NPD Group Inc, which monitors retail sales, has found that sales of Apple Macs in the United States have remained pretty much the same as they were last November, falling by just 1 percent, while sales of Microsoft Windows PCs have risen 7 percent.The research found that sales of desktop computers as a whole have dropped 20 percent, with Windows desktop sales falling by 15 percent and Macs falling 38 percent. Meanwhile, notebook sales have risen. Sales of Apple Macbooks rose by 22 percent in November, while sales of Windows notebooks rose by just 15 percent.
However, the rise of Windows overall may be just down to cost. In an article posted on the Wall Street Journal today, Apple Macbooks are set to deliver a 20% profit margin, compared to just 6% for competing, often Windows based, notebooks. While this is for notebooks, an area which Apple appears to be doing better than Microsoft in, the same is likely to apply to desktop computers.
Speaking to Reuters, NPD analyst Steve Barker said, "for notebooks, there is a little extra value to consumers (to buy Apple). For desktops I'm not so sure. To me the real story is the iMacs need a refresh."
Steve Jobs said in October that Apple has no plans to cut prices on the Macs, because "we're not tremendously worried" that the current economic downturn will drive consumers to cheaper computers. When reporting Apples earnings in October, Jobs said "We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk."
So Microsoft Never wins right little Fanboy ?
No, not only because of the recession. Just MS bouncing back and improving their sales.
We bought a fairly inexpensive laptop for our oldest son. He wanted an Apple, and we considered an iMac for his room, but the Apple line didn't compete well enough on price, especially since we went for a laptop.
This has nothing to do with MS. It's about the price of the hardware. Maybe it will encourage Apple to stop gouging people on overpriced Mac desktops and accessories.
That displayport thing still bothers me too.
I always hear this on this site... but hummm... it's not true? Interesting.
I always hear this on this site... but hummm... it's not true? Interesting.
Hey, you asked for it.
People are now buying more notebooks than desktops.
If more people today are buying notebooks than desktops today (trends, if not reporters, indicate that they are) and Apple's notebook sales are up 22% in November, then their premium-pricing strategy is still paying off.
Apple rivals like HP and Dell offered discounts weeks earlier than usual this holiday season, dropping some prices by as much as 50%. Since last December, the average Windows PC price is down 35% to 45%; in contrast, Apple has offered only modest discounts of 5% to 10% on its computers.
Dell and HP have slashed prices to remain flat (+2%) in November. Apple has kept prices (and margins) in line to remain flat (-1%) in overall unit sales in November YOY. That is the real story. The headline should read: "Apple's notebook sales growth outpaces Windows PCs' even as Apple holds the line on pricing while desperate Windows PC Box assemblers slash prices."
Apple is maintaining its margins while experiencing sales growth.
And as for the rest, there will always be a market for cheap boxes.
People are now buying more notebooks than desktops.
If more people today are buying notebooks than desktops today (trends, if not reporters, indicate that they are) and Apple's notebook sales are up 22% in November, then their premium-pricing strategy is still paying off.
Dell and HP have slashed prices to remain flat (+2%) in November. Apple has kept prices (and margins) in line to remain flat (-1%) in overall unit sales in November YOY. That is the real story. The headline should read: "Apple's notebook sales growth outpaces Windows PCs' even as Apple holds the line on pricing while desperate Windows PC Box assemblers slash prices."
You crack me up dude...but thats whats fun...
PC companies...well, all companies for that matter...always slashes prices around this time of year. Its the holidays and they offer deals to improve sales. I am willing to bet that the prices will go back to normal after the new year. This happens every xmas and it is not because PC users are desperate.
I also find it interesting that Apple is getting a 20% profit over the 6% PCs get. More options at a cheaper price...why people buy PCs and will continue to buy more PCs over Apple.
I always hear this on this site... but hummm... it's not true? Interesting.
Hey, you asked for it.
People are now buying more notebooks than desktops.
If more people today are buying notebooks than desktops today (trends, if not reporters, indicate that they are) and Apple's notebook sales are up 22% in November, then their premium-pricing strategy is still paying off.
Apple rivals like HP and Dell offered discounts weeks earlier than usual this holiday season, dropping some prices by as much as 50%. Since last December, the average Windows PC price is down 35% to 45%; in contrast, Apple has offered only modest discounts of 5% to 10% on its computers.
Dell and HP have slashed prices to remain flat (+2%) in November. Apple has kept prices (and margins) in line to remain flat (-1%) in overall unit sales in November YOY. That is the real story. The headline should read: "Apple's notebook sales growth outpaces Windows PCs' even as Apple holds the line on pricing while desperate Windows PC Box assemblers slash prices."
