Fixing Mac Pricing
In the last couple of articles (part 1, part 2) on market-share, I established that there is an opportunity for Apple to increase its Mac market-share— particularly in the home market. But to compete seriously in that market, Apple is going to have to appeal to it. And price is the number one issue in that market.
Are Mac’s too expensive?
Is price a good reason not to buy a Mac? Well no, of course. Problem, is, unless you can appreciate why the Mac is good value, price is a very good reason not to buy a Mac. Now before you go blurting your coffee all over your keyboard, and unleashing your fiery fingers, consider a few furphies floating around the Zealosphere:
1) If you spec up a PC to match a Mac, there won’t be any price difference (Sorry, Joe Average doesn’t do that)
2) You can run Windows on Macs now (Oops! Forgot to mention it will cost you a few hundred dollars more)
3) Macs are higher quality than most PCs. (Joe average doesn’t know the difference, so doesn’t overly care)
4) Price is not important (Yes is it, because price is budget)
5) More users on Macs will somehow degrade OS X (This is just plain silly. What it does mean is the Zealosphere’s claims of OS X’s legendary user-friendliness will be shown as a little fallacious.)
The simple fact is, Apple is going to have a hard time selling Macs as long it keeps the price up.
It is amusing when those in the Zealosphere try to justify the Mac’s higher price by saying “Yes, but you have to compare apples to apples. Look what it comes with.” And then they set out to show that Macs have bluetooth, and wireless, and iLife, and no need for additional security software, and if it’s a MacBook you get high quality black instead of Brand X PC’s cheap and nasty black, etc etc. Before long they’ve had no trouble making the Brand X PC more expensive than the Mac.
But that’s not how the average the person—in that home PC market we’d like to see Apple making inroads into - shops.
Selling Stickers
Primarily, people buy on price. It’s called budget. It doesn’t matter what we buy, we always have a budget. Otherwise we’d all be driving luxury cars. How often does the salesman try to weasel out of us how much we’ve got to spend? Most times.
The majority of computers sold for personal use are sold to people who are generally ignorant of many aspects of their purchase. They’re the sort who surreptitiously look at sticker prices. The salesman will play off specs between models, but most of them are lost on the average shopper. He will buy based firstly on how much he’s got to spend, and then which seems the best value - based on his limited knowledge of what all the specs mean. This is why Macs struggle
Welcome to Wally’s world
Now, let’s not be Mr Computer Know-It-All, lets be plain old Wally What-the. Let’s put ourselves in his shoes.
Wally has just received his tax refund, a whopping AU$1000 - and he’s going to town! He’s buying the best computer he can for his money. The PC he’s got now is six years old and he’s thinking of giving it to his mother.
His mate, Mr KIA, says he should consider a Mac, that they are a genuine option - and he won’t have to spend extra on security software. Mr KIA tells him he can get a stock standard Mac mini Core Solo with AU$1 change. Plus, wait for it… the new Macs can even run Windows! Therefore Wally can take all his old software with him.
Wally’s rather excited, as Mr KIA has made it all sound so easy. Until he reads the paper. Dell has a PC for AU$899. When he reads the specifications they sound pretty good - 1GB RAM, 80GB hard drive, 17 inch LCD monitor and a 2.8Ghz CPU. These are specs he does have some feel for.
His mate, Mr KIA, points out the Mac mini includes Bluetooth and wireless networking. Wally can’t understand why he needs either of those. He then discovers the rest of the mini’s specs: 512MB RAM, 60GB hard drive, no monitor, no mouse, no keyboard, and a 1.5GHz CPU.
It doesn’t sound as good as the Dell.
“But the Mac comes with bluetooth, wireless networking, Front Row with remote, and iLife,” argues Mr KIA. “Plus you shouldn’t compare CPU speeds anymore.”
BYOKDM? Y?
Wally is going quite cold on the Mac now. Mr KIA has checked Wally’s old computer and the mouse is a serial mouse, the keyboard is PS/2 and the monitor is a 15 inch CRT. Mr KIA says for a few dollars he can get adapters or a few dollars more, a new mouse and keyboard. Wally had planned on giving the old computer to his mother to play Solitaire on, plus he really likes the new LCD monitors, so realizes he will need a new keyboard, display and mouse if he gets the Mac
“Why the heck doesn’t the Mac include a keyboard, display and mouse?” gasps Wally. The Mac is looking rather expensive now. And then Mr KIA just happens to mention that Wally will need to fork out AU$300 for Windows XP to get Windows compatibility on the Mac.
