PDA

View Full Version : Education iMac: For Institutions Only


MacRumors
Jul 12, 2006, 03:45 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Multiple readers report that Apple's $899 iMac (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060705092627.shtml) has been designated as an education institution purchase only product.

From http://www.apple.com/education/imac/
$899 configuration of the 17-inch iMac is available for education institution customers only.

For the past week, the education-only iMac had been available to both qualified education individuals and institutions. There has been no official explanation from Apple on the quick change.

supremedesigner
Jul 12, 2006, 03:50 PM
That sucks for everybody :-\ But that will be good for all colleges and high schools!

Stridder44
Jul 12, 2006, 03:51 PM
lol and a million cries go out as Mac users everywhere weep....




And then we remember about the new MacPros.

WildCowboy
Jul 12, 2006, 03:54 PM
Oh, that sucks big time. Guess the margins just aren't high enough...

Mord
Jul 12, 2006, 03:56 PM
probably cut into the regular imacs sales too much.

Jesus
Jul 12, 2006, 03:57 PM
Well that sucks...:mad: :mad: :mad:

sisyphus
Jul 12, 2006, 03:58 PM
Oh that is soooo going to P.O. my girlfriend. She's an elementary teacher and I just finished convincing her to buy one of those when they became available in Canada. :eek:

It makes me want to cry everytime I go over there and have to use her old e-machines... :mad: :o :(

codo
Jul 12, 2006, 04:00 PM
Still there in the UK NUS store - Grab one whilst you can, I guess.

OldSkoolNJ
Jul 12, 2006, 04:01 PM
Oh come on .. Well know why this was done. Just go read the post about when it was released. I could see this coming a mile away. Either a they would do this or b they would start doing the audits they talk about with educational purchases. There must have been atleast 50 people who blatantly posted about abusing the discount on a "public forum" and hundreds maybe thousands more who thougt of it. Lets say I owned a store and I saw a forum online where 50 plus people said they knew a way to rip off my store, do you think I would leave it vulnerable? I dont know ... maybe this is the reason or maybe it isnt but I think ts great they did it. Because now all the people who thought they could do this and thought its no different from walking in a store and walking out with out paying for an item, will have to mow a few more lawns or bag a few more grocerys and pay what the rest of the honest people out there will. I know I know I am sounding uber negative here but not nearly as negative as someone trying to justify stealing on a "public forum".

Kevin

Lancetx
Jul 12, 2006, 04:02 PM
Hopefully this is just a short term supply and demand thing. There probably aren't enough to go around currently for both institutional and individual purchases, especially if they just received a few large institutional orders. Once inventory ramps back up on them, hopefully they'll be available again for purchase by education individuals.

hyperpasta
Jul 12, 2006, 04:02 PM
Bad move...

Obviously, there is huge demand for cheaper Macs. Cheap doesn't equal bad!

Mac minis should start at $399
iMacs should start at $899
MacBooks should start at $799
MacBook Pros should start at $1499
Mac Pros should start at $1499

There is no reason this wouldn't work.

gregarious119
Jul 12, 2006, 04:05 PM
So much for buying the 80gb / 512 version and upgrading it to my hearts desire (for less of a cost for buying th normal entry model).

papersushi
Jul 12, 2006, 04:07 PM
Get a new girlfriend who uses a Mac. Problem solved.

Oh that is soooo going to P.O. my girlfriend. She's an elementary teacher and I just finished convincing her to buy one of those when they became available in Canada. :eek:

It makes me want to cry everytime I go over there and have to use her old e-machines... :mad: :o :(

68134
Jul 12, 2006, 04:07 PM
_

ham_man
Jul 12, 2006, 04:09 PM
Bad move...

Obviously, there is huge demand for cheaper Macs. Cheap doesn't equal bad!

Mac minis should start at $399
iMacs should start at $899
MacBooks should start at $799
MacBook Pros should start at $1499
Mac Pros should start at $1499

There is no reason this wouldn't work.
You can't drop the price and maintain the quality, champ...

peharri
Jul 12, 2006, 04:11 PM
I'm sure a .edu-discounted MacBook is going to be close in price anyway, and then there's the Mac mini, I doubt the student's Mac will usually be their first computer ever. Either one is probably a better fit.

The $900 iMac really is an institutional product, not aimed at personal users. Personally I think it'd work well as a corporate product too, if Apple could actually start selling to corporate customers.

balamw
Jul 12, 2006, 04:16 PM
You can't drop the price and maintain the quality, champ...
Gordon Moore would probably beg to differ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law). By the time Merom is out the current Yonah processors should become cheap enough to allow a $100-$200 price drop for a Mac mini.

The $900 iMac really is an institutional product, not aimed at personal users. Personally I think it'd work well as a corporate product too, if Apple could actually start selling to corporate customers.
It would work quite well as a secondary Mac in a multi-Mac family too...

B

ham_man
Jul 12, 2006, 04:19 PM
Gordon Moore would probably beg to differ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law). By the time Merom is out the current Yonah processors should become cheap enough to allow a $100-$200 price drop for a Mac mini.

B
Interesting...I just wouldn't want Apple to have to resort to using Celeron processors to make their products cheap. My main consideration for buying a Mac was not just the OS, but the fact that I knew I was getting a quality machine that would stand the test of time and not fry like my Vaio desktop did after 2 years...

codo
Jul 12, 2006, 04:19 PM
I'm sure a .edu-discounted MacBook is going to be close in price anyway, and then there's the Mac mini, I doubt the student's Mac will usually be their first computer ever. Either one is probably a better fit.

The $900 iMac really is an institutional product, not aimed at personal users. Personally I think it'd work well as a corporate product too, if Apple could actually start selling to corporate customers.

How is that exactly? Itís a MacBook with a stand and a bigger screen. How is it not for personal use?

Leoff
Jul 12, 2006, 04:22 PM
There must have been atleast 50 people who blatantly posted about abusing the discount on a "public forum" and hundreds maybe thousands more who thougt of it.

Kevin

This is nothing new to Apple. They wouldn't have pulled it just cause some bozos posted about it on this board or other boards. It's been known for YEARS that you could do this.

Eidorian
Jul 12, 2006, 04:23 PM
The Mac mini and iMac are in dire need of an update. The Mini doesn't really need a speed boost either. Just drop the price to $499 Solo and $599 Duo.

Leoff
Jul 12, 2006, 04:24 PM
Mac minis should start at $399
iMacs should start at $899
MacBooks should start at $799
MacBook Pros should start at $1499
Mac Pros should start at $1499


And I "should" be given a MacBook Pro for free for being a loyal customer. But it ain't gonna happen.

illegalprelude
Jul 12, 2006, 04:27 PM
Gordon Moore would probably beg to differ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law). By the time Merom is out the current Yonah processors should become cheap enough to allow a $100-$200 price drop for a Mac mini.


It would work quite well as a secondary Mac in a multi-Mac family too...

