How the hell would adding one model "cast aside their successful business plan"? Wouldn't offering more consumer choices open up the possibility for more sales? Or are you saying with a straight face that offering another model would actually hurt their profits?
While apple is improving their situation, that doesn't mean that every decision they make is the right one. Or are you saying that they're doing everything perfectly, and there's no possible way their strategy could be improved?
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker
The profits and stock price have noting to do with laptop sales or desktop sales short bus. Your posts are only solidifying the description of ignorance I gave you earlier.
Both these posts ignore Apple's business model - high-margin, high-value hardware. Every counter example given is for a Dell/HP or similar. What are their margins, 10%? Apple builds for 30% margin value. So adding one model, if it designed to complete with these Dell/HP models on both price and features, would be casting aside their model. So the choices seems to be
1) To access this supposedly large market - build low-margin hardware
Not Apple's business model.
2) Maintain the business model and produce these XMAC for significantly more that HP/Dell
Result, don't sell to this supposedly large market.
First, I don't believe this market is that large (outside of corporate drone desktops), but even if it is it currently demands prices that don't allow for the margins that Apple gets for it current product line.
You clearly have no conception of PC hardware development. A midtower would be the absolute easiest possible product apple could develop. There are tons of reference mobos from intel, the vast majority of the design work has been done already. I think the main intel desktop cpus are even socket compatible with the ones in minis and imacs, so that's not even that different from what they have already.
It could be the least risky new product apple has ever shipped.
I appreciate that you are able to throw out a real arguement rather than just spouting baseless insults (*cough*onlooker*cough).
You've only taken into account one area of my statement though, the engineering. It still costs a CRAPLOAD of money to introduce a new product line worldwide.
1) Apple must get a good price on all of their mobile components since they use them across several product lines. The desktop CPUs would surely be ordered in smaller quantities, and they wouldn't be able to charge as a high a markup on them (like the Mac Pro) since the mid-range desktop market is so cut-throat. Smaller profit margins is not what Apple wants, especially on a machine that would essentially wind up competing with the iMac. Some would say it's not competing with the iMac and I would strongly disagree.
2) Any idea how much Apple spent on advertising to launch the iPhone? I'm sure it's pretty staggering, but at least they had the benefit of tons of free press due to the uniqueness and hype around the product. It's fairly easy for them to run a few weeks of commercials when the iPod or iMac or what have you gets updated, people already recognize the product line. I cannot see how there would be much hype for an xMac from the media, really that is just from my opinion that the market for this machine just isn't that big... it's hobbyists that think they are a much larger group than they are.
I guess some people have more faith in the general public than I do, which is much, much larger than the hardcore group of enthusiasts. I could easily see them looking at the xMac compared to the iMac and saying hmmmm...same price, and with one of them I get this ginormous screen included. Pass on the xMac. And let's face it, sadly it's the general public that controls the market, not us.
Quote:
I'm not sure why you think it's a zero sum game. Do you really think apple is in a position where they have to choose between the iPhone and a new computer model? The smart business decision is to do both, ship the iPhone and also optimize the desktop line. And while desktop sales are growing less than laptop sales, it's still a huge market which is still growing, isn't it?
But they already have a very successful entry in the desktop market! The iMac! Some refuse to accept the iMac is a desktop machine but nevertheless, it's true! It makes much more sense to me to just continue to improve this market-proven product. I am just trying to look at this from a business-driven perspective, not what I personally want.
It certainly isn't a zero-sum game, but the reality is Apple is a publicly-owned company that has to show consistancy from quarter-to-quarter to keep that stock price rising. They have a finite amount of money they can sink into this stuff and still keep the profits (and stock price) rising.
You don't know that. The way apple runs, there's a good chance that they are aware that there is demand, but stubbornly refuse to offer the product anyway. If you've followed the company at all you should know that Steve Jobs has a long history of decisions like that, he doesn't make decisions based on market research. And if the public really doesn't want such a machine, why do so many sell on the PC side?
Actually, while a popular thing to say, there very little evidence of this in recent times. Apple's execution in product development and the positive reception of almost all of their products shows a very detailed attention to market input. There are, of course, less than stellar results at times, like the HiFi but one of the best examples is the replacement of the mini iPod with the Nano which the mini was at the height of its popularity. This was a very astute marketing decision.
