If you meant the Netbooks...well, netbook keyboards are typically 92% smaller than standard laptop keyboards. I don't see how that could be any less comfortable.
If you meant the iphone/(Rumored) iTablet...hear, hear. for all the naysayers that think this tablet will eat into the netbook craze, i truly doubt it. good luck takin
g notes in class on a tablet. the UI of the phone/touch is better than all others, but in no way is it faster than a physical keyboard.
on a tablet you will probably just write with your hand on the screen. Even microsoft had a version of xp that did this years ago
It makes sense considering the number one item stolen from a student is a laptop. Might as well be a piece of shit $300 netbook than a more expensive laptop. However, students should back up their data often if they use any computer for taking notes. Hard drive crashes and there go all your notes! Easier to take notes the old fashioned way...pen and paper.
True, true- Apple will be making up for a lost segment. Wasted all that D&D on the Air which totally blows in relation to its cost.
I don't believe that Apple wasted a penny in developing the Air. It was the first embodiment of technology later implemented in the aluminum Macbook Pros, in particular the all-aluminum body and non-customer replaceable battery. It's ultra thinness and beautiful appearance made it desirable to a limited number of people at a premium price. I don't have the numbers, but expect that the money earned selling the Air went a significant way to paying off the R&D costs for those new technologies. I'm sure that they worked out many bugs in the Air's production that permitted Apple to start producing a very much larger number of the Macbook Pros with minimum difficulty and cost. It's the old strategy of introducing new technologies in premium products in smaller quantities, then moving the technologies to less expensive mass-produced products. No reason to stop producing the premium product now, it's still selling.
Hell, I've used one and it's amazingly portable and light and sits on the lap very comfortably. Would like more powerful graphics, bigger hard drive, faster CPUs, and longer battery life. In fact, kind of wish I had never used one - all the other Macbooks seem way too heavy to me in comparison. With a little more power and lower price, Apple could move millions of these things. My advice - don't spend much time carrying around and using an Air - especially if you need a higher-powered system - because you'll want something that comfortable to carry and use and it's just not available - yet.
A device with a 6-inch screen with a price tag in the $400 range, give or take, would have a real shot at reclaiming some sales lost to the netbook segment.
Netbooks like the Aspire One, which I own, are good products and a bargain. But they also are flawed, even within the limited uses to which they are suited. Personally I'd pay a little more for what would amount to a 6-inch version of the Touch. What I could see as advantages would be better battery life (just under 2 hours isn't enough), a more intelligent input interface, more portability, better perceived image quality, etc.
Like the netbook, such a device would not cut it as a desktop replacement but it would be a compelling device, nonetheless, and would surely make quite a few Must-Have lists. What it would not do is convince someone looking to netbooks as a very low-cost means of meeting all their computing needs but on the other hand, in that role, I really do think netbooks are lacking. As such, I don't think that's a segment that Apple would want to compete for.
To date the talk had been about 10-inch tablets and that is a whole other thing. But a 6-inch Touch, now that's something I can understand the value of. It would make a killer net browser, be excellent for watching movies and the like, and it would still be a very portable form factor with decent battery life. For such a device, people would pay a premium over a basic netbook and it would make sense for Apple to bring such a device to market at this time.
Why focus on the Macbook Air? It would be fab if I could afford it. I can't. I do know people who love it - they have more $$$ than I do.
Most college students cannot afford anything. Those that buy their own laptop are buying it out of their student loan money or from their student jobs, and therefore are buying a $300 netbook. The rest are having their parents buy it, who right now are unemployed and therefore also choose the $300 netbook.
Problem is down the road. I know a lot of people who won't consider a Mac because in college they used a Dell, loved it, had few problems with it and see little reason to change. Tere is a definite plus side to having college kids use a Mac over a cheap netbook because eventually we do want them to switch--what's their impetus if all they remember from their first computer purchase is how expensive the Mac was compared to the PC?
Quote:
Apple does best when it does higher end. As stock holder I want profit. Big sales with little to no profit mean nothing.
Apple has plenty of profit. Billions of it in fact. Question is what they do with it--they did little in Mac R&D, as 2009 so far has been craptastic for Macs. It seems like lately they've just stockpiled their winnings.
I agree with previous posters--my sub-$300 netbook is the best money I ever spent. I know a guy who bought one for each of his kids in middle/high school. They wanted a laptop, but at $1000 a Mac was not an option for 3 boys. However a $250 netboook is very viable, especially since it's inevitable one or two will get busted. He spent less on 3 computers than he did for one Macbook, and they serve his kids' purposes well. You can't tell me Apple is glad he gave his money to somebody else because he doesn't fit their "demographic". To be clear, he is a Mac user that makes very good money as a computer engineer--he just didn't want to drop $3000 in computers for his kids (especially considering said computers will be obsolete by the time they go to college anyway, but they need something in the near term).
And to say there's no profit to be had in netbooks is deceiving. Most companies make a profit on their netbook, just not as much. But if you could sell 5 million units at $20 profit, or you sell 500,000 units at $200 profit, what would you choose? Personally I'd rather sell 5 million units since it increases your userbase such that it becomes a desirable platform to develop for, and therefore becomes self-perpetuating much like the iPhone--people desire your product for its applications, not just its cool design which inevitably becomes old and copied.
