<strong>You know...I read (in some other thread covering the same basic topic) that back in the PPC 601-603 days, Apple DID have faster machines. Now I wasn't a Mac owner than (I took a hiatus to try NeXT and later Windoze...ick). But if this is true, and Apple was unable to increase market share at that time (NOTE: I am not necessarily in the "market share is king" camp), what makes us believe if Apple is suddenly faster right now, they would increase share?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well consider Apple didn't have the OS it has now or the industry hype, or the press hype, or the geeks on their side...
If Apple's machines straight out crushed the wintel machines you would see an increase in marketshare...I can't say how much, but you would. What is everyone's biggest complaint with Apple now? Clockspeed. People love the OS.
Well consider Apple didn't have the OS it has now or the industry hype, or the press hype, or the geeks on their side...
If Apple's machines straight out crushed the wintel machines you would see an increase in marketshare...I can't say how much, but you would. What is everyone's biggest complaint with Apple now? Clockspeed. People love the OS.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well consider Apple didn't have the OS it has now or the industry hype, or the press hype, or the geeks on their side...
If Apple's machines straight out crushed the wintel machines you would see an increase in marketshare...I can't say how much, but you would. What is everyone's biggest complaint with Apple now? Clockspeed. People love the OS.</strong><hr></blockquote>
------
Oops! Try that again....1st post here....
Just wanted to pick up on Jay Contonio's final sentence above - 'People love the OS'!
It's SO true. I have two sons in college at the moment :eek: , both with nifty new MDD dual 1Ghz towers on their desks. They each live in 4-person dorm rooms, and each have three roomies who have Wintel machines. One of the roommates spilled something on his Dell laptop and rendered it useless, so he started spending mucho time on my one son's tower, to the point that my son has to kick him off at times. Now - guess what he wants to replace his Dell with?
Of course I said to my son - "well, it's not fair to compare the performance of a dual 1Ghz tower to a laptop".
To which my very down-to-earth and tech-savvy son replied, "Dad, it's not the speed, he loves OS X...."
BTW - most of the other roomies are starting to fall under the Mac spell as well....methinks it's just a matter of time!
I agree that having a nice fast Mac might not increase market share...hopefully it will simply keep apple's market share from dwindling.
now, i need everyone to admit that the only reason they really want to see a 970 powermac is so that they can say "nah nah nah nah nah nah" to annoying PC hardware specs buffs.
Thanks for the compliment. I'm pleasantly surprised to see the thread surviving among the far more tantilizing, speculation threads (hype-threads as a I call'm).
[quote]Originally posted by Spart:
<strong>
You mean Nordstrodamus?
Don't confuse the two. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks for the clarification, Spart! Us Iowans have to watch out for each other.
<strong>Nordstrodamus you are touching on the very foundation on why Apple is still in business. In that respect I'd like to add one very important point:
5. They care (No, I'm not in the market for swampland property in Florida)</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree that Apple does earn that reputation. The more cynical side of me suspects that some smart guys in public relations work hard to propogate that impression. What's the saying? "Sincerity, if you can fake that you've got it made."
Jobs certainly deserves the title of a visionary and I think most of us believe that, unlike Bill Gates, he is compelled by more lofty ideals than the bottom line (that's not to say he's an altruist). I think there's also a culture at Apple that reflects the "Think Different" mantra.
The biggest test of this will be how Apple handles DRM. If they embrace fair use rights, p2p, and reject spyware they will continue to earn our trust.
The plain truth, if Apple releases a dual 1.33 or 1.4 PowerMac in February they still will have anemic PowerMac sales. If they could release a dual 1.5 with better MOBO then they might see slightly better sale. Sale will explode when pros can buy a PowerMac with a dual 1.8 970.
I see Apple improving the iMac up 1.0 GHz, some may argue that this will hurt the PowerMac sales. My response is what PowerMac sales. I believe a lot of companies are not investing the $$ into the PowerMac, sure they are buying a few but I think many are just buy the iMac to hold them over till they see what that believe as a TRUE PowerMac. The eMac will also be updated.
