I've said this all along that it's marketing suicide to launch another major product so close together.
But I don't imagine a low key press release announcing speed bumps to 1GHz G4s would do much harm. Faster than the iMac, but not by that much and obviously more expandable for pros. Leaving G5's for MWNY.
However, the key is for Apple not to screw up on the delivery of these iMacs. The current buzz and excitement can easily fizzle if there are defects (i.e. cube cracks fiasco) or if they don't have enough supply.
[quote] But I don't imagine a low key press release announcing speed bumps to 1GHz G4s would do much harm. Faster than the iMac, but not by that much and obviously more expandable for pros. Leaving G5's for MWNY. <hr></blockquote>
Ok, let's look at this statement (which could well be reality)
If they roll out 1.0ghz towers with more memory, bigger HDs, faster card, etc for $3500 top end and then at least $500 for nice LCD, is it really worth $2200 more than the top iMac? I think the iMac would clearly be a better choice for value. I think a small speed bump is stupid and an unwise purchase decesion to potential buyers, pro or not. Pros I think will wait for something better.
So if they don't lamely bump the towers, then we loose that 6 month rev window. Is the new iMac worth screwing up the 6 month rev?
But I don't imagine a low key press release announcing speed bumps to 1GHz G4s would do much harm. Faster than the iMac, but not by that much and obviously more expandable for pros. Leaving G5's for MWNY.
[quote]The Powermacs are not even that bad of a deal right now, IMHO. I think Apple realizes that if a true mac user Pro customer needs a new machine, the PM DP 800 is still the best computer they can buy.<hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> Funniest post I've ever seen on these forums. let me say again ROTFLMAO.
I can only pray for you. I would home that a Mac fanatic like you would know that MHz doesnt matter at all. Do you have an unusually small penis?</strong><hr></blockquote>
JD, I completely agree. Very well, thought out post.
As for everyone bitching about how "Macs are slow" bla bla bla, you're comparing BRAND NEW Intel chips with nearly 8 month old hardware from Apple.
Yeah, that's pretty old, but we're in for a quantum leap in the near future with the G5. I think this will be the processor for Apple that finally just shuts up all the f*ckin Intel/AMD MHz idiots.
If they roll out 1.0ghz towers with more memory, bigger HDs, faster card, etc for $3500 top end and then at least $500 for nice LCD, is it really worth $2200 more than the top iMac? I think the iMac would clearly be a better choice for value. I think a small speed bump is stupid and an unwise purchase decesion to potential buyers, pro or not. Pros I think will wait for something better.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
They could very well position it like this:
867- $1600
1GHz- $2200
Dual 933 - $3000
15" LCD - $500
The low end is cheaper than the top of the line iMac by $200, but without a display.
Sure the top end with display would be $1700 more than an iMac, but it's a dual processor.
Who knows. The main reason I think there may a speed bump is because MWNY is such a long ways away. Not touching the towers in any manner for another six months seem highly unlikely.
The low end is cheaper than the top of the line iMac by $200, but without a display.
Sure the top end with display would be $1700 more than an iMac, but it's a dual processor.
Who knows. The main reason I think there may a speed bump is because MWNY is such a long ways away. Not touching the towers in any manner for another six months seem highly unlikely.</strong><hr></blockquote>
See tho, the bottom line tower blows compared to the iMac IMO. $700 for 67more mhz, graphics card & bigger HD doesn't make sence to me. It only makes sence if they lower prices, otherwise I can't imagine them selling many of the lowend tower.
Apple really needs to distance the towers from the iMac now that the iMac rocks that way it does. How? Duals at the low endor cheaper then $1600 or 1.2ghz+ or G5s.
The thinking of the original poster of this topic is right on but misses the primary goal of this strategy: marketshare.
iMacs sell to new Macintosh users at far higher rate than the pro-line machines. Wall Street anal-ysts keep looking at our profitable quarters with disdain cause the marketshare numbers are frozen - and without perceived growth the stock is about as popular as day old donuts.
So, Steve strikes while the iron is hot, while XP is irritating, while digital hub and DV are an Apple concept, and before new technologies comes along and distract dollars away from Apple.