Also let's not forget that many netbooks are sold with basically a cell phone plan--the netbook retails for $400, but you pay $50 or $100 for the netbook and instead pay Sprint or Verizon $30 a month for the data access plan. The cell phone companies win, but so do the computer manufacturers--their device is subsidized, yet they also will get a kickback from the cell phone company if the customer keeps their data plan beyond the 2 year contract.
I think it depends largely on the individual's learning style and the professor/instructor's teaching style.
I heard it explained by a good percussion (drum) teacher of mine that people learn in 3 different ways: visually, aurally, or kinesthetically (actually carrying out or doing something). His point was that music is one of the few mediums that incorporates all 3 learning styles.
I can see where there would be excellent arguments for taking hand-written notes as opposed to typed notes, but I can also see situations where typing notes would be more beneficial (especially if one can type faster than they can write, like me).
Ultimately, people need to find out how they learn best and tailor their own methods to that style.
I agree to some extent. But I would assert that people in general, don't make the best decisions when it comes to learning, especially their own learning. Myself included.
Applying one's self is quite difficult. The most obvious example is devoting enough time to studying and studying in a non-distracting environment. People frequently study with a TV on in the background, or listening to music. The reason for this is that forcing your brain to focus only on one thing is difficult, especially when that thing is new or not understood. Doing so actually triggers measurable physiological effects, with the extreme example being panic attacks. The easy way out is to not force your brain to concentrate or comprehend all at once. Distractions while learning are similar to taking breaks while running. It makes the immediate discomfort go away.
In my opinion, copious note taking is a similar crutch. Note taking is certainly valuable, I'm not saying it is bad. But beyond a certain level, you'll find that less learning actually takes place. The tradeoff is that lectures are more bearable, less of a mental load.
In my experience, both in academia and in the workforce, the highest functioning people don't take notes on a computer. Meeting minutes for later dissemination, sure. But not note taking. Hence someone's earlier comment about it being good training for a secretary. Not that there is anything wrong with that. But rather that people who excel in their fields, tend to focus on concepts, not on laboriously transcribing what another person has said.
And with that said, I should hedge the above assertion with an acknowledgement that it is a generalization. There are certainly exceptions. (With emphasis on the word exception)
I don't believe that Apple wasted a penny in developing the Air. It was the first embodiment of technology later implemented in the aluminum Macbook Pros, in particular the all-aluminum body and non-customer replaceable battery. It's ultra thinness and beautiful appearance made it desirable to a limited number of people at a premium price. I don't have the numbers, but expect that the money earned selling the Air went a significant way to paying off the R&D costs for those new technologies. I'm sure that they worked out many bugs in the Air's production that permitted Apple to start producing a very much larger number of the Macbook Pros with minimum difficulty and cost. It's the old strategy of introducing new technologies in premium products in smaller quantities, then moving the technologies to less expensive mass-produced products. No reason to stop producing the premium product now, it's still selling.
Hell, I've used one and it's amazingly portable and light and sits on the lap very comfortably. Would like more powerful graphics, bigger hard drive, faster CPUs, and longer battery life. In fact, kind of wish I had never used one - all the other Macbooks seem way too heavy to me in comparison. With a little more power and lower price, Apple could move millions of these things. My advice - don't spend much time carrying around and using an Air - especially if you need a higher-powered system - because you'll want something that comfortable to carry and use and it's just not available - yet.
Very well put. I thought it was the best laptop to hold when I was looking recently. It's just the price/power which is a total put off. The white MacBook even kicks its ass. I just can't imagine them moving many of them except to rich ladies like Ruth Madoff.
Most college students cannot afford anything. Those that buy their own laptop are buying it out of their student loan money or from their student jobs, and therefore are buying a $300 netbook. The rest are having their parents buy it, who right now are unemployed and therefore also choose the $300 netbook.
Problem is down the road. I know a lot of people who won't consider a Mac because in college they used a Dell, loved it, had few problems with it and see little reason to change. Tere is a definite plus side to having college kids use a Mac over a cheap netbook because eventually we do want them to switch--what's their impetus if all they remember from their first computer purchase is how expensive the Mac was compared to the PC?
Apple has plenty of profit. Billions of it in fact. Question is what they do with it--they did little in Mac R&D, as 2009 so far has been craptastic for Macs. It seems like lately they've just stockpiled their winnings.
I agree with previous posters--my sub-$300 netbook is the best money I ever spent. I know a guy who bought one for each of his kids in middle/high school. They wanted a laptop, but at $1000 a Mac was not an option for 3 boys. However a $250 netboook is very viable, especially since it's inevitable one or two will get busted. He spent less on 3 computers than he did for one Macbook, and they serve his kids' purposes well. You can't tell me Apple is glad he gave his money to somebody else because he doesn't fit their "demographic". To be clear, he is a Mac user that makes very good money as a computer engineer--he just didn't want to drop $3000 in computers for his kids (especially considering said computers will be obsolete by the time they go to college anyway, but they need something in the near term).
And to say there's no profit to be had in netbooks is deceiving. Most companies make a profit on their netbook, just not as much. But if you could sell 5 million units at $20 profit, or you sell 500,000 units at $200 profit, what would you choose? Personally I'd rather sell 5 million units since it increases your userbase such that it becomes a desirable platform to develop for, and therefore becomes self-perpetuating much like the iPhone--people desire your product for its applications, not just its cool design which inevitably becomes old and copied.
