Apple - do they care about making computers anymore?

[stimpycat]

Simple question really - I have been waiting for sometime to buy new mac for my design business - still waiting for updates to iMac and Macpro before diving in but have $5000 here allocated for this.

The longer it goes without seeing or hearing anything of updates the more I am talking myself out of it.

Unlike buying from dell it's rather frustrating that we don't know when a new model is going to appear - whilst i do understand the reasons why.

Before anyone suggests I won't go wrong with buying today - I simply do not want to buy a computer with last years technology at last years prices for the sake of waiting a few weeks or months.

Unlike buying say a DELL, these computers come out and then go stale - DELL are forever updating specs and systems continuously.

Anyway, this isn't my question - I am wondering what anyone's thoughts are on Apple seemingly branching away from computers and into more consumer related ventures of late with new products being Music players, Telephones, and Television Accessories? Combine that with what seems to be the longest period without updates to many of their computers and it seems that they perhaps do not care so much about these areas as they used to some years ago?

Is this a trend that will continue do you think? Will software companies such as Adobe one day give up supporting Apple platforms? (it already seems they have started - considering several features in CS2 and CS3 are windows only)

I am concerned that perhaps with such a small market share compared to PC's and with Jobs probably going bye bye they will gradually dump the high-end computer stuff and focus on the consumer toys like music players and telephones - after all they are being a lot more successful with these products.

 

[JHacker]

The problem here isn't the fact that Apple doesn't update as much as Dell. The problem is that you want the best technology at all times when the current products are extremely fast and probably way more than enough for your needs.

You have 2 options:

1. Be like Dell and have your computer be updated 5 days after you buy it.
2. Be like Apple and have your computer updated 6-8 months after you buy it.

Moral of the story:

1. You're technology will be outdated very quickly after purchase...
2. Who cares? It's absolutely fast enough.
3. You can have the best of the best for 6 months, or for 5 days.

You decide.

Oh, and Apple obviously still cares about computers. And if you really think the current Mac Pros are "stale," then you should rethink what you're actually using the computer for because .2 ghz is not going to make a difference.

 

[Sherman Homan]

I simply don't understand your post. Apple and Dell update processors, bus speeds and ram requirements all the time. They make major modifications in technology like PCIx and 802.11n all the time. They use many of the same components. What are you looking for? How can a MacPro go 'stale' faster than a Dell?

 

[overcast]

Computers and other consumer electronics are old and "stale" the day you buy them. Buy the best you can afford now and enjoy it, until you NEED something better. You aren't going to notice minor bumps in speeds and architectures anyhow. LoL, Jobs is not going anywhere.

 

[torrid30]

Anyway, this isn't my question - I am wondering what anyone's thoughts are on Apple seemingly branching away from computers and into more consumer related ventures of late with new products being Music players, Telephones, and Television Accessories? Combine that with what seems to be the longest period without updates to many of their computers and it seems that they perhaps do not care so much about these areas as they used to some years ago?

I don't believe they will start to get rid of their high-end computer lines, but are merely expanding in their product line. By expanding they are limiting the amount of time to focus strictly on their computers, but I believe now their focus has shifted back to mainly computers for the last half of this year since the first half was devoted to iPhone (which was justified and needed as they needed to make the iPhone a success becuase it was a risk to venture into "uncharted" territory for Apple.)

Is this a trend that will continue do you think? Will software companies such as Adobe one day give up supporting Apple platforms? (it already seems they have started - considering several features in CS2 and CS3 are windows only)

I'm not sure about software companies as a whole, Adobe included, but I think more will convert to Mac as well as Windows. For example, I believe EA (I could be wrong and someone feel free to correct me) just announced at E3 2007 that they would be starting to make games compatible with Macs. And Gametap just announced that they would be releasing 500+ games for the Mac as well on their site.

While I know all these games being released to Macs don't really help you, being a video editor and needing Adobe and such. It's still a light at the end of the tunnel for you with companies such as Adobe. (Maybe Adobe is waiting for Leopard to be released with the new technologies so it can take advantage of it all, like they are doing right now with Vista (if they are). But I think they would).

I am concerned that perhaps with such a small market share compared to PC's and with Jobs probably going bye bye they will gradually dump the high-end computer stuff and focus on the consumer toys like music players and telephones - after all they are being a lot more successful with these products.

