Home > Apple > Apple Profit More Than Quadruples Apple Profit More Than Quadruples Eugenia Loli 2005-01-13 Apple 83 Comments Great news for Apple, big profit and more than 1 million Macs were sold this quarter, something that didn’t happen for years! With the Mac Mini introduction yesterday, the next quarter seems even more favorable for a bigger number on CPU sales. About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 83 Comments 2005-01-13 1:06 am Now everyone’s going to have a Mac and Apple is going to be king. Cheap macs rule! 2005-01-13 1:18 am I mentioned this in the other thread. If you actually read the 2004 earnings report, you’ll see that high-end Macs, Mac laptops, and iPods rule. Sales of iMacs and eMacs make up only 1/4 of their total computer sales by volume, and shipments actually went down by 16% last year. 2005-01-13 1:26 am The new Mini mac is faster that most of the macs at my college other than the dual processor ones. I think my school made a boo boo by not buying the G5’s when they first came out. They opted for the G4’s. 2005-01-13 1:34 am it stands to reason imac sales were down as there was a month or two where there wasn’t an imac available.. 2005-01-13 1:42 am <em>Sales of iMacs and eMacs make up only 1/4 of their total computer sales by volume, and shipments actually went down by 16% last year.</em> The Mac Mini is a somewhat different animal compared to the i- and the eMac. It’s also cheaper than both. I think this one is more squarely aimed at potential switchers than any of their recent products. As such, I don’t think you can predict how the Mac Mini will do by looking at those other two ‘low end’ Macs. 2005-01-13 1:43 am Only 4 posts? hehe Go Apple Go! 2005-01-13 1:44 am Lazy imaging teams My university only migrated to OSX in Summer 2004. Since the G5s can’t run OS 9, that would have been a problem for them. 2005-01-13 2:14 am I am thinking mini mac could increase apple’s mac volumes by 25% next quarter. But that might not do anything for margins or profits. What kind of margins does a $499 mini-mac provide? 2005-01-13 2:15 am This is going to change it though. When I saw the announcement yesterday morning my first thought was “Ok how do I fit in affording one of these?” I want one, that simple and at this price, I’ll be getting one. 2005-01-13 2:27 am The fact that the Mac Mini is cheaper than the other low-end Macs doesn’t mean what you think it means. The sweet-spot for computer puchases is still $750-$1500, a range well-covered by low-end Macs. If Macs aren’t selling in that market, what makes you think they’ll sell in the $200-$500 market? A lot of people might buy them as a second machine to play with OS X, but the vast majority of buyers in the $500 segment don’t even know what an OS is. What makes you believe that they’ll be more likely to buy a Mac than the $750-$1500 segment? 2005-01-13 2:35 am Let me posit an alternate theory for the purpose of the Mac Mini. Is Apple trying to make large inroads into the $200-$500 price class with this product? I don’t think so. I don’t think the $200-$500 group is any more likely to switch than the $750 to $1500 group. I think the utility of the Mac Mini is not in a volume product itself, but as a gateway drug to higher-end Macs. Consider what happens when somebody buys a $500 Mac Mini to play around with. He likes OS X, so when it comes to upgrade the machines at work (which are usually $1000 price range), he suggests iMacs for the purchase. If a people purchasing Mac Minis causes them to buy higher-end Macs in the future for work or personal use, the Mac Mini could be an enormous success without ever acquiring a significant fraction of the $200-$500 market itself. 2005-01-13 2:36 am Agreed, the mini mac (macmini) may just have been what people have been wanting for a long time coming now. Personally I think it looks a bit like a desktop, mini-itx more like then mini mac. I’ve really been considering getting one of these little mac machines now, the price is nice and my machine is on its last legs. Its only a dual 300mhz, so the mac should be a lot faster. The only problem I’m going to be faced with is software and games as always. Software isn’t so much of a problem thanks to opensource as I’ve always tried to go for that anyway. Games on the other hand are a biggy. Not much support for them at all on the mac, not too bad though, I tend to play xbox games more then PC ones now but thats mainly due to my poor performing PC system, hell my xbox has more power then my PC lol. 2005-01-13 2:37 am I think that people who don’t know anything about OS’s still know mac is not PC and are starteing to think that PC has lots of viruses and Mac does not. The really trick for apple is keeping macs a spyware and virus free (I know that they are not truely virus free..but close enough). If mini macs sell as much as I hope they will; they might become a target fo these types of things. 2005-01-13 2:40 am … that I just read a troll saying the usual “Apple is dying” comment on the Mac Mini thread. Oh of course they are, that’s why their profits have quadrupled. Apple seem to be making all the right decisions lately, especially when it comes to ipod. They seem to have read the market so well, and produced products to corner every part of it. When I first read about the iPod Shuffle, I thought “meh, doesn’t seem that good”. But after reading a bit about it and thinking about it, I realise what they’ve tried to do, and it seems like a pretty useful product, for the money. Especially for exercising, bike riding, etc. Not to mention it’s pretty damn cheap just as a USB storage device (in .au anyway). $205AUD education price for one of these. I’m seriously contemplating getting one. 2005-01-13 2:40 am To be honest, I never thought apple would release something like the mac mini, aimed at the low end of the market. Hopfully, due to the success of the mini/iPod all the kids will be asking for a mac computer to go with it now. This is the perfect way for them to bring the Apple computer in to the home again. Released just in time for when apple have everyones details of who owns a iPod (via warrenty documents) they can now splash out and do a nice mail shot for the macmini. I wonder if the ipod sales did anything to induce the release of the mac mini? 2005-01-13 2:46 am What $200 PCs are you buying? eMachines shows their cheapest at $360 after rebate and HPs start at $400. It seemed like you were making the case that the Mac mini couldn’t compete against these $200 PCs in volume sales, but there aren’t any $200 PCs. PCs start around $400 while the Mac mini starts at $500. The Mac mini is aiming for the $400-700 PC market – which exists. Also, the average selling price for a PC is about $700 and not $750-$1500. 