“Apple would like more market share, but making the ‘best personal computer’ is top goal”, Apple CEO Steve Jobs said recently. Additionally, the Mac OS X 10.2.8 update was released internally late last week, sources confirmed to ThinkSecret. Sources also speculated that the update will be provided to users Monday or next week. Separately, Apple seeded build 7B72 of Panther Server to developers on Thursday, posting two installation discs as well as a Server Admin CD.
Steve Jobs: Apple Would Like More Market Share; Panther Gets Closer
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
> …posting two installation discs as well as a Server Admin CD.
Do the users of the desktop version of Panther get the tools on the “Server Admin CD” as well or is it only for Panther Server edition?
You want more market share? Easy! Just release a new iBook with at least a G4 at the current price tag or even better at a lower price and you would gain 0.0000000000000000000000000000001% market share at least! *g (I would buy such a thingy)
>Apple would like more market share
Apple management is blind. If Apple wants more market share, it has to reduce the ridiculously high pricing in comparison with assembled PCs.
Computers have become a commodity nowadays, thanks to PCs. There are simply NOT many people who want to shell out 1500 USD for a relatively decent computer. And many people, especially outside the US and a few other countries, simply do not have the funds, so they go with much more cheap PCs and Win/Linux that are still on a par with the 1500 Macs performance-wise. Yes, Macs may be better designed, yes they may be more reliable, but the masses are never going to really rush to Apple given Apple management’s crooked mentality.
It’s very simple. I can spend 500-800 on a great pc, or 1500 for a good apple.
There is no choice.
Read the article. Jobs seems to know all too well that they will never have much market share with their current prices. He wants Apple to stay where it is: far away from the unwashed less-wealthy masses. He only wants to increase the market share if it can be done without changing the general policy.
Heh people don’t even bother to read the tiny text below the main title. If you read it you would see, loud and clear:
“Apple would like more market share, but making the ‘best personal computer’ is top goal”
This explains why Apple will not enter the PC commodity price war. Please read more than just the title. Thanks.
like max suggested, read the article…
“‘We would like to see our market share grow,’ Steve Jobs, Apple’s chief executive, admitted to The Independent on Sunday last week at the Apple Expo held in Paris. But he argued: ‘Our strategy is to innovate. We are the innovator of the industry. Most of our competitors try to copy us. Our strategy has worked really well for us,'” The Independent reports.
that is just so true… apple pratically is the r&d lab for the entire industry except intel & ibm… thats what i think and i am sticking to it… argue with that!!!
<i m just kidding, dont argue, just mildly discuss :-)… no flamewars please>
“we are the innovator of the industry…. Most of our competitors try to copy us. Our strategy has worked really well for us”
Well if they mean they did a good job by the competition copying them, then yes they did a good job. If they mean they made there market share go up, then no.
Why not just say “Take our innovations while we make overpriced computers”
Why should they not push even hard by lowering their prices?
Would they somehow fail at making ‘best personal computer’?
I did read the article…
Unwashed masses?
First, it is not debatable that the world’s best minds are working with PC and computers different from Apple’s, but in the same price range.
Best personal computer?
The problem with Apple is that for the same price, one can get a PC that is *at least* on a par with the Apple equivalent.
Apple are simply another company, and they aren’t going to increase market share with their current business practices. Apple is deluding people that its systems are “better” by resting on a different hardware architecture. The architecture is different, but Apple’s marketing twists the meaning of different into “better”.
People simply won’t buy into Apple — PCs are already widespread, and Apple doesn’t have any advantages given the price. Most people are going with the cheapest, most widespread and compatible solution, and that is PCs.
But I couldn’t find a laptop that can compare in price/performance with the current Apple offerings.
Of course I can get less for less money, but if I wanted a laptop with all the features of the current Apple PowerBooks, on the PC side I’ll simply end up getting less for the same or more money and still don’t have all the features that Apple provides.
So I guess that Apple being overpriced is yet another one of those FUD myths.
Not true about laptops; Apple’s G4 PowerBooks start at “just” 1,999. For the same price, you can have a PC laptop with the same performance and features. There’s nothing revolutionary in Apple’s laptops, except the inclusion of a GigaBit ethernet card, which is just a peripheral. And if you want a 17 inch notebook, HP just released these types of models.
I entirely agree with your read on the situation. Apple has exceptional computers at the high end, but the market share is on the low end. Any advantages that Apple confers (supposed higher quality, better integration) just aren’t important in the face of a $500 increase in price tag for most consumers.
Apple knows exactly what they need to do for more marketshare – however, it would reduce profitability, and when you get down to it, Apple only exists to make a profit, like any other corporation.
-Erwos
“Be a yardstick of quality. Some people aren’t used to an environment where excellence is expected.”
It’s also very true.
Yes, Erwos, that’s the conclusion when you are of good faith.
there’s absolutely no need for yet another pee-cee mass distributor.
dell does just fine.
besides i get all my x86 goodies from newegg or a local screwdriver shop.
but i _would_ like apple to stick around for another 10 years, as choice-is-good.
that said. they need to drop prices a little bit, and up the power.
they’ll never have 10% market share. but a target of 5% would be realistic, and help them stick around for a while.
Of course Apple would like more market share as would all companies. The article doesn’t say much. A translation of the article would probably reveal:
“Of course our market share sucks and we can’t compete in the commodity parts business. We are trying to expand into markets where Microsoft won’t copy us and take all the market share from us again. Just pleez stop ragging on us for our crappy market share. Besides, right now we’ve convinced all our core mac users that small market share makes our product more leet so they keep buying our ‘complete package’ upgrades. Also, as long as they keep thinking we really don’t care about tapping into the pockets of the ‘walmart shopper’ we can keep our margins nice and high for those suck^ehhhhr^buyers. When we can figure out how to cut our costs we’ll make sure we market that computer as ‘special’ for our ‘special’ walmart buyers. This way we don’t alienate our core fans^eeeeehhhr^market.
Anywho, when we’ve figured out how to get our market share up so we don’t have to keep begging for developers, we’ll put on a great show for ya at macworld. See ya there!”
🙂
Remove the bloat and I’ll have another look.
“But I couldn’t find a laptop that can compare in price/performance with the current Apple offerings.”
Please. For $2000, Apple offers you a 1ghz G4, 60gb HD, 256mb RAM, Radeon 9600 64mb, and a 15 inch LCD. They don’t even give you WIRELESS, for crying out loud!
For the record, you can get a Dell 8600 with standard config plus a GeForceGo FX 5650 128mb and an 802.11g wireless card for the same price (20gb less hard drive space, though). The specs are definitely better than the Apple at the same price – 1.3ghz Pentium-M, 1mb of L2 cache, 512mb RAM, faster video card. So, in standard terms of price/performance, it’s quite easy to get something that’s better than the standard mid-range Apple offering – unless gigabit ethernet and/or Firewire-800 rank high on your list of priorities. For the average consumer, they don’t rank at all, since gigabit hubs are not that common at home, and there aren’t (AFAIK) any FW-800 peripherals yet. I _would_ consider 802.11g to be a selling point, though – why Apple doesn’t have it by default still confuses me.
-Erwos
…their processor, their hardware, their kernel, their GUI or their software? I’m a little confused here. And how do we define quality? Every time I tune to a mac discussion, I hear a lot of quality this and quality that. What quality is Jobs clamoring about?
The point is there in no point in purchasing a G5, when its competitors can do exactly what a G5 can do or better and for cheaper. Don’t give me that quality crap as an excuse for high prices. For all I care, Dell make quality products too. Which makes me raise the question again, who exactly is the G5 targeted towards? No, it’s not home users.
The problem with being a loss leader is that people who buy the cheapest stuff have no loyalty to brand just price. Anyone who buys a Mac will be more likely to buy another one. The brand is that strong and its that good that even the severely deficient G4 has not sunk Apple.
Apple is doing the right thing by continuing to focus on being the best or what they think of as being the best. Only a few companies can do it. Harley Davidson, Maglite, Zero Halliburton are some examples. All of these companies sell products that are significantly MORE EXPENSIVE than their competitors yet they continue to thrive and turn a profit.
The eMac is $799 but it still counts as a Mac and will run MacOSX at a decent clip. You can’t say this about a PC. The year before an eMac cost at least $100 more. Apple will lower their prices over time but they will never be a loss leader. For me I’ve always been able to afford a Mac so I have no complaints.
thank you. exactly true and to the point.
ive no complaints either because i can afford a mac…
to mystileef…
ummmm… no innovations huh? how bout the pda, how bout wifi, how bout the quartz graphical system (which, contrary to popular belief, is NOT simply offloading graphics to the graphics… that is quartz extreme… yes, there is a difference), their unique kernel (no, it isnt just freebsd, it is nextstep, which is a bastard os b/c it is made up of many different components), their large improvements on existing opensource software (dont tell me mystileef that u wont be happy about the khtml improvements in kde 3.2; that woulda taken developers years to fix on their admission <yes, i follow the dot>; rendevouz and freebsd 5-current is another example), how bout being able to provide the first FULL-featured notebook under 1″, how bout the first widescreen notebook (the 15.2″), how bout the first 17″ notebook, how bout the first mass-used gui (yea the original classical mac oses), how bout the first to develop firewire, how bout the first to spark wide-interest in usb, how bout the first to allow dvd authoring from the desktop, how bout the first to allow movie authoring from the desktop, what bout their quicktime codec (the first of its kind, causing a three-way war between quicktime, realplayer, and windows media player), how bout the worlds best classed computer (heck they win design awards)
i skipped a lot of stuff b/c i have to go now <sleep is good>, but dont spread useless fud that they dont innovate anything, especially if u havent touched a mac before in you life…
it is a well-known fact that macs are NOT for everyone, and maybe thats the way it should be… but dont tell me that there is no use for them… frankly, their prices are fine for quality markmanship, care, and uniqueness… dont tell me u can find a pc company that CONSISTENTLY makes the best award-winning designed computers in the world…
in fact, looking at research environments, u will find plenty of mac users to keep apple going for years…
just food for thought…
“Not true about laptops; Apple’s G4 PowerBooks start at “just” 1,999.”