But they have to be very careful. With iBook, TiBook, PowerMac and iPod sales closer to the end of their sales cycles, we have the very real chance of having a crappy quarter if these new iMacs don't start shipping in volume soon. Initial shipments seem to be hitting stores next week, but with most of those already taken in pre-orders the refresh is apparently almost three weeks away! New visitors to Applestores will be lucky to see a demo machine let alone buy one....
It does not make sence to rev the PM's for a less then 6 month time frame... This would force apple to clear the channel an extra time and is relly (if you think about what JD said) not necessary. The reason why "history" will not "repeat itself" (see SOS's post) is becase the new iMac's need to take center stage and get as many sales as possible (accoring to JyD)
it makes more sense to lower the price a little (like $100-$500 depending) in addition to the display promo... This would clear the channel and give you guys less to bitch about.
If JyD is right (i'm not saying he is, but it seems pretty damn likely that he is, Jobs IS a marketing genius) then we will see the kick ass G5's when all the iMacs start to chip in march, AKA MWTKY
Wow, what a compliment. You're such a nice guy.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks buddy. All I was saying is that your stories related to future hardware are either funny and unrealistic or stupid. It was nothing against you, just your stories.
[quote] The thinking of the original poster of this topic is right on but misses the primary goal of this strategy: marketshare.
<hr></blockquote>
Ummm, no. More sales obviously means gains in marketshare, because a certain portion of all Mac sales are to first time Mac users. You are splitting hairs where there are none to be split, because greater Mac sales will ALWAYS translate into greater marketshare. True, iMacs are proportionally bought by more former Wintel users than other Macs, but that doesn't mean that Apple cannot gain marketshare just as effectively by increasing tower sales.
In some cases, I believe that even thought more individual iMac buyers are first time Mac users, Powermac sales drive more converts to the Mac platform, because their use by professionals is more high profile, and the presence of Powermacs in specialized fields legitamizes Macs as serious computers. For example, Hollywood excitement over FCP surely drives countless iMac sales, and the genesis for this was the purchase of Powermacs by those interested in digital video editing. Same could be said for audio, graphic arts, etc. That single Powermac that Trent Reznor bought probably led indirectly to many iMac sales.
So my point is, all Mac sales increase Apple's market share, either directly in the case of iMac sales, or somewhat indirectly in the case of powermac sales. Of course there is a grey area, but by proportion, I think the previous statement holds true.
Back to the Powermacs, I think the lack of an update so far is indication that Jobs has a greater plan that any of us are able to see. There is something huge on the horizon, and it's approaching fast.
The problem with your scenario, dawg, is that Apple makes close to twice the revenue per unit sold on PowerMacs compared to iMacs. And they've said that this iMac has smaller margins than the previous.
I don't think they'd want to kill off PowerMac sales like that - there's no reason why sales of both can't increase.
Face it, they simply don't have the goods - if they did, they'd try to sell them. All these other theories are just a way of trying to tell ourselves that those fast new chips are available and right around the corner, but they just haven't told us about them yet. Wishful thinking.
Perhaps they don't have the goods. You make a good point in bringing up the mondo margins on Powermacs.
But I think that if the G5 were ready, it would make good business and marketing sense to separate the introduction of the G5 and the G4 iMac by a few months. It's difficult to put a price on free advertising, and the extra iMac sales driven by having the iMac and current towers speced so closely.
The alternative is for Apple to announce the new iMac and new Powermac G5 line at nearly the same time, blow their wad all at once, and then be left for the rest of the year with little news coverage besides a few laptops speed bumps and video card shuffling.
Like a true stud, Steve Jobs is pacing himself, delving out the pleasure to Mac users a bit at a time, and running some slick marketing (smooth-talk) by offering comparable iMacs and towers. If the man was a porn start he'd be making 3 hour porn flicks with a single climax. The guy is a genius, plain and simple.
Imagine any other CEO handling the whole PPC/Moto debacle with such grace as Jobs has. He's focused on Apple's strenghts as a software company, and even with totally lame hardware Apple has been getting good press lately, because of Jobs' fulfillment of the digital hub strategy. Jobs doesn't run Apple like a business, it's more like his surrogate child...and he want's the best for Apple long term. Well I'm rambling now so I'd better quit while I'm ahead.
