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

Apple to Introduce Cheaper Macs?

Wild-Bill said:
They should have done that regardless of the "economic crisis". The Mini is not worth $599.00 no matter how you slice it.
Click to expand...

The sad truth is that it IS worth $600 since it's made out of compact and uniquely manufactured laptop parts.

If it was made out of common place desktop mobos and CPUs/GPUs then it would either be larger, upgradeable, and faster @ $600 (worth it), or much like the iMac with a hybrid of parts at a more reasonable price.

To me, I don't mind the mini, it's nice, but Apple took the screen and battery out of a $400 laptop and charged us $200 to do it.
 
You're right of course, but they obviously could drop the price and make less money - Seen them described as many things, 'switcher machines' especially (they're simply small desktops, and apples cheapest computer) - you'd think that if they were really confident in their products they would take a profit hit and try and sell loads. Also, the mini's form factor is suspiciously mini-itx with a couple of mm shaved off the edges where the screws go - almost off the shelf, and not deserving of a huge premium.

I know many 'average user' people that want to buy macs, mainly because of the looks/design/(marketing)/ipods, but don't because of the price. Realisticly I think most users are ignorant of tech and after a purchase might even be surprised that it's a different OS with a different button to press to get a browser.

I think there's a lot of potential for osx as 'the' home desktop os. It's a bit more resilient to these 'average users', and does the things most people want out of the box.
I'd like to see cheaper macs, I think they could sell and take a huge chunk of the home market share (assuming losing niche/premium appeal wouldn't take more away!) - but I don't want to see them producing a range of budget machines (how could they? Fast/cheap desktop part mac excluding), just a price reduction...
 
ltldrummerboy said:
I don't see this happening. But if they do lower prices the cause will likely be from cheaper hardware.

I don't mind paying a premium price for premium hardware.
Click to expand...
It isn't premium hardware. It's the same as any other well-made PC. If some OEM were to make the same machine but put Windows on it instead of OSX (say, the Macbook), it would probably be about $300 cheaper.

We pay a premium for Apple's hardware-software integration and for the privilege of running OSX in general. I'm okay with this tradeoff, but don't fool yourself into thinking that Macs are "premium" in hardware. They aren't.
 
starkruzr said:
It isn't premium hardware. It's the same as any other well-made PC. If some OEM were to make the same machine but put Windows on it instead of OSX (say, the Macbook), it would probably be about $300 cheaper.

We pay a premium for Apple's hardware-software integration and for the privilege of running OSX in general. I'm okay with this tradeoff, but don't fool yourself into thinking that Macs are "premium" in hardware. They aren't.
Click to expand...

I agree. I had to go through three unibody mbp's when I got mine. And the store told me I wasn't the first when we finally found one that's was ok in all aspects. Premium isn't something I relate to Apple anymore.

Their design is though and I find it a pity they have to charge as much as they do to give that "extra layer of exclusivity". But then again they've always done that so it was a choice I made.
 
celtikmind said:
I agree. I had to go through three unibody mbp's when I got mine. And the store told me I wasn't the first when we finally found one that's was ok in all aspects. Premium isn't something I relate to Apple anymore.

Their design is though and I find it a pity they have to charge as much as they do to give that "extra layer of exclusivity". But then again they've always done that so it was a choice I made.
Click to expand...

When did you buy your unibodies? Apple always seems to have some problems for the first few months of production and smooth them out as they go.
 
Digital Skunk said:
The sad truth is that it IS worth $600 since it's made out of compact and uniquely manufactured laptop parts.

If it was made out of common place desktop mobos and CPUs/GPUs then it would either be larger, upgradeable, and faster @ $600 (worth it), or much like the iMac with a hybrid of parts at a more reasonable price.

To me, I don't mind the mini, it's nice, but Apple took the screen and battery out of a $400 laptop and charged us $200 to do it.
Click to expand...

To me all I am paying for in a Mini is the fancy case. The components are laptop style, that much is true, but since laptops can come in at less of a price with a screen, dvd/rw, and such, it is hard to justify.

The real problem is, the mini is not up against laptops, it is up against cheap windows desktops, many with monitors, keyboard, and mouse, for less than a single mini.
 