B

Yes that is true but by then, that technology is out dated. The reason new technology is expensive is because its...well new

bigmc6000
Jul 12, 2006, 04:28 PM
Oh come on .. Well know why this was done. Just go read the post about when it was released. I could see this coming a mile away. Either a they would do this or b they would start doing the audits they talk about with educational purchases. There must have been atleast 50 people who blatantly posted about abusing the discount on a "public forum" and hundreds maybe thousands more who thougt of it. Lets say I owned a store and I saw a forum online where 50 plus people said they knew a way to rip off my store, do you think I would leave it vulnerable? I dont know ... maybe this is the reason or maybe it isnt but I think ts great they did it. Because now all the people who thought they could do this and thought its no different from walking in a store and walking out with out paying for an item, will have to mow a few more lawns or bag a few more grocerys and pay what the rest of the honest people out there will. I know I know I am sounding uber negative here but not nearly as negative as someone trying to justify stealing on a "public forum".

Kevin



Guess what - now a bunch of people who were going to buy this won't buy anything and just wait. Great. You're so obsessed with calling it stealing - HEY - guess what - Apple still makes money off of it and last time I checked making $ is better than not making $. We even see legitimate edu customers getting shafted by this. One poor guy's g/f is now stuck with an e-machine. Yeah that's just wonderful. Is it stealing if you go to Amazon.com and get the $100 discount on the MacBook? That's all it is - a $100 discount (historically speaking) and apple is, in fact, in the business of 1 - Making $ and 2- Increasing user-base (which results in making money). Hurry hurry, quick quick. Grab a calculator. What is greater. 10%*899*1000(just a guess as to how many purchases would be made by people who otherwise aren't going to get a Mac) or 0*0*0. That's right - if you sell things at any profit margin to people who otherwise wouldn't buy anything you are still doing better!!!!!!!!!! Get an economic brain in your head - or better yet - grab some common sense and get off your high horse.

diablojota
Jul 12, 2006, 04:34 PM
The Mac mini and iMac are in dire need of an update. The Mini doesn't really need a speed boost either. Just drop the price to $499 Solo and $599 Duo.

What would you do to update them, then? What is there to update? Add another USB 2.0 slot? Dire need for nothing. As long as they are selling, there won't be a change, not until the new processors start rolling out come september - december.

generik
Jul 12, 2006, 04:37 PM
Guess what - now a bunch of people who were going to buy this won't buy anything and just wait. Great. You're so obsessed with calling it stealing - HEY - guess what - Apple still makes money off of it and last time I checked making $ is better than not making $. We even see legitimate edu customers getting shafted by this. One poor guy's g/f is now stuck with an e-machine. Yeah that's just wonderful. Is it stealing if you go to Amazon.com and get the $100 discount on the MacBook? That's all it is - a $100 discount (historically speaking) and apple is, in fact, in the business of 1 - Making $ and 2- Increasing user-base (which results in making money). Hurry hurry, quick quick. Grab a calculator. What is greater. 10%*899*1000(just a guess as to how many purchases would be made by people who otherwise aren't going to get a Mac) or 0*0*0. That's right - if you sell things at any profit margin to people who otherwise wouldn't buy anything you are still doing better!!!!!!!!!! Get an economic brain in your head - or better yet - grab some common sense and get off your high horse.

Apple is greedy, what's new.

They rather make $0 than to make less, because you know why? The person who end up not getting still has that desire to satisfy, the person who bought cheap? There goes the near future sale.

balamw
Jul 12, 2006, 04:41 PM
Yes that is true but by then, that technology is out dated. The reason new technology is expensive is because its...well new
You are right. However, Apple continued to use the G4 in lots of products while still selling other G5 based products.

B

theBB
Jul 12, 2006, 04:41 PM
I can almost swear the initial press release announced this as an "institutional purchase only" product. I was actually surprised when students or teachers claimed they could order it as well. Maybe they just noticed their mistake and pulled it from personal purchase channels.

Eidorian
Jul 12, 2006, 04:42 PM
What would you do to update them, then? What is there to update? Add another USB 2.0 slot? Dire need for nothing. As long as they are selling, there won't be a change, not until the new processors start rolling out come september - december.

iMac - speed bump (Yonah goes up to 2.33 GHz)
Mac Mini - price drop (tad bit over priced compared to the educational iMac)

Doctor Q
Jul 12, 2006, 04:42 PM
probably cut into the regular imacs sales too much.That's exactly what some are speculating. Which means Apple pulls products like this if they are too unpopular (not enough education sales to justify the product) or if they are too popular (enough education sales to cut into their non-education sales).

Well know why this was done. Just go read the post about when it was released. I could see this coming a mile away. Either a they would do this or b they would start doing the audits they talk about with educational purchases. There must have been atleast 50 people who blatantly posted about abusing the discount on a "public forum" and hundreds maybe thousands more who thougt of it...I doubt that's the reason, because the same is true of every other education deal. Apple chooses how tough to be about verifying student status, knowing that some people always try to beat the system.

ChrisA
Jul 12, 2006, 04:43 PM
Bad move...

Obviously, there is huge demand for cheaper Macs. Cheap doesn't equal bad!

Mac minis should start at $399
iMacs should start at $899
MacBooks should start at $799
MacBook Pros should start at $1499
Mac Pros should start at $1499

There is no reason this wouldn't work.

Yes. Absolutly. I still hear the argument that Macs are expensive. For example my brother needed a new computer. Even the lowest price Apple computer would cost something like $700. His budget was $250. He was able to buy a generic 2Ghz Celeron mini tower. The $250 system was fast enough for normal email and web browsing. He didn't say that the Mac Mini was "over priced" just that it was "expansive" there is a difference.
Apple simply ignores the low end and this is what most people buy.

They do really need a $399 entry level machine.

Caitlyn
Jul 12, 2006, 04:45 PM
I was planning to buy one of these things too. Damn, I'm really disappointed.

Superdrive
Jul 12, 2006, 04:50 PM
Maybe the $899 iMac is a holdover for people who need to buy now. August 7 could have something that is much nicer than that...next gen eMac?:confused:

baleensavage
Jul 12, 2006, 04:54 PM
Didn't they do something like this with the eMac when it first came out? It took them a while to release that eventually to the public. My guess is what happened is that they relized that there was a lot of demand for these amongst students and teachers and got worried that they wouldn't have enough to supply the schools. Lets face it, in terms of educational markets landing a school is a big deal. Losing a few individual sales is not. The institutional deals are where the money is in education. Conisdering that its now July and summer vacation there may be a number of schools in the process of upgrades.

