<strong>Problem is that Apollo will be .18um. Even a Motorola spokesman said the same thing unless he was mistaken.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The Apollo will undoubtedly be switched to a .13µ process at a later stage. From what I heard Motorola just didn't have enough time to implement the .13µ process and produce the chip.
Anybody expecting G5s should also realise that this would make them rather unlikely. Doesn't mean they aren't already being produced but it makes it seem a little more unlikely.
There are advantages and disadvantages about being secretive. One disadvantage, is that people have a tendency to work up expectations that cannot be reasonably met. With some information as to future products, people's expectations could be tempered; and buying decisions more informed.
But of course, you then have everyone saying; "I'll just wait until MWNY." "I'll just wait until MWSF" - perpetually waiting for the next upgrade; while plugging away on their LC 475. Believe me, I should know. I had a 6100-60 until recently (I bought a single processor G4 533 in February). When my 6100 started feeling slow, I thought I'd wait until 604e based machines became affordable. Then I was going to wait for the G3s to be released. Then for the iMac to be released. But I didn't like the iMac, so I waited for new PowerMacs with better cases (the B & W G3s). But then G4 rumors surfaced so I waited for those. I did the "hold off until the next Expo" routine for over four years! In the meantime, I was feeling the pain of my 6100 not being able to use a web browser (quickly), or run Mac OS X Public Beta.
I'm still tugging away on my G4 450. It's fine, it works and I have no real immdeiate need to upgrade-but I want to and can afford to.
However, I'm not gonna drop $3-4000 on something when a completely new generation is due from Apple in the near future. Be it Jan, March, July, it will happen this year. Why spend thousands of dollars on an identical system that is actually only slightly faster when you really can wait?
The G5 is new in every respect. That's worth thousands of dollars. Technology changes all the time but with Apple is almost every 6 months. Getting a 1.4ghz G5 will do you really well investment wise for a few good years. I'm going on 3 with my 450 G4, so i know a G5 at nearly 3 times the speed, faster bus and DDR memory will lasty longer than that.
That's worth 3-4 thousand dollars. Oh yea, hook me up with an Apple employee so I can get those prices
Seriously, if you were in the market for a new PowerMac, and you knew that one that was twice as fast was two weeks away; you wouldn't buy. Now Apple has extra inventory in the channel, which they have to sell at a discount later. They lose money.
]</strong><hr></blockquote>
If that's the punchline at Apple, well screw you. And your mother. (it's said jockingly, k? No offense.)
What's hurting Apple now is the fact that I don't care to replace a G3 350 and a dual 533 with what? A dual 800? The dual 800 is nice, but it's not worth it to me to upgrade. Not at that price. And don't get me started on the cache-less-for - marketing reasons G4 733.
Your reasoning sucks.
If I was in the market for a new powermac, and I'd end up buying one two weeks before a new one was released (without info on the new one), I'd be pissed off. You would expect me to hold on to my machine even longer, because I'd be afraid next time to have the same experience. In the long run, you lose a sale.
However, if I was in the market for a powermac, and I'd know something better was coming along, and I'd know some reasonable specs, I could decide to buy now, to wait and buy a new machine, or to wait and buy an older machine at discount. But you'd end up with a sale either way.
That's how I think. Maybe I'm weird. Or stupid. You decide
[quote] If that's the punchline at Apple... <hr></blockquote>
It's not. My opinions do not reflect Apple's official stance. I'm not Steve Jobs.
[quote]
What's hurting Apple now is the fact that I don't care to replace a G3 350 and a dual 533 with what? A dual 800? The dual 800 is nice, but it's not worth it to me to upgrade. Not at that price. And don't get me started on the cache-less-for - marketing reasons G4 733. <hr></blockquote>
If it's not worth it to you to upgrade, then it sounds like you're NOT in the market for a new PowerMac.
Allow me to clarify. My original statement was not an implication that Mac users should upgrade their machines every cycle even if there is no benefit. I apologize if that's what the statement implied.
I meant that if Apple's current machines offer a substantial benefit over your current machine; you should upgrade. Even if a faster one is coming in two weeks, two months, whatever. Eg: If you have a Beige G3, a G4 867 would offer a substantial improvement and would be worth the money in my opinion. If you have a G4 533, then yes, there is no point upgrading.
[quote]
If I was in the market for a new powermac, and I'd end up buying one two weeks before a new one was released (without info on the new one), I'd be pissed off. You would expect me to hold on to my machine even longer, because I'd be afraid next time to have the same experience. In the long run, you lose a sale.<hr></blockquote>
So you buy a new machine that serves your needs well; and a new one is released in two weeks; fine you're pissed off. I'd be upset too. But technology is always updated.