The iPhone, itself, shows this. Despite massive negative positioning by the various pundits, the iPhone has been an amazing success. It is defining a new market area (niche if you prefer) for mobiles, that may be more than a niche.
In America we call those "periods," no one had a clue what "full stop" means unless it's related to halting a sailing vessel's progress or shutting down machinery.
May I respectfully point out the language you speak is English, I do not think that even the residents of the USA call it American, they call it English. So perhaps just perhaps our word is right and just for once, for it happens so rarely, you Americans are wrong.
May I respectfully point out the language you speak is English, I do not think that even the residents of the USA call it American, they call it English. So perhaps just perhaps our word is right and just for once, for it happens so rarely, you Americans are wrong.
There is a diffrence, slight though it may be, between American English and English English.
Am I the only one (outside the USA) who is getting little tired of the quoted $129 price tag for Leopard? All you yanks, (and Steve Jobs if he reads this) look at what the rest of the world pays for Apple software and hardware. Yes I know they sell much more in the US but perhaps the higher (maybe much higher) prices restrict sales outside the US? What about price tags that are a little closer to the exchange rates from dollar to pound or euro (those are some of the different currencies in the rest of the civilised world) rather than thinking of a number.
Am I the only one (outside the USA) who is getting little tired of the quoted $129 price tag for Leopard? All you yanks, (and Steve Jobs if he reads this) look at what the rest of the world pays for Apple software and hardware. Yes I know they sell much more in the US but perhaps the higher (maybe much higher) prices restrict sales outside the US? What about price tags that are a little closer to the exchange rates from dollar to pound or euro (those are some of the different currencies in the rest of the civilised world) rather than thinking of a number.
You are right there is a difference, but just bear in mind that the US must pay sales tax on top of that, whereas we have it included by default. Unfortunately also the US almost always pay less sales tax than we do. So our government must take some of the blame for the price difference. It is a lot more palatable if you are VAT registered.
A quick calculation shows that the ex-VAT price in the UK for Leopard is the equivalent of approximately $148. So a mark-up but maybe not as much as you'd have thought.
My main complaint is that the $19 gap between the two prices is normally justified with answers regarding international language conversion. This annoys me since although we are buying a product which includes all the European languages, so is everyone else. As another English-speaking country, we have to pay more for those languages we don't use whereas in the US you don't. Many moons ago we were actually given a special British version of the OS with 'quaint' differences such as "Wastebasket" instead of "Trash". Now you Yanks have infiltrated our beloved culture we don't even get that any more.
heh heh! It isn't that you spoke it first as it is that the people who came here couldn't stand the accent, so they came to a place where they could have their own. Oh, and fix the spelling.
Am I the only one (outside the USA) who is getting little tired of the quoted $129 price tag for Leopard? All you yanks, (and Steve Jobs if he reads this) look at what the rest of the world pays for Apple software and hardware. Yes I know they sell much more in the US but perhaps the higher (maybe much higher) prices restrict sales outside the US? What about price tags that are a little closer to the exchange rates from dollar to pound or euro (those are some of the different currencies in the rest of the civilised world) rather than thinking of a number.
All companies either report in their home market, or in their largest one. Therefore they use the pricing and currenct used there.
With Apple, both markets happen to be one and the same.
Prices abroad reflect much more than Apple's pricing. VAT takes a much bigger cut in Europe than taxes do here. And id one lives in a state with sales takes, both state and local, those taxes aren't included in the given pricing, but are added on at the point of sale, unlike the hidden taxes in Europe.
You are right there is a difference, but just bear in mind that the US must pay sales tax on top of that, whereas we have it included by default. Unfortunately also the US almost always pay less sales tax than we do. So our government must take some of the blame for the price difference. It is a lot more palatable if you are VAT registered.
A quick calculation shows that the ex-VAT price in the UK for Leopard is the equivalent of approximately $148. So a mark-up but maybe not as much as you'd have thought.
My main complaint is that the $19 gap between the two prices is normally justified with answers regarding international language conversion. This annoys me since although we are buying a product which includes all the European languages, so is everyone else. As another English-speaking country, we have to pay more for those languages we don't use whereas in the US you don't. Many moons ago we were actually given a special British version of the OS with 'quaint' differences such as "Wastebasket" instead of "Trash". Now you Yanks have infiltrated our beloved culture we don't even get that any more.