See tho, the bottom line tower blows compared to the iMac IMO. $700 for 67more mhz, graphics card & bigger HD doesn't make sence to me.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Kidred, I'm not sure I follow your math. If the low end is $1600+$500(display)= $2100
That's only $300 more, not $700 which can easily be justified with HD, expandability etc...
It just seems that there is a sh*t load of people ready to buy a new tower. But not at it's current price point. Pros waiting often can't wait 6 months. If they price it right, people will buy one tomorrow.
Plus a speed bump doesn't require a whole lot of cost on Apple's part. Same Quicksilver enclosure, probably same motherboard.
<strong>Ummm, no. More sales obviously means gains in marketshare, because a certain portion of all Mac sales are to first time Mac users. You are splitting hairs where there are none to be split, because greater Mac sales will ALWAYS translate into greater marketshare. True, iMacs are proportionally bought by more former Wintel users than other Macs, but that doesn't mean that Apple cannot gain marketshare just as effectively by increasing tower sales.
In some cases, I believe that even thought more individual iMac buyers are first time Mac users, Powermac sales drive more converts to the Mac platform, because their use by professionals is more high profile, and the presence of Powermacs in specialized fields legitamizes Macs as serious computers. For example, Hollywood excitement over FCP surely drives countless iMac sales, and the genesis for this was the purchase of Powermacs by those interested in digital video editing. Same could be said for audio, graphic arts, etc. That single Powermac that Trent Reznor bought probably led indirectly to many iMac sales.
So my point is, all Mac sales increase Apple's market share, either directly in the case of iMac sales, or somewhat indirectly in the case of powermac sales. Of course there is a grey area, but by proportion, I think the previous statement holds true.
Back to the Powermacs, I think the lack of an update so far is indication that Jobs has a greater plan that any of us are able to see. There is something huge on the horizon, and it's approaching fast.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dude, I thought he was AGREEING with you, he just ADDED his point about MORE SALES with the iMac... Apple sells a whole lot more iMacs then PMs.. and most people who buy PMs use Macs anyways, therefore NOT increaing marketshare...
[quote] Like a true stud, Steve Jobs is pacing himself, delving out the pleasure to Mac users a bit at a time, and running some slick marketing (smooth-talk) by offering comparable iMacs and towers. If the man was a porn start he'd be making 3 hour porn flicks with a single climax. <hr></blockquote>
Comments
But I don't imagine a low key press release announcing speed bumps to 1GHz G4s would do much harm. Faster than the iMac, but not by that much and obviously more expandable for pros. Leaving G5's for MWNY.
However, the key is for Apple not to screw up on the delivery of these iMacs. The current buzz and excitement can easily fizzle if there are defects (i.e. cube cracks fiasco) or if they don't have enough supply.
Ok, let's look at this statement (which could well be reality)
If they roll out 1.0ghz towers with more memory, bigger HDs, faster card, etc for $3500 top end and then at least $500 for nice LCD, is it really worth $2200 more than the top iMac? I think the iMac would clearly be a better choice for value. I think a small speed bump is stupid and an unwise purchase decesion to potential buyers, pro or not. Pros I think will wait for something better.
So if they don't lamely bump the towers, then we loose that 6 month rev window. Is the new iMac worth screwing up the 6 month rev?
Or is the new tower (whatever it is) worth it?
<strong>
But I don't imagine a low key press release announcing speed bumps to 1GHz G4s would do much harm. Faster than the iMac, but not by that much and obviously more expandable for pros. Leaving G5's for MWNY.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Right. That's exactly what should be done.
[ 01-26-2002: Message edited by: EmAn ]</p>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> Funniest post I've ever seen on these forums. let me say again ROTFLMAO.
<strong>
I can only pray for you. I would home that a Mac fanatic like you would know that MHz doesnt matter at all. Do you have an unusually small penis?</strong><hr></blockquote>
You don`t know what you are talking about.
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<hr></blockquote>
Wow, what a compliment. You're such a nice guy.
