Steve Jobs Still Involved in Apple, Still Expected to Return in June [Archive]

MacRumors

Apr 11, 2009, 02:34 AM

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/04/11/steve-jobs-still-involved-in-apple-still-expected-to-return-in-june/)

The Wall Street Journal reports (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123941988981610781.html) that despite his medical leave, Steve Jobs has remained very involved in Apple's strategies and planning: Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook runs the day-to-day operations at Apple, these people say. But Mr. Jobs has continued to work on the company's most important strategies and products from home, they say. He regularly reviews products and product plans, and was particularly involved in the user interface of the new iPhone operating system that Apple unveiled last month, these people say.Apple announced (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/01/14/steve-jobs-taking-medical-leave-of-absence-until-june/) in January that Steve Jobs would take a medical leave of absence from the company until June and that Tim Cook would take over day-to-day operations.

According to the Wall Street Journal's sources, Apple remains "much the same" as before Steve Jobs' departure and Jobs is still expected to return to Apple in June. Jobs reportedly did not respond to requests for comment but Apple spokesman Steve Dowling is quoted as saying "Steve continues to look forward to returning to Apple at the end of June."

Article Link: Steve Jobs Still Involved in Apple, Still Expected to Return in June (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/04/11/steve-jobs-still-involved-in-apple-still-expected-to-return-in-june/)

That-Is-Bull

Apr 11, 2009, 02:36 AM

Breaking news: Nothing has changed.

illegallydead

Apr 11, 2009, 02:39 AM

Well, that's good to hear, sounds like at least he isn't getting sicker.

And that is not from a "steve is my Messiah" standpoint, but rather just glad to see that he, as a human being, is still healthy.

And I don't blame him for still working many of the products and strategies. One does not just quit an awesome job like that cold turkey...

Theaser

Apr 11, 2009, 02:42 AM

I don't believe it. Was he supervising the creation of the latest iPod Shuffle?

vansouza

Apr 11, 2009, 02:46 AM

You go Steve; show them all. God Bless and happy Easter.

DMann

Apr 11, 2009, 02:49 AM

Glad to hear it! Best wishes for a full recovery, Steve, and Happy Holidays!

Abstract

Apr 11, 2009, 02:50 AM

dwman

Apr 11, 2009, 02:50 AM

Breaking news: Nothing has changed.

Couldn't have said it better myself. He's basically working from home. I personally don't believe he's coming back, but wish him the best. Apple will be fine without him.

ziggyonice

Apr 11, 2009, 02:56 AM

Having said that, I hope he retires from Apple soon. He won't, but I wish he did. I want change.

Interesting comment. I'm not sure what "change" needs to come to Apple, seeing as they're doing the best they've done in the past well... nearly 30 years! The improvements that Apple has experienced has been solely thanks to Steve Jobs returning to the company.

Yes, he is getting older, and yes, I think it would be good for him to retire on a high note, but I don't think that time is now. Apple's got some great things in the pipeline and as Steve slowly makes his transition out from Apple, they'll be sitting on top. Everyone will know that, despite his not being there anymore, Steve Jobs helped put Apple at the top of their game, and his work is finally done.

aleni

Apr 11, 2009, 02:58 AM

please get well soon steve! hope you're having the best time with your family.

Nermal

Apr 11, 2009, 03:01 AM

Interesting comment. I'm not sure what "change" needs to come to Apple, seeing as they're doing the best they've done in the past well... nearly 30 years! The improvements that Apple has experienced has been solely thanks to Steve Jobs returning to the company.

I of course don't know what Abstract was alluding to, but a lot of people believe that Apple is becoming increasingly arrogant (such as "you may not put apps that we haven't approved on your own iPod") and hope that they can be come a bit more "open".

Mintin8

Apr 11, 2009, 03:03 AM

I of course don't know what Abstract was alluding to, but a lot of people believe that Apple is becoming increasingly arrogant (such as "you may not put apps that we haven't approved on your own iPod") and hope that they can be come a bit more "open".

Yeah, I've heard a lot of people calling Apple arrogant lately. Maybe change is a good thing, but not yet. I have a feeling that Steve has something good planned.

SydneyDev

Apr 11, 2009, 03:06 AM

I'm glad he is reviewing the GUIs. When I use the GUIs of other companies (that shall remain nameless) I often find myself wondering "What were they thinking?"

kennycheng93

Apr 11, 2009, 03:07 AM

We will see him in WWDC!

ditzy

Apr 11, 2009, 03:07 AM

iBug2

Apr 11, 2009, 03:07 AM

mdodd

Apr 11, 2009, 03:12 AM

Peace

Apr 11, 2009, 03:20 AM

We will see him in WWDC!

"Apple spokesman Steve Dowling is quoted as saying "Steve continues to look forward to returning to Apple at the end of June."
WWDC is June 8-12

Steve won't be at WWDC09'.

opeter

Apr 11, 2009, 03:26 AM

Steve Jobs Still Involved in Apple, Still Expected to Return in June

Hope not.

Prom1

Apr 11, 2009, 03:28 AM

Hang on, which company actually allows unsigned applications to be put on their cellphones? As far as I know every company has a similar system if they have an appstore kind of thing.

Um ... Window Mobile does. There is no signing I'm aware of - but I detest that system. Nokia's S60 requires it but you can turn it off on the phone which most apps can be installed - if not hack it.

This is GREAT news for Steve Jobs' status of company interaction. However, I worry that the "invisible/imaginary/god-like syndrome" will occur when he doesn't return in June.

Personally I'd love for his first public speech presentation to feature (in Keynote) how he was able to remote into company XServes; and any major partnership deals in the works. I do hope he's been following the Microsoft onslaught and stabs at Apple computers' pricing. Again I saw Apple has to ingeniously highlight just what you pay for ... showing the world what the experience is like when you take your Mac home & unbox it; use it first day (ALL family members), use it the first week, and the first month. Show the warmth of interaction and the commadre of the community will to help you out.

I'd wager the quality of the system and the apps you take advantage from make the Mac & OS X MUCH MUCH cheaper than Windows XP or Vista or Windows Seven + purchasing Roxio/Adobe Premier + Photoshop just to get close or better than iPhoto.

Prom1

Apr 11, 2009, 03:36 AM

I of course don't know what Abstract was alluding to, but a lot of people believe that Apple is becoming increasingly arrogant (such as "you may not put apps that we haven't approved on your own iPod") and hope that they can be come a bit more "open".

Hang on, which company actually allows unsigned applications to be put on their cellphones? As far as I know every company has a similar system if they have an appstore kind of thing.

BTW< what Nermal is refering to is the intense focus of CONTROL of installing apps on your warranty supported iPhone/iPod Touch without hacking it to install ANY application you choose thats available. Symbian OS (S60, formerly UIQ, and MOAP), Windows Mobile, or Palm OS or Android do NOT force restrictions.

ziggyonice

Apr 11, 2009, 03:42 AM

BTW< what Nermal is refering to is the intense focus of CONTROL of installing apps on your warranty supported iPhone/iPod Touch without hacking it to install ANY application you choose thats available. Symbian OS (S60, formerly UIQ, and MOAP), Windows Mobile, or Palm OS or Android do NOT force restrictions.

I think the iPhone/iPod touch should be able to install apps from anywhere without Apple's approval -- we have that option everyday on our computers. However, I do see that the App Store should have an approval process, as it does. What I don't see or agree with is the comment that this is Steve Jobs' doing and that we "shouldn't hope" to see him in June again.

inkswamp

Apr 11, 2009, 03:48 AM

I of course don't know what Abstract was alluding to, but a lot of people believe that Apple is becoming increasingly arrogant (such as "you may not put apps that we haven't approved on your own iPod") and hope that they can be come a bit more "open".

Heard of any iPhone viruses lately? Oh yeah, that's right. The only iPhone malware out there is for jailbroken iPhones.

Perhaps "a lot of people" are mistaking Apple's efforts to keep the iPhone free of security issues and viruses as arrogance. It has been Apple's stated goal from the start to keep malicious software off the iPhone. Seems to me they're doing a pretty good job so far. Odd that those kinds of measures taken in the interests of their customers is labelled arrogance.

VicMacs

Apr 11, 2009, 03:54 AM

to Steve:

Do what the doctors say :) dont listen to anyone else. We're not going anywhere. Come back to Apple when you're 110%. Rest and enjoy the time off.

Coming from a doctor ;)

Wikinerd

Apr 11, 2009, 04:06 AM

Trajectory

Apr 11, 2009, 04:18 AM

I just realized where Steve Jobs has been all this time. He was hired by the ad firm who created Microsoft's new "Laptop Hunter" ads! He actually created the ads! I mean, why else would Microsoft spend millions on an ad that advertises Apple computers as being "hip" and "sexy"?

kockgunner

Apr 11, 2009, 04:18 AM

Heard of any iPhone viruses lately? Oh yeah, that's right. The only iPhone malware out there is for jailbroken iPhones.

Perhaps "a lot of people" are mistaking Apple's efforts to keep the iPhone free of security issues and viruses as arrogance. It has been Apple's stated goal from the start to keep malicious software off the iPhone. Seems to me they're doing a pretty good job so far. Odd that those kinds of measures taken in the interests of their customers is labelled arrogance.

Agreed. If you want to put 3rd party apps onto your own phone, jailbreak it. I agree with Apple's decision to keep the iPhone/touch closed. They have always had a tight control over their products which is one of the reasons why Apple's user experience is so good. Imagine if Apple did not stop jailbreaking, then many would download apps they see on a random website that bricks their phone or restarts Springboard or gives the SWOD. The whole saying 'it just works' would be dilute and Apple products would have a reputation of being unstable and crappy.

Also, I don't know if it was a good thing to reveal that Steve Jobs had an active role in the company during his leave. Things seemed to go pretty smoothly when Steve was gone, but now we hear that Steve was helping the whole time. Many will get the continue to think that Steve equals Apple equals Steve which is not good for the company should he really retire.

8CoreWhore

Apr 11, 2009, 04:21 AM

He soaking up the rays at Playa El Megano with Fidel. :D

Jayomat

Apr 11, 2009, 04:29 AM

Perhaps "a lot of people" are mistaking Apple's efforts to keep the iPhone free of security issues and viruses as arrogance. It has been Apple's stated goal from the start to keep malicious software off the iPhone. Seems to me they're doing a pretty good job so far. Odd that those kinds of measures taken in the interests of their customers is labelled arrogance.

my thoughts too except for the "arrogance" thing. it must not necessarily be connected to the app store or their attitude towards controlling EVERY product and "add-on" thats "officially" distributed by apple.

apple ist quiete self-confident, but sometimes, it feels more like arrogance. especially if +50% of your "public statements" imply that "the rest" (ms, whoever) of your competitors make bad products, and therfor you are the only one who knows how ANYTHING should be made...

i don't have an example right now, it is just a feeling i got.

8CoreWhore

Apr 11, 2009, 04:35 AM

They're saying end of June so people won't expect him at WWDC - but he could make an surprise appearance. ;)

wonderkid

Apr 11, 2009, 04:44 AM

I don't believe it. Was he supervising the creation of the latest iPod Shuffle?

Interesting thought. Having now seen the new shuffle in person (it is tiny!), I have concluded that like AppleTV, this is an experimental product. Apple are probably test marketing voice based user interfaces, whether it means you talk to the device and/or it talks to you. They may be encouraging people to move towards a new paradigm. However, for most of us without sight problems, there is no faster way to navigate data than browsing a list - something most DPad equipped mobile phones and screen based iPod models do well.

I mentioned the size at the start, because when you see it, you realise it could easily be hidden on your person and be fiddly to glance at. It is possible Apple will launch a new type of remote with a display that you can wear on your wrist etc? Perhaps the new shuffle has hidden Bluetooth like the iPod Touch?

kas23

Apr 11, 2009, 04:51 AM

I think this is a very strange article by the WSJ. If it is true, what exactly has changed then? He's making all the important decisions still, but just from home? How can this be a medical leave, then? If this indeed is the truth, then it's probably best for him to just continue what he's doing. We wouldn't want him to come back, get buried in minutia, and get himself sick again.

applecultvictim

Apr 11, 2009, 04:57 AM

These are the best news over the past few months, for sure.

To Steve:

Steve you are a great inspiration to everyone with your strength and determination for life, as you have been too with your vision and vigor for apple. Everyone who knows anything about anything is extending their warmest regards to you and is expecting you in the wwdc keynote where iphone 3.0 blows all the contenders away, or whenever you see fit to return to the public eye. It's been a great and fun journey so far and we are looking forward to part II.

Bevz

Apr 11, 2009, 05:19 AM

I don't believe it. Was he supervising the creation of the latest iPod Shuffle?

I would imagine the new shuffle was designed and prototyped while he was still there... I understand your point though. Not used the new shuffle so can't really comment on if its any good or not. Design wise though it seems ok.

iPhoneNYC

Apr 11, 2009, 06:03 AM

Steve Jobs has proven himself as the heart and soul of Apple. It would be a delight to have him back. (And I never thought that about John Sculley.)

Doju

Apr 11, 2009, 06:06 AM

Steve, you're an incredible, inspiring person. I wish you the best. Get well soon. :)

kornyboy

Apr 11, 2009, 06:11 AM

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

I hope Steve's health is improving. I look forward to seeing him back at Apple.

northy014

Apr 11, 2009, 06:43 AM

I reckon Steve will let the keynote at WWDC go to Phil Schiller, or another of his little minions, as further proof that Apple can run without him when the time comes. But a couple of weeks later we'll get the iPhone special event, which will be Jobs's show...

applecultvictim

Apr 11, 2009, 07:38 AM

I think it will be part 3 at that point

You are right.

Goona

Apr 11, 2009, 07:57 AM

I hope his health gets better. Seriously, the guy probably works hard every single day. How could he not? He has Apple to worry about, as well as his Disney stock. ;)

Having said that, I hope he retires from Apple soon. He won't, but I wish he did. I want change.

Yeah keep hoping for change, next we will people driving the company into the ground the last time he left. :rolleyes:

Goona

Apr 11, 2009, 07:59 AM

I of course don't know what Abstract was alluding to, but a lot of people believe that Apple is becoming increasingly arrogant (such as "you may not put apps that we haven't approved on your own iPod") and hope that they can be come a bit more "open".

LOL at these dudes calling for change like they know how to run multibillion dollar companies, but these days anybody can be internet CEO's.

Aqueus

Apr 11, 2009, 07:59 AM

Yeah keep hoping for change, next we will people driving the company into the ground the last time he left. :rolleyes:

+1 for change..

Goona

Apr 11, 2009, 08:02 AM

BTW< what Nermal is refering to is the intense focus of CONTROL of installing apps on your warranty supported iPhone/iPod Touch without hacking it to install ANY application you choose thats available. Symbian OS (S60, formerly UIQ, and MOAP), Windows Mobile, or Palm OS or Android do NOT force restrictions.

Of course there are restrictions, haven't you heard of apps getting pulled from Android, they recently started pulling tethering apps from the store, so much for this supposed "open land heaven."

Goona

Apr 11, 2009, 08:04 AM

Kar98

Apr 11, 2009, 08:09 AM

Hang on, which company actually allows unsigned applications to be put on their cellphones? As far as I know every company has a similar system if they have an appstore kind of thing.

Windows Mobile and Palm both allow it. There are thousands of sites on the Web where you can get freeware, shareware and commercial software for your smartphone. You can even write your own.

rdowns

Apr 11, 2009, 08:10 AM

I don't have a subscription and can't see the whole article. SAI and others are reporting (http://9to5mac.com/jobs-ok-tblet-en-route) that they mention Tablet/Netbook in the article

Um, the link you posted has the full story. :rolleyes:

Winni

Apr 11, 2009, 08:10 AM

Breaking news: Nothing has changed.

Exactly. Apple will stay a closed, proprietary shop that does not play well with others.

Winni

Apr 11, 2009, 08:16 AM

LOL at these dudes calling for change like they know how to run multibillion dollar companies, but these days anybody can be internet CEO's.

LOL at these dudes who always disqualify themselves with shallow statements.

DELLsFan

Apr 11, 2009, 08:25 AM

I hope Steve comes back soon. Also that they don't become more 'open'.

I hope he's feeling better ... but while Steve needs to come back, some of his ideas may still be in need of some hospital care. While I actually agree about the iPhone's app restrictions, I don't agree that the company as a whole should not become more open. Quite the contrary, actually.

iPod saturation in the market has arguably peaked. They could weather any storm with the wheelbarrows of cash from sales of these mobile products. However, if Apple intends to grow further, they're going to have to re-think some policy, because those wheelbarrows of iPod and iPhone sales can probably feed the company for only so long.

I'd like to see Apple re-tool the symbiosis of OSX with hardware and allow other manufacturers to legally use the OS. I'd like to see Apple offer more choices in their own family of computers. I'd like to see Apple offer more options for upgrade by consumers for more products than just the Mac Pro. I'd like to see Apple lower prices across the board.

This is what I mean by making the company more open (to innovative change). Mac enthusiasts make up a good portion of the computer market share, but to grow it even further, it seems to me that it will take more than clever, PC-bashing commercials and sexy, eco-friendly designs to capture more hearts, minds, and wallets of the rest of the world. Hopefully, Steve has been using the time at home to think outside the Cupertino Orchard.

:apple:

MacAndy74

Apr 11, 2009, 08:33 AM

We will see him in WWDC!

I really hope so :cool: really looking forward to seeing Mr Jobs back in full flight again.

rdowns

Apr 11, 2009, 08:41 AM

I
I'd like to see Apple re-tool the symbiosis of OSX with hardware and allow other manufacturers to legally use the OS. I'd like to see Apple offer more choices in their own family of computers. I'd like to see Apple offer more options for upgrade by consumers for more products than just the Mac Pro. I'd like to see Apple lower prices across the board.

If I understand you, you want Apple to reverse the policies that has made them so successful these past 10 years.

Anuba

Apr 11, 2009, 09:00 AM

If I understand you, you want Apple to reverse the policies that has made them so successful these past 10 years.
How have they been successful in the computer department?

They've had 25 years to get where they are. They've had the iPod/iTunes halo effect, and now the iPhone halo effect. They've been advertising like mad -- Switch campaigns, Get a Mac campaigns, Pentium Toaster campaigns and what not. They've moved to Intel and made it so that switchers can actually keep Windows around during the transition. They've had much more product placement in movies and TVs than any other computer manufacturer, and a huge amount of direct or indirect celebrity endorsements too. For the last 4 years they've also sold a relatively cheap, entry-level "plugin Mac", the Mac Mini, so you no longer have the price as an excuse for never getting a taste of OS X. Their designs are sexier than ever. And for the last two years they've been up against competition (Vista) that's been a universally panned flop, and Apple has exploited this to no end in their marketing. And STILL the market share is only at 10% in the US and single digits internationally.

That is not success; relatively speaking, considering all things they have going for them now that they didn't have in, say, 1999 -- it's an EPIC FAIL. And if it weren't for the iPods, iPhones, the iPhone store, AppleTV, MobileMe and the rest of their products that aren't computers, they'd still be struggling like they were in the 90's.

Consider this: After two years, the iPhone has a larger market share in its field than Mac/OS X has in the personal computer and OS domain. Despite the fact that with the iPhone, Apple entered an already oversaturated market where competitor like Nokia had a 10-15 year head start, and much better reputation than PC/Microsoft/Windows. What does that tell you about the Mac's market position after twenty-five years of competing against something that supposedly everyone knows is crap?

ditzy

Apr 11, 2009, 09:13 AM

I hope he's feeling better ... but while Steve needs to come back, some of his ideas may still be in need of some hospital care. While I actually agree about the iPhone's app restrictions, I don't agree that the company as a whole should not become more open. Quite the contrary, actually.

iPod saturation in the market has arguably peaked. They could weather any storm with the wheelbarrows of cash from sales of these mobile products. However, if Apple intends to grow further, they're going to have to re-think some policy, because those wheelbarrows of iPod and iPhone sales can probably feed the company for only so long.

I'd like to see Apple re-tool the symbiosis of OSX with hardware and allow other manufacturers to legally use the OS. I'd like to see Apple offer more choices in their own family of computers. I'd like to see Apple offer more options for upgrade by consumers for more products than just the Mac Pro. I'd like to see Apple lower prices across the board.

This is what I mean by making the company more open (to innovative change). Mac enthusiasts make up a good portion of the computer market share, but to grow it even further, it seems to me that it will take more than clever, PC-bashing commercials and sexy, eco-friendly designs to capture more hearts, minds, and wallets of the rest of the world. Hopefully, Steve has been using the time at home to think outside the Cupertino Orchard.

:apple:

I on the other hand think that that would have the effect of turning OSX into windows, and so devalue the whole product.
Remember Apple don't want Microsoft's market share. They do things their way, not Microsoft's way, and make a very good profit doing so.

Anuba

Apr 11, 2009, 09:28 AM

Remember Apple don't want Microsoft's market share.
Then why has all their marketing been directly targeting Microsoft's user base for the last fifty-twelve years? What did you think the Switch campaign and the Get a Mac campaign were all about? Apple are bending over backwards to get a bite out of Microsoft's market share, that's just how it is. They can't afford the aloofness that plagues part of their user base. They have to go for Microsoft's customers because that's all there is. They can't base their expansion plans on the hope that more babies will be born into Mac households, you know.

iOrlando

Apr 11, 2009, 09:46 AM

as i said before...there is no good reason for him to "come back".