And how far in advance should Apple pre-announce new machines? A week? A month? Six months? If they pre-announce machine a week in advance, and somebody buys a machine one day before that, they're pissed off. If they pre-announce a month in advance, and somebody buys a day before that, they'd be pissed off. When does it ever end?
[quote]
However, if I was in the market for a powermac, and I'd know something better was coming along, and I'd know some reasonable specs, I could decide to buy now, to wait and buy a new machine, or to wait and buy an older machine at discount. But you'd end up with a sale either way. <hr></blockquote>
It seems that most of the scenarios involve waiting. Either waiting for a new machine; or waiting for lower prices on old machines. Doesn't seem to help Apple too much.
[quote] Your reasoning sucks.<hr></blockquote>
I'm sorry you don't agree with my reasoning. But most of the dissent seems to be about getting "burned" by new machines making the one you just bought, not top of the line anymore.
Buying a machine 5x as fast as your current machine, even if one 8x as fast comes out two weeks later doesn't seem like getting burned to me.
Just curious ,Pipeline Stall, but do you know what Steve has up his sleeve? i am not asking you to tell me anything confidential, but do you know anything?
[quote]Just curious ,Pipeline Stall, but do you know what Steve has up his sleeve? i am not asking you to tell me anything confidential, but do you know anything? <hr></blockquote>
I know one thing that will be announced for sure. And I have ideas about other things (based on what I see and hear internally). I don't know as much as you may think I do.
In case anyone's wondering; the reason why I'm spending so much time posting today, is because I've been running clean builds on one machine (which take hours) and need some way to pass the time while I wait. I don't want anyone to get the impression that Apple employees are lazy. This is not a typical day for me.
I know one thing that will be announced for sure. And I have ideas about other things (based on what I see and hear internally). I don't know as much as you may think I do.
In case anyone's wondering; the reason why I'm spending so much time posting today, is because I've been running clean builds on one machine (which take hours) and need some way to pass the time while I wait. I don't want anyone to get the impression that Apple employees are lazy. This is not a typical day for me.
That is so cool that you even know one thing for sure! I want to work for Apple someday!
[quote] I meant that if Apple's current machines offer a substantial benefit over your current machine; you should upgrade. Even if a faster one is coming in two weeks, two months, whatever. Eg: If you have a Beige G3, a G4 867 would offer a substantial improvement and would be worth the money in my opinion. If you have a G4 533, then yes, there is no point upgrading. <hr></blockquote>
I'm sorry but a G5 is not simply a faster PM. It is way more then that, RIO, faster bus, DDR, new mobo, new case, possibly USB 2.0, gigawire etc.
Some of us are holding out for New Technology not simply faster PMs. Buy now and not only is our machine not as fast next rev, but it's also older technology. After the G5 then your arguement holds more water. Right now, it's leaking
First off, thanks for being so civil in this discussion. I really appreciate it.
I'm trying to get my point across; just remember that english isn't my mother tongue
[quote]Originally posted by PipelineStall:
<strong>
It's not. My opinions do not reflect Apple's official stance. I'm not Steve Jobs.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Phew
[quote]Originally posted by PipelineStall:
<strong>
If it's not worth it to you to upgrade, then it sounds like you're NOT in the market for a new PowerMac.
Allow me to clarify. My original statement was not an implication that Mac users should upgrade their machines every cycle even if there is no benefit. I apologize if that's what the statement implied.
I meant that if Apple's current machines offer a substantial benefit over your current machine; you should upgrade. Even if a faster one is coming in two weeks, two months, whatever. Eg: If you have a Beige G3, a G4 867 would offer a substantial improvement and would be worth the money in my opinion. If you have a G4 533, then yes, there is no point upgrading.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks for the clarification. I understood your original point much as you intended it, I must say.
However, I'd just like to add that I am in dire need of an upgrade for the G3 powermac, mainly because of two things:
1. I use and love OS X, and I want to continue using it.
2. The combination of
- the 'slowness' (I prefer unresposiveness) of OS X's GUI,
- the suckiness of some carbon ports
(IE comes to mind; it can't even remember I have my system set to 'Dutch', and not 'German'),
- and the fact that some, if not most of the mission-critical apps I use aren't yet carbonised,
has made me decide that I'll wait for native ports of my apps, before I spring for new hardware. Simply because I want to see their performance on my current hardware (for instance, if the iprovements from 10.1 to 10.2 are as good as the speed improvements from 10.0 to 10.1, I'll be thrilled).