Apple is maintaining its margins while experiencing sales growth.
And as for the rest, there will always be a market for cheap boxes.
"Apple's notebook sales growth outpaces Windows PCs' even as Apple holds the line on pricing while desperate Windows PC Box assemblers slash prices."
How can that be if the sales are down? I don't understand...
People are now buying more notebooks than desktops.
If more people today are buying notebooks than desktops today (trends, if not reporters, indicate that they are) and Apple's notebook sales are up 22% in November, then their premium-pricing strategy is still paying off.
Dell and HP have slashed prices to remain flat (+2%) in November. Apple has kept prices (and margins) in line to remain flat (-1%) in overall unit sales in November YOY. That is the real story. The headline should read: "Apple's notebook sales growth outpaces Windows PCs' even as Apple holds the line on pricing while desperate Windows PC Box assemblers slash prices."
You crack me up dude...but thats whats fun...
PC companies...well, all companies for that matter...always slashes prices around this time of year. Its the holidays and they offer deals to improve sales. I am willing to bet that the prices will go back to normal after the new year. This happens every xmas and it is not because PC users are desperate.
I also find it interesting that Apple is getting a 20% profit over the 6% PCs get. More options at a cheaper price...why people buy PCs and will continue to buy more PCs over Apple.
Well, at least you can get a good chuckle out of it, whether you agree with what I post or not. At least that's more than I can say for a lot of people around here.
I am not making fun of you or anything. Just think your posts are entertaining as you include some good info. I dont always agree with you, but hey...if everyone agreed with everyone else, would be a boring place. I do agree with you on some things tho.
Mac sales declined overall, so who cares if Macbooks went up a bit? A loss is still a loss.
As I've said all along, Apple overprices to the point of fault. If LTD chooses to see a different reality, I can't help it.
Mac sales declined overall, so who cares if Macbooks went up a bit? A loss is still a loss.
As I've said all along, Apple overprices to the point of fault. If LTD chooses to see a different reality, I can't help it.
Mac growth has outpaced that of the industry year over year. For the second or third year now.
We don't know how Apple will react to recession conditions. So far, they're doing alright.
Well obviously.
Mac sales declined overall, so who cares if Macbooks went up a bit? A loss is still a loss.
As I've said all along, Apple overprices to the point of fault. If LTD chooses to see a different reality, I can't help it.
Mac growth has outpaced that of the industry year over year. For the second or third year now.
We don't know how Apple will react to recession conditions. So far, they're doing alright.
So a decline of sales.. means MORE sales? Ummmm K.
But none of that would be that bad, but for the fact that computer components are getting cheaper and cheaper all the time, while Apple still skimps and charges a premium, even though the actual HW isn't as good as a similarly priced PC. Ahh, the joys of running OSX legally.
Of course he doesn't. Here's how: Get rid of the Apple Tax. We all know that special logo doesn't come cheap.
"To me the real story is the iMacs need a refresh."
Wow, even I know that the iMac line was just refreshed. Research before commenting, Mr.Barker. It helps with that credibility thing.
It's quite amusing to see the author assume that the change in sales is due to the economy when really, it could just be that more people are wanting Windows computers than Apple ones. Did bias get in the way of considering that? Different profit margins doesn't explain a change in sales especially since Apple has always had a higher profit margin than it's competitors.
What Apple doesnt get is that not everyone needs or wants a $1000+ computer. Some people only use a computer to check email, type documents, or surf the net. You dont need a $1000+ machine to do this and people will choose a $400 PC. Just because a PC costs under $1000, doesnt make it crap. Jobs is pretty much saying that all companies, Dell, Gateway, HP....selling computers for $500 or around $500 is junk. More negative talk from Apple if you ask me.
I hate the saying "you get what you pay for"
I bought a cheap car back in 2000. Friends of mine always buy expensive 30k+ cars. My car lasted 8 years with no major issues and the only reason why I got rid of it was because of the AC compressor. My friends cars had TONS of issues.
Creative makes great MP3 players more features than the iPod and for cheaper. So does Sandisk. Great players, great sound quality and works just as good as an iPod.
You can buy a $30+ Belkin USB cable or you can get one for 1/2 the price from Cables2Go that works just as well.
I could go on and on...
What Apple doesnt get is that not everyone needs or wants a $1000+ computer. Some people only use a computer to check email, type documents, or surf the net. You dont need a $1000+ machine to do this and people will choose a $400 PC. Just because a PC costs under $1000, doesnt make it crap. Jobs is pretty much saying that all companies, Dell, Gateway, HP....selling computers for $500 or around $500 is junk. More negative talk from Apple if you ask me.