2005-01-13 2:58 am With ads like these(http://www.jwz.org/images/iProduct.gif), how could not be rolling in the dough? 2005-01-13 2:59 am I’ve been follwing the reviews and comments about the Mac mini (already ordered mine!) and it really gets me when someone calls it a rip-off of mini-ITX shuttles. I guess you won’t believe it till you see it in person, but a 6.5in x 6.5in x2in Mac mini makes a mini-ITX Shuttle look like a full tower. There’s nothing like the Mac mini on the market right now, nothing at all. Everybody and their dog wants one. They’re not going to be able to keep these babies on the shelves! I’m so used to computer purchases being like buying a dishwasher in a gigantic, heavy box that seeing this image really tripped me out: http://www.apple.com/macmini/gallery/side.html I’ve always said that if Apple would release a cheap, headless Mac I would buy it and I’ve put my money where my mouth is. Heck, I would have bought an eMac a long time ago (at full eMac price) if only it didn’t come with a 40-pound CRT molded to it. 2005-01-13 2:59 am “What kind of margins does a $499 mini-mac provide?” I’d say 100-200$. if someone has an other opinion pleas think about the game cube. ppc, ati grafics, 99$ and nintendo doesn’t lose money on them. 2005-01-13 3:03 am If I read right this thread is about the Apple last quarter profits and gains, not for the Mac Mini debate. You can find that debate here: http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=9382&limit=no On this thread we all say… “I think/don’t think it’s great that Apple has made gains. I think/don’t think that any “low-end” Mac will continue to contribute to market gains because…” The Mac Mini thread is for the other comments, and they’re worth the read so go to that one if you must discuss the pros and cons of “The Brick”. 2005-01-13 3:04 am “I mentioned this in the other thread. If you actually read the 2004 earnings report, you’ll see that high-end Macs, Mac laptops, and iPods rule. Sales of iMacs and eMacs make up only 1/4 of their total computer sales by volume, and shipments actually went down by 16% last year.” And if you looked at the reason why iMac/eMac sales (which are grouped together with no indication how much of each were sold in the 2004 earning report) were 16% lower, you’ll know that it was entirely attributable to the fact that Apple completely stopped selling the iMac G4 in August and only began selling the iMac G5 in September. And as today’s quarterly report showed, sales of the iMac G5 basically doubled last quarter, more than acccounting for the 16% shortfall, and then some. 2005-01-13 3:07 am I’m so used to computer purchases being like buying a dishwasher in a gigantic, heavy box that seeing this image really tripped me out: Nice to meet you, Mr. Joan M’Benga. 2005-01-13 3:09 am Consider what happens when somebody buys a $500 Mac Mini to play around with. He likes OS X, so when it comes to upgrade the machines at work (which are usually $1000 price range), he suggests iMacs for the purchase. So how is this different than someone buying a Mac mini for the first time instead of a PC. So according to your theory a Mac mini is a gateway into more expensive Macs. So by that theory the Mac mini is a volume product atleast highe volume than the high-end Macs the people will not buy after they have bought the mini and didn’t upgrade. An also higher voume because the price is right for experimenting with the Mac platform. I don’t understan why you are being so obtuse and how you define volume. The Mac mini is Apple’s volume product because they can’t possibly be making more margins on this than the other line they have, So Apple must be banking on it being a volume product. 2005-01-13 3:10 am “I think the utility of the Mac Mini is not in a volume product itself, but as a gateway drug to higher-end Macs. Consider what happens when somebody buys a $500 Mac Mini to play around with. He likes OS X, so when it comes to upgrade the machines at work (which are usually $1000 price range), he suggests iMacs for the purchase.” I think this is an exactly spot on observation. The Mini enters an all-PC household as a Trojan horse. It runs aside the Dell, sharing the same display, keyboard, and mouse for a while. Pretty soon, the family notices what a pain in the butt the Dell is to use because of the incessant pop-ups, the urgent messages to apply security updates, the spyware, the anti-virus programs. The Dell becomes slowly relegated to doorstop status. A year later, the family is in the market to buy a new computer, not to replace the Mini, but to add a second computer to the household (like how people went from a single shared TV in the living room to one for each room/person of the house). Are they going to consider a Dell? No. Are they gong to consider another Mini? Well, not after they add in the cost of a new display, keyboard, and mouse, which the original Mini is using perfectly well, thank you. Suddenly, the pricing on an all-in-one eMac, iMac, or iBook doesn’t seem so outrageous, especially since the family knows full well what they kind of value they are getting with a Mac. 2005-01-13 3:26 am Yes..? 2005-01-13 3:35 am @Anonymous: It seemed like you were making the