Actually, that would be 12:00 EST. And since only Indiana is on EST, the point is pretty moot for someone on the east coast, where they are on EDT.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
WWDC - One Day More... Final Thoughts
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Re: Blow-by-blow?
there will propbably be a low-bandwidth version of the site up that you can check every few minutes, plus the IRC channel will be open. check that out.
Speaking of the irc channel, I've been getting 'connection refused' errors trying to log on to the server itself since late Friday night.
Is the server still up? Are some domains being banned?
Is the server still up? Are some domains being banned?
Actually FY2002 means fiscal year 2002, not full year. On top of that inaccuracy, Apple could benefit by lowering the price on low end powermacs if they are elastic goods. For example, if they lower price by 10% and thereby increase sales by 15%, Apple stands to earn greater revenue.
Take your own advice on ranting and an education.
Lokii
and you know, if powermacs were elastic goods, nobody could stopp em. they'd be a-bouncin all over the place like flubber and that gift-thingy from some alien in "men in black".
and everybody'd be like: "where's all those powermacs coming from?" and then they'd all be like: "don't know man. looks to me they're elastic goods!"
actually, if you tame one, you can have him bouncing quite idly by your display with a couple of cables attached. oh, and that head-crash thingy has been taken care of by polymeier storage solutions
[mod edit: personal insults will not be tolerated & result in a banning.
]What about the possibility of new "Adjustable " LCD monitors....
Nobody's talking about them....
Nobody's talking about them....
I predict that Apple will go retro and bring back a 13-inch black-and-white monitor. It will only cost them pennies to make and they can sell it to all of us fanatics for thousands. Plus, Aqua will be super-snappy since it will only have to push a 16-color 640x200 screen (640x400 interlace, if you can stand the flicker).
My feelings exactly!!!!!
If Apple goes and pulls this stunt again I may permantly loose interest in their hardware. Like I said before the hardware software combo from apple is worth a little extra over the equivalent form the PC world, but if they go back to raping their customers all deals are off.
Apple will probally try to pass the machines off as unique and not matched by anything in the PC world. Even if it is true for the few minutes of the conference it won't be for long afterward.
Dave
If Apple goes and pulls this stunt again I may permantly loose interest in their hardware. Like I said before the hardware software combo from apple is worth a little extra over the equivalent form the PC world, but if they go back to raping their customers all deals are off.
Apple will probally try to pass the machines off as unique and not matched by anything in the PC world. Even if it is true for the few minutes of the conference it won't be for long afterward.
Dave
I said nothing about 'have to' using macs.
What I was saying that those who will complain about the high-price (relative to what they can actually afford) of the dual 2ghz 970 when it comes out (and I think it'll be within the price of the dual 1.4ghz) just don't get it. The machine isn't marketed at them. Its aimed at professionals for whom the cost isn't that much of an issue. Apple may charge an extra premium on it because of that reason. For professionals the $200 price difference between that and a 1.4 G4 is more than made up by the speed advantages of the 970. And yes, I am one of those professionals. Speed is essential to my line of work - I'm a video editor. Half an hour to an hour in saved rendering time can mean the difference between meeting a deadline and pissing off clients. This is why so many posties are moving to wintel for rendering. It has nothing to do with cost savings and everything to do with performance.
I ask what the hell kind of consumer needs a dual 2ghz 970?
(I actually often think the same about 3ghz P4s. What the hell kind of consumer needs a 3ghz P4? All you're going to do on it is download porn, rip DIVXs and play crap games)
They don't need one. Its a luxury. I'd love to be able to afford one for my personal use but I'm not going to be able to and thats fine, cause I don't need it.
A lower-end G5 I can understand being 'needed' by a consumer to do things reasonably with iPhoto and iMovie. Hence why I think Apple might introduce an iBox deal. It may be crippled, sure, but in price/performance it'll be an attractive deal to a lot of potential switchers. Specs aren't everything to alot of people - its the Apps too! Apple just needs to get into the ballpark performance-wise against the Intel and AMD with their consumer models to start shifting units.