I hate the saying "you get what you pay for"
I bought a cheap car back in 2000. Friends of mine always buy expensive 30k+ cars. My car lasted 8 years with no major issues and the only reason why I got rid of it was because of the AC compressor. My friends cars had TONS of issues.
Creative makes great MP3 players more features than the iPod and for cheaper. So does Sandisk. Great players, great sound quality and works just as good as an iPod.
You can buy a $30+ Belkin USB cable or you can get one for 1/2 the price from Cables2Go that works just as well.
I could go on and on...
I don' t know what planet your on - but down where I am - the iPod is the cheapest player on the market when it comes to hard disk players (I have 100gb of music and thus need it). Add to the fact that the other vendors can't be stuffed supporting Mac OS X - which rules out their hardware to begin with.
Zune is a prime example of that.
Do you honestly think that a decline in sales for one month is any kind of long-term indicator?
Analysts and pundits at one time declared Apple dead, and kept on declaring them dead. But over the past decade, Jobs has taken over the global music business, turned Apple's lousy and clunky computer business into a juggernaut and stormed through the wireless industry with the iPhone. As a result, Apple's shares have risen more than 1,000% over the past 10 years. By contrast, Microsoft's shares have fallen more than 40%.
Apple's pricing (in recent years) up until now, has been spot-on across their whole line of products. I think it's best to reserve judgment about the future until it actually happens. we don't really know how Apple will fare in a recession, but based on Apple's history, we can be confident that their strategy will be as good as anyone else's.
Much of this sluggish growth is due to the iMac line anyway, which needs a refresh. This will happen early in the new year.
Last edited by LTD on 16 Dec 2008 - 16:29
Bloomberg IS a complicated website I know..
Do you honestly think that a decline in sales for one month is any kind of long-term indicator?
Analysts and pundits at one time declared Apple dead, and kept on declaring them dead. But over the past decade, Jobs has taken over the global music business, turned Apple's lousy and clunky computer business into a juggernaut and stormed through the wireless industry with the iPhone. As a result, Apple's shares have risen more than 1,000% over the past 10 years. By contrast, Microsoft's shares have fallen more than 40%.
Apple's pricing (in recent years) up until now, has been spot-on across their whole line of products. I think it's best to reserve judgment about the future until it actually happens. we don't really know how Apple will fare in a recession, but based on Apple's history, we can be confident that their strategy will be as good as anyone else's.
Much of this sluggish growth is due to the iMac line anyway, which needs a refresh. This will happen early in the new year.
Ok, you cannot compare Apples marketing strategy to HP/Dell. Different company and different ways of doing things.
Apple has gotten a big boost in sales because it claims "no malware or viruses" and it bashes their competition. I am not saying Apple is crap (i own an iPod).
Apple also caters to the college student/novice user. And no, I am not saying that everyone who uses a Mac is a novice. Just how it is and how Apple markets themselves. PCs cater to the business or to users who actually want to do more with the computer and have more choices. If you want a system that locks you down hardware wise, limits the software you can load, and pretty much dictates what you can and cannot use for you...then choose an Apple.
And yes, Apples stuff is all nice and shiny...but if anyone buys a product because of this, well...they arnt very bright.
That was nice. But smart people who want OSX can still get Hackintosh ( EFiX ,Psystar) although you wont get the " Prestige" with it.
Also, are you suggesting Jobs is the sole man responsible for Apple's success? That's insulting to the rest of the Apple staff, y'know.
Also, are you suggesting Jobs is the sole man responsible for Apple's success? That's insulting to the rest of the Apple staff, y'know.
Explain to all of us how $150mil of non voting stock saved a company which had 1.1 billion in cash. Better yet, don't bother, I'll do it for you.
Microsoft had little choice but to agree to Steve's demands at the time. If you remember, MS was in federal court at the time, so Steve had Bill under a fair bit of compulsion and duress to produce the next version MS Office for Macs, and resolve "patent disputes" or he was going to testify at the hearings against Gates.
Specifically, at this time Apple had about three dozen lawsuits against Microsoft, that Microsoft was going to lose, regarding the monopolist argument. Microsoft desperately needed to settle and Apple couldn't afford a long lawsuit so they settled for several billions in cash paid by Microsoft over the next few years. The settlement gave Apple free use of any previous Microsoft patents and any they would gain over the following five years. Apple also could charge any rate they wanted for any Apple patented property already stolen by Microsoft or to be stolen in future. Also Microsoft would have no rights to sue as would Apple for specified infringements. Apple also gained complete access to all Microsoft APIs and documentation at NO cost. No real value as demonstrated by their licensing of same APIs has been a complete failure.