Shivetya said:
To me all I am paying for in a Mini is the fancy case. The components are laptop style, that much is true, but since laptops can come in at less of a price with a screen, dvd/rw, and such, it is hard to justify.

The real problem is, the mini is not up against laptops, it is up against cheap windows desktops, many with monitors, keyboard, and mouse, for less than a single mini.
Click to expand...

Let's not forget quad core in that package as well. :)
 
starkruzr said:
We pay a premium for Apple's hardware-software integration and for the privilege of running OSX in general. I'm okay with this tradeoff, but don't fool yourself into thinking that Macs are "premium" in hardware. They aren't.
Click to expand...

Osx86 kinda screws that all up then, eh?
It may have been more valid during the ppc days when it was actually impossible to run osx on anything else, but today its all just synthetic lockdown that apple graciously puts into its OS for you.

I've often wondered what the phrase "hardware and software integration" meant from the mac users. I have a hackintosh with all the features of a mac (and some they dont have), and it runs perfectly. What makes the mac hardware so much more special, other than perception?
 
NoSmokingBandit said:
I've often wondered what the phrase "hardware and software integration" meant from the mac users. I have a hackintosh with all the features of a mac (and some they dont have), and it runs perfectly. What makes the mac hardware so much more special, other than perception?
Click to expand...

I don't think it's the "mac hardware" per se, but rather the fact that Apple controls both the hardware *and* software (ok, *tries* to control both...*looks over at OSX86*), and optimizes the software to run as fast and efficiently as possible on the hardware that they choose.

You'll certainly never see Microsoft "optimizing" their OS with, what...COUNTLESS numbers of name brand, off-brand, and even home built PC computers, because it's a nearly impossible job. The closest anyone can get is to run system optimization software after the fact, and even that's not really the same as the "hardware and software integration" that Apple can do from the factory.
 
GoKyu said:
I don't think it's the "mac hardware" per se, but rather the fact that Apple controls both the hardware *and* software (ok, *tries* to control both...*looks over at OSX86*), and optimizes the software to run as fast and efficiently as possible on the hardware that they choose.

You'll certainly never see Microsoft "optimizing" their OS with, what...COUNTLESS numbers of name brand, off-brand, and even home built PC computers, because it's a nearly impossible job. The closest anyone can get is to run system optimization software after the fact, and even that's not really the same as the "hardware and software integration" that Apple can do from the factory.
Click to expand...

This is what im trying to figure out. What makes a core2duo in an imac any different that the core2duo in my tower? Same processor running the same OS. Theres really no room for optimization there.

Of course there is the fact that since apple only offers about 2 different cpu classes (core2 and i7) that they only have to worry about compatibility with those, but i would hardly count limiting the end-users choice as a good thing. Some may disagree, but i feel that the end-user is better than Apple at determining what is right for them.
 
NoSmokingBandit said:
This is what im trying to figure out. What makes a core2duo in an imac any different that the core2duo in my tower? Same processor running the same OS. Theres really no room for optimization there.

Of course there is the fact that since apple only offers about 2 different cpu classes (core2 and i7) that they only have to worry about compatibility with those, but i would hardly count limiting the end-users choice as a good thing. Some may disagree, but i feel that the end-user is better than Apple at determining what is right for them.
Click to expand...

First of all, just a minor correction, Core2Duo in imac is the mobile version, they aren't the same as the desktop Core 2 Duo in your tower.

Second of all, the fact that Apple only has to worry about Intel makes it easy for them to optimize the OS specifically for those CPU. AMD and Intel usually does things differently and have extra instruction sets that other one have. I believe AMD doesn't have the latest SSE4 or SSE4.1 and some other instruction sets that only Intel has. Apple can take advantage of those sets. Microsoft probably won't be able to in order to make their OS works across all x86 chips.

Remember the OSx86 project did have different OSX image specifically for SSE2 enabled Intels and extremely hacked up OSX for the AMD chips.

If you don't like the closed design of Apple, just stay away from them and buy PCs with Windows.

I don't know why everybody is wasting their time about this. Apple will never ever again release their OS for anything outside Apple.