You may still see the G3 iMac around (Still sold a lot last quarter). I think you see faster G3 maybe to 1.0 GHz.
I am not sure when the portables will be updated but you will see either a 933 or 1.0Ghz iBook once the PowerBook goes to a 1.1 or 1.15 GHz. I know that the portables where just updated recently but that may have been just to tide us over till we get updated or new form factors this January – March.
Apple has been making their money these past few quarters with there consumer products (iMac, eMac, iBook & the iPod) and the PowerBook. I expect to see them push improvements to these products ASAP since they need strong sales to help them till they can get the new PowerMac out the door.
I still believe that there is a 50% chance of seeing a 970 PowerMac as March – April 2003. If you look at IBM road map of past chips they usually delivered the stated chips months ahead of the stated delivery date (this way IBM never misses a stated release date and does not get the negative news that can effect their stock price).
Well those are my guess. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
... they are moving away from Motorola for that reason, and as their contract with Moto is now ending,...</strong><hr></blockquote>
What contract? Are you refering to AIM?? I have seen this post concerning a contract w/ Motorola ending, yet, I have seen no articles written nor any Press releases refering to a contract w/ Motorola ending.
<strong>now, i need everyone to admit that the only reason they really want to see a 970 powermac is so that they can say "nah nah nah nah nah nah" to annoying PC hardware specs buffs.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The only reason I want to see a 970 PowerMac is so that everyone on these boards will finally shut up about CPU...oh wait...there's no way on God's little green earth THAT will happen.
The only reason I want to see a 970 PowerMac is so that everyone on these boards will finally shut up about CPU...oh wait...there's no way on God's little green earth THAT will happen.
No, we would simply switch into bragging mode. I understand what some are saying here about the necessity of faster processors for the pro market, but my main point was that it's simply out of Apple's hands unless they do a 180 and decide to go with x86 architecture. Doing so would mean that Apple would almost certainly be permanently slower (or the same speed) as wintel boxes.
Aside from the pro market I don't think CPU speed is the most important factor anymore. Apple could do very well making digital devices (like iPod), adding new features (TV), and applying their ease of use skills.
So far the only speed limiting thing I've run into in using my computer is when encoding DVDs, but I can think of a bunch of features I'd rather have than a simple 2x or 4x speed increase in making DVDs.
--------------------
If you live like there is a god, you'd better be sure you picked the right one.
I agree that Macs need more speed, but not just for the CPU, the bus needs improvement as well as faster RAM across the product lines.
It would be nice to see other standard technologies incorporated line Blue Tooth (likely), 803.11g (likely), Firewire 2 and USB 2 (come one Apple get with the times).
My worry, MWSF '03 will be lackluster from a hardware standpoint.
The only reason I want to see a 970 PowerMac is so that everyone on these boards will finally shut up about CPU...oh wait...there's no way on God's little green earth THAT will happen.
<strong>The plain truth, if Apple releases a dual 1.33 or 1.4 PowerMac in February they still will have anemic PowerMac sales. If they could release a dual 1.5 with better MOBO then they might see slightly better sale. Sale will explode when pros can buy a PowerMac with a dual 1.8 970.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree. As more people find out about the ppc970, they are going to hold off until it?s released.
I know the chip won?t be available until late next year but I just can?t see the exec?s at Apple letting IBM announce this chip a year in advance if that?s when they were planning on putting it in powermacs. I?m sure they realize that knowledge of its release in late 2003 would put a big dent into powermac sales months before ppc970 powermacs are available. I?ll be surprised if we don?t see ppc970 powermacs within a few months.
<strong>I want an Airport 802.11b/Bluetooth combo card.</strong><hr></blockquote>
one that costs $50 because you can start to get a windows PC card for less then that (like $30) <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
Simply put, most of us will pay a premium for something with a little apple on it. Not because we are sheep, but because as the iPod demonstrates Apple is able to apply their legendary ease of use to common devices as well as ensuring us that it all works seemlessly with our favorite and familiar OS.
