Apple has presented its financial earnings for the 4th quarter of the 2008 fiscal year yesterday. Despite an across-the-board slump in growth, spectacular iPhone sales more than made up for the lost growth, beating the ten million iPhones claim. You can read all about it at Ars. What’s more interesting were a number of remarks from Jobs regarding netbooks and cheap computers.
On whether or not Apple will introduce a cheap computer, Jobs was clear.
There are some customers which we chose not to serve. We don’t know how to make a $500 computer that’s not a piece of junk, and our DNA will not let us ship that. But we can continue to deliver greater and greater value to those customers that we choose to serve. And there’s a lot of them. We’ve seen great success by focusing on certain segments of the market and not trying to be everything to everybody. So I think you can expect us to stick with that winning strategy and continue to try to add more and more value to those products in those customer bases we choose to serve.
I don’t think this has much to do with being unable to make a cheap, quality computer, but more with not being willing to. Such a cheap Mac would cannibalise sales of the current, pricier Macs, which wouldn’t be good for the company. Of course, such a cheap Mac may have an additive value, but it would be a gamble. The basic premise here is that Apple is more interested in offering more for the same price, instead of offering the same for a lower price.
On netbooks, Jobs explained:
As we look at the netbook category, that’s a nascent category. As best as we can tell, there’s not a lot of them being sold. You know, one of our entrants into that category if you will is the iPhone, for browsing the Internet, and doing email and all the other things that a netbook lets you do. And being connected via the cellular network wherever you are, an iPhone is a pretty good solution for that, and it fits in your pocket.
Jobs is probably right on the netbook market being small, but claiming that the iPhone fits into the netbook category is – dare I say it – idiotic. A netbook is a full-fledged computer, with hyperthreading Atom processors running at 1.6Ghz, with dual-core Atoms on the way. They can also pack lots of RAM, and they’re capable of running even demanding operating systems like Vista (and some even install Mac OS X on these machines). On top of that, they have a lot of features that the iPhone doesn’t have. Flash, large screens, normal web browsers, copy and paste, oh, and a keyboard. Modern netbooks like the Acer Aspire One, MSI Wind, and the Dell Mini are pretty powerful and versatile machine, much more so than the iPhone.
As for cellular connectivity – some netbooks come with 3G built-in, and at least here in The Netherlands, all mobile operators offer unlimited 3G sim-only data plans for as low as EUR 19.95 a month, with a free 3G USB modem (EUR 9.95 for limited data plans).
I am a bit of a netbook fanboy though (I wouldn’t trade in my Aspire One for 10 iPhones), so take my opinion on this one with a grain of salt (if you weren’t already doing that anyway, that is).
Jobs did leave the door open, though, for a future Apple nebook. “But we’ll wait and see how that nascent category evolves, and we have got some pretty interesting ideas if it does evolve.”
I agree with Steve on this one; it’s about value over pricing. I would rather pay a bit more for something that gets me more value.
What I was concerned about was whether his comments were referring to the Mac Mini or not; there’s been rumor floating around again that the Mini will be killed off. Steve made an earlier comment about being very satisfied with the current line of Macs they have at the moment, so I’m a bit more confident the Mini will continue to be around.
I don’t consider the Mac Mini to be a “cheap” computer; I consider it a bargain for the value it gives me.
As for netbooks, I think he’s right as well. Its a new market, and we haven’t seen enough of them sold to determine if Apple should put something into that category or not. The netbooks seem to be emphasizing price over quality, and basic function over features.
That’s not what Apple is about.
Edited 2008-10-22 23:11 UTC
I know that “Steve” is our good buddy, but are WE the ones who determine whether or not Apple should make a netbook?
Edited 2008-10-23 03:25 UTC
Well, I am a shareholder, so I guess WE would be somewhat accurate
1 share, bought when jobs where out of the company?
I pay less and get more value. Value is subjective.
Me too! I prefer a regular PC, it’s less expensive, it works very well, and I prefer the OS I’m using to OS X.
You’ve made your decision, which is fair enough. What works for you, works for you.
Whilst we’re here handing out opinions, I prefer the extra benefits I get from my hardware and OS being integrated by the same company.
What is the extra benefit that you speak of? As far as hardware is concerned, things “just work” on my vaio just like they do on my powerbook g4 and at just over 1 year old, my vaio has had no hardware failures which is more than I can say for my powerbook which had the harddrive and dvd rom fail within in year 1 and the battery shortly there after, not to mention the $70 I had to drop for a new power adapter because the original one from apple got to the point that I could smell burning and feared that it might burn my house down if I continued using it. The powerbook also came with a serious ram deficiency.
At least for me the value is how productive the system allows you to be. In my home there are Windows, OSX and Linux machines. My roommate is the most productive on Windows, my Girlfriend on OSX and as for me Ubuntu. The cost doesn’t really matter its all about letting you work the way you want too.
Is the value really productivity? I’m not sure.
I think taking into account what most people do on a computer (read/write emails, use an office suite, chat), then it boils down to the fact that the OS is pretty much insignificant, as for such uses, either the most popular applications are cross-platform or their counterparts are very similar.
For a general-purpose usage of your computer, no matter what OS you use, I don’t think there is a difference in productivity whether you use one system or another one. This doesn’t mean you don’t prefer one system to another, though
Depends on if you subscribe to that philosophy or not.
I don’t see value as just a subjective idea; value is also what the consumer is willing to give up on their end, for what they receive on the other.
In this, Apple users are willing to give up more money for added benefits that other computers aren’t building into their lines:
1) MagSafe Connectors
2) Unibody construction (New!)
3) Tailored design of hardware and software.
4) BackLit Keyboards
5) Multi-Touch Trackpads
Just to name a few…
Essentially, these are
1) Safe
2) Strong
3) Unique
4) Adaptable
5) Useful.
Based on what you give vs. what you get, this makes Apple’s unit more valuable than units that do not have these features.
As an individual, your assessment of value is different than the inherent value of an item. I guess it really depends on which is more important.