Update: Also, I am happy for those who has Hactinosh that works 100% of the time. Enjoy but don't bitch at Apple if they decide to make the next OS even harder to install. They have the right to pick which hardware they want for their OS and which to exclude other people from. End users can stick with their Windows PC and need to stop bitching at Apple for not bringing OSX to their PCs.
 
starkruzr said:
It isn't premium hardware. It's the same as any other well-made PC.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

The parts in bold seem a little twisted to make your point. Considering the article on the front page of this forum regarding Apple laptops sweeping the CR rankings, I would say, sure, the hardware is the same........as any other premium hardware. ;)
 
starkruzr said:
I'm okay with this tradeoff, but don't fool yourself into thinking that Macs are "premium" in hardware. They aren't.
Click to expand...

Pft yeah! Because R&D is free. Clearly aluminum is cheaper than plastic, operating systems develop themselves, apple got the schematics for the compressed mobo and unibody design off of google.
 
Nobody is saying anything should be free, we all just want apple to sacrifice a little of their massive profit margin in order to help out the customer. Apple makes a **** ton on hardware sales due to the really high price and they could easily cut their margin in half and still be making a lot.
 
Im not doubting what your saying but....

#1 we are still buying there products...

#2 they arent falling apart like alot of companies.

So from a business stand point they are doing something right.
 
will the iMac be cheaper too??? and when do you think they will reduce prices???

answer me please! thank you
 
NoSmokingBandit said:
Nobody is saying anything should be free, we all just want apple to sacrifice a little of their massive profit margin in order to help out the customer. Apple makes a **** ton on hardware sales due to the really high price and they could easily cut their margin in half and still be making a lot.
Click to expand...

I have always believed that Apple's large cash war chest enables them to take greater risks with innovation. Given the profits being brought in today on those innovations of the past, namely OS X, iPods, iPhones, I don't believe they will cut prices and make sacrifices against the very war chest that enables them to take these risks. To suggest they do so only shows a very fundamental lack of understanding for how Apple has structured their business. Given their financial and commercial successes this business structure is generating right now, I think most people would be hard pressed to tell Apple they should make a fundamental change, while keeping a straight face, and concealing the old, tired self-serving demands of "I want good things cheaper" mantra.
 
NoSmokingBandit said:
Nobody is saying anything should be free, we all just want apple to sacrifice a little of their massive profit margin in order to help out the customer. Apple makes a **** ton on hardware sales due to the really high price and they could easily cut their margin in half and still be making a lot.
Click to expand...

No, they'll be making half of what they previous made. The more money that Apple has, the better future it has.

We all don't want Apple to fall into the same trap they fell into the early 90s. We want Apple to keep living a long life, and the only way to do that is to keep innovating the way they do and that often requires a lot of money to be spent on R&D. Suppose if Apple failed on one product? Will it bankrupt the company? Not with a $29 billion war chest. But they could with a $1 billion war chest. As long as people keep buying macs, Apple will not reduce prices. The only way that will happen if Apple just saw a massive drop in sales enough to start losing profit and digging into their savings. At this rate? That might not happen for a long time.
 
MikhailT said:
No, they'll be making half of what they previous made. The more money that Apple has, the better future it has.

We all don't want Apple to fall into the same trap they fell into the early 90s. We want Apple to keep living a long life, and the only way to do that is to keep innovating the way they do and that often requires a lot of money to be spent on R&D. Suppose if Apple failed on one product? Will it bankrupt the company? Not with a $29 billion war chest. But they could with a $1 billion war chest. As long as people keep buying macs, Apple will not reduce prices. The only way that will happen if Apple just saw a massive drop in sales enough to start losing profit and digging into their savings. At this rate? That might not happen for a long time.
Click to expand...

So you feel ok paying apple's exorbitant price just so they can afford to screw up on some products?

Apple has created such a hardcore following thanks to their high prices. Im sure there are quite a few people who would buy macs regardless of the price because "its better for apple." I dont care about apple, i care about my wallet. Apple doesnt care about my wallet, they just care about stuffing their own pockets.
 
Poker-face said:
why don't you answer me this question?? It's extremlly important for me!:confused::confused:
Click to expand...
Quite likely, the current line of iMacs will come down in price once they are replaced by a refreshed line, which will likely happen sometime in September. In the meantime, factory refurbs are always available for less.
 
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