I paid good money to replace my VHS collection with DVD ... I'm not spending more money re-purchasing everything on Blu-Ray now. Last year I got an AppleTV, ripped my DVDs and then sold the whack of them.
You high def nerds can all keep your Blu-Ray.
What will you do if future DRM no longer allows you to play your digital content? That has happened more than once, so far, hasn't it?
What will you do if future DRM no longer allows you to play your digital content? That has happened more than once, so far, hasn't it?
In this case he has taken his content and ripped it into a DRM-less version, so future changes won't have a restriction on him. There have been services who killed off their DRM and left people stranded, but ripping your movies into AVI or whatever will leave you safe for the future
Of course it's a disappointment, what were they thinking with this move? I'd be shocked if they sell many of these at all. And of course there are still a few fanboys around who will defend Apple regardless of how lame and overpriced a given product is.
The problems with this machine were that it was underpowered and too expensive. It was already smaller than it needed to be. So what does apple do? They "fix" the one thing that wasn't broken, keep lousy specs, and raise the price? Could the company be any more tone deaf to what consumers want when it comes to this model?
Seriously, they went to the trouble of a redesign and put all the effort into size, still at the expense of performance and high cost? I'd almost say apple went out of their way to try and get people to NOT buy this model and go with an iMac instead, but then they wouldn't have bothered to redesign. Just amazing how clueless the company is when it comes to desktops.
So where's that affordable midtower that the lineup desperately needs?
I paid good money to replace my VHS collection with DVD ... I'm not spending more money re-purchasing everything on Blu-Ray now. Last year I got an AppleTV, ripped my DVDs and then sold the whack of them. What I didn't sell online I dumped off at the latest music/movie trade in shop... did the same with my music collection too.
I didn't read this properly the first time around, so you have effectively stolen all your movies, and all your music? So when someone from the MPAA, or RIAA comes a knocking, how do you prove to them that you actually own a copy of the phyisical disc when they are dragging you off to court?
You started off stating that they "so much cash reserves" they shouldn't be concerned with profits so much. You don't think that is a wild generalization?
Well no, in order to amass such vast profits, it means their margins are high enough to allow it, so they could make their products more affordable and still be a very profitable company.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Google is far from altruistic. On could argue that taking so much money from the "poorest" people in the world compared to Apple taking it from only the "richest" makes Apple 1/2 Robin Hood.
Yeah but it's the wrong half. Helping out the poor was really Robin Hood's whole appeal as you mentioned at the end of your post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
If you can't afford it then you don't buy it. It's how a free market works. I could right a very long list of things that I want that I can't feasibly afford. I do not for one minute feel I am entitled to them simply because they are out of my price range. If you want more things in life then you work harder and smarter to achieve your goals.
Why should it be Apple's duty to supply one laptop per child for the entire world or are we stopping the humanitarian aspect of for-profit business at a price point more suitable to a specific buyer?
Ok but it's not like even buying an expensive car because with computers you buy into an eco-system and with Apple a very tight-knit one. So all your apps, all your documents, filesystem, plugins and so on are invested in this platform. You have made the decision to purchase a machine from Apple at a certain price point and you are completely setup in this system. Then you look for an upgrade and Apple moves your comfortable price point. The Mini last year was £499, which is quite a comfortable price but it was £399 or £449 or something before that. It now sits at £650. The Mac Pro was once £1449 and is now £1899.
If you bought into the Mac ecosystem at £449 or £1449, where's the upgrade path? There isn't one, they just show you the door back to PC hell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
So because they sell less of them they should be okay with making no profit on them? That doesn't make sense and isn't the way business works.
They wouldn't necessarily make no profit, they just have to make better decisions about how to build it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
You say that they'd make up the loss in profit in volume. You don't even speculate this could be an outcome, you state it as a absolute fact. You can't possibly know that.
Scenario: Apple drops price on Mac Mini to now only make a $10 net profit on each unit sold. How many more Mac Miinis must they sell to break even against the current net profit per unit?
Cost to build was $376 for the $599 model. Now we don't know if those are the prices Apple pays for components and we don't know the R&D costs, software costs etc and if we assumed a $100 drop, it seems fairly certain they make next to no profit at all. But, if they built the new one with a $599 price point in mind then they could reach it as they have done in the past. The superdrive removal should reduce the cost by over $50, using a smaller HDD in the base model would save about the same. If they reduced their profits by even a small amount and threw in an extra 2GB RAM, it would have been great:
50% smaller not 25%, $599 price point, 160 or 250GB space, 4GB RAM, no optical that hardly anybody uses anyway and can be bought for $50. It has an SD slot so ship the OS on an SD card or USB stick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
The rational man would say that Apple knows its market better than we do so. We don't have to like it, but we do have to accept it. Personally, to quote you as I think this is dead on it's a beautifully "over-engineered". My interest likely stops with the iFixit Teardown. I'll never buy it because it's too much money for the performance.
