Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple to cut Titanium notebook Pricetags

ya know i was thinking of it as a stock 500 with a smaller hd and less ram, not a stock 400 with a faster proccessor :)

hell when i ordered it i said '500 mhz, 128 mb, 10 gb' so the person over the phone could have a diffrent system to put in the specs....

one thery i do have though, is maybe just maybe they have better prices for phone orders! the person taking the order does get a commision so maybe the phone orders have better prices so that apple doesn't have to pay as much commision...nah ;)

the thing that has me anoyeed though is that they said '5 days' over the phone, and '5 days' in the email, the order is SILL in the same state as when i mirrored it!!!!! when i called to ask "whats up? why hasn't the machine shown up yet?" (i hadn't noticed the pricing thing yet) on thursday they said that it was in the 2nd state (being assembled) and to expect it in 5 business days! thats still friday!!!! if it doesn't come today i'm gonna be placing another "whats up?" phone call :D
 
nah

The price has *definitely* gone up to upgrade the processor. That would seem to explain it. The bigger question is: WHY?

An artificial increase in that "upgrade" might also be evidence favoring a revision to the TiBook.
 
500Mhz upgarde

Apple probally realized how many people were getting the 500 with the smallest hard drive and the least RAM possible and jacked up the price.
 
Re: 500Mhz upgarde

Originally posted by ThomasB
Apple probally realized how many people were getting the 500 with the smallest hard drive and the least RAM possible and jacked up the price.
Click to expand...

It's possible. You can put a gigabyte of RAM in that thing for roughly $300, and for $100, you can put in a 20 GB harddrive and then turn around and sell your old 10 GB drive to some poor unsuspecting fellow with an older PowerBook.
 
another idea

Maybe, in an effort to bring down the cost of the PB, Apple was selling the processors under cost on the BTO screens and taking a hit. Now that they dropped the price, they can put these back up to where they are making more off of them, but still at a lower overall cost.
 
From our friends at macosrumors.com....

Apple to use ATi RADEON Mobility 7500 in next PBG4 - 6:51 PM EDT 8/27 - Rumor

According to reliable Apple sources, graphics accelerator maker ATi has convinced the executives in Cupertino to go with its RADEON Mobility 7500 chip for the next-generation Powerbook G4. The Mobility 7500 brings performance and features that the original RADEON Mobility lacked, now surpassing nVIDIA's GeForce2GO. The latter was ATi's primary competitor for the role of the PBG4's new accelerator.
Now that performance and features on ATi's high-end mobile offering exceed nVIDIA's, the race is not even close to the perceived dead heat it had been in with the GeForce2GO over the past several months. The GeF2GO draws twice as much power as the RADEON Mobility, and produces more heat - either of which alone causes significant problems for the Titanium's designers, since the enclosure has virtually no room at all to spare for more cooling or battery power.
Much remains up in the air about the PBG4 revision, but a surprising number of sources think that Apple is playing some kind of game with the press by announcing no new hardware announcements at Apple Expo Paris at the end of September. By not being more clear about the definition of "new hardware" and by not mentioning the other big Apple keynote event in late September, the Seybold Expo which will be keynoted by Apple VP of Marketing, Phil Schiller....Apple has practically said nothing of certainty at all with regards to whether we'll see a new PBG4 soon.
Since the current price cuts on both models of Powerbook are typical of Apple's motions that precede a product revision, we still believe there will be a new PBG4 before Autumn is too long in the teeth....but for now, nobody on the grapevine appears willing to read the entrails as our friends at As The Apple Turns have been known to do ;-)
 
FINALY shipping! (sort of...)

well they FINALY shipped the printer! thogh they included 2 tracking numbers... either it means that i'm getting 2 printers (oh boy i like i needed one in the 1st place...) or they are shipping my USB cablle sepretly! (that would make NO sence, though neither would the 2 printer thing...)

you be the judge, take a look at my apple order status mirror page ;)

EDIT: cleaned up some redundant redundencies :D

update: OK, apple is toying with me! i mirrored the page with the shipments and all was well and good, then i got an email saying that the printer had shiped (as expected) then i went to the order stats page again just now, and BAM it says that NOTHING has shipped!!! WTF is apple doing with/to my order?! ARG!!!!

in case you can't tell, i REALY want my power book!

upade 2:eek:k the order status page matches my mirror again :)

[Edited by Hes Nikke on 08-29-2001 at 02:44 AM]
 
Re: Should We Buy?