Where are my pipe and slippers Watson??
Ah I posted my reply to him before I read yours.
But, we have all the languages as well. We can decide to install them or not.
And id one lives in a state with sales takes, both state and local, those taxes aren't included in the given pricing, but are added on at the point of sale, unlike the hidden taxes in Europe.
As a visitor I find American sales tax more 'hidden' anyway, since when one is used to paying the price on the label, you suddenly find yourself paying more at the checkout, and it's normally something obscure like $14.03
I'd gladly give up our hefty 17.5% sales tax on pretty much any good though, to have prices like yours. That is why I buy a lot of my Apple stuff in NJ shhhh don't tell UK customs!!
You don't know that. The way apple runs, there's a good chance that they are aware that there is demand, but stubbornly refuse to offer the product anyway. If you've followed the company at all you should know that Steve Jobs has a long history of decisions like that, he doesn't make decisions based on market research. And if the public really doesn't want such a machine, why do so many sell on the PC side?
I'm in complete agreement with physguy, here. It's most likely a popular "myth" that SJ puts out what he wants, without regards to public demand. Sure, in some of the more brilliant cases, Apple (and SJ, perhaps) manages to *create* demand that wasn't necessarily there to begin with (the iPod line comes to mind), but if you think that SJ can magically pull stuff out of his ass that almost always gets wide public acceptance and popularity, without any market researching, I must say you have too much faith in SJ's godlike abilities
May I respectfully point out the language you speak is English, I do not think that even the residents of the USA call it American, they call it English. So perhaps just perhaps our word is right and just for once, for it happens so rarely, you Americans are wrong.
I love England, the UK and all the Brits. Believe me. Some of my best friends are Brits. However, may I respectfully point out that we invented cars, ergo, you drive on the wrong side of the road.
What a feeble and pointless argument. Let's get back to yelling at each other about the xMac.
What a feeble and pointless argument. Let's get back to yelling at each other about the xMac.
Ok. Apple Doesn't need an xMac. I have a Mac Mini Core duo, and guess what? I have rendered an entire 10 minuet 3d-aminated film on it, in about 10 hours from start to finish, I play Quakes 1,2,3, and 4 on it with little problems, I play Counter Strike and Counter-Strike source, I play Doom 3 and Prey, even though the system requirements say no, I do edit video and audio on it, and I am able to upgrade the HD, RAM, and CPU without too much trouble (for me, personally). I can to this all on a 1.66 GHz computer with no real GPU, and 512 Mb RAM and the iMacs and Mac Pros can do even more. The Mac Mini is a perfectly capable computer, and the iMac does what the Mac Mini can't. Depending on your use, those two can fill your need without dropping $2000 on a Mac Pro.
Ok. Apple Doesn't need an xMac. I have a Mac Mini Core duo, and guess what? I have rendered an entire 10 minuet 3d-aminated film on it, in about 10 hours from start to finish, I play Quakes 1,2,3, and 4 on it with little problems, I play Counter Strike and Counter-Strike source, I play Doom 3 and Prey, even though the system requirements say no, I do edit video and audio on it, and I am able to upgrade the HD, RAM, and CPU without too much trouble (for me, personally). I can to this all on a 1.66 GHz computer with no real GPU, and 512 Mb RAM and the iMacs and Mac Pros can do even more. The Mac Mini is a perfectly capable computer, and the iMac does what the Mac Mini can't. Depending on your use, those two can fill your need without dropping $2000 on a Mac Pro.
"mauvés ovriers ne trovera ja bon hostill"
I understand people's need for xMac's, but I rough-cut a feature on an MBP (so my editor could see what I wanted), cleaned up tons of commercials on someone else's Mini, and correct storyboards, write series' worth of scripts and manage to keep up with all my art directors and editors on an iMac. I've done even more on Mac Pro's, but there are so many complaints sometimes I wonder when people have time to actually get work done.
Comments
How the hell would adding one model "cast aside their successful business plan"? Wouldn't offering more consumer choices open up the possibility for more sales? Or are you saying with a straight face that offering another model would actually hurt their profits?