Yep, we just have to accept it but it's exactly what you are saying. You won't get one, I probably won't get one but it looks like a great machine. What's the point? What's the point in building such a great machine that people won't buy? It remains to be seen if a majority of people won't buy it but I reckon it won't be the same people who bought the older models.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
One step forward and two steps back for the new Mini. It appears that while RAM access has been severely eased you need to completely detach everything and remove the motherboard from the back of the device (not bottom) in order to access the HDD.
The HDD looks quite accessible in this picture - it's the black square at the back:
but it's not clear if it can be removed at that angle or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka
Are you saying that the 5 people you know won't be upgrading to the iPhone 4 just because of the price increase of the new Mac Mini?
No, I mean due to the price increase of the iPhone. I won't be getting the new Mini due to the price increase. If you take a sum total of that, it would amount to over $1,000 profit margins for Apple they won't get as a result. Apparently Apple make $400 profit per phone but there will be other costs so the total of 5 phones is probably about $1,000 and the Mini would be $100-150.
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder
They "fix" the one thing that wasn't broken, keep lousy specs, and raise the price?
I absolutely love the design to get to the RAM. If the HDD replacement is easy then I'd say the design was worth doing but I'd have preferred them to cut costs in other ways to maintain the $599 price.
Well no, in order to amass such vast profits, it means their margins are high enough to allow it, so they could make their products more affordable and still be a very profitable company.
I'd wager that you could live on less money than you're making now so you wouldn't object to a salary cut, right?
If you don't like it, why should Apple shareholders?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
Ok but it's not like even buying an expensive car because with computers you buy into an eco-system and with Apple a very tight-knit one. So all your apps, all your documents, filesystem, plugins and so on are invested in this platform. You have made the decision to purchase a machine from Apple at a certain price point and you are completely setup in this system. Then you look for an upgrade and Apple moves your comfortable price point. The Mini last year was £499, which is quite a comfortable price but it was £399 or £449 or something before that. It now sits at £650. The Mac Pro was once £1449 and is now £1899.
If you bought into the Mac ecosystem at £449 or £1449, where's the upgrade path? There isn't one, they just show you the door back to PC hell.
That's a foolish argument. Just because you buy one Mac doesn't mean your next computer has to be a Mac.
Cost to build was $376 for the $599 model. Now we don't know if those are the prices Apple pays for components and we don't know the R&D costs, software costs etc and if we assumed a $100 drop, it seems fairly certain they make next to no profit at all. But, if they built the new one with a $599 price point in mind then they could reach it as they have done in the past. The superdrive removal should reduce the cost by over $50, using a smaller HDD in the base model would save about the same. If they reduced their profits by even a small amount and threw in an extra 2GB RAM, it would have been great:
50% smaller not 25%, $599 price point, 160 or 250GB space, 4GB RAM, no optical that hardly anybody uses anyway and can be bought for $50. It has an SD slot so ship the OS on an SD card or USB stick.
First, all those prices are just guesses.
Second, you don't have any idea what the cost is for some key components - the new milled aluminum case, for example.
Third, you're ignoring all the overhead costs (your simply pulling a number out of thin air doesn't count).
Finally, and most importantly, COST DOESN'T MATTER. Apple sets the price where they think they'll get the most profit. Lower the price too much and volume goes up but profits drop. Increase it too much and profits per computer go up but total profits drop due to lower volume. Your silly "Apple is allowed to make this much margin or I'll cry" argument is worthless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
No, I mean due to the price increase of the iPhone. I won't be getting the new Mini due to the price increase. If you take a sum total of that, it would amount to over $1,000 profit margins for Apple they won't get as a result. Apparently Apple make $400 profit per phone but there will be other costs so the total of 5 phones is probably about $1,000 and the Mini would be $100-150.
Where did you see a price increase for the phone? The phone's price hasn't changed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
I absolutely love the design to get to the RAM. If the HDD replacement is easy then I'd say the design was worth doing but I'd have preferred them to cut costs in other ways to maintain the $599 price.
Then design your own systems if you think you can do it better than Apple. They're not there to satisfy you. They're there to maximize profits by satisfying the maximum number of customers at a price that maximizes profits. Apple's entire business model for the past 10 years has revolved around NOT cutting corners to shave off a few dollars. Why should they throw out the model that has earned them tens of billions of dollars just because you and a few other whiners are cheap?
Well no, in order to amass such vast profits, it means their margins are high enough to allow it, so they could make their products more affordable and still be a very profitable company.
I disagree with pretty much everything you've said but this sentence is the crux of the issue and why we'll never agree. I believe in a free market system. All for-profit companies should price their goods to make as much profit as possible for themselves and their investors.
