Is Apple reverting?
Remember the old days when Apple had multiple product lines that unecessarily overlapped markets? Remember the old Apple that overextended itself with several different desktop lines, laptop lines and servers, along with multiple configurations with each model? Remember the old Apple which used to have inventory problems, forcing $100, $200 or even $300 rebates on products to clear inventory?
Let us see what we have today. Configurations counted are standard; the ones Apple normally sells through retailers. These configurations are what is in the channel.
[code]
Product | # of Configurations
XServer - 2
iMac LCD - 3
iMac CRT - 3
eMac - 2 (1 institutional bulk)
iBook 12" - 2
iBook 14" - 1
PowerBook G4 - 2
PowerMac G4 - 3
----------------------
Total SKU's 18
</pre><hr></blockquote>
Total distinct form factors and models - 8
I hope Apple doesn't overextend themselves like they did in the dark days. It seems they are now since these product lines are unnecessarily diverse.
And I'd just like to ask one question that's burning me up recently.
What the hell happened to the four product matrix?
Discuss.
[ 05-14-2002: Message edited by: Nostradamus ]</p>
Let us see what we have today. Configurations counted are standard; the ones Apple normally sells through retailers. These configurations are what is in the channel.
[code]
Product | # of Configurations
XServer - 2
iMac LCD - 3
iMac CRT - 3
eMac - 2 (1 institutional bulk)
iBook 12" - 2
iBook 14" - 1
PowerBook G4 - 2
PowerMac G4 - 3
----------------------
Total SKU's 18
</pre><hr></blockquote>
Total distinct form factors and models - 8
I hope Apple doesn't overextend themselves like they did in the dark days. It seems they are now since these product lines are unnecessarily diverse.
And I'd just like to ask one question that's burning me up recently.
What the hell happened to the four product matrix?
Discuss.
[ 05-14-2002: Message edited by: Nostradamus ]</p>
Comments
First things first, cut out the CRT iMac and pump up the iceBook with a G4, please god oh god, this needs to happen
They have their Four products, and then their specialty prodcuts,now, the eMac (for education) and Xserve (for serving and other workstation needs)
So really, yeah, you see many configurations. yet, under my plans, it would be six different products, with (as it is now) custimization.
If you are talking about BTO now, the possiblites are endless. One time SJObs talked about how many possiblites there were for customization, it was large i believe.
---sorry for spelling, OmniWeb wont correct for me
You're starting to break things down arbitrarily too. Make several lists, one for each major market Apple is catering to: Video, Graphics, Education, Consumer, Science. Products overlap, but the number is manageable for each. Also the G3 iMac probably won't be a round for a whole lot longer. To me, that one product seems the most redundant if however necessary for the time being. Those are kind of a hangnail on the product list. Without it, everything seems pretty clear. At least they don't have the Cube sandwiched in there.
[ 05-14-2002: Message edited by: BuonRotto ]</p>
No one is going to mistake an iBook for a rackmount server. No one is going to mistake a G4 tower for an eMac.
Arbitrarily setting a limit on the number of product lines makes no sense at all. As long as each product fills a need, I see no problem with adding to the lineup.
See <a href="http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_performa/index.html"; target="_blank">all the Performa models.</a>
We are nowhere near this today.
[ 05-15-2002: Message edited by: Bozo the Clown ]</p>
<strong>
Arbitrarily setting a limit on the number of product lines makes no sense at all. As long as each product fills a need, I see no problem with adding to the lineup.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I second this. Each Apple product line serves a distinct market segment with hardly any overlap.
[quote] See <a href="http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_performa/index.html"; target="_blank">all the Performa models.</a>
We are nowhere near this today.
<hr></blockquote>
Not to mention there were simultaneous PowerMac lines. The 61xx series nicely illustrates how nuts this got. There were at least 7-8 different models and nobody I talked to at the time could readily distinguish between them.
The product matrix was necessary to get people to focus on what was urgent and critical for Apple to survive. We're past that now.
the four case product matrix is dead.
Another problem is you're counting 3 LCD iMacs when the only difference is ancillary equipment included. It's trivial to replace a CDRW with a Combo drive so it's nothing to have multiple options. That's the key in a BTO plan. Start out with a decent base and let the consumer decide on step up features.
What the hell happened to the four product matrix?
Discuss.</strong>
Hmmm... I'll add to hmurchison's comments. If you look at it from an architecture overview:
[code]
New northbridge and new soutbridge = Xserve
UniNorth + KeyLargo + Snapper Audio = eMac
= Powerbook G4
UniNorth + KeyLargo + Tumbler Audio = Power Mac G4
Pangea + Tumbler Audio = UniNorth and KeyLargo in one package
= iMac G4
= iBook
Pangea + Screamer Audio = iMac G3
</pre><hr></blockquote>
That's about 2 total architectures, and one of them, the Xserve, is brand new. So Apple is basically using the same parts for every machine they ship, and from a supply standpoint, they shouldn't have any supply problems within their domain. The rest is just soldering different resistors, and making sure they buy from the right suppliers.
- Portable consumer
- Portable professional
- Desktop consumer
- Desktop professional
The four products today:
- Portable consumer
/ 12" iBook
/ 14" iBook
/ iPod
- Portable professional
/ PowerBook G4
- Desktop consumer
/ LCD iMac
/ CRT iMac
/ education only eMac
- Desktop professional
/ PowerMac G4
/ Xserve
The four products thing still exist, but like a tree with four main branches, it wouldn't hurt for those main branches to have some branches on their own.
But now, apple has extreme differentiation, in fact I'd say the differentiation between Apple products themselves are more distinct than even between different PC manufacturers. Guess which machine teachers who need desktops for their students will get? Apple even writes (e for Education) on their website just for the dumber ones who want to get Xserves with serial dumb terminals onto each students' desks. Not that I think there are people that dumb, but Apple's got that covered just in case
A hypothetical system administrator walks into an Apple Store and thinks: "I need highly redundant servers, but I'm confused whether to get the Xserve or the eMac, maybe an iBook would work? Maybe the iBook?" Not very likely is it? But just in case there are people so dumb as to not be able to differentiate between the eMac and the XServe and want to try and stick 2 iBooks into 1U in their racks, or maybe stack eMacs into a huge pyramid for serving purposes (who needs rectangular racks when you can have pyramids?), Apple has made it difficult for non-education to get eMacs and called the XServe the XServe.
Now who thinks Apple is reverting?
[ 05-18-2002: Message edited by: Ming ]</p>