- Last Active
Apple is selling the 256GB iPhone 8 for more than a 512GB Galaxy S10. There's your problem right there for Apple.
In a world where top-line Android phones are decent all-round machines, Apple is seen a being greedy. As a 30 year Apple user who has bought tens of thousands of pounds worth of Apple gear in that time, I'm getting totally fed up with the high prices and limited choice in each segment such as desktop Macs.
In the past, it was worth it as Windows was a nightmare world I didn't want to enter into. Now though Windows and Android have got to the point of being passable. I might just make the move.
A lot of people, unfortunately, judge and buy on specs. Most Android phones offer more pixels, more RAM etc... which people think makes them better/faster. Most reviews say the Android phones are blisteringly fast and rarely mention how the latest iPhones blow them out the water, merely mentioning that the iPhones are fast too.
Reviews almost never talk of security or privacy which I find really strange and disappointing as people should be much more aware of this.. Or the state of the various Android app stores compared to Apple's.
Of course, Apple doesn't help itself by being so much more expensive. I think it's now verging on greed, to be honest. When you can see what the likes of Samsung can pack into a phone and charge so much less for it I think Apple is making a bit of a rod for its own back by charging so aggressively. And you can't say Samsung phones are junk, they're absolutely fine quality-wise and last a good few years now.
Most folk just don't know or care about the finer details. Most Android phones are good enough. All Android phones are a good bit cheaper and most folk will never know or care about what they're missing or risking.
Apple has what, 8% of the X86 market. I can't see how they could be in any kind of regulatory trouble with this. Your 'new competitor' line is also puzzling. The silicon industry is packed with competitors. Apple seems to be good at staying near the top of the pile. Having total control over both Mac and iOS would fit right in with how they like to do things. After all, they've been blaming Intel a lot for all manner of holdups. Being able to custom design their next generation of chips would have been something they would be up for doing. Unless of course, they are about to exit the x86 market altogether...
hackintoisier said:What are others' thoughts on whether it makes sense (or not) for Apple's design decision to stop developing expandable Macs? Some users will never open their Macs, others will want to tinker. But older Macbook Pros circa-2009 were expandable in some ways (users could swap out their SATA HDDs for SATA SDDs, and could also upgrade the RAM). Why take away expandability from macOS users? It's not like we have other macOS hardware suppliers to officially choose from.
On the desktop front, Apple could totally market a monitor-less midrange desktop that is more powerful than the mini, but not as powerful as the pro, but is expandable.
And they could simply call it the Macintosh (aka xMac):
- Standard NVME M.2 connectors
- Less PCI-E slots than the Mac Pro
- Non ECC DIMM slots
- Support for LGA 1151 Intel Core Processors (e.g., Coffee Lake Core i9-9900k)
Until Apple markets an expandable Mac, I'm perfectly fine with my midrange (EXPANDABLE) Hackintosh.