Either way, I really do feel it is time for Apple to drop their prices not raise them like they have with their entire product line. Most of the world is not made of money, in particular small businesses. Apple really needs to start thinking about that market. the eMac worked really well for small businesses. $800 for an all-in-one. Now you can get a headless mini for $800 add in a monitor and a keyboard and mouse and you're creeping up on $1,000. It's really hard for an IT person to convince the boss to buy a new $1,000 computer when they see eMachines at Walmart for under $500. Sure Apple's are better than an eMachine, but does someone who will be word processing and browsing the internet really need a core duo, isight, etc. etc. etc.

wmmk
Jul 12, 2006, 04:56 PM
Maybe the $899 iMac is a holdover for people who need to buy now. August 7 could have something that is much nicer than that...next gen eMac?:confused:
that'd be nice!

Stridder44
Jul 12, 2006, 04:58 PM
I agree. As soon as possible Apple should lower the price of the Mac Mini.

ifjake
Jul 12, 2006, 05:09 PM
hmm. Dell used to sell top of the line computers. Used to be the quality computer to get. Now they're, um, catching on fire in very select instances and generally kind of cheap feeling. Maybe Apple computers could stand to lose a little bit off the price, but i'm not wanting Apple to turn into Dell just like Dell turned into Dell. Yes, Dell sells the most computers, but i don't want any of them.

shawnce
Jul 12, 2006, 05:19 PM
They do really need a $399 entry level machine.

...only if Apple wanted to go AFTER that market segment... to date they haven't (and for many good reasons).

KREX725
Jul 12, 2006, 05:20 PM
Didn't they do something like this with the eMac when it first came out? It took them a while to release that eventually to the public. My guess is what happened is that they relized that there was a lot of demand for these amongst students and teachers and got worried that they wouldn't have enough to supply the schools.

That was my first thought too. Maybe they got enough response from non-schools that they are worried the supply wouldn't hold up to get the schools stocked before the new school year.

Just like the eMac originally being this way, I think once school is in full swing and Apple is caught up, we'll see these offered to teachers and higher edu students.

hyperpasta
Jul 12, 2006, 05:22 PM
And I "should" be given a MacBook Pro for free for being a loyal customer. But it ain't gonna happen.

This isn't as hard to pull off as it looks.

Let's take the $399 Mac mini as an example. Starting with the current $599 model, we need to take it down $200. First, the Mac mini is now five months old. We know its overpriced, since the MacBook Pro has had TWO processor speed boosts during the time that the Mac mini has been availible. In addition, Yonah chips will be price-dropped dramatically when Merom is released. Other components have probably become cheaper too. Let's say that the cheaper components add up to a $150 price drop. Reasonable.

Now if we chop the HD to 4200 RPM and 40GB, remove Bluetooth, and use slower RAM, we could easily shave off another $50.

Laugh at this configuration all you like, but I'm much more likely to buy a $399 computer to use as a streaming media box on top of my TV than a $599 one.

It also works great for the average family. Us on MR tend to expect more from our computers. This $399 Mac mini configuration would be perfectly capable of holding large-sized iTunes and iPhoto libraries, maybe some light video editing here and there, making music with GarageBand, publishing a blog with iWeb, video conferencing, browsing the internet, etc.

And with the next revision, it could easily be improved upon.

TheSailerMan
Jul 12, 2006, 05:32 PM
Wow, my mom got really lucky. This Saturday, my family went to the Apple Store on 5th Avenue, and my dad and I were finally able to convince my mom (a special ed. teacher) to switch to a Mac. So my dad ordered the education iMac for my mom on Sunday, and it'll ship tommorrow.

If it wasn't for the edu. iMac, my dad probably wouldv'e ordered a Mac mini, bu tthe iMac was such a better deal (my mom doesn't use bluetooth or burn DVDs).

alep85
Jul 12, 2006, 05:35 PM
Guess what - now a bunch of people who were going to buy this won't buy anything and just wait. Great. You're so obsessed with calling it stealing - HEY - guess what - Apple still makes money off of it and last time I checked making $ is better than not making $. We even see legitimate edu customers getting shafted by this. One poor guy's g/f is now stuck with an e-machine. Yeah that's just wonderful. Is it stealing if you go to Amazon.com and get the $100 discount on the MacBook? That's all it is - a $100 discount (historically speaking) and apple is, in fact, in the business of 1 - Making $ and 2- Increasing user-base (which results in making money). Hurry hurry, quick quick. Grab a calculator. What is greater. 10%*899*1000(just a guess as to how many purchases would be made by people who otherwise aren't going to get a Mac) or 0*0*0. That's right - if you sell things at any profit margin to people who otherwise wouldn't buy anything you are still doing better!!!!!!!!!! Get an economic brain in your head - or better yet - grab some common sense and get off your high horse.

I agree with you in a lot of ways.....being a business major, I understand the need for margin on a product....HOWEVER, Apple should first be interested in gaining MARKET SHARE. With this little $899 baby, Apple had a chance to really market a one-size-fits-all solution for many families. For instance, I work at Best Buy in computer sales and I see NO NEED for anything past Intel Integrated Graphics on the computers we sell to 75-80 percent of the people that come in a purchase a computer. The educational iMac would have been PERFECT for the masses, a computer that's more than capable for what most people want to do with it, with the capability for a little bit of gaming as well. Anyone who needs more can get the one with the graphics card.

I agree with the fact that margin has to be made, but there comes a time when you have to gain market share. Once you've done that and the volume of business you are doing is much greater than before (and your competitors are in the dust, much like I would like Dell and Windows to be), you can increase your margin and please the shareholders....

My two cents, Apple messed up on this one, hopefully we see that iMac configuration or a similar model on the market soon...

68134
Jul 12, 2006, 05:41 PM
_

pknz
Jul 12, 2006, 05:52 PM
I had a feeling this would happen. Actually no I assumed this was how it would be from the beginning, was a bit surprised any Educationists could get one.

hyperpasta
Jul 12, 2006, 05:56 PM
Most people who buy Macs are somewhat creative. With a Celeron processor, you can't be very creative...

How about a Core Solo? I thought they were about as fast as an early G5. Plus the Intel graphics are actually faster for 2D stuff (playing video, for instance) than an accelerator card with 64MB of VRAM.

Frisco
Jul 12, 2006, 06:04 PM
I agree with you in a lot of ways.....being a business major, I understand the need for margin on a product....HOWEVER, Apple should first be interested in gaining MARKET SHARE. With this little $899 baby, Apple had a chance to really market a one-size-fits-all solution for many families. For instance, I work at Best Buy in computer sales and I see NO NEED for anything past Intel Integrated Graphics on the computers we sell to 75-80 percent of the people that come in a purchase a computer. The educational iMac would have been PERFECT for the masses, a computer that's more than capable for what most people want to do with it, with the capability for a little bit of gaming as well. Anyone who needs more can get the one with the graphics card.

I agree with the fact that margin has to be made, but there comes a time when you have to gain market share. Once you've done that and the volume of business you are doing is much greater than before (and your competitors are in the dust, much like I would like Dell and Windows to be), you can increase your margin and please the shareholders....