A 1.4ghz iBox/iCube wouldn't surprise me and would be very welcome and I'd love people to have macs like that for non work use.
the same reason why people needed machines running at 500MHz with people like you complaining noone would need that power: because some people tend to think ahead and won't buy a new machine next year already. (ok, if you bought a G4 a while ago you are ****ed up the arse anyway now).
And I was criticising the price of the whole range. Even the lowend models are alwas ridiculously overpriced. Each model compared to a Dell box of similr features, wqhich a switcher will compare a mac to, is vastly overpriced, which is why Apple is **** out of luck with increasing it's marketshare in a significant manner.
And I was criticising the price of the whole range. Even the lowend models are alwas ridiculously overpriced. Each model compared to a Dell box of similr features, wqhich a switcher will compare a mac to, is vastly overpriced, which is why Apple is **** out of luck with increasing it's marketshare in a significant manner.
NB: I am referring generally to the high end of the powermac line and specifically to the dual 2ghz. Its price may go up a bit relative to the 1.4ghz G4. That's fine, as far as I'm concerned, cause its not really marketed at consumer users. Nor should it be. Apple does need a real high-end flag ship to regain its ground in design and print and post and audio. It has nothing to compete hardware wise with a BOXX. Sure a BOXX PC costs like $10-20K... but for these people cost isn't a hurdle. I am hoping apple eventually introduces a killer Shake machine that's quad 970 (and then goes to quad multicore 980). They won't ship that many of, but hey, flagships are there to be seen!
The middle PM G5 (1.8) is likely to stay the same price - or go a touch up. The bottom PM G5 (1.6) is likely to drop a little (hopefully), if not it'll stay equal.
Then they'll introduce a 1.4 iBox (or MacBox). It will take a hit on the fancy additions like PCI-X but it'll sell for less than the PM G5. It'll be the switcher machine. Buy this for this price (which will be relatively competitive with dell - mb a $100 difference?) and you'll get a good machine with iLife and you can use your old PC monitor!
Who knows. the iBox is purely speculation on my part, but I think everyone is pretty damn sure Apple needs an entry level tower including Apple. Apple will never compete price/perfoormance wise with the crap-no-brand-boxes but they can compete with HP/Shuttle etc. if they desire. I don't think they'll ever get as cheap as dell but they can come reasonably close and offer a better user experience.
i totally agree. and everyone who keeps complaining about the price of a decent apple- buy an emac and strap some extra ram inside. who cares what it looks like- it works. and will still dance circles around a pc.
that said... i DO plan to use my new dual 2ghz ppc970 for dick measuring
and folding... lots of folding. Who does need that power? My Centris 650 is still in use and it runs at (IIRC) 50mhz. Surfs the web (tho no multimedia) and gets e-mail as good as it ever did.
You can get a 486 laptop for like $25, put a 8011a wireless card in it, run linux on it, and have a cheap & fast WiFi internet machine.
What does the average consumer do with their PC?
Surf the web. Check e-mail. Word process. Mp3s. Digital Photos.
With the exception of the last two, I could do the first three on my SE back in 1988.
A G3 iMac is quite adequate for the other two. It's not the snappiest around, but for the price you can buy one on the second hand market for, its price/performance/UTILITY ratio is actually really great.
You've forgotten another important part of the equation: "utility" (which I use to describe usefulness, productivity and ease of use).
If Apple gets in the ballpark of the Dell box with a decently powered machine, then it wil get switchers that see the Mac as machine with greater utility for them and one that they can afford.
A lot of potential switches I know are prepared to pay a premium for Apple's 'utility' but only to a certain extent. Apple needs to find that certain extgent.l They will never compete with Dells, but if they find out how much more the average joe is prepared to pay for the mac-experience then they will ship units.