Conclusion- Apple could make good money selling cellular phones, cordless phones, Tivo like PVRs, hard drive based camcorder, tablet computers, whatever, even if they only mostly sold to existing Apple customers.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is an interesting idea. I have often wondered why Apple didn't do more to take advantage of their brand name. Some possible reasons are:
Profitability. With consumer goods you need to sell large volumes to overcome the fixed development costs. It works for Apple when they can introduce a radical new product and charge a decent margin. It doesn't work for products that have already had their prices driven down. Recall that Apple used to make laser printers, digital cameras, CRT monitors and PDAs.
Brand dilution. If Apple licensed their name to be used on all sorts of products there is a danger of the brand being devalued. Instead of associating Apple with great products it could become associated with junk.
one that costs $50 because you can start to get a windows PC card for less then that (like $30) <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay. Here we go again.
TROY WNDPT WindPort Bluetooth Wireless PC Card
802.11B Wireless PC Card ($129 at CDW)
I did see Toshiba Bluetooth-ONLY card for $30. And a Belkin one for $80 (before $15 mail-in rebate).
I'd bet you'd see a new 802.11g (54Mbs) Airport base station for $299 (maybe $249) and an 802.11g + bluetooth card for $99
<strong>I have often wondered why Apple didn't do more to take advantage of their brand name. Some possible reasons are:
... Recall that Apple used to make laser printers, digital cameras, CRT monitors and PDAs.
...Brand dilution. If Apple licensed their name to be used on all sorts of products there is a danger of the brand being devalued. Instead of associating Apple with great products it could become associated with junk.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree with you that Apple should avoid commodity type things like printers and cameras (recalling quicktake), but I think they should definately be aggressive in evolving technologies like PDAs, phones, PVRs, camcorders, and tablets.
There have been enough good suggestions on these fertile forums alone to distinguish an offering from Apple in any of these markets.
As for brand dilution I think it goes without saying that they shouldn't just slap an apple on any old piece of junk. In the realm of non-computer digital devices an Apple should mean that it is easy as cake to use and that it plays well with your mac.
Comments
<strong>You know...I read (in some other thread covering the same basic topic) that back in the PPC 601-603 days, Apple DID have faster machines. Now I wasn't a Mac owner than (I took a hiatus to try NeXT and later Windoze...ick). But if this is true, and Apple was unable to increase market share at that time (NOTE: I am not necessarily in the "market share is king" camp), what makes us believe if Apple is suddenly faster right now, they would increase share?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well consider Apple didn't have the OS it has now or the industry hype, or the press hype, or the geeks on their side...
If Apple's machines straight out crushed the wintel machines you would see an increase in marketshare...I can't say how much, but you would. What is everyone's biggest complaint with Apple now? Clockspeed. People love the OS.
<strong>
Well consider Apple didn't have the OS it has now or the industry hype, or the press hype, or the geeks on their side...
If Apple's machines straight out crushed the wintel machines you would see an increase in marketshare...I can't say how much, but you would. What is everyone's biggest complaint with Apple now? Clockspeed. People love the OS.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>
Well consider Apple didn't have the OS it has now or the industry hype, or the press hype, or the geeks on their side...
If Apple's machines straight out crushed the wintel machines you would see an increase in marketshare...I can't say how much, but you would. What is everyone's biggest complaint with Apple now? Clockspeed. People love the OS.</strong><hr></blockquote>
------
Oops! Try that again....1st post here....
Just wanted to pick up on Jay Contonio's final sentence above - 'People love the OS'!
It's SO true. I have two sons in college at the moment :eek: , both with nifty new MDD dual 1Ghz towers on their desks. They each live in 4-person dorm rooms, and each have three roomies who have Wintel machines. One of the roommates spilled something on his Dell laptop and rendered it useless, so he started spending mucho time on my one son's tower, to the point that my son has to kick him off at times. Now - guess what he wants to replace his Dell with?