The 'it's not worth it to me' part of my statement actually referred to the fact that the new(er) towers aren't that great a leap IMHO like the G3 B/W (native firewire for instance) was over my beige G3 (it's now a print server). To give an example: the so called 'supêrdrive' is moot to me, because the company that produces the dvd's we make doesn't accept files written on them to be used as master disks. They need to be DVD-RAM. Sure, they'll take less time to render on a dual G4 800 than on my 533, but that doesn't matter, as I can happily continue working on the G3, while the 533 renders away. I personally don't have the impression a dual 800 would allow me to do those things more comfortably. Furthermore, it costs more than the two other machines set me back (which I bill to clients anyway).
The comment also implied that I'm just not too happy with what's offered now, in the desktop line. For instance, I liked the powerbook G4, but I wouldn't buy them, unless they got a combo drive, and a nice graphics chipset (like radeon). Those two have now been fulfilled, and my order will go out the second week of January (can't do it before the new year since I already closed the budget for 2001, and I don't expect to work the first week, since it's new year and my birthday and whatnot, so...°). The desktop line wasn't improved that significantly IMHO.
**On a side note, do you actually realise that hiking the prices up 2-4% when the Apple store was converted from BEF to euro is a. illegal and b. another blow to the general public? I'm sorry to say that I've just the past weekend bought our 3D guy some new dual Athlon 1900 boxes, for 24000 BEF a piece, while a dual 800 would set me back 204000 BEF. That price delta is getting awfully big, even for a macloving company boss :eek: .
[quote]Originally posted by PipelineStall:
<strong>
So you buy a new machine that serves your needs well; and a new one is released in two weeks; fine you're pissed off. I'd be upset too. But technology is always updated.
And how far in advance should Apple pre-announce new machines? A week? A month? Six months? If they pre-announce machine a week in advance, and somebody buys a machine one day before that, they're pissed off. If they pre-announce a month in advance, and somebody buys a day before that, they'd be pissed off. When does it ever end?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I understand what you're saying, and you're partly right.
However, in upgrading at the expo's, Apple created the expectations with the Mac buying public to buy within the first three months after an expo, then get a small upgrade and/or price drop, and wait, from like two months before the expo....
[quote]Originally posted by PipelineStall:
<strong>
It seems that most of the scenarios involve waiting. Either waiting for a new machine; or waiting for lower prices on old machines. Doesn't seem to help Apple too much.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
But you said yourself that technlogy is constantly updated. So why does apple wait so long to up the processors in the powermacs? Or to add a faster bus?
[quote]Originally posted by PipelineStall:
<strong>
I'm sorry you don't agree with my reasoning. But most of the dissent seems to be about getting "burned" by new machines making the one you just bought, not top of the line anymore.
Buying a machine 5x as fast as your current machine, even if one 8x as fast comes out two weeks later doesn't seem like getting burned to me.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree, and I probably worded my sentiment wrong. It's not so much getting 'burned', it's more of an 'Apple's not progressing as much as I would like them to' kinda feeling. I mean, you're not actually telling me that Apple was glad to be stuck at 500 MHz for a year?!?
Again, thanks for being so civil. But you'd better be on my side, 'cause I buy the machines that make you your living
[quote]Unfortunately I think that Apple views its monitors as a luxuary. People who can afford them will buy them, but those who can't will have to buy some third-party monitor. Sadly, I doubt we'll ever see 'competitive' pricing on Apple-branded monitors.
<hr></blockquote>
Back when the ASDs were all CRT, you could buy a 17" for $500. That was about the price of a high-end sony trinitron, and the ASD also served as a USB hub, and it had the ADC.
So it would not be unlike Apple to cut prices on their LCD display lineup to be competitive with other high-end LCD displays. I think Apple really ought to do this.
What would be even better is if Apple implemented a permanent deal on ASDs, so that if you buy a new Powermac, you get a deal on the Apple LCD display. If Apple was ensured a powermac sale with each LCD sale, they could afford to lower their profit margin on the LCD displays. Make it such a good deal that with the purchase of a Mac, the Apple LCD display is the same or less in price than competitive LCD displays from other manufacturers. After all, the Apple displays should only be bait for buying Apple computers. Apple is a computer company, not a display company.
If Apple isn't going to offer displays at reasonable prices, then they may as well not make displays at all. I remember when Apple sold printers...they were overpriced, and while the quality was competitive, too many people saw them for what they were: commodities. So Apple quit making them. Will the same happen to Apple displays? It might, unless Apple pulls their head outta their a$$ and treats them like commodities.
If someone buys a mac, then the Apple display should be a DEAL, not a rip off. Otherwise, why not just save money and buy a 3rd party display?!?! Judging by the ASD sales figures, this is exactly what many people are doing. If I bought a new powermac, that's what I would do!
I never thought about that. It would rock to have a $500 off deal when you bought a ASD with a power mac, that makes a lot of sence. I hope they keep it after MWSF.
