Has Apple missed both the entry and workstation end markets ? I keep asking why soldered storage and no BTO GPU and dual socketed drive bays, and if size was truly the only issue, perhaps just make the darn thing a little bigger...?
I object to the argument that Apple is charging more an more for their product. Find an inflation calculator and enter what price you paid for your mac 20 years ago, 10 years ago, and 5 years ago. I think that inflation-adjusted apple's pricing is not increasing as dramatically as people think.
If inflation is confusing, think about how much you would spend on lunch about 15 years ago...$8? $5? now it is difficult to get out for lunch for less than $20.
Lastly, think about how much more processing power is vs years ago. I'd say not only is processing power greater but it is now much MUCH greater than the software needs of the vast majority of people. For example, I remember when running MS office was a chore for the computer...now the processing is WAY more than needed for that basic task.
(the $2,499 I spent on a G4 tower in 1999 would cost me $3,787 today.) (the iPhone 3G 8GB cost $599 in 2008, that's $702 in today's dollars, compare to the XR today at $749 but vastly superior)
The problem with your argument is that the Windows PC’s and competing Android phones have got cheaper, or stayed the same price, whilst offering far more than they did 5 or more years ago.
Apple was never “cheap” and nor should they be. But their current obsession with increasing margins every generation is now at the point where they are pricing out a fair chunk of the market.
I’ve switched a lot of people to the Mac, I’m a major advocate for Apple, but I’m struggling now to justify a Mac over a Windows competitor and it’s all because of price.
Not so long ago when someone was looking at a £500 Windows notebook you could talk them around to an £800 Mac. For that extra £300 you get attention to detail, premium build materials and Mac OS.
But with the starting point of £1200 for the new MacBook Air I can no longer justify the extra expense to people. It’s a beautiful machine, but it’s not £700 better than a £500 Windows based notebook.
Apple might be happy selling less for more, but I think it’s going to bite them in the arse sooner rather than later.
I seriously disagree with this. I hope Apple never compromises on the Mac again. The $800 Mac Mini is an excellent machine. The $200-400 is served by the iPad. Btw the iPad has the NVME storage that is in the Mac Mini.
I seriously disagree with this. I hope Apple never compromises on the Mac again. The $800 Mac Mini is an excellent machine. The $200-400 is served by the iPad. Btw the iPad has the NVME storage that is in the Mac Mini.
The iPad Pro does, the sixth does not have the same speed. Was the 2012 Mac mini compromised for $599?
You never want to price yourselves out of the game. But at the same time, you have to understand the marketplace. The original market for the Mac Mini largely changed over the last decade. You could say the same for machines like the iMac which originally were marketing as the Mac for most buyers before laptops took over as the default machine for most people.
Could you remove features? Sure. Could you remove enough features to still make the product worthwhile for a $499 buyer while still satisfying the customer and giving Apple enough margin to build it? I'm doubtful. I'm sure this exercise were played out inside of Apple for a while before we got the SKUs we did. And Apple likely did some quiet market research with customers as well as look at their own Mac Mini purchasing data to figure out what the machine should look like.
The Late 2018 Mac Mini creates a platform that Apple can swap out the few different items that are configurable without changes to the motherboard design: processor (8th gen), flash RAM and DRAM. Anything else may have caused changes in either the motherboard or form factor, driving up the overall price of the program.
And a $199 model could serve even greater audience. Don't get me even started on a $99 model...
Nope. $199 and $99 are too compromised. There's a reason we picked $499.
Not for an AppleTV like mini...and that's been possible for a few years no and Apple has made no move to make a ARM based home server or edu desktop.
In what way would a $200 A10X 4GB RAM 32GB SSD EduMini be "compromised"? Nothing really.
Of course Mac sales would take a huge hit but maybe you could make it up on volume. It would still cheapen the MacOS brand.
4GB of RAM, and 32GB of storage is pretty compromising. I generally like where you're going, though.
Not when the primary use case is Google Drive, Google Docs and iOS productivity apps...which would largely use cloud storage since students switch devices a lot.
And a $199 model could serve even greater audience. Don't get me even started on a $99 model...
Nope. $199 and $99 are too compromised. There's a reason we picked $499.
Not for an AppleTV like mini...and that's been possible for a few years no and Apple has made no move to make a ARM based home server or edu desktop.
In what way would a $200 A10X 4GB RAM 32GB SSD EduMini be "compromised"? Nothing really.
Of course Mac sales would take a huge hit but maybe you could make it up on volume. It would still cheapen the MacOS brand.