Now the Mac is looking decidedly seedy. To spec the Mac mini up to the Dell is going to cost Wally at least another AU$500, plus the AU$300 for XP. That’s AU$800 more - almost the price of the Dell which has everything he wants.
Wally is floundering in specs, but he does understand RAM, hard drive and the extras the Mac needs. Decision time.
Budget was AU$1000. Wally buys the Dell and takes the McAfee anit-virus upgrade for AU$99, and with his remaining two dollars, buys a scratchie ticket, wins AU$100,000 and buys the luxury car he’s always wanted. And with his Dell, he surfs the net, sends some email, chats on Messenger, plans an overseas holiday, and doesn’t know how much better off he could have been if he’d stretched himself and bought a Mac. And, even though he can now afford it, since there’s no such thing as a luxury computer (despite what Apple would have you believe), Wally doesn’t dump the Dell and buy a Mac.
A computer is a computer is a computer. We Mac users know the advantages of Macs, but to the Wallys of the world, they aren’t worth paying extra. If Apple is going to increase its market-share, these are the people it has to sell to.
More Wally shopping
Lately we hear the MacBook is the best value Mac by comparison to PCs. Let’s do a Wally look.
MacBook - AU$1749: 13.3 inch screen, 1.83Ghz CPU, 512MB RAM, 60GB hard drive, DVD ROM plus Windows XP AU$300. Total AU$2049
Dell Laptop - AU$1699: 14.1 inch screen, 1GB RAM, 80GB hard drive, DVD burner.
Even without Windows XP, on face value, the Dell looks a better deal to Wally.
And whatever Mac Wally gets, we haven’t even told him he’s going to have to buy a new copy of MS-Office for the Mac at a few hundred dollars, otherwise he’ll have to reboot into Windows every time he wants to use Word.
Distorted logic?
If I’ve done this right, there should be torrent of people wanting to flame me saying these comparisons are skewed. But guess what? That’s exactly how it is for the Wally What-the’s of the world. This is their thought processes. They don’t think like you.
And what else? Even people who should know better - who live and breathe computers - still buy PCs because they represent better value.
Ouch that hurts doesn’t it?
I never switched to Macs because they were cheaper. Not a chance. I switched because I could finally afford to, my budget finally allowed it, and as a computer nerd of 20 years, knew Macs provide a more enjoyable and productive experience of computing. To me it was embarrassing saying I was a computer expert but owned a Windows computer. That’s like a car connoisseur owning a Kia.
Luxury!
When I started writing this week’s piece, I believed Apple would want to increase its market-share. But I think otherwise now - for the simple fact Apple is doing everything to demonstrate it considers itself a maker of premium computers. Apple created and maintains a market it is the only player in - luxury computers. This is an excuse for keeping prices inflated.
Further proof of Apple’s non-interest in increasing market-share is the half-hearted marketing outside the USA. Members of the Zealosphere love to bandy around Apple’s market-share at some four or five percent, but that’s US figure. The world figure of nearer two percent indicates Apple is not genuine about increasing market-share. Plus the absence of so much advertising, such as the “Get a Mac” ads - and so many others.
But if Apple wanted to, what could it do?
Sales and bundles
The Dells I used in my examples, were on special. When was the last time you saw Apple have a special deal on a Mac? Sometimes they throw in something for free, like an iPod, but Apple just don’t have enough specials. My local Kmart has specials every week. So do Dell. And so should Apple. Why? Because it’s advertising. Nothing keeps a retailer in the customer field of vision more than specials. Is it degrading? Only if you think there is a luxury computer market, and Apple belongs in it.
Apple could also have a better range of pre-built configurations. Eg For the student; the small business; the gamer; the videographer or musician; and so on. Package Macs based on who will use them. Take the thinking out of it. At the moment buying a Mac is like as if car dealers advertised cars based on their specs, with no mention of who they’d suit - eg off roader, commuter, family etc.
Certainly cheaper Macs doesn’t fix the additional Windows cost for those wishing to run it, but it will for some.
Back to Wally
I could give Wally a million good reasons to buy a Mac, but if it doesn’t fit in his budget, they’re all worth jack.
