and parents. Although I have no idea as to the "going on" of intellect and artistic creation, design, print, publish, and marketing of the materials, I do know all about inventory, exchange rates and inventory control and having precious shelf space occupied, especially when it's YOU who is laying out money before ever recouping those monies from the profits realized in sales of said materials. So what I say is not based on a joke!
Also, being the sole outlet in the states but not the "authors" of the materials we had to fight tooth and nail for them to create an "Americanized" version of their product so American students would learn the "American' version of words like 'color' not 'colour' etc. We never won out, though. Also, like Steve Jobs, they too thought they new what was best for the market here, much to our chagrin, some of the materials we pruchased just languished, while other materials could have had greater potential if only expanded upon. But the American way versus what worked in the UK and "we've been at it longer" was all we ever heard from them. We also learned about inventory control the hard way, by pre-ordering in bulk, but a lot of items were left on the shelf and a big bill was left to us to pay. We soon changed our ways by extending delivery times and by keeping smaller quantities on hand and increased frequency of orders placed to England.
In the end, being the bunch of novices we were, we paid off our huge business debt, worked our inventory down to managable levels of what sold great and what didn't and had a smoother operation then our inital growing pains. Apple is no "Cottage Industry" and I am sure their inventory and production has been worked down to a science of what serves them best. Having two versions of the iMac, even if one requires BTO, would not be the ruin of Apple! Trust me, they invented, manufactured, warehoused and store shelved "The Cube" for Heaven's sake!
But the audience for the MBP is mostly different from most of the iMac audience. I'm not sure we could compare a laptop customer to a desktop cone that directly, or one buying a much more expensive device..
It may be true that the audience may be different for the MBP versus the MB or iMac, it's just that the MBP is the only line that gives the consumer the chocie of matte or glossy.
AND...
Melgross, are we arguing and bickering like a bunch of old ladies? I thought we were having a point - counterpoint conversation?
To those who say Glossy is not bad, I am not debating regarding that issue. I am however, griping, bickering like an old lady, if you care, with regards to the loss of what once was and no freedom of choice. What if Ford put a 4 cylinder, no make that 2 cylinder in their "muscle" car the Mustang and said it's what the people want, a greener environment and no car enthusiast was given the choice to BTO with a V-8! Bet you'd hear a bunch of old ladies bickering on some muscle car auto enthusiast board!
It's getting late ya'll, Good night!
Speaking of black, not only do I dislike the black logo, I really dislike the black back. Truly ugly.
I use to work for a small education company (small as in "Cottage Industry") that was the sole distributor of both a professional and consumer line of educational teaching materials of a product line well over 100 items - teacher manuals, workbooks, audio, software, consumables and the like, of a product used to teach English through storyline characters versus the American way of rules like "i before e except after c". This product, produced in England, authored by a woman named Lyn, was a success in the UK - used in 80% of the schools.
We were the sole outlet here in the states selling to school districts, private schools and parents. Although I have no idea as to the "going on" of intellect and artistic creation, design, print, publish, and marketing of the materials, I do know all about inventory, exchange rates and inventory control and having precious shelf space occupied, especially when it's YOU who is laying out money before ever recouping those monies from the profits realized in sales of said materials. So what I say is not based on a joke!
Also, being the sole outlet in the states but not the "authors" of the materials we had to fight tooth and nail for them to create an "Americanized" version of their product so American students would learn the "American' version of words like 'color' not 'colour' etc. We never won out, though. Also, like Steve Jobs, they too thought they new what was best for the market here, much to our chagrin, some of the materials we pruchased just languished, while other materials could have had greater potential if only expanded upon. But the American way versus what worked in the UK and "we've been at it longer" was all we ever heard from them. We also learned about inventory control the hard way, by pre-ordering in bulk, but a lot of items were left on the shelf and a big bill was left to us to pay. We soon changed our ways by extending delivery times and by keeping smaller quantities on hand and increased frequency of orders placed to England.
In the end, being the bunch of novices we were, we paid off our huge business debt, worked our inventory down to managable levels of what sold great and what didn't and had a smoother operation then our inital growing pains. Apple is no "Cottage Industry" and I am sure their inventory and production has been worked down to a science of what serves them best. Having two versions of the iMac, even if one requires BTO, would not be the ruin of Apple! Trust me, they invented, manufactured, warehoused and store shelved "The Cube" for Heaven's sake!
I never said that it would be the ruin of them. Just that the products would have some added cost.
You found out that for yourself.
But, I'll relate a short bit of my history, which the older members her already have heard.
I was a partner in an audio manufacturing company Magnum Opus, in the '70's through the end of '82, when we sold it. In designing products I always had to take care to try to use components that could be used within other products, to keep the complexity of ordering and inventory down. This was for professional products costing mucho bucks. It was impossible to keep different versions of products for different needs of customers because that would lessen the production run of everything, driving up costs.
As a compromise, we designed a chassis for our studio preamplifier/control unit. That way, the chassis and power supply was always the same, and modules could be bought to make the unit into whatever the customer needed.
It was still expensive to do that way, but had advantages. It did cost far less than coming out with several models, each one just a bit different than the next.
It's how computer companies work today.
Apple has the same problem, don't think they can avoid it by being larger.
Other computer companies have several more lines of computers than Apple has, and it shows in their margins.
I prefer the black logo.
One would get sick and tired of seeing yourself all day with the mirrored one.
Well I have two of the old plastic Cinema displays from the G4 era, and both of them have the shiny chrome silver Apple logo..
To be honest, in the past three years, I have never once looked at my reflection in the logo until today after reading this article.. Oh yeah, I can see myself in there..
It may be true that the audience may be different for the MBP versus the MB or iMac, it's just that the MBP is the only line that gives the consumer the chocie of matte or glossy.
AND...
Melgross, are we arguing and bickering like a bunch of old ladies? I thought we were having a point - counterpoint conversation?
To those who say Glossy is not bad, I am not debating regarding that issue. I am however, griping, bickering like an old lady, if you care, with regards to the loss of what once was and no freedom of choice. What if Ford put a 4 cylinder, no make that 2 cylinder in their "muscle" car the Mustang and said it's what the people want, a greener environment and no car enthusiast was given the choice to BTO with a V-8! Bet you'd hear a bunch of old ladies bickering on some muscle car auto enthusiast board!
It's getting late ya'll, Good night!
I guess you can read this tomorrow.
Bickering is a way of life here. Imagine how boring it would be if everyone said, "Yes, you're right", and then the other said, "Yes, you're right too" all the time.
Well, we can look at it this way, we didn't have a choice before, it's no different now. Except that those who may have preferred glossy had no choice. Now those who may prefer matte have no choice.
It's almost fair, don't you think?