case that the Mac mini couldn’t compete against these $200 PCs in volume sales, but there aren’t any $200 PCs. PCs start around $400 while the Mac mini starts at $500. No, I said the $200-$500 PC market. The $500-$700 PC market consists of hardware that handily outclasses the Mac Mini, so it’s not really comparable. The Mac Mini is competing with ultra low-end PCs. My point is that if iMacs and eMacs can’t compete in their price bracket, why do you think the Mac Mini will compete in it’s? @NewType: I’d love to see you explain how one lost month (8% of the year) rationalizes a 16% drop in sales. No, the reason iMac sales were slow last year (which is also explained in articles describing the 2004 financial report), is because nobody wanted to buy G4 computers, a liability that the Mac Mini shares. Even discounting that, the fact remains that low-end Macs only account for a 1/4 of Apple’s computer sales by volume. This is a very different distribution from that of most other companies. You can’t say that Apple’s low-end machines are doing well, when they ship almost as many PowerMacs as iMacs and eMacs combined! It’s completely backwards. 2005-01-13 3:43 am I think Apple has a great chance to sell more cpu’s with the mini. I like the idea of buying my own moniter, because after buying the mini, I want a G5 Powermac and still use my monitor 2005-01-13 3:46 am So how is this different than someone buying a Mac mini for the first time instead of a PC. It’s very different. I don’t think the Mac Mini is going to fare any better in it’s “weight class”, than the iMacs and eMacs are doing in theirs. I can’t think of any reason why somebody looking at $500 computers would be any more likely to buy a Mac than somebody looking at $1200 computers. However, for the gateway effect to work, the Mac Mini doesn’t *have* to sell anymore than 2% of the market (or whatever iMacs are doing). If a sysadmin buying a Mac Mini causes him to recommend iMacs for a future upgrade, that’s a big win for Apple. If a family buying a Mac Mini for grandma causes them to buy an PowerMac instead of a Dell for their own home, that’s a win. Apple continues to exist because of high-end, high-margin products like the iPod and PowerMac, and the extent to which the Mac Mini helps *their* sales is likely more important to Apple’s bottom line than sales of the Mac Mini itself. 2005-01-13 3:53 am “the extent to which the Mac Mini helps *their* (iPod, PowerMac) sales is likely more important to Apple’s bottom line than sales of the Mac Mini itself.” I agree, I think that’s a part of the grand sceme… I think the more Mac Mini’s they sell, the more it’ll get the brand “out there.” Maybe more BigMacs will be sold and Apple has accomplished two targets. 2005-01-13 4:20 am I’m something of msft hater. I hope the Mac is gaining market share. 2005-01-13 4:23 am It’s very different. I don’t think the Mac Mini is going to fare any better in it’s “weight class”, than the iMacs and eMacs are doing in theirs. I think the buying process goes like this. Do I get a PC or a Mac? | ——–PC—-> Dell, Walmart, IBM, microtel | | Mac | | | V V How much can I spend and what can I get for the money? The graph above will only look as shown to most people if an apple box could be had for cheap. Before the Mac mini the graph would only have a PC decision because the Mac was considered too expensive to factor into the process, I don’t think most people combine PCs and Macs together in thier buying process and make lateral comparisons. So the how much can I spend question was the deal breaker for the Apple so far prior to the Mac mini. Creating the image that Macs are expensive. Now a mac starts at $499 just like the PCs. So now people will atleast consider the Mac when making a decision. There by potentialy increasing Apple’s lowend volume. 2005-01-13 4:28 am My graph got messed up buy UBB. Anyway if you squint you may be able to make out what it says. Otherwise here is the graph in written form Do I get a PC or a Mac? if PC go to Dell, Walmart, IBM, microtel ……… then figure out How much can I spend and what can I get for the money? if Mac go to Apple then figure out How much can I spend and what can I get for the money? 2005-01-13 4:44 am “What kind of margins does a $499 mini-mac provide?” I’d say 100-200$. if someone has an other opinion pleas think about the game cube. ppc, ati grafics, 99$ and nintendo doesn’t lose money on them. Clueless; Nintendo, like Sony make a loss of each sale, but remake the money back through the licenses they sell off to software vendors, hence the reason why not only are studios peeved off about piracy, but gaming vendors too because they can’t obvious get royalties off the pirated versions being sold. Obviously you *really* need to actually read up on how the game console market is working; the reason why they DON’T declare they’ve made a loss is because that is off set through revenue from software they sell, and royalties pay. For the system to work effectively, you need volume, hence the reason why Microsoft is losing money at this point it time; a combination of not only a lack of volume but willingness to take an intial loss as to boost their mind share for third party product development. 2005-01-13 4:53 am I disagree. The buying process goes: “I need to get on this ‘internet’ thing. I want to spend $1000. What computers are in my price range?” The “PC or Mac” question comes later. The price range is picked first, then computers in that price range are considered. Remember, most people don’t hang around on OSNews. If they want a computer, they go to their Mall, look at “computers/electronics” in the directory, and hit the appropriate shops. 2005-01-13 4:58 am I’d say 100-200$. if someone has an other opinion pleas think about the game cube. ppc, ati grafics, 99$ and nintendo doesn’t lose money on them. When Nintendo first sold them, they did lose money on them. They might not now, but you also have to consider that a gamecube has a 405MHz processor, 40MB of RAM, no disk, no CD-ROM, not and no network interface. 