My two cents, Apple messed up on this one, hopefully we see that iMac configuration or a similar model on the market soon...


Excellent points made! Apple messed up bigtime!

SeaFox
Jul 12, 2006, 06:14 PM
For the past week, the education-only iMac had been available to both qualified education individuals and institutions. There has been no official explanation from Apple on the quick change.


Obviously because allowing students and teachers to purchase the machine would just anger regular consumers and increase the calls for the machine to be available as a regular item to everyone. :rolleyes:

And that would lower sales of other, higher cost, iMacs. Duh.

iMikeT
Jul 12, 2006, 06:21 PM
Was the eMac ever available for everyone?

balamw
Jul 12, 2006, 06:25 PM
Most people who buy Macs are somewhat creative. With a Celeron processor, you can't be very creative...
I don't know why the Celeron keeps coming up. I and others think it's quite likely Apple could drop the price on the current Core Solo $599 unit to $499 based on the reduction of costs of the CPU, chipset and other components, now that they are 6 months old... In fact they might even be able to use a faster Core Solo processor at the same time. If the prices haven't dropped yet they will soon, real soon. Merom is just around the corner...

Was the eMac ever available for everyone?

Yes, it was even available retail at places like CompUSA.

B

iBookG4user
Jul 12, 2006, 06:30 PM
Bad move...

Obviously, there is huge demand for cheaper Macs. Cheap doesn't equal bad!

Mac minis should start at $399
iMacs should start at $899
MacBooks should start at $799
MacBook Pros should start at $1499
Mac Pros should start at $1499

There is no reason this wouldn't work.
I think a much more reasonable price point would be
Mac Minis at $499
iMacs at $999
MacBooks at $999
MacBook Pros at $1499
Mac Pros at $1499

balamw
Jul 12, 2006, 06:40 PM
I think a much more reasonable price point would be
Sold! (Even though that would mean that the $999 iMac would likely have integrated graphics...)

B

Electro Funk
Jul 12, 2006, 06:54 PM
Apple is greedy, what's new.

They rather make $0 than to make less, because you know why? The person who end up not getting still has that desire to satisfy, the person who bought cheap? There goes the near future sale.

What :confused: :confused: :confused:

Name 1 corporation that is not greedy...

And non-profits are not allowed...;)

boncellis
Jul 12, 2006, 06:56 PM
I agree this is a bummer. I was hoping to ge one of them for the wife so she would be distracted from the machine I end up getting. I wonder if the offer will come back at some point.

generik
Jul 12, 2006, 07:01 PM
He didn't say that the Mac Mini was "over priced" just that it was "expansive" there is a difference.

The Mac Mini is not expansive, to have an expandable Mac the suits in Apple decides that you are a "pro" user and adjusts the pricing of your MacOS according... oh, I was referring to the flat 20% margins they have on every single product in their line.

Why does MacOS costs so much more on a Powermac than on a Mini? Beats me! :rolleyes:

...only if Apple wanted to go AFTER that market segment... to date they haven't (and for many good reasons).

Indeed, why sell a $399 Mac for what it is worth when you can sell it for $799? :rolleyes:

What :confused: :confused: :confused:

Name 1 corporation that is not greedy...

And non-profits are not allowed...;)

It is a good deal of greed that separates those who are happy to buy something at $c and sell it at $c + $p from those who decides it is not even worth their while unless $p = 20% * $p...

Eidorian
Jul 12, 2006, 07:04 PM
I say keep the Core Solo Mac mini around. I know it's a few dollars less then a Core Duo but we need something to round out the $500 area again. The markets are really segmented at $499, $999, $1499, and $1999.

balamw
Jul 12, 2006, 07:08 PM
The markets are really segmented at $499, $999, $1499, and $1999.
Hence iBookG4User's price points...

It is a good deal of greed that separates those who are happy to buy something at $c and sell it at $c + $p from those who decides it is not even worth their while unless $p = 20% * $p...

Even though your last equation seems wrong (1=20%) you seem to forget that $p typically pays for marketing, administation, R&D and finally profit. 20% gross margin is pretty poor.

B

SeaFox
Jul 12, 2006, 07:09 PM
Bad move...

Obviously, there is huge demand for cheaper Macs. Cheap doesn't equal bad!


The reason there is a huge demand for cheaper Macs is simply because you can buy an HP for so little. If PCs started in price at $599, you wouldn't see people bellyaching about Mac prices. It's a market driven effect that really doesn't reflect the real market value of a PC in my opinion. Everyone trying to undercut each other just a little bit untill eventually everyone is cutting bone.

There is no reason this wouldn't work.

It wouldn't work. The reason PCs can be sold for that little is that the companies making them:

1) Don't do much of their own R&D work (they mostly follow others' lead)
2) Are making the costs up in volume (and Apple's volume isn't quite what Dell's is).
3) They offer inferior customer service to what I think most people here would argue is Apple's norm.
4) They have no software development costs. Think of all the programs that come on your Mac for free, not to mention OSX itself. PC makers are paying a licence fee to Microsoft that is paltry (and M$ makes it up on volume) but Apple has to fund development of OSX and the iApps somehow, and part of that higher Mac price goes to fund them. PC makers bundle lots of trialware and other software other companies have spent the development costs to make.

KindredMAC
Jul 12, 2006, 07:09 PM
Jeez Apple.... you think that maybe the current lowest end iMac might be a little rich for everyone's blood? Sure sign of that is if everyone if buying the $899 model even though it is missing a SuperDrive and Front Row.

I think Apple should use this occurance as good solid info that people will just eat up the iMac if it is priced a tad cheaper.

In the next revisions, why not offer:
$999
17" 1.83 GHz Intel Core Duo
512 MB Ram
160GB HD
Combo Drive
ATI Radeon X1600 w/ 128MB
APE + BT 2.0

$1299
17" 2 GHz Intel Core Duo
512 MB Ram
160GB HD
Super Drive
ATI Radeon X1600 w/128MB
APE + BT 2.0

$1499
20" 2.16 GHz Intel Core Duo
1GB Ram
250GB HD
Super Drive
ATI Radeon X1600 w/ 256MB
APE + BT 2.0

Then I would say lower the Mac Mini's to the following:
$399
1.66GHz Intel Core Duo
512 MB Ram
60GB HD
Combo Drive
APE + BT 2.0

$599
1.83GHz Intel Core Duo
512 MB Ram
80GB HD
Super Drive
APE + BT 2.0

I would go with the risky $399 price point because with those specs you would be selling a throw away computer at that point. The 1.66GHz chip is already dated and it would be perfect for someone who doesn't know a heck of a lot about Apple. That way they aren't feeling like they are spending a "fortune" for something they are unfamiliar with. Plus once they have been bitten by the "Mac Bug", they will be more likely to go for the bigger and better models on their next purchase in 1-3 years.