Assuming they aren't an illegal monopoly or acting anti-competitively they should price their products for their market. If they can get away with selling their goods for a premium price because the competition is poor then it's up to the competition to force them to lower their prices, not for the successful company to cripple itself. Capitalism FTW!
PS: This reminds me of the stories about schools giving the students with less aptitude and focus a better grade than they deserve to bolster their self esteem. Frak that!
Apple figured out that $699 was the most common config that people bought, so no loss. If this feature-matches that config, then they did the right thing, despite the perceived price jump.
I could swallow that IF Apple had not stiffed consumers on necessities like RAM and storage. Many people (like me) would need more than 2Gb RAM and certainly greater than the pathetic 320Gb drive. 4Gb RAM + a 500Gb disk would add about $140 or so, depending on where you buy and the type of drive. You could sell the stock 320Gb drive for...$35 maybe?
So the new Mini is $699 + $105 for a decently equipped model. Why not just tear my heart out, Apple?
It is widely known that the Bill of Materials for most smartphones - including the 3GS, top BlackBerries, Nexus One, etc. - are around $200 per pop. However, since Apple is not selling the iPhone 4 unlocked in the States, we don't know how much retail value to attach to it.
Let's assume that the base iPhone 4 costs $350 to manufacture; in the UK it's £499 ($733), so Apple's UK profit is at least close to $400 a phone.
Generally, Apple is aiming for 150-200% profit margin on the iPhone, and I have no problem with it because the 4 is a premium product. The Mac Mini? Not so much.
Who wants to own a movie when they're all available for streaming? One day. I have never understood why people would want to have racks of plastic discs in their living rooms.
Because streaming 1080p, uncompressed video is unachievable in the foreseeable future, for anyone without an absurdly expensive internet account.
I don't know about you folks, but our Shaw.ca 25mbps plan is capped at around 150Gb of data per month. We generally exceed that by quite a bit, but obviously we can't get away with going over that number by something insane like 1Tb.
Uncompressed Blu-Ray movies are generally around 30Gb. Stream that?
I disagree with pretty much everything you've said but this sentence is the crux of the issue and why we'll never agree. I believe in a free market system. All for-profit companies should price their goods to make as much profit as possible for themselves and their investors.
Assuming they aren't an illegal monopoly or acting anti-competitively they should price their products for their market. If they can get away with selling their goods for a premium price because the competition is poor then it's up to the competition to force them to lower their prices, not for the successful company to cripple itself. Capitalism FTW!
Yup, and the best part is we all complain about said high prices but many of us buy at such high prices hence fueling the high prices. Maybe that's capitalism, maybe its just the smooth, sexy, cool Mac/ iPad/ iPhone just beggin to be caressed.
It is widely known that the Bill of Materials for most smartphones - including the 3GS, top BlackBerries, Nexus One, etc. - are around $200 per pop. However, since Apple is not selling the iPhone 4 unlocked in the States, we don't know how much retail value to attach to it.
Let's assume that the base iPhone 4 costs $350 to manufacture; in the UK it's £499 ($733), so Apple's UK profit is at least close to $400 a phone.
Generally, Apple is aiming for 150-200% profit margin on the iPhone, and I have no problem with it because the 4 is a premium product. The Mac Mini? Not so much.
First of all, the UK price includes VAT.
Secondly, your cost of goods do not include cost/resources for R&D, Manufacturing Organization, Customer Support, Shipping, Freight Forwarding, Customs Applications, Packaging, Patent/Government Agency/Legal/Translation/Accounting fees, Marketing/Sales print/electronic/internet materials/service, etc., etc. And note that each of the above activities have to address individual country government/business regulations.
And where did you ever hear that, "Apple is aiming for [a] 150-200% profit margin on the iPhone?"
I could swallow that IF Apple had not stiffed consumers on necessities like RAM and storage. Many people (like me) would need more than 2Gb RAM and certainly greater than the pathetic 320Gb drive. 4Gb RAM + a 500Gb disk would add about $140 or so, depending on where you buy and the type of drive. You could sell the stock 320Gb drive for...$35 maybe?
So the new Mini is $699 + $105 for a decently equipped model. Why not just tear my heart out, Apple?
A 320 GB drive for $35? Where?
For all your needs, why are you thinking mini? Doesn't your MPB suffice?
And since you spend over $96 a month, what?, to download 30 GB movies, which would take nearly 3 hours to download over your High Speed Warp service, you are complaining about $105?
For a faster processor, better graphics, double the drive, great power efficiencies, SD Card Slot, HDMI output, improved wireless performance, etc.,* who is trying to stiff whom here?
Somehow, I will take Macworld's review* over your observations. At least, they got one in their hands before proclaiming their opinion.