Of course I said to my son - "well, it's not fair to compare the performance of a dual 1Ghz tower to a laptop".
To which my very down-to-earth and tech-savvy son replied, "Dad, it's not the speed, he loves OS X...."
BTW - most of the other roomies are starting to fall under the Mac spell as well....methinks it's just a matter of time!
now, i need everyone to admit that the only reason they really want to see a 970 powermac is so that they can say "nah nah nah nah nah nah" to annoying PC hardware specs buffs.
<strong>I really like the post by Nostradamus !
Sincerely,
Dr. Ledgard</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks for the compliment. I'm pleasantly surprised to see the thread surviving among the far more tantilizing, speculation threads (hype-threads as a I call'm).
[quote]Originally posted by Spart:
<strong>
You mean Nordstrodamus?
Don't confuse the two.
Thanks for the clarification, Spart! Us Iowans have to watch out for each other.
<strong>Nordstrodamus you are touching on the very foundation on why Apple is still in business. In that respect I'd like to add one very important point:
5. They care (No, I'm not in the market for swampland property in Florida)</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree that Apple does earn that reputation. The more cynical side of me suspects that some smart guys in public relations work hard to propogate that impression. What's the saying? "Sincerity, if you can fake that you've got it made."
Jobs certainly deserves the title of a visionary and I think most of us believe that, unlike Bill Gates, he is compelled by more lofty ideals than the bottom line (that's not to say he's an altruist). I think there's also a culture at Apple that reflects the "Think Different" mantra.
The biggest test of this will be how Apple handles DRM. If they embrace fair use rights, p2p, and reject spyware they will continue to earn our trust.
I see Apple improving the iMac up 1.0 GHz, some may argue that this will hurt the PowerMac sales. My response is what PowerMac sales. I believe a lot of companies are not investing the $$ into the PowerMac, sure they are buying a few but I think many are just buy the iMac to hold them over till they see what that believe as a TRUE PowerMac. The eMac will also be updated.
You may still see the G3 iMac around (Still sold a lot last quarter). I think you see faster G3 maybe to 1.0 GHz.
I am not sure when the portables will be updated but you will see either a 933 or 1.0Ghz iBook once the PowerBook goes to a 1.1 or 1.15 GHz. I know that the portables where just updated recently but that may have been just to tide us over till we get updated or new form factors this January – March.
Apple has been making their money these past few quarters with there consumer products (iMac, eMac, iBook & the iPod) and the PowerBook. I expect to see them push improvements to these products ASAP since they need strong sales to help them till they can get the new PowerMac out the door.
I still believe that there is a 50% chance of seeing a 970 PowerMac as March – April 2003. If you look at IBM road map of past chips they usually delivered the stated chips months ahead of the stated delivery date (this way IBM never misses a stated release date and does not get the negative news that can effect their stock price).
Well those are my guess. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
<strong>
... they are moving away from Motorola for that reason, and as their contract with Moto is now ending,...</strong><hr></blockquote>
What contract? Are you refering to AIM?? I have seen this post concerning a contract w/ Motorola ending, yet, I have seen no articles written nor any Press releases refering to a contract w/ Motorola ending.
Do have any links to articles or press releases?
<strong>now, i need everyone to admit that the only reason they really want to see a 970 powermac is so that they can say "nah nah nah nah nah nah" to annoying PC hardware specs buffs.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The only reason I want to see a 970 PowerMac is so that everyone on these boards will finally shut up about CPU...oh wait...there's no way on God's little green earth THAT will happen.
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<strong>
The only reason I want to see a 970 PowerMac is so that everyone on these boards will finally shut up about CPU...oh wait...there's no way on God's little green earth THAT will happen.
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
No, we would simply switch into bragging mode.
Aside from the pro market I don't think CPU speed is the most important factor anymore. Apple could do very well making digital devices (like iPod), adding new features (TV), and applying their ease of use skills.