You do know that the backlit keyboard only comes with the most expensive model? I’m somewhat surprised that they finally got rid of the combodrives
1) MagSafe connectors
These connectors introduce a host of safety and reliability problems:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rheauchyr/sets/72057594082940769/
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/laptops/magsafe-burning-not-isolated-183…
Here’s a MacWorld article on a third-party strain-relief device designed to prevent the problems common to Apple MagSafe connectors:
http://www.macworld.com/article/135299/2008/08/macmagsaver.html?lsr…
The article mentions that one company was “… contracted to repair ‘several thousand’ MagSafe adapters…”
In addition, the existence of this strain-relief product begs the question: why would a properly designed MagSafe connector need a strain-relief accessory?
I would much rather have a solid, stout, reliable, mechanical connector, with wiping contacts/pins, instead of a delicate, flimsy, arcing MagSafe connector.
The best solution is for the mac users to quit tripping over their cords.
2) Unibody construction
This new “benefit” is one of the biggest loads of palaver that Apple has so swiftly shoveled into the waiting, open mouths of its followers.
In the first place, Apple didn’t invent machining computer enclosures. Laptop makers have be milling shells for their prototypes for decades, and machining has been around since before the industrial age (when the first person used a rotating bit on a piece of wood).
Secondly, the term “unibody” has been used in the automobile industry since the 1960s to describe welded car body construction (instead of using fasteners).
Also, this type of construction doesn’t mean that the computer is stronger or tougher. Let’s do a series of drop tests — my toughbook against your “unibody” Macbook. The owner of the first computer to fail has the pay the other owner $10,000.
Furthermore, the unibody method is an inherently wasteful and environmentally unsound way of manufacturing. Built into the process is a lot of milling energy expended on each unit and a lot of metal that has to be recycled (requiring more energy).
Still think that “unibody” construction is an “innovative” advantage?
3) Tailored design of hardware and software
Another load of BS that Apple fans have blindly gobbled up.
Anyone can optimize their computer with Gentoo more finely than Apple has optimized OS X for any one of its machines. For most, the benefits of such Apple or Gentoo “optimization” are non-existent to minute.
Also, the Apple “hardware/software integration” argument breaks down when one merely observes the endless breakdowns in Apple integrated hardware/software:
http://www.macfixit.com/
http://www.macfixitforums.com/
4) BackLit Keyboards
I haven’t even done any research on backlit keyboards, but I am willing to bet $100 that Apple didn’t invent them and that Apple is not the only manufacturer to offer them.
Is a backlit keyboard so advantageous? Most people don’t even look at their keyboard while they are typing. Is it worth the extra energy used (not to mention the extra cost of engineering and manufacturing)?
I have never felt the need for a back-lit keyboard, and the only illumination that I want from my computer is the screen and indicator leds.
5) Multi-Touch Trackpads
Apple did not invent multi-touch — not on screens nor on trackpads.
Multi-touch work has been a part of the non-Apple world for decades: http://www.billbuxton.com/multitouchOverview.html
Note that the Multi-touch Wacom trackpads were released in 1992.
Regardless, how is multi-touch an advantage to most computer users?
Edited 2008-10-23 20:03 UTC
I have yet to see a government warning or consumer protection alert, or recall by Apple for their MagSafe adapter line. Until we do, your pictures don’t mean a whole lot.
Mac implemented this due to the return rates and repurchasing many PC users have to do with broken connectors from Dell and other types of PC laptops.
Its the #1 thing I have to replace in my environment for my users with PC’s
Yes, in comparison with other laptop manufacturers. Can you name anyone else in the PC industry that’s using a “unibody” construction in their laptops?
Most are using some type of plastic or polymer in concert with metal fasteners and glued metal.
I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea that the unibody construction is wasteful, as when you view the process, it reuses the aluminum cut from the block and remolds it into another block to be used for construction; how is that wasteful? The energy for the plant creating this would be used irregardless of the manufacturing process, so to say it takes up energy resources doesn’t make much sense.
So you’re quoting the use of a Linux distribution, primarily designed for experts only to build their systems as the equivalent to OS X? You’re right, Gentoo could be tailored to fit the PC that you’re installing it on, provided that YOU are the one that does it. Apple is doing it for their users; you can’t honestly expect Joe User to deal with a distro like Gentoo to setup his system; that’s plain unrealistic.
Also, quoting the macfixit pages as an attempt to make your point more credible seems to be a bit off, as the prime focus of the site is to help people make changes to their hardware from Apple, not to highlight what’s wrong with their design methods.
Re-read my post. Did I mention that Apple invented back-lit keyboards? No.
I stated that other manufacturers may not be implementing back-lit keyboards, whereas Apple is.
If you’ve ever seen some of the users I manage, then you’d understand why this is an advantage to them.
Again, I did not state that Apple invented the use of multi-touch on trackpads. RIF…
Apple has implemented the use of multi-touch as a method of increasing productivity when using their tools; this is something you don’t usually find on brand X laptop you buy from Circuit City…
Look up the Macbook Pro power supply on Apple Store and read the reviews. Numerous people call their power adapter a fire hazard. I just had to replace mine the other day because the magsafe connector started buzzing and a dark brown burn line started slowly tracing the length of the cord. I think the things are dangerous. You’re correct there’s not a recall or class-action lawsuit–yet.
The reality distortion field is a powerful force, that can blind Mac fanboys to the truth presented plainly in front of their face.
Those are not MY pictures, and I did not write the MacWorld article acknowledging the several thousand MagSafe adapters repaired by only a single company.
I can’t help it that there is no government warning nor an Apple recall (although it is interesting that Apple would not comment on the MagSafe fire problem reported by a user in one of the links).
Do you actually deny that there is a large scale safety/reliability problem with the MagSafe connectors? Are you actually claiming that MacWorld is perpetrating a falsehood?
Really? It is interesting news that Apple follows Dell so closely. Perhaps someone could verify this claim.
Please post a link to the government warning and to the manufacturer recall on the faulty PCs/connectors that you mention.
No. I can’t think of any other computer manufacturer that is stupid enough to machine their laptop enclosures from a couple of pieces of metal.
Also, there is nothing particularly special nor innovative about “unibody” construction, as Apple would have everybody believe. By itself, the method does not make a laptop more rugged. If you disagree, please put your money where your mouth is and accept my wager — a unibody Macbook vs. a multi-part Toughbook.