While apple is improving their situation, that doesn't mean that every decision they make is the right one. Or are you saying that they're doing everything perfectly, and there's no possible way their strategy could be improved?
The profits and stock price have noting to do with laptop sales or desktop sales short bus. Your posts are only solidifying the description of ignorance I gave you earlier.
Both these posts ignore Apple's business model - high-margin, high-value hardware. Every counter example given is for a Dell/HP or similar. What are their margins, 10%? Apple builds for 30% margin value. So adding one model, if it designed to complete with these Dell/HP models on both price and features, would be casting aside their model. So the choices seems to be
1) To access this supposedly large market - build low-margin hardware
Not Apple's business model.
2) Maintain the business model and produce these XMAC for significantly more that HP/Dell
Result, don't sell to this supposedly large market.
First, I don't believe this market is that large (outside of corporate drone desktops), but even if it is it currently demands prices that don't allow for the margins that Apple gets for it current product line.
You clearly have no conception of PC hardware development. A midtower would be the absolute easiest possible product apple could develop. There are tons of reference mobos from intel, the vast majority of the design work has been done already. I think the main intel desktop cpus are even socket compatible with the ones in minis and imacs, so that's not even that different from what they have already.
It could be the least risky new product apple has ever shipped.
I appreciate that you are able to throw out a real arguement rather than just spouting baseless insults (*cough*onlooker*cough).
You've only taken into account one area of my statement though, the engineering. It still costs a CRAPLOAD of money to introduce a new product line worldwide.
1) Apple must get a good price on all of their mobile components since they use them across several product lines. The desktop CPUs would surely be ordered in smaller quantities, and they wouldn't be able to charge as a high a markup on them (like the Mac Pro) since the mid-range desktop market is so cut-throat. Smaller profit margins is not what Apple wants, especially on a machine that would essentially wind up competing with the iMac. Some would say it's not competing with the iMac and I would strongly disagree.
2) Any idea how much Apple spent on advertising to launch the iPhone? I'm sure it's pretty staggering, but at least they had the benefit of tons of free press due to the uniqueness and hype around the product. It's fairly easy for them to run a few weeks of commercials when the iPod or iMac or what have you gets updated, people already recognize the product line. I cannot see how there would be much hype for an xMac from the media, really that is just from my opinion that the market for this machine just isn't that big... it's hobbyists that think they are a much larger group than they are.
I guess some people have more faith in the general public than I do, which is much, much larger than the hardcore group of enthusiasts. I could easily see them looking at the xMac compared to the iMac and saying hmmmm...same price, and with one of them I get this ginormous screen included. Pass on the xMac. And let's face it, sadly it's the general public that controls the market, not us.
I'm not sure why you think it's a zero sum game. Do you really think apple is in a position where they have to choose between the iPhone and a new computer model? The smart business decision is to do both, ship the iPhone and also optimize the desktop line. And while desktop sales are growing less than laptop sales, it's still a huge market which is still growing, isn't it?
But they already have a very successful entry in the desktop market! The iMac! Some refuse to accept the iMac is a desktop machine but nevertheless, it's true! It makes much more sense to me to just continue to improve this market-proven product. I am just trying to look at this from a business-driven perspective, not what I personally want.
It certainly isn't a zero-sum game, but the reality is Apple is a publicly-owned company that has to show consistancy from quarter-to-quarter to keep that stock price rising. They have a finite amount of money they can sink into this stuff and still keep the profits (and stock price) rising.
You don't know that. The way apple runs, there's a good chance that they are aware that there is demand, but stubbornly refuse to offer the product anyway. If you've followed the company at all you should know that Steve Jobs has a long history of decisions like that, he doesn't make decisions based on market research. And if the public really doesn't want such a machine, why do so many sell on the PC side?
Actually, while a popular thing to say, there very little evidence of this in recent times. Apple's execution in product development and the positive reception of almost all of their products shows a very detailed attention to market input. There are, of course, less than stellar results at times, like the HiFi but one of the best examples is the replacement of the mini iPod with the Nano which the mini was at the height of its popularity. This was a very astute marketing decision.
The iPhone, itself, shows this. Despite massive negative positioning by the various pundits, the iPhone has been an amazing success. It is defining a new market area (niche if you prefer) for mobiles, that may be more than a niche.