Perhaps you misread, but Apple’s G4 PowerBooks start at (US) $1,599. That is $400 mistake.
…their processor, their hardware, their kernel, their GUI or their software? I’m a little confused here. And how do we define quality? Every time I tune to a mac discussion, I hear a lot of quality this and quality that. What quality is Jobs clamoring about?
The G5 is not just about the chip, or the massive FSB. Someone had to do the engineering to put it together and it wasn’t AMD or IBM. Quality? Look at a PowerBook and another PC laptop next time you are at the airport. Even the fit and finish of Alienware computers won’t match a G5. You would never know unless you compared both of them side by side. Most PC users have never owned a Mac so its understandable. They think all computers are the same because it is what they are used to.
” The point is there in no point in purchasing a G5, when its competitors can do exactly what a G5 can do or better and for cheaper. Don’t give me that quality crap as an excuse for high prices. For all I care, Dell make quality products too. Which makes me raise the question again, who exactly is the G5 targeted towards? No, it’s not home users.”
Well, Apple refers to the G5 as a personal computer so I think thats pretty obvious where they are targeting it. I am sure it will find its way into companies as well.
As far as what you are saying regarding their is no point in purchasing a G5, VT doesn’t seem to agree with you even though Dell was also up for that bid. Apple already has preorders for over 100,000 G5 units and most of those orders are for the Dual processor. People are finding a lot of reasons to get the G5 for many just the fact that they don’t have to deal with Windows is good enough. You may not have a reason the buy a G5 but their are lots that do. Performance on the high end is fading as an issue as long as Apple can keep cranking out new systems with faster G5s and features.
Vesselin Peev wrote:
>Apple management is blind. If Apple wants more market share, it has >to reduce the ridiculously high pricing in comparison with assembled >PCs.
If you can’t afford it, stick with your PC (but add up the money you’ve spent on PCs, peripherals, troubleshooting time, software, etc.). Don’t underprice that PC.
>Computers have become a commodity nowadays, thanks to PCs.
Agreed. But if you need what Apple’s got, a commodity PC is not going to get the job done.
>There are simply NOT many people who want to shell out 1500 USD >for a relatively decent computer.
Check the prices. They start well below $1,500.
>but the masses are never going to really rush to Apple given Apple >management’s crooked mentality.
To say that Apple management has a “crooked mentality” is a baseless slur.
Regards,
Mark Wilson
mikesum32 wrote:
>It’s very simple. I can spend 500-800 on a great pc, or 1500 for a >good apple.
For me, a good Apple is far superior to a great PC. In addition, when I price PC’s, nothing looks that great until I get to the $1,499 price point.
>There is no choice.
For you, maybe.
Regards,
Mark Wilson
Apple could become a commodity vendor; management of the company are against the idea. Hence, Apple won’t become one at the present time, or likely to in the near future.
However, the fact that Apple continues to exist, to make a profit, and to command the mindshare it has on so few customers overall exposes this idea that “there is no room in the industry for a non-commodity vendors the likes of Apple” as without foundation.
Nothing lasts forever, and Apple won’t — but neither will Microsoft, Dell, Intel, or any other organisation.
Saying that an eMac with 128 megs of RAM would run OS X is somewhat ironic
i simply dont get it…..
….since most of u consider Apple to be ‘just another company’ or an overpriced crap pc software/hardware maker… WHY TF are there so MANY replies whenever theres an article here on OSNEWS.
id say that proportional to its market, the Apple articles are gettin too many replies… are the WINTEL fas afraid of somethin… ???
apple.ca store
eMac
? 512MB SDRAM – 1 DIMM
? Keyboard/Mac OS – U.S. English
? 1GHz PowerPC G4
? 60GB Ultra ATA drive
? DVD-ROM/CD-RW Combo drive
? Mac OS X and Mac OS 9 included
Subtotal $1,724.00
NCIX.com
[case] LIAN-LI ALUMINUM PC-6070 18IN LOW NOISE CASE 4X5.25 3X3.5 5X3.5INT W/O PS $213.57
[case fan] 2x ANTEC 80MM CASE FAN 3-PIN BALL BEARING $24.84
[p/s] ENERMAX EG365P-VE 350W W/ 2 FAN $72.89
[mobo] EPOX 8RDA+ NFORCE2 SOCKETA DDR AGP 6PCI FIREWIRE USB2.0 ATA133 SOUND & LAN $145.92
[cpu] AMD ATHLON XP 2500+ 512K 333FSB SOCKET A BARTON RETAIL BOX 3YR MFR WARRANTY $140.79
[ram] 2x SAMSUNG 256MB PC3200 DDR400 184PIN OEM $147.06
[hdd] MAXTOR 80GB 7200RPM 2MB 8.5MS ATA133 QUIET VERSION OEM 1YR WARRANTY $103.74
[video] SAPPHIRE RADEON 9600 PRO 128MB DDR DVI-I W/ TV OUT RETAIL BOX $237.30
[drive] LITEON 48X24X48 CDRW& 16X DVD COMBO INT EIDE ATAPI OEM W/ CDRW SW $82.11
[speakers] LOGITECH Z340 32W 3-PIECE SPEAKER SET W/ SUBWOOFER $69.66
[keyboard] Fujitsu 8725 with Win95 Keys PS/2 $19.50
[mouse] LOGITECH MOUSEMAN DUAL OPTICAL SENSOR MOUSE USB PS/2 $48.38
[monitor] LG STUDIOWORKS F700B 17IN 0.25MM 1280X1024 FLATRON CRT $229.60
YOUR TOTAL
Shipping and final tax calculation will be calculated at checkout
ALL PRICES QUOTED IN CANADIAN FUNDS
$1,535.36
(I have to assemble this one myself, but it’s not like it would take more then an hour)
Disclaimer: the comparison was done because the author is bored.
for god’s sakes, stop comparing prices!!!
it doesnt matter… u posting prices will not make them lower the prices… plus, didnt i say that macs arent for everyone!!! if u think pcs r a better deal, then get a pc; however, i cannot see the pc having benefit over the mac, so i wont buy a pc… just dont try convince to buy a pc if i am perfectly satisfied with buying a mac… i dont care if u think that its money down the toilet, its my money, and its my toilet, and to me it doesnt look like sh*t floating in there, its gold…
Jeez!
I mean they are a business, let them do what they want to turn a profit.. all i can say is that as long as they are turning a profit, and still there, they must be doing something right…
plus to all the stupid comments about pcs becoming commodities… DUH!!!
apple, as well as microsoft, realized this a LONG time ago and have therefore started to branch out into other sources of revenues, if u havent noticed already… these branches are not major sources of income yet, but both companies are positioning themselves for anything to not allow the same mistakes that happened before to happen again (the tech burst, i mean).
Ewww, thats some nasty PC parts you chose there 😉 LG Screen, eek! Sapphire graphics card, almost equal to buying “Black and Gold” branded food (ultra-budget brand in Australia).
Its a good comparision, however, when I do replace this computer in around 2-3 years, depending on the progress of wine and Linux, I might actually move back to the PC, however, if everything is still the same mess it is, aka, if you want applications run Windows, if you want a quality operating system run Linux, then I have to say, I’ll buy another Mac.
Yes, Apple have been innovative in many ways (Firewire, in particular, comes to mind) and yes, they offer a more polished product than the PC, but they certainly are not the sole innovators in the computer field. In fact, Apple users have benefited considerably from developments in the PC market – USB devices, PCI components, AGP Graphics cards. There are thousands of PC component makers and vendors, it’s hardly surprising they aren’t as well-integrated as a Mac where Apple has COMPLETE control over the design of the hardware and software.
but who said that? no one said that they were the only ones… just that they do a LOT of innovating and get very little credit for it…
but that comes with the territory because they end up opening the specifications (wi-fi, firewire) or people just copy the designs
plus it is true that apple is out of the reach of much of middle-america…
anyways, isnt it true what they say…
imitation is the sincerest form of flattery?
Yes, Apple have been innovative in many ways (Firewire, in particular, comes to mind) and yes, they offer a more polished product than the PC, but they certainly are not the sole innovators in the computer field. In fact, Apple users have benefited considerably from developments in the PC market – USB devices, PCI components, AGP Graphics cards. There are thousands of PC component makers and vendors, it’s hardly surprising they aren’t as well-integrated as a Mac where Apple has COMPLETE control over the design of the hardware and software.
Explain to me why it took until Apple adopted USB and firewire before the Dell’s and HP’s of the world jumped on board? AGP is a mutant PCI connector which will be obsolete in 2 years as PCI Express replaces it. The AGP was mearly a mutated PCI slot until such time that a general purpose connector could be developed which provided the through-put a graphics card needs.
So actually to a certain extent, Apple is more of a Sony, they popularise things that would have otherwised died a slow and painful death. What would the likelihood be had USB not been embraced by Apple first. We’d all be using crusty connectors and praying that we have the device in the right position on the SCSI device chain.
Well, from what I know, Sapphire is part of PC Partner, the company that actually makes cards for ATI. They are a well-recognized OEM. In any case, it is better then what eMac comes with
.
Monitor… just picked any CRT since eMac is CRT, too. I am not really aware of situation in CRT scene and my next monitor would probably be an LCD. If you think eMac monitor is better then this one, tell me what should I pick to match it.
The other thing that might seem strange to some is a Lite-On drive. The reason for choosing this firm is that it is not worse then all those “known” brands (if I remember correctly, Sony re-sells Lite-On drives under its brand, and others might do it, too), and is not crippled with artificially limited firmware (read: can work around pesky CD protections).