2005-01-13 5:22 am But then after putting the Dell away, the 16 year old daughter in the house wants to connect her webcam to the mac, and it doesn’t work with MSN Messenger, and suddenly most of the 14year old boy’s collection of games won’t play anymore. What then? 2005-01-13 5:28 am “I need to get on this ‘internet’ thing. I want to spend $1000. What computers are in my price range?” The “PC or Mac” question comes later. The price range is picked first, then computers in that price range are considered. Regardless of when the price desicison is made the rest of the process is the same. If I pick $500 and there are no Macs in the $500 range the decision is obvious. Remember, most people don’t hang around on OSNews.If they want a computer, they go to their Mall, look at “computers/electronics” in the directory, and hit the appropriate shops. That is exactly why they wouldn’t know the difference between and Sempron and G4 if it bit them in the ass. They want a machine that allows them to get on the “Internet thing”. Not play HL2, compile massive C++ projects and run Pro/Engineer. The Mac mini fits the bill. “Oh look that computer is so tiny and cute and it can do all that (organize my pcitures, buy music on the Internet and so on so forth “. 2005-01-13 5:29 am She buys an iSight and converts her friends to use AIM instead Especially after Tiger comes out, her friends will come over and look at it and go OMG dat r0x0rz. Heh. Well at least, I suppose that’s how it’s meant to work. 2005-01-13 5:43 am The Mac mini fits the bill. “Oh look that computer is so tiny and cute and it can do all that (organize my pcitures, buy music on the Internet and so on so forth “. Then why aren’t more iMacs selling in their price-range? Apple ships 700,000 PowerMacs a year, they should be shipping a whole lot more iMacs and eMacs than the 900,000 they sell. They’re cute, they’re flashy, they’re tiny, so why aren’t they selling? That’s precisely what I think you’re missing. You can make a plausible argument for why high-end users might purchase Macs disproportionately. They know more about computers, and are open to alternatives. However, I don’t see a rational argument for why people looking at PCs in the $500 price range would be any more receptive to Macs than people in the $1200 price range are. Ergo, if you’re expecting the Mac Mini to get a higher share of the $500 market than the iMac and eMac have of the $750-$1500 market, I think you’ll be dissapointed. 2005-01-13 5:46 am Look for all of those out there that are going to buy one, and are put off by these nay sayers, just buy one, they’re going to bash the Mac, no matter what kind it is, anyways, is it because its a better product, you bet, is it because its not just a cheap black or baige box, you guessed, right. They complain about how Macs are expensive, but praise the likes of Voodoo and Alienware. I hope that the Mac mini does do well, i’m tired of living in this crappy and virus ridden windows world. 2005-01-13 5:57 am Since I missed the monster thread yesterday I was curious about Apple’s supplies of G4s. Are they trying to dump a bunch of them or what by offering this mini? Since OSX has no software that really interests me, I would be a bit more willing to buy one of these once they put a G5 into these things. 2005-01-13 6:18 am Actually, I’d be rather interested in trying out MCL on this thing. Mac’s historically have been a platform for Lisp development, so there is still some cool Mac-only Lisp software. That said, I can’t justify $500 for something so anemic, and I don’t have an extra monitor lying around here. Which brings me to a question for those saying that these Mac Mini’s will be popular in the low-end market: how many non-geeks do you know that have extra monitors, keyboards, or mice lying around? I mean, geeks tend to accumulate all sorts of hardware over time, but most non-geeks I know tend to buy computers in complete pieces. 2005-01-13 6:44 am because of all the misconceptions that the general public has about the Mac. my Aunt is looking for a New computer. they want to spend about 1200 – 1500 on it. the last computer they bought was in 1997 and was an aptiva. My Uncle wants a wide screen LCD monitor (he is not tech savvy but knows what looks cool) I mention the new iMacs and the first thing out of my Aunt’s Mouth is “Oh, they are not compatible I thought”. this is a woman who still calls Dell and Compaq computers “IBM compatibles”. the stuff she wants to do like e-mail, internet, organize recipes, write letters, and now that my uncle got a new Digital camera and DV camcorder from UPS for his years of service there, to have software to get pictures and organize them and make movies. the iMac is EXACTLY what she should use, especially since this woman doe snot know how to take care of a windows computer to keep it running well. her sale was lost because of a few factors: 1) Apple does no advertise to the masses like Dell 2) The tech guys at her work are morons 3) There are a lot of Apple haters out there that spread lies (you do not have to love Apple and the Mac to not be a hater) 2005-01-13 6:46 am Lisp on my Mac is great…. I felt bad for my fellow students who did not have access to the Mac tools because they used Windows at home and the computers at school did not even have cLisp installed. 