Originally posted by mikebach
I am been waiting to get a PowerBook G4 and now seems to be better then ever with the 500 price cuts. I was waiting to the end of September to see if they were going to introduce a better graphic board and faster speeds. What do you guys think. Get one with the Price drop? or wait till Seybold.

Mike
Click to expand...
if you wanna play,wait,rage 8 mb is terrible
 
USB cable

Yeah, they ship the cable separately. My grandparents just ordered an iMac with the free printer deal, and the cable shipped separate. Lexmark must not bundle a cable with their printer, and Apple doesn't want people to have to go out and buy one, it would defeat their "works out of the box" policy.
 
Power Book order delayed!!!!

To Our Valued Apple Customer:

We appreciate your recent Apple Store order. Due to an unexpected supply
delay, we are unable to ship your PowerBook by the date you were originally
quoted. Our goal is to ship your order within the next 3 to 5 business days.
If you provided an email address when you placed your order, you will receive
an email notification once your order has been shipped.

If you would like to change or cancel your order, please contact the Apple
Store Sales Support team at 1-800-676-2775, 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. central time,
Monday through Friday, or 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. central time, Saturday and Sunday.

We appreciate your business and apologize for any inconvenience this delay has
caused you. Thank you for shopping at the Apple Store!
Click to expand...

this is just getting anoyeing!
 
My NEW Ti G4

Hey People,


Just got my new powerbook from Clubmac and I'm stoked. I added an airport card and 512M of ram - I'm all ready to have some fun. If you go to Clubmac's website and dig deep enough you can get the 400mhz model for cheaper than Apple's educational discount (minus a free 256 of Ram - that you can add yourself for 59 bucks).
So far i'm really excited......Plus, I can still cash in on the Cd-burner offer - No hassles with apple - *grin*
 
prices

it would be great if the prices stayed this low...but most likely it will only be until the new line of PB G4s come out late this year

apple needs to keep prices low if they want to go back to their 10 percent market share of notebooks they had during their brief highpoint in '99-'00 before the pc world abruptly grabbed back a few percent of that with their "faster" speeds and lower prices

the MHz thing may be a myth but the average consumer does not know that like we do so the only thing apple could talk loudly with now is yet lower prices on desktops and notebooks

the $1299.00 dollar ibook was an amazing step in the right direction as sales seem to reflect...now it may be time for a sub-$2000.00 dollar G4 laptop...now that would send a loud message to VAIO and the pc laptop world
 
one thing...

One thing I think is getting forgotten here is the role that marketing research plays in Apple's pricing decisions.
Like any company, Apple has a trained team of economists who have determined the elasticities in various markets (i.e., how responsive demand would be to changes in prices). As a company with the goal of making the most money possible, they will of course have set prices at an optimal level. So while we may be following the mantra of "lower prices sell more," that might not be in the corporate interest according to the numbers.
 
LOL!

With all due respect (which I doubt you deserve John123), I would like to say IT IS THE DECADE OF THE CONSUMER, not the producer. So, IT WOULD BE IN CORPORATE INTEREST TO KEEP THE CONSUMER HAPPY, hence low prices is THE KEY.

Duh, according to Varian or Hirschleifer Hirschleifer (probably the source of your high school economics knowledge), profit maximization is the key for any firm. BUT DUHHHHHH, helooooo, we are in a perfectly competitive market here...sooo like umm...low prices is the only way.
 
Yeah that sounds correct.
It isnt really just low costs blah, but more of competitively pricing the products, because at the moment macs are just not as good value for money as PCs. Especially the imac, which is really double the price it should be if it wants to compete with other consumer machines.
 
Re: LOL!

Originally posted by Kela
With all due respect (which I doubt you deserve John123), I would like to say IT IS THE DECADE OF THE CONSUMER, not the producer. So, IT WOULD BE IN CORPORATE INTEREST TO KEEP THE CONSUMER HAPPY, hence low prices is THE KEY.