Well, from what I know, Sapphire is part of PC Partner, the company that actually makes cards for ATI. They are a well-recognized OEM. In any case, it is better then what eMac comes with
.
Sapphire is inline with Gigabyte graphics cards. They receive a capital “C” for crappiness. I used to think, “ooh! great! cheap card! then found out the hardway when X11 kept crashing. I gave up, bit the bullet and bought a quality Matrox card. Never had a problem since then. The computer industry is the prime example of “you pay for what you get”.
Monitor… just picked any CRT since eMac is CRT, too. I am not really aware of situation in CRT scene and my next monitor would probably be an LCD. If you think eMac monitor is better then this one, tell me what should I pick to match it.
I would go for a Sony Trinatron. LG monitors are just plan cheap, not “low cost” but cheap and nasty.
The other thing that might seem strange to some is a Lite-On drive. The reason for choosing this firm is that it is not worse then all those “known” brands (if I remember correctly, Sony re-sells Lite-On drives under its brand, and others might do it, too), and is not crippled with artificially limited firmware (read: can work around pesky CD protections).
Well, LG branded drives are just Hitashi branded ones. Sony uses LiteOn and Dell, IBM and SUN (and a few others) use Sony branded tubes in their monitors.
I recently used a G4-800 (512 MB) iMac for one month (I resold it on ebay) to see how well these do on daily usage.
I must say I wasn’t impressed.
The system felt much slower than my current PC (P3-700) with Windows XP, despite being twice as fast.
With Cleartype switched on, XP has comparable font rendering as well. The ‘@’ on the ‘L’ key on the Mac needs getting used to; I always hit cmd-Q, which usually quits the application…
Putting ftp-server connections on the desktop didn’t work too well either. Also it seems there wasn’t even gcc installed; I would have had to download another 300MB or so for the Unix stuff…
My current PC is an old business line (SCENIC) Fujitsu/Siemens offering which I got for less than 500 on ebay (compared to 1200 for the iMac). Except for my fanless EPIA board it is the most silent computer I’ve ever heard.
The iMac by contrast is _very_ noisy, _and_ sits on the desk, which makes it worse.
No really, if I pay a lot of money (i.e. more than 1000 bucks), I expect a computer of superb quality, just like my SCENIC box, which will go on running happily through the next year. (I’m still waiting for other CPUs that match the 30W power consumption, performance and semi-passive cooling of my box!)
If Apple want to get more switchers, they need snappier GUI, more GUI comfort (and I even happen to like WindowMaker on Unix!!), and more decent desktop prices (I think their notebooks are competitively priced).
Matrox with its Parphelia series is the prime example of “you pay a lot and get very little”. As for X11 crashing, if anything wrong happens with X, you should really look at drivers. And the drivers are made either by community, your X vendor or the GPU maker. Now if your card would be noisy, overheat or give blurry output, that is problem of OEM that produced it.
Windows not included?
Windows? Add $130 canadian. Still cheaper and better.
What would the likelihood be had USB not been embraced by Apple first. We’d all be using crusty connectors and praying that we have the device in the right position on the SCSI device chain.
Well, the size and nature of the PC market means that it’s always going to move slower in some respects than an all-encompassing vendor like Apple. PCI was part of Intel’s PC98 Spec with Microsoft and numerous vendors ready to support it, so the change would certainly have come. With regard to Firewire, Apple demanded high royalties from motherboard and component manufacturers. In contrast, Intel offered PCI to vendors royalty-free and that’s what most component makers adopted, despite it’s initial technical inferiority. Apple subsequently lowered their fees for Firewire, but the damage had been done. Firewire could have have been the dominant standard for component connectivity, but Apple shot themselves in the foot.
I bet that the inclusion of pci-x will be just as dragged out as the usb port was i.e. Apple/IBM will still only include pci-x when every pc has pci express. Apple is good at innovation but not as good as headlines give them credit for.
Man, these Microsoft/Apple discussions always suck.
They tend to bring out two extreme people: Those who are very price conscious and those who aren’t at all. And they will never agree since Apple is doing a decent job segmenting the PC market.
There’s a science to pricing. The word ‘overpriced’ means nothing without context. Does it mean a nonoptimal price for Apple? Or just, “It’s overpriced for me”?
Yes, Apple has lost marketshare. They shook out their market and increased their profits. That happens. Suppose you get 10% profit on your widgets. Then you raise the price another 10%. That’s doubling your profit, and you’re still ahead if you lose 20% of your customers! Of course, you have to make sure that market’s very loyal, but it’s sometimes good to focus on your loyal market, giving them exactly what they want.
Release workeable OS X software for the PC/Intel platform.
That would give them market share… (when they released the first one i got to the shops to try to buy it… just to watch in the box… Gx Platform only… Apple only… and the like).
And the Apple management is very bad… When they lauched their mp3 portable appliance imagine what was it compatible with? Yes, only with macs… Only about 6 months later or so was available compatible versions of it (i’m not sure if the “compatibility” layer was from them either).
Apple is a nice company, and one that should always be in the management courses all over the world…
Well, the size and nature of the PC market means that it’s always going to move slower in some respects than an all-encompassing vendor like Apple. PCI was part of Intel’s PC98 Spec with Microsoft and numerous vendors ready to support it, so the change would certainly have come. With regard to Firewire, Apple demanded high royalties from motherboard and component manufacturers. In contrast, Intel offered PCI to vendors royalty-free and that’s what most component makers adopted, despite it’s initial technical inferiority. Apple subsequently lowered their fees for Firewire, but the damage had been done. Firewire could have have been the dominant standard for component connectivity, but Apple shot themselves in the foot.
Incorrect. Apple requested only a few cents per-motherboard. Apple then later sent it to be standardised by IEEE. IIRC, it was less than 20cents per motherboard.
Incorrect. Apple requested only a few cents per-motherboard. Apple then later sent it to be standardised by IEEE. IIRC, it was less than 20cents per motherboard.
It’s about $20-25 cents now. It wasn’t when they introduced it. Do a search on Google. Here’s one article from 1999:
http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG19990115S0019
Quote: “Apple Computer Inc. is seeking royalties of $1 per port from chip and system makers using the 1394 interface, which was born at Apple as Firewire.”
And here’s another from News.com
http://news.com.com/2100-1040_3-220209.html
RE: Kobold (IP: —.vc.shawcable.net) – Posted on 2003-09-21 10:58:27
Matrox with its Parphelia series is the prime example of “you pay a lot and get very little”. As for X11 crashing, if anything wrong happens with X, you should really look at drivers. And the drivers are made either by community, your X vendor or the GPU maker. Now if your card would be noisy, overheat or give blurry output, that is problem of OEM that produced it.
The video card I used to own was a Gigabyte Nvidia video card, and the Nvidia drivers are crap. Their Windows ones are crap and their linux ones are even worse (if at all humanly possible). Had they opensourced them like Matrox did for their Gxx line, then we would see stable drivers on all the platforms that use X and the bugs that irritate the crap out of people would be fixed up by now.
Why does Nvidia think that they need to be 007 secret squirl with the source code for their video cards remaining closed source. ATI is another example of this same policy of “hinding the code” in regards to drivers.
Ulrich Hobelmann (IP: —.HRZ.uni-oldenburg.de) – Posted on 2003-09-21 10:53:32
I recently used a G4-800 (512 MB) iMac for one month (I resold it on ebay) to see how well these do on daily usage.
I must say I wasn’t impressed.
Why do I think this whole post is nothing but BS. Someone purchases a computer AUS$2500 then suddeny sells if after a month. Anyway, I’ll bite this flame bait and continue.
The system felt much slower than my current PC (P3-700) with Windows XP, despite being twice as fast.
Funny, no configuration/specifications given. For some reason, I am not convinced. Anyway, I’ll continue.
With Cleartype switched on, XP has comparable font rendering as well. The ‘@’ on the ‘L’ key on the Mac needs getting used to; I always
hit cmd-Q, which usually quits the application…
@ on the L key? what are you crapping on about? the @ is located on the same key as the PC and same goes for L.
Putting ftp-server connections on the desktop didn’t work too well either. Also it seems there wasn’t even gcc installed; I would have had to download another 300MB or so for the Unix stuff…
Gee, it is so hard to open up System Preferences, selecting FTP then clicking on start. As for the UNIX stuff. If you TOOK THE TIME, you would find that the developer tools are located in Applications:Installers:Developer Tools then double click on the developer package.
My current PC is an old business line (SCENIC) Fujitsu/Siemens offering which I got for less than 500 on ebay (compared to 1200 for the iMac). Except for my fanless EPIA board it is the most silent computer I’ve ever heard.
The iMac by contrast is _very_ noisy, _and_ sits on the desk, which makes it worse.
So now we’re comparing second hand prices with a new computer? this makes no sense what so ever.
No really, if I pay a lot of money (i.e. more than 1000 bucks), I expect a computer of superb quality, just like my SCENIC box, which will go on running happily through the next year. (I’m still waiting for other CPUs that match the 30W power consumption, performance and semi-passive cooling of my box!)
Hmm, interesting that you don’t mention the specifications again.
If Apple want to get more switchers, they need snappier GUI, more GUI comfort (and I even happen to like WindowMaker on Unix!!), and more decent desktop prices (I think their notebooks are competitively priced).
What is so non-snappy about MacOSX?
So, lets recap, we have a very “special” person who buys a computer for AUS$2500, sells it for over half price on ebay, then goes off and buys a second hand desktop and claims that it is better than iMac. Does anyone actually believe that.
As for the “MacOS X for Intel”, please, read an economics and business book, look at the current situation with PC vendors who are trying to squeeze the last dollar out of each PC they sell, then come back to me explaining how Apple will magically produce a profit selling an operating system that is currently subsidised by hardware sales, and will most likely kill their own hardware side as people will purchase cheap Dells to install MacOS X onto. Then add on the fact that they would have to write 1000s of drivers for hardware and try to convince the Windows sycophants such as Adobe and Macromedia to spend another boot load of money to re-tweak their software for another hardware move.