While Apple does have a small share compared to PC's, it's share value is continuing to grow. So I don't think that they would dump their high-end computers with the positive way things are going right now. If they start making things too high-end and exclusive that their market share starts declining (which it can't really afford to happen) then I'd say they'd either dump their high-end computer line or have to make it "not so high-end". And that seems to be the direction they are taking it now (as well as the rest of the computer industry), more power for an equal or lesser cost because of the constant development of new technology. Many comparisons have been made and Apples and PCs that are spec'd the same are nearly the same price. Many people just think that Macs are so expensive because they don't offer that lower end computer that places it with Dell and other companies, but that could all change with their release of the "ultra-portable" laptop. (But who knows being "ultra-portable" could carry a price tag that wasn't so convienient).

And like I said before I just think that Apple is expanding their product line because like their famous tagline says: "It just works". They want us to buy the iPod, buy the iPhone, buy all those "consumer toys", AND buy a computer to go with them all. So they all can sync together beautifully, like iLife does with itself, and the "It just works" motto can be extended outside of your computer and into your everyday life.

Torrid

 

[nbs2]

No. They don't.

Is that what you wanted to hear? Good. We can now close the thread and wasteland it.

 

[john2006wright]

Do people think that Apple should drop their prices more often. On the imac and mini for example. If you buy need the end of a cycle you do not get as good a deal, specs:cost ratio. Do people think a 12 month cycle should include more price drops or minor speed bumps.

Not passing judgement just wondering what people think.

 

[stimpycat]

Torrid - thanks for a great and helpful answer.

 

[torrid30]

Torrid - thanks for a great and helpful answer.

No problem. Glad I could help.

Torrid

 

[teflon]

I can understand the frustration towards iMac, it hasn't been updated in a long while. But Mac Pro? What more do you want in it? It already has the fastest processor, can accommodate up to 32 gb or ram & 4tb of storage. The graphic cards are still very capable of handling the job that you intended for it to do.

 

[Silencio]

Do people think that Apple should drop their prices more often. On the imac and mini for example. If you buy need the end of a cycle you do not get as good a deal, specs:cost ratio. Do people think a 12 month cycle should include more price drops or minor speed bumps.

By all accounts, Apple's machines are selling very well. When your products are selling well, you don't tend to drop prices. Supply and demand. And yeah, I don't think the mini is much of a bargain, either. If the mini and the 17" iMac really do go away, then Apple's entry-level machine is going to not be very cheap, barring a big price cut on the 20" iMac. But Apple is mostly concentrating on the higher-end, higher-margin market segments, anyway -- and wisely so IMO.

And Apple does not have a lot of room to speed-bump their systems as often as people think. When Intel releases new CPU and/or motherboards, Apple tends to put the fastest available chips in their products. In the lower-end MacBook, for example, Apple opted for 1.83GHz and 2.0+GHz CPUs when Intel offered -- and most other PC-makers jumped at for their comparable laptops -- slower 1.66GHz CPUs.

Apple is not getting out of the computer market any time soon. They make, oh, you know: billions and billions of dollars selling Macs. It's simply foolish to think they would turn their back on all that revenue.

 

[Bigheadache]

With the MacPro, I can understand them not being able to change anything until Intel delivers Harpertown CPUs and Seaburg chipset (your Dell would have the same issue of having to wait for Intel). But there really isn't any excuse for Apple to persist with old GPUs (and still making us pay top prices) and 1gb standard RAM (especially when other Apple products now come with 2gb standard).

 

[pcorajr]

You have 2 options:

1. Be like Dell and have your computer be updated 5 days after you buy it.
This will happen also to a Apple computer actually any OEM has this problem. The only way you gonna have the lates and greates is if you build you own computer and upgrade individual component as you come out. The problem here is not that Dell Upgrades faster. The problem here si that dell updates their hardware so that you get up to date hardware for the same price.
2. Be like Apple and have your computer updated 6-8 months after you buy it.
This has nothing to do with pricing. Here we are 300+ days since the iMac was release and we are paying $1999. We do not need for Apple to update hardware that often, we just need them to price accordingly. If they could do that then I can justify dropping 2k on a computer that cannot be upgraded in the future. Pro models have something different in them. They can be upgraded with no problem. iMac in the other hand does not have this option.
Moral of the story:


2. Who cares? It's absolutely fast enough.
That is you own opinion and only you. You do not do the same things that I do. A better statement would be to point out the fact that Apple has created one of the best OS in the market, and that this OS does better use of hardware. Unlike Vista Apple makes sure that their new version of OS X will work on both old hardware and not so old hardware.
You decide.