Also let's not forget that many netbooks are sold with basically a cell phone plan--the netbook retails for $400, but you pay $50 or $100 for the netbook and instead pay Sprint or Verizon $30 a month for the data access plan. The cell phone companies win, but so do the computer manufacturers--their device is subsidized, yet they also will get a kickback from the cell phone company if the customer keeps their data plan beyond the 2 year contract.
you could buy dell mini's and install OS X on them. they take OS X better than a lot of the more expensive PC laptops.
apple is not going into the netbook market for the same reason MS won't sell a lite OS like android or ubuntu. they use their legacy products as cash flows to fund other projects where there is strong growth.
I bet MS doesn't even care about Zune because they probably make more money licensing Active Sync to Apple than on the Zune. they make almost as much profit on each Apple product as they do on a Windows license on a netbook
And this magical "Tablet" isn't aimed at the netbook market. It won't cost $230, unless there's some sort of subsidization involved. A Tablet is not a netbook. it's not an anything, but a Tablet. It's an entirely different animal that will open up an entirely new segment of mobile computing. It's got nothing to do with netbooks because it won't compete with most cheap netbooks.
Apple has thus far (and is poised to continue) bypassed the cheap netbook market entirely without so much as batting an eyelash.
Does it bother you that the netbook market is large, but Apple doesn't want to be involved? Is there something wrong with Apple being selective??
Apple is expected to have a blowout Q4, and to top it off, a lot of that will come from Mac sales. If only 17% of students will contribute to that . . . oh well.
Personally, I think the reason why this debate over whether Apple knowingly "missed the boat" is this...
There seems to be two opinions are are spawned off of the (rumored) iTablet craze. The first being the one's who want it to be an enlarged iPod touch with multi-tasking and improved gaming. The second being the people that want it to be like a MB, but as a tablet.
I think the people who favor the later idea are on this forum. They want this new tablet to be a netbook and it probably won't. However, we haven't seen it yet so the speculation is mute for the time being.
Regardless, i think it's these people (who want this iTablet to be a netbook) that are arguing that Apple "missed the boat" on the netbook craze. And i think there is a little anxiety about that with regards to why apple won't give in.
Now, in this new market where a good % of people are favoring this light/simple, fully-functioning computer market, has Apple missed it? Probably not...but you never know. A netbook is a very attractive market.
I think it's a completely irrelevant argument to say that since netbooks make so little profit, then somehow that's a disadvantage. As long as i've known, demand dictates success of any market. However, I think we all agree that Apple subscribes to the % of the market drive by the economically well-off and perhaps the part of frugley minded people who is save for a quality device.
That is a baloney. What kind of survey will just sample 300 persons. ....
300 out of 34 million. How can you make a conclusion based on such minute sample.
Don't believe it!
You need to learn about the basics of statistical sampling and optimal sample sizes before making uninformed statements like this...... for starters, take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(statistics)
(It is not an easy read, but I am too lazy to google any further than the nearest Wiki entry).
In my opinion, copious note taking is a similar crutch. Note taking is certainly valuable, I'm not saying it is bad. But beyond a certain level, you'll find that less learning actually takes place. The tradeoff is that lectures are more bearable, less of a mental load.
I can testify to that idea. I definitely got better grades when I took fewer notes. Go figure. Unfortunately it took me the first two years of college to figure that out.
Besides, in very few of my classes could notes be captured as simple lines of text. Diagrams, connectors, formulas, margin notes about a note, all added depth and context to the notes and would be difficult to duplicate on a computer. And how do you draw doodles on a computer during the boring parts of the lecture?
True, true- Apple will be making up for a lost segment. Wasted all that D&D on the Air which totally blows in relation to its cost.
Even if it was only a test bed for their unibody concept, they probably feel it was worth it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlBoy
This will be until they realize they cant fricken type papers on the damn things without cramping up.
At the desk, a USB keyboard can clear that up. On the go, the size trade-off might be worth it for some people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron
Spend that money for $400 15.4" notebook with a dual core CPU, 4GB RAM, adequate storage and many more other options and they a portal computer that is also usable for long durations. But to each their own, if a netbook suits your needs then go for it. Personally I'd go for a $400 notebook or a used $300 notebook over a netbook anyday. But to each their own, if a netbook suits your needs then go for it.
There's the size and weight, not to mention heat because regular notebook CPUs seem to run pretty not. If it's for simple tasks, a netbook might be the right thing for the job. Most of what I use my MBP for just don't require all that power
Quote:
Originally Posted by OC4Theo
That is a baloney. What kind of survey will just sample 300 persons. According to the U.S. Census Bureau 34 million people go to college in the United States. 16.5 million People are seeking a college degree and 17.5 million students are seeking their post-secondary degree.
300 out of 34 million. How can you make a conclusion based on such minute sample.
It's not so simple. You can sample a very small proportion of a given population and be able to compute a confidence as for how well it reflects the entire population. It might actually be adequate, though they don't give a confidence figure.
A sample of 300 out of 30 million appears to give a plus or minus 4.25% error at 95% confidence. A sample of 3000 out of 30M would be 1.34% margin of error. It would cost 10 times more to reduce the margin of error by 3 points.
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1
you might want to clarify your statement.
If you meant the Netbooks...well, netbook keyboards are typically 92% smaller than standard laptop keyboards. I don't see how that could be any less comfortable.