Just keep doing what he has been doing for the past 2 months. It works well, takes the pressure off of him...and everyone is happy.

also, i highly doubt sources would say..... "we havnt heard from steve in months...not sure where he is or what he is doing....

rdowns

Apr 11, 2009, 09:52 AM

How have they been successful in the computer department?

Doubling your market share, shipping twice as many computers as you did 8 years ago and having record Macintosh revenues the past few quarters is sure an epic fail to me. :rolleyes:

drakeshipway

Apr 11, 2009, 09:54 AM

Steve will com back to Apple, stay a while and introduce one more product that will change the industry even more then the iPod and the iPhone, then he'll be like "One more thing.. I'm leaving Apple."

Anuba

Apr 11, 2009, 10:11 AM

Doubling your market share, shipping twice as many computers as you did 8 years ago and having record Macintosh revenues the past few quarters is sure an epic fail to me. :rolleyes:
Well the increased revenues come from epic margins so that's understandable, but I still think Mac sales are so disproportionate to the potential, the marketing and the situation in general, it's surreal. They should be at 25-30% by now that they've tried every trick in the book while MS has been idle for the most part.

Apple's prices are wrong and they know it, which is why they've hinted that shareholders may have to prepare for thinner margins at some point in the near future. I'm sure that a lot of people in the first class compartment will be upset when the airline fills the empty seats with backpackers and bums, but they're just gonna have to eat it and like it.

synth3tik

Apr 11, 2009, 10:13 AM

We need Steve back in the day to days. Apple is sucking without him.

twoodcc

Apr 11, 2009, 10:28 AM

well this is good news. i'm not surprised to hear this. i expected jobs to still be involved

MikeTheC

Apr 11, 2009, 10:33 AM

0 CLS
10 FOR A = 1 TO 1000
20 REM Steve is recovering and nothing has changed
30 NEXT A
40 GOTO 10

memaz8

Apr 11, 2009, 10:34 AM

Hello everyone,
My first post!!!
I hope SJ will make a return on WWDC

renegad3

Apr 11, 2009, 10:58 AM

How have they been successful in the computer department?

They've had 25 years to get where they are. They've had the iPod/iTunes halo effect, and now the iPhone halo effect. They've been advertising like mad -- Switch campaigns, Get a Mac campaigns, Pentium Toaster campaigns and what not. They've moved to Intel and made it so that switchers can actually keep Windows around during the transition. They've had much more product placement in movies and TVs than any other computer manufacturer, and a huge amount of direct or indirect celebrity endorsements too. For the last 4 years they've also sold a relatively cheap, entry-level "plugin Mac", the Mac Mini, so you no longer have the price as an excuse for never getting a taste of OS X. Their designs are sexier than ever. And for the last two years they've been up against competition (Vista) that's been a universally panned flop, and Apple has exploited this to no end in their marketing. And STILL the market share is only at 10% in the US and single digits internationally.

That is not success; relatively speaking, considering all things they have going for them now that they didn't have in, say, 1999 -- it's an EPIC FAIL. And if it weren't for the iPods, iPhones, the iPhone store, AppleTV, MobileMe and the rest of their products that aren't computers, they'd still be struggling like they were in the 90's.

Funny thing though, Apple is FAR from struggling, regardless of why they aren't.

So, are you comparing Microsoft hardware to Apple hardware?

Last I checked, Microsoft hasn't built one PC. Microsoft doesn't build phones. They build a music device(Zune), which when put against the iPod, as in a comparison such as yours, would be considered MUCH MORE than an "EPIC FAIL". The only wide spread hardware they built(XBOX360) had major problems. And interestingly enough, with the XBOX360 clearly established in the market, the Wii came along, with far inferior hardware, and DESTROYED that to. Also strikes me as funny, that now, Microsoft is rushing to put out a product that Apple already has out(XBOX360 as a HTPC vs. AppleTV, MobileMe vs. SkyBox, App Store vs. SkyMarket). Wonder why that is?
But we won't go off on a tangent.

Apple has gone from about zero market share to 10% in 25 years(and if you really want to be technical the last 13 or so since Jobs returned in 1996). Their market share increases just about yearly. They are not going to "defeat" Microsoft overnight, nor may they ever. But, no one else is even close. What we are seeing is companies going in different directions. Apple's star is on the rise, and Microsoft's is falling. The iPod/iPhone halo effect has only been the last 10 years or so of their history. Apple computers lead to, and gave them the opportunity to develop/market the iPod/iPhone. It also opened up the other markets that you mentioned for Apple.

Consider this: After two years, the iPhone has a larger market share in its field than Mac/OS X has in the personal computer and OS domain. Despite the fact that with the iPhone, Apple entered an already oversaturated market where competitor like Nokia had a 10-15 year head start, and much better reputation than PC/Microsoft/Windows. What does that tell you about the Mac's market position after twenty-five years of competing against something that supposedly everyone knows is crap?

Following your analogy, shouldn't Microsoft be worried about all the market share they lost? Damn right they are. Take a look at their latest round of advertising flops. Their OWN ads, don't even mention their OWN product(windows)!!! Funny, they mention the competitors an awful lot though. In fact, in one of their previous ad campaigns they used Apple MAC's to create them!!!!

What that tells me, that in two years, a computer company went into an arena that they had no experience in, against far superior competition that had been established for years, and DESTROYED them. They changed the game, just look at all the companies now trying to mimic their success.
It shows me a company that isn't afraid to diverge and try new avenues to gain revenue.

Who knows, maybe Apple will stop making computer hardware altogether, it might be part of the evolution of Apple.

All said, if you want to compare products that each actually makes, and competes against each other, there really isn't any. Microsoft is for the most part a software development house, they don't build hardware. Apple for the most part builds hardware, and also writes software to run on those devices.

If you want to compare Zune to iPod, there isn't any comparison.

Can't really compare iPhone to anything that Microsoft offers, as they don't make any phones. They do make an OS for phones, Apple doesn't.

Can't compare gaming devices, as Apple doesn't make one.

If you want to go down the enterprise road, its really same the same as home PC market. Apple builds hardware, and a OS to run on it. Microsoft makes an OS, but no hardware.

Comparing them to, and pitting them against each other, isn't really a fair comparison, as they don't directly compete with specific products(save the iPod/Zune. In which case, the iPod clearly wins).

If we are just comparing company vs. company at this point in time, Apple is clearly "better" right now. That certainly hasn't always been the case.

I like and use products of both. There is room in the world for both. The competition between them is made up by the media and people on forums! ;)

How come no one compares Dell to Microsoft? HP to Microsoft? Dell to Apple? HP to Apple?

renegad3

Apr 11, 2009, 11:02 AM

Then why has all their marketing been directly targeting Microsoft's user base for the last fifty-twelve years?

What other user base is there for them to target?
:eek:

iOrlando

Apr 11, 2009, 11:18 AM

We need Steve back in the day to days. Apple is sucking without him.

def sucking...i mean come on a billon apps...in 9 months? please...it should have been like in 4 months.

new macbooks, imacs, ipods, please...they should have updated months before they actually did..

and dont get me going on the iphone...no one is buying an iphone... no one.

def sucking.....

hmmm

KnightWRX

Apr 11, 2009, 11:18 AM

I don't believe it. Was he supervising the creation of the latest iPod Shuffle?

Considering he left in January and that the product was announced in March, I think the answer is obvious. You don't design and build a product like that in 2 months.

Stetrain

Apr 11, 2009, 11:22 AM

0 CLS
10 FOR A = 1 TO 1000
20 REM Steve is recovering and nothing has changed
30 NEXT A
40 GOTO 10

Why would you need a for-loop when you already have a goto-loop?

;)

Fraghax

Apr 11, 2009, 11:26 AM

fleshman03

Apr 11, 2009, 11:28 AM

iMacoo7

Apr 11, 2009, 11:30 AM

Glad to hear that Steve Jobs will be returning but the kicker is that this report says the end of June....
WWDC is the beginning of June,
The report might be off just a wee bit, because I do not think that Steve will miss out on introducing a new product/products......
Or maybe he will not be there and when the demo of iChat is unveiled , Steve will be on the receiving end of the call or the one making the call.....
Time will tell the true tale of this whole situation....

KnightWRX

Apr 11, 2009, 11:33 AM

Well the increased revenues come from epic margins so that's understandable, but I still think Mac sales are so disproportionate to the potential, the marketing and the situation in general, it's surreal. They should be at 25-30% by now that they've tried every trick in the book while MS has been idle for the most part.

Apple's prices are wrong and they know it, which is why they've hinted that shareholders may have to prepare for thinner margins at some point in the near future. I'm sure that a lot of people in the first class compartment will be upset when the airline fills the empty seats with backpackers and bums, but they're just gonna have to eat it and like it.

Microsoft aren't in the hardware business. Apple is a hardware company. If you want to compare their market share, do it to their primary competitors, HP, Dell, Acer, Asus, etc...

Apple just decided to go with their own in house OS, which they tout against the competition's, namely Windows. The switch ads don't necessarily go against Microsoft itself, but mostly against their competitors that only offer this Windows thing.

You see, Apple sells you an experience, or what is called vertical integration. They sell you the underlying hardware but also provide everything right up to the applications you'll be using to make sure everything is integrated and works. Dell, HP only provide hardware and leave the experience up to some 3rd party. They don't really have a brand following because they don't have a brand. Dell/HP customers will shop for value, knowing that ultimately they get the same thing from either company.

If you compare numbers in that arena, HP is king, but that's because of corporate accounts. Dell and Apple are surprisingly close to one another, which is not EPIC fail for Apple, but EPIC win, considering their line-up is much smaller and doesn't cover every market segment under the sun like Dell's.

Why would you need a for-loop when you already have a goto-loop?

;)

Because you shouldn't abuse GOTO loops. Hence using the FOR loop first, he's only going to have to rely on the GOTO loop once every 1000 iterations. ;)

str1f3

Apr 11, 2009, 12:00 PM

Windows Mobile and Palm both allow it. There are thousands of sites on the Web where you can get freeware, shareware and commercial software for your smartphone. You can even write your own.

Windows and Palm are both putting an end to it. Both will have their own app store within a year and I'm pretty sure both will be closed. Complete openness has been the reason why these phones have always been unstable. Their phones constantly have to be rebooted. The best way for malware makers to attack you phones is through unsigned apps. The only one left doing this is android and symbian. You have already seen some malware for android come out (even within their app store).

IJ Reilly

Apr 11, 2009, 12:19 PM

They should be at 25-30% by now that they've tried every trick in the book while MS has been idle for the most part.

To those of us who've been around for awhile, statements like this come off as real knee-slappers. Microsoft was effectively born with a 100% market share, and they became very adept at using their inherited dominance to run competitors and would-be competitors off the road, including by illegal means when necessary. The great exception is Apple. Name another company that has gone toe-to-toe with Microsoft, and has not only survived, but thrived.

freebooter

Apr 11, 2009, 12:20 PM

I just hope Jobs' brush with death brings him to his senses and he makes Apple release a mid-priced tower. :apple:

I don't mean to be crass. I speak as someone who has had at least a dozen brushes with death (falls, drownings, cars, bears, not quite frozen rivers, poisoning, etc, etc) . Sadly, I'm still a fool.... :rolleyes:

AHDuke99

Apr 11, 2009, 12:22 PM

Good news for me and all the other AAPL shareholders, if true. If Steve were to show up during WWDC as a surprise at the end, I'd be happy man. If he retires in June, I'm selling it all and buying it back once the stock tanks to $50/share or so.

MacTheSpoon

Apr 11, 2009, 12:34 PM

I really hope he comes back looking completely fit and happy, that would be awesome. It'd be great if the questions of his health then went away forever.

Unfortunately, though, I don't expect it'll happen - as least as far as the rumors go. At best he'll come back looking slightly better. But he'll never look as fit as he did before his cancer operation, thanks to that Whipple procedure. He's always going to look quite thin, because of the digestion problems it causes.

And so people are always going to be spreading little rumors about his health from now until he retires. Such a drag.

Virgil-TB2

Apr 11, 2009, 12:41 PM

Don't really understand how Steve "was particularly involved in the user interface of the new iPhone operating system" considering the user interface differences between 2.0 and 3.0 are relatively minor and revolve around tweaking of features...What a ridiculously dumb comment.

known new features in 3.0 for which getting the interface right is crucial? ...

spotlight
cut/copy/paste
new camera/video app

(plus whatever we don't know about like a possible new compass app)

Even the first two of these could easily be considered crucial parts of the OS that are important to get right. In reality, Steve has to sign off on pretty much all UI stuff before it gets implemented.

tailu

Apr 11, 2009, 12:52 PM

What a ridiculously dumb comment.

known new features in 3.0 for which getting the interface right is crucial? ...

spotlight
cut/copy/paste
new camera/video app

(plus whatever we don't know about like a possible new compass app)

Even the first two of these could easily be considered crucial parts of the OS that are important to get right. In reality, Steve has to sign off on pretty much all UI stuff before it gets implemented.

agreed..http://www.************.co.uk/pics/6/7.gif

sjo

Apr 11, 2009, 01:15 PM

Windows and Palm are both putting an end to it. Both will have their own app store within a year and I'm pretty sure both will be closed. Complete openness has been the reason why these phones have always been unstable. Their phones constantly have to be rebooted. The best way for malware makers to attack you phones is through unsigned apps. The only one left doing this is android and symbian. You have already seen some malware for android come out (even within their app store).

there's difference in having an appstore and forcing the usage of appstore as sole means of obtaining and installing apps.

symbian shows that malware can be controlled through making the apps traceable, you don't need the kind of approval process apple is forcing on developers. that's decision is purely business driven (and nothing wrong with business driven decisions, apple is a business).

kdarling

Apr 11, 2009, 01:15 PM

Windows and Palm are both putting an end to it. Both will have their own app store within a year and I'm pretty sure both will be closed.

The stores might be closed, but I doubt Microsoft at least will stop you from installing anything you wish.

Checking apps for stability is a good thing, and I don't think people fault Apple for that.

Being an app censor is an entirely different story.

puckhead193

Apr 11, 2009, 01:25 PM

i'm glad he's still active with apple. Its a good sign, hopefully he'll be back by WWDC to deliver the keynote

Virgil-TB2

Apr 11, 2009, 01:34 PM

... Being an app censor is an entirely different story.I'm against all censorship, but I can never understand why people are so against Apple for censoring the app store when everything else is censored more.

Any censorship is crazy to me, but TV shows and radio are all very heavily censored, all the main Internet sites like YouTube, eBay, Amazon, and pretty much all newspapers and media sites as well. Why is Apple's censorship any different?

The whole "Apple is censoring the app store" deal, (beyond the basic banning of any sex, nudity and swearing that the average prudish American finds offensive), is a meme that originates from a small bunch of whiny, shady app developers with a giant axe to grind. As despicable as any censorship should be to all of us, Apple isn't really doing doing anything unusual at all here.

It seems like "crocodile tears" to me, to cry about the censorship in the app store but at the same time to swallow worse censorship from all the major media outlets day after day.

Virgil-TB2

Apr 11, 2009, 01:37 PM

... apple ist quiete self-confident, but sometimes, it feels more like arrogance. especially if +50% of your "public statements" imply that "the rest" (ms, whoever) of your competitors make bad products, and therfor you are the only one who knows how ANYTHING should be made ... It's not arrogance if you are right though. ;)

All this talk of Apple's "arrogance" kind of misses the mark for me. In the first place they have always been exactly the same attitude wise that they are now, so it's nothing new. In the second place, it *is* just a quiet confidence and not arrogance at all. If Apple says their stuff is so much better than brand X, and it is, it's a simple statement of fact, not arrogance.

napabar

Apr 11, 2009, 01:38 PM

That is not success; relatively speaking, considering all things they have going for them now that they didn't have in, say, 1999 -- it's an EPIC FAIL. And if it weren't for the iPods, iPhones, the iPhone store, AppleTV, MobileMe and the rest of their products that aren't computers, they'd still be struggling like they were in the 90's.

Uh, that's like saying if it wasn't for Windows and Office, Microsoft would be struggling.

Your logic=EPIC FAIL

Eric S.

Apr 11, 2009, 01:43 PM

According to the Wall Street Journal's sources, Apple remains "much the same" as before Steve Jobs' departure

That would be too bad. Nothing against SJ and I hope he gets well, but I'd like to see Apple reverse some of its more unfortunate trends. To wit: computer products suffering due to the priority placed on consumer electronics, the neurotic compulsion with minimalism and "thinness," and the removal of features (like Firewire) for marketing reasons.

Anuba

Apr 11, 2009, 01:52 PM

Microsoft aren't in the hardware business. Apple is a hardware company. If you want to compare their market share, do it to their primary competitors, HP, Dell, Acer, Asus, etc...
Call it what you will - Microsoft's marketshare, the PC's marketshare, Winbloze, beige boxes, I don't care -- the fact remains that Apple is after the customers who go for the non-Mac option (which tends to be a PC running Windows) because it's the only place to get new customers from. Yet people keep insisting (as an argument against suggestions that Apple should think about cutting their prices) that nooo, Apple aren't after that marketshare at all. As if they're too cool to be bothered. When the fact is that Apple are all over those customers like horny teenage boys.

These discussions tend to descend into petty arguments about things that are completely besides the point (I see we're already on "but Microsoft doesn't make hardware!" :rolleyes:), so I'll go back to the post I originally commented on:

If I understand you, you want Apple to reverse the policies that has made them so successful these past 10 years.

Which was in response to:

I'd like to see Apple re-tool the symbiosis of OSX with hardware and allow other manufacturers to legally use the OS. I'd like to see Apple offer more choices in their own family of computers. I'd like to see Apple offer more options for upgrade by consumers for more products than just the Mac Pro. I'd like to see Apple lower prices across the board.

I.e. the exact same thing that all Apple fans except the apologists have been saying all along.

rdowns' suggestion, then, being that Apple owes their success over the past ten years to NOT lowering their prices and NOT offering a diverse product range.

My view is the opposite: These policies are exactly what has prevented the Mac from becoming the hit it should be by now, given the reasons I mentioned earlier (25 years, Vista sucks, relentless advertising, overrepresentation in product placement, the Mini, iPod/iTunes/iPhone halo effect etc etc). It's not just that their prices are too high for riff-raff -- that's perfectly alright. The problem, I feel, is that some of their computers are so overpriced that people who can afford them are racking their brains trying to justify the purchase. I keep going back and forth myself, go in and configure a Mac Pro and go "OK, well, it's within budget"... then I think for a second and go "Wait... no! The nerve of these bastards, who do they think they're fooling", and I'm off to Dell's configuration page again.

Uh, that's like saying if it wasn't for Windows and Office, Microsoft would be struggling.
That's gotta be the worst analogy I've heard this year, and it's April already. Those two products are the backbone of Microsoft's business, one has been around for 24 years, the other for 20 years. Not even close to Apple's software, phones and portable music players, products they started making in this millennium, 25 years after they started a computer company.

napabar

Apr 11, 2009, 01:52 PM

To wit: computer products suffering due to the priority placed on consumer electronics, the neurotic compulsion with minimalism and "thinness,"

Hmmm....sounds like Apple's MO to me. Not sure what the problem is.

Maybe your just not cool enough to be a Mac person. ;)

sam10685

Apr 11, 2009, 01:56 PM

People that care about nothing but money better start buying stock now. :rolleyes:

KnightWRX

Apr 11, 2009, 02:00 PM

Call it what you will - Microsoft's marketshare, the PC's marketshare, Winbloze, beige boxes, I don't care -- the fact remains that Apple is after the customers who go for the non-Mac option (which tends to be a PC running Windows) because it's the only place to get new customers from. Yet people keep insisting (as an argument against suggestions that Apple should think about cutting their prices) that nooo, Apple aren't after that marketshare at all. As if they're too cool to be bothered. When the fact is that Apple are all over those customers like horny teenage boys.

It's funny how petty arguments seem to always follow your derogatory comments (Apple = EPIC FAIL, using your own capitalization)... :rolleyes:. Maybe you should stop making them in the first place and the conversations won't degenerate ?

So ... are you saying that Honda is epic fail, because compared to all other car makers, it only has a small part of the market ? :rolleyes:. They're essentially going for the "car buying public". Maybe if they offered a gas-guzzling pick-up truck...

napabar

Apr 11, 2009, 02:02 PM

My view is the opposite: These policies are exactly what has prevented the Mac from becoming the hit it should be by now, given the reasons I mentioned earlier (25 years, Vista sucks, relentless advertising, overrepresentation in product placement, the Mini, iPod/iTunes/iPhone halo effect etc etc). It's not just that their prices are too high for riff-raff -- that's perfectly alright. The problem, I feel, is that some of their computers are so overpriced that people who can afford them are racking their brains trying to justify the purchase. I keep going back and forth myself, go in and configure a Mac Pro and go "OK, well, it's within budget"... then I think for a second and go "Wait... no! The nerve of these bastards, who do they think they're fooling", and I'm off to Dell's configuration page again.

You're forgetting the intrinsic value of the Mac OS itself. Comparing specs to specs is not the only measure of whether or not Macs are over-priced. Owning a Mac is more than your what you paid for your processor speed. It's a lifestyle, and it's not for everybody. Personally, I like that Apple puts a premium on their machines. I don't want the Mac to have a 90% share. I like being part of an elite group. I'm proud of it. Call me a snob? Maybe so, but I like things the way they are. Apple doesn't need 90% market share to be wildly successful and profitable. Besides, they already have those kinda numbers with the iPod! ;)

Anuba

Apr 11, 2009, 02:10 PM

You're forgetting the intrinsic value of the Mac OS itself. Comparing specs to specs is not the only measure of whether or not Macs are over-priced.
Been there, done that. The value of MacOS isn't in dispute, the problem is that it doesn't even begin to account for the >$1000 discrepancy between a Mac Pro and a server-grade professional PC with near-identical specs.

I like being part of an elite group.
An elite group? Nah, that would be something akin to owning a Ferrari or a Rolls-Royce. You're on a computer platform with a 10% marketshare in the US, which makes the Mac 5 times more common than a Volkswagen.

napabar

Apr 11, 2009, 02:14 PM

Been there, done that. The value of MacOS isn't in dispute, the problem is that it doesn't even begin to account for the >$1000 discrepancy between a Mac Pro and a server-grade professional PC with near-identical specs.

An elite group? Nah, that would be something akin to owning a Ferrari or a Rolls-Royce. You're on a computer platform with a 10% marketshare in the US, which makes the Mac 5 times more common than a Volkswagen.

Your comparison is vague. Please slap up an exact model of PC your are comparing the Mac Pro to. Let's get it on the table. Remember, when the Mac Pro debuted, it was cheaper than a comparable PC from Dell. Even Dell had to admit it.

When 90% of the world uses Windows, 10% is an elite group. :D

Stately

Apr 11, 2009, 02:17 PM

May God bless you in your recovery Steve ! :D:apple:

Jayomat

Apr 11, 2009, 02:20 PM

It's not arrogance if you are right though. ;)

All this talk of Apple's "arrogance" kind of misses the mark for me. In the first place they have always been exactly the same attitude wise that they are now, so it's nothing new.

I never said it is a "new" phenomenon. apple has, and always will have this attitude. it's their "style", the way they feel about themselves.

In the second place, it *is* just a quiet confidence and not arrogance at all. If Apple says their stuff is so much better than brand X, and it is, it's a simple statement of fact, not arrogance.

cmon, that sounds fanboyish ;)

but, EVEN IF they make the best products (IF!)....imagine the following situation:

you're working at company X as a Y (it really doesn't matter). You're doing a really good job, even your collegues consider you as one of the best workes there.
BUT, you will be a pain in the *** for everyone if you're just talking about how great you are, and how bad the others suck.... It just doesn't matter how good you are, you just don't talk about it on every occasion.... that's all... only posers do that because they have to cover up their weak spots.... that's where their "arrogant images" comes from..

PS:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-2C2gb6ws8 (that *is* not just "quiete confidence", it's an embarrasing and pathetic extract of a keynote. IMHO!)

Revelation78

Apr 11, 2009, 02:25 PM

So you want Apple to go back to, prior to the return of Steve, when they did license out MSC OS to third parties, and the company almost went bankrupt?

I like how people keep bringing this notion up that Apple should allow their OS to be installed on other PC's - they claim it'll only make them money. Look back 18 years ago when Apple almost ceased existing and ****.

So let Apple release its OS to other manufacturers, Apple will go out of business and then we'll have no Mac OS, only windows. The other option is Apple charges third parties $400-500 to install Mac OS, and guess what - it now costs more to own a PC with Mac OS than is does with Windows.

Ted13

Apr 11, 2009, 02:35 PM

Also, I don't know if it was a good thing to reveal that Steve Jobs had an active role in the company during his leave. Things seemed to go pretty smoothly when Steve was gone, but now we hear that Steve was helping the whole time. Many will get the continue to think that Steve equals Apple equals Steve which is not good for the company should he really retire.

OK, one more time, addressing all similar comments: Steve Jobs may die, he may be forced to quit due to really bad health, but he isn't going to retire, not for the next 15-20 years minimum. Steve's life is Apple. He will not retire willingly.

KnightWRX

Apr 11, 2009, 02:39 PM

sflocal

Apr 11, 2009, 02:55 PM

Exactly. Apple will stay a closed, proprietary shop that does not play well with others.

You want a Bangkok red-light-district where anything goes, where you can load anything, accept that your smartphone may get compromised and unstable in an anarchist environment, by all means go to the other players... you...will...not...be...missed.

Look at the amount of crap already out on the App Store? Many people (including folks here) complain about how bad it is. And that is for a "closed" system! And you want Apple to open it up even more? Not going to happen. As far as the general iPhone community is concerned, we hope it remains that way.

Most folks are completely satisfied with the way Apple is running their "closed" ecosystem. If it keeps the trash out, I'm all for it.

It's only the very vocal 1% minority whiners that make are raising a stink with it.

Anuba

Apr 11, 2009, 02:56 PM

Your comparison is vague. Please slap up an exact model of PC your are comparing the Mac Pro to. Let's get it on the table.
Fine, I'll recycle my own personal case which I posted yesterday. Welcome to "Desktop Hunters". I'm buying a laptop and a minitower this year (I do this every 3 years and last time was in July of 2006). The MBP 17" already won me over -- on portability (you should see these 17" professional PCs... can you say "intervertebral disk displacement"?) and battery life, plus the ability to run OS X on occasion.

So chalk one sale up for Apple Store Sweden.
The Mac Pro, on the other hand... OK, here goes:

My budget for the tower is 40,000 SEK (Swedish Kronor), give or take. That's $4842, approximately. That's including sales tax (see below).

Candidate A: Mac Pro, 2.93 GHz quad (Nehalem W3540), 6 GB RAM, 2x640 GB HDD, ATI HD4870, AppleCare Protection Plan: 41,270 SEK.

(You can go to apple.se and build your own to confirm this; you may not understand the Swedish gobbledegook but you'll recognize the BTO options from the US site)

Candidate B: Dell Precision T4500, 2.93 GHz quad (Nehalem W3540), 6 GB RAM, 2x750 GB HDD, ATI FirePro V5700 512 MB, 3-year warranty w/ NBD on-site repairs: 28,546 SEK.

I'm gonna help you translate that to US dollars.

First, we remove the 25% sales tax (I'm not kidding) because I run a business so that's deductible.

That brings the Mac Pro to 33,016 SEK, and the T3500 to 22,836 SEK.

Or, in dollars:
Mac Pro = $3997
T3500 = $2764

Difference: $1233

For this difference, I can deck out the Dell with stuff like...

- 12 GB RAM
- Blu-Ray
- 1 GB ATI card

...neither of which is possible on the Mac Pro.

I should also add that I know I'll be getting 10% off on the Dell if I call the same business sales rep I ordered from the last time, though it wouldn't be fair to bring that into the objective comparison. Subjectively, it will save me around $270 though. And I will not get discounts on Macs.

Now, before you say that the Mac Pro has one more hard drive bay, or aluminium enclosure, or cable-free guts, or iLife... remember -- it's $1233 ($1500 for me).

The OS matters less, since I already have one Adobe CS license for each platform and all my other relevant apps (Cubase, Reason, various VST/VSTi plugins) shipped with both the Mac and the PC version on the same DVD. So I'm not really interested in the marvels of iLife.

Disregarding your own OS preference for a second, do you really not understand why I find it more or less impossible to justify going with the MP?

KnightWRX

Apr 11, 2009, 02:59 PM

Exactly. Apple will stay a closed, proprietary shop that does not play well with others.

It's worked out pretty well for Microsoft up to now :rolleyes:.

Anuba

Apr 11, 2009, 03:05 PM

So let Apple release its OS to other manufacturers, Apple will go out of business and then we'll have no Mac OS, only windows.
Why would they go out of business? This isn't 1998 when the computers were all they had.

First off they have iPods, iPhones, AppleTV, iTunes Store and all the software. Steve could cease all computer manufacturing today and still be able to afford building that 24K gold, ruby encrusted palace.

Last time I checked, there are thousands of companies who live off of nothing but software sales, and doing splendidly. Apple would have those sales plus all the portable devices as well as iTunes Store, the App Store, etc.

Second, why would it diminish the value of Macs to such a degree that they lose ALL computer hardware sales? Many people will still want the real thing, the machines that were tailor made for OS X. Given the relatively high ratio of brand loyalists in the Mac camp I very much doubt they'd be looking elsewhere for the hardware... unless of course you're suggesting that prices DO matter to Mac users, despite the assurances that it's all about the priceless experience?

cthielen

Apr 11, 2009, 03:08 PM

I don't believe it. Was he supervising the creation of the latest iPod Shuffle?

Well yea, products are in the pipeline for at least months, the specs were all ready before he even took his leave I'm sure.

I'm not really convinced that iPod is all bad. The controls are a little less convenient for jogging, etc. but the main complaint reviewers had was "heavy headphones due to the controls being on them." What? Seriously? Like the exact same weight of controls on your iPhones that you loved so much? ********.

napabar

Apr 11, 2009, 03:15 PM

Fine, I'll recycle my own personal case which I posted yesterday. Welcome to "Desktop Hunters". I'm buying a laptop and a minitower this year (I do this every 3 years and last time was in July of 2006). The MBP 17" already won me over -- on portability (you should see these 17" professional PCs... can you say "intervertebral disk displacement"?) and battery life, plus the ability to run OS X on occasion.

So chalk one sale up for Apple Store Sweden.
The Mac Pro, on the other hand... OK, here goes:

My budget for the tower is 40,000 SEK (Swedish Kronor), give or take. That's $4842, approximately. That's including sales tax (see below).

Candidate A: Mac Pro, 2.93 GHz quad (Nehalem W3540), 6 GB RAM, 2x640 GB HDD, ATI HD4870, AppleCare Protection Plan: 41,270 SEK.

(You can go to apple.se and build your own to confirm this; you may not understand the Swedish gobbledegook but you'll recognize the BTO options from the US site)

Candidate B: Dell Precision T4500, 2.93 GHz quad (Nehalem W3540), 6 GB RAM, 2x750 GB HDD, ATI FirePro V5700 512 MB, 3-year warranty w/ NBD on-site repairs: 28,546 SEK.

I'm gonna help you translate that to US dollars.

First, we remove the 25% sales tax (I'm not kidding) because I run a business so that's deductible.

That brings the Mac Pro to 33,016 SEK, and the T3500 to 22,836 SEK.

Or, in dollars:
Mac Pro = $3997
T3500 = $2764

Difference: $1233

For this difference, I can deck out the Dell with stuff like...

- 12 GB RAM
- Blu-Ray
- 1 GB ATI card

...neither of which is possible on the Mac Pro.

I should also add that I know I'll be getting 10% off on the Dell if I call the same business sales rep I ordered from the last time, though it wouldn't be fair to bring that into the objective comparison. Subjectively, it will save me around $270 though. And I will not get discounts on Macs.

Now, before you say that the Mac Pro has one more hard drive bay, or aluminium enclosure, or cable-free guts, or iLife... remember -- it's $1233 ($1500 for me).

The OS matters less, since I already have one Adobe CS license for each platform and all my other relevant apps (Cubase, Reason, various VST/VSTi plugins) shipped with both the Mac and the PC version on the same DVD. So I'm not really interested in the marvels of iLife.

Disregarding your own OS preference for a second, do you really not understand why I find it more or less impossible to justify going with the MP?

I'm not here to argue what YOU personally can justify or not justify. You could be in the market for an Atari Falcon. I'm saying that for many people, the extra expense is justified. An extra hard drive bay, Firewire 800, cable free guts, superior design, ability to run Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio, Shake and yes even iLife are important. If your just looking for a file server, knock yourself out.

backdraft

Apr 11, 2009, 03:18 PM

Um ... Window Mobile does. There is no signing I'm aware of - but I detest that system. Nokia's S60 requires it but you can turn it off on the phone which most apps can be installed - if not hack it.

This is GREAT news for Steve Jobs' status of company interaction. However, I worry that the "invisible/imaginary/god-like syndrome" will occur when he doesn't return in June.

Personally I'd love for his first public speech presentation to feature (in Keynote) how he was able to remote into company XServes; and any major partnership deals in the works. I do hope he's been following the Microsoft onslaught and stabs at Apple computers' pricing. Again I saw Apple has to ingeniously highlight just what you pay for ... showing the world what the experience is like when you take your Mac home & unbox it; use it first day (ALL family members), use it the first week, and the first month. Show the warmth of interaction and the commadre of the community will to help you out.

I'd wager the quality of the system and the apps you take advantage from make the Mac & OS X MUCH MUCH cheaper than Windows XP or Vista or Windows Seven + purchasing Roxio/Adobe Premier + Photoshop just to get close or better than iPhoto.

I'm hoping he comes back and buys out Sun and essentially makes them Apple Enterprise. Apple needs to get ZFS working in leopard and tie that in with Sun StorageTek SANS for use with Final Cut Server + XSAN, they need native iSCSI. Xgrid + Sun Grid Engine along with Solaris Zones need to be merged into the kernel (look at Linux vserver even M$ is getting virtualization in the kernel) and no BSD chroot/jails don't compare to zones. I also wouldn't mind Apple switching from Mach to the l4.sec kernel for performance gains and merging the best parts of Solaris with OS X (Solaris scales better then OS X). Sparc engineers + PA Semi + Pagemaster would be interesting (btw Sun's top Sparc engineer is now at M$, they are up to something) Sun has a lot to offer and now that the IBM buyout fell through Apple has an opportunity to revolutionize IT and the enterprise. A buyout of Sun would get M$ trembling, Sun + Apple make a perfect fit and their technologies don't overlap so there wouldn't be any antitrust/monopoly concerns (IBM would have problems here) and no massive cuts, things would be smooth.

Anuba

Apr 11, 2009, 03:19 PM

I'm not here to argue what YOU personally can justify or not justify.
You asked for an exact comparison, I gave you one.

napabar

Apr 11, 2009, 03:25 PM

You asked for an exact comparison, I gave you one.

Of hardware specs. Not your personal dilemma.

Anuba

Apr 11, 2009, 03:38 PM

Of hardware specs. Not your personal dilemma.
Well you got both, and you could have chosen to address the hardware specs part. But I can see why you quickly lost interest after it turned out that the difference exceeded my "vague reference" to $1000 by $200+.

I used my personal dilemma as a backdrop because it ties in to what I was saying earlier about some Macs being so overpriced that even the people who can afford them are scratching their heads trying to justify the seemingly arbitrary markup. That's the difference between expensive and overpriced.

And to write the Precision off as a file server was a cheap shot, you know perfectly well that it's a workstation that runs all the software I listed -- some of it, such as Photoshop, even runs faster due to the fact that Adobe went 64-bit all the way with the Windows version but not the OS X version. In PCMag's review of the Mac Pro they stressed that Photoshop runs a helluvalot better in BootCamp, I don't see how that's irrelevant to graphic design pros.

mikeinternet

Apr 11, 2009, 04:22 PM

He's not going to let anyone else release the new iphone.

kdarling

Apr 11, 2009, 04:28 PM

Look at the amount of crap already out on the App Store? Many people (including folks here) complain about how bad it is. And that is for a "closed" system! And you want Apple to open it up even more?

Most people with computers actually use software that is obtainable from places other than the seller of their OS.

If you're too scared to use anything that Apple doesn't approve of, then fine. Don't.

However, a lot of people would love to have alternative browsers, email and SMS handlers, Flash and Java support, useful homescreens and themes... all of which would be officially available with an open system. Heck, Slingbox would be available right now.

As you said, we've already seen the crap that comes with a closed system.

Anuba

Apr 11, 2009, 04:29 PM

He's not going to let anyone else release the new iphone.
Well, it depends on what shape he is in. Unfortunately the stockholders seem to be investing in Steve, not Apple. One cough and the stock plummets.

If he's still gaunt but a little less pale and a little more peppy, the market will be cautiously reassured. If he's in really good shape and a few pounds heavier, the stock will skyrocket. If he rolls in like Stephen Hawking, pandemonium will ensue on Wall St.

BTW

Apr 11, 2009, 04:32 PM

I don't believe it. Was he supervising the creation of the latest iPod Shuffle?

Somehow I doubt it since that thing is so plain looking. Looks like a piece of metal just hanging on the person for no apparent reason.

zedsdead

Apr 11, 2009, 04:56 PM

Somehow I doubt it since that thing is so plain looking. Looks like a piece of metal just hanging on the person for no apparent reason.

Of course he did. He told the Shuffle Department "I want it smaller," and they said, "but we'll have to remove the buttons and force people to use the ****** Apple earphones." He replied, "do it."

I think his goal is to announce the iPhone at WWDC, if he feels and looks up to it. If not, he will simply return silently to Apple at the end of June. If Apple announces that he is doing the keynote, and then can't, it will cause even more problems.

iMacmatician

Apr 11, 2009, 05:02 PM

From 9 to 5 mac (http://www.9to5mac.com/jobs-ok-tblet-en-route):

Apple co-founder Mr. Jobs, who is considered the company's creative leader, is also involved in the development of future projects, they say. People privy to the company's strategy say Apple is working on new iPhone models and a portable device that is smaller than its current laptop computers but bigger than the iPhone or iPod Touch.A new portable device? Mini-tablet? Netbook? Small MacBook Air?

bobbleheadbob

Apr 11, 2009, 05:04 PM

I just hope he recovers quickly and is able to continue with as much involvement as he wants to have. Get well, Steve.

yongxiaofeng

Apr 11, 2009, 05:12 PM

"Apple spokesman Steve Dowling is quoted as saying "Steve continues to look forward to returning to Apple at the end of June."
WWDC is June 8-12

Steve won't be at WWDC09'.

don't you think it will be one more thing in June 8-12

with a larger scale touch screen device...

Anuba

Apr 11, 2009, 05:12 PM

From 9 to 5 mac (http://www.9to5mac.com/jobs-ok-tblet-en-route):

A new portable device? Mini-tablet? Netbook? Small MacBook Air?
Tablet netbook seems like the obvious way to go. A metal slab with glass front, 4x the screen size of iPhone and the ability to run iPhone games after some slight modifications (vector graphics will simply be scaled up but bitmaps need some work).

andy721

Apr 11, 2009, 05:36 PM

Thats when 10.6 comes out or at least in November.

Anuba

Apr 11, 2009, 05:48 PM

Of course he did. He told the Shuffle Department "I want it smaller," and they said, "but we'll have to remove the buttons and force people to use the ****** Apple earphones." He replied, "do it."
The new Shuffle reminds me of an episode of Absolutely Fabulous called "White Box". Edwina is having her kitchen redecorated by this obsessive-compulsive, latex-clad German woman who keeps removing everything until it's just a plain white room with a white kitchen table and no chairs. Something is still disturbing her, though (to the point where her partner has to increase her dosage of sedatives), and through clenched teeth she insists that the table will have to go, too.

don't you think it will be one more thing in June 8-12
Maybe Steve will be the one more thing this time. Phil Schiller does the whole keynote, then "One More Thing..." appears on the screen, then Steve comes crashing through it on a motorcycle.

Eric S.

Apr 11, 2009, 06:06 PM

AbFab rules.

BTW

Apr 11, 2009, 06:07 PM

ucfgrad93

Apr 11, 2009, 06:19 PM

Glad to hear it! Best wishes for a full recovery, Steve

Agreed, I hope he is better soon.

kdarling

Apr 11, 2009, 07:19 PM

Tablet netbook seems like the obvious way to go. A metal slab with glass front, 4x the screen size of iPhone and the ability to run iPhone games after some slight modifications (vector graphics will simply be scaled up but bitmaps need some work).

No need to scale up the graphics Just display three+ iPhone apps side by side (or above and below) all at the same time. One could be weather, the second photos, another something else. Make it the ultimate widget tablet with the App Store.

Slap a magnet on the back, and it could be the fabled refrigerator device. Pop out its stand and it can sit on a desk.

deconstruct60

Apr 11, 2009, 07:28 PM

How have they been successful in the computer department?

They've had 25 years to get where they are.

1984. Apple entered the computer business in 1984? Wow that was quite apropos to have a Big Brother in that commercial. 25 years later and folks are rewriting history: only it isn't those "Other folks" but the Apple fans that is doing it. At one point Apple was the largest PC vendor. They got smoked over the years and now are a niche player. IBM PC + DOS came in and pulled ahead. Windows came out and pulled away.

Apple's market share in recent years has somewhat gone up because "market share" is a skewed statistic. Most folks normally treat "market share" as if it was a percentage of units sold. For instance, if there are 100 million PCs sold in the world and Apple has 10% "market share" that 10 million of them are Macs. The most commonly quoted "market share" in the press and by 'analyst' is "revenue market share". That doesn't necessarily equate to number of units sold; they a coupled but not the same.

A significant part of Apple's revenue market share of late has been Apple keeping the average selling price of their computers higher than other folks. That's giving them an increase in revenue "market share", but not necessarily in terms of unit market share.

Another smaller contributing factor is Bootcamp. If for whatever reason Apple collapsed in a year or two you can still boot up a copy of Windows. You hardware isn't a doorstop. Back when you couldn't have an emergency exit strategy to a leading Desktop OS, that kept some folks out of the market for a Mac.

A bigger contributor was Apple putting boxes on the market that were competitively priced. Matching hardware features got you similar prices as the vendors who had greater than Apple's market share were offering.

Short term it probably will work for a while of fighting the market forces to freeze average selling prices. Long term, it is a loser. In computer tech market, the high end features all go to the lower end over time. At some point going to get to point where computers are fast enough for most folks.
(that's in part what the Microsoft campaign is driving at. PCs have a more competitive/diverse ecosystem for consumers to participate in. )

That "we're just going to ignore market and just demand higher margins" strategy worked for a while in the 90's until it eventually collapsed. Apple gained share when they brought their prices back into line. Perhaps someone in Apple wants to kill off the single Quad, 3xxx series Xeon Mac Pros because those are example of where Apple not even close to competitive.

Consider this: After two years, the iPhone has a larger market share in its field than Mac/OS X has in the personal computer and OS domain.