Yes. Plastic is an excellent, resilient material for a laptop shell. My ten-year-old Toshiba has had the hell beaten out of it, and, except for the screen, it still works fabulously.
Milling large pieces of metal in large scale production-runs consumes a lot of electricity, and uses a lot of machining lubricant.
To recycle metal shavings, energy has to be expended to gather them and package/handle them. Then, the shavings have to be shipped to a foundry, using even more energy. At the foundry, a lot of additional energy is required to remelt the shavings and to make new ingots.
Injection molding plastic requires much less energy and material waste, with no recycling necessary.
Please explain how one can overcome a basic law of physics, which dictates that a greater quantity of metal requires a greater amount of energy to melt.
Actually, I think Gentoo is superior to OS X.
It is irrelevant that most people won’t be using Gentoo, or that Apple can’t achieve the degree of optimization available with Gentoo, or that Apple “optimizes” for their users. The point is that such optimization does not amount to any perceptible difference in probably 99.9% of cases.
In addition, Apple’s products have serious operational problems, so any hardware/software integration (perceived or real) is completely ruined.
If the prime focus of MacFixit is to merely help Mac users make changes on their Apple hardware, then why is the site not called, “MacChangeit?”
No. The site clearly exists to help Mac users try to overcome the numerous, unending problems stemming from the use of their integrated, Apple hardware/software.
Even more problems can be found daily on the MacFixit forums. Furthermore, MacFixit is not the only Apple trouble-shooting site!
I never claimed that you mentioned anything about Apple inventing back-lit keyboards.
However, I find that, when dealing with Mac fanboys, it is always important for them to first accept the reality that Apple actually is not very innovative. Also, if Apple didn’t invent the feature, it means that Apple is copying someone else, probably a PC maker!
In addition, the fact that Apple did not invent backlit keyboards means that Apple merely chose to offer the feature on some of their machines — the feature is not particularly special, and it is offered by other manufacturers.
So, this feature that you claim is a benefit of Apple machines is not unique to Apple and is not special — it is a benefit of PCs, too.
I see. It’s just like the notion, “If you have ever used a Mac, they you’d understand.” It’s the Apple “experience.” By the way, does one get a matching turtleneck with the back-lit keyboard?
Again, I did not claim that made such a statement.
Any productivity increase attributed to multi-touch is debateable.
I would appreciate it if you would argue your points without the namecalling. I am a fan of Mac products by Apple; that does not mean I’m a raving fanatic, or blind to the world around me.
I am aware of the Macworld article. Just because someone pays attention to a story doesn’t mean it’s a crisis. I understand they’re not your pictures, but you posted them, so I assumed you would take responsibility for them.
I will concede that I have no empirical data to support this; experience has told me this.
My point was that the MagSafe was a feature designed based on feedback from PC users about having to replace their power supplies.
No. I can’t think of any other computer manufacturer that is stupid enough to machine their laptop enclosures from a couple of pieces of metal. [/q]
A simple No would have worked here, but yet again, an offensive answer is the first response.
In comparison to a plastic or polymer based laptop, the construction is more rugged, which is the point I was attempting to make. In comparison to a Panasonic Toughbook, you’re correct. I have no need to drop my MacBook Pro to make a point.
My point wasn’t that plastic or polymer based laptops were of horrible construction; my point was that in comparison to a unibody construction, it is structurally more cohesive, which to people who are accident prone, or bang up their system, that’s an appealing feature.
I’m not an expert in manufacturing processes; if you are then great. My point was that the process from what I saw, appeared to be more environmentally sound, and less wasteful.
Because working for a manufacturing company, one of the things I’ve learned is that we purchase a flat rate of power; no matter if the lights are on or off, we pay one set rate. So the power is being paid for, whether we use it or not. I was trying to equate the two; maybe it doesn’t.
That’s fine if you think so. Joe User wouldn’t if he knew what he had to go through to install Gentoo instead of OS X.
I have to admit, I was a bit astonished to see that you think my point was irrelevant, when you were the one who brought up Gentoo to begin with. Then you state subjective statements that I could consider just as irrelevant as yours…
Fine…there are problems with Mac’s. There are problems with PC’s…nothing’s perfect.
Yes, you did.
Again, personal insults do not make for a good argument.
I see. It’s just like the notion, “If you have ever used a Mac, they you’d understand.” It’s the Apple “experience.” By the way, does one get a matching turtleneck with the back-lit keyboard?
Three times now you have made this type of comment. Are you not able to argue on the merits, and only resort to personal attacks?
Again, I did not claim that made such a statement.
Yes, you did
This is a claim.
Any productivity increase attributed to multi-touch is debateable. [/q]
Based on the way you’ve been debating, I’m not so sure.
I have decided I’ve had enough. It’s obvious that nothing I’ve said will make any change, so this is my last comment to you on the subject. If you reply back, that’s your choice.
No, what we value is entirely subjective. Not everyone value the same things in a computer, just like how people value different things in, say, music or cars.
Only if these features are valuable to you, which is not a given.
You are confusing monetary value with what people actually value in a computer.
Thank you for your perspective. I do not agree with you. I am not confused; but if you think so, that’s you.
I don’t see anything on that list that is not in an alienware or clevo reseller, only going that route will get you much more powerful hardware and more practical design.
What is Value? For me value is small (screen less than 10″), light (1 kg), and long battery life (4h+ in real life usage with wifi). Under those criteria Apple isn’t offering anything of value at any price. Had they had such a product I might have been willing to pay slightly more for it, but until Apple has a product to offer in the market segment one cannot really talk about price vs value.
Now if I was in the market for a laptop with a 15-17″ screen for serious video editing, then Apple would offer something of value, and a price/value comparison with say Del, HP and Lenovo becomes interesting.
There are certain price sectors that Apple doesn’t want to compete in. That’s fine, I can respect them focusing harder on a smaller segment instead of trying to be everything.
But his comments on inexpensive computers being “pieces of junk” or a poor value are ignorant and elitist. For many people a low-spec $300 computer is perfectly capable of performing necessary daily tasks. And the low-spec inexpensive components available today are yesterday’s high-dollar cutting edge technology.
And if Jobs thinks that people would rather spend years saving for a Mac than buy a $300 Dell today, he’s wrong.