Dawg, I couldn't agree with you more. The ASD as beautiful as it is, ought to be made to where it comes with a significant reduction in price for buying one of their machines. Think of it like this, $300 off for a display and low-end machine, $400 for mid, and $500 for high end.
That would help boost sales, because now it makes the machines more worth their price!!
Apple's margins are the best in the industry. But Apple needs its margins that high. First, it pays for almost 100% of the R&D on its machines. Second, it has lower volume that most manufacturers.
Apple could decrease their margins. But the question is, would they see a proportional increase in sales? I doubt it, with their current offerings.
If Apple charges a lot for their LCDs, let them. Don't complain about it; buy a cheap one from another vendor. As someone said, Apple isn't a display company. Any display sales are icing on the cake.
Imagine, for a second, if Apple had stuck with DVI (or if DVI+ was more widely implemented than just Formac and Apple). Clearly, the Cinema Display is a coveted piece of hardware for everyone...yet Apple hasn't leverage that fact like they could.
Imagine, for a little longer, that the Crystal Clear Savings promo stopped being a promo, and was permanent. But to qualify for these savings, you had to buy a mac. Not a problem for 90% of Mac users, who would probably drop the bills for both a system + monitor. But what about PC users...Apple could keep the margins high (possibly higher) and keep volume up by having a PC standard digital signal plus some drivers!
This would allow Apple to "reward" Macheads by shifting the burden of development costs of the LCD (and other Apple products) from those who buy systems, to those PC users who just want the Cinema Display and will stop and nothing to get it.
As far as the ASC's are concerned; you know that they don't know shit when I (not an Apple emp) tell's the ASC that Apple will release a DVD/CDRW combo drive Monday and he knows nothing about it and then it happens. He didn't even know what the new prices were!
This lays to rest that Apple doesn't tell the Comp USA ASC's anything concerning new releases.
Imagine, for a second, if Apple had stuck with DVI (or if DVI+ was more widely implemented than just Formac and Apple). Clearly, the Cinema Display is a coveted piece of hardware for everyone...yet Apple hasn't leverage that fact like they could.
Imagine, for a little longer, that the Crystal Clear Savings promo stopped being a promo, and was permanent. But to qualify for these savings, you had to buy a mac. Not a problem for 90% of Mac users, who would probably drop the bills for both a system + monitor. But what about PC users...Apple could keep the margins high (possibly higher) and keep volume up by having a PC standard digital signal plus some drivers!
This would allow Apple to "reward" Macheads by shifting the burden of development costs of the LCD (and other Apple products) from those who buy systems, to those PC users who just want the Cinema Display and will stop and nothing to get it.
Bah. Who cares.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Simply brilliant!
Best response I've ever heard for the whole ADC controversy.
It makes sense on technology, business, and marketing levels!
[quote] Apple's margins are the best in the industry. But Apple needs its margins that high. First, it pays for almost 100% of the R&D on its machines. Second, it has lower volume that most manufacturers.<hr></blockquote>
Agreed. Apple needs the margins.
[quote]Apple could decrease their margins. But the question is, would they see a proportional increase in sales? I doubt it, with their current offerings.<hr></blockquote>
that's my point. I believe that they would see greater sales if they offered a display deal to mac buyers. If most mac buyers opt to buy a third party display, this doesn't help Apple one bit. But if Apple offered a discount to mac buyers on their displays, then this would virtually guarantee a display sale with each mac, if the discount was right. Sales of Apple displays would go up for sure. I'm not saying Apple should sell them at cost or anything, keep the high margins, but give mac buyers a competitive price. If someone buys a new mac, and with their discount the Apple LCD costs the same as a good sony LCD, then most people would go for the Apple display! And Apple would win.
[quote]If Apple charges a lot for their LCDs, let them. Don't complain about it; buy a cheap one from another vendor. As someone said, Apple isn't a display company. Any display sales are icing on the cake.
<hr></blockquote>
I'm not complaining--I'm the one who would just buy a good LCD from another vendor, and get about the same quality for much less cash. As MSLEE pointed out, Apple should do the following: Ditch ADC. Make Apple displays with a universal connector. Now, offer the displays at two prices: one price for purchasing the display without a Mac. This is the high margin price where Apple scores big cash. PC users can buy the superior Apple displays, and Apple would of course offer Windows drivers so they can benefit from the USB hub functionality, the power switch functionality, basically make the Apple displays work on a PC every bit as good as they do on a Mac. The only difference is that for a PC user, the Apple displays cost more...much more.
But for anyone who purchases a Mac, offer a deal on the Apple displays, enough of a deal so that mac buyers have no incentive to buy a non-Apple LCD display. This way, Apple moves more displays, and as the volume goes up, Apple's cost goes down, so their margins will increase.