I haven't been following closely this particular part of the thread, but aren't the prices in Europe all inclusive of VAT, whereas the advertised US prices do not include sales tax. I don't know how much of the difference that would account for, but I don't recall that being discussed.
Most of the European posters will acknowledge and account for the VAT - what they often overlook are the higher inherit costs of doing business due to extra government regulation.
Although we seem he'll bent on closing that gap too \
I like my BluRay - and I do buy the occasional mob and more likely a documentary like Life. But most of my movies come from Netflix, and sometimes redbox. Very few movies are worth watching more than once. And if I do buy a BluRay, I just ensure it has the digital copy option. I had no problem getting StarTrek to work with ituenes or my Apple TV.
As much as I loath physical media, I hate to admit that BR will be with us for a while. It's just too cost effective in terms of storage.
I'm not sold on the hybrid drives. A nice option but it only improves the performance of frequent data, nothing else and the OS caches things too so I don't think there will be much noticeable benefit but there is still some extra cost.
I guess I will find out, I have a new Seagate sitting in a box waiting door me to install. I anticipate a huge difference under windows just because windows caching SUCKS - even if you have tons of RAM. OS X appears to be much better, but I think it will still help. We'll see...
I paid good money to replace my VHS collection with DVD ... I'm not spending more money re-purchasing everything on Blu-Ray now..
Blu-Ray isn't about rebuying old movies; it's about getting the best quality possible for all of a person's purchases and rentals moving forward. Since Blu-Ray players are backwards compatible with DVDs, I dont know why you think you would need to repurchase everything. It's absolutely nothing like the move from VHS to DVD in that regard.
I'd wager that you could live on less money than you're making now so you wouldn't object to a salary cut, right?
If you don't like it, why should Apple shareholders?
The most likely scenario is that the margins on the new model are the same and the aluminum case costs more so this argument doesn't hold up because inevitably fewer people will buy at this price point so the shareholders make less anyway.
As I said, simply absorbing costs from other profits isn't the solution but to build the product with the lower price points in mind. The Mini didn't really need a unibody enclosure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
That's a foolish argument. Just because you buy one Mac doesn't mean your next computer has to be a Mac.
Say you bought a £1449 Mac Pro and iwork, Final Cut Pro and Logic and you work for 2 years on projects. You're saying it's trivial to switch to a Windows PC and migrate all that work over when Apple remove your upgrade path?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Where did you see a price increase for the phone? The phone's price hasn't changed.
What Apple have done year after year is move the models down, this year the lowest end handset is £70 higher than last year. It would be more accurate to say that the price hasn't dropped this year. This year's 3GS costs the same as last year's, although it might be slightly more since they cut the storage in half this time from 16GB to 8GB.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Then design your own systems if you think you can do it better than Apple.
Take the old Mini design, make it smaller vertically, add 4 screws on the bottom so you can open it easily. Put in the new internals. Leave it at the same price points. The Macbook went through the same internal spec upgrade and stayed the same price so the cost is the enclosure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
If they can get away with selling their goods for a premium price because the competition is poor then it's up to the competition to force them to lower their prices, not for the successful company to cripple itself. Capitalism FTW!
The whole competition thing doesn't really work with Apple on the computer side. With phones it currently does because you can switch from one to another in a single day very easily.
I agree Apple shouldn't hold themselves back from making certain products if they feel they have a market but there has to be limits. What if they had made a $999 Mini and that was all they offered. Would you all be defending the decision? Probably not, so just because you don't have an issue with the current decisions made doesn't mean no one has any right to have a problem with it.
With the low entry price, it was fairly easy to tell a family member to get a Mini, now it's almost impossible once you have to explain that the Mini + monitor + keyboard and mouse will be around £850. That is the cheapest machine you can get from Apple outside of the refurb section and it used to be £650. £650 was already a high entry level when netbooks are £200-300 but Apple don't go with Atom CPUs, which is fine.
I could swallow that IF Apple had not stiffed consumers on necessities like RAM and storage.
That's right. My upgrades on my old Mini came to the price of the new one but now I'd have to upgrade starting at that price. In my case I can use the same parts but it means I have to putty knife the old one, take out the parts and almost gut the new one to put the bits in again and after all that, it would still cost over £300 for the upgrade and the only benefit is the 320M GPU.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka
For a faster processor, better graphics, double the drive, great power efficiencies, SD Card Slot, HDMI output, improved wireless performance, etc.,* who is trying to stiff whom here?
Almost none of those things should add to the cost though. The hardware is old, Core 2 Duo is the last generation and the Macbook got the same spec upgrade at the same price. It didn't need a 320GB drive if they had made it easy to access. The current price point is what the second Mini was, except it was 2.53GHz with 4GB RAM. Apple pretty much cut out the low end model.
