Here's the rundown of the business strategy Apple is using.
Sigh.... I recently saw this thread and it already up to 200 posts. so skip to the end and find the typical disinformation being thrown about. ... Oh well.
The overall goal is quite simple: Reach as many markets as you can and sell good products to those markets.
Markets are composed of the problems and workloads that people want to put on the computer.
Apple's goal is not to enter as many submarkets as they can. If a product doesn't sell in high enough numbers to gets axed. It is really that simple. Some submarkets are either small or extremely commoditized (very little "value add" can be used to differentiate product).
These "consumer" , "prosumer" , and "pro" labels have devolved into a pile to backwards retrofitted hocus pocus to justify
Consumer means that you buy it primarily for your own personal enjoyment. Pro means you make your livelihood off of the machine. Prosumer is muddled area where a high mix of people from the previous two category buy (i.e., it is hard to tell who is who since the percentages are close).
There a Mac minis deployed as departmental servers. That is not a consumer function. Likewise there are Mac Pro which are used to just play game (because the owner has enough disposable income to throw at the box it doesn't matter).
Market 3 - Professional
This is where cost does not matter. Performance is all the customer wants.
Cost always matters. These decisions go into never-neverland . Some people have bigger budgets than others, but even folks buying $1.5M computers have a budget cap.
If the "pro" machine is earns revenue then the buyer is less cost sensitive. [ If Mac Pro makes $1,000/yr and will keep it for 3 years then a $3,000 cost isn't a major issue. ]
Dropping Mac Pro: This would officially mark Apple's departure from professionals, servers and corporations, having dropped the Xserve which preceded it.
If significantly fewer "Pros" are buying Mac Pros over the last couple of years... then who dropped whom ?
Part of the drop is professions ( use Macs to make money) moving to more affordable Mac. For those "pros" whose software workload has stayed relatively constant the current mini/iMacs outclass the Tower-with-slots they may have been using 6-8 years ago. That market did not change (the problem) the machine/form-factor that fits the market changed. The "shape" of the boxes is
not the key characterics of the market. The work is.
The Mac Pro has two large problems:
1. There are many markets whose problems/workload really aren't growing harder over time at rates faster than the hardware is improving. Over time "good enough" performance is available on boxes at the lower end of the line up.
2. Much of the legacy software out there can't take full advantage of the Mac Pro hardware. So even where the latent ability to put distance between the Mac Pro and the iMac & mini exists the software pisses it away. The OS as much as the many of the individual 3rd party packages are all contributors to this.
These professionals (more often companies) are the ones who buy in bulk. For example, an animation studio such as Pixar, which obviously needs the superior horsepower of the Mac Pro, might buy them in bulk.
Pixar has a render farm of linux boxes for high computational jobs.
Not to mention the extreme power enthusiasts who always strive for better performance.
Those "poser" market is another latent problem that the Mac Pro has. Frankly, the people who need the performance is smaller than the "well I might use it someday and in the mean time I'm a player because I have the big box on my desk." market.
If this drop occurs, then about 90% of the professional market will disappear from Apple's earnings.
And if the pro market comprises 0.5% of Apple revenues this will have exactly zero impact on stock price and operations.
That's quite a sizable chunk, because of the sheer price of these machines.
Sizable chunk to whom. Folks very often confuse who bank accounts are being measured. A $300K purchase order may be a big deal to your company. Apple makes $100's of thousands a day on interest on their cash hoard.... selling nothing... So posturing like you are a prime time player and Apple better lick your boots ... please....
. The reason why Xserve was dropped was lack of profits,
False. The XServe got dropped because not enough people were buying it. To quote Steve Jobs " Nobody was buying them". (not literally true but rounded to the significant digits on the high level overview sales charts that was probably true.)
Apple is about growth in sales. Not riding the death spiral down to the last 100 units sold. The Mac Pro doesn't have to match the iPad in volume. Nor does it have to match the iMac or mini in volume. However, it does have to be within striking distance of the other Mac models in growth.
All this talk about Apple has to sell the Mac Pro even if the year over year unit sales are tanking is delusional. It is not about profit per unit. It is about selling great products. Great products don't have multiple years of declining sales.
and for the MacBook, an inefficient overlap in market with the cheaper MacBook Air.
Buzz. The MacBook died in part becauce it could enter the reserved iPad price zone. Once the MacBook collided with the $999 barrier it had no where to go. As the MBP 13" moved close to the $999 barrier it was squeezed between a rock and hard place.
The MBA isn't cheaper (at the same $999 price point) and sales volume was
worst amoung the Macs (Mac Pro's were commonly rated higher in the oneline Mac store "best sellers" list) than the MBA. It probably still would be last place if not for the $999 model to boost the volume. (because price
does matter. )