The five years of office development and the non-voting stock was also an "Apple condition of settlement" to show Microsoft’s faith in Apple’s survival since all the morons were forecasting Apple's demise. The non-voting stock Microsoft was forced to buy was ALL sold the first day it was eligible for sale, three years later and Microsoft quadrupled their money, something that can’t be said for Microsoft shares.
Apple was never in danger of "going under", but they did suffer from many years of poor product management (1992-1996 - roughly) so Apple bought NeXT for $400 million and Steve returned to Apple to help sort things out.
Everyone needs to keep in mind, Apple had $1.1 billion in cash, and no long term debt at the time, so Apple was only in danger of becoming a much smaller company... $11 billion down to $3 or $4 billion, but not disappearing.
Last edited by LTD on 16 Dec 2008 - 20:24
While I am thankful for the insights, I would like to see a source.
And a response to the second half of my quote.
And a response to the second half of my quote.
What sources? Find them anywhere. It's what actually happened. It's only a little over 10 years ago.
As to your second quote, you decide, chicken or the egg. Makes no difference to me.
Also, are you suggesting Jobs is the sole man responsible for Apple's success? That's insulting to the rest of the Apple staff, y'know.
Explain to all of us how $150mil of non voting stock saved a company which had 1.1 billion in cash. Better yet, don't bother, I'll do it for you.
Microsoft had little choice but to agree to Steve's demands at the time. If you remember, MS was in federal court at the time, so Steve had Bill under a fair bit of compulsion and duress to produce the next version MS Office for Macs, and resolve "patent disputes" or he was going to testify at the hearings against Gates.
Specifically, at this time Apple had about three dozen lawsuits against Microsoft, that Microsoft was going to lose, regarding the monopolist argument. Microsoft desperately needed to settle and Apple couldn't afford a long lawsuit so they settled for several billions in cash paid by Microsoft over the next few years. The settlement gave Apple free use of any previous Microsoft patents and any they would gain over the following five years. Apple also could charge any rate they wanted for any Apple patented property already stolen by Microsoft or to be stolen in future. Also Microsoft would have no rights to sue as would Apple for specified infringements. Apple also gained complete access to all Microsoft APIs and documentation at NO cost. No real value as demonstrated by their licensing of same APIs has been a complete failure.
The five years of office development and the non-voting stock was also an "Apple condition of settlement" to show Microsoft’s faith in Apple’s survival since all the morons were forecasting Apple's demise. The non-voting stock Microsoft was forced to buy was ALL sold the first day it was eligible for sale, three years later and Microsoft quadrupled their money, something that can’t be said for Microsoft shares.
Apple was never in danger of "going under", but they did suffer from many years of poor product management (1992-1996 - roughly) so Apple bought NeXT for $400 million and Steve returned to Apple to help sort things out.
Everyone needs to keep in mind, Apple had $1.1 billion in cash, and no long term debt at the time, so Apple was only in danger of becoming a much smaller company... $11 billion down to $3 or $4 billion, but not disappearing.
OK I don't feel like typing a book like you did so I will start by linking you to the official source... Apple's official filling with the SEC says you aren't telling anyone the truth, so sources please?
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/320...9-97-006960.txt
Let me point out some key points that disagree with you...
In 1997 (the year MS gave Apple $150M) Apple had posted an over $1Billion loss and had over $900Million in long term debt...
Also notice Apple had went from over $11Billion in sales in 1995 down to around $7Billion in 1997 (putting them back at 1993 sales levels!)
(Pull up "ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA" for that tidbit)
I'm not going to read the rest of it as I don't see the point. You mentioned all these claims with no source and it took me all of 30 seconds to invalidate them. Without a valid source I'm not looking any deeper and will just consider your long statement a bunch of hot fanboy air.
Also, are you suggesting Jobs is the sole man responsible for Apple's success? That's insulting to the rest of the Apple staff, y'know.
Explain to all of us how $150mil of non voting stock saved a company which had 1.1 billion in cash. Better yet, don't bother, I'll do it for you.
Microsoft had little choice but to agree to Steve's demands at the time. If you remember, MS was in federal court at the time, so Steve had Bill under a fair bit of compulsion and duress to produce the next version MS Office for Macs, and resolve "patent disputes" or he was going to testify at the hearings against Gates.