As for everyone bitching about how "Macs are slow" bla bla bla, you're comparing BRAND NEW Intel chips with nearly 8 month old hardware from Apple.
Yeah, that's pretty old, but we're in for a quantum leap in the near future with the G5. I think this will be the processor for Apple that finally just shuts up all the f*ckin Intel/AMD MHz idiots.
<strong>
If they roll out 1.0ghz towers with more memory, bigger HDs, faster card, etc for $3500 top end and then at least $500 for nice LCD, is it really worth $2200 more than the top iMac? I think the iMac would clearly be a better choice for value. I think a small speed bump is stupid and an unwise purchase decesion to potential buyers, pro or not. Pros I think will wait for something better.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
They could very well position it like this:
867- $1600
1GHz- $2200
Dual 933 - $3000
15" LCD - $500
The low end is cheaper than the top of the line iMac by $200, but without a display.
Sure the top end with display would be $1700 more than an iMac, but it's a dual processor.
Who knows. The main reason I think there may a speed bump is because MWNY is such a long ways away. Not touching the towers in any manner for another six months seem highly unlikely.
<strong>
They could very well position it like this:
867- $1600
1GHz- $2200
Dual 933 - $3000
15" LCD - $500
The low end is cheaper than the top of the line iMac by $200, but without a display.
Sure the top end with display would be $1700 more than an iMac, but it's a dual processor.
Who knows. The main reason I think there may a speed bump is because MWNY is such a long ways away. Not touching the towers in any manner for another six months seem highly unlikely.</strong><hr></blockquote>
See tho, the bottom line tower blows compared to the iMac IMO. $700 for 67more mhz, graphics card & bigger HD doesn't make sence to me. It only makes sence if they lower prices, otherwise I can't imagine them selling many of the lowend tower.
Apple really needs to distance the towers from the iMac now that the iMac rocks that way it does. How? Duals at the low endor cheaper then $1600 or 1.2ghz+ or G5s.
iMacs sell to new Macintosh users at far higher rate than the pro-line machines. Wall Street anal-ysts keep looking at our profitable quarters with disdain cause the marketshare numbers are frozen - and without perceived growth the stock is about as popular as day old donuts.
So, Steve strikes while the iron is hot, while XP is irritating, while digital hub and DV are an Apple concept, and before new technologies comes along and distract dollars away from Apple.
But they have to be very careful. With iBook, TiBook, PowerMac and iPod sales closer to the end of their sales cycles, we have the very real chance of having a crappy quarter if these new iMacs don't start shipping in volume soon. Initial shipments seem to be hitting stores next week, but with most of those already taken in pre-orders the refresh is apparently almost three weeks away! New visitors to Applestores will be lucky to see a demo machine let alone buy one....
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
it makes more sense to lower the price a little (like $100-$500 depending) in addition to the display promo... This would clear the channel and give you guys less to bitch about.
If JyD is right (i'm not saying he is, but it seems pretty damn likely that he is, Jobs IS a marketing genius) then we will see the kick ass G5's when all the iMacs start to chip in march, AKA MWTKY
seems VERY plausable...
<strong>
Wow, what a compliment. You're such a nice guy.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks buddy. All I was saying is that your stories related to future hardware are either funny and unrealistic or stupid. It was nothing against you, just your stories.
<hr></blockquote>
Ummm, no. More sales obviously means gains in marketshare, because a certain portion of all Mac sales are to first time Mac users. You are splitting hairs where there are none to be split, because greater Mac sales will ALWAYS translate into greater marketshare. True, iMacs are proportionally bought by more former Wintel users than other Macs, but that doesn't mean that Apple cannot gain marketshare just as effectively by increasing tower sales.
In some cases, I believe that even thought more individual iMac buyers are first time Mac users, Powermac sales drive more converts to the Mac platform, because their use by professionals is more high profile, and the presence of Powermacs in specialized fields legitamizes Macs as serious computers. For example, Hollywood excitement over FCP surely drives countless iMac sales, and the genesis for this was the purchase of Powermacs by those interested in digital video editing. Same could be said for audio, graphic arts, etc. That single Powermac that Trent Reznor bought probably led indirectly to many iMac sales.