2005-01-13 6:57 am Then why aren’t more iMacs selling in their price-range? Apple ships 700,000 PowerMacs a year, they should be shipping a whole lot more iMacs and eMacs than the 900,000 they sell. They’re cute, they’re flashy, they’re tiny, so why aren’t they selling? Where do you get your data???? Here is the latest quarter: Among other individual product lines, Apple’s iMac line, which also includes the educational market’s eMac computer, reported shipments of 456,000 units, more than double the 227,000 units it posted a year ago. Apple refreshed the iMac line in September with a new, all-in-one unit running on the G5 processor, which is made by IBM Corp. The only weakness in the report was falling sales of Apple’s highest-priced computers. PowerBook sales slipped to 152,000 from 195,000 units, and PowerMac sales came in at 167,000 units, down from 206,000 a year ago. iMac, eMac sales are up PowerMac and Powerbook sales are down. 456,000 units in a quarter is a lot more than the 900,000 units you calim for the year. However, I don’t see a rational argument for why people looking at PCs in the $500 price range would be any more receptive to Macs than people in the $1200 price range are. Ergo, if you’re expecting the Mac Mini to get a higher share of the $500 market than the iMac and eMac have of the $750-$1500 market, I think you’ll be dissapointed. The latest qurater throws your argument down the tube doesn’t it. I think I won’t be dissapointed. 2005-01-13 7:00 am Funny you bring up Lisp because I’ve got Corman Lisp and DrScheme opened up as I type this. But have you checked out the IDE Apple had for Dylan back in ’96 or so? From the screenshots (sorry don’t have link) it seems to have blown away anything out there offered to this day. If Dylan had become the first-class language on OSX I would already have a Mac. The language absolutely amazes me. Nice infix notation, but with a very CLOS-inspired object system and a macro system (not as powerful as CL though) Too bad that Dylan is on life-support. I guess another casualty of the Jobs(NeXT) takeover of Apple. At least Functional Objects open-sourced their entire software stack. 2005-01-13 7:01 am This is due to two things, I believe. The first and largest is that Apple announced the new iMac well over a month earlier than the arrival. That’s a big effect, probably around 10% of the iMac yearly sales, and then you can factor in the people who were turned away but bought something else entirely (ie a PC). The old (lamp) iMac was also underpowered compared to other machines out there. That hampered sales, and the current GPU would be doing the same thing now. I believe the rest of the sales drop is made from people looking for a more powerful machine than the iMac, but cheaper than the tower. I completely disagree with Rayiner on the Mini Mac, but time will tell on that one. To me it looks like a brilliant machine, although it really needed a slightly better GPU. Still, maybe we can review in six months…? 2005-01-13 7:04 am The one flaw with not including the keyboard with the mac mini is that windows keyboards do not have the same layout as a mac keyboard. So even if they get people to switch their old dell box with a mac mini, they will be confused by the fact that they are missing thinks like the command key and even the eject and volume keys. Relying on people with no mac experience to use their existing windows keyboards is a BIG mistake IMO. 2005-01-13 7:08 am “her sale was lost because of a few factors: 1) Apple does no advertise to the masses like Dell 2) The tech guys at her work are morons 3) There are a lot of Apple haters out there that spread lies (you do not have to love Apple and the Mac to not be a hater)” Right on, and Apple needs to advertise the hell out of OS X and iLife. Rayiner Hashem, here are some real numbers for you… http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=837 That link also clears up the profit margins on the Mac mini. As for the target audience of the Mac mini, they aren’t going for a $200-$500 market or a $500 to $700 market. They are targeting the sub-$1,000 market, and they are doing so in a new way. They are selling the Mac mini as an additional computer. A computer that sits on your desk alongside your PC. The audience does not need an extra monitor, keyboard, and mouse laying around, becuase this audience isn’t made up of people who want more than one monitor, keyboard, and mouse sitting on their desk. They don’t need to use great hardware either, because this is the same market who has no clue how a computer works, period. The ones who do spend more money (he he, highend iMacs are now selling better than lowend iMacs). All Apple has to do is make sure the Mac mini starts well under $1,000, has plenty of power to handle basic iLife usage, not drag on OS X performace, and make using the internet simpler and more pleasant (they’ve had that one nailed for ages now). This takes care of the people who have no clue who AMD is, and no clue what an ATX case is. You could even call this an iPod accessory. And now is the time to do all this because their brand name is in a place Coke could only dream about. Evidence is right in front of us too. Go to your local Frys or Microcenter and look at the iPods that they have in stock. Usually it’s about 2 iPods on the shelf and 2 shopping carts full of HP iPods in the next aisle. Why? Same hardware, same software, same price. Different logo on the back. 2005-01-13 7:08 am My numbers are from Apple’s FY04 10-k filing to the SEC: The article describing the report: http://www.macworld.com/news/2004/12/03/10k/index.php The report itself: http://www.hoovers.com/free/co/secdoc.xhtml?ipage=3126557&doc=0&att… 2005-01-13 7:19 am Well, I’ve never used it (it’s hard to get a hold of copies), but I’ve seen it and it does look amazing. Stuff like that is the reason I always like the sans-Jobs era Macs better. Mac Classic really reached a level of GUI finesse that I don’t think has yet been matched by any other GUI, and they had some genuinely cool stuff, not just Dylan, but NewtonOS, all the plans for the next-gen MacOS, etc. Unfortunately, Apple had too many smart people and nobody to herd them in a common direction. 2005-01-13 7:30 am Thats funny Rayiner, when you used to post on osOpinion.com, you had nothing positive to say about OS 9 then. Why are you getting the OS 9 religion now? (Because Apple is not making it anymore ofcourse…) You were downplaying Apple’s strengths way back then as well… nothing as changed. 