My one problem with Apple`s pricing
Ok, aside from the initial high price that is (I think we're all agreed that they are more expensive, right) but the other thing which gets me is that the prices never drop over the months.
If you look at other manufacturers, when they release a new update, let`s take a laptop for example, then after a few months the prices naturally come down. Apple never does this. The iMac is a great example. In the top-end we have a ATI Radeon HD 4850 GPU. This is pretty old technology now, 2008 if i'm not mistaken? And yet if you want to buy one in an iMac the price hasn't changed from October last year. The same will be said for the macbooks etc etc.
I'm not 'bashing' Macs here (i'm still on the fence as to get one or not) but thought i'd throw this out into the open.
If you look at other manufacturers, when they release a new update, let`s take a laptop for example, then after a few months the prices naturally come down. Apple never does this. The iMac is a great example. In the top-end we have a ATI Radeon HD 4850 GPU. This is pretty old technology now, 2008 if i'm not mistaken? And yet if you want to buy one in an iMac the price hasn't changed from October last year. The same will be said for the macbooks etc etc.
I'm not 'bashing' Macs here (i'm still on the fence as to get one or not) but thought i'd throw this out into the open.
Comments
Ok, aside from the initial high price that is (I think we're all agreed that they are more expensive, right) but the other thing which gets me is that the prices never drop over the months.
It's been brought up a few times. Other manufacturers keep selling older models for a while - Dell still sells Pentium chips. After an update, Apple drop the old line entirely.
Imagine the scenario that you get a Macbook starting at $999 and every 3 months, it drops by $100. After a 9 month wait, it would have dropped twice to $799. There wouldn't be a 3rd drop as a replacement would come instead.
At this point, buyers would be looking at the item and saving up for it. Then an update comes, the old model is wiped out and the new one is $200 more and those people saving up can no longer afford one.
Apple could continue selling the old one after the new one comes out but then it dampens uptake of the new model as people would rush to get the old one before it went out of stock. Not only that but people who wanted the new one may hold off until the inevitable price drop.
In the current model, the price stays the same all the way through so when an update finally hits, it means psychologically you are getting a better machine for the same price.
I prefer the first model and most consumers probably would as it benefits us. It benefits Apple more to keep the price high because when a new model is out, there is demand so profits on volume and when demand is low, the profit is on charging a lot for old hardware.
It's been brought up a few times. Other manufacturers keep selling older models for a while - Dell still sells Pentium chips. After an update, Apple drop the old line entirely.
Imagine the scenario that you get a Macbook starting at $999 and every 3 months, it drops by $100. After a 9 month wait, it would have dropped twice to $799. There wouldn't be a 3rd drop as a replacement would come instead.
At this point, buyers would be looking at the item and saving up for it. Then an update comes, the old model is wiped out and the new one is $200 more and those people saving up can no longer afford one.
Apple could continue selling the old one after the new one comes out but then it dampens uptake of the new model as people would rush to get the old one before it went out of stock. Not only that but people who wanted the new one may hold off until the inevitable price drop.
In the current model, the price stays the same all the way through so when an update finally hits, it means psychologically you are getting a better machine for the same price.
I prefer the first model and most consumers probably would as it benefits us. It benefits Apple more to keep the price high because when a new model is out, there is demand so profits on volume and when demand is low, the profit is on charging a lot for old hardware.
True, but when you are still paying the premium price for the two year old technology, it does seem a bit harsh.
And of course it benefits Apple. They are able to continually sell the older (and cheaper tech) for the same price.
The other part of the equation that even many Mac users do not realize is the resale value on a Mac. Coming from a PC background, one would never think of this as PC's are mostly worthless the moment you buy them. I had read about the vaunted resale value of Macs, but decided to try it before buying my second Mac. I discovered ebay and gave it a whirl. I couldn't believe the going rate for two year old, dead end tech. I priced mine accordingly and sold it right away. Today, I resale almost every Mac I buy after about a year or two. I get the vast majority of my original purchase price back when I resell. It take that money and add a couple hundred dollars and I and walking out of the Apple store with a new machine. Till you do this a few times, you will never understand it. I hope Apple never changes its pricing structure. It allows me to have the latest and greatest for pennies on the dollar. Try that with a commodity PC.
When I was a PC using Apple basher, I, too, thought that Apple's pricing was not just outrageous, but abusive. What changed my mind? The first Mac I owned was an 800 MH G3 iBook. It had a smaller screen and lower specs than any other machine I looked at. It only took a day to realize it was by far, the best computing experience I ever had. It didn't take long before I forgot how much I paid for it. When I was ready for a new computer, I never considered anything but a Mac. So it has been to this day. I have purchased $3000 computers. None of them even came close to my overall Mac experience. So much for initial price.