4GB of RAM, and 32GB of storage is pretty compromising. I generally like where you're going, though.
Not when the primary use case is Google Drive, Google Docs and iOS productivity apps...which would largely use cloud storage since students switch devices a lot.
Huh, that's an interesting thought. I'll have to consider that. I think that this use case would be good in education, but not as an edu model repurposed for retail like the eMac model.
I seriously disagree with this. I hope Apple never compromises on the Mac again. The $800 Mac Mini is an excellent machine. The $200-400 is served by the iPad. Btw the iPad has the NVME storage that is in the Mac Mini.
The iPad Pro does, the sixth does not have the same speed. Was the 2012 Mac mini compromised for $599?
With a hard drive ,yes the 2014 Mac Mini was compromised. For 2012 I think SSD prices kept it an okay machine. I believe Apple switched all iOS devices to NVMe since the A9 in the 6S ,SE & iPad 5(2017).
Unfortunately Apple under Cook is way too greedy for that. The iPhone has convinced them that people are more than willing to pay crazy high prices for an Apple product so why should they release an iPhone or Mac aimed towards education or lower income buyers. If people stopped paying the crazy high prices then Apple would have to lower their margins. But until then Apple has zero incentives to make affordable products for education or anyone else.
Every time someone calls Apple “greedy” an angel gets their wings.
And a $199 model could serve even greater audience. Don't get me even started on a $99 model...
Nope. $199 and $99 are too compromised. There's a reason we picked $499.
Not for an AppleTV like mini...and that's been possible for a few years no and Apple has made no move to make a ARM based home server or edu desktop.
In what way would a $200 A10X 4GB RAM 32GB SSD EduMini be "compromised"? Nothing really.
Of course Mac sales would take a huge hit but maybe you could make it up on volume. It would still cheapen the MacOS brand.
4GB of RAM, and 32GB of storage is pretty compromising. I generally like where you're going, though.
Not when the primary use case is Google Drive, Google Docs and iOS productivity apps...which would largely use cloud storage since students switch devices a lot.
Huh, that's an interesting thought. I'll have to consider that. I think that this use case would be good in education, but not as an edu model repurposed for retail like the eMac model.
Well, if you add a $499 version with a 8TB fusion drive and a A12 it makes a killer home server too...so you can have local storage of music, movies, apps, backups, photos, movies, etc...run iOS photoshop, iMovie, ...
With iCloud you also get offsite backup...
Its a nice little concept that has been technically feasible since the aTV4 with the A8 shipped and doubly so with the A10X. aTV3 might have been a little slow.
Given how easy it could have been with the aTV4K the only conclusion I can reach is that Apple doesn't want to do this.
I seriously disagree with this. I hope Apple never compromises on the Mac again. The $800 Mac Mini is an excellent machine. The $200-400 is served by the iPad. Btw the iPad has the NVME storage that is in the Mac Mini.
The iPad Pro does, the sixth does not have the same speed. Was the 2012 Mac mini compromised for $599?
With a hard drive ,yes the 2014 Mac Mini was compromised. For 2012 I think SSD prices kept it an okay machine. I believe Apple switched all iOS devices to NVMe since the A9 in the 6S ,SE & iPad 5(2017).
I didn't ask about the 2014, but I appreciate the partial answer on the $599 2012 model.
NVMe can be fast, but does not necessarily mean blistering speeds. Like anything else, there are a hundred factors that go into the speed of the flash. So, just saying the storage is NVMe is like saying that food is made of carbon. True, but not precise.
Unfortunately Apple under Cook is way too greedy for that. The iPhone has convinced them that people are more than willing to pay crazy high prices for an Apple product so why should they release an iPhone or Mac aimed towards education or lower income buyers. If people stopped paying the crazy high prices then Apple would have to lower their margins. But until then Apple has zero incentives to make affordable products for education or anyone else.
You may call that greedy but then again you probably don't own or run a business and have little understanding of what it takes to be successful.
I think we can safely say that AppleInsider’s argument for a $499 Mac Mini won't even get a preliminary glance from Apple. Entry level this, workstation that, Apple missed the boat, Apple is greedy, Apple doesn’t care about poor people. It’s the new mantra the desktop fans like to blather on about. If you haven’t figured out by now that the iPad is Apple’s entry level computer then there’s no hope for you. A $429 iPad (9.7 inch with 128GB) will out perform that $499 HP plastic box at Walmart any day.