2005-01-13 7:52 am When did I post anything on osOpinion.com regarding OS9? The only things I’ve ever posted to osOpinion are a “Linux is Overhyped” article in 1999, and a “Is OpenGL in Trouble?” article in 2000. I don’t recall ever posting anything about OS9 on the site — I haven’t even read it regularly for years. 2005-01-13 7:55 am I think this paragraph in the 10k report explains the decline in the iMac sales. Most of the reason for such a decline is not black and white as you would have us believe. And most certainly not because of the reasons you so adamantly stand by. The sweet spot is below $100 as I have been saying Note the last statement in the paragrah. So the Mac mini fits the bill according to Apple. And the proof that you are wrong is that Apple sold half the FY04 volume of IMac and eMacs in just one quarter. Net sales and unit sales of iMac systems were down 23% and 16%, respectively, during fiscal 2004 versus 2003. The decrease in iMac net sales and unit sales was largely due to the delay in the introduction of the new iMac, based on the PowerPC G5 processor, primarily as a result of manufacturing problems experienced by IBM. The delays in the new iMac resulted in the depletion of inventory of the old iMac flat panel prior to availability of the new iMac G5. The old flat panel iMac form factor which was available during most of fiscal 2004, was nearly 3 years old by the time the new iMac G5 began shipping in September 2004 and had experienced declines in sales as a result of the age of this product. The Company believes that sales of iMac systems have also declined due to a shift in consumer preference to portable systems and competitor desktop models with price points below $1,000. The Company introduced a new version of the eMac in April 2004 with a suggested retail price starting at $799 aimed at the price sensitive customer. 2005-01-13 7:56 am The sweet spot is below $100 as I have been saying Note the last statement in the paragrah. Below $1000. 2005-01-13 8:35 am Stuff like that is the reason I always like the sans-Jobs era Macs better I think Apple would have always been better off if Jobs would have continued tripping acid, exploring alternative religions, and never been associated with Apple. The guy is a major league asshole and his only useful role has been a svengali to the apple cult members. At least Gates used to hack assembly when writing Basic and other languages. Jobs has 0 technical knowledge. He’s useless. 2005-01-13 9:03 am … although without Jobs, there never would have been anyone driving Wozniak. Jobs is Apple is Jobs. 2005-01-13 9:19 am The mini mac will do well for about 6 months as a novelty. It well then be recognised for what it is – underpowered, overpriced and minimally upgradeable. The mini Mac is a new iteration of the old LC series machines of the early 90s. They were small, slow, poor quality and minimally expandable – I should know – I had a couple. 2005-01-13 9:35 am While he might not be the most technically savvy guy around, he knows business and he knows cool, and he’s used that to completely turn Apple around. I used use Macs in school in the 90’s, All that happened was they added colour. Since Jobs we’ve had OS X (started by Amelio, admittedly), Aqua, iLife and iPod, which have all been leveraged, one against the other, to increase overall market share, to say nothing of XServer and XSAN which will probably see steady growth for the next few years. The man knows how to run a company. 2005-01-13 10:05 am He’s useless. Yep, I can’t see any value in the CEO of a Forbes 500 company being admired like a rock god. Can’t do anything for the brand, must be disastrous for the sales figures. Doesn’t even wear a shirt and tie when he’s demoing his stuff. Certainly, if anyone made the early Apple, it was the Woz’s magic, by all means. But you need someone who sees the world in a different light and Saint Steve does that with a vengeance. Too furious in his younger years, he’s definitely more balanced now. And to say that in the years that he wasn’t there things were better: that’s why they were doing so well just before he returned, right? Anyway, you’ll get your wish: they’re reporting profits, they’re selling insanely cool stuff, the Apple store came to a screeching halt because people were tripping over themselves to buy the products. Yep, you aced that one: they’re doomed. End of October and Steve is clearing out his desk at 1 Infinite Loop and the receivers come in. It’s been nice knowing ya, Apple. 2005-01-13 10:12 am Actually, I don’t do The Wizard of Woz enough credit. It’s his technical genius that made it all possible. You needed the balls of someone like Jobs to even have the nerve to think you can change the world from your garage, but it goes absolutely nowhere if you don’t have someone like Steve Wozniak to breathe life into the thing. I’d give him a permanent office at the Apple campus, for whenever he feels like dropping in. I’d even give him a statue but he’d think that was hilarious and way over the top. I’d certainly send him all the cool kit that came off the production line. Just as a very thank you for building the first one in a wooden box. Mad props to you, Mr. Wozniak sir! 2005-01-13 11:00 am I will be there on opening day to buy myself a new Mini Mac! I can not wait. I was about to spend $500 on a used e-mac now I can go right to Apple and get the Mac Mini, I already have a 19″ Samsung flat screen for my PC and I would rather use a PC mouse with 2 buttons and a scroll anyway! Go Apple! Let Bill know that all is not over! Only sucky part is that the new Mac OS is not ready yet! I don’t want to buy a Mini Mac and then 2 months later have to pay $129 for an OS upgrade! 2005-01-13 11:51 am I will be there on opening day to buy myself a new Mini Mac! I can not wait. I was about to spend $500 on a used e-mac now I can go right to Apple and get the Mac Mini, I already have a 19″ Samsung flat screen for my PC and I would rather use a PC mouse with 2 buttons and a scroll anyway! You’d be better off looking for a used ca. 800Mhz – 1Ghz Dual G4 PowerMac. It’ll be a _lot_ faster and also has the advantage of being expandable. 