It probably depends on how big your hands are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin
I can testify to that idea. I definitely got better grades when I took fewer notes. Go figure. Unfortunately it took me the first two years of college to figure that out.
I tried that, but then that's less information for later. The real kicker was that one of the teachers got offended that I'm not writing anything down. The complaint wasn't that I wasn't paying attention, just not writing everything. I guess it was a no-win.
Quote:
Besides, in very few of my classes could notes be captured as simple lines of text. Diagrams, connectors, formulas, margin notes about a note, all added depth and context to the notes and would be difficult to duplicate on a computer. And how do you draw doodles on a computer during the boring parts of the lecture?
That is a problem, I don't know of an inexpensive program that offers adequate and easy sketching within a text document. If I did when I was in college, I might have bought a notebook computer.
Um . . . The Shuffle is an MP3 player. Not a computer.
The Mini is a desktop system. Not a notebook.
No one is making any real money from netbooks, which is a problem.
Netbooks aren't a factor when it comes to Apple and Apple's market. Apple sells computers on margin, not volume. Apple "missed" the netbook market because it has no intention of being in it in the first place. And they were right.
I think you are wrong there.
For the price of some (most?) netbooks you can get, for example, entry level Toshiba notebook with Celeron or older Pentium Mobile CPU (even dual core version of it)... here in NZ at least.
Considering that above mentioned Toshiba comes with bigger screen, DVD burner, comparable or faster CPU and still sells for same or lower price than most netbooks, I'd say margin on those is perfectly fine.
Of course, margin on nz$800 (average netbook price) is much less than same margin on nz$2999 (cheapest MacBook Air) but with volumes I think it is perfectly lucrative market.
It comes down to income brackets and basic knowledge of Apple's pricing. Apple will always sell fewer Macs in comparison to PC sales. Macs are marketed and priced as Premium items. Apple functions at the highest tier of the market pyramid.
Just connect the dots. Apple's deomgraphic is NOT a reflection of the entire market. Hence, their 91% share of the $1000+ notebook market.
What is that number covering? Retail or complete market? US or whole world?
Among our corporate users, we have number of high-end (and expensive) HP EliteBook units as well as Lenovo T and other equally expensive lines for executives... and zero Mac notebooks. Hard to believe NZ market is so much off the target.
Spend that money for $400 15.4" notebook with a dual core CPU, 4GB RAM, adequate storage and many more other options and they a portal computer that is also usable for long durations. But to each their own, if a netbook suits your needs then go for it. Personally I'd go for a $400 notebook or a used $300 notebook over a netbook anyday. But to each their own, if a netbook suits your needs then go for it.
I was thinking the same, thus I have purchased Core 2 Duo based full-size notebook last year.
Down the timeline I discovered I'm using it mostly for minor (processing-wise) things - ebooks, emails, web, images browsing (but not editing).
I also discovered I tend to use it in unortodox situations - in bed, armchair, couch, floor, where size matters; if I feel like sitting by the desk, I'll just go to my study and use desktop with 24" screen, full size keyboard, decent speakers and other goodies.
So I can perfectly see myself replacing notebook with netbook... specially now that they started shipping with 2GB RAM, Vista (7 in a month) and bigger 7200rpm drives... and specially that I did have chance to play a bit with one of those, HP Mini 5101, and found performance perfectly acceptable for what I need it for.
But I'll probably hold my consumer impulses until SSDs come down with price a bit more and netbooks with ION platform become available.
And this magical "Tablet" isn't aimed at the netbook market. It won't cost $230, unless there's some sort of subsidization involved. A Tablet is not a netbook. it's not an anything, but a Tablet. It's an entirely different animal that will open up an entirely new segment of mobile computing. It's got nothing to do with netbooks because it won't compete with most cheap netbooks.
Apple has thus far (and is poised to continue) bypassed the cheap netbook market entirely without so much as batting an eyelash.
Does it bother you that the netbook market is large, but Apple doesn't want to be involved? Is there something wrong with Apple being selective??
Apple is expected to have a blowout Q4, and to top it off, a lot of that will come from Mac sales. If only 17% of students will contribute to that . . . oh well.
I see you like statistics and numbers a lot - 17% here, 90% there... well, then; how come 17% of students turn into 8% or less of general population? Does that mean that more than 50% of bellow-25 Mac users will give up on Macs and turn to PC once they grow up?
That is a huge number of cross-overs, statistically speaking
Isn't the MacMini supposed to be the "affordable" Mac?
A $600 desktop where the cheap desktops are $300.
Quote:
Excuses , excuses- Netbooks are penetrating deeper and deeper into the public's consciousness- Apple missed the boat.
Instead Apple gave us - the Air????
No excuses. Apple doesn't do low end so no boat to miss. If Apple made a netbook it would cost $799...you might as well buy a white MB for $999 if it still existed.
Comments
you might want to clarify your statement.
If you meant the Netbooks...well, netbook keyboards are typically 92% smaller than standard laptop keyboards. I don't see how that could be any less comfortable.
If you meant the iphone/(Rumored) iTablet...hear, hear. for all the naysayers that think this tablet will eat into the netbook craze, i truly doubt it. good luck takin
g notes in class on a tablet. the UI of the phone/touch is better than all others, but in no way is it faster than a physical keyboard.
on a tablet you will probably just write with your hand on the screen. Even microsoft had a version of xp that did this years ago
True, true- Apple will be making up for a lost segment. Wasted all that D&D on the Air which totally blows in relation to its cost.