Apple computer are great, They have great hardware and are very flexible machines, they are so flexible we can dual boot Windows in it. But the facts are clear, Apple needs to stick to a schedule of upgrades. They need to understand that selling 1 year old hardware at 1 year old prices does not encourage people like me (who are willing to switch to the superior OS) to make the switch. Keep the same prices but update Hardware every 180 days instead of waiting 300+ days.

 

[foidulus]

I can understand the frustration towards iMac, it hasn't been updated in a long while. But Mac Pro? What more do you want in it? It already has the fastest processor, can accommodate up to 32 gb or ram & 4tb of storage. The graphic cards are still very capable of handling the job that you intended for it to do.

You can get a quad core machine with 3 gigs of ram and 640 gigs of storage for just north of $1k, now granted it's CPU isn't quite as good as the mac pro cpu, but it's about $1200 less than the base mac pro(go to the 2Ghz CPU)

Apple's neglect of its computer line has made me angry too. I will wait for the new iMac and if it doesn't blow me away, then my powerbook will be my last mac. Love the OS and don't mind paying a small premium(<20%), but the current situation is just insane.

 

[teflon]

^^^^
The HP is a desktop computer, Mac Pro is a workstation. They're aimed at two different markets. Mac Pro is also a lot more expandable and you can go up to 8 cores instead of 4. If you want something like the HP, then you're in a market that Apple isn't interested in yet. You're not gonna get something like that. It's not a problem of updating, it's just that you want a machine that Apple doesn't produce.

 

[suneohair]

The Mac Pro is horribly outdated. Quad-core Xeon chips are dropping in price this month. 500GB drivers are chump change. FB-DIMMs have plummeted (they could do 2GB standard easy). 8x00 GPUs and new ATIs are available.

There is more that could be done. Sure, there is a lot included with the Mac Pro and at a good price. But that doesn't give Apple an excuse to not stay current. If they burnt themselves by dropping it at $2500 thats their problem.

 

[MacSA]

^^^^
If you want something like the HP, then you're in a market that Apple isn't interested in yet.

Yes the market with poor people.

This from AppleInsider: "While robust Mac sales are likely to drive Apple to yet another solid quarter, it will be discussion of iPhone metrics that dominate the firm's fiscal third quarter conference call next week, according to Piper Jaffray."

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...rics_to_be_focus_of_apple_quarterly_call.html

Yet again Apple's computer business becomes irrelevant.

I really don't think Apple are that committed to the Computer business any more, they're just coasting along on iPhone and iPod sales now.

 

[Subiklim]

Apple computer are great, They have great hardware and are very flexible machines, they are so flexible we can dual boot Windows in it. But the facts are clear, Apple needs to stick to a schedule of upgrades. They need to understand that selling 1 year old hardware at 1 year old prices does not encourage people like me (who are willing to switch to the superior OS) to make the switch. Keep the same prices but update Hardware every 180 days instead of waiting 300+ days.

They've sucessfully done this for years. What makes you think they'll change for those in the minority who care if their processor has a .33 instead of a .11 on the end? Apple's main market now is the average consumer, who couldn't care less about a .22 change in processor speed.

 

[suneohair]

They've sucessfully done this for years. What makes you think they'll change for those in the minority who care if their processor has a .33 instead of a .11 on the end? Apple's main market now is the average consumer, who couldn't care less about a .22 change in processor speed.

There are more updates than simply 220mhz in 3-6 months. I am not going to say the average consumer cares, but it is really the principal. I think the consumer lines, basically the iMac and the notebooks (including the MBP) get regular updates. However Apple is not really catering to the middle of the road people and they aren't paying much attention to the Mac Pro people either right now.

 

[richard4339]

I think they probably have their computer updates ready to go, they're just holding off on them for awhile for Leopard, so they can really just release a bunch of computer related products all at once.

As far as a continued discounting program, yes, I do think they should do that. I think that considering they do only update every 6+ months or so, continually discounting hardware on older models IS a good idea. However, since they simply put their older hardware in the refurb store, they would have to choose one of the other; older hardware in refurb store or older hardware sold as new at a discount. Personally, I don't think Apple will ever do this. If anything, I would say they should just commit to updates more often. Once again, they won't set anything to a more definite timetable, because then sales would slow right before an anticipated refresh.

 

[Jestered]

Why would anyone think that Apple is not going to continue with computers? That makes no sense at all.

Every non-computer product that Apple makes is an extension of the computer. What are you going to do with an AppleTV without the computer? The same goes for the iPod, etc...

The only way you could use these devices fully, without having a Mac computer, would be to use a PC with them. If you think Apple is going to turn into a company that makes products that are used only on a Windows box... you are crazy!

 

[Markleshark]

FFS, you know what? I'm sick of you whining bunch of wankers. (Might want to add that one to the naughty word filter)

So it's been almost a year since Apple upgraded the iMac. So? It's obviously selling well, or they'd have done it by now. The saying I was always taught is: If it's not broken, don't fix it.

You'd twine if you bought one and Apple upgraded it inline with everything new that is released by other companies every month because yours would be 'old' and now your moaning like a small girl because it's been a while since they upgraded it.

Apple knows whats best. If Apple want to upgrade it, and Apple find the time is right, then guess what? (ZOMFG!!! You might want to sit down) They'll... (Waitttt....) They'll... Upgrade it!!

Apple are a business. They do things to make money. As long as computers make money, of course they'll still make them. At the moment, it seems as if the iPhone is making money. Am I sick of hearing about it? Yes, but thats only because I can't buy one. Do I understand the workings of business? Yes, yes I do. It aint hard to grasp either.

Until they upgrade the iMac, either buy the current iMac like most other people who want/need a new computer, or, **** and wait nice and quiet. Because I tell you something, no one, least of all Steve Jobs cares in the very slightest if you, one person, just feels Apple are not doing enough to tend to your personal needs.

The moral of the story: You can't please all of the people all of the time, just some of the people... Some of the time.

 

[stimpycat]

Markleshark your obviously a bit of a nobbiscuit (may want to add that one to the swear filter) but if you follow this and other forums you'd see many potential PC to Mac switchers wanting to switch but not doing so because they don't feel comfortable BUYING 2006 TECHNOLOGY AT 2006 PRICES.

Some of these people give up and go get a Dell box.

Now new customers are very important to Apple or any business and thus they do like to cater for them specifically in certain areas - by getting a user to switch from PC to Mac they are both obtaining extra revenue, and deducting potential revenue from their competitors. Then their is brand loyalty whereby Apple will hope that if a 'convert' likes one Apple product he or she will try others - thus creating some nice brand loyalty and of course revenue for Apple.

Take into account that consumer interest in Apple is probably bigger than it ever has been thanks to the media circus surrounding the iPod and now the iPhone - now is a perfect opportunity to bring out an updated iMac et al.

Hell even my mum has now heard of Apple.

So, I think you'll find the market for people expecting an update before they jump in is actually a pretty large one - but more importantly this is from a very important demographic.

You can argue as long as you want as to whether it is wise or stupid to wait, but the fact remains that by dragging their heals with updates to certain lines they are loosing on all sides of the coin.

 

[Antares]

One problem with the lowering of prices as hardware ages is what you have to do when new hardware is released. If the previous model was selling for $1,800 (reduced over time from $2,300) and suddenly jumps to $2,300 for the new model, would people still be as inclined to buy? Going from $2,300 to $2,300 and then lowering the price of the old model to $1,800 may not affect people's willingness to buy as much. It's the psychological illusion that the price is being raised that causes the problem. Think about the auto industry...base car prices stay the same through the whole model year and then drop for the previous year's model when the new model year car is released.

Apple keeps things simple. If they followed a depreciation price based model, they would constantly have to offer a tiered store with both old an new models of hardware with varying levels of unstable prices. If prices reduce over time, people might also be inclined to wait for the price to drop...then wait for it to drop a little more, then a little more..... Having a single price allows people to make a concrete choice, "it costs this much and has these features...buy it, yes or no?" Not to mention the complexity that actual hardware updates would add to the whole system on top of this.

Plus, what would quality be like if updated models were released every couple of weeks? Every time a new feature or chip is added, that's another potential piece for failure. A longer release window allows for more detailed testing and perfection of current hardware. What value is there for the company or the consumer to get rushed out hardware with minimal improvements?

 

[pcorajr]

They've sucessfully done this for years. What makes you think they'll change for those in the minority who care if their processor has a .33 instead of a .11 on the end? Apple's main market now is the average consumer, who couldn't care less about a .22 change in processor speed.

I'm not just talking about a minor bump in clock speed. I would not do that even with a PC. I am talking about major updates.

Updates to the HD + Video + Memory + Built in Camera + CPU.

This is not about a small updates. I personally would also care less about the kind of change you talk about.

Average consumer now is more computer literate. It means a great deal to me if you tell me one year after i buy my new computer that i cannot play a game because my video card is 2 years old. that kind of scenario needs to be prevented. They did well by offering the 88XX series nvidia card on the MBP now they need to do the same with the iMac.