It’s very simple. I can spend 500-800 on a great pc, or 1500 for a good apple
I am wondering: if great PCs are to be had for $500-$800, why are PC makers like Dell also offering PCs with a starting price of $1200 for configurations less powerful than the $800 one?
> @ on the L key? what are you crapping on about? the @ is
> located on the same key as the PC and same goes for L.
He is not ‘crapping’ – he is talking about Apple’s german keyboard layout (@ on alt-l, | on alt-7, ~ on alt-n, etc.).
“Matrox with its Parphelia series is the prime example of “you pay a lot and get very little”. “
The Parhelia is an awesome card. Just because it doesn’t have the highest serious sam benchmarks in the world doesn’t mean it’s a bad card. The triple monitor function is great for pepole who use cad programs, video editing, 3d software… also the dual monitor + video out feature could also be very usefull for video editing if you don’t already have video out on a capture card.
There are other uses for a video card than to play 3D games.
Apple is in an interesting position to expand market share in an untraditional way. Nonetheless, regardless of what mr jobs says about his goal, he knows apples needs to expand market share for the developers and the chip maker(s). BMW does not need software developers or IBM to fab G5’s.
Expanding market share is about channel and price. Apple needs to get someone (like an IBM) to push apple solutions at the business market and even the server market. Like it or not the share won’t go up more than a few points until the prices come down. The G4 is now 1299 to start and i have a feeling that we will see additional reductions, perhaps in a striped down uglier box. Apple might want to enable multi-vendor support as well (IE: a few (2 or 3) clone builders).
The key here is that the clone vendors need to sell to only the enterprise segment, where apple really has no presence.
Apple is in an interesting position to expand market share in an untraditional way. Nonetheless, regardless of what mr jobs says about his goal, he knows apples needs to expand market share for the developers and the chip maker(s). BMW does not need software developers or IBM to fab G5’s.
True, however, they need to also fix their supply problems. There is a line a mile long of people demanding PowerBooks, iPods and iMac/eMac’s. The demand is there but the supply isn’t.
Expanding market share is about channel and price. Apple needs to get someone (like an IBM) to push apple solutions at the business market and even the server market. Like it or not the share won’t go up more than a few points until the prices come down. The G4 is now 1299 to start and i have a feeling that we will see additional reductions, perhaps in a striped down uglier box. Apple might want to enable multi-vendor support as well (IE: a few (2 or 3) clone builders).
The key here is that the clone vendors need to sell to only the enterprise segment, where apple really has no presence.
I personally wouldn’t want to see clones as the last time it ripped Apples guts out, however, what they need to do is grab the current ThinkCentre Desktop box, rip out the core, replace it with Mac components, and get assembled at the same place where IBM outsources their hardware to, then team up with IBM global services so that a global network of support and services can be provided to big business.
If they get the volume then the price can easily come down. If they get the enterprise, the end user will want the same thing. To encourage the user to purchase one, the business could make a bulk order which includes their own desktops plus an order for their employees (who then pay the business back). Thus, the employee could end up being able to purchase a nice, slick, black Mac for US$600 including a decent 17inch CRT flatscreen.
I switched to a Mac in Jan 2002 having used WIntel machines for about 14 years. I can say after having 2 Macs now (Sold my PowerMac for a PowerBook, had to travel ) that I will never buy another WIntel machine. Hows the old saying go “You get what you pay for”. When I paid $2600 (after tax, etc.) for my PowerBook G4 1Ghz 15.2 I knew I was getting one thing that I know I can not get by spending that kinda of cash for a WIntel machine, “The Best Overall Computing Experience”.
I have friends that are diehard WIntel zealots and every time I am around them with my laptop and doing some operation (ex: changing IP for LAN party, printing on a network that I have not printed on before) they are amazed at how much more simpler and elegant the Mac solution is versus the Windows solution. I get the same response from them, ” next time I am considering a Apple computer”. In fact since I bought my first Apple computer 3 of my WIntel zealots friends have bought PowerBooks and they have agreed that “Macs are what personal computing should be like for everyone”.
By the way my friends and me are all Engineers. I know who Apple is trying to increase their market share with. 😉
Cheers,
ooartist
Look at the hardware and software you get out of the box. It is more than worth the money, just a matter if you have it or not. If Apple was to lower the price, they would have to kill their products. Kill in the sence that they would have to put generic graphic card, that would give horrible graphics to OS X. Lower the processor speeds, which would in turn drop the price, but loss the performence that we want. Generic nic cards, that would most likely blow in 5 minutes, generic sound card, that doesn’t offer everything that Apple does now to us, and gives bad sound to go with it. All of this would just kill the name of Apple, and they would go right out the door, because no one would want them. Don’t forget no super drive or cd burner like its PC counter parts that say, “look how low our prices are”.
Probably the only thing that I see getting people, is a two button mouse. Make it feel more like a regular computer. They are so use to it on the PC, and then they look at the Mac, and say no way, look at the mouse. Sure they can buy a new one, but who wants to get a computer then have to swap out the mouse they give you. I personally like the one button mouse, which I have hooked up right now. Just other people just don’t know how to use it, and how right click works on it and what not.
couldn’t they at least throw in a mouse that has more than 1 button on their ridiculously over-priced hardware!!!
When you consider that you can get a top-of-the-line G5 dual processor setup for $3,000 and I paid $5,000 for a 9500/120 and then $4,500 for an 8500/120 about 8 years ago, I’m sorry… I don’t see the argument.
Yeah, they’re more expensive than some screwed-up driver shop (er, screwdriver shop, I mean) PC, but there is a quality control, uniqueness, MacOS Xperience, and esthetics to consider.
I have been a PC user (latest system was an Athlon XP 2000+ setup) for about 5-6 years, since selling my 8500/120 (the same one I paid $4,500 for a couple years earlier) for a Pentium 166 system with a DVD drive so I could play Dragon’s Lair DVD on it. Just a few weeks ago, I sold my Athlon XP 2000+ system for a mere $175 (PC’s are like cars… nearly worthless the instant you take them off the lot) and mustered the cash (about $100 extra) together to buy a G3 B&W/350 on eBay.
Yeah… it’s a LOT slower than my PC, but do I care? Nope. It’s a Mac! MacOS 8.6 is fun, too. I am finally back to where I was before… actually better off than I was before, since the 8500/120 is miles less powerful than the G3 B&W/350.
I just bought MacOS X 10.2 for $117.77 + $10 shipping. And I plan to stay Mac from now on, regardless what happens.
Oh, and if you’re wondering why I can’t plunk down a mere $3,000 for a G5, like I plunked down $5,000 for a 9500/120 back then…
I got married. Bye-bye single life and lots of available cash. So now I struggle to get where I am, but am extremely happy to be “back with Mac!”
No more PC’s for me. Bill Gates’ ain’t gonna be watching over MY shoulder with Windows XP or any of his Spyware today…
Personally, I believe you get what you pay for. I paid big $$ for my PowerBook 17, but when I compared it to similar Wintel notebooks, the premium I paid for an Apple product was worth it. The ability to run OS X is in itself worth the premium, because I like it better than Linux.
There will always be a certain number of people like me who will pay extra for an Apple. If Apple is profitable with a 3% – 5% marketshare composed of such individuals, the shareholders will be happy. However, I think its also a good idea for Apple to sell a $500 cheapo system that competes with the performance of similarly priced Wintel systems. That should be do-able. For example, don’t use aluminum, use the cheapest plastic you can get. A cheap Apple box might increase marketshare by appealing the the budget conscious buyer, while also increasing mind share by exposing more people to the merits of OS X.
Look at these comments and they are pretty predictable, the ones who can’t afford a Mac cry and whine the most.
The neat thing is that even among those that hate Apple, Apple has massive mindshare.
Marketshare for Apple will come in time but it won’t be massive numbers or even double digit. It will be enough to sustain the company and make it profitable enough to keep pushing out great hardware and software so that the PC industry can copy, cry and moan about it.
I would rather Apple focus on trying to create the best personal computer in the world versus trying to sell the most personal computers. Heck thats the business model of a white-box PC manufacturer, there are thousands of them doing it and most not as profitable as Apple. I want Apple to keep pusing out hardware and software that makes me happy and PC zealots MAD!
Back to the topic, MacOSX 10.2.8 coming out soon hopefully and looking forward to it. Gonna upgrade to Panther Server at work.
I personally wouldn’t want to see clones as the last time it ripped Apples guts out, however, what they need to do is grab the current ThinkCentre Desktop box, rip out the core, replace it with Mac components, and get assembled at the same place where IBM outsources their hardware to, then team up with IBM global services so that a global network of support and services can be provided to big business.
Well, there’s clones and there’s clones – I can see where it wasn’t advantagous to Apple to license MacOS to vendors who were going to compete with them in their own backyard. But perhaps it wouldn’t be a bad idea to license it to someone like IBM who has access to markets Apple doesn’t and who’s products target a different audience.
OS X would be a great OS for a high-end p-series workstation or a workgroup server. And those products don’t hurt Apple because they don’t have a substantial presence in those markets, anyway. If anything, if IBM was successful in introducing OS X based machines into those markets, it would provide Apple with an opportunity to sell into them, too. Not to mention, it would help IBM establish their PowerPC architecture as an alternate standard to x86.
Sounds like a win-win to me. Given the growing closeness of the relationship between Apple and IBM, I wonder if any sort of arrangement like this might be in the works?
Many of these remarks, especially regarding Apple, show no reflection or context, no knowledge of even the recent history of computing. Instead there are remarks about Steve Jobs being “stupid” (yeah, sure), “Mac on Intel” and endless arguments about the number of buttons on a mouse.