I don't believe that Apple wasted a penny in developing the Air. It was the first embodiment of technology later implemented in the aluminum Macbook Pros, in particular the all-aluminum body and non-customer replaceable battery. It's ultra thinness and beautiful appearance made it desirable to a limited number of people at a premium price. I don't have the numbers, but expect that the money earned selling the Air went a significant way to paying off the R&D costs for those new technologies. I'm sure that they worked out many bugs in the Air's production that permitted Apple to start producing a very much larger number of the Macbook Pros with minimum difficulty and cost. It's the old strategy of introducing new technologies in premium products in smaller quantities, then moving the technologies to less expensive mass-produced products. No reason to stop producing the premium product now, it's still selling.
Hell, I've used one and it's amazingly portable and light and sits on the lap very comfortably. Would like more powerful graphics, bigger hard drive, faster CPUs, and longer battery life. In fact, kind of wish I had never used one - all the other Macbooks seem way too heavy to me in comparison. With a little more power and lower price, Apple could move millions of these things. My advice - don't spend much time carrying around and using an Air - especially if you need a higher-powered system - because you'll want something that comfortable to carry and use and it's just not available - yet.
Really- what's an iPod Shuffle then?
Isn't the MacMini supposed to be the "affordable" Mac?
Excuses , excuses- Netbooks are penetrating deeper and deeper into the public's consciousness- Apple missed the boat.
Instead Apple gave us - the Air????
Why focus on the Macbook Air? It would be fab if I could afford it. I can't. I do know people who love it - they have more $$$ than I do.
Apple does best when it does higher end. As stock holder I want profit. Big sales with little to no profit mean nothing.
Netbooks like the Aspire One, which I own, are good products and a bargain. But they also are flawed, even within the limited uses to which they are suited. Personally I'd pay a little more for what would amount to a 6-inch version of the Touch. What I could see as advantages would be better battery life (just under 2 hours isn't enough), a more intelligent input interface, more portability, better perceived image quality, etc.
Like the netbook, such a device would not cut it as a desktop replacement but it would be a compelling device, nonetheless, and would surely make quite a few Must-Have lists. What it would not do is convince someone looking to netbooks as a very low-cost means of meeting all their computing needs but on the other hand, in that role, I really do think netbooks are lacking. As such, I don't think that's a segment that Apple would want to compete for.
To date the talk had been about 10-inch tablets and that is a whole other thing. But a 6-inch Touch, now that's something I can understand the value of. It would make a killer net browser, be excellent for watching movies and the like, and it would still be a very portable form factor with decent battery life. For such a device, people would pay a premium over a basic netbook and it would make sense for Apple to bring such a device to market at this time.
Why focus on the Macbook Air? It would be fab if I could afford it. I can't. I do know people who love it - they have more $$$ than I do.
Most college students cannot afford anything. Those that buy their own laptop are buying it out of their student loan money or from their student jobs, and therefore are buying a $300 netbook. The rest are having their parents buy it, who right now are unemployed and therefore also choose the $300 netbook.
Problem is down the road. I know a lot of people who won't consider a Mac because in college they used a Dell, loved it, had few problems with it and see little reason to change. Tere is a definite plus side to having college kids use a Mac over a cheap netbook because eventually we do want them to switch--what's their impetus if all they remember from their first computer purchase is how expensive the Mac was compared to the PC?
Apple does best when it does higher end. As stock holder I want profit. Big sales with little to no profit mean nothing.
Apple has plenty of profit. Billions of it in fact. Question is what they do with it--they did little in Mac R&D, as 2009 so far has been craptastic for Macs. It seems like lately they've just stockpiled their winnings.
I agree with previous posters--my sub-$300 netbook is the best money I ever spent. I know a guy who bought one for each of his kids in middle/high school. They wanted a laptop, but at $1000 a Mac was not an option for 3 boys. However a $250 netboook is very viable, especially since it's inevitable one or two will get busted. He spent less on 3 computers than he did for one Macbook, and they serve his kids' purposes well. You can't tell me Apple is glad he gave his money to somebody else because he doesn't fit their "demographic". To be clear, he is a Mac user that makes very good money as a computer engineer--he just didn't want to drop $3000 in computers for his kids (especially considering said computers will be obsolete by the time they go to college anyway, but they need something in the near term).
And to say there's no profit to be had in netbooks is deceiving. Most companies make a profit on their netbook, just not as much. But if you could sell 5 million units at $20 profit, or you sell 500,000 units at $200 profit, what would you choose? Personally I'd rather sell 5 million units since it increases your userbase such that it becomes a desirable platform to develop for, and therefore becomes self-perpetuating much like the iPhone--people desire your product for its applications, not just its cool design which inevitably becomes old and copied.
Also let's not forget that many netbooks are sold with basically a cell phone plan--the netbook retails for $400, but you pay $50 or $100 for the netbook and instead pay Sprint or Verizon $30 a month for the data access plan. The cell phone companies win, but so do the computer manufacturers--their device is subsidized, yet they also will get a kickback from the cell phone company if the customer keeps their data plan beyond the 2 year contract.
I think it depends largely on the individual's learning style and the professor/instructor's teaching style.