Specifically, at this time Apple had about three dozen lawsuits against Microsoft, that Microsoft was going to lose, regarding the monopolist argument. Microsoft desperately needed to settle and Apple couldn't afford a long lawsuit so they settled for several billions in cash paid by Microsoft over the next few years. The settlement gave Apple free use of any previous Microsoft patents and any they would gain over the following five years. Apple also could charge any rate they wanted for any Apple patented property already stolen by Microsoft or to be stolen in future. Also Microsoft would have no rights to sue as would Apple for specified infringements. Apple also gained complete access to all Microsoft APIs and documentation at NO cost. No real value as demonstrated by their licensing of same APIs has been a complete failure.
The five years of office development and the non-voting stock was also an "Apple condition of settlement" to show Microsoft’s faith in Apple’s survival since all the morons were forecasting Apple's demise. The non-voting stock Microsoft was forced to buy was ALL sold the first day it was eligible for sale, three years later and Microsoft quadrupled their money, something that can’t be said for Microsoft shares.
Apple was never in danger of "going under", but they did suffer from many years of poor product management (1992-1996 - roughly) so Apple bought NeXT for $400 million and Steve returned to Apple to help sort things out.
Everyone needs to keep in mind, Apple had $1.1 billion in cash, and no long term debt at the time, so Apple was only in danger of becoming a much smaller company... $11 billion down to $3 or $4 billion, but not disappearing.
OK I don't feel like typing a book like you did so I will start by linking you to the official source... Apple's official filling with the SEC says you aren't telling anyone the truth, so sources please?
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/320...9-97-006960.txt
Let me point out some key points that disagree with you...
In 1997 (the year MS gave Apple $150M) Apple had posted an over $1Billion loss and had over $900Million in long term debt...
Also notice Apple had went from over $11Billion in sales in 1995 down to around $7Billion in 1997 (putting them back at 1993 sales levels!)
(Pull up "ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA" for that tidbit)
I'm not going to read the rest of it as I don't see the point. You mentioned all these claims with no source and it took me all of 30 seconds to invalidate them. Without a valid source I'm not looking any deeper and will just consider your long statement a bunch of hot fanboy air.
It makes no difference how much debt Apple had, or how sizable their cash reserves were. That isn't the point. Apple at the time had Microsoft in a legal stranglehold, and Microsoft and Apple reached an agreement where Apple would drop its several lawsuits, among them claiming Microsoft infringed on several Quicktime patents. For their part, Microsoft agreed to purchase $150 million worth of non-voting Apple shares and commit to developing Office for Mac for another 5 years. It was a settlement. Go look that up as well.
This event is often inaccurately described as a "bailout" of Apple by Microsoft. Microsoft later sold its shares for a tidy profit. In fact, it was part of a legal settlement, concluding a legal battle which MS would have lost.
Last edited by LTD on 17 Dec 2008 - 02:19
Since you're making the claims it is only fair for you to put the sources...
I responded with the facts I did simply because you posted in bold at the end of your post that Apple not only had a large amount of cash, but that they also had no long term debt and weren't in any risks. Which were not true. Appe had long term debt, had a huge net loss, and were facing serious risks.
So you're basically saying that the majority if your argument posted previous to my post is useless? And all that matters now is that it was a legal settlement?
OK, Y isn't true, but it's irrelevant.
That's LTD for you
-nvidia video problem (present since 2007).
-Overheat problem.
and for the latest model:
-matte option discarded.
-no really new features, just a minor update. between 8600m and 9600m there are little difference.
-no low-profile models.
-no firewire400 (where many if not all firewire devices are compatible with fw400), you can use a adapter but this s*ck *ss!.
-new video connector, again you can use a adapter.
-no blu-ray, even Acer have some models with blu-ray.
-nvidia video problem (present since 2007).
-Overheat problem.
and for the latest model:
-matte option discarded.
-no really new features, just a minor update.
-no low-profile models.
Yet they're selling extremely well. What's your point?
The issue was with the aging iMac line, not notebooks.
And the ones that don't know of anything beyond Windows (most people)?
What are they?
What are they?
People? You're the one telling us those issues with macbooks mean nothing because people are still buying them, which implies people either don't care or are following the crowd.
Comparing a Macbook and Windows is a little silly, as this is a specific piece of hardware. If you could buy OS X standalone for other PCs, then we can talk. Or, you can compare a Macbook to a Dell XPS.
(fwiw, people who unquestionly use Windows are also sheep, but we're not the ones using that excuse)
Just because you think that the GPU or the CPU is hot - Apple has guidelines which they have set in their SMC for their fans to operate etc. I've got a MacBook and iMac, both of them work perfectly.