Apple was a computer company in the deepest kind of trouble. They had successfully made the transition to the RISC platform (but that wouldn’t have gone so well had it not been for Code Warrior), but all else was failing badly.
Their new OS – Copland – had totally collapsed. They had poured resources into Open Doc and it ran out of gas. As a result, their whole internet strategy – Cyberdog – also collapsed. They were going nowhere and had nothing to offer anyone, except the original simplicity of the Mac OS, but it was obsolete.
They brought Jobs in as an advisor and ended up settling on NeXT, which was a start, at least. But, Amelio was still floundering around with no ideas, no vision and they canned him and brought Jobs completely on board.
Jobs knew Apple had to do something. He knew what we now know as OS X was a few years off. All that could be done with the original Mac OS was to try and add features (OS 8/9). Apple had a larger problem overall though. What reasons were there to buy Apple computers at this point? Not many, that’s for sure. To turn Apple into a Dell type company with low cost, pretty good quality computers would have been a disastor. With Windows so dominant and Dell perfecting their online buying, they even squeezed out Gateway when it made a couple of mistakes. There was and is no place for Apple in that type of model. This is what many people cannot understand, for some reason. To go up agaainst Windows and Dell head on? No way.
So, Jobs came up with another idea. Uniquely styled computers like the iMac and all that has been done since then to re-establish Apple as a brand. He has succeeded tremendously. Apple is slowly but surely finding niches and segments in the market for itself. How could and can one expect huge market share gains with juggernauts like Windows and Dell plowing ahead at full speed? No, Jobs has made the right decisions. He is not beyond criticism of course, but what he has done is nothing short of a business miracle. It seemed there was no place or direction for Apple to go at its low point. But, he found direction and places.
So, let’s have some historical context when we tal about why Apple is like it is. The bottom line is that Dell and Apple are the only two companies making a profit from selling computers. Those who try and copy Dell or take them head on lose money. There is no room there. Jobs found another way for Apple.
Apple Had To Do Something- I agree,
There was a time when Apple came to a fork in the road, that was when they decided not to license their OS to PC’s. Lets call that the “FORD” road. Instead, they took the “BMW” road. Problem was, they were making FORD computers, with BMW prices. And to make maters worse, they didn’t run on the same full as FORD, GM, etc… Now with Jobs back on board, they’re making BMW’s and perfecting a cleaner more efficient full to boot.
Why does Nvidia think that they need to be 007 secret squirl with the source code for their video cards remaining closed source. ATI is another example of this same policy of “hinding the code” in regards to drivers.
Because Nvidia does not own all of the code in their drivers. They have licenses for binary distribution, but of course do not have the right to distribute the source code for those sections.
It’s tough to participate in the discussion and NOT post price comparisons. There are always morons out there who make comments like buying a comparable PC for “half as much” or comparing a 5.6 lb Powerbook to a 6.9 lb Dell Inspiron 8600. I still am not sure if these statements are made out of ignorance or an attempt at deception. I suppose it’s probably a mixture of both depending on the person….
one of the reasons apple charges more is r&d. if you slap a pc together, the logic board and processor stuff is done for you by intel and the os is done for you by ms.
and unless you are dell you are most likely still losing money selling pc hardware.
apple needs to charge more to design the logic and write os10 and do all the ipod thingies.
“they’ll never have 10% market share. but a target of 5% would be realistic, and help them stick around for a while.”
I don’t agree. I think apple could easily have 15%-20% market share and that is enough. In order to get that they need to address the enterprise, lower prices, and continue to add value to the platform. They’ll need something to offset the lower desktop revenues and should be servers, service, souped up G5s, high-end creatives, high-end scientific. I’d even say apple should consider selling stripped down apples in the developing world (india, china) for 500-600 now. They won’t lose any sales by doing that.
Btw, the dual 3GHz Dell system PC Magazine compared ro the Dual 2Ghz G5 were about the same price. The G5s aren’t really that over priced. Apple just lacks a lower (and less expensive) line of computers.
IMOP, Apple should lower the price of there G4s to $1,000/$1,300/$1,500 that way you have prices from $1,000 to $1,500 for the G4s and $2000 to $3000 for the G5s.
They almost could have two product lines of desktops – G4s for home/regular users and G5s for more advance workstation type of uses…
Just a thought.
IMOP, Apple should lower the price of there G4s to $1,000/$1,300/$1,500 that way you have prices from $1,000 to $1,500 for the G4s and $2000 to $3000 for the G5s.
Oooh, Apple should lower their proces to $100 across the board! Good lord! People never cease to amaze me.
Consider for a second that there is nothing to compare or compete with Apple computers. Whether you like their computers or not – there’s no comparison. The buck stops there. The only choice is Apple.
Now, everybody wants to play CEO for a day and have their shot at ruining Apple. This is a slow, delicate burn that Jobs is orchestrating.
I’m amazed by what is happening that people don’t realize. I talk to WinTel users who make fun of the Mac and when I show them an infinitely easier way to do something they say, “Wow! That’s incredible you can do that?”
Beyond that, I had someone give a comparison of a WinTel box to a Mac and said basically that the Mac is better and easier to use, but the WinTel is what I know. The odd sense of envy and doubt that echoes in WinTel users voices whenever they talk about Macs these days is priceless (a lot pricier than a Mac)
I just lent an old powerbook to my sister who’s always having WinTel computer disasters. Their modem stopped working and they replaced network cards and called support and all sorts of things and I brought this old Mac oer and plugged it in and Voila!
Gotta run…
i don’t think Apple should make cheapo boxes like lindows or windows has. It would probably cost them more in service then would making a quality mac with good parts.
Have you looked at the cheapo boxes? They usually don’t come with a lot of ram, mother boards,,,,I really don’t like the ones in them. Video cards,,,,,,well you will have to buy a better one, firewire cards,,,,well you will have to get a card, by the time you upgrade all that you could of bought a nice pc or a mac. I guess you could save a bit by building one, but most people are buying them.
He continues to make reality be whatever he wants it to be. Yeah, okay, whatever, Steve. I wish I had the ability to just dictate what perceived reality will be.
To translate what he seems to be saying: “We’re not going to apologise for having less marketshare because we like it this way. If you were really cool and smart and leading edge, you too would want to buy our stuff. We created everything that is personal computing and everyone copied us. We’re so cool and you should be kissing our feet instead of pointing out little technicalities such as market share.” It’s called “Classic Redirection” folks.
I’m not discounting Apple’s contribution in the past. They are one of the most important historical figures in personal computing. I’m just saying that Apple isn’t what it used to be. The product focus is not “the best technology” but instead “the best appearance.” The fact that they include things like Firewire, wireless connectivity and high quality LCD displays as standard in their machines is very rapidly becoming moot. They do not design or build anything that’s actually new or different in function or purpose; just in form. They continue to use “PC” technology (PCI, AGP, IDE, etc) instead of developing anything superior (because it would cost them real money to do such engineering and they know they will be more sucessful with commodity components). The OS has gone from being an original and brilliant (if not very technologically bleeding edge on a performance level) design to just another “me too” design, mostly built by anyone other than Apple. Their much vaunted expert UI design is very quickly eroding away into mediocrity and sameness, while still refusing to learn the real lessons (like where some of their original ideas were actually BAD ones). In short, Apple is just another Microsoft, albeit the underdog with slightly less obnoxious behavior (and do you doubt they would behave the same as MS if given the ability?). Apple is no longer a company that engineers new and brilliant technology for personal computing. I would venture to guess that even the iPod is just a sexy-looking rebranded/copied technology (such as the handwriting recognition technology that OS X recently got, which just came from the Newton, a device created when Apple was actually creating new things and engineering their own hardware).
Lastly: Between Microsoft and Apple… I HATE the word “innovate.” Someone please stop these damn fools using it in every bloody press statement!!
Jace you have no idea what you are talking about.
“I would venture to guess that even the iPod is just a sexy-looking rebranded/copied technology”
Who else makes or matches the iPod? Rebranded from what?
“the Newton, a device created when Apple was actually creating new things and engineering their own hardware). ”
Who engineered the PowerMac G5? AMD? IBM? Motorola? Intel? Microsoft?
Where do you “Mac experts” get your info?
“Why do I think this whole post is nothing but BS. Someone purchases a computer AUS$2500 then suddeny sells if after a month. Anyway, I’ll bite this flame bait and continue.”
Someone buys a used iMac with twice the RAM for 300 bucks less than in the apple store (1500) and sells it one month later for the same amount (1200 euros). (btw. what does BS mean?)
“”The system felt much slower than my current PC (P3-700) with Windows XP, despite being twice as fast.”
Funny, no configuration/specifications given. For some reason, I am not convinced. Anyway, I’ll continue.”
What specs do you need? The G4-800 is roughly twice as fast as a P3-700. The iMac had 512MB, the PC has 384 MB RAM.
Both systems were just installed (Win XP Pro, OS X 10.2.6).
Graphics cards were the GF2MX (mac) and radeon 9200 (pc).
With a 8MB Matrox G200 the PC has the same speed, though.
“”With Cleartype switched on, XP has comparable font rendering as well. The ‘@’ on the ‘L’ key on the Mac needs getting used to; I always
hit cmd-Q, which usually quits the application…”
@ on the L key? what are you crapping on about? the @ is located on the same key as the PC and same goes for L.”
In Germany the @ is Alt-Q, while on the Mac it is Alt-L (and the Mac-cmd key is where my Alt is on the PC, i.e. alt-Q means cmd-Q on the mac.
“”Putting ftp-server connections on the desktop didn’t work too well either. Also it seems there wasn’t even gcc installed; I would have had to download another 300MB or so for the Unix stuff…
Gee, it is so hard to open up System Preferences, selecting FTP then clicking on start. As for the UNIX stuff. If you TOOK THE TIME, you would find that the developer tools are located in Applications:Installers:Developer Tools then double click on the developer package.”