Eidorian
Jul 12, 2006, 07:25 PM
I agree with KindredMAC's pricing. The Core Duo is more then enough. I know we'll find a way to complain about it. (Core 2 Duo, etc.) :rolleyes:

The average joe isn't going to care other then it's "fast", it can game, and it's not expensive. Apple needs a GOOD all-in-one solution at $999.

balamw
Jul 12, 2006, 07:27 PM
I agree with KindredMAC's pricing. The Core Duo is more then enough. I know we'll find a way to complain about it. (Core 2 Duo, etc.) :rolleyes:

The average joe isn't going to care other then it's "fast", it can game, and it's not expensive. Apple needs a GOOD all-in-one solution at $999.
I think the $999 iMac will be made available to the public at some point, just like the eMac was.

I can't see a $399 Core Duo mini for a while though.... Maybe a 1.6 GHz Core Solo version...

B

Eidorian
Jul 12, 2006, 07:37 PM
I think the $999 iMac will be made available to the public at some point, just like the eMac was.

I can't see a $399 Core Duo mini for a while though.... Maybe a 1.6 GHz Core Solo version...

BYeah, Apple needs to make the Mac mini more lucrative. If the $999 iMac ever shows up I expect a price drop on the educational variant. Well Apple should drop the price..

boncellis
Jul 12, 2006, 07:39 PM
I agree with KindredMAC's pricing. The Core Duo is more then enough. I know we'll find a way to complain about it. (Core 2 Duo, etc.) :rolleyes:

The average joe isn't going to care other then it's "fast", it can game, and it's not expensive. Apple needs a GOOD all-in-one solution at $999.

Just wait 6 months and you'll have it...in the low end MacBook!

JK, I know what you mean. I would even settle for a Mini and 20" display combination for $1099. I can't really explain it, but for some reason I prefer the Mini (integrated graphics and all) to the iMac.

Frisco
Jul 12, 2006, 07:47 PM
Was the eMac ever available for everyone?

Yes, not at first, but once it became popular it was available to everyone. And for most of eMac's life.

Detlev
Jul 12, 2006, 07:47 PM
Oh stop whinning. You know deep down there were way to many people using the discount when they should not have been. The policy just falls back on what they previously did years ago with the discount. Dang, it wasn't long ago that you had to have it shipped to the school. Come on, look at what some university bookstores are doing now before you can buy Apple software at discount.

I don't blame them. It makes it tougher for those whom need the hardware but this has gone on long enough. It's three hundred flippin' USD, and you get enough upgrades for that. Suck it up and work a few hours of overtime for a couple weeks.

Good for you Apple! There is no need to explain.

Multimedia
Jul 12, 2006, 08:02 PM
I say keep the Core Solo Mac mini around. I know it's a few dollars less then a Core Duo but we need something to round out the $500 area again. The markets are really segmented at $499, $999, $1499, and $1999.I think it's time to Retire Core Solo & Offer Two Core 2 Duo Speeds By January 2007. There's no cost reason to keep a Core Solo in the line. Just offer the two slowest Core 2 Duo speeds in what I would like to see as $499 Combo and $699 Superdrive models. But I guess $100 more for each will have to do if Apple really can't make enough profit at those lower prices.

Electro Funk
Jul 12, 2006, 08:05 PM
It is a good deal of greed that separates those who are happy to buy something at $c and sell it at $c + $p from those who decides it is not even worth their while unless $p = 20% * $p...

do you buy clothes? ever bought a used car? how about dinner out at a restaurant?

Some Customary Markup Percentages for Retail Businesses:

New cars 15%
Used cars 75%
Electrical Appliances 30%
Clothing 50%
Trend Clothing 59%
Crystal Ware 60%
Gifts and clocks 55%
Food Retailers 45%

Bregalad
Jul 12, 2006, 08:08 PM
Now if we chop the HD to 4200 RPM and 40GB, remove Bluetooth, and use slower RAM, we could easily shave off another $50.

Laugh at this configuration all you like, but I'm much more likely to buy a $399 computer to use as a streaming media box on top of my TV than a $599 one.

It also works great for the average family. Us on MR tend to expect more from our computers. This $399 Mac mini configuration would be perfectly capable of holding large-sized iTunes and iPhoto libraries, maybe some light video editing here and there, making music with GarageBand, publishing a blog with iWeb, video conferencing, browsing the internet, etc.

And with the next revision, it could easily be improved upon.

You think a 40GB drive can hold OS X, iLife, a couple of additional apps, and large sized iTunes and iPhoto libraries? You must have forgotten to include the "just kidding" smilie.

Let's do some quick math. A small iPhoto library like mine is 2000 photos. I have a 5 megapixel camera, half the images have red eye removed or some other change (iPhoto keeps the originals and the edited copies) so I have roughly 3000 files averaging 1.8MB each or 5.4GB. That's a small iPhoto library. You also want to hold a large iTunes library which implies a 30 or 60GB iPod owner.

So without going any further we need about 10GB for OS X and all the bundled apps, another 10GB for a fairly small iPhoto library, 15GB to half fill an iPod and 25GB to hold two hours of footage from your digital video camera. For all practical purposes, remembering that hard drives don't run well without a bunch of free space for editing, virtual memory, etc., we've just filled an 80GB hard drive (formatted capacity 74GB).

So I've just proved that the Mac mini is fatally flawed for many users because it's physically too small to hold a standard 3.5" HD. If it had been even one inch bigger it could have not only held more, it would have been less expensive to manufacture.

I was surprised when they announced the edu iMac at only $899 and so the announcement that it's now restricted to institutional purchase makes sense. Regarding the specs I figure Apple must have gotten a really great deal on 80GB HDs because in the retail market there's only a $10-20 difference between 80GB and 160GB. Heck there's only a $35 difference between 80GB and 250GB.

alep85 said that 80% of the consumer market doesn't need anything more than integrated graphics. Obviously those people are over the age of 30 and don't have children.

Multimedia
Jul 12, 2006, 08:30 PM
You think a 40GB drive can hold OS X, iLife, a couple of additional apps, and large sized iTunes and iPhoto libraries? You must have forgotten to include the "just kidding" smilie.

Let's do some quick math. A small iPhoto library like mine is 2000 photos. I have a 5 megapixel camera, half the images have red eye removed or some other change (iPhoto keeps the originals and the edited copies) so I have roughly 3000 files averaging 1.8MB each or 5.4GB. That's a small iPhoto library. You also want to hold a large iTunes library which implies a 30 or 60GB iPod owner.

So without going any further we need about 10GB for OS X and all the bundled apps, another 10GB for a fairly small iPhoto library, 15GB to half fill an iPod and 25GB to hold two hours of footage from your digital video camera. For all practical purposes, remembering that hard drives don't run well without a bunch of free space for editing, virtual memory, etc., we've just filled an 80GB hard drive (formatted capacity 74GB).