In America we call those "periods," no one had a clue what "full stop" means unless it's related to halting a sailing vessel's progress or shutting down machinery.
May I respectfully point out the language you speak is English, I do not think that even the residents of the USA call it American, they call it English. So perhaps just perhaps our word is right and just for once, for it happens so rarely, you Americans are wrong.
May I respectfully point out the language you speak is English, I do not think that even the residents of the USA call it American, they call it English. So perhaps just perhaps our word is right and just for once, for it happens so rarely, you Americans are wrong.
There is a diffrence, slight though it may be, between American English and English English.
There is a diffrence, slight though it may be, between American English and English English.
The main difference is we spoke it first.
Am I the only one (outside the USA) who is getting little tired of the quoted $129 price tag for Leopard? All you yanks, (and Steve Jobs if he reads this) look at what the rest of the world pays for Apple software and hardware. Yes I know they sell much more in the US but perhaps the higher (maybe much higher) prices restrict sales outside the US? What about price tags that are a little closer to the exchange rates from dollar to pound or euro (those are some of the different currencies in the rest of the civilised world) rather than thinking of a number.
You are right there is a difference, but just bear in mind that the US must pay sales tax on top of that, whereas we have it included by default. Unfortunately also the US almost always pay less sales tax than we do. So our government must take some of the blame for the price difference. It is a lot more palatable if you are VAT registered.
A quick calculation shows that the ex-VAT price in the UK for Leopard is the equivalent of approximately $148. So a mark-up but maybe not as much as you'd have thought.
My main complaint is that the $19 gap between the two prices is normally justified with answers regarding international language conversion. This annoys me since although we are buying a product which includes all the European languages, so is everyone else. As another English-speaking country, we have to pay more for those languages we don't use whereas in the US you don't. Many moons ago we were actually given a special British version of the OS with 'quaint' differences such as "Wastebasket" instead of "Trash". Now you Yanks have infiltrated our beloved culture we don't even get that any more.
Where are my pipe and slippers Watson??
The main difference is we spoke it first.
heh heh! It isn't that you spoke it first as it is that the people who came here couldn't stand the accent, so they came to a place where they could have their own. Oh, and fix the spelling.
Am I the only one (outside the USA) who is getting little tired of the quoted $129 price tag for Leopard? All you yanks, (and Steve Jobs if he reads this) look at what the rest of the world pays for Apple software and hardware. Yes I know they sell much more in the US but perhaps the higher (maybe much higher) prices restrict sales outside the US? What about price tags that are a little closer to the exchange rates from dollar to pound or euro (those are some of the different currencies in the rest of the civilised world) rather than thinking of a number.
All companies either report in their home market, or in their largest one. Therefore they use the pricing and currenct used there.
With Apple, both markets happen to be one and the same.
Prices abroad reflect much more than Apple's pricing. VAT takes a much bigger cut in Europe than taxes do here. And id one lives in a state with sales takes, both state and local, those taxes aren't included in the given pricing, but are added on at the point of sale, unlike the hidden taxes in Europe.
You are right there is a difference, but just bear in mind that the US must pay sales tax on top of that, whereas we have it included by default. Unfortunately also the US almost always pay less sales tax than we do. So our government must take some of the blame for the price difference. It is a lot more palatable if you are VAT registered.
A quick calculation shows that the ex-VAT price in the UK for Leopard is the equivalent of approximately $148. So a mark-up but maybe not as much as you'd have thought.
My main complaint is that the $19 gap between the two prices is normally justified with answers regarding international language conversion. This annoys me since although we are buying a product which includes all the European languages, so is everyone else. As another English-speaking country, we have to pay more for those languages we don't use whereas in the US you don't. Many moons ago we were actually given a special British version of the OS with 'quaint' differences such as "Wastebasket" instead of "Trash". Now you Yanks have infiltrated our beloved culture we don't even get that any more.
Where are my pipe and slippers Watson??
Ah I posted my reply to him before I read yours.
But, we have all the languages as well. We can decide to install them or not.
the people who came here couldn't stand the accent, so they came to a place where they could have their own.
The differences stem from the rhotic areas of the British Isles anyway, so you have our common seafolk to thank for your peculiar drawl.