Comments
I paid good money to replace my VHS collection with DVD ... I'm not spending more money re-purchasing everything on Blu-Ray now. Last year I got an AppleTV, ripped my DVDs and then sold the whack of them.
You high def nerds can all keep your Blu-Ray.
What will you do if future DRM no longer allows you to play your digital content? That has happened more than once, so far, hasn't it?
What will you do if future DRM no longer allows you to play your digital content? That has happened more than once, so far, hasn't it?
In this case he has taken his content and ripped it into a DRM-less version, so future changes won't have a restriction on him. There have been services who killed off their DRM and left people stranded, but ripping your movies into AVI or whatever will leave you safe for the future
The problems with this machine were that it was underpowered and too expensive. It was already smaller than it needed to be. So what does apple do? They "fix" the one thing that wasn't broken, keep lousy specs, and raise the price? Could the company be any more tone deaf to what consumers want when it comes to this model?
Seriously, they went to the trouble of a redesign and put all the effort into size, still at the expense of performance and high cost? I'd almost say apple went out of their way to try and get people to NOT buy this model and go with an iMac instead, but then they wouldn't have bothered to redesign. Just amazing how clueless the company is when it comes to desktops.
So where's that affordable midtower that the lineup desperately needs?
It's a nice cosmetic upgrade but little in the way of things that count, like speed, memory and value.
I paid good money to replace my VHS collection with DVD ... I'm not spending more money re-purchasing everything on Blu-Ray now. Last year I got an AppleTV, ripped my DVDs and then sold the whack of them. What I didn't sell online I dumped off at the latest music/movie trade in shop... did the same with my music collection too.
I didn't read this properly the first time around, so you have effectively stolen all your movies, and all your music? So when someone from the MPAA, or RIAA comes a knocking, how do you prove to them that you actually own a copy of the phyisical disc when they are dragging you off to court?
You started off stating that they "so much cash reserves" they shouldn't be concerned with profits so much. You don't think that is a wild generalization?
Well no, in order to amass such vast profits, it means their margins are high enough to allow it, so they could make their products more affordable and still be a very profitable company.
Google is far from altruistic. On could argue that taking so much money from the "poorest" people in the world compared to Apple taking it from only the "richest" makes Apple 1/2 Robin Hood.
Yeah but it's the wrong half. Helping out the poor was really Robin Hood's whole appeal as you mentioned at the end of your post.
If you can't afford it then you don't buy it. It's how a free market works. I could right a very long list of things that I want that I can't feasibly afford. I do not for one minute feel I am entitled to them simply because they are out of my price range. If you want more things in life then you work harder and smarter to achieve your goals.
Why should it be Apple's duty to supply one laptop per child for the entire world or are we stopping the humanitarian aspect of for-profit business at a price point more suitable to a specific buyer?
Ok but it's not like even buying an expensive car because with computers you buy into an eco-system and with Apple a very tight-knit one. So all your apps, all your documents, filesystem, plugins and so on are invested in this platform. You have made the decision to purchase a machine from Apple at a certain price point and you are completely setup in this system. Then you look for an upgrade and Apple moves your comfortable price point. The Mini last year was £499, which is quite a comfortable price but it was £399 or £449 or something before that. It now sits at £650. The Mac Pro was once £1449 and is now £1899.
If you bought into the Mac ecosystem at £449 or £1449, where's the upgrade path? There isn't one, they just show you the door back to PC hell.
So because they sell less of them they should be okay with making no profit on them? That doesn't make sense and isn't the way business works.
They wouldn't necessarily make no profit, they just have to make better decisions about how to build it.
You say that they'd make up the loss in profit in volume. You don't even speculate this could be an outcome, you state it as a absolute fact. You can't possibly know that.
We know the bill of materials for the last Mini:
http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns-Man...own-Shows.aspx
Cost to build was $376 for the $599 model. Now we don't know if those are the prices Apple pays for components and we don't know the R&D costs, software costs etc and if we assumed a $100 drop, it seems fairly certain they make next to no profit at all. But, if they built the new one with a $599 price point in mind then they could reach it as they have done in the past. The superdrive removal should reduce the cost by over $50, using a smaller HDD in the base model would save about the same. If they reduced their profits by even a small amount and threw in an extra 2GB RAM, it would have been great:
50% smaller not 25%, $599 price point, 160 or 250GB space, 4GB RAM, no optical that hardly anybody uses anyway and can be bought for $50. It has an SD slot so ship the OS on an SD card or USB stick.
The rational man would say that Apple knows its market better than we do so. We don't have to like it, but we do have to accept it. Personally, to quote you as I think this is dead on it's a beautifully "over-engineered". My interest likely stops with the iFixit Teardown. I'll never buy it because it's too much money for the performance.