So my point is, all Mac sales increase Apple's market share, either directly in the case of iMac sales, or somewhat indirectly in the case of powermac sales. Of course there is a grey area, but by proportion, I think the previous statement holds true.
Back to the Powermacs, I think the lack of an update so far is indication that Jobs has a greater plan that any of us are able to see. There is something huge on the horizon, and it's approaching fast.
I don't think they'd want to kill off PowerMac sales like that - there's no reason why sales of both can't increase.
Face it, they simply don't have the goods - if they did, they'd try to sell them. All these other theories are just a way of trying to tell ourselves that those fast new chips are available and right around the corner, but they just haven't told us about them yet. Wishful thinking.
But I think that if the G5 were ready, it would make good business and marketing sense to separate the introduction of the G5 and the G4 iMac by a few months. It's difficult to put a price on free advertising, and the extra iMac sales driven by having the iMac and current towers speced so closely.
The alternative is for Apple to announce the new iMac and new Powermac G5 line at nearly the same time, blow their wad all at once, and then be left for the rest of the year with little news coverage besides a few laptops speed bumps and video card shuffling.
Like a true stud, Steve Jobs is pacing himself, delving out the pleasure to Mac users a bit at a time, and running some slick marketing (smooth-talk) by offering comparable iMacs and towers. If the man was a porn start he'd be making 3 hour porn flicks with a single climax. The guy is a genius, plain and simple.
Imagine any other CEO handling the whole PPC/Moto debacle with such grace as Jobs has. He's focused on Apple's strenghts as a software company, and even with totally lame hardware Apple has been getting good press lately, because of Jobs' fulfillment of the digital hub strategy. Jobs doesn't run Apple like a business, it's more like his surrogate child...and he want's the best for Apple long term. Well I'm rambling now so I'd better quit while I'm ahead.
<strong>
See tho, the bottom line tower blows compared to the iMac IMO. $700 for 67more mhz, graphics card & bigger HD doesn't make sence to me.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Kidred, I'm not sure I follow your math. If the low end is $1600+$500(display)= $2100
That's only $300 more, not $700 which can easily be justified with HD, expandability etc...
It just seems that there is a sh*t load of people ready to buy a new tower. But not at it's current price point. Pros waiting often can't wait 6 months. If they price it right, people will buy one tomorrow.
Plus a speed bump doesn't require a whole lot of cost on Apple's part. Same Quicksilver enclosure, probably same motherboard.
<strong>Ummm, no. More sales obviously means gains in marketshare, because a certain portion of all Mac sales are to first time Mac users. You are splitting hairs where there are none to be split, because greater Mac sales will ALWAYS translate into greater marketshare. True, iMacs are proportionally bought by more former Wintel users than other Macs, but that doesn't mean that Apple cannot gain marketshare just as effectively by increasing tower sales.
In some cases, I believe that even thought more individual iMac buyers are first time Mac users, Powermac sales drive more converts to the Mac platform, because their use by professionals is more high profile, and the presence of Powermacs in specialized fields legitamizes Macs as serious computers. For example, Hollywood excitement over FCP surely drives countless iMac sales, and the genesis for this was the purchase of Powermacs by those interested in digital video editing. Same could be said for audio, graphic arts, etc. That single Powermac that Trent Reznor bought probably led indirectly to many iMac sales.
So my point is, all Mac sales increase Apple's market share, either directly in the case of iMac sales, or somewhat indirectly in the case of powermac sales. Of course there is a grey area, but by proportion, I think the previous statement holds true.
Back to the Powermacs, I think the lack of an update so far is indication that Jobs has a greater plan that any of us are able to see. There is something huge on the horizon, and it's approaching fast.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dude, I thought he was AGREEING with you, he just ADDED his point about MORE SALES with the iMac... Apple sells a whole lot more iMacs then PMs.. and most people who buy PMs use Macs anyways, therefore NOT increaing marketshare...
[quote] Like a true stud, Steve Jobs is pacing himself, delving out the pleasure to Mac users a bit at a time, and running some slick marketing (smooth-talk) by offering comparable iMacs and towers. If the man was a porn start he'd be making 3 hour porn flicks with a single climax. <hr></blockquote>
LOL <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />