And the pricing is not really entry level anymore. For a little more, we can get in MacBook category.The Mini does have a place, the one it was created for in the first place.
The Mini was supposed to be the "switch to mac" entry level desktop. Any easy way to go mac with your existing display and peripherals. Cost effective enough to get people into the ecosystem with the potential for their next upgrade to be a more fully featured mac.
The problem is it hasn't really fit in its place for a while.
To be fair, costs have come down in real-terms across the entire tech industry in that time. Economies of scale, China, etc.
I can think of several things:Why is it needed with the amount of free wifi that's out there
Yes. Computer prices, in real dollars, have dropped significantly while computing power has risen exponentially. Consider the ][+, with a floppy drive and 64K and sans monitor, would be around $5,600 in 2019 dollars.
One issue with tethering is not all plans include unlimited LTE data when tethering so it's not a long term use option unless you're willing to pay extra. In addition, not all wifi spots support high speed streaming.Why were they never released? Well, how often do you use your laptop in places where both a) there's no WiFi, and b) you don't have your phone with you for tethering? You'd also need a separate SIM card, which costs money - generally it's going to be much cheaper to have a single SIM and tether off your existing data plan!
I believe there is an error here. The narrative is Tim Cook is keeping margins at 40%. No way older tech cost more than newer tech. No way.
I think the new 2019 MBA is $1099, or $999 with student discount.So, the price of an entry-level Mac laptop (prices from Everymac.com or Wikipedia for the PB100):
1991: $2300 (Powerbook 100)
1998: $2799 (Powerbook G3)
1999: $1599 (iBook)
2006: $1299 (MacBook)
2010: $999 (11" MacBook Air)
2019: $1199 (new MacBook Air...)
I'm not going to bite on the Jobs vs. Cook bait, just point out that maybe, just maybe, you shouldn't expect the prices of computers to follow the general rate of inflation (any more than you'd expect the price of a volatile commodity like gas or property to follow the headline average). The number of dollars needed for a half-decent (desktop) personal computer (of any flavour) stayed in the same $1000-$2000 ball-park pretty much from 1980 through the early 2010's, while the definition of "half-decent" rose exponentially higher - so the norm in the computer market has been to expect rapid de-flation over time. The last few years have seen prices start to creep up as the technology stagnates and people are increasingly happy to stick with 5+ year-old machines.
...a lot of that is just the market, and can't be laid at either Jobs' or Cook's door. However, the iMac and iBook were the result of Jobs' efforts to make mass-market Macs (look at the dip between the PB G3 and the iBook) and moving to commodity Intel processors vs. PPC chips that nobody else was using in personal computers probably saved a penny or two.
Ultimately, though, the changes in technology (and its affordability) over the years has been so great that the only way to compare the value-for-money of tech products is against their contemporary competitors.
Anyway, a lot of price criticisms about current Macs are mainly about gaps in the product line (e.g. no mid-range headless desktop, no affordable non-retina entry level laptop, no performance-over-form laptop workstation) rather than the products themselves.
...also, wake me up when I can get a mobile contract that gives me SIM cards (or the digital equivalent) for my phone, laptop and tablet without paying through the nose.
Sounds like a peculiarity of the US market. I can get up to 6 "data only" SIMs linked to my phone number/contract for a nominal once off fee for the SIM (like $10 IIRC)....also, wake me up when I can get a mobile contract that gives me SIM cards (or the digital equivalent) for my phone, laptop and tablet without paying through the nose.
Not really. The 2x2 grid, beloved of consulatnts everywhere, is a bit simplistic but is useful despite its lack of detail. All the grid describes is the types of markets a company choses to address. The next question would be the deirablity of the market in terms of profit margin and growth potential; which leads to decisons on where to focus.I'd argue this style of grid is outdated now anyway, given that currently on the order of 80% of Macs sold are laptop form factors, but the grid implies equal weight to the desktop market.
SJW drama llama alert. This is a tech site, and the changing the world comment was made in the tech context. Go to reddit to spread that kind of nonsense.Sure, self-centered authoritarian egotists firmly convinced that the world revolves around them are definitely the dreamers that change the world. After all what else is in need to be changed to make the world better if not making cool tech devices. It’s not like there are wars, hunger, slavery, exploitation, children that die every minute from curable diseases just so that entitled western people can keep their life style and be able to afford their shiny widget.
Yes, but based on my experience, PC won’t charge iPhone fast enough to provide any sort of juice when PH is active, just breaks even on energy consumption. Not too bad I suppose. On the Mac side, things are a bit better, but Mac don’t really need an USB Ethernet most of the time anyway.So connect your iPhone to your laptop with a cable. No WiFi involved, and charges your phone from your laptop, effectively using your laptop battery.
I think there are multiple factors at play in pricing including component costs and manufacturing costs which are probably the big 2 as far as actually making the product. Component costs appear to have followed the same de-inflationary price curve as the machines they are in; which leaves manufacturing costs. Wages tend to rise, as do cost such as shipping, so, IMHO, the key to keeping a good margin is to control those costs to limit increases on profitability. Optimizing a supply chain is key to keeping those costs down, and Cook is very good at that. Apple no doubt could charge less but unless that means greater profitability and higher stock prices there is no reason to so do.I believe there is an error here. The narrative is Tim Cook is keeping margins at 40%. No way older tech cost more than newer tech. No way.
They came out when computers and laptops were grey or beige square boxes and Apple introduced curves and colors across the iMac and iBook line so they stood out. Even the ][gs was a square box with a lip, although it did have the first color finder.With an eye on the fact they were from 20 years ago...
OMG They're fugly. I mean those things are hideous. Like Jake, from State Farm ugly.
the current crop of Apple products are 1,000 years ahead of that. While I'm a naturally nostalgic SOB, its hard to imagine there was a time when these products seemed cutting edge and innovative. It's also hard to imagine I've had the same job all that time.....
Yes, but your phone is out of battery in an hour if you do that. At least, that's the experience I have (had) with both my 5s and 7. Besides that a direct connection will be faster and more stable.
I rather keep my data private and never want to connect to unprotected networks. 4G is also way faster and more stable in many areas.
Besides the iMac Pro, isn’t the Mac lineup now about the same as when Steve was around? MacBook Air is the consumer portable, iMac is the consumer desktop, MacBook Pro is the pro portable, and Mac Pro is the pro desktop. Mac Mini was a product under Steve.Would love to see a product grid for today's line up, but I think we might run out of shapes and dimensions.
And yet, I enjoy Apple products under Cook more - iPad Pro & Pencil, iPhone X, AirPods - maybe the best Apple products I’ve used and owned.The differences between Steve Jobs (enthusiasm, love for detail, free talking) and Tim Cook are pretty obvious.