And id one lives in a state with sales takes, both state and local, those taxes aren't included in the given pricing, but are added on at the point of sale, unlike the hidden taxes in Europe.
As a visitor I find American sales tax more 'hidden' anyway, since when one is used to paying the price on the label, you suddenly find yourself paying more at the checkout, and it's normally something obscure like $14.03
I'd gladly give up our hefty 17.5% sales tax on pretty much any good though, to have prices like yours. That is why I buy a lot of my Apple stuff in NJ
But, we have all the languages as well. We can decide to install them or not.
So the justification of paying for an International version is completely false then.
How else can Steve Jobs justify the extra $19 then?
You don't know that. The way apple runs, there's a good chance that they are aware that there is demand, but stubbornly refuse to offer the product anyway. If you've followed the company at all you should know that Steve Jobs has a long history of decisions like that, he doesn't make decisions based on market research. And if the public really doesn't want such a machine, why do so many sell on the PC side?
I'm in complete agreement with physguy, here. It's most likely a popular "myth" that SJ puts out what he wants, without regards to public demand. Sure, in some of the more brilliant cases, Apple (and SJ, perhaps) manages to *create* demand that wasn't necessarily there to begin with (the iPod line comes to mind), but if you think that SJ can magically pull stuff out of his ass that almost always gets wide public acceptance and popularity, without any market researching, I must say you have too much faith in SJ's godlike abilities
May I respectfully point out the language you speak is English, I do not think that even the residents of the USA call it American, they call it English. So perhaps just perhaps our word is right and just for once, for it happens so rarely, you Americans are wrong.
I love England, the UK and all the Brits. Believe me. Some of my best friends are Brits. However, may I respectfully point out that we invented cars, ergo, you drive on the wrong side of the road.
What a feeble and pointless argument. Let's get back to yelling at each other about the xMac.
-Clive
What a feeble and pointless argument. Let's get back to yelling at each other about the xMac.
Ok. Apple Doesn't need an xMac. I have a Mac Mini Core duo, and guess what? I have rendered an entire 10 minuet 3d-aminated film on it, in about 10 hours from start to finish, I play Quakes 1,2,3, and 4 on it with little problems, I play Counter Strike and Counter-Strike source, I play Doom 3 and Prey, even though the system requirements say no, I do edit video and audio on it, and I am able to upgrade the HD, RAM, and CPU without too much trouble (for me, personally). I can to this all on a 1.66 GHz computer with no real GPU, and 512 Mb RAM and the iMacs and Mac Pros can do even more. The Mac Mini is a perfectly capable computer, and the iMac does what the Mac Mini can't. Depending on your use, those two can fill your need without dropping $2000 on a Mac Pro.
Ok. Apple Doesn't need an xMac. I have a Mac Mini Core duo, and guess what? I have rendered an entire 10 minuet 3d-aminated film on it, in about 10 hours from start to finish, I play Quakes 1,2,3, and 4 on it with little problems, I play Counter Strike and Counter-Strike source, I play Doom 3 and Prey, even though the system requirements say no, I do edit video and audio on it, and I am able to upgrade the HD, RAM, and CPU without too much trouble (for me, personally). I can to this all on a 1.66 GHz computer with no real GPU, and 512 Mb RAM and the iMacs and Mac Pros can do even more. The Mac Mini is a perfectly capable computer, and the iMac does what the Mac Mini can't. Depending on your use, those two can fill your need without dropping $2000 on a Mac Pro.
"mauvés ovriers ne trovera ja bon hostill"
I understand people's need for xMac's, but I rough-cut a feature on an MBP (so my editor could see what I wanted), cleaned up tons of commercials on someone else's Mini, and correct storyboards, write series' worth of scripts and manage to keep up with all my art directors and editors on an iMac. I've done even more on Mac Pro's, but there are so many complaints sometimes I wonder when people have time to actually get work done.
Righteous on the 10 minute 3D film.
I just don't understand how the 2GHz Mac Mini (or the iMac) is underpowered for the average user?
it isn't.
but a lot of people like to say "mine is bigger".
the mac mini and imac is made for the average user.
The differences stem from the rhotic areas of the British Isles anyway, so you have our common seafolk to thank for your peculiar drawl.
And thanks to them, we have a bigger navy.