I’ve always considered Macs to be fashion statements. I’ve got real work to do. I’ve got to make my clients’ IT infrastructure work for them at a reasonable cost. Apple just is not an option in that situation. “Fashion Statement” is simply not a credible line item.
That’s funny. I feel the same way. I have real work to do and I have to make my clients happy; which is exactly why I always buy Apple computers.
Edited 2008-10-23 04:45 UTC
What are the primary apps that these machines run?
There are three apps I use all the time at work on my Mac: “uptime”, “low maintenance” and “stability”. I flip open the Macbook and they’re all there all the time. Never fails. That’s pretty important for a work situation.
I know Windows could use a port of “low maintenance”, but the architecture does not seem to fit.
You forgot to add “fast obsolescence”. That makes for a high TCO if you consider most Mac users need to constantly upgrade their systems.
Why do Mac users have to constantly upgrade their system. My G4 iBook works as well today as the day I bought it and it isn’t certainly isn’t any more obsolete than a windows laptop bought at the same time.
I used to do a lot of work in Matlab. Expose + loads of graphs = pure bliss. Tabbing through graphs on Windows/Linux just doesn’t quite compare. The Macbook had a very high uptime too as the simulations I ran sometimes took weeks to run. In that time, I had no stability issues or else I’d lose a few week’s worth of work(!)
Once I finished being a grad student, I spent a bit of time consulting and contracting. It was always pretty nifty to whip out the Macbook, have all my applications already running and provide a live demo of some mathematical models that I’d written.
These days I work as a windows developer (boo! hiss! die infidel!) and I do miss working on the Mac.
He doesn’t think that at all. He’s perfectly content with those people buying the Dell. He only has to sell one iMac to someone who does have the money (which on average has a 40% gross margin) to make the same amount of money as Dell selling something like 20 of those… With that approach comes the added benefits of:
1. Smaller support infrastructure (fewer customers, but much higher revenue per customer)
2. Lower material requirements.
3. Lower production requirements.
4. Lower inventory costs.
I’m not saying Apple’s approach is better, just that it is certainly economically viable. Being high margin traditionally means being low volume. Apple generally manages to be high margin with fair volume, and sometimes (iPod, iPhone) high volume. Its a good way to make money if you can pull it off, I don’t know why everyone knocks them for it.
don’t know why everyone knocks them for it.
I’m not knocking their business decisions. Of course Apple has computed the profit margin vs. volume calculation. Every company has to decide where to position their product line in the market to maximize profits. Apple shoots higher than other companies for sure, and it’s been a recent success for them.
My comment was regarding Jobs’ condescending attitude towards consumers at the lower end of the spectrum, someone who would buy a $500 “piece of junk.” As if everyone would buy an Apple if only they knew about the “increased value” of Apple’s current lineup. [rolls eyes]
And, “…our DNA will not let us ship that.” They sure as hell used to; Apple’s DNA is firmly rooted in budget-priced (for the time) computers sold to schools and students.
Ah. Well that is certainly fair.
Well that’s true but that was also a LONG time ago – it pretty much ended when the original Mac came out. Apple was a much different company in its pre-Macintosh days… They seemed to have tried to go back to the education market a bit in the late 90s (pre-Jobs) but it didn’t work.
Sorry, I can’t agree. At least in my experience, the $500 computers were pieces of junk. At my old job, we bought two of them for use as UPS shipping computers, not exactly a demanding task. Both of them lost their original PSU’s, one lost the optical drive, the other had so many stability problems (even after multiple wipe-and-reinstalls) over time that it was replaced. That’s not counting the otherwise mediocre build quality, poorly designed case, etc. etc.
Actually, that wasn’t true either. An Apple IIe was at least $1500 once you added the floppy drive (in 1983 dollars – more than $3000 in today’s dollars). The Commodore 64 was the true cheap computer at the time, hitting our price range almost exactly at $400 (of course, that’s more than $800 in today’s dollars, and didn’t include a floppy drive). The quality comparison holds true as well; the IIe was built like a tank and demonstrated that, the C64… wasn’t.
…And Apple courted with private schools HEAVILY to arrange through-your-school purchases of Apple IIs for sometimes as little as $1000 if the school could get enough parents to play along (and the schools were rewarded, depending on the number of purchased machines, some ratio of free machines (i.e. parents bought 20, school would get 2 free ones).
Commodore’s were course course cheaper when they became popular, but Commodore (at least in the US) had virtually ZERO presence in schools – actually, other than the occasional TRS-80, PC, PCJr, Apple virtually dominated the education market for quite a while. Apples volume discount programs were brilliant and effective marketing during the early 80s.
Edited 2008-10-24 03:24 UTC
Our Illinois schools, way back when, had only Commodore computers. I recall the school upgrading from the Vic-20 to the Commodore 64 in 1984-ish. Apple and IBM were both too expensive… I don’t know what they used before the Commodores, probably nothing.
The local schools in this area went from early IBM PCs (like the 5150), to IBM 286/386/486, to Apples like the LCii and LCiii, and have been using nothing but PCs (Dell, Compaq, customs) for the last 10-15 years.
The early 1990s seems to have been the only time that Macs were preferred by schools, but they sure did dominate for that short period.
its jobs, ignorant, maybe, elitist, hell yes.
Sub $500 (not even $300) computer is not just low-spec. It is usually built from cheap, poor quality components.
“We don’t know how to make a $500 computer that’s not a piece of junk, and our DNA will not let us ship that.”
I find that the Mac mini is a perfectly fine computer, definitely not junk, albeit it is slightly outdated now…
I hope this doesn’t mean that the Mac Mini won’t get an update soon
meh, they’ll just add a variant of iwork to the appletv and call it a day. then the “kids” have a entertainment box that they can also do homework on…
I like apple hardware I even think osx looks nifty. I think they have done some good for open source. Although I don’t like how they lock up osx code. I just need something to tip the scales for me to feel good while buying an apple.
I really wish they would certify for Linux compatibility on some of their hardware. I would feel just fine buying an apple then.
Linux works fine on all macs anyway (provided you know where to look for drivers). It’s easy enough to set up if you write down what hardware you’ve got and get the drivers before you actually install linux.
I didn’t say you couldn’t install Linux on an apple my desire to see apple certify Linux is mostly about my personal feelings on apple. I think it would make me feel better about them and it may help their image with the rest of the open source community too.
Edited 2008-10-23 02:30 UTC
Quite a bit of OS X is open source, it’s basically a hybrid Open/closed source operating system both licensing and source-code availability-wise. Also, Cocoa is based on an open spec (OpenStep), and of course it’s Unix certified, so if that’s your kind of open it’s got that too. That having been said, it would be nice if their hardware had more Linux support, really the only thing that properly supports their cooling fans is OS X, for example… Though with OS X running the same software as any other Unix you don’t really miss Linux all that much on it, other than Fink and Macports not having the library of apt-get for instant downloading…
//Although I don’t like how they lock up osx code.//
Typical freetard statement. Why the hell does it bother you so much that 1.) Apple is not violating any GPL rules, and 2.) they charge money for an incredibly good OS?
Its obvious that Apple is not interested in the cheap market. Its something they consciously abandoned and for all Apple’s naysayers it works for them.
I agree that at the level and quality of design that Apple is determined to provide their customers a $500 machine isn’t something they are willing to put their resources in at the moment. The Mac Mini hasn’t had a any significant redesign since it was released. All Apple has done with that machine is update the internals. All their other models have seen significant redesigns and updates. Even the AppleTV is only considered a side project. If they were really serious there woudl have been a Blu-Ray player included, a tv tuner and DVR to boot.
I also agree with him on the netbook market but I disagree with his assessment that an iphone is a good replacement. While I think that people are just cheap and want their netbooks to be and do more than what a more capable/expensive machine could be/do, the iphone is fairly limited for certain things. I don’t see myself typing a lengthy document on an iphone let alone have the capability of printing that document once I’m done. However I do agree that as smart phones get more powerful and more streamlined we will see the netbook market dry up as more and more users start to use their devices to do most of the things a netbook can and then some.
From what I can tell, Blu-ray is niche outside of the US. I certainly don’t know anyone who uses it (past those with PS3, who obviously had it bundled.) The discs are too expensive when compared with DVD… I can get a DVD for less than ~A‘^Alb10, why would I spend over ~A‘^Alb25 for the same film, when I might only watch it 10 times or less then sell it on eBay?. The blu-ray spec is fluctuating ang those who invested early are now finding their players are out of date. Steve is right to say that licensing is a minefield. What would you prefer, a Blu-ray burner that plays no movies for the foreseeable future or a no Blu-ray drive and no lies about support “coming soon”?
As for the TV tuner.. well, fine if all countries used NTSC or whatever US standard there is in place for digital, but we don’t. Apple went with GSM on the iPhone because the US is capable of GSM and the rest of the world is “pretty much” GSM based. TV standards differ so much that it would be suicide to include a tuner right now. I guess a video input might work, but even then it’s a half arsed approach that just isn’t Apple in nature.
I think it’s going to be the other way around. I think people will be more willing to buy a netbook with 3G and internet-proper (instead of the crippled internet on the iPhone and other smartphones), accompanied by a cheaper phone, instead of a smartphone. I think netbooks are going to eat away at the smartphone market (or, at least, make a seizable number of people NOT buy a smartphone) instead of the other way around.
Smartphones (even the iPhone, despite the hype) are extremely cumbersome devices compared to netbooks when it comes to email, IM, and internet. They do phoning and txt msg’ing just fine, but so can a much cheaper phone.
However I do agree that as smart phones get more powerful and more streamlined we will see the netbook market dry up as more and more users start to use their devices to do most of the things a netbook can and then some.
I don’t think the netbook market will dry up that quickly. Smartphones can’t replace a netbook. No matter how powerful or nifty a Smartphone is, it is bound by form factor restraints. It has a maximum size. You can’t go beyond a certain size or weight, because it still has to be manageable as a phone. That means too small screens and far too tiny keyboards. For stuff with a short duration, a Smartphone is OK, but for activities that take a longer time, nobody wants to futz around on tiny sized hardware.
A netbook is the right compromise between portability and ergonomics. A laptop is too big to lug around and a Smartphone is too small the work comfortably.
Only for a given definition of ‘portability’. A netbook is too big for a pocket, so you’re still going to want a carrying case or some way to sling it over your shoulder; you’re not going to want to wander around carrying it in your hand all day. That’s where smartphones have the big win; they’re so easy to slip into a pocket or a holster that having one with you at all times is automatic. As soon as you have to take significant extra steps to have a machine with you, it’s a major lose on the portability front; carrying a netbook vs. a laptop is a matter of degree and not of kind, while carrying something pocketable (smartphone or PDA) is a major difference from either one.
Usability/ergonomics is much the same way. If a setting is too awkward for using a laptop, in many if not most cases, a netbook is only marginally better; smaller and lighter doesn’t help a whole lot when there’s no flat surface to rest it on, for example. Again, while a smartphone has major compromises in ergonomics, it’s usable in many situations where a netbook simply isn’t; standing in line somewhere is a classic example.
Netbooks are still cool; the size and weight do make a nice improvement in portability, aside from being cool in themselves, and the capability loss over full laptops has narrowed. But they’re still in that awkward neither-fish-nor-fowl category, and will therefore always be third in priority for me. They’ll never match the capability of laptops (for screen size, if no other reason), so they’ll never completely replace a laptop for me; likewise, they’ll never have the automatic portability or in-all-situations usability of smartphones, so they’ll never replace a smartphone for me.
The major problem that I have with phones, in general, is that people can call you on them. Give me a “send only” phone and I would be more interested.
Messr Jobs is out of touch with the real world, and this is why Apple products are niche. Just because something is pricier than something else doesn’t automatically mean it’s better.
I wish I had Steve Job’s hypnomindf*ckingray for women
Dave
I know a lot of people who voice such sentiments, but it just isn’t logical. Apple is niche not because they have failed or are somehow out of touch with reality… They are niche exactly for the reasons Jobs states – its part of their DNA, i.e. it is what makes them Apple. They are particularly good at designing and selling high margin products that people want – not everyone, but enough people that the volumes are high enough to sustain their business (and then some).
Competing on price and going after volume is simply not interesting to them, so they don’t. It’s a lovely position to be in, i.e. not having market pressure force your pricing. Most companies would kill to be in that position.
There was an article here recently stating the entire Linux ecosystem was valued at $25 billion dollars. Whether that is correct or not, I find it an interesting coincidence that Apple has exactly that much money right now… Cash – and no debt. Can you honestly say being niche isn’t working for them?
ps. I don’t own ANY apple products, not even an iPod. I’m a PC user. I’ve played with OSX on other peoples machines and I actually like it. I’d love a cheap Mac – but I don’t hate Apple for not giving me one. I’m a rational guy. Frankly if I were Apple I wouldn’t give a rats *ss what people like me wanted – it isn’t in their financial interest to do so.
If it smells like shit, looks like shit, it usually is shit, as the old saying goes.
I maintain that Jobs is out of touch with the real world. He expects people to pay price premiums of relatively substantial amounts for hardware that is no better than standard PC hardware. And he has done so for quite some time. People are paying for this priviledge. Sure, Macs look good, but that doesn’t mean that they are good.
Let’s consider the most recent MacBooks – no FireWire. What sort of retard can make a decision like that? Even cheap PC based notebooks have FireWire ports. My Toshiba A200 cost nearly 35% less than one of the new MacBooks [in Australia] and betters it on nearly every aspect from a hardware point of view. That’s $700 ffs!!! OS X is good, but it isn’t worth that much, and it isn’t certainly $700 better than Vista.
As to others – people are going to OS X/Apple because they’re lemmings. Nothing more and nothing less. iPods are no better than any of the MP3 players from alternative manufacturers, in many areas they’re worse. They’ve become a cult (yes, a cult) and that’s a rather disturbing social trend. iPods are now so popular, and so de rigeur, that retailers will ONLY stock iPods, because they’re a “sure seller”. In fact, I’d say that Apple is now a sure fire monopolist in the world of portable music players, and should be investigated as such.
Dave
I believe exactly the same about Bill Gates. That is why Macs are on the rise.
Oh no, he is not out of touch with the real world. The real world is the one in which Apple is making money hand over fist.
He knows exactly what he is doing, and right not, it is working like a charm.
I agree with Thom on this one. An iPhone, sleek and sexy though it may be, doesn’t hold a candle to a netbook. If nothing else, netbooks don’t come with an ball and chain–er, a “cell phone contract”.
I’d wager Apple did not make a deliberate decision to avoid the netbook market; rather, they were caught with their paints down on this one, and are working to catch up. The netbook could seriously eat into a field that was once considered Apple’s forte: education. Jobs’ statement sounds a lot like what some companies do: dismiss the competition in public, concede only that they’re keeping their options open, and privately develop something to enter the market. Intel-based Macs come to mind.
So, yeah, I’ve been wrong before, but, hey! So has Jobs.
most of the industry was caught with their pants down, as they had been doing the same as apple is doing. produce more bang for the same buck.
why? the price they where selling for have a acceptable profit margin. just up the hardware package ever so to match the new requirements for windows and games.
these netbooks, no matter what people are doing with them today, where basically firmware devices. the linux used was basically a quick way to get a cheap device out that could do office documents, web, mail and entertainment.
it was only after microsoft got their pants in a twist over a linux based product selling impressively, and people found that xp worked while vista was a no-go, that we started seeing them morph into small laptops.
remember, the first eeepc had 4GB storage on flash at best. now we are seeing “netbooks” with 160GB hardrives.
the real problem right now for most companies is that the netbook is eating up their market for the 12″ roadwarrior laptop. the ones they could sell at a impressive corporate premium.
it may well be that we are seeing the start of the biggest transformation in personal computing since the day the laptop became a acceptable replacement for the desktop pc.
and its not based on software or hardware, but on the way we access the net, and thru it, people.
any device that can run third party software, have a connection to the net and comes with a battery for on the go use can be seen as a personal computer these days.
netbook, smartphone, laptop, mid, umpc, its all the same, just a at different points between portability and computing power. and the distance between those two is shrinking continually.
and of them with a voip program and a net connection is a phone.
I’m a big fan of OS X but I wish that Apple would allow a little more diversity in their hardware line.
I would love to see an updated Mac Mini with a new nVidia chip in it plus a Blue-Ray option. It would also be awesome if they redesigned the Mac Mini to use 3.5″ drives instead of 2.5″ but I don’t see that happening. I think the basic design of the Mac Mini is fine they just need to update it and the iMac before Christmas if possible. I wonder when they will had 20″ and 30″ cinema displays to their line-up? I would also assume that the Mac Pro will receive an update when Intel’s new processors and interconnect technology are released.
I also wish that they would release a MacBook with a 15″ or 17″ screen. I don’t need all the Pro features (although Firewire would be nice) just a bigger screen.
Give me a decent mid-range mac tower for $699-$1299. Dual/quad core, 4/8gigs of ram, mid/high end graphics card, 500GB/1TB hard drive, DVD/Blueray. Is this below apple’s standards? Try $2299.00 for apple’s least expensive power mac with a single quad-core 2.8GHz xeon, 2Gb ram, 320GB hard drive, ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB, One 16x SuperDrive, Apple mighty mouse and keyboard. Maybe I’m missing something but a quad-core xeon runs around $350. So what do I get with my other $1949.00?
The fastest workstation per buck, period.
When it comes to real speed, it’s architecture, architecture, architecture.
Benchmarks?
The problem is the Mac Pro is not playing with the same parts. I mean its not fair to compare it to a Dell, Core 2 Duo’s and Athlon X2’s are not Xeon chips by a long shot, The Mac Pro has ECC ram once again something the Dell wont have. Depending on the Xeon it could the price rang for me to by it is 450-900 dollars thats a big jump from the 100 bucks I spend on my Q6600.
So to be fair we shouldn’t be comparing Apples to Oranges. (Pun Intended)
“Jobs is probably right on the netbook market being small”
http://hothardware.com/News/Asus-Shows-New-Swank-Eee-PC-S101-Sexys-…
http://gizmodo.com/5058853/more-info-on-the-asus-s101-the-macbook-a…
http://blog.laptopmag.com/hands-on-with-asus-premium-eee-pc-s101
As you can see in the above Steve Jobs as missed one notebook that come directly in competition with the MacBook air , This news was blocked on OSAlert because it showed 4 things :
1) That’s the 800$ notebook that should have an Apple branding and OS on it. That Apple wont do. That people wanted and asked for.