Again the skewed revenue market share effect. Apple doesn't sell more affordable phones; only one of the most expensive phones on the market. In fact, Apple eventually broke and now even the iPhone has gone to the highly subsidized price model. That only masks the fact that iPhone still has one of the highest lifetime costs. If Apple hadn't cut the "buy in" price they likely would not have hit the numbers they were talking about hitting.

Again short term it will work. However, when every phone manufacturer has a touch screen phone and a "good enough" phone experience in the longer run.

The iPod has been more of an abnormality for Apple over the last 25 years. They did come to market with more affordable products and did let the average price go down .... at least until now. The touch is to a small extent them trying to push it back up. ( at least with some value-add. )

DELLsFan

Apr 11, 2009, 08:46 PM

... I'd like to see Apple re-tool the symbiosis of OSX with hardware and allow other manufacturers to legally use the OS. I'd like to see Apple offer more choices in their own family of computers. I'd like to see Apple offer more options for upgrade by consumers for more products than just the Mac Pro. I'd like to see Apple lower prices across the board ...

I'll concede most of the Mac fanatics I know dislike the notion of licensing OSX to other hardware manufacturers. I understand this didn't work out too well in the past. Does that mean the approach would fail today? I don't know, but I think Anuba makes a great point:

Why would they go out of business? This isn't 1998 when the computers were all they had.

First off they have iPods, iPhones, AppleTV, iTunes Store and all the software. Steve could cease all computer manufacturing today and still be able to afford building that 24K gold, ruby encrusted palace.

Last time I checked, there are thousands of companies who live off of nothing but software sales, and doing splendidly. Apple would have those sales plus all the portable devices as well as iTunes Store, the App Store, etc.

Second, why would it diminish the value of Macs to such a degree that they lose ALL computer hardware sales? Many people will still want the real thing, the machines that were tailor made for OS X. Given the relatively high ratio of brand loyalists in the Mac camp I very much doubt they'd be looking elsewhere for the hardware... unless of course you're suggesting that prices DO matter to Mac users, despite the assurances that it's all about the priceless experience?

QFT.

If all Apple did was the OS and computers, I might pay attention to Apple Purist thinking. Sexy design with a product that just works is still a successful model. So when someone else starts designing a different sexy product that just works but costs less than Cupertino pricing, how long do you think the cash saved from iPod/iPhone sales will last? The Halo effect from the iPod and the iPhone can not last forever. So when it ebbs to the point where margins are lower than the shareholders prefer, I suspect the Board will want to re-evaluate the "priceless experience" to keep those margins profitable.

Meanwhile, what is so wrong with wanting more choices, more selection, and more options in upgrading the products Apple IS making? Mac propeller heads are in a league all our own, right? However, please don't tell me we discourage price reduction because it would lower us to some lower class (of propeller head). Are we that much of a snob? :eek:

GenNovE

Apr 11, 2009, 10:21 PM

In other news...

Apple still behind the ipods success...tonight @ 11. :rolleyes:

JGowan

Apr 11, 2009, 11:05 PM

…Difference: $1233

For this difference, I can deck out the Dell with stuff like...

- 12 GB RAM
- Blu-Ray
- 1 GB ATI card

...neither of which is possible on the Mac Pro.But can you run Mac OS X? The Mac Pro sure can run any Windows OS you throw at it.

Goodbye. Good Riddance.

boa13

Apr 11, 2009, 11:19 PM

I connected this monitor to my windows vista home premium. I can see the image, but I can only see 3 or 4 colors. Pink, yellow and red. Do you know what the problem might be? I have it connected to a power adapter model A1096. Please help!

inkswamp

Apr 11, 2009, 11:37 PM

0 CLS
10 FOR A = 1 TO 1000
20 REM Steve is recovering and nothing has changed
30 NEXT A
40 GOTO 10

Oh, what's with this BASIC, procedural nonsense? Get with the times, buddy! ;)

while (steve.stillRecovering()) {
echo "Nothing has changed.";
}

APPLE ROCKZ

Apr 12, 2009, 12:10 AM

Steve Can't Live Without Apple=)
I Hope He Gets Better
Keep Fighting STEVE JOBS!!!!
Live Love=)

sanshou

Apr 12, 2009, 12:13 AM

steve jobs rocks

MacFly123

Apr 12, 2009, 12:36 AM

You go Steve; show them all. God Bless and happy Easter.

That's refreshing! I didn't know anyone on this site believed in God haha! :rolleyes:

Glad to hear the good news and hope to have you back soon Steve :)

MikeTheC

Apr 12, 2009, 01:22 AM

Oh, what's with this BASIC, procedural nonsense? Get with the times, buddy! ;)

while (steve.stillRecovering()) {
echo "Nothing has changed.";
}

Sorry, but the only programming language I know (and fairly little of it, too) is GW-BASIC. I never got that much into programming in high school, and I never got into it afterward, either.

(Psst... Don't tell anyone, but I think I'm one of those five or six MacRumors users who actually doesn't know HTML. Oh, the shame.)

SkippyThorson

Apr 12, 2009, 01:30 AM

So it seems e will not be the one releasing the next iPhone, but he will more than likely be there when a new Tablet / NetBook is released.

It seems metaphorical on his end - they don't need one man to keep doing great things, but you know what, he's still got it. It's like a message from him. Zen-y.

sflocal

Apr 12, 2009, 02:23 AM

Most people with computers actually use software that is obtainable from places other than the seller of their OS.

If you're too scared to use anything that Apple doesn't approve of, then fine. Don't.

However, a lot of people would love to have alternative browsers, email and SMS handlers, Flash and Java support, useful homescreens and themes... all of which would be officially available with an open system. Heck, Slingbox would be available right now.

Nonsense. You can spin it to whatever fits your argument. You want to apply PC system to a phone system thinking its the best solution for everything else. Look at the mess the Windows, Linux system is for the average consumer. So many choices to pick from and 100 different ways to get a job done that nothing gets done. Drivers, configurations, corruptions, conflicts, it just keeps going on. And you very well know that.

The iPhone works as well as it does because there is a single entry point to a given system. As a developer, I want to create a web application just once on the platform and not have to worry about different browsers and the quirkiness that goes with each one. The PC way is just too much of a mess. Forget Java and Flash. They're horrible on the PC/Mac platform so why would we want it on the iPhone?

This is not about me being "scared" as you say to accept something Apple doesn't approve of. Exact opposite in fact. I deal with Windows in my 9-to-5 job as a systems engineer. It's refreshing to deal with the simplicity of how the iPhone is designed.

A lot of people would like alternative option for their phone as you said. But even more people would prefer it to be just the way it is... a stable platform.

As you said, we've already seen the crap that comes with a closed system.

And you think it will magically "improve" by lifting the restrictions completely? Right... Convince me. :confused:

OldMike

Apr 12, 2009, 04:26 AM

I'm hoping he comes back and buys out Sun and essentially makes them Apple Enterprise. Apple needs to get ZFS working in leopard and tie that in with Sun StorageTek SANS for use with Final Cut Server + XSAN, they need native iSCSI. Xgrid + Sun Grid Engine along with Solaris Zones need to be merged into the kernel (look at Linux vserver even M$ is getting virtualization in the kernel) and no BSD chroot/jails don't compare to zones. I also wouldn't mind Apple switching from Mach to the l4.sec kernel for performance gains and merging the best parts of Solaris with OS X (Solaris scales better then OS X). Sparc engineers + PA Semi + Pagemaster would be interesting (btw Sun's top Sparc engineer is now at M$, they are up to something) Sun has a lot to offer and now that the IBM buyout fell through Apple has an opportunity to revolutionize IT and the enterprise. A buyout of Sun would get M$ trembling, Sun + Apple make a perfect fit and their technologies don't overlap so there wouldn't be any antitrust/monopoly concerns (IBM would have problems here) and no massive cuts, things would be smooth.

Finally someone who really gets it.

I just don't understand why this isn't completely beyond obvious for everyone at Apple. Apple, alone, will have a long hard struggle to make it in enterprise computing. Apple + Sun would give them instant credibility and market share. I think it would generate such a buzz that they probably wouldn't need to budget for advertising for a long time.

I can't think of two companies that would compliment each other better. Apple excels in what Sun has difficulty in, and Sun excels in areas that Apple has no traction.

A very interesting article (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/12/sun_apple_snapple/) from a few years back:

Sun Microsystems tried to acquire Apple once and then almost merged with Apple on two other occasions, according to Sun co-founder Bill Joy. Beyond these deals, the two companies almost teamed on three other projects including sharing a user interface and the SPARC architecture. The moves were cheered by Apple fan Joy, while Sun's CEO Scott McNealy appeared less impressed with some of the proposals.

All of this we learned tonight at a Computer History Museum event where Sun's four co-founders held the stage for close to two hours.

At one point during the discussion, questioner John Gage, a longtime Sun staffer, asked McNealy about Sun's "three attempts" to buy Apple. McNealy dodged the question.

Moments later, Joy – a Unix god and venture capitalist on the side – dragged the conversation back to Apple, seeming to want to make a confession.

Joy voiced an affinity for Apple's CEO Steve Jobs and said it was a "personal disappointment" that the two companies were never closer.

"There were six very close encounters," Joy said.... (more (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/12/sun_apple_snapple/))

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 04:33 AM

A lot of people here don't seem to understand Apple. When you buy Apple, you don't just buy a computer, you buy into a philosophy. Apple has always been about control. Call them "arrogant" if you wish, but your assessment changes nothing. They launched the personal computer industry. They brought the GUI to the masses. They introduced all sorts of technologies long before the PC world caught on (3.5" floppy, CD-ROM, USB, for starters). At NeXT, Jobs created a machine that, in 1987, had multimedia email, an erasable optical drive, Ethernet, an object-oriented programming environment, and plenty more - while Microsoft was still struggling to release a stable version of Windows 3. Apple (and Jobs) have always been the innovators.

The bottom line is this: Apple doesn't care one bit about the small vocal minority of whiners who think they could be even more successful if they did X or Y. They don't care. They're too busy making money hand over fist, selling more and more machines every year, opening more and more stores, and dominating the multimedia player and smartphone markets. How long has Microsoft been trying to crack the smartphone market? How long did it take Apple to blow them out of the water? Sony should have owned the MP3 player market. Oops!

Apple doesn't want to be the everyman computer any more than BMW wants to be the everyman car. Deal with it. Can you find a cheaper car with better horsepower than a BMW? Sure. But it's not a BMW! All of these price comparisons and arguments over pricing make me laugh. If all you care about is price, buy Windows. No one is forcing you to pay the "Apple tax." I've used Windows enough to know that I wouldn't personally own a Windows machine if Microsoft gave it to me. OS X is worth every extra penny. I don't even think about the cost. And clearly I'm not alone.

Complain all you want, but Apple will never give you a cheap tower. It doesn't jive with their philosophy. Complain about the closed nature of the App Store all you want and, again, Apple doesn't care. They're too busy being wildly successful to worry about a few whiners. They don't hide anything. They make it very clear that the Touch OS platform is not an "open" platform and that all apps are purchased through them. You may not agree with this business model, but Apple really doesn't care. They're too busy selling apps and making software affordable and distribution simple. And what is the rest of the industry trying to do? Right, copy Apple (again).

When you buy Apple, you buy into a holistic philosophy, a vertically integrated philosophy where everything is supposed to "just work." It is a belief that computing should be simple, that computers are tools to make out lives better, not challenges to be faced, not black holes for our time. It started with the tight integration of hardware and the OS. Now they've added software distribution. If you want the anything goes, wild west of computing, buy Windows. You have a choice. But don't malign Apple for thinking different. They're never going to open the Touch platform to other stores. They're never going to allow developers to sell apps directly to consumers on the Touch platform. And they spell that out very clearly. They're always going to charge a premium for their machines and design is always going to be a key component of their strategy.

I've been a customer for 27 years and I fully expect to be one for another 27 - and beyond. I believe in their philosophy of simplicity. I don't care what it costs. The meager amount I'd save on a Windows box or the relatively minor performance increase I'd gain from buying a PC is irrelevant to me. The Apple experience is so much better. It makes my life better. And no other company has ever convinced me that they can match Apple's offerings. Never. And, clearly, I'm not alone. So, to the whiners, stop complaining. Either get on board, or buy a PC.

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 04:42 AM

Anuba

Apr 12, 2009, 07:12 AM

But can you run Mac OS X? The Mac Pro sure can run any Windows OS you throw at it.

Yes, the MP can run OS X which is a nice added bonus. But in order to fill the shoes of the aforementioned $1200-1500 discrepancy it's gonna have to do a little better than that.
Apple doesn't want to be the everyman computer any more than BMW wants to be the everyman car. Deal with it. Can you find a cheaper car with better horsepower than a BMW? Sure. But it's not a BMW!
The reason why there is no such term as "BMW tax" is, people understand that a luxury car developed and assembled in Germany is more expensive to make than a mass produced Kia that's available in a dozen combinations of color + engine + equipment level. There are so many factors you can point to that justify the pricetag. Therefore a BMW is merely expensive, not overpriced. Myself I drive a VW Golf GTI assembled at the VW home factory in Wolfsburg. It cost a little more than a standard BMW 1-series due to various bells & whistles, but whatever, it was worth every penny. Does that mean I would gladly pay the same amount for a Chinese-built VW "Bora"? No frickin' way. You wanna sell me a Chinese VW, sure, here's 50 bucks.

This is why your analogy is an insult to BMW since hardware wise, a Mac is nothing more than a generic PC mass-produced in a Chinese sweatshop. The illusion of 'premium' is created by a sexy aluminium exterior which only cost marginally more than any plastic counterpart. Nobody would be yapping about Mac prices if manufacturing costs were unusually high or if they were precision-assembled in some Swiss clock factory. But they're not. And that's why "Apple tax" even became a term in the first place. How hard is this to understand?

BMW's CEO should take a trip around Mac land and pop everyone in the face who tries to borrow BMW's image to glorify fake premium products.

Anuba

Apr 12, 2009, 07:37 AM

Skika

Apr 12, 2009, 07:43 AM

SactoGuy18

Apr 12, 2009, 08:49 AM

Apple doesn't want to be the everyman computer any more than BMW wants to be the everyman car. Deal with it. Can you find a cheaper car with better horsepower than a BMW? Sure. But it's not a BMW! All of these price comparisons and arguments over pricing make me laugh. If all you care about is price, buy Windows. No one is forcing you to pay the "Apple tax." I've used Windows enough to know that I wouldn't personally own a Windows machine if Microsoft gave it to me. OS X is worth every extra penny. I don't even think about the cost. And clearly I'm not alone.

I would agree 100% if we were in good economic times, but alas, with the potential that our economy could be headed for its deepest recession--one that could be somewhere between the 1980-1982 recession and the Great Depression in terms of how much our economy is set back--Apple may have to pretty soon start seriously re-evaluating itself over the its own direction for the future before it suddenly realizes it burnt through that US$24 billion in cash reserves in no time flat.

I can see Apple do the following very soon:

1) It will stop opening more Apple Stores worldwide, and may close a small number of them as a cash-saving move. The store closings could happen in Europe first, where the economic situation is actually more dire because banks in Europe are vastly more leveraged than any US bank and there has been a string of major bank failures/bailouts in recent months.

2) Apple may have no choice but to get into the netbook market with a machine about the size of the Asus 1000 HE (10.1" display version), but it will use the latest Intel Atom CPU with more RAM installed (2 GB) and possibly a 240 GB 1.8" hard drive so it could run MacOS X 10.6 Snow Leopard reasonably fast; of course, it will sport a brighter, better quality display than the Acer, Asus or MSI netbooks. Such a sub-notebook will probably sell for something in the US$550 to US$600 range, a bit more than the US$400-US$500 range of current Windows-based netbooks with the 160 GB hard disk drive.

3) Apple will seriously look at building a small tower machine to replace the iMac that looks like a reduced height Mac Pro but powered by the same generation of CPU's and GPU's the iMac now uses; it will sport DVI-D and Mini DisplayPort connectors so you can use Apple's own Cinema Displays or third-party displays that will now get Apple certification for picture quality and refresh speed for displaying full motion video. Such a machine will sell in the US$800 to US$1,200 range depending on user options.

Yes, these options are rather extreme for Apple, but given the tightening world economy, Apple may not have a choice if they want to conserve cash for the future. I mean think about it: are even end users willing to pay US$2,000 for an all-in-one 24" iMac when you could possibly get a small tower machine plus Apple-certified third party 24" widescreen monitor from LG, Samsung or Viewsonic for possibly US$700 to US$800 less?

(EDIT: By the way, even BMW is hitting hard times. BMW sales levels have really crashed lately and as such BMW is concentrating on upgrading the MINI hatchback line and developing next-generation 1-Series derivatives to capture the more fiscally-frugal auto market until the economy recovers.)

Anuba

Apr 12, 2009, 09:02 AM

I can see Apple do the following very soon:
I agree on all points except...

3) Apple will seriously look at building a small tower machine to replace the iMac that looks like a reduced height Mac Pro but powered by the same generation of CPU's and GPU's the iMac now uses; it will sport DVI-D and Mini DisplayPort connectors so you can use Apple's own Cinema Displays or third-party displays that will now get Apple certification for picture quality and refresh speed for displaying full motion video. Such a machine will sell in the US$800 to US$1,200 range depending on user options.

...which sounds more like a jumbo Mac Mini than a mini Mac Pro. The only reason iMac uses portable-grade CPU is the limited space and thermal headroom on the back of a flatscreen, it would make no sense in a "microtower". The should of course use the only Intel processor family they've skipped, i.e. the consumer-grade Core i7.

And yes, BMW is more vulnerable because all they have is Rolls-Royce, BMW and the Mini (the latter is in the premium supermini segment). The Volkswagen Group has it easier because they have everything from entry-level junk to the Bugatti Veyron. They can just ramp up production of Skoda, Seat and low-end VW, and take it easy with Audi, Lamborghini and Bugatti for a while.

DELLsFan

Apr 12, 2009, 09:17 AM

A lot of people here don't seem to understand Apple ...

... The bottom line is this: Apple doesn't care one bit about the small vocal minority of whiners who think they could be even more successful if they did X or Y. They don't care. They're too busy making money hand over fist, selling more and more machines every year, opening more and more stores, and dominating the multimedia player and smartphone markets...

... Apple doesn't want to be the everyman computer any more than BMW wants to be the everyman car. Deal with it...

... Apple doesn't care. They're too busy being wildly successful to worry about a few whiners. They don't hide anything...

Anyone who's been awake in the past few years knows what a crock of kool-aid you're drinking, friend. The biggest counter to your Apple Apathy theme is their aggressive "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" advertising campaign. If Apple was so confident in its products and pricing, and was so oblivious to market competition and market share as you boldly suggest, it would not have aggressively maligned the PC and Vista in particular in those ads. Its confidence would have precluded the beckoning of Windows users to try the Mac. They wouldn't have even bothered with Boot Camp and all the marketing suggesting folks could run Windows on the Mac. One could argue to take your premise to the extreme and presume Apple would never have shifted to Intel processors.

No sir, there are many purist-apologists like you which seem to forget Apple is a business, albeit successful, that I think (despite rumors to the contrary) really IS influenced by consumer market share and opinion. I'm thankful they are - as I've noticed Apple RAM prices have come down to reasonable levels for consumers ... have you?

When the iPod/iPhone sales ebb to some value below which it can no longer comfortably shore up the profit margins to shareholders, I suspect Apple will disappoint folks like you. When it begins its next wave of endearing Mac commercials, they won't be targeting luxury car drivers and spoiled brat college students (Apple scored this demographic years ago). They'd be wise to target a few more groups like Soccer Moms and Gamers (the REAL ones). There are enthusiasts that would love to buy a Mac (price be damned, even) - if there were more options in upgrade other than the RAM (for the most part).

... When you buy Apple, you buy into a holistic philosophy, a vertically integrated philosophy where everything is supposed to "just work." It is a belief that computing should be simple, that computers are tools to make out lives better, not challenges to be faced, not black holes for our time. It started with the tight integration of hardware and the OS. Now they've added software distribution. If you want the anything goes, wild west of computing, buy Windows. You have a choice. But don't malign Apple for thinking different ...

I happen to agree with you here. We part ways when your resistance to change ... to "different thinking" paints you a hypocrite.

:apple:

Sai Zelion

Apr 12, 2009, 10:40 AM

Heard of any iPhone viruses lately? Oh yeah, that's right. The only iPhone malware out there is for jailbroken iPhones.

Perhaps "a lot of people" are mistaking Apple's efforts to keep the iPhone free of security issues and viruses as arrogance. It has been Apple's stated goal from the start to keep malicious software off the iPhone. Seems to me they're doing a pretty good job so far. Odd that those kinds of measures taken in the interests of their customers is labelled arrogance.

I agree with u 100%. From the beginning Apple has made it clear that performance and stabaility are even more important than how "cool" the iPhone works.

How soon. Have as forgotten how dreadful the pocketpc experience can be. Constant crashing, installing unsigned apps causing system instabilty and vulnerability, and the subsequent viruses learking, poor battery life as well causinge to purchase bulky- tumorous looking extended batteries

How can we forget the fact that no other company has shown the dedication apple has to constantly impoving the iPhone OS, keeping it secure etc!? Apple is not perfect bit they are by far better than the rest.

mccldwll

Apr 12, 2009, 10:49 AM

I won't waste time reading all the posts, and I certainly hope it's already been stated, but the article is complete crap. There is no news. Nothing. Zip. Nada. It's intended to yet again raise fears, uncertainity and doubt (FUD) about his health and what will happen if he leaves--after all, it says he hasn't really left. [For one thing, directors of companies do not consult with patient's doctors.] Rupert Murdoch now owns the WSJ, and it's now about as reliable as the Faaux Noise, and the National Enquirer with its stories about alien abductions. It's a paid for, planted story to impact the stock. That's it.

jouster

Apr 12, 2009, 11:10 AM

Nobody would be yapping about Mac prices if manufacturing costs were unusually high or if they were precision-assembled in some Swiss clock factory. But they're not.