I meant, the FTP connection was quite sucky. In fact I had to establish a new link on the desktop each session.
As for the developer tools I took the time, but didn’t want to take the time to downloas 300MB.
The install CD didn’t seem to contain anything, as did the apps folder on disk. But I might have overlooked something.
“”My current PC is an old business line (SCENIC) Fujitsu/Siemens offering which I got for less than 500 on ebay (compared to 1200 for the iMac). Except for my fanless EPIA board it is the most silent computer I’ve ever heard.
The iMac by contrast is _very_ noisy, _and_ sits on the desk, which makes it worse.”
So now we’re comparing second hand prices with a new computer? this makes no sense what so ever.”
So I bought two machines on ebay, one new and 300 bucks less than the Apple price and with more RAM, the other a 3 year-old PC which I continue using after adding some RAM and a disk and a Radeon card.
“”No really, if I pay a lot of money (i.e. more than 1000 bucks), I expect a computer of superb quality, just like my SCENIC box, which will go on running happily through the next year. (I’m still waiting for other CPUs that match the 30W power consumption, performance and semi-passive cooling of my box!)”
Hmm, interesting that you don’t mention the specifications again.”
Intel Pentium III 700 MHz, 384MB SDRAM (133), 60G disk (same as imac). I don’t think these matter. Both machines have ample RAM.
“”If Apple want to get more switchers, they need snappier GUI, more GUI comfort (and I even happen to like WindowMaker on Unix!!), and more decent desktop prices (I think their notebooks are competitively priced).”
What is so non-snappy about MacOSX?”
Oh, when I open a Finder Window, it takes maybe twice as much time as for WinXP, Gnome 2.2 or BeOS on the other machine.
“So, lets recap, we have a very “special” person who buys a computer for AUS$2500, sells it for over half price on ebay, then goes off and buys a second hand desktop and claims that it is better than iMac. Does anyone actually believe that.”
I only said I was disappointed with the Mac, though I like WindowMaker (the NeXT like WM on Unix), BeOS and other UIs.
I resold the iMac for 1 (one) euro less on ebay. My net loss was just the ebay costs. I said my PC reacts faster (i.e. the file manager and operating system UI functions).
“As for the “MacOS X for Intel”, please, read an economics and business book, look at the current situation with PC vendors who are trying to squeeze the last dollar out of each PC they sell, then come back to me explaining how Apple will magically produce a profit selling an operating system that is currently subsidised by hardware sales, and will most likely kill their own hardware side as people will purchase cheap Dells to install MacOS X onto. Then add on the fact that they would have to write 1000s of drivers for hardware and try to convince the Windows sycophants such as Adobe and Macromedia to spend another boot load of money to re-tweak their software for another hardware move.”
Huh? I never said anything about OS X on Intel. In fact I think that would be crap.
I’d rather have a PowerPC PC platform with Unix (see above, where I said I’ll only replace my PC with something which is faster and doesn’t need ten times the power and cooling –> G3 or G4 would be perfect here).
I really didn’t mean to troll, I only stated my opinion. I’ sorry you misunderstood me. If you are happy with your Mac (if you have one) all the better.
Negvibe-
Wow. That was a really stupid comment.
“Oooh, Apple should lower their proces to $100 across the board!”
Please learn how to subtract.
“People never cease to amaze me.”
Good for you.
“Consider for a second that there is nothing to compare or compete with Apple computers.”
1- Yes, there is something to compare with Apple computers – every other computer. It may, or may not, be a fair comparison, but it’s still a comparison.
I can say that my car is nicer that you piece of cherry pie – it’s a comparrison. A bad one, but I am still comparing two things.
2- If ther wasn’t anything to compete with Apple’s computers they would have 100% market share. Duh.
“The buck stops there.”
Thank you, Mr. Truman.
“The only choice is Apple.”
Umm. Didn’t we talk about this a few lines ago. Mabye, in your eyes, the only good choice is Apple, but there are still other choices.
Crackerjack-
“i don’t think Apple should make cheapo boxes like lindows or windows has.”
I never said they should make cheap crappy computers like emachines. When I say less expensive I am not talking about $400 computers, I am talking about something like an $800 to $1,300 line.
“It’s tough to participate in the discussion and NOT post price comparisons. There are always morons out there who make comments like buying a comparable PC for “half as much” or comparing a 5.6 lb Powerbook to a 6.9 lb Dell Inspiron 8600. I still am not sure if these statements are made out of ignorance or an attempt at deception. I suppose it’s probably a mixture of both depending on the person….”
i don’t think the issue is comparing price according to features. I think the issue is comparing how much you have to pay to get a system that will do the job required and which is expandable (people seem to prefer mini-towers).
You can “get the job done” with a $500-700 dell. While you might like the features of the $1299 G4 but most seem to prefer paying the $500-700 because it does what is needed and you are left with $600-800 in your pocket. That is the one thing that gates really understands. He understands do just what is necessary and no more because only a limited % of people will pay for those extras.
I really didn’t mean to troll, I only stated my opinion. I’ sorry you misunderstood me. If you are happy with your Mac (if you have one) all the better.
Ulrich, there’s no need to apologize. These topics always seem to degenerate into a “my-computer-is-superior-to-yours” type of debate. Windows and Mac zealots are as bad as each other and they both seem to be out in force in this discussion.
(btw, BS stands for bullshit)
and the cloners. or port os x to x86-64
… the Mac fans show up and demonstrate astounding arrogance.
You know, I like Apple laptops, even if they are over-priced, and coming from a Unix background, I like the OS. But I don’t think I’ll buy a Mac anytome soon, since it’d mean I’d become a Mac user.
Wow. That was a really stupid comment.
Jeez, man. Get a grip.
I wasn’t suggesting that Apple is the only computer out there worth using. What I was suggesting is that:
A. We would ALL like cheaper prices on everything. It’s a loose argument that Macs are expensive when so many CAN afford them.
B. What I meant was Apple is the only choice for a Mac – I’m not talking about a WinTel PC or anything else. There isn’t a comparison because no one else makes Macs. Do you get it yet? I wasn’t trolling or being a zealot about it (although I can see how uppity people get on wording)
Yes, there is something to compare with Apple computers – every other computer. It may, or may not, be a fair comparison, but it’s still a comparison.
I can say that my car is nicer that you piece of cherry pie – it’s a comparrison. A bad one, but I am still comparing two things.
Pure silliness. Just like arguing, huh?
Anyway. Good stuff coming from Apple for those that like Apples. Whay do people who don’t use Macs bother here?
“… the Mac fans show up and demonstrate astounding arrogance.
You know, I like Apple laptops, even if they are over-priced, and coming from a Unix background, I like the OS. But I don’t think I’ll buy a Mac anytome soon, since it’d mean I’d become a Mac user.”
This is a Mac article so why do you find it a mystery that people that likes Macs and knows about them comment on the article?
What is a mystery is why PC zealots consistantly come here to tell me how they bought a PC for 5 cents or found one in the dumpster and its faster than any G5 and because I buy Apple hardware I must be dumb.
Go to your PC articles or and we are nowhere to be found. Even when there were several articles on PC viruses you probably had 3-4 remarks that were barely snide.
Now you have an article on Apple marketshare and Panther and all people seem to complain about is how they won’t buy a Mac unless Steve Jobs sold it to them personally for $100.
Mac people have ZERO interest in your PC world. So why so much interest and anger towards all things Apple and Mac?
Apple just can’t win with you people.
“Anyway. Good stuff coming from Apple for those that like Apples. Whay do people who don’t use Macs bother here?”
Exactly NV. What are you people doing here if you can’t even comment on 10.2.8 or Panther?
> I never said they should make cheap crappy computers like
> emachines. When I say less expensive I am not talking about $400
> computers, I am talking about something like an $800 to $1,300 line.
I assume you’re talking US dollars. The kind of computer you’re looking for is the eMac. Starting at just $800 (US), these computers come with a 800Mhz to 1Ghz processor and an ATI Radeon 7500 graphics card.
Why won’t people see that the eMac is the LOW COST COMPUTER?
..because supply exceeds demand.
mikesum32 (IP: —.27.241.220.Dial1.WashingtonDC1.Level3.net)
It’s very simple. I can spend 500-800 on a great pc, or 1500 for a good apple.
And what if you don’t pirate all your software? (by the way, if you think Zoltrix modems and Red Fox motherboards are “great”, please allow me to sell you some “great” hardware).
Vesselin Peev (IP: 66.160.74.—)
First, it is not debatable that the world’s best minds are working with PC and computers different from Apple’s, but in the same price range.
I’d have a hard time coming up with a more vague over-generalisation. Care to provide some pertinent facts?
The problem with Apple is that for the same price, one can get a PC that is *at least* on a par with the Apple equivalent.
You can buy a Dell running OS X? Cool! Where can I find one?
Mystilleef (IP: 66.71.219.—)
The point is there in no point in purchasing a G5, when its competitors can do exactly what a G5 can do or better and for cheaper.
By “do exactly what a G5 can do”, do you mean a dual Xeon taking up to a full minute longer than a dual G5 to load Photoshop menu bars during intensive graphical processing?
Don’t give me that quality crap as an excuse for high prices.
Tell that to Porsche. Or Bang & Olufsen. Or Herman Miller. Or Allied Telesyn. Or Cray. Or Bose. Or Ducati. Or Lloyd’s of London. Or Armani. Or APC. Or Moet & Chandon. Or Leica. Or BMW. Or..
For all I care, Dell make quality products too.
Then you obviously don’t care very much. But you care enough to post here. Interesting.
Hugo (IP: —.dsl.pipex.com)
Windows and Mac zealots are as bad as each other
I beg to differ: Windows and Mac zealots are as self-assured as each other, but Windows users are far less respectful of Mac users’ choice in computing environments. I’ve never owned a Mac in my life, and I’m more comfortable talking to Mac guys than Wintel morons.