Duh, according to Varian or Hirschleifer Hirschleifer (probably the source of your high school economics knowledge), profit maximization is the key for any firm. BUT DUHHHHHH, helooooo, we are in a perfectly competitive market here...sooo like umm...low prices is the only way.
Click to expand...

This is really pathetic. "Decade of the consumer"? Please. Economic laws aren't temporally variable. More to the point, your line of logic implies that companies should give away their products for free. Where is this magical dividing line between profit and consumer happiness? In reality, the only reason to keep the consumer happy is toward profit maximization anyway.

Also, "we are in a perfectly competitive market here"? Stud, no we are not. Perfectly competitive markets assume lack of product differentiation (Apple thrives precisely by breaking this assumption), a number of tiny firms (and the market for Macs is anything but this), perfect information (how many consumers do you know that have perfect info? and companies for that matter?) and a host of other things. Sorry, dude, go back to your Econ 101 class.
 
John123, ok so I meant competitive market and not "perfect" competition. However, I did not say that Apple should give away their products for free. If you assume such a nonsensical thing then it shows where your level of deduction lies. Additionally, IT IS THE DEDCADE OF THE CONSUMER, and regardless of wether there a re a few firms in the market or many, IF PRICES OF macs are not kept extremely low, AS SPIKEY SAID, the value for money for any mac now is just not as good as the PC. The PCs would always win in terms of market share. SO....Im sure you agree that Apple's CORPORATE INTEREST WOULD BE TO STAY ALIVE AND SURVIVE AND THE ONLY WAY IT CAN DO THAT IS KEEP ITS PRICES LOW (look at the imac example in 1998 and how it saved Apple).

Secondly, what are you on about PRODUCT DIFFERENTIATION? All firms in this industry are selling computers. THAT IS ONE PRODUCT YOU IDIOT. Variations like the imac, cube are just VARIATIONS. Its still one product. (now dont counter this by telling me that Apple sells cofee mugs with Apple logos on it) SO IN ACTUALITY APPLE IS NOT BREAKING THE RULE of product differentiation. LOL! get your facts straight.

- Kela
 
Economics 101 for Kela

Originally posted by Kela
John123, ok so I meant competitive market and not "perfect" competition. However, I did not say that Apple should give away their products for free. If you assume such a nonsensical thing then it shows where your level of deduction lies. Additionally, IT IS THE DEDCADE OF THE CONSUMER, and regardless of wether there a re a few firms in the market or many, IF PRICES OF macs are not kept extremely low, AS SPIKEY SAID, the value for money for any mac now is just not as good as the PC. The PCs would always win in terms of market share. SO....Im sure you agree that Apple's CORPORATE INTEREST WOULD BE TO STAY ALIVE AND SURVIVE AND THE ONLY WAY IT CAN DO THAT IS KEEP ITS PRICES LOW (look at the imac example in 1998 and how it saved Apple).

Secondly, what are you on about PRODUCT DIFFERENTIATION? All firms in this industry are selling computers. THAT IS ONE PRODUCT YOU IDIOT. Variations like the imac, cube are just VARIATIONS. Its still one product. (now dont counter this by telling me that Apple sells cofee mugs with Apple logos on it) SO IN ACTUALITY APPLE IS NOT BREAKING THE RULE of product differentiation. LOL! get your facts straight.

- Kela
Click to expand...

It's starting to seem that you are comatose. First, the point I was making (which clearly sailed over your head, or perhaps it hit you square in the forehead and cold-cocked you) is that you make no delineation between "low prices" and "giving products away for free." Sure, it's all well and dandy to say that a producer should offer products for "low prices," but the truth is that neither you nor I nor anyone in any of these forums for that matter can really tell you what low is. Were the prices on the TiBook 2 weeks ago low? What about now? What about if it dropped another $200? The point is that you can't delineate between what's high and what's low and what's giving away the farm. Which leads to the bigger point that I originally discussed (and that you still aren't quite seeming to grasp): it is likely the case that, as of this moment, dropping prices even more is not in Apple's "corporate interest." I'm sorry, Kela, but despite Apple's utter stupidity when it comes to making business decisions, I have just a bit more faith in their marketing teams' ability to set prices than you. It is, after all, their livelihood...and frankly, they're in Cupertino and we're here. That's about the best and only credential they need.