The other part of the equation that even many Mac users do not realize is the resale value on a Mac. Coming from a PC background, one would never think of this as PC's are mostly worthless the moment you buy them. I had read about the vaunted resale value of Macs, but decided to try it before buying my second Mac. I discovered ebay and gave it a whirl. I couldn't believe the going rate for two year old, dead end tech. I priced mine accordingly and sold it right away. Today, I resale almost every Mac I buy after about a year or two. I get the vast majority of my original purchase price back when I resell. It take that money and add a couple hundred dollars and I and walking out of the Apple store with a new machine. Till you do this a few times, you will never understand it. I hope Apple never changes its pricing structure. It allows me to have the latest and greatest for pennies on the dollar. Try that with a commodity PC.
That`s actually a pretty good point .
(The one time they DID try that approach... with the original iPhone... people got upset because they DID lower the price after 3 months!!)
You also don't have to be concerned about buying new Apple hardware the day it comes out. There's no need to "wait a couple months till the price comes down" ... It'll be the same price right up until the day it's replaced.
(The one time they DID try that approach... with the original iPhone... people got upset because they DID lower the price after 3 months!!)
I'd expect older hardware to get cheaper over time. Apple's approach simply means that it is very poor value for money after it has been on sale for a while.
I'd expect older hardware to get cheaper over time. Apple's approach simply means that it is very poor value for money after it has been on sale for a while.
From a strictly "spec-whore" point of view, it's poor value on the day it's first released. But (as we all know) Macs are as much about the OS and usability as they are about max performance.
From a strictly "spec-whore" point of view, it's poor value on the day it's first released. But (as we all know) Macs are as much about the OS and usability as they are about max performance.
Hmmm, maybe, but the cost of the OS doesn't go up and up as the hardware gets older.
I'd expect older hardware to get cheaper over time. Apple's approach simply means that it is very poor value for money after it has been on sale for a while.
You have discovered that Macs are not commodity items. They do not follow the commodity pricing model. There is no law that requires the commodity model. It is just that among personal computer manufacturers, Apple is lone in differentiating its products by features other than price.
You have discovered that Macs are not commodity items. They do not follow the commodity pricing model. There is no law that requires the commodity model. It is just that among personal computer manufacturers, Apple is lone in differentiating its products by features other than price.
As much as Apple likes to pretend it's a commodity item, at the end of the day, it's still just a computer, and I would expect it to follow the computer model. Hey, they're entitled to do whatever they like. If they're happy with their single digit marketshare, that's fine, it just means that developers aren't that interested in the platform, and that seems to be the measure we're using to judge success these days.
From a strictly "spec-whore" point of view, it's poor value on the day it's first released. But (as we all know) Macs are as much about the OS and usability as they are about max performance.
A computer with a fast processor and generic software can be a lot slower than a computer with a slower processor and more efficient software. To me it always seemed crazy to buy the cutting edge CPU or graphics card when there is almost no software available that can properly utilize it.
A computer with a fast processor and generic software can be a lot slower than a computer with a slower processor and more efficient software. To me it always seemed crazy to buy the cutting edge CPU or graphics card when there is almost no software available that can properly utilize it.
Agreed... but even with Apple/OSX's non-cutting-edge hardware ... much of the 3rd party software has not been optimized to take advantage of what OSX offers. (64 bit, multiple processor cores, GPU processing) ... OSX will take care of some of those things when it can, but the individual apps still need to be optimized to get the real benefit from these things... And OSX has the same "developer lag" that Windows does.
As much as Apple likes to pretend it's a commodity item, ....
I presume that you meant that Apple pretends that the Mac is not a commodity item. Nobody disputes the fact that Macs are computers. However, computers are not necessarily commodity items. You cannot conflate the two. The fact that Apple is thriving in a market dominated by commodity vendors is truly remarkable.
More generally, there are some "deals" that Apple will create in the back half of some models' lifespans. They often don't show up directly from Apple, either. Microcenter will have some great deals on Apple hardware and I can only assume that Apple is underwriting some of those costs. It's a good deal for all, too. Apple gets to maintain the price at it's most visible venue (Apple Store), allows smart shoppers some saving (at non-Apple retailers), and probably moves more hardware late in some product cycles than they otherwise would.
The other element to this is some desire on Apple's part to not be perceived as raising price every time a new model comes out. It's desirable for them to have each new model to make as big a splash as possible and having a de facto price increase at each intro only hurts that.