So I've just proved that the Mac mini is fatally flawed for many users because it's physically too small to hold a standard 3.5" HD. If it had been even one inch bigger it could have not only held more, it would have been less expensive to manufacture.

I was surprised when they announced the edu iMac at only $899 and so the announcement that it's now restricted to institutional purchase makes sense. Regarding the specs I figure Apple must have gotten a really great deal on 80GB HDs because in the retail market there's only a $10-20 difference between 80GB and 160GB. Heck there's only a $35 difference between 80GB and 250GB.

alep85 said that 80% of the consumer market doesn't need anything more than integrated graphics. Obviously those people are over the age of 30 and don't have children.You don't use the internal drive anyway. You build a 400GB FW drive with a $100 400GB ATA Drive and a $40 FW Case. That's your boot drive on these Minis not what comes inside them. Mini sits right on top of the FW Drive. Not a space problem. Runs way faster that way as well. I would never buy-use a mini without booting off a big external drive like this. :rolleyes:

theBB
Jul 12, 2006, 08:39 PM
I think it's time to Retire Core Solo & Offer Two Core 2 Duo Speeds By January 2007. There's no cost reason to keep a Core Solo in the line.
Well, considering Core Solo is bound to be much cheaper than Core 2 Duo, I'd say that's a good COST reason to keep it.

sisyphus
Jul 12, 2006, 08:42 PM
Get a new girlfriend who uses a Mac. Problem solved.

Hmmmmmmm..... tempting.... oh wait, I think she reads this board... I would NEVER give her up. Never. Ever. :D :eek: :D

Multimedia
Jul 12, 2006, 08:55 PM
Well, considering Core Solo is bound to be much cheaper than Core 2 Duo, I'd say that's a good COST reason to keep it.I doubt there will be much difference. If fact I doubt Core Solo will continue to be made beyond this Winter.

Multimedia
Jul 12, 2006, 09:28 PM
Hmmmmmmm..... tempting.... oh wait, I think she reads this board... I would NEVER give her up. Never. Ever. :D :eek: :DSo are you asking her to marry you or what?

kevin.rivers
Jul 12, 2006, 10:09 PM
I find it funny how everyone wants lower pricing based on what Dell and other sell computers for.

$299 from dell gets you this:
2.53 Celeron
256MB
80GB
Combo Drive
Intergrated Graphics (of course)
17" CRT

What a computer. Boy oh boy.

Cheap is fine. If someone want a cheap computer, have at it. However when I buy a Mac I know I am getting the best parts out there.

2.0Ghz Core Duos. Bigger Hard Drives. More memory. Faster Graphics.

I don't have to configure the $299 computer to be something worthwhile.

Not to mention, the cost to design such a lovely machine. The cost of the OS and software that comes on it.

I can see them bringing down the mini and maybe the iMac depending on what the updates bring.

But whining for lower prices on the same parts is ridiculous. If you want them to keep Yonah, sure they will drop costs. However most of use want Merom or Conroe, in which cases the prices stay the same.

You can buy the old model if you want to save a few bucks, but keep your whining to yourself.

Eidorian
Jul 12, 2006, 10:10 PM
Well, considering Core Solo is bound to be much cheaper than Core 2 Duo, I'd say that's a good COST reason to keep it.I don't see the Mac mini getting Core 2 Duo anytime soon.

Core Duo's price difference between a Core Solo CPU is only $30-40.

iowamensan
Jul 12, 2006, 10:14 PM
I just got the call today that my order of 25 of these iMacs will be delivered Friday. I just placed the order last Friday! I guess either I was one of the first to order or they had a ton of them ready to go!

LBmacman
Jul 12, 2006, 10:16 PM
Crap I planned on buying one of these... :mad:

kevin.rivers
Jul 12, 2006, 10:59 PM
Crap I planned on buying one of these... :mad:

Yeah, I recommended them to a few people as well as my g/f. Sucks. :mad:

seenew
Jul 12, 2006, 11:36 PM
Damn, I just convinced my friend to buy one of these!

adamyoshida
Jul 13, 2006, 12:36 AM
I think Apple would be smart to look at the new generation of Celerons for low-end systems.

The Celeron M 4XX series are basically a rebranded Core Solo with a 1 Megabyle L2 Cache. They're actually not bad performers. Certianly superior to the G4 chips they've been using in the iBooks, eMacs, and Mac Minis up until quite recently.

I've got a Toshiba Notebook with a Celeron M 420 and, with 1.5 Gigs of Ram, it runs the Beta of Windows Vista quite smoothly (ndeed, almost better than my Pentium D Desktop does - and far better than my Dual USB iBook 800 with 640 Megs of Ram has ever run Tiger).

Basically, something like:

Celeron M 420 (1.7 Ghz)
512 Megs of Ram (Single Chip, Please)
Radeon x200
60 Gig Hard Drive
Combo Drive

Could probably ship for $599-$699. No Front Row, no iSight.

Throw in another Gig of Ram off-the-shelf and you've got a system which will run quite nicely - and dual boot, of course. I'd buy one.

The same basic configuration could be put into a Mini for $450ish, I'd guess.

adamyoshida
Jul 13, 2006, 12:38 AM
I'd add that the Desktop Celerons are junk (especially when you can get the budget-priced Pentium D for something like $130).

But the Mobile ones are actually a fairly good chip at a fairly good price. So long as the rest of the configuration is acceptable.

BlizzardBomb
Jul 13, 2006, 01:14 AM
A 1.66GHz Core 2 Duo costs roughly the same as a Core Solo per 1,000 sold ($209 + Apple's discount). With the graphics chip costing Apple pennies, they can go quite aggressive on the processor.

TangoCharlie
Jul 13, 2006, 02:34 AM
probably cut into the regular imacs sales too much.

Yes, that's why. The Edu-iMac was good (too good) value compared to the regular iMac. However, when the Merom based iMacs come out (WWDC), and the Edu-iMac is left behind with Yonah, then they will probably go back to the previous policy.

Roll on WWDC :)

TangoCharlie
Jul 13, 2006, 02:38 AM
You can't drop the price and maintain the quality, champ...

...unless you can turn over a much higher volume. It's unlikely that Apple is in a position to do that at the moment. :(

TangoCharlie
Jul 13, 2006, 02:46 AM
Apple is greedy, what's new.

They rather make $0 than to make less, because you know why? The person who end up not getting still has that desire to satisfy, the person who bought cheap? There goes the near future sale.

Your assertion doesn't make any sense.

Apple has to make a profit otherwise it would go under. Apple saw that the edu-iMac was taking sales from the normal iMac. Presumably Apple was making a smaller margin on the Edu-iMac. It made a commercial decision on whether stopping non-institutions buying the Edu-iMac would have a negative impact on total sales and obviously decided it wouldn't. That's standard business practice.