2) GNU/Linux is the majority default OS on the model shipped on it.
3) If it where a small market as Thom is falsely suggesting Asus would drop making them. Not increase it’s offers.
4) It was submited to the news here as proving Thom repeatitive point that GNU/Linux is not driving this category as false.
http://blogs.inquirer.net/m-ph/2008/10/22/2-million-netbooks-sold-i…
“they’re capable of running even demanding operating systems like Vista”
Thom there is a reason why the hardware makers are not shipping Vista on the netbooks , it as nothing to do with price or GNU/Linux. Recall are costly when the hardware start breaking.
Acer Tops HP in European Sales :
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/oct2008/gb20081016_57…
Gartner: Mini-laptops keep PC market from sinking :
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleB…
Mobile PC Sales Drive Strong U.S. PC Growth: Gartner :
http://www.crn.com/hardware/211200534
Netbooks a temporary Band-aid on PC industry :
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10066106-1.html
Netbook explosion takes Acer to number 1, Asus to number 4 in EMEA :
http://www.itwire.com/content/view/21221/53/
Apple’s U.S. PC Market Share Nears Double-Digits :
“According to Gartner Inc.’s preliminary Q3 report on worldwide PC shipments, Apple’s U.S. market share has nearly reached double-digits, at 9.5%, up from 7.7% last year (a 29.4% increase). Meanwhile, worldwide shipments reached 80.6 million units in the quarter, a 15% increase from last year.”
“However, bad news for Apple (perhaps). The title of the report emphasized that netbooks were a strong component of the worldwide growth in PC sales. ”
“In terms of worldwide shipments, Apple still hasn’t managed to break into the top 5”
Edited 2008-10-23 07:45 UTC
I bought an eMac back in 2004 when they were good value. There just is no Mac around now which offers that value – the mini is overpriced and crippled. Everything about Apple now – their high prices for low spec and ‘lifestyle’ marketing – is a product of the boom that’s just died. There’s a recession coming and Apple will have to get wise.
To compare: Dell Inspiron 530, 2.53GHz Core 2 duo, 2Gb RAM, 2500Gb HD, Vista HPrem, Intel GMA 3100: $439
Mac mini, 2GHz Core 2 duo, 1Gb RAM, 120Gb HD, OS X, onboard Intel graphics: $799
I don’t have money to waste and the second is just not value for money.
BTW, I wrote this back in ’06, but I still haven’t replaced my eMac.
http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2006/05/12/why_i_will_probab…
Sorry, that’s Inspiron 518, a US model.
Stack about 6~7 Mac Mini’s on top of each other, and you’ll get that Dell. Can’t do that the other way around.
Small Space == Cost.
Keep repeating this until you understand that your comparison is worthless.
You couldn’t install that Dell as a carputer, or attach it to the back of an HD screen, or put it into an original Mac, or make a tiny server rack, or fit it into a G4 Cube or …
Although hackers and modders might be doing that with their multiple minis, the mainstream markets that both PCs and Macs appeal to don’t do that. What the Mac mini would be is an excellent general-purpose Apple TV, just replace the combo/super drive with Blue Ray and it’d be a perfect HTPC. It already is with boxee or xmbc…
Which hackers are doing that anyway?
RAID is dead, long live RAEC (redundant arrays of expensive computers).
123macmini.com
macminicolo.net
Yes, there are some strange people on the internet.. I’m not sure why kroc thinks the mini modder community represents the mainstream user of that platform.
(Owner of both a netbook and a mac mini)
Normal people do not totally ignore the size of something when it comes to price. Regular people expect to pay a premium for exceptionally small things.
Only a geek who sees a Mac Mini only as a set of numbers on a spec sheet to be matched to those of PCs would disregard the size of the machine. All of the PCs that are of the same size as the Mac Mini are more expensive or not equal on parts. (AOpen &c.)
You forget about the eeebox, which is quite small, or the ShuttlePC, another Linux-based solution which is cheap and small. All a Mac mini is is a laptop in a desktop case, which is not expensive to make (the most expensive part of a laptop is the screen.) The Mac mini does have a form factor that lends itself to certain applications, especially home theatre PC applications, but that’s a small niche – a niche that Steve Jobs clearly would rather sell the Apple TV to fill.
So the only thing going for the Mac Mini is the lunchbox size… Well if space isn’t a premium, there is cheaper anemic hardware.
Well space sometimes is needed. I admit the mini was my first mac, and now I am on a mini and a macbook.
But thing is, i use the mini mainly as htpc and there it serves my needs really well.
Well it shows its age, HDTV is sort of the thing which breaks the minis processing power (but mainly due to apples lousy HDTV codecs not due to its speed)
If I will stay on the mini for my future needs.
Well depends. The cheap PCs like the ASUS EEE boxes does not cut it currently, also the investment into the elgato boxes were heavy. I am not sure. Out of the mill PC is way too loud to be in the living room, and stuff like the ASUS EEE box are way too slow. So if apple can do another mini with a decent graphics card and the needed processing power to HDTV I probably will do another upgrade,
Sure you can get way more for the same price from Dell etc, but not in the form factor and not that silent!
Are you serious? That is possibly the worst argument I have ever heard. The mini has a place for very “particular” people, or people who want a cheap mac. I do not know one single person who couldn’t come up with the space for a regular desktop if they wanted a non-portable computer. Not one. Most people who live in constrained areas purchase lappys – end of story. And let’s be serious – if Apple really believed that there were people out there who had so little space that all they could fit into it was a mini, they would offer monitors that were less, um, ostentatious. And the average person has no frigging idea wtf a “carputer” is, let alone has a use for one. Please flag a taxi back to Get Real street because you’ve obviously wandered off the path somewhere…
Apple has always touted themselves as education friendly. While in the past this might have been true, the current budgetary crises that states find themselves in only emphasizes the phrase, ‘more bang for your buck’. Education buyers in the K-12 segment of the market only care about one thing, getting the most out of their limited funding.