Using this strategy, Apple makes mondo profits off Wintel users, and good profits off Mac users. All while giving Mac users a little bit of a deal, which will make them all that much more loyal to Apple.
Furthermore, all the Wintel users who buy the Apple displays will experience the uber-quality of Apple products. What better advertising for Apple than to let Wintel users experience the superiority of Apple displays? I know a few wintel users who would love to use an Apple cinema display, but they cannot because of that stupid ADC connector. Apple loses sales because of this dumb-ass connector...that's the real tragedy here.
While I do agree with some of your points I also understand what Apple seems to be doing. They don't want window users buying any one piece of Apple hardware. You either buy an entire system or nothing. I think that's why they invented ADC, so if a pc user wants a Mac monito the only way to get one is to buy a new tower.
Same thing as the iPod. Want to use it? Buy a Mac.
Comments
<strong>Problem is that Apollo will be .18um. Even a Motorola spokesman said the same thing unless he was mistaken.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The Apollo will undoubtedly be switched to a .13µ process at a later stage. From what I heard Motorola just didn't have enough time to implement the .13µ process and produce the chip.
Anybody expecting G5s should also realise that this would make them rather unlikely. Doesn't mean they aren't already being produced but it makes it seem a little more unlikely.
<strong>
There are advantages and disadvantages about being secretive. One disadvantage, is that people have a tendency to work up expectations that cannot be reasonably met. With some information as to future products, people's expectations could be tempered; and buying decisions more informed.
But of course, you then have everyone saying; "I'll just wait until MWNY." "I'll just wait until MWSF" - perpetually waiting for the next upgrade; while plugging away on their LC 475. Believe me, I should know. I had a 6100-60 until recently (I bought a single processor G4 533 in February). When my 6100 started feeling slow, I thought I'd wait until 604e based machines became affordable. Then I was going to wait for the G3s to be released. Then for the iMac to be released. But I didn't like the iMac, so I waited for new PowerMacs with better cases (the B & W G3s). But then G4 rumors surfaced so I waited for those. I did the "hold off until the next Expo" routine for over four years! In the meantime, I was feeling the pain of my 6100 not being able to use a web browser (quickly), or run Mac OS X Public Beta.
[ 12-19-2001: Message edited by: PipelineStall ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm still tugging away on my G4 450. It's fine, it works and I have no real immdeiate need to upgrade-but I want to and can afford to.
However, I'm not gonna drop $3-4000 on something when a completely new generation is due from Apple in the near future. Be it Jan, March, July, it will happen this year. Why spend thousands of dollars on an identical system that is actually only slightly faster when you really can wait?
The G5 is new in every respect. That's worth thousands of dollars. Technology changes all the time but with Apple is almost every 6 months. Getting a 1.4ghz G5 will do you really well investment wise for a few good years. I'm going on 3 with my 450 G4, so i know a G5 at nearly 3 times the speed, faster bus and DDR memory will lasty longer than that.
That's worth 3-4 thousand dollars. Oh yea, hook me up with an Apple employee so I can get those prices
<strong>
Seriously, if you were in the market for a new PowerMac, and you knew that one that was twice as fast was two weeks away; you wouldn't buy. Now Apple has extra inventory in the channel, which they have to sell at a discount later. They lose money.
]</strong><hr></blockquote>
If that's the punchline at Apple, well screw you. And your mother.
What's hurting Apple now is the fact that I don't care to replace a G3 350 and a dual 533 with what? A dual 800? The dual 800 is nice, but it's not worth it to me to upgrade. Not at that price. And don't get me started on the cache-less-for - marketing reasons G4 733.
Your reasoning sucks.
If I was in the market for a new powermac, and I'd end up buying one two weeks before a new one was released (without info on the new one), I'd be pissed off. You would expect me to hold on to my machine even longer, because I'd be afraid next time to have the same experience. In the long run, you lose a sale.
However, if I was in the market for a powermac, and I'd know something better was coming along, and I'd know some reasonable specs, I could decide to buy now, to wait and buy a new machine, or to wait and buy an older machine at discount. But you'd end up with a sale either way.
That's how I think. Maybe I'm weird. Or stupid. You decide
It's not. My opinions do not reflect Apple's official stance. I'm not Steve Jobs.
[quote]
What's hurting Apple now is the fact that I don't care to replace a G3 350 and a dual 533 with what? A dual 800? The dual 800 is nice, but it's not worth it to me to upgrade. Not at that price. And don't get me started on the cache-less-for - marketing reasons G4 733. <hr></blockquote>
If it's not worth it to you to upgrade, then it sounds like you're NOT in the market for a new PowerMac.