So far the only speed limiting thing I've run into in using my computer is when encoding DVDs, but I can think of a bunch of features I'd rather have than a simple 2x or 4x speed increase in making DVDs.
--------------------
If you live like there is a god, you'd better be sure you picked the right one.
It would be nice to see other standard technologies incorporated line Blue Tooth (likely), 803.11g (likely), Firewire 2 and USB 2 (come one Apple get with the times).
My worry, MWSF '03 will be lackluster from a hardware standpoint.
<strong>
The only reason I want to see a 970 PowerMac is so that everyone on these boards will finally shut up about CPU...oh wait...there's no way on God's little green earth THAT will happen.
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
actually one too many "nah"s
<strong>The plain truth, if Apple releases a dual 1.33 or 1.4 PowerMac in February they still will have anemic PowerMac sales. If they could release a dual 1.5 with better MOBO then they might see slightly better sale. Sale will explode when pros can buy a PowerMac with a dual 1.8 970.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree. As more people find out about the ppc970, they are going to hold off until it?s released.
I know the chip won?t be available until late next year but I just can?t see the exec?s at Apple letting IBM announce this chip a year in advance if that?s when they were planning on putting it in powermacs. I?m sure they realize that knowledge of its release in late 2003 would put a big dent into powermac sales months before ppc970 powermacs are available. I?ll be surprised if we don?t see ppc970 powermacs within a few months.
<strong>I want an Airport 802.11b/Bluetooth combo card.</strong><hr></blockquote>
one that costs $50 because you can start to get a windows PC card for less then that (like $30) <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
<strong>
2. Apple underutilizes it's brand
Simply put, most of us will pay a premium for something with a little apple on it. Not because we are sheep, but because as the iPod demonstrates Apple is able to apply their legendary ease of use to common devices as well as ensuring us that it all works seemlessly with our favorite and familiar OS.
Conclusion- Apple could make good money selling cellular phones, cordless phones, Tivo like PVRs, hard drive based camcorder, tablet computers, whatever, even if they only mostly sold to existing Apple customers.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is an interesting idea. I have often wondered why Apple didn't do more to take advantage of their brand name. Some possible reasons are:
Profitability. With consumer goods you need to sell large volumes to overcome the fixed development costs. It works for Apple when they can introduce a radical new product and charge a decent margin. It doesn't work for products that have already had their prices driven down. Recall that Apple used to make laser printers, digital cameras, CRT monitors and PDAs.
Brand dilution. If Apple licensed their name to be used on all sorts of products there is a danger of the brand being devalued. Instead of associating Apple with great products it could become associated with junk.
<strong>
one that costs $50 because you can start to get a windows PC card for less then that (like $30) <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay. Here we go again.
TROY WNDPT WindPort Bluetooth Wireless PC Card
802.11B Wireless PC Card ($129 at CDW)
I did see Toshiba Bluetooth-ONLY card for $30. And a Belkin one for $80 (before $15 mail-in rebate).
I'd bet you'd see a new 802.11g (54Mbs) Airport base station for $299 (maybe $249) and an 802.11g + bluetooth card for $99
<strong>I have often wondered why Apple didn't do more to take advantage of their brand name. Some possible reasons are:
... Recall that Apple used to make laser printers, digital cameras, CRT monitors and PDAs.
...Brand dilution. If Apple licensed their name to be used on all sorts of products there is a danger of the brand being devalued. Instead of associating Apple with great products it could become associated with junk.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree with you that Apple should avoid commodity type things like printers and cameras (recalling quicktake), but I think they should definately be aggressive in evolving technologies like PDAs, phones, PVRs, camcorders, and tablets.
There have been enough good suggestions on these fertile forums alone to distinguish an offering from Apple in any of these markets.
As for brand dilution I think it goes without saying that they shouldn't just slap an apple on any old piece of junk. In the realm of non-computer digital devices an Apple should mean that it is easy as cake to use and that it plays well with your mac.