Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
To be accurate, America try’s its best to prevent the exploitation of its workforce. China doesn’t give a **** about its workers

Google 996. 9am to 9pm, six days a week.

Pot calling kettle, though I do understand your point your argument is bias.
[doublepost=1561786123][/doublepost]
Would have been amazing to keep more Mac Production diverse and US based. even this high priced and lower volume line.

It makes sense, of most of the suppliers are located in Asia there is no point in building it here for the sake of, considering tariffs on supplies, components, logistics delays, port shipment inspections, etc.
 
Would have been amazing to keep more Mac Production diverse and US based. even this high priced and lower volume line.

"Mac production" hasn't been US based for decades. What they did is final assembly/packaging, I'd guess <10% of the work that went into making the parts.

The whole discussion is mixing 2 issues that really should be looked separately:

1. Should Apple run factories (in the US or elsewhere)? Answer is a clear no.
2. Should the companies contracted by Apple for production have factories in the US? Feel free to make a case that makes economic sense.
 
Can’t compete with slave labor. China is nothing without it and that’s all they have to offer. It’s disgusting.

You really have not been over there, in Shanghai, HongKong, etc, have you? The future of the 21st century is being conceived there as we speak, and America needs to wake the F up and smell the coffee because those guys are going to eat our lunch, dinner and breakfast.

BTW, a relative of mine, owner of an America-based Software company but with branches abroad, often tells that his American employees are some of the worst ones in terms of low productivity, absurd levels of entitlement, constant salary raise requests, bitching and corporate politics, etc. And dont get him started with milleneals!

Indeed, America's work force needs to wake up!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: garya73 and jeyf
I think the reason these will be built in China is pretty simple, and it’s been explained several times by Tim Cook and others. It takes a very specific expertise to manufacture these types of goods, and Chinese companies are way better at it than anybody else. Manufacturing these types of things takes manufacturing know-how that the US does not have anymore. Stop thinking of China as the place of super cheap labor and start thinking about China as the place where very smart people are pushing forward the latest and best manufacturing processes and practices in the world. Way more qualified to do this than any other country. Wages in China have gone up a lot over the past ten years or so, so much that many factories have moved out of China to Thailand or Vietnam to build less technically demanding things that are getting too expensive to produce in China. But the fact remains that China builds a lot of our tech products because they are simply the best in the world at building these types of products.

Makes too much sense. Have an upvote.

America doesn’t even have a single LCD fab, not even an obsolete fab. And some people are wondering why iPhone can’t be made in the U.S. There are no skilled workers in the U.S. who have the know-how, not for the past 20 years.
 
Not sure why you attributed "greedy Tim Cook hates me" to any comment I've made since it's pretty clear I haven't come close to saying anything like that. My criticism of an idiotic comment can't be construed as a criticism of Apple. Duma supported his argument with more nonsense. Nothing in his reply to me explains why customer price would go down due to Apple's lower cost. It just tries to obfuscate by talking about Apple wanting to meet their margin objectives. Maybe read better next time. ;)

As to why Apple is keeping cost low, that's simple. They want, like any business, to keep their cost low because it helps to improve their margins and profit. A larger margin on say, for example, Macs helps keep the overall margin in their preferred zone when they may take a little hit in margin on phones for example because they had to pay more to Samsung for the more expensive OLED. (please don't get caught up in my example... it's just an example of margin management)

Apple gets their cost lower so they in turn lower the cost of their items to the customer
... ←yeah bud, that has never been a thing.
Sorry, to be clear I didn't mean to attribute that comment to you personally, it's just in the air all around this discussion...

"Improve" is kind of an unclear term here. Like any business they want to increase their profit. Profit is the direct measure of value created. What it means to improve their margin can vary-- but the key point is that it's not true that increasing margin always increases profit.

Profit is a product of two quantities: margin and unit volume. Price is basically cost * (1+margin). Most demand curves are downward sloping, so unit volume decreases as price increases. Profit increases as volume increases. Profit increases as margin increases from zero to some optimal value, and then decreases as margin exceeds that value because demand falls off.

Additionally, there's a certain minimum margin Apple feels they need to maintain to cover engineering and other costs.

So, when deciding whether to sell a product a company will decide if it is sufficiently profitable and whether the margin is sufficient to meet their operating costs.

Macs are among the smallest wedges in the Apple revenue pie. Increasing their margin on Macs won't offset a declining margin on phones. Services have a significantly higher margin than hardware so hardware margins won't do much to prop them up either.

So, if gross margins are constant, and costs go down, then price=cost*(1+margin) will go down.