Allow me to clarify. My original statement was not an implication that Mac users should upgrade their machines every cycle even if there is no benefit. I apologize if that's what the statement implied.
I meant that if Apple's current machines offer a substantial benefit over your current machine; you should upgrade. Even if a faster one is coming in two weeks, two months, whatever. Eg: If you have a Beige G3, a G4 867 would offer a substantial improvement and would be worth the money in my opinion. If you have a G4 533, then yes, there is no point upgrading.
[quote]
If I was in the market for a new powermac, and I'd end up buying one two weeks before a new one was released (without info on the new one), I'd be pissed off. You would expect me to hold on to my machine even longer, because I'd be afraid next time to have the same experience. In the long run, you lose a sale.<hr></blockquote>
So you buy a new machine that serves your needs well; and a new one is released in two weeks; fine you're pissed off. I'd be upset too. But technology is always updated.
And how far in advance should Apple pre-announce new machines? A week? A month? Six months? If they pre-announce machine a week in advance, and somebody buys a machine one day before that, they're pissed off. If they pre-announce a month in advance, and somebody buys a day before that, they'd be pissed off. When does it ever end?
[quote]
However, if I was in the market for a powermac, and I'd know something better was coming along, and I'd know some reasonable specs, I could decide to buy now, to wait and buy a new machine, or to wait and buy an older machine at discount. But you'd end up with a sale either way. <hr></blockquote>
It seems that most of the scenarios involve waiting. Either waiting for a new machine; or waiting for lower prices on old machines. Doesn't seem to help Apple too much.
[quote] Your reasoning sucks.<hr></blockquote>
I'm sorry you don't agree with my reasoning. But most of the dissent seems to be about getting "burned" by new machines making the one you just bought, not top of the line anymore.
Buying a machine 5x as fast as your current machine, even if one 8x as fast comes out two weeks later doesn't seem like getting burned to me.
[ 12-19-2001: Message edited by: PipelineStall ]</p>
I know one thing that will be announced for sure. And I have ideas about other things (based on what I see and hear internally). I don't know as much as you may think I do.
In case anyone's wondering; the reason why I'm spending so much time posting today, is because I've been running clean builds on one machine (which take hours) and need some way to pass the time while I wait. I don't want anyone to get the impression that Apple employees are lazy. This is not a typical day for me.
In case anyone's wondering; the reason why I'm spending so much time posting today, is because I've been running clean builds on one machine (which take hours) and need some way to pass the time while I wait. I don't want anyone to get the impression that Apple employees are lazy. This is not a typical day for me.
That is so cool that you even know one thing for sure! I want to work for Apple someday!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IP: Logged
I'm sorry but a G5 is not simply a faster PM. It is way more then that, RIO, faster bus, DDR, new mobo, new case, possibly USB 2.0, gigawire etc.
Some of us are holding out for New Technology not simply faster PMs. Buy now and not only is our machine not as fast next rev, but it's also older technology. After the G5 then your arguement holds more water. Right now, it's leaking
That is hilarious!!
Thank you.
I'm trying to get my point across; just remember that english isn't my mother tongue
[quote]Originally posted by PipelineStall:
<strong>
It's not. My opinions do not reflect Apple's official stance. I'm not Steve Jobs.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Phew
[quote]Originally posted by PipelineStall:
<strong>
If it's not worth it to you to upgrade, then it sounds like you're NOT in the market for a new PowerMac.
Allow me to clarify. My original statement was not an implication that Mac users should upgrade their machines every cycle even if there is no benefit. I apologize if that's what the statement implied.
I meant that if Apple's current machines offer a substantial benefit over your current machine; you should upgrade. Even if a faster one is coming in two weeks, two months, whatever. Eg: If you have a Beige G3, a G4 867 would offer a substantial improvement and would be worth the money in my opinion. If you have a G4 533, then yes, there is no point upgrading.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks for the clarification. I understood your original point much as you intended it, I must say.
However, I'd just like to add that I am in dire need of an upgrade for the G3 powermac, mainly because of two things:
1. I use and love OS X, and I want to continue using it.
2. The combination of
- the 'slowness' (I prefer unresposiveness) of OS X's GUI,
- the suckiness of some carbon ports
(IE comes to mind; it can't even remember I have my system set to 'Dutch', and not 'German'),
- and the fact that some, if not most of the mission-critical apps I use aren't yet carbonised,
has made me decide that I'll wait for native ports of my apps, before I spring for new hardware. Simply because I want to see their performance on my current hardware (for instance, if the iprovements from 10.1 to 10.2 are as good as the speed improvements from 10.0 to 10.1, I'll be thrilled).