Now, moving on to your second point (and encompassing the second part of your first point), the precise reason that Apple can keep prices a bit higher than comparable PCs -- and the reason that Apple *has always* kept its prices a bit on the high side -- is that it does differentiate its products from the rest of the industry. You are correct in saying that all firms in the industry are selling computers, but where you're offbase is by saying that "Variations like the imac, cube are just VARIATIONS. Its still one product." Product differentiation is a within-industry phenomenon, not a within-firm phenomenon. Translation? Apple offers a product that's a little different than that from other computer makers. It's the classic economic case of a company taking one product (in this case, computers) and doing something to it to make it stand out from the competition (in this case, "Appleizing" computers with G4s and cool designs and such). Ultimately, the point is that we, in the end, pay a price for our Macs precisely because they aren't PCs. This is intelligent product differentiation on Apple's part; if they built just another Wintel box and charged the same prices, they would obviously go out of business. But, they don't, and thus they haven't, and thus we're here.
 
no, u r wrong.

Apple keeps prices higher because the powerpc chip is more expensive to make, or so i hear.
And anyway, compared to PCs Macs just aint good value for money.
So blahdey blah end of convo.
 
ok wait...

"if they built just another Wintel box and charged the same prices, they would obviously go out of business. But, they don't, and thus they haven't, and thus we're here"
---originally posted by John123



I would like to say John123 that Apple HAS SURVIVED today BECAUSE OF ITS I-MAC. Do you agree with me or not? Without the intro of the imac in '98, Apple would have sooner or later have become insolvent. So it was indeed the cheap imac which was comparable to PC computer prices that saved apple. (if the imac line did not exist today, please tell me who would buy the expensive G4s except pros?????) Also SPIKEYs point about Apple's computers being WAY more expensive to produce is valid. The G4 costs more than the pentium to produce. agreed or not?

p.s John123, I never once said that Apple should give products away for free. I dont even know why you brought that up.
 
Originally posted by spikey
no, u r wrong.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. Besides, if you are going to call someone wrong, you have to back it up with evidence.
 
Re: ok wait...

Originally posted by Kela
"if they built just another Wintel box and charged the same prices, they would obviously go out of business. But, they don't, and thus they haven't, and thus we're here"
---originally posted by John123



I would like to say John123 that Apple HAS SURVIVED today BECAUSE OF ITS I-MAC. Do you agree with me or not? Without the intro of the imac in '98, Apple would have sooner or later have become insolvent. So it was indeed the cheap imac which was comparable to PC computer prices that saved apple. (if the imac line did not exist today, please tell me who would buy the expensive G4s except pros?????) Also SPIKEYs point about Apple's computers being WAY more expensive to produce is valid. The G4 costs more than the pentium to produce. agreed or not?

p.s John123, I never once said that Apple should give products away for free. I dont even know why you brought that up.
Click to expand...

By and large, I think we agree on most counts here. Yes, the iMac saved Apple's butt...but the reason why it did so was more than the fact that it was just price-competitive with PC's. It was an innovative design (and this is the product differentiation thing) that caught people's eyes. But, at the same time, there are a bunch of "Mac loyalists" out there -- lots of us in these forums, in fact. I'm not a pro; I don't do graphic design or anything like that. But I will happily buy a Mac over a cruddy PC any day because it is a Mac. We're like a cult and willing to pay our pseudo-membership fee for that right.

You're also right that the G4 is a pricier chip, both on the production side and on the sale side to Apple. But that difference (cost of G4-cost of P4 or Athlon or whatever) does not equal the price difference between G4s and PCs. It's still too big.
 
u r wrong, again.

Look at the rest of that post you blind git, you will see that i am right and you are wrong.

I think the problem with macs today is the vaue for money is just not good enough.
This is because the value for money of PCs over the past few years has dramatically increased, a top of the range PC a few years ago would cost £2500, nowadays the prices have dropped to around £1200 (mainly because of the chip battle between AMD and intel)
But because macs are more expensive to make then they cannot keep up with that trend.
I think this will change as soon as Apple bring a 64bit chip to the consumer or pro market, seeing as no PC company can get to grips with making a good 64bit chip with good flops ratings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back