Yep, we just have to accept it but it's exactly what you are saying. You won't get one, I probably won't get one but it looks like a great machine. What's the point? What's the point in building such a great machine that people won't buy? It remains to be seen if a majority of people won't buy it but I reckon it won't be the same people who bought the older models.
One step forward and two steps back for the new Mini. It appears that while RAM access has been severely eased you need to completely detach everything and remove the motherboard from the back of the device (not bottom) in order to access the HDD.
The HDD looks quite accessible in this picture - it's the black square at the back:
http://slideshow.techworld.com/32271...inside-look/8/
but it's not clear if it can be removed at that angle or not.
Are you saying that the 5 people you know won't be upgrading to the iPhone 4 just because of the price increase of the new Mac Mini?
No, I mean due to the price increase of the iPhone. I won't be getting the new Mini due to the price increase. If you take a sum total of that, it would amount to over $1,000 profit margins for Apple they won't get as a result. Apparently Apple make $400 profit per phone but there will be other costs so the total of 5 phones is probably about $1,000 and the Mini would be $100-150.
They "fix" the one thing that wasn't broken, keep lousy specs, and raise the price?
I absolutely love the design to get to the RAM. If the HDD replacement is easy then I'd say the design was worth doing but I'd have preferred them to cut costs in other ways to maintain the $599 price.
Well no, in order to amass such vast profits, it means their margins are high enough to allow it, so they could make their products more affordable and still be a very profitable company.
I'd wager that you could live on less money than you're making now so you wouldn't object to a salary cut, right?
If you don't like it, why should Apple shareholders?
Ok but it's not like even buying an expensive car because with computers you buy into an eco-system and with Apple a very tight-knit one. So all your apps, all your documents, filesystem, plugins and so on are invested in this platform. You have made the decision to purchase a machine from Apple at a certain price point and you are completely setup in this system. Then you look for an upgrade and Apple moves your comfortable price point. The Mini last year was £499, which is quite a comfortable price but it was £399 or £449 or something before that. It now sits at £650. The Mac Pro was once £1449 and is now £1899.
If you bought into the Mac ecosystem at £449 or £1449, where's the upgrade path? There isn't one, they just show you the door back to PC hell.
That's a foolish argument. Just because you buy one Mac doesn't mean your next computer has to be a Mac.
We know the bill of materials for the last Mini:
http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns-Man...own-Shows.aspx
Cost to build was $376 for the $599 model. Now we don't know if those are the prices Apple pays for components and we don't know the R&D costs, software costs etc and if we assumed a $100 drop, it seems fairly certain they make next to no profit at all. But, if they built the new one with a $599 price point in mind then they could reach it as they have done in the past. The superdrive removal should reduce the cost by over $50, using a smaller HDD in the base model would save about the same. If they reduced their profits by even a small amount and threw in an extra 2GB RAM, it would have been great:
50% smaller not 25%, $599 price point, 160 or 250GB space, 4GB RAM, no optical that hardly anybody uses anyway and can be bought for $50. It has an SD slot so ship the OS on an SD card or USB stick.
First, all those prices are just guesses.
Second, you don't have any idea what the cost is for some key components - the new milled aluminum case, for example.
Third, you're ignoring all the overhead costs (your simply pulling a number out of thin air doesn't count).
Finally, and most importantly, COST DOESN'T MATTER. Apple sets the price where they think they'll get the most profit. Lower the price too much and volume goes up but profits drop. Increase it too much and profits per computer go up but total profits drop due to lower volume. Your silly "Apple is allowed to make this much margin or I'll cry" argument is worthless.
No, I mean due to the price increase of the iPhone. I won't be getting the new Mini due to the price increase. If you take a sum total of that, it would amount to over $1,000 profit margins for Apple they won't get as a result. Apparently Apple make $400 profit per phone but there will be other costs so the total of 5 phones is probably about $1,000 and the Mini would be $100-150.
Where did you see a price increase for the phone? The phone's price hasn't changed.
I absolutely love the design to get to the RAM. If the HDD replacement is easy then I'd say the design was worth doing but I'd have preferred them to cut costs in other ways to maintain the $599 price.
Then design your own systems if you think you can do it better than Apple. They're not there to satisfy you. They're there to maximize profits by satisfying the maximum number of customers at a price that maximizes profits. Apple's entire business model for the past 10 years has revolved around NOT cutting corners to shave off a few dollars. Why should they throw out the model that has earned them tens of billions of dollars just because you and a few other whiners are cheap?
Well no, in order to amass such vast profits, it means their margins are high enough to allow it, so they could make their products more affordable and still be a very profitable company.
I disagree with pretty much everything you've said but this sentence is the crux of the issue and why we'll never agree. I believe in a free market system. All for-profit companies should price their goods to make as much profit as possible for themselves and their investors.