I heard it explained by a good percussion (drum) teacher of mine that people learn in 3 different ways: visually, aurally, or kinesthetically (actually carrying out or doing something). His point was that music is one of the few mediums that incorporates all 3 learning styles.
I can see where there would be excellent arguments for taking hand-written notes as opposed to typed notes, but I can also see situations where typing notes would be more beneficial (especially if one can type faster than they can write, like me).
Ultimately, people need to find out how they learn best and tailor their own methods to that style.
I agree to some extent. But I would assert that people in general, don't make the best decisions when it comes to learning, especially their own learning. Myself included.
Applying one's self is quite difficult. The most obvious example is devoting enough time to studying and studying in a non-distracting environment. People frequently study with a TV on in the background, or listening to music. The reason for this is that forcing your brain to focus only on one thing is difficult, especially when that thing is new or not understood. Doing so actually triggers measurable physiological effects, with the extreme example being panic attacks. The easy way out is to not force your brain to concentrate or comprehend all at once. Distractions while learning are similar to taking breaks while running. It makes the immediate discomfort go away.
In my opinion, copious note taking is a similar crutch. Note taking is certainly valuable, I'm not saying it is bad. But beyond a certain level, you'll find that less learning actually takes place. The tradeoff is that lectures are more bearable, less of a mental load.
In my experience, both in academia and in the workforce, the highest functioning people don't take notes on a computer. Meeting minutes for later dissemination, sure. But not note taking. Hence someone's earlier comment about it being good training for a secretary. Not that there is anything wrong with that. But rather that people who excel in their fields, tend to focus on concepts, not on laboriously transcribing what another person has said.
And with that said, I should hedge the above assertion with an acknowledgement that it is a generalization. There are certainly exceptions. (With emphasis on the word exception)
I don't believe that Apple wasted a penny in developing the Air. It was the first embodiment of technology later implemented in the aluminum Macbook Pros, in particular the all-aluminum body and non-customer replaceable battery. It's ultra thinness and beautiful appearance made it desirable to a limited number of people at a premium price. I don't have the numbers, but expect that the money earned selling the Air went a significant way to paying off the R&D costs for those new technologies. I'm sure that they worked out many bugs in the Air's production that permitted Apple to start producing a very much larger number of the Macbook Pros with minimum difficulty and cost. It's the old strategy of introducing new technologies in premium products in smaller quantities, then moving the technologies to less expensive mass-produced products. No reason to stop producing the premium product now, it's still selling.
Hell, I've used one and it's amazingly portable and light and sits on the lap very comfortably. Would like more powerful graphics, bigger hard drive, faster CPUs, and longer battery life. In fact, kind of wish I had never used one - all the other Macbooks seem way too heavy to me in comparison. With a little more power and lower price, Apple could move millions of these things. My advice - don't spend much time carrying around and using an Air - especially if you need a higher-powered system - because you'll want something that comfortable to carry and use and it's just not available - yet.
Very well put. I thought it was the best laptop to hold when I was looking recently. It's just the price/power which is a total put off. The white MacBook even kicks its ass. I just can't imagine them moving many of them except to rich ladies like Ruth Madoff.
Most college students cannot afford anything. Those that buy their own laptop are buying it out of their student loan money or from their student jobs, and therefore are buying a $300 netbook. The rest are having their parents buy it, who right now are unemployed and therefore also choose the $300 netbook.
Problem is down the road. I know a lot of people who won't consider a Mac because in college they used a Dell, loved it, had few problems with it and see little reason to change. Tere is a definite plus side to having college kids use a Mac over a cheap netbook because eventually we do want them to switch--what's their impetus if all they remember from their first computer purchase is how expensive the Mac was compared to the PC?
Apple has plenty of profit. Billions of it in fact. Question is what they do with it--they did little in Mac R&D, as 2009 so far has been craptastic for Macs. It seems like lately they've just stockpiled their winnings.
I agree with previous posters--my sub-$300 netbook is the best money I ever spent. I know a guy who bought one for each of his kids in middle/high school. They wanted a laptop, but at $1000 a Mac was not an option for 3 boys. However a $250 netboook is very viable, especially since it's inevitable one or two will get busted. He spent less on 3 computers than he did for one Macbook, and they serve his kids' purposes well. You can't tell me Apple is glad he gave his money to somebody else because he doesn't fit their "demographic". To be clear, he is a Mac user that makes very good money as a computer engineer--he just didn't want to drop $3000 in computers for his kids (especially considering said computers will be obsolete by the time they go to college anyway, but they need something in the near term).
And to say there's no profit to be had in netbooks is deceiving. Most companies make a profit on their netbook, just not as much. But if you could sell 5 million units at $20 profit, or you sell 500,000 units at $200 profit, what would you choose? Personally I'd rather sell 5 million units since it increases your userbase such that it becomes a desirable platform to develop for, and therefore becomes self-perpetuating much like the iPhone--people desire your product for its applications, not just its cool design which inevitably becomes old and copied.
Also let's not forget that many netbooks are sold with basically a cell phone plan--the netbook retails for $400, but you pay $50 or $100 for the netbook and instead pay Sprint or Verizon $30 a month for the data access plan. The cell phone companies win, but so do the computer manufacturers--their device is subsidized, yet they also will get a kickback from the cell phone company if the customer keeps their data plan beyond the 2 year contract.
you could buy dell mini's and install OS X on them. they take OS X better than a lot of the more expensive PC laptops.
apple is not going into the netbook market for the same reason MS won't sell a lite OS like android or ubuntu. they use their legacy products as cash flows to fund other projects where there is strong growth.