The 'it's not worth it to me' part of my statement actually referred to the fact that the new(er) towers aren't that great a leap IMHO like the G3 B/W (native firewire for instance) was over my beige G3 (it's now a print server). To give an example: the so called 'supêrdrive' is moot to me, because the company that produces the dvd's we make doesn't accept files written on them to be used as master disks. They need to be DVD-RAM. Sure, they'll take less time to render on a dual G4 800 than on my 533, but that doesn't matter, as I can happily continue working on the G3, while the 533 renders away. I personally don't have the impression a dual 800 would allow me to do those things more comfortably. Furthermore, it costs more than the two other machines set me back (which I bill to clients anyway).
The comment also implied that I'm just not too happy with what's offered now, in the desktop line. For instance, I liked the powerbook G4, but I wouldn't buy them, unless they got a combo drive, and a nice graphics chipset (like radeon). Those two have now been fulfilled, and my order will go out the second week of January (can't do it before the new year since I already closed the budget for 2001, and I don't expect to work the first week, since it's new year and my birthday and whatnot, so...°). The desktop line wasn't improved that significantly IMHO.
**On a side note, do you actually realise that hiking the prices up 2-4% when the Apple store was converted from BEF to euro is a. illegal and b. another blow to the general public? I'm sorry to say that I've just the past weekend bought our 3D guy some new dual Athlon 1900 boxes, for 24000 BEF a piece, while a dual 800 would set me back 204000 BEF. That price delta is getting awfully big, even for a macloving company boss :eek: .
[quote]Originally posted by PipelineStall:
<strong>
So you buy a new machine that serves your needs well; and a new one is released in two weeks; fine you're pissed off. I'd be upset too. But technology is always updated.
And how far in advance should Apple pre-announce new machines? A week? A month? Six months? If they pre-announce machine a week in advance, and somebody buys a machine one day before that, they're pissed off. If they pre-announce a month in advance, and somebody buys a day before that, they'd be pissed off. When does it ever end?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I understand what you're saying, and you're partly right.
However, in upgrading at the expo's, Apple created the expectations with the Mac buying public to buy within the first three months after an expo, then get a small upgrade and/or price drop, and wait, from like two months before the expo....
[quote]Originally posted by PipelineStall:
<strong>
It seems that most of the scenarios involve waiting. Either waiting for a new machine; or waiting for lower prices on old machines. Doesn't seem to help Apple too much.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
But you said yourself that technlogy is constantly updated. So why does apple wait so long to up the processors in the powermacs? Or to add a faster bus?
[quote]Originally posted by PipelineStall:
<strong>
I'm sorry you don't agree with my reasoning. But most of the dissent seems to be about getting "burned" by new machines making the one you just bought, not top of the line anymore.
Buying a machine 5x as fast as your current machine, even if one 8x as fast comes out two weeks later doesn't seem like getting burned to me.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree, and I probably worded my sentiment wrong. It's not so much getting 'burned', it's more of an 'Apple's not progressing as much as I would like them to' kinda feeling. I mean, you're not actually telling me that Apple was glad to be stuck at 500 MHz for a year?!?
Again, thanks for being so civil. But you'd better be on my side, 'cause I buy the machines that make you your living
<hr></blockquote>
Back when the ASDs were all CRT, you could buy a 17" for $500. That was about the price of a high-end sony trinitron, and the ASD also served as a USB hub, and it had the ADC.
So it would not be unlike Apple to cut prices on their LCD display lineup to be competitive with other high-end LCD displays. I think Apple really ought to do this.
What would be even better is if Apple implemented a permanent deal on ASDs, so that if you buy a new Powermac, you get a deal on the Apple LCD display. If Apple was ensured a powermac sale with each LCD sale, they could afford to lower their profit margin on the LCD displays. Make it such a good deal that with the purchase of a Mac, the Apple LCD display is the same or less in price than competitive LCD displays from other manufacturers. After all, the Apple displays should only be bait for buying Apple computers. Apple is a computer company, not a display company.
If Apple isn't going to offer displays at reasonable prices, then they may as well not make displays at all. I remember when Apple sold printers...they were overpriced, and while the quality was competitive, too many people saw them for what they were: commodities. So Apple quit making them. Will the same happen to Apple displays? It might, unless Apple pulls their head outta their a$$ and treats them like commodities.
If someone buys a mac, then the Apple display should be a DEAL, not a rip off. Otherwise, why not just save money and buy a 3rd party display?!?! Judging by the ASD sales figures, this is exactly what many people are doing. If I bought a new powermac, that's what I would do!
I never thought about that. It would rock to have a $500 off deal when you bought a ASD with a power mac, that makes a lot of sence. I hope they keep it after MWSF.
That would help boost sales, because now it makes the machines more worth their price!!
Apple could decrease their margins. But the question is, would they see a proportional increase in sales? I doubt it, with their current offerings.