Anonymous (IP: —.in-addr.btopenworld.com)
You know, I like Apple laptops, even if they are over-priced
So, considering the fact that Apple laptops are UNDER-priced compared to any and all other laptops, you must absolutely -adore- them =)
and coming from a Unix background, I like the OS. But I don’t think I’ll buy a Mac anytome soon, since it’d mean I’d become a Mac user.
Ba-a-a-a-a-a.
Let us know when you start thinking for yourself.
ILBT,
Good Grief
On the subject of price and functionality, the following article is pretty timely. It discusses the budge eMac and declares it “dollar-for-dollar the best Apple computer you can buy.” If you examine what all it comes with, there is a pretty compelling argument there.
http://www.machome.com/reviews/display.lasso?grr8=151
“I really didn’t mean to troll, I only stated my opinion. I’ sorry you misunderstood me. If you are happy with your Mac (if you have one) all the better. ”
Ulrich, there’s no need to apologize. These topics always seem to degenerate into a “my-computer-is-superior-to-yours” type of debate. Windows and Mac zealots are as bad as each other and they both seem to be out in force in this discussion.
I have no problems with a person saying, “zyz does a really good job”. I do, however, take exception to those who say, “I bought a computer, owned it for a month then sold it below half price”. This goes for the person who sold his PC to buy a Mac and the person I replied to who sold is Mac to buy a PC.
I really have to ask where their prorieties lay if they are constantly selling and buying computers because they can’t make up their mind. I own an eMac, and it does all that I want a computer to do. I certainly don’t expect anyone to follow me and purchase one, however, if one inquires, I’ll be honest and say that although you won’t have a rocket speed machine, you will find that the reliability and good software bundle outweighs any of the “performance issues”.
RE: Jace (IP: 204.186.253.—)
Stop trolling. You well and truely bloody know why the Mac uses openstandards interfaces over using proprietary ones. Obviously you have a memory like a sieve because that is what Mac used to do, make proprietary and complicated extensions that in some cases WERE better than the PC counterpart but then they expected hardware companies to produce expansion cards for their ultra-nich market.
Steve saw the reality that you fail to see. Costs of the Mac needed to come down from $5000 mark in 1996-1995 down to $1899, and this could only be done by removing as much of the proprietary parts as possible. Today, the only proprietary components are the motherboad and chipset, which is NO DIFFERENT to dell using Intel motherboard.
As for creating PowerPC clones, nothing stopping you, the only downside is that if you want to source them from IBM or Motorola, you would have to sell a minimum of 10,000 units per-month.
why do we have to pay extra for hardware to get the good OS?
i need to upgrade my home machine soon, but i’ve already got a keyboard, mouse, expensive monitor, etc. I could spend $800-1000 for a *decent* PC running an atrocious OS, or a lot more for a new MAC. Or, I can go to EBAY and get something a little older and be relatively happy for a while.
I suppose there’s still a little room in the “quality counts” posts for the fact that, well, some people are going to be buying used Macs when Apple could be selling them a decent box right now. get a desktop down to $1000 and apple might find their market share climb.
furthermore, it’s hard to argue for the higher prices in this extended economic downturn. it’s nice that apple is profitable, but maybe they just need to move some more boxes, too.
why do we have to pay extra for hardware to get the good OS?
Because Linux/FreeBSD lacks the applications and Windows is just a, well, I’ll let some other people fill that with great emphasisers and adjectives.
i need to upgrade my home machine soon, but i’ve already got a keyboard, mouse, expensive monitor, etc. I could spend $800-1000 for a *decent* PC running an atrocious OS, or a lot more for a new MAC. Or, I can go to EBAY and get something a little older and be relatively happy for a while.
Or if you are a geek, you could get a UNIX workstation such as an SGI Octane, O2 or a SUN Ultra Sparc 10, 20 or 50. I’m hoping that when I need to get a new computer in around 2-3 years time, the cost of the Fuel Workstation on eBay will be around the same as the O2’s being sold today 😉 what is also pretty cool is that OpenOffice.org is also available on it.
I suppose there’s still a little room in the “quality counts” posts for the fact that, well, some people are going to be buying used Macs when Apple could be selling them a decent box right now. get a desktop down to $1000 and apple might find their market share climb.
There is one below US$1000, it is the eMac. The only gripe I have is the lack of memory. If they boosted the memory up to 512MB and removed the limitation of 1GIG and added an extra couple of slots, thus boosting the capacity to around 3-4gigs, it would be very good value for money.
furthermore, it’s hard to argue for the higher prices in this extended economic downturn. it’s nice that apple is profitable, but maybe they just need to move some more boxes, too.
There is only an economic down turn in the US, Australia is pumping along nicely, sames goes for Australia, a large number of Asian country, China is in overdrive and around 2 South American countries are on track for strong GDP growth. Just because everything in the US is turning to s**t, doesn’t mean that ther are customers overseas who can’t afford one.
The sole problem with Apple is the lack of supply. There are around 42,000 back orders for iPod, the demand for Powerbooks is even greater and their consumer line is also experiencing high demand. The fact remains, the demand is there, the supply isn’t.
I personally don’t see them as being a major force, however, it would be perfectly achievable for Apple to reach 1-1.5million units shipped, they just need to stop the PC bashing and promote the positives of their platform. Not the raw price but the over all package they can provide, aka, the “Out of the box experience” (people who have owned an SGI would know what that means 🙂 ).
Australia is pumping along nicely, sames goes for Australia, a large number of Asian country
Should be:
Australia is pumping along nicely, sames goes for New Zealand, a large number of Asian country…..
That is a good point about maybe considering a used Mac. If someone is on a budget you can probably find a capable Mac in a decent price range doing that.
get a desktop down to $1000 and apple might find their market share climb.
Um, I humbly suggest an eMac for $800 or spring for the SuperDrive version for a $1000.
Ignorance is bliss.
Just a small correction, the whole eMac line up is now 1Ghz. The best value for money, IMHO is the medium one, DVD/RW Combo. One thing I would suggest is buying the memory from a third part vendor rather than via the Apple Shop.
That is a good point about maybe considering a used Mac. If someone is on a budget you can probably find a capable Mac in a decent price range doing that.
“get a desktop down to $1000 and apple might find their market share climb.”
Um, I humbly suggest an eMac for $800 or spring for the SuperDrive version for a $1000.
Ignorance is bliss.
I wouldn’t worry about jason v. He is the typical winzealot, if there is a economic downturn in the US, obviously there is a global one (which is pantently false as statistics show that trade has increased) and that a computer has to be one made of heaps of components so that it is impossible to setup and thus require him (who charges by the hour) to set up Joe Users PC.
It is true that the eMac hasn’t been pushed as strongly as it should, however, there is nothing stopping Jason from jumping onto the Apple website and checking out the prices.
Australia is pumping along nicely, sames goes for New Zealand, a large number of Asian country…..
Yup, Apple are ripping us off big-time down here!
$800 for an 800mhz computer? you can’t even buy something so pitifully slow in the pc world. a 2.6Ghz athlon is only $100 for christ sakes. all the people suggesting apples are not overpriced must be smoking crack because i wouldn’t even pay $100 for a comparable pc. the walmart pc’s ($199) come with 1.2Ghz cpu’s. the emac is a pathetic joke. to even sell such a lame computer is reprehensible. it’s an insult.
I have no problems with a person saying, “zyz does a really good job”. I do, however, take exception to those who say, “I bought a computer, owned it for a month then sold it below half price”. This goes for the person who sold his PC to buy a Mac and the person I replied to who sold is Mac to buy a PC.
Again, I resold the Mac for just one Euro less than I bought it, both on ebay. Please at least read my posts correctly.
Also I already owned my PC for a year and wanted to switch to the Mac, being a Unix-lover and since I like NeXT/WindowMaker and Objective C.
Once I bought the iMac, I found out, the 15″ version didn’t even have tv-out graphics (only optional VGA-out), and programs were more sluggish than on Windows even (i.e. opening terminal windows, finder windows, etc.). So I simply thought, for _1200 Euro_ I’d expect at least an increase in productivity, so I resold the iMac and upgraded the PC for 200 bucks (all in all I ended up paying 500 for the PC).
“I really have to ask where their prorieties lay if they are constantly selling and buying computers because they can’t make up their mind. I own an eMac, and it does all that I want a computer to do. I certainly don’t expect anyone to follow me and purchase one, however, if one inquires, I’ll be honest and say that although you won’t have a rocket speed machine, you will find that the reliability and good software bundle outweighs any of the “performance issues”. ”
I was very happy with the reliability of the Mac, yes. I only think it simply wasn’t worth spending more than 1000 for a medium-speed machine (while my PC works pretty fast for all my needs). So I’ll continue using XP (which is a compromise) and Unix on Intel (also a compromise), but at least these are fast.
For those who are wondering, the original bottom line of my post was, that I think Apple needs to price desktop machines less and make them faster if it really thinks they are that much better quality than PCs (which is what most Mac-users claim here). Maybe they should have bought Be, not NeXT for the sake of speed
I think my PC is high quality (it isn’t a Dell, but a computer originally targeted at companies, not home consumers). It even was quite pricey originally, I bet. But it runs up-to-date OSes nicely, while a used Mac will probably not give you a nice experience with OS X, if even the almost-new iMac didn’t for me.
“$800 for an 800mhz computer? you can’t even buy something so pitifully slow in the pc world. a 2.6Ghz athlon is only $100 for christ sakes. all the people suggesting apples are not overpriced must be smoking crack because i wouldn’t even pay $100 for a comparable pc. the walmart pc’s ($199) come with 1.2Ghz cpu’s. the emac is a pathetic joke. to even sell such a lame computer is reprehensible. it’s an insult.”