As things stood, the edu-iMac was "too" good value, when compared to the regular iMac. However I expect Apple to re-release the iMac with a Core 2 Duo (Merom) processor at the WWDC, but leave the Edu-iMac with the Core Duo (Yonah) cpu. When that happens (!!), I should think Apple will go back to the previous policy for educational sales on the edu-iMac.

noservice2001
Jul 13, 2006, 05:57 AM
how are education and institution different? why would anyone in college buy an emac? macbook pro is where the party @.... oh well... sill love my g4....:cool:

AidenShaw
Jul 13, 2006, 06:58 AM
However, when the Merom based iMacs come out (WWDC), and the Edu-iMac is left behind with Yonah, then they will probably go back to the previous policy.
Apple should drop all Yonah products as soon as sufficient Merom chips are available to do it.

Imagine The Steve saying "Mac - all Intel, all 64-bit" in Paris.

It would be to Apple's (and third parties') advantage to get rid of all 32-bit MacIntel's as soon as possible, so that "even fatter binaries" won't be needed to support the small number of 32-bit MacIntel's sold.

It will cost Apple and others a lot of money to support both 32-bit and 64-bit systems.

peharri
Jul 13, 2006, 07:23 AM
How is that exactly? Itís a MacBook with a stand and a bigger screen. How is it not for personal use?

Well, yeah, you kind of made my point for me.

It combines the awesome power of a laptop with the portability, ease of installation, and desktop requirements of a desktop. The MacBook, in hardware terms, is a compromise. The key feature of it is portability. It's not a great computer, but it's "good enough" and, when combined with portability, is a great system.

A personal user is either going to want to spend $900-1,000 on a moderately powerful desktop optimised for personal use (which the $900 iMac isn't, with its choice of optical drive, low hard disk capacity, and lack of modern graphics), or a good laptop (which, again, the iMac isn't.) From an institutional point of view, however, the portability is a liability, but the fact the machine comes with everything all pre-installed with minimum set up other than the "locating a spot for it" (which is inherently done in offices anyway) means it's ideally suited to that.

That's what makes it great for institutions. It's not that a personal user can't use it, it's that, at the price point, there are machines far better suited to personal users than the $900 iMac.

My real concern at the moment is the lack of a desktop in that space from Apple. A "high end" Mac mini really is needed.

Core Trio
Jul 13, 2006, 08:25 AM
You are right. However, Apple continued to use the G4 in lots of products while still selling other G5 based products.

B

Most likely only because they had too...could you imagine a G5 in a mini or a powerbook?:rolleyes:

thejadedmonkey
Jul 13, 2006, 08:31 AM
Most people who buy Macs are somewhat creative. With a Celeron processor, you can't be very creative...
Creative Technology without a Celeron (http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/romans/tech.shtml)

Core Trio
Jul 13, 2006, 08:48 AM
Apple should drop all Yonah products as soon as sufficient Merom chips are available to do it.

Imagine The Steve saying "Mac - all Intel, all 64-bit" in Paris.

It would be to Apple's (and third parties') advantage to get rid of all 32-bit MacIntel's as soon as possible, so that "even fatter binaries" won't be needed to support the small number of 32-bit MacIntel's sold.

It will cost Apple and others a lot of money to support both 32-bit and 64-bit systems.

While this is true, developers and apple are going to have to have "even fatter binaries" to support the 32-bit machines ALREADY sold. I realize that the sooner they move to all 64-bit the sooner all software can be written for it, but lets be honest...apple is still supporting PPC...they are not ditching 32-bit processors anytime soon (as far as support goes)

Yvan256
Jul 13, 2006, 09:30 AM
What would you do to update them, then? What is there to update? Add another USB 2.0 slot? Dire need for nothing. As long as they are selling, there won't be a change, not until the new processors start rolling out come september - december.

I think what Eidorian meant was that Apple should lower the price of the Mac mini once Intel lowers its prices on processors. Maybe Apple will even be able to increase the speed a bit while lowering the price (we all know how CPU speeds and prices fluctuate).

Eidorian
Jul 13, 2006, 09:35 AM
I think what Eidorian meant was that Apple should lower the price of the Mac mini once Intel lowers its prices on processors. Maybe Apple will even be able to increase the speed a bit while lowering the price (we all know how CPU speeds and prices fluctuate).Intel already lowered the prices back in late May. I don't really see a need for the Core Solo Mini anymore. I'd like to see a $599 Mini with Super Drive...

SPUY767
Jul 13, 2006, 09:52 AM
Oh, that sucks big time. Guess the margins just aren't high enough... They're probably damn near taking a hit on each one. They just want to snatch up some more of the education market.

SPUY767
Jul 13, 2006, 09:56 AM
I'd add that the Desktop Celerons are junk (especially when you can get the budget-priced Pentium D for something like $130).

But the Mobile ones are actually a fairly good chip at a fairly good price. So long as the rest of the configuration is acceptable.

And when the budget priced Pentium D can be turned, with fairly little investment into an Athalon Smiting, Fire-Breathing beast. Give it a bit, if the Apple MBs have to conform to intel standards, then they're going to have standard fan mounts on them. With standard fan mounts, that means that if Apple doesn't include Phase-Change cooling systems from the factory, that aftermarket units will work. And that means, that when the MacPros come out, someone will be figuring out how to OC them to death.

generik
Jul 13, 2006, 10:32 AM
Even though your last equation seems wrong (1=20%) you seem to forget that $p typically pays for marketing, administation, R&D and finally profit. 20% gross margin is pretty poor.

B

1) Eh.. $p by definition would be the pure gravy.. stuff like advertising and administration would fall under $c.

2) Since you brought that up, I see a lot more Dell adverts on TV.. make what you want of it.



Cheap is fine. If someone want a cheap computer, have at it. However when I buy a Mac I know I am getting the best parts out there.

2.0Ghz Core Duos. Bigger Hard Drives. More memory. Faster Graphics.


Bigger hard drives? Sure... look at Apple's upgrade prices. For the price of the upgrade itself you could have gotten the original drive as well as the upgraded drive. Oh yeah, and please tell me how a Dell's integrated graphics solution is slower than one that is used by a Mac (hint: it isn't).

What I find amusing is how people all beat on the Celeron line like it is some kind of cheap crap, well it certainly is cheap, but performance on a Celeron is pretty decent as well. People who think otherwise are simply ill adviced (think: brainwashed by Apple's propaganda) and these bunch are pretty much the same folk whose worlds collapsed around them when Apple launched products containing integrated graphics.

So it was bad in the past because Apple has a small snippet of info saying so, and now that they jumped on the cost cutting bandwagon themselves it is suddenly good? Puh-leez.

Your assertion doesn't make any sense.

Apple has to make a profit otherwise it would go under. Apple saw that the edu-iMac was taking sales from the normal iMac. Presumably Apple was making a smaller margin on the Edu-iMac. It made a commercial decision on whether stopping non-institutions buying the Edu-iMac would have a negative impact on total sales and obviously decided it wouldn't. That's standard business practice.