I bet MS doesn't even care about Zune because they probably make more money licensing Active Sync to Apple than on the Zune. they make almost as much profit on each Apple product as they do on a Windows license on a netbook
And this magical "Tablet" isn't aimed at the netbook market. It won't cost $230, unless there's some sort of subsidization involved. A Tablet is not a netbook. it's not an anything, but a Tablet. It's an entirely different animal that will open up an entirely new segment of mobile computing. It's got nothing to do with netbooks because it won't compete with most cheap netbooks.
Apple has thus far (and is poised to continue) bypassed the cheap netbook market entirely without so much as batting an eyelash.
Does it bother you that the netbook market is large, but Apple doesn't want to be involved? Is there something wrong with Apple being selective??
Apple is expected to have a blowout Q4, and to top it off, a lot of that will come from Mac sales. If only 17% of students will contribute to that . . . oh well.
Personally, I think the reason why this debate over whether Apple knowingly "missed the boat" is this...
There seems to be two opinions are are spawned off of the (rumored) iTablet craze. The first being the one's who want it to be an enlarged iPod touch with multi-tasking and improved gaming. The second being the people that want it to be like a MB, but as a tablet.
I think the people who favor the later idea are on this forum. They want this new tablet to be a netbook and it probably won't. However, we haven't seen it yet so the speculation is mute for the time being.
Regardless, i think it's these people (who want this iTablet to be a netbook) that are arguing that Apple "missed the boat" on the netbook craze. And i think there is a little anxiety about that with regards to why apple won't give in.
Now, in this new market where a good % of people are favoring this light/simple, fully-functioning computer market, has Apple missed it? Probably not...but you never know. A netbook is a very attractive market.
I think it's a completely irrelevant argument to say that since netbooks make so little profit, then somehow that's a disadvantage. As long as i've known, demand dictates success of any market. However, I think we all agree that Apple subscribes to the % of the market drive by the economically well-off and perhaps the part of frugley minded people who is save for a quality device.
That is a baloney. What kind of survey will just sample 300 persons. ....
300 out of 34 million. How can you make a conclusion based on such minute sample.
Don't believe it!
You need to learn about the basics of statistical sampling and optimal sample sizes before making uninformed statements like this...... for starters, take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(statistics)
(It is not an easy read, but I am too lazy to google any further than the nearest Wiki entry).
In my opinion, copious note taking is a similar crutch. Note taking is certainly valuable, I'm not saying it is bad. But beyond a certain level, you'll find that less learning actually takes place. The tradeoff is that lectures are more bearable, less of a mental load.
I can testify to that idea. I definitely got better grades when I took fewer notes. Go figure. Unfortunately it took me the first two years of college to figure that out.
Besides, in very few of my classes could notes be captured as simple lines of text. Diagrams, connectors, formulas, margin notes about a note, all added depth and context to the notes and would be difficult to duplicate on a computer. And how do you draw doodles on a computer during the boring parts of the lecture?
True, true- Apple will be making up for a lost segment. Wasted all that D&D on the Air which totally blows in relation to its cost.
Even if it was only a test bed for their unibody concept, they probably feel it was worth it.
This will be until they realize they cant fricken type papers on the damn things without cramping up.
At the desk, a USB keyboard can clear that up. On the go, the size trade-off might be worth it for some people.
Spend that money for $400 15.4" notebook with a dual core CPU, 4GB RAM, adequate storage and many more other options and they a portal computer that is also usable for long durations. But to each their own, if a netbook suits your needs then go for it. Personally I'd go for a $400 notebook or a used $300 notebook over a netbook anyday. But to each their own, if a netbook suits your needs then go for it.
There's the size and weight, not to mention heat because regular notebook CPUs seem to run pretty not. If it's for simple tasks, a netbook might be the right thing for the job. Most of what I use my MBP for just don't require all that power
That is a baloney. What kind of survey will just sample 300 persons. According to the U.S. Census Bureau 34 million people go to college in the United States. 16.5 million People are seeking a college degree and 17.5 million students are seeking their post-secondary degree.
300 out of 34 million. How can you make a conclusion based on such minute sample.
It's not so simple. You can sample a very small proportion of a given population and be able to compute a confidence as for how well it reflects the entire population. It might actually be adequate, though they don't give a confidence figure.
Here is a good site to try:
http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm
A sample of 300 out of 30 million appears to give a plus or minus 4.25% error at 95% confidence. A sample of 3000 out of 30M would be 1.34% margin of error. It would cost 10 times more to reduce the margin of error by 3 points.
you might want to clarify your statement.
If you meant the Netbooks...well, netbook keyboards are typically 92% smaller than standard laptop keyboards. I don't see how that could be any less comfortable.
It probably depends on how big your hands are.
I can testify to that idea. I definitely got better grades when I took fewer notes. Go figure. Unfortunately it took me the first two years of college to figure that out.
I tried that, but then that's less information for later. The real kicker was that one of the teachers got offended that I'm not writing anything down. The complaint wasn't that I wasn't paying attention, just not writing everything. I guess it was a no-win.