++

My MacBook is a fine example of just how unlike "precision-assembled" products some Macs are. I'm surprised another small piece didn't fall off while I was typing this.

mccldwll

Apr 12, 2009, 11:25 AM

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 11:34 AM

Anyone who's been awake in the past few years knows what a crock of kool-aid you're drinking, friend. The biggest counter to your Apple Apathy theme is their aggressive "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" advertising campaign. If Apple was so confident in its products and pricing, and was so oblivious to market competition and market share as you boldly suggest, it would not have aggressively maligned the PC and Vista in particular in those ads. Its confidence would have precluded the beckoning of Windows users to try the Mac. They wouldn't have even bothered with Boot Camp and all the marketing suggesting folks could run Windows on the Mac. One could argue to take your premise to the extreme and presume Apple would never have shifted to Intel processors.

Like I said, I've been drinking the Kool-Aid for 27 years. In that time, I've witnessed countless individuals predict Apple's demise and countless consumers post silly things to websites (and before that, newsgroups and magazine reader letters) claiming they know what's BEST for Apple. And, here we are, 27 years later. Apple has $25+ billion in the bank, no debt, and yet people STILL think they know better than Apple. Sorry, but I find it pretty darn funny!

Furthermore, aggressive marketing and switching to Intel doesn't change anything I said. What's your point? Apple is very confident in the superiority of their products. They market aggressively. They're not oblivious to market competition. They've been fighting since DAY ONE. They're a business, after all. Your comments are hardly a rebuttal of my argument. You're merely stating the obvious.

Apple isn't going to open themselves up to clones. They're NEVER going to license OS X. NEVER. They aren't going to open the Touch platform to other stores and software distribution methods. They're (probably - I'm not 100% confident on this one!) not going to release any sort of "cheap" mini-tower. Etc. No matter how hard a small vocal minority whines, these things aren't going to happen. That was my point (which you obviously missed). It has nothing to do with marketing their products, switching to Intel, etc. These are completely different topics.

No sir, there are many purist-apologists like you which seem to forget Apple is a business, albeit successful, that I think (despite rumors to the contrary) really IS influenced by consumer market share and opinion. I'm thankful they are - as I've noticed Apple RAM prices have come down to reasonable levels for consumers ... have you?

Sure, and I'm glad they've dropped. But, again, what's your point?

When the iPod/iPhone sales ebb to some value below which it can no longer comfortably shore up the profit margins to shareholders, I suspect Apple will disappoint folks like you. When it begins its next wave of endearing Mac commercials, they won't be targeting luxury car drivers and spoiled brat college students (Apple scored this demographic years ago). They'd be wise to target a few more groups like Soccer Moms and Gamers (the REAL ones). There are enthusiasts that would love to buy a Mac (price be damned, even) - if there were more options in upgrade other than the RAM (for the most part).

They don't care about these groups. How many times do they have to make it clear? Where games are concerned, it's a chicken-egg problem. Unless game developers support the platform, why would Apple build a sick gaming machine? And, so far, game developers have only moderately (at best) embraced the Mac. I'm sure that, if and when, Mac gaming gains moment, Apple will deliver a great product. But it's neither here nor there at this point. And, for the record, I find the current Apple hardware satisfactory for gaming. I'm not a hardcore gamer by any means, but this notion that Macs can't run games is ludicrous. I won't argue for a moment that more powerful gaming hardware can be had on the PC side, but if price is no object, buy a Mac Pro.

Apple isn't DULL, er DELL, or any other generic box manufacturer. They're all about design. They spend a ton of $$$ on R&D while every other PC manufacturer just slaps cheap hardware together in basically the same cases they've been using for decades. Apple is not interested in building the cheapest machine possible. They sell an EXPERIENCE. It starts with your purchase at one of their stores. Can you go into a DELL store and take free training classes? Oops, what DELL store? If something goes wrong, you can speak with someone in the US, not "Sally" in India. You can bring your machine into an Apple Store and get one-on-one assistance from someone who actually knows the products and isn't reading off a script. And if your machine requires repair, it's the most hassle-free experience I've ever had. All of this costs money.

So, my point remains. Either get on board, or shut up and buy a PC. You have a choice.

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 11:49 AM

I would agree 100% if we were in good economic times, but alas, with the potential that our economy could be headed for its deepest recession--one that could be somewhere between the 1980-1982 recession and the Great Depression in terms of how much our economy is set back--Apple may have to pretty soon start seriously re-evaluating itself over the its own direction for the future before it suddenly realizes it burnt through that US$24 billion in cash reserves in no time flat.

Fair enough. But, again, it's all mere speculation. And right now Apple is doing very well, the best they've ever done. I have no doubt that they have a Plan B (and C, and D...) if the economy REALLY tanks, but it's neither here nor there at this point. They're still selling tons of Macs and iPods. They're still wildly profitable. And, by all accounts, they have some interesting new devices in the pipeline. And, keep in mind, they weathered the 1980-82 recession just fine. And if we hit another Great Depression, I'd say all bets are off for everyone!

Jobs is a master at reinventing himself. He's been counted out so many times and, yet, he roars back every time with a vengeance (I hope that's the case this time around with his health, too). Unlike Microsoft, Apple can change course quite quickly because they control the entire experience. They're not dependent upon third parties to deliver the right products for their OS. They make everything. So, if need be, I'm sure Apple will tighten a bit here and try something new there. But why get into the low-margin, low-profit netbook sector when you don't need to? I have no doubt that Apple is working on a device to compete against current netbook offerings, but it won't be a traditional netbook. Think Knowledge Navigator.

jouster

Apr 12, 2009, 11:52 AM

They don't care about these groups. How many times do they have to make it clear?

Till you show how they changed from not-caring to caring about the MP3 player market before late 2001, and why the same mechanism should not apply to markets in which they do not currently have products.

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 11:54 AM

This is why your analogy is an insult to BMW since hardware wise, a Mac is nothing more than a generic PC mass-produced in a Chinese sweatshop. The illusion of 'premium' is created by a sexy aluminium exterior which only cost marginally more than any plastic counterpart. Nobody would be yapping about Mac prices if manufacturing costs were unusually high or if they were precision-assembled in some Swiss clock factory. But they're not. And that's why "Apple tax" even became a term in the first place. How hard is this to understand?

Ok, fair enough. I personally find the quality of Apple's hardware has declined since they started making things in China, so I'll give you that. But let's not forget that Apple spends a ton of $$$ on R&D. While they might still make the products in China, R&D is homegrown and not cheap.

And it's not hard to understand "Apple tax" at all. What I said in my original post is that I don't care. And clearly I'm not alone. I'll gladly pay a premium for Apple products, made in the USA (which I would prefer!) or China, because the overall Apple experience is so much better, from purchasing at the store, to free training, to US-based customer service, to no-hassle repairs, to, finally and ultimately, a vastly superior OS. This is why I pay the "Apple tax" without so much as a thought.

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 11:56 AM

Till you show how they changed from not-caring to caring about the MP3 player market before late 2001, and why the same mechanism should not apply to markets in which they do not currently have products.

They started to care about the market when they had a way to improve upon the crap that was already out there. And they did. And look at the rest of the market. Decimated. And the same will be true of the netbook market - if and when they decide to tackle it. But, it's all about profit margins. Apple isn't interested in competing in the low-profit arena. They've made that clear again and again. They're not the everyman computer company, no matter how hard some people wish they were. Deal with it.

jouster

Apr 12, 2009, 12:01 PM

They started to care about the market when they had a way to improve upon the crap that was already out there. And they did. And look at the rest of the market. Decimated. And the same will be true of the netbook market - if and when they decide to tackle it. But, it's all about profit margins. Apple isn't interested in competing in the low-profit arena. They've made that clear again and again. They're not the everyman computer company, no matter how hard some people wish they were. Deal with it.

Sure, no argument about the margins. But you made plenty of capital stressing that you'd been hearing how Apple was doomed for 27 years; my argument is that there have similarly been years of naysayers when new market segments have been suggested for Apple (sometimes including Jobs!), then lo and behold - the iPod! The Apple TV! etc etc...

There's no reason to assume any market area is not of interest to Apple. Soccer moms and gamers? Why not? Apple made those 25bn bucks by appealing more than ever before to joe sixpack. Why stop now?

IJ Reilly

Apr 12, 2009, 12:02 PM

Finally someone who really gets it.

I just don't understand why this isn't completely beyond obvious for everyone at Apple. Apple, alone, will have a long hard struggle to make it in enterprise computing. Apple + Sun would give them instant credibility and market share. I think it would generate such a buzz that they probably wouldn't need to budget for advertising for a long time.

I can't think of two companies that would compliment each other better. Apple excels in what Sun has difficulty in, and Sun excels in areas that Apple has no traction.

I don't understand why it isn't completely beyond obvious that Apple has little interest in enterprise computing. Entering this market would put them in direct competition with Microsoft, challenging Microsoft on turf they would defend with every fiber of their being. If Apple has learned anything about coexistence with the 5,000 ton gorilla, it's that you don't get in its face. And I'm not talking about cheeky advertising campaigns. I'm talking about full-frontal assaults in areas where Microsoft is hugely dominant.

This they won't do. It's no accident that Apple has made most of its progress in markets where Microsoft had little or no presence.

There's a reason why Apple and Sun have played footsie for so long without actually getting together. The reason is that they aren't really compatible companies, and if Apple swallowed up Sun, that would portend a major change in the way Apple does business. So unless you believe that Apple's business is doing poorly, then I don't see the reasoning behind them merging with a wreck of a company like Sun.

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 12:06 PM

Sure, no argument about the margins. But you made plenty of capital stressing that you'd been hearing how Apple was doomed for 27 years; my argument is that there have similarly been years of naysayers when new market segments have been suggested for Apple (sometimes including Jobs!), then lo and behold - the iPod! The Apple TV! etc etc...

There's no reason to assume any market area is not of interest to Apple. Soccer moms and gamers? Why not? Apple made those 25bn bucks by appealing more than ever before to joe sixpack. Why stop now?

Because until Apple cares, they don't care. :) Jobs is fickle. We all know this. And he's not the most transparent (understatement!) human being in the world either. He'll say one thing and do something completely different the next, as you point out. But there's always a method to his madness. And right now I believe him when he says that Apple isn't interested in low-margin markets. Apple didn't build a 25 billion dollar cash reserve by making a $50 profit on each machine and I don't expect them to change that tune anytime soon. And he certainly is NEVER going to license the MacOS, as some people doggedly (and stupidly) insist he should. Nor is he going to ease restrictions on the Touch platform's software distribution method. People can complain about these latter two issues until they are blue in the face, but nothing is going to change there.

IJ Reilly

Apr 12, 2009, 12:08 PM

Because until Apple cares, they don't care. :) Jobs is fickle. We all know this. And he's not the most transparent (understatement!) human being in the world either. He'll say one thing and do something completely different the next, as you point out.

This isn't being fickle, it's deliberate misdirection. He and Apple are opaque for a reason.

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 12:11 PM

There's a reason why Apple and Sun have played footsie for so long without actually getting together. The reason is that they aren't really compatible companies, and if Apple swallowed up Sun, that would portend a major change in the way Apple does business. So unless you believe that Apple's business is doing poorly, then I don't see the reasoning behind them merging with a wreck of a company like Sun.

Excellent points. I definitely see the (perceived) allure of a merger, but Apple is doing too well to open that can of worms. Integrating their current (rather meager) enterprise offerings with Sun's would be a huge task, not unlike transitioning from MacOS 9 to NEXTSTEP. It would take a lot of time and resources. Back then it made sense because Apple needed a better OS. And it still took years. Getting Apple and Sun to play nicely together would be a huge task and a very expensive one at that. Why go there when you're wildly successful already?

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 12:13 PM

This isn't being fickle, it's deliberate misdirection. He and Apple are opaque for a reason.

You're right. Fickle was totally the wrong way to describe it. Although I do think he doesn't care about things until he has a good reason to. He probably didn't give the MP3 player market a second thought until someone brought him the iPod and iTunes Store concepts. Then it clicked and he was on it like nothing else.

KnightWRX

Apr 12, 2009, 12:40 PM

Sure, no argument about the margins. But you made plenty of capital stressing that you'd been hearing how Apple was doomed for 27 years; my argument is that there have similarly been years of naysayers when new market segments have been suggested for Apple (sometimes including Jobs!), then lo and behold - the iPod! The Apple TV! etc etc...

There's no reason to assume any market area is not of interest to Apple. Soccer moms and gamers? Why not? Apple made those 25bn bucks by appealing more than ever before to joe sixpack. Why stop now?

Because unlike iPods or AppleTV, they have already been there, done that and dropped it. That's the difference. The B&W G3 tower and PowerMac G4 both had easy to access and upgrade components and had inexpensive configurations. Then it all went poof.

That's the difference and what makes people say they won't go back there. The market has gotten even worse and more competitive than it was the last time they were in it. Today you can buy a gamer rig or tower computer for under 1000$ on a razor thin profit margin. Apple doesn't want to compete in this segment.

ditzy

Apr 12, 2009, 12:46 PM

I happen to agree with you here. We part ways when your resistance to change ... to "different thinking" paints you a hypocrite.

:apple:

I don't believe that saying that you agree with the way apple does things presently means that you are being a hypocrite to say think different. I'll try to make a logical argument for my belief.
1. Microsoft have the largest share of the computer OS market, by far. So one could conclude that the way Microsoft run their business is thinking normally.
2. A business that markets their OS in a different way to Microsoft, (Apple) is thinking differently to the norm.
4. Someone who suggests the Apple should run their business like Microsoft is actually thinking normally, even if they are in a forum full of Apple fans.

Anuba

Apr 12, 2009, 12:52 PM

Ok, fair enough. I personally find the quality of Apple's hardware has declined since they started making things in China, so I'll give you that. But let's not forget that Apple spends a ton of $$$ on R&D. While they might still make the products in China, R&D is homegrown and not cheap.

And it's not hard to understand "Apple tax" at all. What I said in my original post is that I don't care. And clearly I'm not alone. I'll gladly pay a premium for Apple products, made in the USA (which I would prefer!) or China, because the overall Apple experience is so much better, from purchasing at the store, to free training, to US-based customer service, to no-hassle repairs, to, finally and ultimately, a vastly superior OS. This is why I pay the "Apple tax" without so much as a thought.
I agree that Macs are worth a certain premium and even some brand tax, that's part of the game when you're dealing with such brands. And yeah, they clearly spend more effort on R&D than, say, Dell -- whose machines are actually well-built if you go for the professional line (Latitude, Precision), but thoroughly devoid of any innovation spirit. They'd never bother with stuff like the 8-hour battery on the MBP, or a multi-touch trackpad, they just slap the machines together by the book.

Having said that, Apple is a worldwide operation and while their US-based service may be excellent, there's no such luck in my part of Europe (Scandinavia). In the US, Apple service rocks and Dell sucks due to the whole Indian call center thing and whatnot. In Sweden, Dell's service is stellar, while Apple give you nothing for your AppleCare plan except snarky people on the phone and having to transport or ship your computer to the nearest authorized repair center which may be tens or even hundreds of miles away. So I have to bring that into the equation since I rely on my machines for work -- if I'm two days from a deadline and my computer breaks down, would I want Dell to come here and fix it the next morning or do I want to drive a Mac to Stockholm and pick it up 5 days later? Premium pricetags should come with excellent service, IMHO.

Also, Apple often doesn't bother to make localized versions of their software. If you use Microsoft products you can basically speak any obscure language and still find a version for you. But iWork is only available in English (and perhaps German and French), no Scandinavian versions. Personally I don't care, I use US English versions of everything anyway, but if I were to get a computer for my grandma I couldn't get her a Mac because Apple doesn't bother to localize anything other than the OS itself and iLife. As long as Apple treats Sweden (the country with the world's highest broadband penetration and hi-tech gear up to our necks) like some boil they'd like to have surgically removed, I'll remain somewhat skeptical of taking my business to them. And I have a feeling there may be a lot of people outside North America, UK and Australia who feel the same way. This is part of why I'd like them to worry more about market share than otherworldly profit margins, because they'll never bother to shape up their international operations if they don't manage to crawl past the 10-15% mark worldwide.

ditzy

Apr 12, 2009, 12:58 PM

I agree that Macs are worth a certain premium and even some brand tax, that's part of the game when you're dealing with such brands. And yeah, they clearly spend more effort on R&D than, say, Dell -- whose machines are actually well-built

Dells are well built really? I must have gut unlucky with the three I bought then.

VoR

Apr 12, 2009, 01:06 PM

We've got a super-cheap dell laptop at home, a vostro I think, which I assume is the 'poorly made consumer version'. Looks similar to a mbp but made out of black plastic. It's only about a year old but feels very sturdy.
Dell also have laptops and solutions that last far longer than 8 hours - should try clicking through their stupidly complicated site a bit longer!

Anuba

Apr 12, 2009, 01:07 PM

Dells are well built really? I must have gut unlucky with the three I bought then.
How nice of you to cut off the quote before the crucial part their professional line. I have no idea which Dell machines you bought, but the consumer lines (Inspiron and Dimension) are made from cheap wobbly plastic, the laptop hinges creak and the laptop keyboards flex. But if you actually bought three Precision and/or Latitude machines and had issues with all three, then yeah, you must've gotten really unlucky. I'm typing on a Precision laptop right now which has been subjected to torture over the last 2½ years, but it's still going strong and probably will until I crush it under my car. If the Precisions were poorly built, Dell wouldn't dare include a 3-year warranty with NBD on-site repairs in the price.

If you want to compare to Mac build quality you obviously have to look at Dell's high-end machines, not their bargain-bin crap.

We've got a super-cheap dell laptop at home, a vostro I think, which I assume is the 'poorly made consumer version'. Looks similar to a mbp but made out of black plastic. It's only about a year old but feels very sturdy.
Dell also have laptops and solutions that last far longer than 8 hours - should try clicking through their stupidly complicated site a bit longer!
Vostro is actually a business line, but for businesses with no money. Startups and such. They're probably built with the same, err, enthusiasm as the Inspiron consumer laptops. The reliability isn't necessarily poor, though, your Vostro there is probably gonna last another year or two. It's just that they're cheaply built, and look accordingly cheap.

And yeah, I know they have some machines with battery life up to 19(!) hours, provided you remove the optical drive and replace it with an extra battery. But the one I was referring to is their MBP 17" equivalent, the Precision M6400. Its battery lasts only 2 hours due to the fact that the machine more or less uses desktop-grade parts.

DELLsFan

Apr 12, 2009, 01:24 PM

I don't believe that saying that you agree with the way apple does things presently means that you are being a hypocrite to say think different. I'll try to make a logical argument for my belief.
1. Microsoft have the largest share of the computer OS market, by far. So one could conclude that the way Microsoft run their business is thinking normally.
2. A business that markets their OS in a different way to Microsoft, (Apple) is thinking differently to the norm.
4. Someone who suggests the Apple should run their business like Microsoft is actually thinking normally, even if they are in a forum full of Apple fans.

Thinking differently is great. It's worked for Apple and Jobs' vision for the company has been very profitable. However, those who believe Jobs' course set for the company years ago can't possibly steer along a different path to allow more choice for their customers, more options with the products available, and an improved "priceless experience" at a lower price, are simply deluding themselves; stuck in the 90's or maybe 27 years ago. ;)

It's understandable for many Mac enthusiasts. Those who have weathered the Apple storms over the years are very defensive of their precious. It's too bad most of the purists misinterpret constructive opinion for doom saying around here.

...Sure, and I'm glad they've dropped... (Apple RAM prices) ... But, again, what's your point?

That your premise that Apple doesn't care about X or Y was false. They either listened to consumer concern over and/or simply noticed no one was upgrading RAM using Apple RAM during config. That the "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads proves they aren't willing to just stay the course; relying on brilliant design alone. That the beckoning of Windows users to switch to Mac all over the website is proof to me they are possibly less smug than your initial post implies. That some folks are slightly more intelligent here than you believe - able to discern the obvious in a Windows vs. Mac choice without your arrogance.

Does that clear it up a bit? :rolleyes:

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 01:28 PM

This is part of why I'd like them to worry more about market share than otherworldly profit margins, because they'll never bother to shape up their international operations if they don't manage to crawl past the 10-15% mark worldwide.

I'm sorry to hear that Apple's operations in Sweden aren't up to snuff. However, just focusing on market share isn't going to change that. And maybe Apple doesn't want more than 10-15% of the worldwide market? I appreciate your frustration, but the reality is, Apple is very, VERY successful. Providing the same kind of service in Sweden as they offer in the US would require a huge investment on their part and it's clearly not one they are willing to make at this point. While it is surely frustrating for you, I also understand their reasoning. They are about measured and controlled growth. They want to ensure that the total experience is a good one. If they can't offer that experience, they're not going to offer much at all. Focusing on low-cost, low-margin items to gain market share isn't going to suddenly give them the resources to offer an Apple Store in every Swedish town. In fact, it will have the opposite effect as their resources will be spread thin in order to accommodate all of the new low-margin customers.