Now, Apple has never been a company to chase the low priced market, and the Mac Pro certainly isn't a cut rate product, but for any product they make, they would prefer to keep their prices down by reducing cost rather than reducing margin or compromising on design.
 
the whole gaggle of MAGA peeps have never been outside of Ohio:
-it is an international market for Apple products
 
So basically Apple and its customers subsidize jobs. Genius idea. Let us know how you plan solve world hunger.
One could alternatively ask Apple stock holders to 'donate' the dividend they receive (or use it for scheme that subsidises wages of American workers).

When people say that Apple makes so much profit and it should do this or that, it's very rare to see them also making the same demands on the people who actually receive the lion's share of those profits, it's shareholders. Why is that? There are of course some who do so, like Elisabeth Warren with her proposed wealth tax (though not directly targeting investment income, it does reduce the net income after taxes from holding assets).
[doublepost=1561807140][/doublepost]
Apple is still registered in Ireland to avoid paying US taxes.
Not necessarily U.S. taxes. If Apple wouldn't be routing all European, African and (I think) Middle Eastern sales through Ireland it might simply be paying taxes in all the individual countries it sells its products in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pallymore and jeyf
Do people realise Apple is a company and not a charity?

Apparently not.

Do your realize that this American argument is tiresome, old and doesn't actually justify the destructive capitalism that you all defend even though it is responsible for the disastrous state your nation is in? There are only a fistful of people that actually benefit from capitalism -- billionaires. Everybody else is just paying the price and suffering for it obe way or another, day in day out.

The quote "We work jobs we hate to buy **** we don't need" from Fight Club only scratches the surface, but describes our everyday lives quite well.

Companies have social responsibilities as well, and the Scandinavian countries set an excellent example that wealth can be distributed fairly and can be there for all who live in a country, not just for a few.

But yeah, Americans like to believe in their own marketing for the American dream... When was the last time you actually met a millionaire who did not inherit his money from rich parents? Or did not become wealthy through criminal deeds or by screwing others over? The American dream has always been nothing but a well-marketed myth to keep the wage slaves in line.
 
Yet one of the most successful and admired companies in the world, with 130,000+ employees, and many millions of repeat customers opening their wallets to buy Apple products. Year after year after year.

Yeah, your “mediocre” assessment above seems legit. /s

It is like Microsoft under Satya Nadella where financial success does not correlate with how people perceive products.
Steve left a company with great financial results and people love products from Steve's era. TC is great accountant but his products are worse year by year. Too many products, insane prices to cover poor product reception like iPhone, any plans for breathtaking hardware changes (now they want to release a 16" MBP that does not meet 4K res standard - a joke???, terrible design (even swedish Ikea laughs about the latest Apple Mac Pro design) etc. So to conclude everything is how we define a success - you can work for a small company that sell a good products with an excellent customer reception and be more satisfied than working for Apple (as 130,001 corporate employee that never exchange any word with boss) that sell iPhone XXX that nobody cares. It is not all about money.

@Jsameds:
Apple is not a charity and I am not also a charity to sponsor billionaire companies (to be more precise private equity funds like Blackstone Group etc.). If Tim Cook is greedy so I am greedy too. So instead of buying new Mac Pro I will choose Toyota Camry or holidays on Hawaii.
 
Last edited:
America can't compete in manufacturing. That's just reality.

Is it worth supporting a totalitarian communist regime though? Not to mention the IP theft and other illegal, and long-term-bad shenanigans? IMO no.
[doublepost=1561812108][/doublepost]
This sort of shareholder-focused capitalism, which really has only been present since the 1980s, is why wealth has become so top-heavy in recent decades.

Totally agree. Being a public company has some very unhelpful mechanics attached to it. If a CEO decides to pay 2¢ more per hour for, say, a call center in the US the shareholders can SUE him and the company for fiduciary malpractice. And they'll win. That's not good.
 
We really need a lower cost Mac. This is the computer for the Top 1% of it's customers and does not have mass appeal. The $5999 model is a joke of features and will likely need $20-30k to be at the target customer base. Even the Mac Mini is super expensive for what it is.

Everything Apple sells is a "joke" for what it is except the 15" Macbook Pro when you can buy it just before the new model is announced. BestBuy and Amazon had the base 15" for $1,899- a couple months back for maybe a day or two.

That's it though.

The Macbook Air should start at $799- MSRP. You should be able to regularly purchase an Air for $699- or less. That's what it's worth at best.

Apple is now at the level where you laugh at anyone who buys one of their products.
 