2005-01-13 1:39 pm You’d be better off looking for a used ca. 800Mhz – 1Ghz Dual G4 PowerMac. It’ll be a _lot_ faster and also has the advantage of being expandable. Yeah but no way near as pretty! 2005-01-13 2:05 pm “The man knows how to run a company.” Well, he’s always been a super salesman, and that’s why the money people have him there now. Back in 1982, IBM was gonna take-over the PC market no matter what Jobs did. When Jobs presented the original Mac, he was probably the last person to figure out that the IBM-PC had by then drawn away most of the developer and user base from competitors; 6502, Z-80, 6809 based 8-bit systems. Smart engineers like to use the skills they already have. Apple has however been able to retain a core of high-end pro users for the last 15-years or so. These pro users upgrade/replace their systems pretty often, about every 18-24 months. I don’t see the mini-mac impacting the monopoly market share of Wintel since the hardware costs of win boxes will continue downward, and many Winbox volume buyers will insist on mainboards with Intel chip-sets. The mini-mac does however target well the key weakness of Linux in the desktop or consumer space, which is software/hardware integration. It’s a big “nail in the coffin” for desktop Linux vendors. Apple seems to be effecting an anti-OSS/FS stategy more than anything directed at MS, especially since the iPod doesn’t support patent-free formats. The market goal for Apple seems to be attack the OSS/FS movement generally, rather than to seek long-term market share and profitability. That’s why I, like some, see the Mac high-end user base and software going to IBM, and the iPod/low-end user base going to Dell/HP (on Win). Do Apple and the money people see a future for Apple long-term? I don’t think they do. 2005-01-13 2:28 pm They’re already making the rounds at all the free sites. Pick up a few and start clustering. http://free.GearLive.com/index.php?referral=146 2005-01-13 2:32 pm A G4 iBook. I must say Apple does indeed make the very best laptops. I’ve played around with decade old LCIIIs and Classics, but this is the first modern Mac I’ve ever used. To sum up my feelings for this wonderful machine; best computer purchase I have ever made! 2005-01-13 3:20 pm Clever company.The products aren’t bad either. 2005-01-13 3:38 pm Since IBM recently sold off their loss making PC hardware division, how exactly are they are going to take the high end user base with no hardware to sell them. Personally I don’t see a graphics professional sitting down in front of an eServer. And how exactly is opening the unix layer of their operating system and contributing to KHTML anti-OSS? 2005-01-13 3:45 pm “he one flaw with not including the keyboard with the mac mini is that windows keyboards do not have the same layout as a mac keyboard. So even if they get people to switch their old dell box with a mac mini, they will be confused by the fact that they are missing thinks like the command key and even the eject and volume keys. Relying on people with no mac experience to use their existing windows keyboards is a BIG mistake IMO.” What are you talking about? Most keyboards will work fine for all the really critical keys. The issues you cite that really are not available are volume and eject. This is actually a non issue as many PC keyboards have these keys. Further, to change volume is OS X is easy as there is a control onscreen. To eject, drag to the trash. 2005-01-13 5:08 pm Apple can never break the monopoly of wintel and microsoft alone. If Apple were run with that as the goal, they’ll surely go out of business. No company today is making money off PC sales like they used to the market is so competitve there are no margins and many times continuous loss. IBM dumped it’s PC business for precisely that very reason. Dell started selling PDAs, Printers, music players and so on. HP has a printer business and soon starting the digital media center focus too. So has Gateway. Apple is leading them all with the ipod and itunes in the digital music player business. That business will help pick up the PC sales business and it has the iMac and eMac sales have doubled compared to last years Q1. Apple has steadly posted profits and this quarter the profits beat analyst expectations by 37 cents per share. Apple os doing everything right at the moment, releasing new products continuously to keep product intereset, Releasing products to meet all the price ranges. There were huge price gaps in Apple’s product range and they have filled them quitre nicely wih the Mac mini in the PCs. The ipod range has a player from $99-$599 whereas before it was $299-$599. iPod sales increase iTunes music store sales, meaning exclusive deals by record companies. iPod and iTunes have rightly been licensed to other companies creating a market not just a product. All of this was possible after Steve Jobs returned. He has constantly lead Apple to profitability and MacOS X would not have been possible without the purchase of Next Inc and the return of Jobs. 2005-01-13 5:12 pm So even if they get people to switch their old dell box with a mac mini, they will be confused by the fact that they are missing thinks like the command key and even the eject and volume keys. At work my Sun keyboard works perfectly with my powerbook. The meta key maps to the windows key and the voume control keys on the keyboard map to the volume controls. I supect hat the windows key would work as the cmd key on a windows key board. You can always right-click if you have a two button mouse. 2005-01-13 6:17 pm If Apple can move these machines as fast as people wanted them this quarter then we may see even higher 1st quarter numbers. This past holiday Apple did NOT meet all demand for the iPod. I think that says a lot about how much consumer recognition Apple is getting. A majority of these iPod purchases will be used on a PC so I can see these same people taking a look at the Mini and think that they don’t have to put up with spyware, virsuses, and constant security issues. 