Originally posted by gwuMACaddict
that said... i DO plan to use my new dual 2ghz ppc970 for dick measuring
Who wouldn't use it for dick measuring!
We all know that the ladies prefer mac users - or their macs at least.
(It really is the secret weapon that Apple needs to capitalise on to get the linux crowd: buy a mac. get laid.)
Well lets look at it this way I'm a consumer, one that has to limit his hardware purchases to every few years. To that end I have to make sure that the dollars invested will leave me in good shape for a few years (barring upgrades like ram). Second; SMP hardware is the future of computing, if Apple reserves this for their high end then they obviously don't understand the market.
One little purchase Like a Nikon D100, can quickly take a machine that you thought was good enough and put it into the realm of antique hardware. Image processing is one consumer applicaiton that benefits greatly form CPU performance and addressable memory. Sure you can get by with lesser hardware but the difference in performance can often be 10 to a 100 times worst.
Your comment about the P4 is interesting, but you have to realize that at introduction the P4 was an extremely poor performer and only beat out the p3 due to a significant increase in clock rate. The reality is that for many people the p4 is a poor performer and I'm talking consumers here. The 970, from all appearances, is just going to nudge out the P4 so yes a single processor 970 most likely will not meet the demands of some consumers.
I understand the issue with financing personal purchase of PC hardware. It is a problem for many of us. The reality is though that you are doing yourself more harm in the pocketbook by buying low end. It is much better to get the hardware that will be viable for at least a couple of years.
Thanks
Dave
One little purchase Like a Nikon D100, can quickly take a machine that you thought was good enough and put it into the realm of antique hardware. Image processing is one consumer applicaiton that benefits greatly form CPU performance and addressable memory. Sure you can get by with lesser hardware but the difference in performance can often be 10 to a 100 times worst.
Your comment about the P4 is interesting, but you have to realize that at introduction the P4 was an extremely poor performer and only beat out the p3 due to a significant increase in clock rate. The reality is that for many people the p4 is a poor performer and I'm talking consumers here. The 970, from all appearances, is just going to nudge out the P4 so yes a single processor 970 most likely will not meet the demands of some consumers.
I understand the issue with financing personal purchase of PC hardware. It is a problem for many of us. The reality is though that you are doing yourself more harm in the pocketbook by buying low end. It is much better to get the hardware that will be viable for at least a couple of years.
Thanks
Dave
Ok:
Apple stays in business through relatively good margins on a relatively small market.
- To drop the price and remain profitable, they would need to increase volume sales dramatically.
- There is no guarantee that a $500, whatever, price-drop would bring in the appropriate new market to compensate for this. I have no idea if that $500 is even close to a reasonable drop, but if I must, I will find all these figures and show what increased volume Apple would need if they cut margins by whatever amount. [nb: I will not actually do this, I am lazy]
- People who endlessly say they'd buy a mac if only it were cheaper will *always* complain about that, since building a box from scratch will always be cheaper than what Apple can put together. So there is not a huge, untapped market there.
- The market (us) will take the price range that Apple currently uses, evidenced by Apple's survival.
- It is technically possible for Apple to drastically cut margins in an attempt to re-take a great deal of market-share. I can't see that working in any short or mdeium term plan, simply because of entrenched reservations about Apple by a large part of the community, so despite cash reserves, this would hit Apple bad, and in the end would result in a slightly increased marketshare, depleted cash, and people still complaining that "MACs aer to expensive!@!@!@".
Apple stays in business through relatively good margins on a relatively small market.
- To drop the price and remain profitable, they would need to increase volume sales dramatically.
- There is no guarantee that a $500, whatever, price-drop would bring in the appropriate new market to compensate for this. I have no idea if that $500 is even close to a reasonable drop, but if I must, I will find all these figures and show what increased volume Apple would need if they cut margins by whatever amount. [nb: I will not actually do this, I am lazy
]- People who endlessly say they'd buy a mac if only it were cheaper will *always* complain about that, since building a box from scratch will always be cheaper than what Apple can put together. So there is not a huge, untapped market there.