Besides, in very few of my classes could notes be captured as simple lines of text. Diagrams, connectors, formulas, margin notes about a note, all added depth and context to the notes and would be difficult to duplicate on a computer. And how do you draw doodles on a computer during the boring parts of the lecture?
That is a problem, I don't know of an inexpensive program that offers adequate and easy sketching within a text document. If I did when I was in college, I might have bought a notebook computer.
Um . . . The Shuffle is an MP3 player. Not a computer.
The Mini is a desktop system. Not a notebook.
No one is making any real money from netbooks, which is a problem.
Netbooks aren't a factor when it comes to Apple and Apple's market. Apple sells computers on margin, not volume. Apple "missed" the netbook market because it has no intention of being in it in the first place. And they were right.
I think you are wrong there.
For the price of some (most?) netbooks you can get, for example, entry level Toshiba notebook with Celeron or older Pentium Mobile CPU (even dual core version of it)... here in NZ at least.
Considering that above mentioned Toshiba comes with bigger screen, DVD burner, comparable or faster CPU and still sells for same or lower price than most netbooks, I'd say margin on those is perfectly fine.
Of course, margin on nz$800 (average netbook price) is much less than same margin on nz$2999 (cheapest MacBook Air) but with volumes I think it is perfectly lucrative market.
It comes down to income brackets and basic knowledge of Apple's pricing. Apple will always sell fewer Macs in comparison to PC sales. Macs are marketed and priced as Premium items. Apple functions at the highest tier of the market pyramid.
Just connect the dots. Apple's deomgraphic is NOT a reflection of the entire market. Hence, their 91% share of the $1000+ notebook market.
What is that number covering? Retail or complete market? US or whole world?
Among our corporate users, we have number of high-end (and expensive) HP EliteBook units as well as Lenovo T and other equally expensive lines for executives... and zero Mac notebooks. Hard to believe NZ market is so much off the target.
We've all heard 70% of the US economy is driven by consumer spending...but did you know the top 10% wealthiest consumers drive 50% of the US economy?
That's apple's target demographic.
I think you are missing his point.
He is saying that not everyone who doesn't purchase Mac can't afford it. People will buy non-Mac computer for number of reasons beside price.
Spend that money for $400 15.4" notebook with a dual core CPU, 4GB RAM, adequate storage and many more other options and they a portal computer that is also usable for long durations. But to each their own, if a netbook suits your needs then go for it. Personally I'd go for a $400 notebook or a used $300 notebook over a netbook anyday. But to each their own, if a netbook suits your needs then go for it.
I was thinking the same, thus I have purchased Core 2 Duo based full-size notebook last year.
Down the timeline I discovered I'm using it mostly for minor (processing-wise) things - ebooks, emails, web, images browsing (but not editing).
I also discovered I tend to use it in unortodox situations - in bed, armchair, couch, floor, where size matters; if I feel like sitting by the desk, I'll just go to my study and use desktop with 24" screen, full size keyboard, decent speakers and other goodies.
So I can perfectly see myself replacing notebook with netbook... specially now that they started shipping with 2GB RAM, Vista (7 in a month) and bigger 7200rpm drives... and specially that I did have chance to play a bit with one of those, HP Mini 5101, and found performance perfectly acceptable for what I need it for.
But I'll probably hold my consumer impulses until SSDs come down with price a bit more and netbooks with ION platform become available.
And this magical "Tablet" isn't aimed at the netbook market. It won't cost $230, unless there's some sort of subsidization involved. A Tablet is not a netbook. it's not an anything, but a Tablet. It's an entirely different animal that will open up an entirely new segment of mobile computing. It's got nothing to do with netbooks because it won't compete with most cheap netbooks.
Apple has thus far (and is poised to continue) bypassed the cheap netbook market entirely without so much as batting an eyelash.
Does it bother you that the netbook market is large, but Apple doesn't want to be involved? Is there something wrong with Apple being selective??
Apple is expected to have a blowout Q4, and to top it off, a lot of that will come from Mac sales. If only 17% of students will contribute to that . . . oh well.
I see you like statistics and numbers a lot - 17% here, 90% there... well, then; how come 17% of students turn into 8% or less of general population? Does that mean that more than 50% of bellow-25 Mac users will give up on Macs and turn to PC once they grow up?
That is a huge number of cross-overs, statistically speaking
Is the MacBook Air selling well? Do we actually know that for a fact?
Haven't seen a commercial for it since last year with that stupid interoffice envelope commercial hyping its thinness.
Oddly, he never mentioned the Air at all in his post. He simply said that Apple doesn't do low end and the Air isn't low end.
Frankly the margins are so low on netbooks it's not worth Apple's effort to canibalize MB sales for them.
The tablet doesn't fill the same niche. Without a keyboard (if it is a slate) it can't do what a netbook does...which is a laptop replacement.
Really- what's an iPod Shuffle then?
An $80 MP3 player where cheap models are $25.
Isn't the MacMini supposed to be the "affordable" Mac?
A $600 desktop where the cheap desktops are $300.
Excuses , excuses- Netbooks are penetrating deeper and deeper into the public's consciousness- Apple missed the boat.
Instead Apple gave us - the Air????
No excuses. Apple doesn't do low end so no boat to miss. If Apple made a netbook it would cost $799...you might as well buy a white MB for $999 if it still existed.