I’m not trying to discourage anyone from buying a Mac. Macs are a great computer that I believe provide a better experience and make you more productive. (I was at my local library the other day and one of the staff was going around the PCs run Adaware on each of them. That’s the sort of productivity dents Windows makes.)
But no, what I’m really trying to do, is show that Macs are over priced and are holding Apple back from increasing it’s market-share (if it really wanted to…)
There is no luxury PC market; no premium PC market. It’s just an Apple illusion, as the black MacBook proves. If there was, people who buy luxury items would be buying Macs en masse. A computer is a computer.
What is out there, is a PC market crying out for a genuine alternative (not Linux, no popular commercial software support) that won’t break the budget.
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Comments
“There is no luxury PC market; no premium PC market. It’s just an Apple illusion, as the black MacBook proves. If there was, people who buy luxury items would be buying Macs en masse. A computer is a computer.” - C.H.
Oops, have we forgotten Falcon Northwest or Alienware? Those “high-end” PC makers that make us drool just by reading their specs? If they don’t exist, why would Dell, of all companies that thrive on low prices, buy Alienware? Hmmmm? Seems a illogical and irrational move on Dell’s part. There’s got to be something enticing for them to add AW in their stable. So, pricing (even ~$5k for a PC) is not an impediment to good fortunes. Market share is a percentage of the total pie. That big pie keeps getting bigger every year and analysts forecast to eclipse 400 mils by 2008. What is important is market volume, and that’s what Apple cares about.
Apples market volume is increasing but not greater than the rate of the big pie expansion. Hence, the apparent decrease in worldwide % share.
Chris, your “Wally-What The” analogy is true for the most part. Those folks will buy what fits their budgets, PC or Mac be damned, and we know by that price metric Joe Average will end up lugging a PC out the door.
Price is a very slippery slope to tread. Even Dell would admit that now (but I don’t think publicly). Once, you dip your toes below, say $500, you won’t be able to go back up. I remember Apple at one time was offering iBooks below a grand ($1k) but faced an uproar when they had to creep up the prices up $100 due to cost increases mainly due to LCD panels and DRAM price hikes.
I agree Apple should come up with package variations of the Mac minis to suit differing applications and adjust pricing structures accordingly. Each Mac minis (Core Duo) cost ~$285 dollars to build according to iSupply and should get lower as manufacturing efficiencies increase. Apple can price these to make them affordable to the Wallys and Joe Averages of the world but it’s a big risk and a risk worth taking.
“Falcon Northwest or Alienware” Are these the PCs people who buy luxury items buy?
“Price is a very slippery slope to tread.” Which is what Chris S’s excellent piece this week says and why his conclusions differ to mine.
Also, I guess I should have said something like “You can’t have your caeke and eat it too.” If Mac users want an increase in market-share, then they are going to have to give up on the elite nature of the Mac, and sell to the Wallys.
Good point about increasing volume, while decreasing market-share.
The price sensitive sector of any market is not everyone’s cup of tea. There is little brand loyalty at the bottom of the market, and if you lose your price advantage you are out of business. Dell has this end of the market more or less to itself - and I think HP and Apple and others are pretty much happy to leave them to it.
I dont see Apple ever giving Wally something to buy in lieu of a cheap plastic Dell - at least not at the same price. They may woo the Wallys of the world with the Apple experience, but they won’t, because they almost certainly cannot, try to out-Dell Michael Dell.
I have seen some estimates that have the home market at about 1/3 of the market overall. But I have not seen any figures splitting Apple’s market share between Home and Business users.
Apple seem to have around 2% worldwide of all PC sales - that might give them, if we are generous, say 4% of the home market. If they double their sales to the home market, they would have 8% of the home market, but still only 3.3% of the total market.
I believe it is achievable, even likely, and without a low priced product. In the home market there are Wallys of course - but there are also those with a high disposable income who buy products that reflect the values they hold. Premium products. A high-end Euro TV, a BMW in the garage, Hugo Boss suits, Armani accessories… And a Mac.
Not every Mac will be sold to a high net worth individual - but not many plastic Dells will be sold to this group of buyers either. And if Apple can maintain the allure of their premium brand status, aspirational computer buyers will buy Macs because they see them as desirable.