Especially put against the battery life caused by Vista, it's most certainly a "feature".
The white MacBook with its updated price is more of a low profile laptop model than Apple has ever had before, and the other MacBooks fare much better against the new Pro's now... Sure, even their cheapest MacBook isn't as cheap as the budget segment of PC laptops, but then again, those laptops are shipping with Vista Home Basic and crapware... It's a lot about what you pay for...
Last edited by Jugalator on 16 Dec 2008 - 23:20
Yeah, because people will want to stay hip and trendy in the middle of an economic meltdown, excellent job Steve...
Yeah, because people will want to stay hip and trendy in the middle of an economic meltdown, excellent job Steve...
No, they'll just put it off.
I've hit hard times before, and I can tell you that when money is tight - I don't buy the $1000 or the $500 computer, I don't buy a computer at all - make my existing one last a little longer.
"For notebooks, there is a little extra value to consumers (to buy Apple). For desktops I'm not so sure. To me the real story is the iMacs need a refresh."
Just Wondering
Are these the NP words here? 1% translates to A LOT of sales and I doubt Apple sees it as "pretty much the same as last year."
So does this mean the new Mac Minis that he'll apparently be unveiling are, by his own admission, pieces of junk?
So does this mean the new Mac Minis that he'll apparently be unveiling are, by his own admission, pieces of junk?
Not unless you already know what the pricing will be on those Minis.
Windows and OS X are about as alike as night and day.
Think he was talking about the hardware since the made a comment that Apple is shiny. Dont think he was comparing OSX and Windows.
Besides, no they aren't quite that different, as much as you might want to believe it.
It depends on how you look at it. OS X is a bit like a high quality *nix distribution for the desktop. They're that different at least. Next it depends on how you define "different".
Ive used both for a while and no they really arent that much different. What does Windows do than a Mac doesnt do? or what does a Mac do a Window machine doesnt do?
Sure some keyboard shortcuts are different and the UI is moved about a bit, but come-on seriously.
Both have some software you can use that functions poorly, and both have UI limitations. I often find myself looking for options on Windows that are one click on a Mac... but then on the Mac I look for options that are one click on Windows.
I don't understand how Microsoft are rising, I mean, don't they already dominate? The Mac switchers aren't going to ever be won over again by Microsoft, that's for sure.
Another thing, why do Microsoft even need to advertise Windows, most people think of Windows as being "A Computer" these days...
Why do you say that? A lot of people (me included) switched from iPods, why can't they switch from Macs?
Because most of the time, they are people who've already switched from Windows. I don't know (m)any Mac users who would leave OS X behind.
it just blows because it happens during the holidays. They should have come up with a new mini in the course of november, it would have changed a god damn lot in that.
it just blows because it happens during the holidays. They should have come up with a new mini in the course of november, it would have changed a god damn lot in that.
A slow November and December (only in terms of Mac sales) won't break Apple. The real fallout will happen once Apple brings the updated machines to market, given the current economic climate. Then we'll see how Apple will fare.
Keep in mind, Apple's overall health doe not depend solely on the Mac. They have other devices, and if they *do* release a Netbook-like device or some other device (midrange tower maybe?) then that has the the potential of bolstering revenue.
it just blows because it happens during the holidays. They should have come up with a new mini in the course of november, it would have changed a god damn lot in that.
A slow November and December (only in terms of Mac sales) won't break Apple. The real fallout will happen once Apple brings the updated machines to market, given the current economic climate. Then we'll see how Apple will fare.
Keep in mind, Apple's overall health doe not depend solely on the Mac. They have other devices, and if they *do* release a Netbook-like device or some other device (midrange tower maybe?) then that has the the potential of bolstering revenue.
IMHO Apple should buy out Adobe and move their focus so that they're more of a balanced hardware and software company - you find that in downtimes people will make their hardware last a little longer but more willing to upgrade their software.
it just blows because it happens during the holidays. They should have come up with a new mini in the course of november, it would have changed a god damn lot in that.
A slow November and December (only in terms of Mac sales) won't break Apple. The real fallout will happen once Apple brings the updated machines to market, given the current economic climate. Then we'll see how Apple will fare.
Keep in mind, Apple's overall health doe not depend solely on the Mac. They have other devices, and if they *do* release a Netbook-like device or some other device (midrange tower maybe?) then that has the the potential of bolstering revenue.
IMHO Apple should buy out Adobe and move their focus so that they're more of a balanced hardware and software company - you find that in downtimes people will make their hardware last a little longer but more willing to upgrade their software.