No.
The eMac 800 is a joke, but because they only include a CDROM, which is ridiculous for a machine that costs more than many good PCs.
BUT: the 800 MHz G4 is comparable to a P4-1700 maybe and takes less than 20W compared to 60-80W for a P4.
What bugs me is that I have to buy a bloody CRT (or a small TFT for the iMac) along with the actual computer, so I’ll never be able to just get, say, a 19″ TFT, AND that though the Macs have much more power-efficient processors, they still roar like horny tigers (though my ex-iMac’s hard disk wasn’t even audible; might have something to do with that roar
)
Apple knows how to sell top-of-the-line workstations for a premium price (G5s), they know how to make good portables for a fair price, I’d say, but they insult customers by giving them crap, if they don’t buy the most expensive product line.
For some people even $800 is a lot of money, especially compared to PC prices, and if they pay twice the price for a Dell of same speed, they want a machine that’s almost silent, has fast software and some minimum connectivity (tv-out), upgradability (maybe buy a DVD-R _later_; better graphics _later_), and still don’t want to shell out $1X00 for a Power Mac which isn’t really fast.
If they were silent, though, Macs might make decent Unix machines (i.e. non-OS X).
RE: Robocop (IP: 203.98.50.—) – Posted on 2003-09-22 05:21:24
“Australia is pumping along nicely, sames goes for New Zealand, a large number of Asian country…..”
Yup, Apple are ripping us off big-time down here!
I feel sorry for you if you are so poverty stricken that AUS$1899 will send you into bankruptcy. $1899 for a Medium Mac is chump change. $2299 for a LCD 15″ iMac, well, lets put it this way, if you are having problems affording that then maybe you should look for a job that pays more than paper boy.
If a part time student like me can afford $1899, I am sure ANYONE can afford a computer of that price.
Ulrich Hobelmann (IP: —.HRZ.uni-oldenburg.de) – Posted on 2003-09-22 08:50:55
Once I bought the iMac, I found out, the 15″ version didn’t even have tv-out graphics (only optional VGA-out), and programs were more sluggish than on Windows even (i.e. opening terminal windows, finder windows, etc.). So I simply thought, for _1200 Euro_ I’d expect at least an increase in productivity, so I resold the iMac and upgraded the PC for 200 bucks (all in all I ended up paying 500 for the PC).
Why didn’t you research it first? it clearly states that on the website, which has now been updated for the latest iMac which includes that feature for the whole range.
I was very happy with the reliability of the Mac, yes. I only think it simply wasn’t worth spending more than 1000 for a medium-speed machine (while my PC works pretty fast for all my needs). So I’ll continue using XP (which is a compromise) and Unix on Intel (also a compromise), but at least these are fast.
What do you use the computer for then? for me I use on a regular basis Netbeans, Corel Draw, Corel Painter, Freehand MX, Dreamweaver MX (with 6.1 update), and I find it “plenty fast for me” (yes, I really hate that George Bush’ism).
I would be interesting in what version of MacOS you were running as I found when I updates from the pre-installed version, 10.2.4 to 10.2.4, there was a decent speed increase and improvement in responsiveness.
For those who are wondering, the original bottom line of my post was, that I think Apple needs to price desktop machines less and make them faster if it really thinks they are that much better quality than PCs (which is what most Mac-users claim here). Maybe they should have bought Be, not NeXT for the sake of speed
I think my PC is high quality (it isn’t a Dell, but a computer originally targeted at companies, not home consumers). It even was quite pricey originally, I bet. But it runs up-to-date OSes nicely, while a used Mac will probably not give you a nice experience with OS X, if even the almost-new iMac didn’t for me.
Here is a question. Have you EVER ran business? have you EVER looked at OEM pricing structure? costs associated with running a business? do you think that out of the blue Apple can just suddenly drop the price and magically they still turn a profit and everything is nice and dandy? have you ever thought about uncontrolled costs such as currency fluctuations? yes, one can currency hedge against those sorts of fluctuations, however, that is not a long term plan.
Ulrich Hobelmann (IP: —.HRZ.uni-oldenburg.de) – Posted on 2003-09-22 10:17:51[/i]
The eMac 800 is a joke, but because they only include a CDROM, which is ridiculous for a machine that costs more than many good PCs.
BUT: the 800 MHz G4 is comparable to a P4-1700 maybe and takes less than 20W compared to 60-80W for a P4.
Sure I like Macs but to state “800Mhz is comparable to a 1700Mhz P4” is rubbish to say the least. If you are going to be completely honest, it would be more comparable to a PIII 1.2Ghz (1.5x clockspeed).
Ulrich Hobelmann (IP: —.HRZ.uni-oldenburg.de) – Posted on 2003-09-22 10:17:51
The eMac 800 is a joke, but because they only include a CDROM, which is ridiculous for a machine that costs more than many good PCs.
BUT: the 800 MHz G4 is comparable to a P4-1700 maybe and takes less than 20W compared to 60-80W for a P4.
Sure I like Macs but to state “800Mhz is comparable to a 1700Mhz P4” is rubbish to say the least. If you are going to be completely honest, it would be more comparable to a PIII 1.2Ghz (1.5x clockspeed).
“He continues to make reality be whatever he wants it to be. Yeah, okay, whatever, Steve. I wish I had the ability to just dictate what perceived reality will be.
To translate what he seems to be saying: “We’re not going to apologise for having less marketshare because we like it this way. If you were really cool and smart and leading edge, you too would want to buy our stuff. We created everything that is personal computing and everyone copied us. We’re so cool and you should be kissing our feet instead of pointing out little technicalities such as market share.” It’s called “Classic Redirection” folks.”
I’m not discounting Apple’s contribution in the past. They are one of the most important historical figures in personal computing. I’m just saying that Apple isn’t what it used to be. The product focus is not “the best technology” but instead “the best appearance.” The fact that they include things like Firewire, wireless connectivity and high quality LCD displays as standard in their machines is very rapidly becoming moot. They do not design or build anything that’s actually new or different in function or purpose; just in form. They continue to use “PC” technology (PCI, AGP, IDE, etc) instead of developing anything superior (because it would cost them real money to do such engineering and they know they will be more sucessful with commodity components). The OS has gone from being an original and brilliant (if not very technologically bleeding edge on a performance level) design to just another “me too” design, mostly built by anyone other than Apple. Their much vaunted expert UI design is very quickly eroding away into mediocrity and sameness, while still refusing to learn the real lessons (like where some of their original ideas were actually BAD ones). In short, Apple is just another Microsoft, albeit the underdog with slightly less obnoxious behavior (and do you doubt they would behave the same as MS if given the ability?). Apple is no longer a company that engineers new and brilliant technology for personal computing. I would venture to guess that even the iPod is just a sexy-looking rebranded/copied technology (such as the handwriting recognition technology that OS X recently got, which just came from the Newton, a device created when Apple was actually creating new things and engineering their own hardware).
Lastly: Between Microsoft and Apple… I HATE the word “innovate.” Someone please stop these damn fools using it in every bloody press statement!!”
Sorry to be a spoilsport. Apple Computer is worth <less> now than it was in 1984 if you take inflation into account. It has about 1/10th of the market share it had 20 years ago. Apple is barely profitable if you ignore the accounting tricks.
Jobs is not a business wizard he is a destroyer of financial capital. NeXT went broke. Jobs then greenmailed Apple into buying the worthless remnants of NeXT.
Sorry to be a spoilsport. Apple Computer is worth <less> now than it was in 1984 if you take inflation into account. It has about 1/10th of the market share it had 20 years ago. Apple is barely profitable if you ignore the accounting tricks.
Jobs is not a business wizard he is a destroyer of financial capital. NeXT went broke. Jobs then greenmailed Apple into buying the worthless remnants of NeXT.
Funny that you fail to bring into account the fact that when Steve Jobs left, it moved from being a market leader to a basket case within around a decade. It went from a cash and asset rich company to something equivilant of a banana republic overnight.
What was every CEO’s solution, “lets sell assets, cut costs and hopefully we’ll regain profitability”. A continuous cycle of cost cut, asset sell, one quarter of profit, then quickly back into the red. Apple continued on that path until Apple bought NeXT and Steve Jobs came back on board. Put some direction down and moved the company towards it. Had Apple continued on the same path, there would be nothing left.
As for profitability, there is no PC vendor, except for Dell, who are currently making a profit. So, lets recap, HP PC business is loosing money and marketshare, IBM PC business is losing money and market share is steady, Gateway is falling to pieces before our eyes and is dying a painful death under the illusion that the founder will turn around its fortunes.
That is the PC industry for you, and in a few years, once the CIO’s see reality, you’ll see Dells market share clime further and as a result demolish HP into a small ball of dust made up of poor quality printers and scanners and even crappier servers. Gateway will simply implode into itself. So in 6 years well IBM, Dell and Apple. Dell serving the majority, IBM serving its Global Services customers and Apple serving its niche markets.
Its obvious that you have no business experience or otherwise you would be able to see 3years in front rather than just assuming that every consumer is a cheapskate and wants to have the cheapest, nastiest computer humanly imaginable.
“Be a yardstick of quality. Some people aren’t used to an environment where excellence is expected.”
Snobbish, elitist drivel! It never ceases to amaze me how much MAC zealots are so un-informed. The typical mac user knows nothing about computers or the industry. I picked up a Mac Addict magazine with a G5 on the cover out of pure curiosity since the G5’s are kinda cool..expensive but cool. Looking at the reviews they had of hardware and sofware, one thing that stuck out was the enormous price associated with every little thing that is Mac. Not only do you pay a premium for the hardware you have to pay no less than $500 each for most decent applications not to mention the hardware perhiperhals. Tell me again what the advantage is to owning a mac? Since Apple finally came out with an OS that is worth something perhaps they can atract a more intelligent user base to pressure them into the realms of sales reality.