There are companies out there with better products and better prices that just don't know how to sell them or create that image.
But that's the point. In a free market goods will sell for what the seller can get. The "worth" of something is reflected in the price. The fact that Apple can get 5-10% of the market despite charging so much says something - Acer, HP, Dell, etc. would price their machines over $1000 if they could get away with it.
they sell an image and a vision of 'ease' which is rarely matched by the product itself.
There is only one Rolls Royce in the Computer world and that's Apple.
in OSX apple have a unique differentiater (in that everyone else sells windows), the price of the 'hard' goods is separate.
Apple have created a (false) image with OSX and spread FUD about Vista, some deserved, some not so much.
again..why is any of this news..??
This sounds like a ridiculous statistic.
Most PCs aren't overpriced like macs, so it's obvious that PC buyers don't need to spend as much for the same level of performance.
....not good for us. Why are we so 'happy' that Apple can retain high prices? Give me an Apple....at a PC price!
Q1 2010 Revenue by Product
Desktop: $1.7 billion, up 62 percent from $1 billion a year earlier.
Portables: $2.76 billion, up 9 percent from $2.52 billion a year earlier.
iPod: $3.4 billion, up 1 percent from $3.37 billion a year earlier.
Music: $1.16 billion, up 15 percent from $1.01 billion a year earlier.
iPhone: $5.6 billion, up 90 percent from $2.9 billion a year earlier.
Peripherals: $469 million, up 21 percent from $387 million a year earlier.
Software & Services: $631 million, up 4 percent from $606 million a year earlier.
RR cars are owned by BMW. RR (the aircraft engine maker) is a completely different company.how dare you..>!!
RR don't get chinese kids to work for less than minimum wage in sweatshops do they..?
besides, if it weren't for RR engines then RR cars would have gone bust years ago.
Since over 90% of PC sales are under $1000, I do not doubt these figures.
The correct analogy is: Apple is the Cadillac of computers. You pay a premium and get Chevy parts (no offense intended to Cadillac owners).
Wrong. These products that "rarely match" the vision . . . are selling in record numbers each quarter. As in, there are more people buying them (of the target demographic, whether it's higher-income bracket or just people who happen to have disposble income.)
Apple has the highest customer satisfaction ratings in the industry - across their whole product line, several years running now.
Which means the goods reflect the vision. Easily.
Your opinions, however, don't quite reflect reality.
I absolutely despise car analogies but why does this one work for me?The correct analogy is: Apple is the Cadillac of computers. You pay a premium and get Chevy parts (no offense intended to Cadillac owners).
You know when people say they hate Mac users? look in the mirror....its you!
I absolutely despise car analogies but why does this one work for me?
You're right. Cadillac uses much better parts these days...It doesn't
That quote is by betanews, and not from NPD. If the NPD numbers tell us anything, it's that Apple computers are more expensive than other PC's, and that Apple is over-charging for what they offer.
Good for shareholders, but not for consumers.
Mac users are rarely rational.
did you miss MS' record quarter then..?
http://www.edge-online.com/news/microsoft-reports-record-q2-results
You are aware that their record numbers are record even taking the accounting method into account, right? You are aware that Apple went back two years and re-released their results using the new method, so it's easy to compare? And you certainly don't mean to accuse Apple of securities fraud by saying "Apple record profits they made last quarter while good were not as good as apple reported" because you understand that under the 1933 and 1934 securities acts, apple's actual profits must be "as good as apple reported?"
Record sales is just ufimism for shrinking marketI did learn something new today.
$500-700 on the tower is getting to be very upper midrange. AMD offers their quad cores starting at $99 and quite a few vendors are taking advantage of that. I've seen the prices on viable performance video cards drop from $300 to $100-179 in the past 3 years alone.
Spending more than $1,000 on something that's not a notebooks requires a lot of commitment, a grant, or a business expense.