I wonder if they could just offer the previous base model at the previous $499? It would be a low cost option for people, while giving a large reason to upgrade due to the $499 option being older generation, dual core, and having all the inferiority of a 3+ year old model...
Perhaps Apple's trying to keep the entry price to the walled garden a certain amount to maximize profit, or their 'premium' image, at the very least? Having a cheap model alone could perhaps hurt that high end computer maker feeling?
A comparison I would make is that I personally would prefer a sports car that the base price is $30000 and not available for less, over a sports car that has a $20000 entry price, then a souped up version comparable to the first car for $30000. On the outside, it still looks the same, has comparable specs, but I feel like I'm getting a car that is a tier up because its not available at all for $20000...just my own psychology. I'm sure there is some value to be had in keeping the price up. Apple are not stupid.
Disagree with this. A consumer Mac for budget seekers is something like a $600 to $700 laptop. The market for desktops is pretty small, and is basically nonexistent in education now? How Apple would get to a $700 laptop is a very good question, and for a lot of people what will be in it will be unacceptable.
It would be nice if there was a $500 Mac mini, but there just aren’t that many buyers for something like this anymore. Just don’t see it if most of the market is buying laptops and tablets. Look at the Surface Go. Any takers if that hardware was inside a $500 box? An Apple TV with macOS/ARM on it for $400? Is the lack of near term compatible software going to kill it? And would buy it?
For education, I think iPad + Pencil + Services is Apple’s best option for students, and the most benefit for students. Apple really needs to shore up its educational services and iPad + Pencil software, but the triad of iPad + Pencil + Services is the way to go. They need to develop an attractive package for schools. Whether they want to do it, who knows.
A lot of the computer or web based homework I see for my junior high schooler has a real good chance of making students dumber, not smarter. I mean I’m near steaming mad about it. What a waste of time.
Apple doesn't seem hungry enough to compete with other companies going after educational sales. Apple is always going to set the highest price point and believes schools are going to choose them for quality or ecosystem. Apple needs to create some loss leader product to crush the competition. I think that's the only way Apple can get some momentum going when it comes to selling products to schools. Whether it's worth it for Apple to do something like that, I wouldn't know. Apple is all about revenues and profits and little else. Schools have limited budgets and are probably always going for the least expensive offering. Apple isn't about to work out some special pricing deal. It's either Apple's way or the highway. The Chromebooks are always going to win and Apple is always going to lose when fighting for school contracts.
Comments
Has Apple missed both the entry and workstation end markets ? I keep asking why soldered storage and no BTO GPU and dual socketed drive bays, and if size was truly the only issue, perhaps just make the darn thing a little bigger...?
Apple was never “cheap” and nor should they be. But their current obsession with increasing margins every generation is now at the point where they are pricing out a fair chunk of the market.
I’ve switched a lot of people to the Mac, I’m a major advocate for Apple, but I’m struggling now to justify a Mac over a Windows competitor and it’s all because of price.
Not so long ago when someone was looking at a £500 Windows notebook you could talk them around to an £800 Mac. For that extra £300 you get attention to detail, premium build materials and Mac OS.
But with the starting point of £1200 for the new MacBook Air I can no longer justify the extra expense to people. It’s a beautiful machine, but it’s not £700 better than a £500 Windows based notebook.
Apple might be happy selling less for more, but I think it’s going to bite them in the arse sooner rather than later.
Could you remove features? Sure. Could you remove enough features to still make the product worthwhile for a $499 buyer while still satisfying the customer and giving Apple enough margin to build it? I'm doubtful. I'm sure this exercise were played out inside of Apple for a while before we got the SKUs we did. And Apple likely did some quiet market research with customers as well as look at their own Mac Mini purchasing data to figure out what the machine should look like.
The Late 2018 Mac Mini creates a platform that Apple can swap out the few different items that are configurable without changes to the motherboard design: processor (8th gen), flash RAM and DRAM. Anything else may have caused changes in either the motherboard or form factor, driving up the overall price of the program.
It’s not in Apple’s DNA to sell anything for a loss. That’s for the Android’s/PC’s of the world. You need look no further than the quality.
Huh, that's an interesting thought. I'll have to consider that. I think that this use case would be good in education, but not as an edu model repurposed for retail like the eMac model.
With iCloud you also get offsite backup...
Its a nice little concept that has been technically feasible since the aTV4 with the A8 shipped and doubly so with the A10X. aTV3 might have been a little slow.
Given how easy it could have been with the aTV4K the only conclusion I can reach is that Apple doesn't want to do this.