Apple has to make a profit. True. Are they making a loss on the educational iMac?

What I hate about Apple really is how Apple actually capitalises on "MacOS" and charges *us* arbitrary prices for compatible hardware. Tell me, is Apple in the computer business or the <discrete graphics/bluetooth adapter> resale business?

Why impose this artificial "packaging" on buyers?

It is not like the offering doesn't exist, but it is explicitly denied, why?

Switchers buy macs out of their own choosing, but after making that choice it seems like a lot of choices are denied from them. Really funny isn't it?

"Oh, you can't buy this computer, it is too cheap"
"Oh, you can't buy this configuration, we don't build it because it is too cheap"
"Oh, you can't upgrade this computer? Wanna have a go why? (Hint: it is too cheap)"

I managed to win over a recent convert lately but even then her first question is "Why is this so expensive? For the same price I can get a 2.8Ghz computer at <supermart> and get a free monitor on top of it."

Person who bought was a friend's granny, the ideal market segment for a Mac (ie: a computer for mommys and daddys), I don't see Apple winning hearts in this area.

As for the others.. namely people who use their computer to do actual work, or teenagers who play games, I don't see Apple having any advantage at all.

ITR 81
Jul 13, 2006, 10:42 AM
anyone still can order it.
Just use an edu account.

JosiahPB
Jul 13, 2006, 11:10 AM
Can you really still order it with just an edu account?

cswarthout
Jul 13, 2006, 11:11 AM
How do you get an edu acct?

wmmk
Jul 13, 2006, 11:15 AM
anyone still can order it.
Just use an edu account.
nope. you'd need to own/be the IT guy of an educational institution

Can you really still order it with just an edu account?
no, you can not.

How do you get an edu acct?
you go to college or grad school, or become a teacher.

kingtj
Jul 13, 2006, 11:27 AM
Let's call things what they are....
Sure, lots of people out there realized they could magically "become a student" at some area school in order to receive an Apple discount on some hardware. It's deceitful - but if the practice was actually costing Apple money, you'd have seen them auditing all edu. purchases long ago.

The fact is, the edu. discount has generated quite a few new Apple customers who probably wouldn't have purchased one otherwise. And even at the discounted prices, they're high enough that Apple's still making a profit on those sales. Just not as large of one as they think they can usually get from the general public for the products otherwise.

I personally know a guy, for example, who bought a quad G5 tower using an educational discount, even though he's been done with school for quite some time. He had to scrape and beg to get the cash together for that system, even at the edu. price - and it involved selling his other Windows PCs too. He was convinced by the "Mac faithful" that it was a "better way" to do things, and at the edu. price, it was just *barely* possible for him to get it.

What good would it do Apple to punish him and lose a new customer forever, vs. give him a couple hundred bucks discount on a $3000+ machine?


Oh come on .. Well know why this was done. Just go read the post about when it was released. I could see this coming a mile away. Either a they would do this or b they would start doing the audits they talk about with educational purchases. There must have been atleast 50 people who blatantly posted about abusing the discount on a "public forum" and hundreds maybe thousands more who thougt of it. Lets say I owned a store and I saw a forum online where 50 plus people said they knew a way to rip off my store, do you think I would leave it vulnerable? I dont know ... maybe this is the reason or maybe it isnt but I think ts great they did it. Because now all the people who thought they could do this and thought its no different from walking in a store and walking out with out paying for an item, will have to mow a few more lawns or bag a few more grocerys and pay what the rest of the honest people out there will. I know I know I am sounding uber negative here but not nearly as negative as someone trying to justify stealing on a "public forum".

Kevin

balamw
Jul 13, 2006, 11:31 AM
1) Eh.. $p by definition would be the pure gravy.. stuff like advertising and administration would fall under $c.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=AAPL&annual

Using you definition Apple's net profit margin was ~12% for the last year reported here (2005), i.e. nowhere near 20%. Using the more typical definitions they're operating with 29% gross margin accross the board. Which is pretty typical. G&A expenses were similar to the net profit (again typical) and R&D was less (~5%). Pretty typical.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=DELL&annual

Dell's most recent profit margins accross the board were 18% gross and 8% net with 9% G&A and under 1% R&D.

These differences are consistent with the two companies differing business models. Dell does no R&D, and thus can't expect to command the extra 4% profit margin.

B

Eidorian
Jul 13, 2006, 11:36 AM
nope. you'd need to own/be the IT guy of an educational institution


no, you can not.


you go to college or grad school, or become a teacher.Actually you can.

http://www.apple.com/education/store/

After you pick which school you go to you can make a purchase in either Individual or Institutional store. Still, you might be redirected by your school's "custom Mac" pick for their school. Ugh!

balamw
Jul 13, 2006, 11:37 AM
After you pick which school you go to you can make a purchase in either Individual or Institutional store.
Yeah, but the $899 iMac is no longer available for purchase in the individual/personal EDU stores...

B

Eidorian
Jul 13, 2006, 11:40 AM
Yeah, but the $899 iMac is no longer available for purchase in the individual/personal EDU stores...

BNote that I did say Institutional. It's Departmental for me. I normally just use the link off of my campus site to get to the Departmental Store.

balamw
Jul 13, 2006, 11:48 AM
Note that I did say Institutional. It's Departmental for me. I normally just use the link off of my campus site to get to the Departmental Store.
Just trying to be clear. You said either either individual or institutional, but you can't get the $899 iMac from the former only the latter, and to make an institutional purchase you must be authorized by the institution. From the link you provided:

Authorized purchasers
Submit an order to Apple if you are authorized by your school or school board to make purchases and you have been issued an authorized purchaser Apple ID and password.

B

swingerofbirch
Jul 13, 2006, 12:31 PM
Granted, there are PC's out there with 200 GB hard disks and DL DVD-burners for about $500. The difference between those and the Mini, is that one the Mini is mini (just look at a cheap PC box side by side with a mini), and the second is that the margins on the PC don't need to support as much infrastructure as Apple's do. Apple spends a lot on development which they can't really charge for except through hardware and the occassional OS and iLife release. Imagine if eMachines had the burden of developing Windows Vista--I imagine it would force them to raise their prices.

Having said that I do sometimes see Apple hobbling consumer hardware for the sake of differentiating it from the pro lines. Hopefully that will change as the Intel chips Apple uses grow in depth.

ijimk
Jul 13, 2006, 01:03 PM
boooo, i was considering getting one too.:mad:

mccldwll
Jul 13, 2006, 01:25 PM
A $300 price difference between the two, for which you get superdrive, front row, ipod nano ($179 credit--sell on ebay $150) and $100 printer credit (worth maybe $75). Not too much difference in the end for a better home machine. My guess is Apple planned to do this from beginning if enough institutional orders came in. Would have sent negative message if first closed access, then opened up. Plus, I think they're trying to get rid of existing ipods so prefer real imac sale.