If Apple charges a lot for their LCDs, let them. Don't complain about it; buy a cheap one from another vendor. As someone said, Apple isn't a display company. Any display sales are icing on the cake.
Imagine, for a second, if Apple had stuck with DVI (or if DVI+ was more widely implemented than just Formac and Apple). Clearly, the Cinema Display is a coveted piece of hardware for everyone...yet Apple hasn't leverage that fact like they could.
Imagine, for a little longer, that the Crystal Clear Savings promo stopped being a promo, and was permanent. But to qualify for these savings, you had to buy a mac. Not a problem for 90% of Mac users, who would probably drop the bills for both a system + monitor. But what about PC users...Apple could keep the margins high (possibly higher) and keep volume up by having a PC standard digital signal plus some drivers!
This would allow Apple to "reward" Macheads by shifting the burden of development costs of the LCD (and other Apple products) from those who buy systems, to those PC users who just want the Cinema Display and will stop and nothing to get it.
Bah. Who cares.
This lays to rest that Apple doesn't tell the Comp USA ASC's anything concerning new releases.
<strong>Apple is missing the boat on ADC.
Imagine, for a second, if Apple had stuck with DVI (or if DVI+ was more widely implemented than just Formac and Apple). Clearly, the Cinema Display is a coveted piece of hardware for everyone...yet Apple hasn't leverage that fact like they could.
Imagine, for a little longer, that the Crystal Clear Savings promo stopped being a promo, and was permanent. But to qualify for these savings, you had to buy a mac. Not a problem for 90% of Mac users, who would probably drop the bills for both a system + monitor. But what about PC users...Apple could keep the margins high (possibly higher) and keep volume up by having a PC standard digital signal plus some drivers!
This would allow Apple to "reward" Macheads by shifting the burden of development costs of the LCD (and other Apple products) from those who buy systems, to those PC users who just want the Cinema Display and will stop and nothing to get it.
Bah. Who cares.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Simply brilliant!
Best response I've ever heard for the whole ADC controversy.
It makes sense on technology, business, and marketing levels!
Agreed. Apple needs the margins.
[quote]Apple could decrease their margins. But the question is, would they see a proportional increase in sales? I doubt it, with their current offerings.<hr></blockquote>
that's my point. I believe that they would see greater sales if they offered a display deal to mac buyers. If most mac buyers opt to buy a third party display, this doesn't help Apple one bit. But if Apple offered a discount to mac buyers on their displays, then this would virtually guarantee a display sale with each mac, if the discount was right. Sales of Apple displays would go up for sure. I'm not saying Apple should sell them at cost or anything, keep the high margins, but give mac buyers a competitive price. If someone buys a new mac, and with their discount the Apple LCD costs the same as a good sony LCD, then most people would go for the Apple display! And Apple would win.
[quote]If Apple charges a lot for their LCDs, let them. Don't complain about it; buy a cheap one from another vendor. As someone said, Apple isn't a display company. Any display sales are icing on the cake.
<hr></blockquote>
I'm not complaining--I'm the one who would just buy a good LCD from another vendor, and get about the same quality for much less cash. As MSLEE pointed out, Apple should do the following: Ditch ADC. Make Apple displays with a universal connector. Now, offer the displays at two prices: one price for purchasing the display without a Mac. This is the high margin price where Apple scores big cash. PC users can buy the superior Apple displays, and Apple would of course offer Windows drivers so they can benefit from the USB hub functionality, the power switch functionality, basically make the Apple displays work on a PC every bit as good as they do on a Mac. The only difference is that for a PC user, the Apple displays cost more...much more.
But for anyone who purchases a Mac, offer a deal on the Apple displays, enough of a deal so that mac buyers have no incentive to buy a non-Apple LCD display. This way, Apple moves more displays, and as the volume goes up, Apple's cost goes down, so their margins will increase.
Using this strategy, Apple makes mondo profits off Wintel users, and good profits off Mac users. All while giving Mac users a little bit of a deal, which will make them all that much more loyal to Apple.
Furthermore, all the Wintel users who buy the Apple displays will experience the uber-quality of Apple products. What better advertising for Apple than to let Wintel users experience the superiority of Apple displays? I know a few wintel users who would love to use an Apple cinema display, but they cannot because of that stupid ADC connector. Apple loses sales because of this dumb-ass connector...that's the real tragedy here.
While I do agree with some of your points I also understand what Apple seems to be doing. They don't want window users buying any one piece of Apple hardware. You either buy an entire system or nothing. I think that's why they invented ADC, so if a pc user wants a Mac monito the only way to get one is to buy a new tower.
Same thing as the iPod. Want to use it? Buy a Mac.