IJ Reilly

Apr 12, 2009, 01:31 PM

Anuba

Apr 12, 2009, 01:31 PM

They either listened to consumer concern over and/or simply noticed no one was upgrading RAM using Apple RAM during config. That the "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads proves they aren't willing to just stay the course; relying on brilliant design alone. That the beckoning of Windows users to switch to Mac all over the website is proof to me they are possibly less smug than your initial post implies.
Funny, that; I remember an interview with Steve where he explicitly stated that the zero-sum game Apple and Microsoft have been playing for 20+ years was a thing of the past, that he had made peace with Gates and that they're now working together instead of resorting to cat fights. But he said this in 2007 when the "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ad run was in overdrive, so... it's possible that Steve doesn't want to play that game, but at the end of the day, MS customers are the only new customers Apple can find. They can't wait for a generation of Mac user babies to grow up and buy Macs, they need fresh meat and all the sheep are already in Microsoft's fold...

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 01:35 PM

Does that clear it up a bit? :rolleyes:

No, actually it doesn't. You still haven't made a point. So, their prices have come down. Great. And why? Because they switched to Intel and now they benefit from expanded R&D options and cheaper component costs. Ergo, prices go down. But this has nothing to do with Apple "arrogance", the "Apple tax", or any other nonsense being argued here.

My point remains. Apple doesn't care about EVERY possible customer. They have a clear vision of who they are targeting and what they are selling. If you want a highly customizable and cheap PC, they don't sell one. Period. Never will. Your insistence that their ads prove something makes no sense. They've always advertised. It's just that now their ads are much better and more effective - and their product offerings are stronger. Combined with lower costs and a chain of stores that give them heightened visibility, they've seen an increase in market share. But they're not behaving differently. Their message is just resonating with more consumers.

Like I said back in my original post, I've been a customer for 27 years. I've seen all sorts of Apple ads targeting PC users long before the "I'm a Mac" ads appeared. They launched the Mac with one of the most iconic ads of all time - and it was very anti-PC. I remember ads in the 80s where PC users were falling off cliffs like lemmings. Apple ran cheesy infomercials in the 90s. They launched the iMac with a head-to-head setup showdown between a PC tech and a 10 year old kid to demonstrate how much easier it was to get online with a Mac. Etc. Nothing has changed. They're just selling more boxes today. And, frankly, Microsoft's repeated missteps have just given Apple and its ad agencies all that much more ammo. And the only way for Microsoft to retaliate? Harp on price. But people aren't just buying a box. They're buying an experience and it's one Microsoft can't touch.

Again, your point?

Anuba

Apr 12, 2009, 02:05 PM

They've always advertised. It's just that now their ads are much better and more effective. Combined with lower costs and a chain of stores that give them heightened visibility, they've seen an increase in market share. But they're not behaving differently. Their message is just resonating with more consumers.
Well, much of the focus in those ads has been on Vista, and Vista is also one of the main reasons why part of the MS user base has trickled over to the Mac side. Those golden days are about to end later this year because like it or not, Windows 7 is a huge improvement over Vista (moreso than any versions of Windows have been over their respective predecessors). Plus, the economy is down the toilet. Plus, switching from PC to Mac isn't quite the one way street everyone assumes it is. I've met quite a few switchers in my day, but I've also met two who switched from Mac to PC. One of them, an electronic musician, said "Look... as much as I love Mac, I have to buy a cutting-edge machine once every two years to keep up with the inflation in system requirements..." (music apps tend to hog a lot of resources and this guy likes wall-of-sound arrangements) "...and Apple's prices are just killing me. I can't afford to keep up. So I went PC after the PowerMac G5 came out."

The thing is, while some Mac faithful enjoy the feeling of exclusivity (I believe you said you were one of them), they often get p*ssed off when they're shut out from certain things. Like when Google made Chrome for Mac a low priority, or when Adobe couldn't be arsed to make Creative Suite 4 full 64-bit for Mac, or when peripheral manufacturers like Logitech can't be arsed to supply Mac drivers for this or that mouse or keyboard. Or the fact that they have to boot into Windows to play games. A larger market share would take care of all that, there'd be plenty more software and peripherals to choose from. You may feel that living in a gated community is worth its weight in gold, but many would sacrifice that for a little more network effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect) benefits.

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 02:17 PM

A larger market share would take care of all that, there'd be plenty more software and peripherals to choose from...You may feel that living in a gated community is worth its weight in gold, but many would sacrifice that for a little more network effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect) benefits.

And again, who cares? I don't give a crap about Logitech's hardware add-ons, nor do I care one bit about Google's Chrome. And the VAST majority of users feel the same way. Sure, the bleeding edge nerds don't like it. But the rest of us? The remaining 95+%? We don't care. We're happy with what Apple offers. We're happy that it all works together. We're happy that we DON'T have to deal with Logitech's crap drivers. There's plenty of Mac software to choose from. I want for nothing. Same goes for peripherals. I have a lot of choices when it comes to printers, scanners, mice, keyboards, hard drives, and whatever else. Do I care if every peripheral manufacturer offers EVERY product for the Mac? Nope. Not one bit. When I look at how poorly some of the PC peripherals and drivers interoperate, I'm THANKFUL that Mac versions don't exist!

As for Windows 7, I've heard it all before. That's what they said about 95, then 2000, then XP, then Vista. The reality is, M$ always sucks. Always have, always will. Well, maybe not always will. Ray Ozzie is pretty genius, so maybe he can turn it around. I have my doubts, though.

The only real change I've seen for Apple is, by moving to Intel, they can now sell the psychological security of keeping Windows if you need it. That is huge.

I think it's pretty funny when people point how, with Macs, you have to upgrade all the time. That's not my "real world" experience. I recently installed Leopard on a G4 tower I bought back in 2001. No hardware mods or upgrades. Can you install Vista on a stock machine from 2001? Didn't think so. Furthermore, the PC users I know are always buying new machines, whereas the Mac users are still plugging away on their old G4s or even G3s. I doubt your friend who switched back in the PPC days would switch again today if he had an Intel Mac. Yes, certain apps are very resource intensive, but, again, this is a VERY SMALL segment of the market.

jouster

Apr 12, 2009, 02:32 PM

Because unlike iPods or AppleTV, they have already been there, done that and dropped it. That's the difference. The B&W G3 tower and PowerMac G4 both had easy to access and upgrade components and had inexpensive configurations. Then it all went poof.

That's the difference and what makes people say they won't go back there. The market has gotten even worse and more competitive than it was the last time they were in it. Today you can buy a gamer rig or tower computer for under 1000$ on a razor thin profit margin. Apple doesn't want to compete in this segment.

Well, maybe. But I wasn't talking about the G3 tower or PowerMac G4, neither of which was remotely low margin compared to what qualifies these days. I was talking about things like netbooks, the sort of low margin offering that started this part of the thread.

jouster

Apr 12, 2009, 02:36 PM

Dells are well built really? I must have gut unlucky with the three I bought then.

I hope you weren't as unlucky as I am with my 2nd Gen MacBook.

If you want to compare to Mac build quality you obviously have to look at Dell's high-end machines, not their bargain-bin crap.

Well, I'm sure the unibody 'books are well-made. My CrackBook, unfortunately, is not.

KnightWRX

Apr 12, 2009, 02:44 PM

Well, maybe. But I wasn't talking about the G3 tower or PowerMac G4, neither of which was remotely low margin compared to what qualifies these days. I was talking about things like netbooks, the sort of low margin offering that started this part of the thread.

You were talking about Soccer moms and Gamers. Gamers don't use netbooks last time I checked (well maybe they do, but not for gaming).

Anuba

Apr 12, 2009, 02:46 PM

And again, who cares? I don't give a crap about Logitech's hardware add-ons, nor do I care one bit about Google's Chrome. And the VAST majority of users feel the same way. Sure, the bleeding edge nerds don't like it. But the rest of us? The remaining 95+%?
I think it's quite the overly bold assumption to claim that 95% of all Mac users don't care one single bit about these things (not merely my examples but the big picture). If that was indeed true, the remaining 5% must be the most vocal minority in history, and should get Guinness on the phone pronto.

As for Windows 7, I've heard it all before. That's what they said about 95, then 2000, then XP, then Vista. The reality is, M$ always sucks.
The issue wasn't whether they suck or not (that's subjective) but the fact that Windows 7 isn't the golden opportunity that Vista was. Let's say that the entire 90% of the OS marketshare that sticks to Windows, feel that Windows sucks. OK, but the lion's share obviously isn't going anywhere. Not even when Vista was the latest offering. So why would they leave when Windows 7 comes along? Vista, Windows ME and Windows 1.0 were the only ones that were universally panned, Windows 7 is the first one that's been praised.

The only real change I've seen for Apple is, by moving to Intel, they can now sell the psychological security of keeping Windows if you need it. That is huge.
That's what I thought too, but it appears that the only significant change that happened was that a lot more Mac owners started using Windows on the side.

Furthermore, the PC users I know are always buying new machines, whereas the Mac users are still plugging away on their old G4s or even G3s.
Right, but is that because they still work or because Macs are so costly that you have to keep the old ones around? And will they be installing Snow Leopard on their G5s from 2006?

I doubt your friend who switched back in the PPC days would switch again today if he had an Intel Mac. Yes, certain apps are very resource intensive, but, again, this is a VERY SMALL segment of the market.
At the time he switched, Macs (and PowerBook G4s in particular) were absolutely rotten when it came to audio performance. Intel had just come out with the Centrino platform and the Pentium-M (the forefather of the Core family), and those machines were running circles around their Mac contemporaries. Working with a song with numerous audio tracks and a bunch of software synthesizers and effects that have to be rendered in realtime is a task that can easily bring CPU usage up to 80-90%, and a Pentium-M could handle a 2-3 times heavier load than a G4 could. But that wasn't the only problem for my "friend" (more of a forum acquaintance really), it was about the money. And a Mac Pro is no less expensive than a PMG5 or G4 was, Intel processor or not.

IJ Reilly

Apr 12, 2009, 03:26 PM

I think it's quite the overly bold assumption to claim that 95% of all Mac users don't care one single bit about these things (not merely my examples but the big picture). If that was indeed true, the remaining 5% must be the most vocal minority in history, and should get Guinness on the phone pronto.

I believe it is true, but nothing so special as you suggest. These online forums are not the "real world," in that they don't represent an accurate cross-section of the population. I don't know about 95%, but certainly the overwhelming majority of computer users, if they care at all about the things computer geeks care about, it's because computer geeks are constantly telling them that they should care.

Anuba

Apr 12, 2009, 04:05 PM

I believe it is true, but nothing so special as you suggest. These online forums are not the "real world," in that they don't represent an accurate cross-section of the population. I don't know about 95%, but certainly the overwhelming majority of computer users, if they care at all about the things computer geeks care about, it's because computer geeks are constantly telling them that they should care.
I don't base my assessment on forums in general or MacRumors in particular.
Furthermore, the Mac community has an overrepresentation of geeks. The share of mainstream users is on the rise, certainly, but in the dark days (mid 1990's) you had to be a geek if you stayed with Mac.

Also... what's so geeky and specialized about the three examples I used? I don't consider it particularly geeky to want a certain mouse or to play a game once in a while. Logitech just sold their billionth mouse, and an estimated 63% (http://www.eelke.com/files/cs281/business.ppt) of all Americans play games (PC or console), 43% are women, and 60% are between ages 25-44. And Google Chrome reached 2 million downloads in its first week alone.

thomas419924

Apr 12, 2009, 04:06 PM

:D yes i have to agree with that !Yeah, I've heard a lot of people calling Apple arrogant lately. Maybe change is a good thing, but not yet. I have a feeling that Steve has something good planned.

DELLsFan

Apr 12, 2009, 04:22 PM

No, actually it doesn't. You still haven't made a point...

Yes, I have. A few of them actually. It's unfortunate that you refuse to acknowledge them. A shame, really - as you seem to be quite an intelligent person. Most of the fellow Mac folks I encounter tend to not be so rigid with their ideology and fanaticism over Cupertino. One might otherwise learn a great deal from your years of experience with the Mac. Maybe in another 27 years, you'll look at opinions differently. :)

I think there's room for both hard core purist thinking: "Mac is uber and if you don't like it, there's the road to Redmond ... " and the more tempered approach shared here in these forums and elsewhere. I love my MBP and Mac OS X, but I have experience with other hardware and OS' as well. Apple is a great company and they deserve all the credit they have earned in their success. However, they are not perfect and priced at quite a premium.

While you may disagree and continue to dismiss & bemoan my opinions and others', there are still many like me who would like to see Apple re-tool their "priceless experience" - to evolve into something better and more inclusive, providing more options, at a lower price as their market share and profit grows. If this model isn't a worthy endeavor in your opinion, we may never share any common ground here. Indeed, maybe this speaks more to the root of a problem at Apple than the evil, anti-trusting, Microsoft monopoly ever did for the PC side.

:apple:

KnightWRX

Apr 12, 2009, 05:05 PM

Windows 7 is the first one that's been praised.

You can't have read much PC press in your years then. Every time there's a Windows Beta out, it gets praised by the likes of PC Mag or ZDnet or other publications like that.

It's. Always. The. Same. Story.

"This time..." "They finally got it right..." "This beta is more stable than the last release version ever was" "Wait until it's released, it'll just be even better!".

Frankly, we've heard it all and seen it all before. Let's just see what happens when it actually gets released before we start humping Microsoft's leg.

I don't base my assessment on forums in general or MacRumors in particular.
Furthermore, the Mac community has an overrepresentation of geeks. The share of mainstream users is on the rise, certainly, but in the dark days (mid 1990's) you had to be a geek if you stayed with Mac.

Also... what's so geeky and specialized about the three examples I used? I don't consider it particularly geeky to want a certain mouse or to play a game once in a while. Logitech just sold their billionth mouse, and an estimated 63% (http://www.eelke.com/files/cs281/business.ppt) of all Americans play games (PC or console), 43% are women, and 60% are between ages 25-44. And Google Chrome reached 2 million downloads in its first week alone.

I think you have the wrong community. Of all my times hanging around geeks, the real die hard Mac fans have all been about as ungeeky as your typical high school goth kid. Most were artsy types or students.

In fact, it's only in recent years, with the release of NeXTST... err.. OS X that the geeks have all started paying attention to Apple, myself included. If you want geeks, look no further than the Linux crowd. Those are the true geeks (again myself included).

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 05:12 PM

While you may disagree and continue to dismiss & bemoan my opinions and others', there are still many like me who would like to see Apple re-tool their "priceless experience" - to evolve into something better and more inclusive, providing more options, at a lower price as their market share and profit grows. If this model isn't a worthy endeavor in your opinion, we may never share any common ground here. Indeed, maybe this speaks more to the root of a problem at Apple than the evil, anti-trusting, Microsoft monopoly ever did for the PC side.

Bingo! *YOU* would like to see it. And I have never suggested that you're alone in your desire. However, your arguments are personal. You might not like Apple's pricing. You might not like the fact that their hardware isn't the most upgradeable. But, again, who cares? The vast majority of Apple's customers don't agree with you.

Apple continues to prosper doing exactly what they are doing. They have the highest margins in the industry. They're not hurting for customers or profits. That's been my point all along, one you don't seem to acknowledge. Just because you think Apple should do X or Y, doesn't really matter one bit. Apple is not just another PC company. They are a vertically-integrated and entirely holistic model of what technology should be (in their opinion). They don't believe in being open to everyone. They never have.

When you buy Apple, you buy more than a machine. You buy an experience. This is what they sell. Your (and a few other vocal individuals') focus on pricing is irrelevant. Complain all you want, but they're not going to suddenly release a cheap, upgradeable tower any more than they are going to license OS X to PC manufacturers. It's just not what they are about.

You've certainly made many points, but they are personal in nature and they completely ignore Apple's history as well as its very clear, very obvious philosophy as a company. If you don't like it, you have plenty of choices, but Apple isn't going to change. Thank goodness!!!

I'm not sure how offering cheap, low-margin products and diluting their brand allows them to "evolve into something better and more inclusive." It will just mean longer hold times for tech support, longer waits at the Apple store, fewer services to customers, etc. Your focus on pricing is totally off the mark. It's about margins, not pricing. If Apple can deliver an affordable computer with high margins, they will. In fact, they already do. It's called the Mini. No, it can't be upgraded. No, it doesn't offer cutting edge hardware. But it offers the Apple experience at a fair price point while maintaining Apple's high margins. Cutting into those margins isn't going to grow profits. In fact, it will do the exact opposite. They'll have more users and they'll make less money on each. Hardly a benefit!

Finally, the root of what problem at Apple? From where I'm sitting (and have been for the past 27 years), Apple doesn't have a problem.

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 05:25 PM

Furthermore, the Mac community has an overrepresentation of geeks.

I disagree completely. It definitely has an overrepresentation of zealots ;), but not geeks. Mac users don't enjoy building their computers or spending their weekends troubleshooting.

Also... what's so geeky and specialized about the three examples I used? I don't consider it particularly geeky to want a certain mouse or to play a game once in a while. Logitech just sold their billionth mouse, and an estimated 63% (http://www.eelke.com/files/cs281/business.ppt) of all Americans play games (PC or console), 43% are women, and 60% are between ages 25-44. And Google Chrome reached 2 million downloads in its first week alone.

First off, before Mighty Mouse, I used a Logitech mouse with my Mac. No problem. Just plug it in and it works. Logitech doesn't focus on the Mac market because Mac users don't buy their products. Having a cheap Mac isn't going to change that. Mac users are, overwhelmingly, satisfied with Apple's offerings, so certain third party products will never gain traction. Logitech could write Mac drivers for every product they produce and I still don't think they'd sell well despite the fact that Apple is selling millions of Macs every quarter. Why? Because Mac users aren't interested.

As for gaming, as I said before, it's chicken and egg. Until the game companies really focus on Mac development, what is Apple supposed to do? They're busy selling tons of machines. If the gaming companies want to take advantage of all these users, they should write more games. It's not Apple's problem. And there are plenty of games available for the Mac. It is a complete misnomer that one can't play games on a Mac.

Finally, Google Chrome? Um, who cares? Yet another browser. Yawn. I haven't had any serious problems with Safari and I use the web A LOT. A few sites don't work well, so I keep Camino around for backup. I have no incentive or desire to use Chrome because my current experience is great. Sure, 2 million people downloaded it. But how many people are actually USING it? I bet when they do release their Mac version, few will care. Why? Because Mac users already have a great browser.

Your arguments, like so many others, essentially boil down to what you want personally. You have not demonstrated how Apple is going to benefit by doing X or Y. Furthermore, your arguments, again, like so many others, ignore Apple's history as well as its guiding philosophy. Just because you think it would be better if they did this or that doesn't mean Apple shares your opinion.

Anuba

Apr 12, 2009, 05:37 PM

If you don't like it, you have plenty of choices, but Apple isn't going to change. Thank goodness!!!
I believe they said the same thing about the Intel switch.

"Bwhawhaha.... Suck it Wintel losers, PPC rulez!"

Boom.

Hello Mactel.

Oops.

"Ahem... I mean... Intel is... Intel is great. Go Apple!"

The simple fact of the matter is, you have no idea what they're going to do because you're extrapolating their future from their past. Which tells me you haven't paid much attention to their history, because if there's one thing we know about Steve Jobs, it's his ability to -- as Bill Gates put it -- "figure out where the next bet should be". Nobody could've predicted that Apple would one day go with Intel, or become the world's largest music store, or define the 21st century equivalent of the Walkman, or allow Macs to run Windows, or enter the cellphone market, or drop "Computers" from their name. And from this you conclude that Apple isn't going to change? And that they're never going into the mainstream market with products for the masses? So who is the iPod for... a small private club?

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 05:37 PM

"This time..." "They finally got it right..." "This beta is more stable than the last release version ever was" "Wait until it's released, it'll just be even better!".

Frankly, we've heard it all and seen it all before. Let's just see what happens when it actually gets released before we start humping Microsoft's leg.

:D Exactly!

Plus, we really don't know what Apple has in store with Snow Leopard. And by the time M$ gets around to releasing Windows 7, Apple will probably be readying their next OS for release. We hear the same sorry song and dance from the Windows press every time M$ talks about their next generation OS. And, every time, it's the same can of worms.

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 05:40 PM

The simple fact of the matter is, you have no idea what they're going to do because you're extrapolating their future from their past. Which tells me you haven't paid much attention to their history, because if there's one thing we know about Steve Jobs, it's his ability to -- as Bill Gates put it -- "figure out where the next bet should be". Nobody could've predicted that Apple would one day go Intel, or become the world's largest music store, or define the 21st century equivalent of the Walkman, or allow Macs to run Windows, or enter the cellphone market, or drop "Computers" from their name. And from this you conclude that Apple isn't going to change? And that they're never going into the mainstream market with products for the masses? So who is the iPod for... a small private club?

Actually, it was very obvious that they would move to Intel, especially considering NEXTSTEP ran on Intel boxes. My NEXTSTEP machine was a DEC/486.

Furthermore, I never said they're not interested in the mainstream market. What market do you think they're in? How much more mainstream do you get than the shopping mall? What I said is that they don't care about low-margin, low-cost products. Never have, never will. And they like to control the entire user experience, which is why they're never going to license the OS or allow anyone else to sell Touch apps.

KnightWRX

Apr 12, 2009, 05:42 PM

"Bwhawhaha.... Suck it Wintel losers, PPC rulez!"

Boom.

Hello Mactel.

By boom, you mean a steady decline over 6 years ? That's some slow boom you have there.