Might not be a bad idea. Adobe's been releasing slow bloatware lately. I have CS4, but there's a lot of cruft in there. I wouldn't mind seeing an Apple take on the UI design of those apps.
Important issues will be pricing, how Apple will handle Windows compatibility, and demand for those creative-professional oriented products in the current economic climate.
But honestly, I think Apple, if they seriously invested time in this department, would release much better software. Or if they bought Adobe, they would fix a bunch of things.
Thing is, the UI of Adobe apps changes so many times these days, Apple would make new (radical) changes once more
Look.. I own an iMac and it's a lovely machine and all. But Windows 7 is right on track to be a major improvement over Vista.. and if the aggressive pricing & generous specs continue in the PC market, Apple is going to find a lot of people jumping ship to go back to Windows next year. I certainly won't hesitate. I've enjoyed my Mac experience so far but I'm under no illusions regarding how much it cost compared with what you could get for the same money from the PC vendors. Vista was the straw that broke the camels back for me, but Microsoft know they blew it and won't make the same mistake again.
Apple's core market knows better. We switched for a reason.
Whether Apple can attract non-mac users in this economic climate is a different story. Mac users who have chosen OS X up until now will stick with it and simply hold off on Mac purchases for a while. Windows is still Windows. I hope you don't honestly think that for those of us who have already chosen OS X there will be some compelling reason to go back to Windows!
Last edited by LTD on 16 Dec 2008 - 22:26
What.. the industry leading operating system?
Microsoft do frequently make mistakes - but they sure as hell work hard at putting them right. Vista was a disappointment for me but Microsoft simply won't screw up in the same way with Windows 7. I genuinely think it'll be an excellent product.. and only the Apple diehards will ignore it.
The iMac just doesn't cut it from a performance point of view any more and the Mac Pro is flat out too expensive and extravagant for a home user. I'll go wherever the best value for money is frankly.
And with a company that has the guts to tell "OK, so our next OS won't have much new features, because we're going to spend time on making it more streamlined and faster". Something to compare to OpenCL to delegate CPU work to the GPU isn't even on Microsoft's public roadmap yet.
It's not the different operating systems that made me switch, it's the different philosophies.
I'm sure Windows 7 will be a major improvement over Vista, but it'll still be based on Vista, the UI, the complete Windows heritage with everything that implies, and I don't like it anymore, I'm fed up of it.
Do you know WHY it "leads"?
A great deal of it has to do with licensing. With a capital "L." In fact, the most lucrative licensing scheme of our time.
And "industry leading" has very little to do with market share, in that market share is just one aspect, and does not necessarily have anything to do with quality. "Industry leading" is in fact a vague and nebulous phrase. In what way is something "industry leading"? Units sold? Level of technology? Design?
And there are a lot of "Apple diehards." I'll reserve my judgment about the success of Windows 7, because it is unreleased. I'll also reserve my judgment about Apple's level of success in the new year because we haven't seen how Apple (in the OS X era) handles a recession.
Yes, so? This is of importance if you depend on it leading the industry for what you use your OS for, but not otherwise. Personally I'm amazed by much software there is for Macs these days, for its market share. So for me this is not an issue. Maybe if you need something particular, especially gaming, and then, by all means, go Windows 7.
Microsoft do frequently make mistakes - but they sure as hell work hard at putting them right. Vista was a disappointment for me but Microsoft simply won't screw up in the same way with Windows 7. I genuinely think it'll be an excellent product.. and only the Apple diehards will ignore it.
The iMac just doesn't cut it from a performance point of view any more and the Mac Pro is flat out too expensive and extravagant for a home user. I'll go wherever the best value for money is frankly.
Ok, I am not an Apple fan by far as I dont care for Macs...but I wanna comment anyway....
Microsoft has already screwed up, worse tho, than they did with Vista. Ever heard of a lovely (input sarcasm) OS called Windows ME? I had it loaded for less than a week before reinstalling Win98se. ME was a complete joke and nothing worked on it for very long, if at all. MS screwed up several years later with releasing Vista with little driver support and before it was ready. It seems that MS releases a good reviewed/rated OS every other year. Wonder what Windows 8 will be like........
Microsoft do frequently make mistakes - but they sure as hell work hard at putting them right. Vista was a disappointment for me but Microsoft simply won't screw up in the same way with Windows 7. I genuinely think it'll be an excellent product.. and only the Apple diehards will ignore it.
The iMac just doesn't cut it from a performance point of view any more and the Mac Pro is flat out too expensive and extravagant for a home user. I'll go wherever the best value for money is frankly.
Ok, I am not an Apple fan by far as I dont care for Macs...but I wanna comment anyway....