It is like Microsoft under Satya Nadella where financial success does not correlate with how people perceive products.
Steve left a company with great financial results and people love products from Steve's era. TC is great accountant but his products are worse year by year. Too many products, insane prices to cover po product reception like iPhone, any plans for breathtaking hardware changes (now they want to release a 16" MBP that does not meet 4K res standard - a joke???, terrible design (even swedish Ikea laughs about the latest Apple Mac Pro design) etc. So to conclude everything is how we define a success - you can work for a small company that sell a good products with an excellent customer reception and be more satisfied than working for Apple (as 130,001 corporate employee that never exchange any word with boss) that sell iPhone XXX that nobody cares. It is not all about money.


I define company success as having a base of many millions of repeat customers opening their wallets to purchase premium products at premium prices year after year after year. Feel free to define it according to your views.


"TC is great accountant but his products are worse year by year."

Mr. Cook is not an accountant - he's an engineer. The only problem I've had with Apple products was having two of my "grater" Mac Pros die. But that was when Apple was lead by another CEO. Anecdotes are fun!



"Too many products, insane prices to cover po(or) product reception like iPhone,"

And of course that's your personal opinion. See my view of "success" above. Apple products are priced right for the value offered. Yes, some people can't afford them. As another anecdote, I can't afford a BMW 7 series automobile. OTOH, I don't whine-n-moan on a BMW forum about how expensive they are and not meant for the masses.
 
This news made me sad. If a company of Apple's stature building expensive, luxury goods cannot keep its manufacturing in the US, what hope does the US manufacturing sector have?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlexGraphicD
I thought Angela Ahrendts left Apple and took her Edition stuff with her. Did she move to the Mac team instead?
 
This news made me sad. If a company of Apple's stature building expensive, luxury goods cannot keep its manufacturing in the US, what hope does the US manufacturing sector have?
dont be sad
almost all the first world junk we own is manufactured in places like China
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlexGraphicD
Apple originally released the Macintosh 128k in 1984 for $2,500, which in today’s money is $6,000.

Anyone remember the almost $10k Lisa back in 83’?

I still remember getting a $4,000 plus Tandy 2000 setup with a RGB monitor and dot matrix printer for Xmas and my parents still had to upgrade the ram for it to properly run the mouse and some programs I wanted back in 86’.

Say what you want about Tim but Steve did the same thing back in the 80’s. Profit margins on hardware from Apple has always stayed around 30-40% profit margin.

I think people forget how much we used to pay for computers. I still remember my school buying an entry level SGI octane workstation with monitor for $18-19k back in 98’ and that was the discounted price!
 
Mr. Cook is not an accountant - he's an engineer.
An engineer who focus on colors of aluminium body ;) So maybe he shall back to past job as an engineer. As CEO he is so good as Paddy Lowe as technical director of Williams F1 ;)

And of course that's your personal opinion. See my view of "success" above. Apple products are priced right for the value offered. Yes, some people can't afford them. As another anecdote, I can't afford a BMW 7 series automobile. OTOH, I don't whine-n-moan on a BMW forum about how expensive they are and not meant for the masses.

Opinion based on market trends, technology solutions and feedback from people in social media, YT, internet. If Apple is still so strong why they stopped to publish number of sold iPhone units? It is not priced right if you can have better hardware in Samsung Galaxy 10 (except SoC). Similar situation with Mac Pro (some time ago I posted a price of Dell T5820 workstation). Assuming that people complain about Apple product prices because they cannot buy it is not true. More money you have then you feel respect to every $ you earn like Warren Buffett who prefer old car because he does not need a new one (except football players, music stars and Hollywood actors). Also companies can offer an extreme prices for the products but consumers have a minimum intelligence to judge if it is fair price or not. Anyway it is not just a problem of price but customer satisfaction. Apple products are desired because they are expensive. They are not "cool products" anymore for next generation. Competitors are even better like Huawei or Razor.

@itr81:
Most of us remember computer prices in 80's and 90's but technology was different and cost much higher. After 2000 year computers started to be available for everyone for a reasonable prices. Internet is popular and available in so many places on Earth for a reasonable price. This is what we call the progress of civilization. Now we made a giant step back going back to 90's? Do we really want it? There is no problem if high prices correlate with higher level of living (salaries) like in Norway but I have not heard about 30-50% salaries increase in any country (fair trade). Now there is any technical and financial explanation for such prices even if companies like Intel have a problem with 10nm process (who the hell told him to put xx cores CPUs with TDP 45W to thin ultrabooks??!).
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.