Anuba

Apr 12, 2009, 06:04 PM

I disagree completely. It definitely has an overrepresentation of zealots ;), but not geeks. Mac users don't enjoy building their computers or spending their weekends troubleshooting.

Geeks don't necessarily have to be people who build their own computers out of scotchtape and popsicle sticks, I'm talking about people whose lives revolve around their computers. Macs are very popular among developers, for example. I know software developers who barely know how to switch out a hard drive, but I still categorize them as geeks.

First off, before Mighty Mouse, I used a Logitech mouse with my Mac. No problem. Just plug it in and it works.
Yeah, well, no. Logitech Control Center wreaks havoc on Leopard and due to the plethora of buttons on a Logitech mouse you only get a fraction of the functionality without a driver. My mouse of choice is the G9, best mouse I ever used for graphic design (technically it's for gaming). The Logitech forum has quite a few threads along the lines of "Uhh, so, any chance of a Mac driver soon?"

As for Apple's own input devices, funny story... I worked at a software company on a freelance basis last year, they have some 20 developers and most of them have both Mac and PC. So I was in their server room which also serves as storage for semi-retired spare gear, looking for a monitor I could borrow, and I noticed a pile of boxes with the new Apple keyboards and Mighty Mouses ("Mighty Mice" sounds weird), so on my way back I said to the IT guy "boy, the devs sure wear out a lot of mice and keyboards don't they?" and pointed at the pile. He said "nah, those were never used". Turns out nearly everyone hated the new keyboards and the MM so much they either kept their old plastic white Apple keyboards (the previous generation) or got something else, and most of them used Microsoft mice that the company buys in 5-packs.

In the beginning I used the mouse and keyboard included with my iMac but I later switched to Logitech. As cutting edge as Apple are in some areas, their wireless mice and keyboards with stinky old AA batteries are like something out of the 90's. How hard is it to make rechargeable Li-On mice and keyboards like everyone else?

Logitech doesn't focus on the Mac market because Mac users don't buy their products.
Well somebody must be buying them because they have Mac editions of their DiNovo and DiNovo Edge keyboards. They're made from brushed aluminium and glossy black plastic, which matches the new Macs perfectly, and that's more than can be said about the white keyboards Apple currently offers. They appear to be designed to match Macs from the white era, circa 2003-2007.

Anuba

Apr 12, 2009, 06:08 PM

By boom, you mean a steady decline over 6 years ? That's some slow boom you have there.
Boom. As in kaboom. As in whammo, you wake up one day and Macs suddenly use Intel processors. Then again I've grown to expect you to deliberately misinterpret pretty much anything I say if you spot an opportunity. But feel free to express yourself in Swedish and we'll see how well you fare in getting every nuance right.

You can't have read much PC press in your years then. Every time there's a Windows Beta out, it gets praised by the likes of PC Mag or ZDnet or other publications like that.
I can't recall anyone other than Paul Thurrott, the most deluded fanboy in the universe, insisting that MS hit a home run with Vista. Everyone was whining, and CNET has Vista and WinME listed as 2 out of the 10 worst OS:es of all time. You're spot on with your observation on the pattern as such, but even you understand that the tops and the bottoms of the curve have some variation. The verdict on Win7 is leagues above what anyone said about Vista, XP, 98... if you were to rate them in terms of reception, it would be something like this:

1. Win7
2. Win2K
3. Win95
4. Win98
5. Vista
6. ME

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 06:16 PM

Boom. As in kaboom. As in whammo, you wake up one day and Macs suddenly use Intel processors.

This really came as no surprise. When NeXT acquired Apple, PPC offered superior performance. But NEXTSTEP ran on Intel, SPARC, PA-RISC, Moto68k, and PPC. Apple stuck with PPC for obvious reasons. Performance was great and they needed to support the older Mac "Classic" apps. But anyone who knew anything about NeXT knew that an Intel build was (probably) maintained from day one and that, at any given moment, Apple could and would jump to Intel. For me, it came as no surprise whatsoever, especially given the fact that the PPC architecture just wasn't cutting it any longer (when they finally made the switch).

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 06:22 PM

Yeah, well, no. Logitech Control Center wreaks havoc on Leopard and due to the plethora of buttons on a Logitech mouse you only get a fraction of the functionality without a driver. My mouse of choice is the G9, best mouse I ever used for graphic design (technically it's for gaming). The Logitech forum has quite a few threads along the lines of "Uhh, so, any chance of a Mac driver soon?"

Fair enough. But this isn't Apple's problem. It is yet another example of a peripheral manufacturer who half-asses Mac support. Maybe the reason Logitech doesn't sell well to Mac users is because their developers can't write decent Mac drivers? But this has NOTHING to do with Apple. Zip, zero, zilch.

As for Apple's own input devices, funny story...

I won't argue with you here. Personally, I find Apple's input devices more than adequate. I like the new slim keyboard very much. Mighty Mouse is ok, but more than adequate for my needs. And I imagine that many users feel the same way. But you're right. Apple could certainly do more in this arena. However, they're also not stopping anyone else from competing.

There are plenty of Mac-compatible keyboards and mice out there. The trouble is, as you point out above, the software usually sucks. And that's not Apple's fault. These peripheral companies are actually doing themselves a great disservice by claiming Mac support but offering a mediocre experience. This only reinforces the belief that one should just stick with Apple.

Anuba

Apr 12, 2009, 06:36 PM

This really came as no surprise. When NeXT acquired Apple, PPC offered superior performance. But NEXTSTEP ran on Intel, SPARC, PA-RISC, Moto68k, and PPC. Apple stuck with PPC for obvious reasons. Performance was great and they needed to support the older Mac "Classic" apps. But anyone who knew anything about NeXT knew that an Intel build was (probably) maintained from day one and that, at any given moment, Apple could and would jump to Intel. For me, it came as no surprise whatsoever, especially given the fact that the PPC architecture just wasn't cutting it any longer (when they finally made the switch).
I used to get into long and arduous arguments with a Mac user on a music software forum a few years back. He was The. Single. Biggest. Mac. Zealot. I ever encountered -- nobody on MacRumors comes close -- honestly, it was quite scary. He hated Intel processors with a passion, would rant forever about how poorly they performed and how their architecture was retarded, and actually insisted that any -- ANY G-series Mac was faster than the fastest Wintel desktop. OK, I said, so my Mac Mini G4 is faster than a dual core Pentium 4 minitower? Sure, no contest, he said. I then posted some screenshots to illustrate how the Mac Mini would stop playing a Cubase song after just a couple of bars when the CPU meter hit 100%, and how my feeble Pentium-M 1.6 GHz laptop could play the same song all the way through without breaking a sweat. His response was that the test was rigged (it wasn't) or that the software wasn't properly optimized (no amount of optimization would even begin to bridge the performance gap).

And I'm telling you, that guy... did not expect Apple to switch to Intel, and he probably cried for several days after the announcement. While it may have come as no surprise to you, I noticed a lot of dropped jaws at the time.

robbyx

Apr 12, 2009, 06:47 PM

And I'm telling you, that guy... did not expect Apple to switch to Intel, and he probably cried for several days after the announcement. While it may have come as no surprise to you, I noticed a lot of dropped jaws at the time.

Haha. Funny story. Yeah, I know a lot of people were shocked. But those people also didn't know much about NeXT or the technology Apple acquired during the reverse take-over. NeXT had already moved to Intel when they dropped their hardware line and became a software company. Considering that MacOS X would be based on NEXTSTEP, it seemed pretty obvious that an Intel port would, at the very least, be maintained. But, since I was a NeXT fanboy (bigtime!), I can see why this was obvious to me and not others. I had actually abandoned the Mac platform for NeXT in the early 90s and only came back to the Mac when Jobs brought NeXT to Apple. Of course, I'm glad Apple made the switch to Intel. After all, who cares what processor they use, so long as performance is up to snuff? Since Jobs's return, it's been one smart move after another.

Anuba

Apr 12, 2009, 07:16 PM

Haha. Funny story. Yeah, I know a lot of people were shocked. But those people also didn't know much about NeXT or the technology Apple acquired during the reverse take-over. NeXT had already moved to Intel when they dropped their hardware line and became a software company. Considering that MacOS X would be based on NEXTSTEP, it seemed pretty obvious that an Intel port would, at the very least, be maintained. But, since I was a NeXT fanboy (bigtime!), I can see why this was obvious to me and not others. I had actually abandoned the Mac platform for NeXT in the early 90s and only came back to the Mac when Jobs brought NeXT to Apple. Of course, I'm glad Apple made the switch to Intel. After all, who cares what processor they use, so long as performance is up to snuff? Since Jobs's return, it's been one smart move after another.
The whole NeXT episode is mostly a mystery to me, I never looked into what happened there. I toyed around with one once when I was really drunk, so I don't remember much other than that it was black and vaguely resembled a 90's Mac, it had the same form factor, a flat thing that sat under the monitor. I was at a friend's house and his basement is like a museum of rare hi-tech gear. The NeXT sat next to a home-built analog vocoder.

Lisa, NeXT, Mac Pro... yeah, Jobs sure likes to create cost-prohibitive stuff. ;)

Sehnsucht

Apr 12, 2009, 07:19 PM

Frankly, we've heard it all and seen it all before. Let's just see what happens when it actually gets released before we start humping Microsoft's leg.

Wow, that's a lovely mental image. :eek:

:D

Gluben

Apr 12, 2009, 08:45 PM

For what it's worth, I think that Steve Jobs will still indeed return to the day-to-day running of Apple at the end of June, but that would still allow him to make a special appearance as keynote speaker for the WWDC in early June, and then announce his intension to return there.

Trajectory

Apr 12, 2009, 08:47 PM

Lisa, NeXT, Mac Pro... yeah, Jobs sure likes to create cost-prohibitive stuff. ;)

Boy, you really want to keep beating that dead horse, don't you.

WE. GET. IT. You like cheap crap. I don't.

KnightWRX

Apr 12, 2009, 08:57 PM

Boom. As in kaboom. As in whammo, you wake up one day and Macs suddenly use Intel processors. Then again I've grown to expect you to deliberately misinterpret pretty much anything I say if you spot an opportunity. But feel free to express yourself in Swedish and we'll see how well you fare in getting every nuance right.

But that's the point, you didn't wake up one day and WHAMMO Macs were Intel machines. You had clues such as slipping ship dates for the mobile G5s (biggest clue yet, their best line of computer was stuck 3 years earlier as far as processors went). This didn't happen overnight, signed on some pub napkin by Intel CEO's and Steve over a beer like you're trying to portray. It was a steady decline in the PPC platform over the years that lead to this deal.

And if you want to think I'm nitpicking your problems with the English language, please note that I am not a native English speaker myself, and as such would never make fun of someone else. I've argumented against your posts solely based on the facts you are trying to twist in favor of your Apple bashing.

I can't recall anyone other than Paul Thurrott, the most deluded fanboy in the universe, insisting that MS hit a home run with Vista. Everyone was whining, and CNET has Vista and WinME listed as 2 out of the 10 worst OS:es of all time. You're spot on with your observation on the pattern as such, but even you understand that the tops and the bottoms of the curve have some variation. The verdict on Win7 is leagues above what anyone said about Vista, XP, 98... if you were to rate them in terms of reception, it would be something like this:

1. Win7
2. Win2K
3. Win95
4. Win98
5. Vista
6. ME

But that's the point. All the supposed praise and positive press you've read about Windows 7 is the same press I've read about every Windows BETA before it, save the early NT days when it wasn't aimed at consumers (up to Windows NT 4.0).

And. Every. Time. It's the same story. Beta is great, super awesome, Windows done right. Shipping version gets in the hand of the less zealot crowd and suddenly it's Windows as usual, yet another Windows version, some stuff is better, some is worse.

I'm reserving my judgment for the shipping versions (all 7, no wait, 10, or is it more ?) of them. Though in the end it makes little difference to me, my beef with Windows is ideological, not technical and is deeply rooted in my last 10 years with Linux, Unix and the open source community.

DELLsFan

Apr 12, 2009, 10:39 PM

Bingo! *YOU* would like to see it. And I have never suggested that you're alone in your desire. However, your arguments are personal. You might not like Apple's pricing. You might not like the fact that their hardware isn't the most upgradeable. But, again, who cares? The vast majority of Apple's customers don't agree with you...

Now who's being presumptuous? Naw ... never mind ... I've only been a Mac user for a couple years - just tell me when I get MY pass to presume to speak for the vast majority of Apple's customers! I can't wait!!

Of course my points are personal, sir. Yours aren't? Your experience lends credibility to your arguments. I don't discount them. However, I know the difference between an opinion and haughty presumption. Unless you ARE Steve Jobs (come clean now ...) how about we just state and claim our own opinions and let others claim theirs, ok?

... Apple continues to prosper doing exactly what they are doing. They have the highest margins in the industry. They're not hurting for customers or profits. That's been my point all along, one you don't seem to acknowledge.

No, I acknowledged it. It's just that you have a little problem dealing with the counterpoint. No, scratch that - you dismissed it entirely. You weren't very interested in my supposition that if they weren't hurting for customers, they wouldn't have been so aggressive with the "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads. If they weren't hurting for profits, they wouldn't be trying to gain more market share by berating Vista, and then beckoning PC users to climb aboard the good ship Mac. No, you dismissed both premises soundly. There's a difference between acknowledgment and acceptance, friend. We appear to disagree. That's ok with me, but I can understand how disconcerting that can be for some folks. ;)

...Just because you think Apple should do X or Y, doesn't really matter one bit. Apple is not just another PC company. They are a vertically-integrated and entirely holistic model of what technology should be (in their opinion). They don't believe in being open to everyone. They never have...

Oh, you've made this quite apparent. I get it. As a related aside, I find it ironic that in my experience many folks who seem to champion the concepts and philosophies of Open Source, Net Neutrality, and Open Disclosure and the like make unique exception to all things Apple and their philosophies. How strange ... but I digress ...

Sure, the proprietary, closed door brilliant mindset has worked so far for Cupertino - as you've taken great pleasure to point out. However, I don't think brazen disregard to innovative, inclusive change that still returns decent profit should or will be ignored indefinitely. It's apparent to me you disagree with me on this as well. So be it.

... Finally, the root of what problem at Apple? From where I'm sitting (and have been for the past 27 years), Apple doesn't have a problem.

Of course they don't. It's just me and my silly opinions ... well ... maybe mine and the other 90% market share still using non Apple products? :rolleyes: Oh drat ... sorry ... I don't have that pass yet. Mind if I borrow yours? I feel like we're bonding now. Do you feel the love?

Don't take it personal, robbyx. It's ok that you like a more hands-off, purist approach to corporate growth for Apple. A lot of Mac enthusiasts do. Maybe eventually you'll all let the rest of us into your gated community to share some ideas. There are still a few good ones out there Apple hasn't patented, you know? The thing about strange bedfellows is we probably have more things in common than not. That's a start button I don't mind clicking.

:apple:

AidenShaw

Apr 12, 2009, 10:44 PM

I'm reserving my judgment for the shipping versions (all 7, no wait, 10, or is it more ?) of them.

These needless shots against Vista really damage your credibility. Please try to keep to the issues at hand.

deconstruct60

Apr 12, 2009, 11:42 PM

Cutting into those margins isn't going to grow profits. In fact, it will do the exact opposite. They'll have more users and they'll make less money on each. Hardly a benefit!

Walmart is the largest, profitable retailer out there because they sell the most high margin stuff. Sure.

If Apple makes $150 off of each mac mini sold and sells 1M of them or makes $100 off of each mac mini sold and sells 2M of them, which ones of those leads to greater profitability? [ This also completely ignores the secondary effects of providing a better ecosystem for the Mac OS X developer and partner community to sell into. ]

If moving the price gets a higher percentage changed in units sold than the percentage decrease in margins (and it is still a quality product) then it would lead to great profitability.

Now would buy into some arguments that says that Apple stays out of delivering as full spectrum of products for every possible market segment. However, in the segments they do compete in, going with a lower number of units shipped just to dogmatically stick to some 'fixed in stone' margin number that is pegged higher than there competitors "just because it is part of our 'brand'" is economically misguided long term. Short term it may appear to work. Longer term though, the number of units will shrink being limited to the folks who stick with it just for the label (not the value). It is a pricing approach that is just out for customers who want to get stroked.

KnightWRX

Apr 13, 2009, 12:22 AM

These needless shots against Vista really damage your credibility. Please try to keep to the issues at hand.

Citing facts is a shot ? :rolleyes: At least I didn't claim Microsoft was a "buggy whip maker" whining about "horseless carriages" (which would be saying Apple fails to innovate, pretty far from reality).

deconstruct60

Apr 13, 2009, 12:56 AM

A lot of people here don't seem to understand Apple. When you buy Apple, you don't just buy a computer, you buy into a philosophy.
.... Either get on board, or buy a PC.

Sheesh. Don't buy an Apple product if you are not ready to buy into the Kool-aid. Steve Jobs is all knowing and all seeing. Make it sound like buying an Apple is like joining a cult.

A Mac is a tool. Period. It isn't a philosophy to buy into or an experience (as in some ride at Disneyland or a Pixar movie.). Nobody primarily uses the OS or hardware directly. They utilize the applications that sit on top.

Apple doesn't provide everything it users need. Nor should it. That is silly approach. No way, no how Apple is going to build all the software that it users need to effectively turn their tool in the wide variations of the tools they need to get their work done. The notion that Apple is going to sell me everything I need is an even bigger glass of Kool-aid.

Apple does some things that are only in Apple's interests at times. For instance this 3 bracket non-overlapping price breakdown for desktops.
The mini is left comatose for a very long time. The mini is marginally a good deal for folks now that it has been updated. For a long while there it sucked as a value proposition. Similarly, the single Quad Pros stayed about the same in price while Apple moved to a lower tier Xeon chip for those (dropping by a couple $100 in unit costs).

Apple does make moves that don't deliver customer value from time to time. They seem to be making more of them as bank account grows larger rapidly.

Just because Apple has lots of money in the bank doesn't necessarily mean they are going to make good decisions going forward or that they have a good plan going forward. Two years ago Bear Sterns and Lehman Bros. had alot of money too. They don't exist anymore.

KnightWRX

Apr 13, 2009, 01:11 AM

A Mac is a tool. Period.

A vertically integrated tool, sold as entire experience out of the box and supported by a brand image making sure that from one model to the next, this tool has the same experience.

You don't understand Apple. No need to be a fanboy or a cult member or anything. You just need to understand that Apple always was about this integration and when did they try to go beyond it, it almost resulted in them disappearing.

Why is it that so many people want Apple to be this big market player ? Do you really want Apple to be something you need just because you want it ? If you don't need an Apple product, then buy something else. No one is special because they buy Apple.

robbyx

Apr 13, 2009, 01:50 AM

You weren't very interested in my supposition that if they weren't hurting for customers, they wouldn't have been so aggressive with the "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads. If they weren't hurting for profits, they wouldn't be trying to gain more market share by berating Vista, and then beckoning PC users to climb aboard the good ship Mac. No, you dismissed both premises soundly. There's a difference between acknowledgment and acceptance, friend. We appear to disagree. That's ok with me, but I can understand how disconcerting that can be for some folks.

I dismissed your supposition because I don't agree with it - and for good reason. Before "I'm a Mac", there was "Think Different." Before that, there were all those iMac ads. Before that, cheesy infomercials. Before that, PC lemmings falling off a cliff. Before that, 1984. Etc. Apple has ALWAYS marketed their products as a better alternative to the PC. Always. Vista just gave them more ammo. And the "I'm a Mac" ads started before Vista's release, if I'm not mistaken?

Apple didn't suddenly decide to advertise the Mac because they were "hurting for profits." They've always advertised the Mac. Some campaigns have been more successful than others. The "I'm a Mac" campaign has worked so well because it finally struck a chord with consumers. It simplified the platform differences in an easy to comprehend, yet very pointed way. It took advantage of Microsoft's inability to stop all of the malware and viruses plaguing PC users. It poked fun at the blue screen of death. Etc.

Aggressive and smart advertising doesn't equate to "hurting for customers", especially when Apple has a clear history of advertising the Mac's advantages. Furthermore, they're a business. Do you expect them NOT to try to sell more products whenever possible???

Oh, you've made this quite apparent. I get it. As a related aside, I find it ironic that in my experience many folks who seem to champion the concepts and philosophies of Open Source, Net Neutrality, and Open Disclosure and the like make unique exception to all things Apple and their philosophies. How strange ... but I digress ...

Apple actually supports and utilitizes Open Source quite a bit. Darwin is open source. Ever heard of WebKit? Apple has a far superior record where open source, net neutrality, etc. is concerned. With WebKit, Apple is pushing STANDARDS, not ActiveX, ASP, and other proprietary technologies. Apple has NEVER tried to OWN the Internet as some other company has (repeatedly).

Sure, the proprietary, closed door brilliant mindset has worked so far for Cupertino - as you've taken great pleasure to point out. However, I don't think brazen disregard to innovative, inclusive change that still returns decent profit should or will be ignored indefinitely. It's apparent to me you disagree with me on this as well. So be it.

Brazen disregard for innovative, inclusive change? What are you smoking??? Please share! What change will return decent profit? Please enlighten us.

Of course they don't. It's just me and my silly opinions ... well ... maybe mine and the other 90% market share still using non Apple products? Oh drat ... sorry ... I don't have that pass yet. Mind if I borrow yours? I feel like we're bonding now. Do you feel the love?

Yawn. Great, then stick to your 90%. We don't care. Your sarcasm is boring. Apple has made it clear time and again that they're happy to grow their market share slowly and deliberately and that market share alone is not their primary motivator. If you don't like this, you and your 90% can keep on doing what you're doing. It doesn't effect me (or Apple) one bit.