Assuming they aren't an illegal monopoly or acting anti-competitively they should price their products for their market. If they can get away with selling their goods for a premium price because the competition is poor then it's up to the competition to force them to lower their prices, not for the successful company to cripple itself. Capitalism FTW!
PS: This reminds me of the stories about schools giving the students with less aptitude and focus a better grade than they deserve to bolster their self esteem. Frak that!
Apparently Apple make $400 profit per phone
Where did you ever get that from?
Apple figured out that $699 was the most common config that people bought, so no loss. If this feature-matches that config, then they did the right thing, despite the perceived price jump.
I could swallow that IF Apple had not stiffed consumers on necessities like RAM and storage. Many people (like me) would need more than 2Gb RAM and certainly greater than the pathetic 320Gb drive. 4Gb RAM + a 500Gb disk would add about $140 or so, depending on where you buy and the type of drive. You could sell the stock 320Gb drive for...$35 maybe?
So the new Mini is $699 + $105 for a decently equipped model.
Where did you ever get that from?
It is widely known that the Bill of Materials for most smartphones - including the 3GS, top BlackBerries, Nexus One, etc. - are around $200 per pop. However, since Apple is not selling the iPhone 4 unlocked in the States, we don't know how much retail value to attach to it.
Let's assume that the base iPhone 4 costs $350 to manufacture; in the UK it's £499 ($733), so Apple's UK profit is at least close to $400 a phone.
Generally, Apple is aiming for 150-200% profit margin on the iPhone, and I have no problem with it because the 4 is a premium product. The Mac Mini? Not so much.
Who wants to own a movie when they're all available for streaming? One day. I have never understood why people would want to have racks of plastic discs in their living rooms.
Because streaming 1080p, uncompressed video is unachievable in the foreseeable future, for anyone without an absurdly expensive internet account.
I don't know about you folks, but our Shaw.ca 25mbps plan is capped at around 150Gb of data per month. We generally exceed that by quite a bit, but obviously we can't get away with going over that number by something insane like 1Tb.
Uncompressed Blu-Ray movies are generally around 30Gb. Stream that?
I disagree with pretty much everything you've said but this sentence is the crux of the issue and why we'll never agree. I believe in a free market system. All for-profit companies should price their goods to make as much profit as possible for themselves and their investors.
Assuming they aren't an illegal monopoly or acting anti-competitively they should price their products for their market. If they can get away with selling their goods for a premium price because the competition is poor then it's up to the competition to force them to lower their prices, not for the successful company to cripple itself. Capitalism FTW!
Yup, and the best part is we all complain about said high prices but many of us buy at such high prices hence fueling the high prices. Maybe that's capitalism, maybe its just the smooth, sexy, cool Mac/ iPad/ iPhone just beggin to be caressed.
It is widely known that the Bill of Materials for most smartphones - including the 3GS, top BlackBerries, Nexus One, etc. - are around $200 per pop. However, since Apple is not selling the iPhone 4 unlocked in the States, we don't know how much retail value to attach to it.
Let's assume that the base iPhone 4 costs $350 to manufacture; in the UK it's £499 ($733), so Apple's UK profit is at least close to $400 a phone.
Generally, Apple is aiming for 150-200% profit margin on the iPhone, and I have no problem with it because the 4 is a premium product. The Mac Mini? Not so much.
First of all, the UK price includes VAT.
Secondly, your cost of goods do not include cost/resources for R&D, Manufacturing Organization, Customer Support, Shipping, Freight Forwarding, Customs Applications, Packaging, Patent/Government Agency/Legal/Translation/Accounting fees, Marketing/Sales print/electronic/internet materials/service, etc., etc. And note that each of the above activities have to address individual country government/business regulations.
And where did you ever hear that, "Apple is aiming for [a] 150-200% profit margin on the iPhone?"
I could swallow that IF Apple had not stiffed consumers on necessities like RAM and storage. Many people (like me) would need more than 2Gb RAM and certainly greater than the pathetic 320Gb drive. 4Gb RAM + a 500Gb disk would add about $140 or so, depending on where you buy and the type of drive. You could sell the stock 320Gb drive for...$35 maybe?
So the new Mini is $699 + $105 for a decently equipped model.
A 320 GB drive for $35? Where?
For all your needs, why are you thinking mini? Doesn't your MPB suffice?
And since you spend over $96 a month, what?, to download 30 GB movies, which would take nearly 3 hours to download over your High Speed Warp service, you are complaining about $105?
For a faster processor, better graphics, double the drive, great power efficiencies, SD Card Slot, HDMI output, improved wireless performance, etc.,* who is trying to stiff whom here?
Somehow, I will take Macworld's review* over your observations. At least, they got one in their hands before proclaiming their opinion.
*http://www.macworld.com/article/1520...10handson.html
I haven't been following closely this particular part of the thread, but aren't the prices in Europe all inclusive of VAT, whereas the advertised US prices do not include sales tax. I don't know how much of the difference that would account for, but I don't recall that being discussed.