Since Apple refuses to make low cost computers, buyers in this segment are forced to buy PeeCees. The large majority of computers that are used in K-12 Ed. are used for two things, Internet access and word processing, both of these tasks do not require expensive, high-end, hardware. Computers that are cheap and easily replaced when damaged or no longer servicable are now essential for education.
Because Apple wishes to maintain high gross margins for its products they will never produce a low-cost device for the K-12 market segment. Consequently, they will lose out to the cheap, low-margin, PeeCee makers like Dell and Lenovo. In return, education gets strapped with devices that are harder to manage and have higher TCO, that will ultimately cost much more than any Apple product that they purchase.
I, for one, don’t care what the product looks like as long as it runs OS X and I can use the tools and technologies that allow me to manage the nearly 1000 Mac computers at my school site as easily as I do now. Unfortunately for Apple, they continue to make it harder to justify their expensive products to administrators who don’t understand spec comparisons and only make decisions based on dollar signs.
If Apple doesn’t want the little money that we have, I will gladly buy cheap ‘netbooks’ like the MSI ‘Wind’ and a copy of OS X and hack them all to run it. I still come out ahead because I still get to use a technology that ‘just works’ and I get hardware -that I can toss in the recycle bin when it breaks- at a two-for-one price advantage. Sorry Steve, but until you realize this and meet the customer demand, you will continue to lose ground in this market segment.
Interesting – would you mind sharing how you manage these Macs? How do you manage 1000 nodes, how do you lock them down, how do you setup different profiles, etc? How do you image them? IME, it’s a hell of a lot harder to lock a mac down than it is a PC when in an atmosphere where the “attacker” is also someone who is *supposed* to have access. Is there a particular reason you’d champion Apple but not Linux/BSD in this area?
If you have to hack the hardware/software, how does it “just work”?
“I’ve always considered Macs to be fashion statements. I’ve got real work to do. I’ve got to make my clients’ IT infrastructure work for them at a reasonable cost. Apple just is not an option in that situation. “Fashion Statement” is simply not a credible line item.”
I use the Mac because I have real work to do and don’t have the time to put up with Windows. And I am not going to use Windows just because other people think it is cool.
You can assemble a pc with better hardware than the current mac mini for a lot less money. The only difference is it size. Maybe it a RDF world it’s a drawback that you can put a large 3.5″ harddisk in it and it has even room for another one.
Waaaa waaaa waaaaa (that’s the sound of babies crying). Steve Jobs is mean. He won’t build a computer EXACTLY the way I want it. He doesn’t think I’m cool enough to build the computer that I want.
Waaaa waaaa waaaaa, he’s an idiot. My cheap computer does everything that I need it to so Apple should build a $300 computer so I can use it instead of my (fill in the blank OS) computer.
Waaaa waaaa waaaaa everything else.
To put it bluntly. Steve Jobs doesn’t care to have 100% of all customers out there. He doesn’t care about computers that can only do e-mail and docs. He cares about people that do creative things. They tend to need computers that aren’t bottom feeder computers.
Sure you can build a Windows/Linux/other OS computer for less. Guess what. More than you know, people that buy Macs, buy them for the OS that comes on them. The price you see for buying upgrades of OS X is exactly that. Upgrade prices. The full price of what Apple feels OS X is worth is probably closer to $400 or $500. That would put your $300 PC at least at $650/$700.
Steve Jobs has stated over and over that if he can’t sell a good looking computer he won’t sell it. So good looks cost money. Try buying an ugly hooker or good looking one. The good looking one costs more. Same with computers.
Well said.
Yes, but the serious question is whether it is prudent and viable to have a product line with these particular gaps in it? In the non-laptops, a product line whose low end separates entry is the dying Mini. Whose sole genuine entry in the mid priced range is an all-in-one. And finally, a product line with no entry in the fastest growing segment of the laptop market: netbooks.
This is not about defending Apple or Jobs or whatever, and its not about what you or I want to buy, its a serious question about how Apple is to deal with the fact that the laptop market is changing very fast indeed. For comparisons, look at Sony and the Walkman in the iPod era. Look at the Intel/PPC situation. It may be a case of change or wither.
I doubt its going to be able to carry on as if nothing had changed. When the netbook segment is 50% of the laptop market, do you really still want it to have no entry there? When the Mini stops selling altogether do you really still not want it to have an entry in the separates segment?
The blind conservatism about the future and any possible changes that results from a blind determination to defend to the death whatever Apple is doing right this minute never ceases to amaze.
So, um, a mac is a good looking hooker? I suppose it’s at least more interesting/appropriate than the tired old comparison of macs to BMWs or Jaguars.
I think Jobs ego get out of hand sometimes.
He may crow about quality, but frankly many
use Win-tel in corporations. A market
apple has lost many decades ago and will never
be able to reclaim.
I agree.. today’s Apple is about “Fashion Stmt”.
Under the hood.. the components are the same as in a Dell or any other Win-tel box.. Apple has no mfg sites any longer. All the mfg is done in China. The parts are standard parts common in the PC industry. All apple has become is just another NIKE.. its just a brand name with a slick marketing team!
I have a new mac LT and a new Asus .. I think the Asus is pretty slick and very consumer friendly given its price. One can argue this and that about the Macpro and be right, but Jobs is repeating the same mistake he made back in early 80s thinking higher price will bring in more buyers. The opposite happens, consumers are price sensitive will economize given the current
economic conditions.
“As to others – people are going to OS X/Apple because they’re lemmings. Nothing more and nothing less. iPods are no better than any of the MP3 players from alternative manufacturers, in many areas they’re worse. They’ve become a cult (yes, a cult) and that’s a rather disturbing social trend. iPods are now so popular, and so de rigeur, that retailers will ONLY stock iPods, because they’re a “sure seller”. In fact, I’d say that Apple is now a sure fire monopolist in the world of portable music players, and should be investigated as such. ”
I I were a lemming, I would buy a Windows machine like everyone else. I use a Mac because it works better for me. I have owned a PC for 6 years and owned a Mac for 6 years and I get so much more done in the same amount of time, it is definitely worth the extra cost. Also I save on programs because I can try out ones from small developers that cost less and install and uninstall applications without causing problems for my system as when I did so with Windows.