Don't take it personal, robbyx. It's ok that you like a more hands-off, purist approach to corporate growth for Apple. A lot of Mac enthusiasts do. Maybe eventually you'll all let the rest of us into your gated community to share some ideas. There are still a few good ones out there Apple hasn't patented, you know? The thing about strange bedfellows is we probably have more things in common than not. That's a start button I don't mind clicking.

I could say the same to you: don't take it so personally. :) I still don't know what you're arguing, nor what point you're trying to make. And I don't say that to be offensive. Perhaps I'm just an idiot.

My point has been that Apple is growing by leaps and bounds, that they are very successful, and that their strategy is sound. What ideas do you wish to share? This is hardly a "gated community." Everyone is welcome. But you must accept the fact that Apple doesn't care about certain product segments or certain markets. I feel like a broken record, but I'll say it again: Apple is never going to deliver a low-cost, upgradeable computer. It's just not part of their philosophy. Apple cares about margins. Period. They offer a low cost Mac, the Mini. For $500, you get a super compact and speedy little box with 5 USB ports, FireWire800, Nvidia graphics, WiFi, Bluetooth, a Gig of RAM, a DVD burner, etc. It's a very nice, affordable Mac. And Apple maintains their 30% margin.

What you and others seem to argue for is a cheap, low-margin box. This doesn't benefit Apple one bit. It drains resources while doing nothing but simply adding market share. Each of these new users costs Apple in terms of support, etc. if they're only making 5% on the box, how is this smart?

The Apple world isn't the elitist, close-minded one you paint. But it is a world with clear boundaries. These boundaries have always existed and part of being an Apple customer is accepting them. Apple is VERY successful. And nothing I've seen argued in this thread is going to make them more successful. So, I'll ask you, point blank, what is it you think Apple should do and how do you think it will benefit them as a company?

robbyx

Apr 13, 2009, 01:56 AM

Sheesh. Don't buy an Apple product if you are not ready to buy into the Kool-aid. Steve Jobs is all knowing and all seeing. Make it sound like buying an Apple is like joining a cult.

Some would argue that it is! :)

A Mac is a tool. Period. It isn't a philosophy to buy into or an experience (as in some ride at Disneyland or a Pixar movie.). Nobody primarily uses the OS or hardware directly. They utilize the applications that sit on top.

It is very much a philosophy. If you don't understand that, you don't understand Apple at all.

Apple doesn't provide everything it users need. Nor should it. That is silly approach. No way, no how Apple is going to build all the software that it users need to effectively turn their tool in the wide variations of the tools they need to get their work done. The notion that Apple is going to sell me everything I need is an even bigger glass of Kool-aid.

Who said that Apple is going to sell you everything? They have a thriving developer community and wide third party peripheral support. They're just not going to compete in certain market segments because it is not in their best interest. That's all.

Just because Apple has lots of money in the bank doesn't necessarily mean they are going to make good decisions going forward or that they have a good plan going forward. Two years ago Bear Sterns and Lehman Bros. had alot of money too. They don't exist anymore.

Trust me, we've heard it all before. Time and again. And, guess what, Apple is still thriving and everyone else is still playing catch up. It's a tired refrain.

robbyx

Apr 13, 2009, 02:26 AM

Walmart is the largest, profitable retailer out there because they sell the most high margin stuff. Sure.

No, they sell low margin crap that doesn't require support. You can't even begin to compare Walmart to Apple. Quite frankly, doing so completely invalidates anything you have to say, in my opinion. But, I can't resist responding anyway!

If Apple makes $150 off of each mac mini sold and sells 1M of them or makes $100 off of each mac mini sold and sells 2M of them, which ones of those leads to greater profitability? [ This also completely ignores the secondary effects of providing a better ecosystem for the Mac OS X developer and partner community to sell into.]

Well, they have 1M more customers to support and they've made $50 less on each customer. I'm not sure how that equates to more profitability. Apple knows how much it need to make on each machine to provide their start to finish experience, to offer free training at their stores, to offer industry leading telephone support, to offer no hassle repairs, etc. I think they understand this stuff quite a bit better than either you or I.

If moving the price gets a higher percentage changed in units sold than the percentage decrease in margins (and it is still a quality product) then it would lead to great profitability.

If you conveniently - and foolishly - toss out all of the extras that come with the Apple experience. It's about support. It's about the stores. Something has to pay for all of that and your bargain basement PC pricing mentality doesn't take any of that into account.

Now would buy into some arguments that says that Apple stays out of delivering as full spectrum of products for every possible market segment. However, in the segments they do compete in, going with a lower number of units shipped just to dogmatically stick to some 'fixed in stone' margin number that is pegged higher than there competitors "just because it is part of our 'brand'" is economically misguided long term. Short term it may appear to work. Longer term though, the number of units will shrink being limited to the folks who stick with it just for the label (not the value). It is a pricing approach that is just out for customers who want to get stroked.

Yeah, the numbers are shrinking. :rolleyes: That's why Apple continues to sell more and more Macs quarter over quarter. Because what they're doing isn't working, right? If you really believe that people buy and stick with Apple because of some perceived brand cachet and not the inherent superiority of the user experience, you're more out of touch than I already believe. Seriously, what's your point?

curlyjimbo

Apr 13, 2009, 04:15 AM

i hope he comes out with a new iphone. but good on him for staying with doing what he loves.

Anuba

Apr 13, 2009, 06:46 AM

Boy, you really want to keep beating that dead horse, don't you.

WE. GET. IT. You like cheap crap. I don't.
Wow, so you don't get it at all.
I like paying a lot for stuff that was expensive to make.
You like paying a lot for stuff that was cheap to make. I don't.

SactoGuy18

Apr 13, 2009, 07:03 AM

Fair enough. But, again, it's all mere speculation. And right now Apple is doing very well, the best they've ever done. I have no doubt that they have a Plan B (and C, and D...) if the economy REALLY tanks, but it's neither here nor there at this point. They're still selling tons of Macs and iPods. They're still wildly profitable. And, by all accounts, they have some interesting new devices in the pipeline. And, keep in mind, they weathered the 1980-82 recession just fine. And if we hit another Great Depression, I'd say all bets are off for everyone!

If the world's economy really goes into the tank I have some things so say about this, but that goes into the Politics, Religion and Social Issues forum section here, so.... :)

The biggest reason why Apple survives is the iPod and iPhone line (sales of Macs have actually gone flat in recent months). Because both the iPod and iPhone will work with Macs and PCs (thanks to iTunes), this means iPod and iPhone sales aren't just limited to the Mac market, but also covers PC users running Windows XP, Windows Vista, and soon Windows 7. Apple was very lucky that the USB 2.0 spec was finalized shortly before the first iPod was released, and as such Apple could offer iPods with USB 2.0 connections, which was fast enough to copy large numbers of audio files and larger movie files into the player in reasonably short times. I expect the future generation of iPods coming out in September 2010 to be among the first widely available devices to take advantage of USB 3.0 spec, which will finally appear in hardware form in the first half to 2010.

By the way, there were two big problems with Windows Vista:

1) There were a lot of mistakes made during its development process. In fact, they pretty much scrapped everything developed for it in 2005 and started over again for what became the first release at the end of 2006.

2) Vista's hardware requirements were just too much for computer hardware at the time, especially since it needed a dual-core CPU to do anything reasonably fast. It wasn't until the late winter of 2008 when there were enough dual-core computers out there that Vista finally became viable, especially with the release of Service Pack 1 in February 2008.

Windows 7, which is coming probably late fall 2009, takes essentially the Vista code base and does two things: 1) clean up the interface and 2) highly optimize the code for much faster operation. Indeed, Windows 7 is even fast enough to run on the new netbook class of computers.

JayMan8081

Apr 13, 2009, 10:13 AM

Looking forward to any announcements Steve brings back with him when he returns in June.

bedifferent

Apr 13, 2009, 10:26 AM

(378 Positives; 64 Negatives)

Seriously guys, I'm starting to wonder about MacRumors. I've been reading from the sidelines for years, and lately I've noticed a huge influx of anti-Apple people running around the forums. Now I've noticed the "ratings" are 1/4-1/3 and even 1/2 negative on many posts. In scrolling down the front page I was surprised to see 64 negative votes concerning the health of Apple's CEO Steve Jobs and his eventual return to Apple. Why would anyone vote this down, even if you don't like Steve Jobs, he's been in seriously critical health for a while? First the ridiculous 3000+ comments on Microsoft versus Apple, and now this trend? I don't get it. :(

Seriously people, IF YOU DON'T LIKE APPLE, STOP TROLLING AN APPLE FAN SITE.*

*and please, do not tell me just because you own an iPod you like Apple but are simply being critical because it's "best for the company". BULLS#^T. When you make EVERY SINGLE THREAD a battle between Microsoft and Apple it wreaks of bias and agenda. GET A LIFE, go visit a Microsoft blog, and LEAVE US ALONE.

KnightWRX

Apr 13, 2009, 12:27 PM

Wow, so you don't get it at all.
I like paying a lot for stuff that was expensive to make.
You like paying a lot for stuff that was cheap to make. I don't.

Then don't. If others want to because it meets their needs, let them do it. You don't need to educate them, you do not hold any truths that are hidden from anyone.

jessica.

Apr 13, 2009, 12:36 PM

Ignorance is bliss. This is nothing more than a "keep the shareholders at bay" article and of course, when brought to MacRumors for discussion it inevitably changes into a "Macs cost so much and PCs do not" argument.

mccldwll

Apr 13, 2009, 12:38 PM

Sheesh. Don't buy an Apple product if you are not ready to buy into the Kool-aid. Steve Jobs is all knowing and all seeing. Make it sound like buying an Apple is like joining a cult.

A Mac is a tool. Period. It isn't a philosophy to buy into or an experience (as in some ride at Disneyland or a Pixar movie.). Nobody primarily uses the OS or hardware directly. They utilize the applications that sit on top.

Apple doesn't provide everything it users need. Nor should it. That is silly approach. No way, no how Apple is going to build all the software that it users need to effectively turn their tool in the wide variations of the tools they need to get their work done. The notion that Apple is going to sell me everything I need is an even bigger glass of Kool-aid.

Apple does some things that are only in Apple's interests at times. For instance this 3 bracket non-overlapping price breakdown for desktops.
The mini is left comatose for a very long time. The mini is marginally a good deal for folks now that it has been updated. For a long while there it sucked as a value proposition. Similarly, the single Quad Pros stayed about the same in price while Apple moved to a lower tier Xeon chip for those (dropping by a couple $100 in unit costs).

Apple does make moves that don't deliver customer value from time to time. They seem to be making more of them as bank account grows larger rapidly.

Just because Apple has lots of money in the bank doesn't necessarily mean they are going to make good decisions going forward or that they have a good plan going forward. Two years ago Bear Sterns and Lehman Bros. had alot of money too. They don't exist anymore.

Bear and Lehman? Terrible examples. And who said Bear and Lehman ever had anything more than a lot of balls in the air. And certainly not @$30B in cash, and zero debt.
And if a Mac is "a tool, period", it's the tool I want to use.

Conficker worm hits University of Utah computers

The Associated Press
Sunday, April 12, 2009; 8:11 AM

SALT LAKE CITY -- University of Utah officials say a computer virus has infected more than 700 campus computers, including those at the school's three hospitals.
University health sciences spokesman Chris Nelson said the outbreak of the Conficker worm, which can slow computers and steal personal information, was first detected Thursday. By Friday, the virus had infiltrated computers at the hospitals, medical school, and colleges of nursing, pharmacy and health.
Nelson says patient data and medical records have not been compromised.
"That's secured in a much deeper way because of the implications," he said.
Nelson said the virus is mainly attacking personal computers and could be siphoning login and password data, credit card numbers and banking information.

Directions for purging the virus from personal computers and equipment like thumb drives, digital cameras and smart phones has been distributed to staff and students.
Information technology staff shut of Internet access for up to six hours at some campus locations Friday so they could isolate the virus. They were expected to work through the weekend to eradicate it from the system.
Mindy Tueller of the university's office of information technology said all faculty and students should take steps to make sure they are protected. The virus does not infect Macs.
"It can do a lot of bad things," Tueller said. "Every university member should be concerned about this if they're using Windows-based devices."

robbyx

Apr 13, 2009, 12:39 PM

Then don't. If others want to because it meets their needs, let them do it. You don't need to educate them, you do not hold any truths that are hidden from anyone.

Exactly. And what the tired PC apologists can't seem to get through their thick skulls is that we buy Macs for the OS more than anything else. If I could buy a generic PC and run OS X with the same seamless experience I get today on Apple hardware, I'd consider one, sure. But that's not the case - and never will be.

It may be expensive, relatively-speaking, but I happen to like Apple hardware and appreciate their industrial design and attention to detail. The little things add up quickly. And, even more, I appreciate the level of service they offer EVERY customer.

People who obsess over hardware price and nothing else don't take OS development, R&D, industrial design, retail stores, Apple Care, etc. into account. I'm not suggesting that Apple couldn't lower it's prices some, but they're never going to be able to deliver a bargain basement priced Mac with all the bells and whistles AND provide the total experience they do today.

It's not that hard to understand. Well, I guess for some it is. :rolleyes:

Roessnakhan

Apr 13, 2009, 12:47 PM

Seriously guys, I'm starting to wonder about MacRumors. I've been reading from the sidelines for years, and lately I've noticed a huge influx of anti-Apple people running around the forums. Now I've noticed the "ratings" are 1/4-1/3 and even 1/2 negative on many posts. In scrolling down the front page I was surprised to see 64 negative votes concerning the health of Apple's CEO Steve Jobs and his eventual return to Apple. Why would anyone vote this down, even if you don't like Steve Jobs, he's been in seriously critical health for a while? First the ridiculous 3000+ comments on Microsoft versus Apple, and now this trend? I don't get it. :(

Seriously people, IF YOU DON'T LIKE APPLE, STOP TROLLING AN APPLE FAN SITE.*

*and please, do not tell me just because you own an iPod you like Apple but are simply being critical because it's "best for the company". BULLS#^T. When you make EVERY SINGLE THREAD a battle between Microsoft and Apple it wreaks of bias and agenda. GET A LIFE, go visit a Microsoft blog, and LEAVE US ALONE.

Its not trolling. I don't even rate the news stories but some people may not care if Jobs is still involved with Apple or not at this point (hence the negative ratings). Apple hasn't moved on necessarily, but its definitely got a new direction with the focus on developers and designers more than Jobs himself. Rating the articles doesn't necessarily mean they dislike the message of the content (i.e. Jobs' health improving) they would just prefer an alternative Apple-related article.

bedifferent

Apr 13, 2009, 12:56 PM

Its not trolling. I don't even rate the news stories but some people may not care if Jobs is still involved with Apple or not at this point (hence the negative ratings). Apple hasn't moved on necessarily, but its definitely got a new direction with the focus on developers and designers more than Jobs himself. Rating the articles doesn't necessarily mean they dislike the message of the content (i.e. Jobs' health improving) they would just prefer an alternative Apple-related article.

My comment was pointed at certain individuals who have been actively instigating fights with MacRumors commentators, so I meant no offense to the general community. I just find it interesting that the ratings on articles have been steadily leaning towards "negative", and I was especially alarmed that any one would vote negative on a story regarding the general health of an individual (this article pertains to Steve Jobs' health and thus his eventual full-time return).

KnightWRX

Apr 13, 2009, 02:25 PM

Its not trolling. I don't even rate the news stories but some people may not care if Jobs is still involved with Apple or not at this point (hence the negative ratings). Apple hasn't moved on necessarily, but its definitely got a new direction with the focus on developers and designers more than Jobs himself. Rating the articles doesn't necessarily mean they dislike the message of the content (i.e. Jobs' health improving) they would just prefer an alternative Apple-related article.

The negative ratings notwithstanding, this thread has been turned into yet another "Macs are more expensive than PCs" thread. We already have 2 of those ongoing, did we really need a third one ?

DELLsFan

Apr 13, 2009, 06:33 PM

... I dismissed your supposition because I don't agree with it ...

Yes, I know. So next time, instead of feigning ignorance, maybe you should try just disagreeing with a point right away. It would save a little time and eyestrain.

... Brazen disregard for innovative, inclusive change? What are you smoking??? Please share! What change will return decent profit? Please enlighten us.

I have. Others here have. Apparently change that you disagree with is not really change at all. It's a coy, circular argument used a lot around here.

... Yawn. Great, then stick to your 90%. We don't care. Your sarcasm is boring ...

So I guess that "my way or the highway" mantra is a bit more exhilarating for you? Are you so sure of yourself and Apple? Is your genius so resolute, so black and white brilliant, that that is no room in your head for anything else but the word no? Not even a "maybe"?

... I could say the same to you: don't take it so personally. :) I still don't know what you're arguing, nor what point you're trying to make. And I don't say that to be offensive. Perhaps I'm just an idiot.

I don't think so. You feel strongly about Apple's business model and apparently have for years. It's not easy for some folks to accept change. I just wish I had met you sooner - like maybe around June 2005, to witness the conniption fits I suspect you and many other enthusiasts experienced when Apple announced a serious change (to the Intel processors).

... What you and others seem to argue for is a cheap, low-margin box. This doesn't benefit Apple one bit. It drains resources while doing nothing but simply adding market share. Each of these new users costs Apple in terms of support, etc. if they're only making 5% on the box, how is this smart?

Quite a load of supposition in your premise here. In short, you're wrong. I think a less expensive, mid-range machine doesn't need to be "cheap" (read: inferior) to be profitable. To clarify, I would like to see prices come down across the board, yes. I think if Apple offered more choices (of computers built for a wider cross section of budgets), & offered more options for upgrade, they could easily sell enough units to cover the overhead, support, and still make profit, & increase market share. All this while providing the holistic, vertical Apple experience to many folks who would otherwise choose a "cheap, low margin box".

The last I checked, Apple Care plans weren't free - so I have some difficulty understanding all of the FUD regarding the opportunity cost of the support of Apple products if they "just work".

The iPod and iPhone success can't shore up profit returns forever. Many feel Apple should make some changes to other products or introduce new, brilliant ones to keep profit margins where they are. I'm disappointed that the only ones allowed to "Think Different" around here are Steve Jobs and a handful of his disciples in Mac forums.

The Apple world isn't the elitist, close-minded one you paint.

Yes, you're right. Most folks I know who use Macs are reasonable, respectful people who share knowledge and an enthusiasm for the experience that is Apple with me. Only a small handful of the most zealous fans could care less what anyone else thinks. :)

... So, I'll ask you, point blank, what is it you think Apple should do and how do you think it will benefit them as a company?

I think I've made my opinions clear enough - so in deference to good form and respect for you and others, I'm done repeating them and chasing your tail here ... at least for a while.

:apple:

bedifferent

Apr 13, 2009, 06:50 PM

blah

http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1239_i39m_an_idiot.gif

applecultvictim

Apr 13, 2009, 06:56 PM

Two years ago Bear Sterns and Lehman Bros. had alot of money too. They don't exist anymore.

No, they didn't they 'd lended it out.

robbyx

Apr 13, 2009, 07:34 PM

I just wish I had met you sooner - like maybe around June 2005, to witness the conniption fits I suspect you and many other enthusiasts experienced when Apple announced a serious change (to the Intel processors).

You suspect wrong. As I've said before, this was an obvious move to anyone who knew anything about NeXT.

I think a less expensive, mid-range machine doesn't need to be "cheap" (read: inferior) to be profitable. To clarify, I would like to see prices come down across the board, yes. I think if Apple offered more choices (of computers built for a wider cross section of budgets), & offered more options for upgrade, they could easily sell enough units to cover the overhead, support, and still make profit, & increase market share. All this while providing the holistic, vertical Apple experience to many folks who would otherwise choose a "cheap, low margin box".

Apple already offers a low cost machine, the Mini. I'd like to see it come down a bit in price, but $500 still strikes me as quite reasonable for all that's packed into the box. But this goes back to what I said originally. When you buy Apple, you accept certain limitations. Back before Jobs returned to Apple, they did offer machines with more upgradability. And, guess what? Not many people bought the upgrades. All those early PPC Macs and the various II series before them offered expansion slots, etc. Some had upgradable processors. In all my time as an Apple customer, I never ran into anyone who took advantage of those expansion/upgrade options. Why offer it if no one is going to use it?

I'm not suggesting that upgradability is a bad idea. However, too much upgradability can also work against you, especially when said upgrades conflict or don't work properly. Then you have disgruntled and unhappy customers on your hands and that negates the entire "it just works" experience. By keeping the box closed, Apple eliminates a lot of headaches for both itself and its users. It's a trade-off. Furthermore, Apple isn't just another PC company. They approach computers differently (surprise, surprise). They view the computer as an appliance and they've made the buying experience easy and simple. Look at how confusing the entire purchasing experience can be on the PC side simply because of how MANY choices one has. While "nerds" like this, the rest of the public, generally speaking, does not. Yes, Apple limits choice, but there's a method to the madness. Clearly you don't agree, and that's fine, but Apple hasn't really changed much since I've been a customer and I don't imagine they're going to suddenly rethink their philosophy now.

In short, you're not saying anything that hasn't been said many times before, usually by PC pundits and users who don't really understand Apple. Apple could take the path you suggest at any time, but they don't - and they've made their reasons quite clear (time and again). It's not that you're wrong to believe what you do, but it just isn't the Apple way.

At least you didn't suggest they license the OS to Dell! :)