2005-01-13 6:32 pm Apple sells computers, not CPUs… 2005-01-13 6:40 pm Your God Jobs had a chance to license NeXT to IBM back in the late 80s and refused because of his irrational hardware fetish. That’s probably the biggest IT blunder of all times. Microsoft would have most likely been relegated to doing languages and maybe office suites. Now Apple is just a miniscule player with a continual declining market share. 2005-01-13 8:50 pm Has the Seeker been booted from OS News… ? I wrote a series of Apple predictions about five months ago that he dismissed as complete fantasies barely worth his consideration. I’d love to revisit them now… Now that most of my outlandish claims have come to pass… The turnaround at Apple is surely one of the top 10 business stories in 2004, and the company might be there again in 2005. I’ll say it again: There’s never been a better time to be a Macolyte! 2005-01-13 9:55 pm Apple can never break the monopoly of wintel and microsoft alone. They can never “break” it because, legally speaking, they don’t even participate in the market Microsoft was found a monopoly of. 2005-01-13 11:41 pm If my memory serves, Microsoft were a major shareholder in Apple, isn’t this still the case? I doubt therefore that Apple will ever be given enough rope to hang Microsoft, maybe themselves though, ehy? 😉 Besides, when compared to similar PC kit (which gets ever cheaper) “Mini” is still overpriced for what it is, particularly when you add Apple branded keyboard/mouse/display but then it does have an Apple badge, so that’s ok 😉 …and it does look rather iPod-cute and gurly! Maybe MTV will run a “pimp-my-Mini” show, I’m hoping…hehe 😀 2005-01-13 11:49 pm If my memory serves, Microsoft were a major shareholder in Apple, isn’t this still the case? Microsoft have never been a shareholder in Apple, bailed Apple out of bankruptcy or in any other way “saved” Apple. Besides, when compared to similar PC kit (which gets ever cheaper) “Mini” is still overpriced for what it is, particularly when you add Apple branded keyboard/mouse/display but then it does have an Apple badge, so that’s ok 😉 It’s worth pointing out that if size is a major consideration, there *isn’t* any “similar PC kit” at anything close to that price point. 2005-01-14 12:22 am it actualy seems you dont have a clue about the videogame-industry. md and sony lose money with every console they sell. nintendo doesn’t. i have to admit that i dont know if the PStwo is subsidized or not. @ Rayiner Hashem: thats why i’d say the mini mac costs about 300$ (compared to the 99 of the cube). the difference is only a faster cpu, better gpu, hdd and a bit more of that dirt cheap ram. the optical drives should be pretty equal in productioncosts. 2005-01-14 12:34 am You all are smoking crack. If you called the iPod a computer….why not, it has a display, hard drive, os…and add that to powermac sales, you see that not only does Apple, really have a 10% marketshare (not 3)…but the iPod os is actually a far more popular OS than OS X… WOW, I bet that sounded real cool in the haze. Now, back to serious business… the Mac mini is a whole different product line from the powerbook/ibook/imac/emac/powermac line. It’s going to sell well, and it’s not cannabilizing any sales…the contrary it will drive sales of the other products…I don’t believe through an ‘upsell’ int he store, but rather via the next upgrade cycle, mac users buy more macs…we all know that. What I’d like to see, is a few predictions, we’ll meet back here in a year. I say the Mac Mini sells about 4 million this year, and add that, to the other lines continuing to sell at 2004 levels, with no drop off. Any prediction into the future is going to be wrong, but its all in fun. So, predictions? 2005-01-14 1:24 am “Microsoft would have most likely been relegated to doing languages and maybe office suites. Now Apple is just a miniscule player with a continual declining market share.” Well, technically, according to the recent numbers, they grew 26% as the rest of the industry grew 11%, and that means a rising market share. All before the Mac mini, too. “Microsoft have never been a shareholder in Apple, bailed Apple out of bankruptcy or in any other way “saved” Apple.” Microsoft became a minor shareholder of Apple back in the 90s. If I remember correctly, they sold a lot of that stock about 5 years later. “thats why i’d say the mini mac costs about 300$ (compared to the 99 of the cube). the difference is only a faster cpu, better gpu, hdd and a bit more of that dirt cheap ram. the optical drives should be pretty equal in productioncosts.” They make less than 20% profit off Mac mini’s according to the report. “…but the iPod os is actually a far more popular OS than OS X…” Close, and getting closer very fast. About 10 millions iPods out there, and about 12 million 10.3 users out there (not counting previous versions of OS X). 2005-01-14 2:04 pm “Since IBM recently sold off their loss making PC hardware division, how exactly are they are going to take the high end user base with no hardware to sell them. Personally I don’t see a graphics professional sitting down in front of an eServer. And how exactly is opening the unix layer of their operating system and contributing to KHTML anti-OSS?” I suspect that in 3-4 years, there won’t be any difference between Apple and IBM hardware on the high-end, IBM will buy whatever assets from Apple, hopefully at a premium. Apple uses KHTML, but I’m gonna guess that Moz will be the dominant browser app on most every enterprise level system within 18-24 months aside from IE, and any assertion that KHTML has a future, or that Apple supports OSS/FS is tenuous at best. Apple supports neither FLAC nor Vorbis on the iPod which is a clear intention to block-out non-patented audio formats. Apple clearly doesn’t support long-term user freedom.