Microsoft has already screwed up, worse tho, than they did with Vista. Ever heard of a lovely (input sarcasm) OS called Windows ME? I had it loaded for less than a week before reinstalling Win98se. ME was a complete joke and nothing worked on it for very long, if at all. MS screwed up several years later with releasing Vista with little driver support and before it was ready. It seems that MS releases a good reviewed/rated OS every other year. Wonder what Windows 8 will be like........
Here . . . borrow my flamesuit.
Whenever "Windows ME" is used in the same breath as "Vista" or "Windows 7", flames usually follow.
It's like the tech version of Godwin's Law.
Ok, I dont care how little Macs get nailed...we always load antivirus on our Macs at work and I tell people at work who own personal Macs to protect their systems. And the people I work with listen to me and install antivirus or asked me to install it for them. Its being smart because the time is coming for Macs especially with every article written has a blurb or two about how Macs dont get viruses and malware like Windows. This is like teasing the hackers to attack Macs and I am willing to bet a lot of people will be caught with their pants down. PCs didnt always get hacked/viruses either but look what happened to them...because of their popularity...
Whenever "Windows ME" is used in the same breath as "Vista" or "Windows 7", flames usually follow.
It's like the tech version of Godwin's Law.
FLAME ON!
I dont care really, I dont respond to flamers.
Have Apple done ANYTHING that you've disagreed with? No company is perfect IMHO and whilst I think they're more 'cuddly' than Microsoft, they still do some outrageous and facelessly corporate crap.
Not a whole lot, TBH. But:
- The pricing on their Cinema Displays. I was never really convinced by their quality anyway.
- The Mighty Mouse. Nice idea, but poorly executed.
- Front Row. Still not that useful even if you've got a large display. But better with AppleTV
- The Finder. So much room for development. Let's have tabs and a Pathfinder-like shelf, please.
- That "hockey puck" one-button mouse.
- The noise of the G4 tower model
- Pulling out of MacWorld. Perhaps there will be other ways Jobs will deliver live keynotes, but for now, it's a shame that Apple is breaking this exciting tradition.
- Jobs not trotting out a likely successor sooner. We need to get accustomed to whoever it will be. Last minute intros will likely make the stock tank.
That's about it.
Last edited by LTD on 17 Dec 2008 - 11:57
Have Apple done ANYTHING that you've disagreed with? No company is perfect IMHO and whilst I think they're more 'cuddly' than Microsoft, they still do some outrageous and facelessly corporate crap.
People are entitled to their opinions and views on things. There are a TON of MS fanboys out here that things MS can do no wrong as well. Its all good and let LTD speak, he isnt being rude or anything and offers some good points and info.
But they're perfectly willing to do so when the economy is fine.
I doubt many people will be buying a Mercedes or Maserati under these economic conditions. Yet both brands have survived several recessions and have made their money during more prosperous times.
But regardless, those who can afford it, will spend. And there will always be a certain demographic that can afford it. Always.
I doubt many people will be buying a Mercedes or Maserati under these economic conditions. Yet both brands have survived several recessions and have made their money during more prosperous times.
But regardless, those who can afford it, will spend. And there will always be a certain demographic that can afford it. Always.
The problem I see with some people is, they cannot afford it but think they need it to fit in with everyone else around them. Heck, I used to do the same thing. See a new gadget a friend bought and had to go out and get me something like it. Now i think about if I need it, will I use it fully, and if i can afford it. If it doesnt meet those criteria, then its pretty much wasting money. I cannot count how many times I talked myself out of buying something. I will keep my 3rd gen iPod instead of buying a touch. :-)
Love it! I think we really hammered this one out.
Love it! I think we really hammered this one out.
Yes we did. Mac sales are down. Windows sales are up. There ya go. All in one, short post.
Isn't the iPod Touch a computer? And thats $229, (the Mac Mini is only $599) - you're not meant to call your own computers "junk".
The Touch is an iPod, a handheld/portable device. While it certainly has some computer-like properties, it isn't classified as a computer as such. "Computer" has become a catch-all term with the advent of more powerful and functional handhelds - hell I can control my entire Mac from my iPhone and print, edit documents, surf the web, as if I was sitting in front of it.
But Apple's handhelds are still not computers, and are certainly not part of Apple's computer division.
And the Mini isn't $500 It's $599 before taxes. One dollar less $600. And depending on where you live, it's even more.
But you never know . . . Apple *might* make a $500 "computer" in the future that isn't "junk." And maybe the term "computer" will technically encompass a much more broad range of products.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.