Most of the European posters will acknowledge and account for the VAT - what they often overlook are the higher inherit costs of doing business due to extra government regulation.
Although we seem he'll bent on closing that gap too
You high def nerds can all keep your Blu-Ray.
I like my BluRay - and I do buy the occasional mob and more likely a documentary like Life. But most of my movies come from Netflix, and sometimes redbox. Very few movies are worth watching more than once. And if I do buy a BluRay, I just ensure it has the digital copy option. I had no problem getting StarTrek to work with ituenes or my Apple TV.
As much as I loath physical media, I hate to admit that BR will be with us for a while. It's just too cost effective in terms of storage.
I'm not sold on the hybrid drives. A nice option but it only improves the performance of frequent data, nothing else and the OS caches things too so I don't think there will be much noticeable benefit but there is still some extra cost.
I guess I will find out, I have a new Seagate sitting in a box waiting door me to install. I anticipate a huge difference under windows just because windows caching SUCKS - even if you have tons of RAM. OS X appears to be much better, but I think it will still help. We'll see...
I paid good money to replace my VHS collection with DVD ... I'm not spending more money re-purchasing everything on Blu-Ray now..
Blu-Ray isn't about rebuying old movies; it's about getting the best quality possible for all of a person's purchases and rentals moving forward. Since Blu-Ray players are backwards compatible with DVDs, I dont know why you think you would need to repurchase everything. It's absolutely nothing like the move from VHS to DVD in that regard.
I'd wager that you could live on less money than you're making now so you wouldn't object to a salary cut, right?
If you don't like it, why should Apple shareholders?
The most likely scenario is that the margins on the new model are the same and the aluminum case costs more so this argument doesn't hold up because inevitably fewer people will buy at this price point so the shareholders make less anyway.
As I said, simply absorbing costs from other profits isn't the solution but to build the product with the lower price points in mind. The Mini didn't really need a unibody enclosure.
That's a foolish argument. Just because you buy one Mac doesn't mean your next computer has to be a Mac.
Say you bought a £1449 Mac Pro and iwork, Final Cut Pro and Logic and you work for 2 years on projects. You're saying it's trivial to switch to a Windows PC and migrate all that work over when Apple remove your upgrade path?
Where did you see a price increase for the phone? The phone's price hasn't changed.
What Apple have done year after year is move the models down, this year the lowest end handset is £70 higher than last year. It would be more accurate to say that the price hasn't dropped this year. This year's 3GS costs the same as last year's, although it might be slightly more since they cut the storage in half this time from 16GB to 8GB.
Then design your own systems if you think you can do it better than Apple.
Take the old Mini design, make it smaller vertically, add 4 screws on the bottom so you can open it easily. Put in the new internals. Leave it at the same price points. The Macbook went through the same internal spec upgrade and stayed the same price so the cost is the enclosure.
If they can get away with selling their goods for a premium price because the competition is poor then it's up to the competition to force them to lower their prices, not for the successful company to cripple itself. Capitalism FTW!
The whole competition thing doesn't really work with Apple on the computer side. With phones it currently does because you can switch from one to another in a single day very easily.
I agree Apple shouldn't hold themselves back from making certain products if they feel they have a market but there has to be limits. What if they had made a $999 Mini and that was all they offered. Would you all be defending the decision? Probably not, so just because you don't have an issue with the current decisions made doesn't mean no one has any right to have a problem with it.
With the low entry price, it was fairly easy to tell a family member to get a Mini, now it's almost impossible once you have to explain that the Mini + monitor + keyboard and mouse will be around £850. That is the cheapest machine you can get from Apple outside of the refurb section and it used to be £650. £650 was already a high entry level when netbooks are £200-300 but Apple don't go with Atom CPUs, which is fine.
Where did you ever get that from?
http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Makes...ticle15528.htm
I could swallow that IF Apple had not stiffed consumers on necessities like RAM and storage.
That's right. My upgrades on my old Mini came to the price of the new one but now I'd have to upgrade starting at that price. In my case I can use the same parts but it means I have to putty knife the old one, take out the parts and almost gut the new one to put the bits in again and after all that, it would still cost over £300 for the upgrade and the only benefit is the 320M GPU.
For a faster processor, better graphics, double the drive, great power efficiencies, SD Card Slot, HDMI output, improved wireless performance, etc.,* who is trying to stiff whom here?
Almost none of those things should add to the cost though. The hardware is old, Core 2 Duo is the last generation and the Macbook got the same spec upgrade at the same price. It didn't need a 320GB drive if they had made it easy to access. The current price point is what the second Mini was, except it was 2.53GHz with 4GB RAM. Apple pretty much cut out the low end model.