- The market (us) will take the price range that Apple currently uses, evidenced by Apple's survival.
- It is technically possible for Apple to drastically cut margins in an attempt to re-take a great deal of market-share. I can't see that working in any short or mdeium term plan, simply because of entrenched reservations about Apple by a large part of the community, so despite cash reserves, this would hit Apple bad, and in the end would result in a slightly increased marketshare, depleted cash, and people still complaining that "MACs aer to expensive!@!@!@".
Here's the thing. The average individual consumer generally does not upgrade his or her computer. This is generally true, not universally true. The average consumer buys a computer like a television: take it home, plop it down in the corner, and forget about it. What you're talking about is not compatible with that approach. You're talking about a computer with lots of cables and moving parts that requires more space and an external monitor and so forth and so on. That's not generally what the average consumer wants.
So poof. The business case for a low-end modular configuration just disappeared.
Who buys inexpensive modular computers? Hobbyists, mostly. People who like sticking a new hard drive into their computers, or a new graphics card, or what have you. These people were Apple's target market in the early 1980's; heck, they were Apple's only market. This is no longer true. Now Apple's target markets are creative professionals (they own that market) and individual consumers (they are gaining mindshare and marketshare in that market). Neither of these markets would be well served by a low-end modular offering.
There are always going to be people who will not pay any more for a computer than their perceived value of the sum of the component parts. These are the "I can build it myself for less than that!" people. Apple does not care to cater to these people; Apple's goals are orthagonal to those people's goals.
This is neither good nor bad; it just is.
(Oh, and all this talk about what Apple needs to do to stay in business? Drop it, okay? I don't want to take the time to go get my 10-K's out of the basement right now, but Apple has posted a profit for something like 18 of the last 20 quarters. They're doing just fine. If Apple merely keeps doing what they've been doing since about 1997, they're going to continue to be around for a long, long time.)
The last time I compared a Mac to a PC feature for feature Dell and IBM both were within $200 of the same price as a PowerMac. I'm sorry but overpriced Macs is a myth unless you are building your own PC which can't rightly be compared as you are putting your own labor into it which isn't being added into the cost on top of you don't have system warranty o any support.
Exactly; and just where are PowerMac sales right now???? The market has spoken, its saying clearly that PowerMacs are not worth the extra cash by any measure. By market I mean both professional and consumer.
Apple is doing nicely but it has little to do with the sales of PowerMacs. The 970 will provide and intermittant boost due to pent up demand, but don't expect fantastic sales over the long haul if they are over priced.
Dave
Apple is doing nicely but it has little to do with the sales of PowerMacs. The 970 will provide and intermittant boost due to pent up demand, but don't expect fantastic sales over the long haul if they are over priced.
Dave
I have found that to be true as well. The problem is in order to make a real apples-to-apples comparison, you have to really load down the PC.
? dual processors
? 802.11g or at least b (do any PC's even have built-in wireless antennas? not notebooks, but desksides?)
? FireWire 800, or at least 400
? Bluetooth
? DVD writer
And even then, there's the software to consider. What's iTunes' equivalent on the PC? Is it free, or do you have to buy it? Remember, iTunes isn't just a player; it's a music library manager. What's iPhoto's equivalent? What's iMovie's equivalent? These things have to be taken into consideration.
If you want all of these things, a Power Mac is definitely the better buy. It will cost less (in money, probably, and in time+money, definitely) and work better. If you don't care about some or all of these things, you can get a PC that satisfies your checklist for less. If you can live with the user experience, that's what you should do. Apple is not now, nor has it ever been, an "all things to all people" company.
Yeah. I kinda doubt Steve Jobs is going to walk on stage, and say "Here's Panther, guys! Look, I made everything brushed metal! And there's a little rotating button that lights up red green and yellow when you click it! Thankyou, and goodnight!" and then expect people to go and party about that.