Re: 24" iMacs.
- From: me4@xxxxxxxxxxx (Wayne Stuart)
- Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 21:10:01 GMT
Chris Ridd <chrisridd@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2006-09-06 23:36:50 +0100, me4@xxxxxxxxxxx (Wayne Stuart) said:
Stuart Bell <spamfritterspam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ivor <ivor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
MacMinis also updated to Duo processors :-)
But the better Mini has just 512Mb, and they still want £529 for it.
Ex-VAT it's £450, which equates to $846,
The Mini was the first $500 Mac. Even the cheap one is now $640 ex-VAT.
And it's still $599 in the US.
It would have been better to keep a Solo model and drop the price to
keep tempting the switchers.
I'd go one step further and bung in a Celeron M 410-450 to try and meet
a say £299 pricepoint. Same strategy for the MacBook, plus strip off a
few other 'luxuries' to try and reach something closer to £500. That
should get Apple's foot in the door of a few tightarses.
Celeron M's consume quite a lot of power (27W according to
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Celeron_microprocessors#
Celeron_M>)
so are you sure it would be a good idea?
I think it would be a step in the right direction towards at least
vaguely covering a part of the market that Apple currently doesn't, when
virtually all their competitors do. Yes, such a gadget would be slow,
yes, it may not be so hot with battery life, but all that is the price
the tightarse pays for their tightness. That's the difference between a
decent lappy, like a current Macbook, and a budget lappy.
<adapted from my contribution to 'another' Mac group>
Call it my pet gripe if you will, but Apple needs to introduce a budget
laptop to the range. I'll tell ya why...
There's a www based multi-purpose forum I frequent with a computer
section. As you might expect of such a place, its quite heavily
tech-clueless, and hence, is likely to be a rather more representative
of the masses than here for example. This is likely the kind of place
'normal' folk may go if they need advise on buying a computer. And
indeed, they do...
Over the last few months there, I've noticed a couple of telling trends:
1. More and more people are looking at laptops instead of desktops.
2. Every time anyone asks for advise on what sort of laptop to get,
their criteria almost always includes a budget constraint of around
£500.
As you can see right there, anyone who would ordinarily jump in and
suggest a Mac at this point, is immediately excluded from doing so.
Given the fact that virtually every PC manufacturer offers a sub-£500
laptop in their range, it's understandable that a newbie may conclude
that £500 is a reasonable amount to spend on a basic one that fits their
perceived basic needs. So what sort of reaction do you think you might
get if you then jump in and suggest something with a starting price a
full 50% more than their pre-decided maximum? Answer: Not too
favourably.
The thing is, a MacBook may indeed be reasonably price competitive for
what it is, and may indeed suit the needs of said newbie perfectly, but
if they can get a Windows based lappy for between £300 and £500, a
MacBook as it stands, is more mid-range-like which is still going to be
perceived as somewhat too rich for their blood.
Now, you may argue most super-cheap, probably Celeron based lappys will
be sluggish, flimsy, disposable cack. And you may be right. But the
thing is, by the time the clueless newbie finds this out, he'll have
already bought it. So when he's lived with its shortcomings, and
dropped it in the trash a little over a year later, finally comes round
to the realisation of why it was cheap, and starts looking for something
with a bit more umph and quality, will he then consider a Mac laptop?
Maybe. Or maybe not...
You see, by this time, he's already got an investment in Windows. He's
already ingrained within the Windows way of working by now, all his
circle of friends and colleagues are probably Windows based, and all his
software is now Windows based. At this stage, a platform change will
usually not even be considered. He'll simply buy a better Windows
laptop. He's made his bed, and he'll probably lie in it forever. Apple
will never get him as a customer beyond maybe selling him an iPod.
So just to reiterate the point of this: It is my humble opinion that
Apple needs to introduce a sub-MacBook of somewhere close to £500, to
minimise being excluded from the buying decisions of newbies who don't
yet know any better. If it means a Celeron M, so be it. If it means
stripping off features such as wirelessness or camera, so be it. If it
means stripping away the software bundle, so be it. If it means bunging
in a lower capacity battery, so be it. Whatever it takes. That "Mac
laptops from £499" headline would keep them in the hunt, where now they
pretty much fall at the first hurdle.
Yes, there is the risk of such a thing devaluing the brand. And yes,
I've heard all the usual argument that they're doing fine without
pursuing further marketshare. But I disagree. From observations such
as the one above, Apple should be doing more to appeal to these pricetag
obsessive masses, to get more of them onboard to the brand right off the
bat, and thereby hopefully keep them. They're going to be a lot more
difficult to convert afterwards. And after all, the iPod might not be
able to prop up the margins forever.
--
This message was brought to you by Wayne Stuart - Have a nice day!
<http://homepage.ntlworld.com/wssenterprises/whynotmacfaq/>
.
- References:
- 24" iMacs.
- From: Andy Matheson
- Re: 24" iMacs.
- From: Jim
- Re: 24" iMacs.
- From: Graham J Lee
- Re: 24" iMacs.
- From: Ivor
- Re: 24" iMacs.
- From: Stuart Bell
- Re: 24" iMacs.
- From: Wayne Stuart
- Re: 24" iMacs.
- From: Chris Ridd
- 24" iMacs.
- Prev by Date: Re: Seach and replace tools
- Next by Date: A new Quicksilver trick
- Previous by thread: Re: 24" iMacs.
- Next by thread: Re: 24" iMacs.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