I see post after post berating Apple for not being competitive on price. Yet in any marketing course, one of the first things which is taught is that price is only one factor in a buying decision. Most markets are quite complex - and many factors contribute to market share, not just price.
Dell have the low end of the market today because they can build PCs very cheaply. But, say, Lenovo are able to undercut them. What would happen to Dell’s market share? What do they offer except a low price? Apple has pursued a sector of the market which brings loyalty. And they have pursued market share based, not on price, but on the perceived value of their intellectual property, and their design flair. In short, Apple has more chance of hanging on to their users than Dell does. Lenovo might be able to build plastic computers cheaper than Dell, but can you see a Lenovo product with the cachet to out-appeal the Mac? And without OS/X, or iLife, or Front Row?
If you were gong to buy shares in one or the other, Apple is probably the safer bet.
I am sure Apple have some interesting products to release this next year. They will be in the news constantly, which is not a bad thing. And they will be releasing interesting, desirable products - also not a bad thing.
Apple will presumably replace the eMac shortly - with something lower priced than the current iMac. And, if they take a leaf out ot BMW’s book, they will release premium products in several more market sectors.
Whatever Apple does, they will play to their strengths - design, commitment to excellence, innovation, swanky stores… They are doing something different here. Don’t expect this to change any time soon…
““Falcon Northwest or Alienware” Are these the PCs people who buy luxury items buy?” - C.H.
I do not and will not consider them in my “high-end” palatte. No computer will ever top my everdearest Lisa XL <chuckle>
But Falcon and Alienware prices are stratospheric compared to the well-accepted ceiling of $2500. PC buyers in general do think of their brand as “high end” compared to Dell’s (yes they have Alienware now and their XPS offerings). Those are also considered to be a higher-end category.
If exotic liquid cooling and super Gflops of pixel-moving bravado, not to mention those oozy chick-attracting cases, are not considered “high end” then what is the baseline or dividing line from a low-end? Any opinions? Sorry, I’m being chauvanistic. I meant scintillating case designs that may appeal to our female audience.
I understand they appeal mainly to hardcore gamers and other applications where the massively intensive graphical/computational speeds are a necessity, if not for bragging purposes.
Hey, C.H. did you time your article with C.S.? Same topic, different angle of conclusion. Just a thought.
Also, I guess I should have said something like “You can’t have your caeke and eat it too.” If Mac users want an increase in market-share, then they are going to have to give up on the elite nature of the Mac, and sell to the Wallys.
To be brutally honest, I didn’t like all of this article. But that’s the most intelligent summary of the situation I’ve seen so far. We is impressed.
What’s your hurry? Apple has enough on its plate. It is likely to grow to between eight to ten percent of the American market by 2010 (and 5% of the world market) just from the current marketing plan. Why would we want Apple to grow too fast?
Microsoft is in self-destruct mode with no change in sight. Computer hardware will continually improve, but there is no reason for people to buy Vista which is merely Windows XP SP3. It will take Microsoft ten years to match the current Mac OS, let alone Leopard 10.5 and the succeeding versions.
Apple is vying for the consumer, SOHO and the education markets; it is here that Apple’s virtues stand out. The most lucrative portion of the computer market is exactly where Apple is. Why would it want to fight the white box manufacturers who aren’t even profitable?
Word of mouth is the best advertising. Let the word of mouth take care of this. If Apple makes the best computing experience in the world, then eventually, the world will catch on.
Do you remember when the Mac was considered incompatible, quirky and too expensive? And Apple was reputed to be going out of business? That was less than ten years ago. How times have changed.
Ps. The installed base of Macs is higher than two percent world wide, but why worry about that?
To quote today’s AppleInsider article of UBS analysts’ Mac market analysis for 2005, 2006, and 2007:
“‘Given indications of solid demand for new Macs, prospects for new products next quarter and an increasing shift of consumer interest to Macs, we are raising our Mac estimates,” analyst Ben Reitzes told clients in a research note.
Reitzes now expects Apple to sell 1.32 million Macs during its third (June) quarter, up from 1.24 million units—representing unit growth of approximately 12 percent yearly or 19 percent quarter-to-quarter. The analyst also increased his fiscal year 2006 and 2007 total Mac unit sales estimates to 5.1 million and 6.7 million units, up from 5 million and 6.3 million units, respectively.’”
Is it proof of a sound business logic or what? This increase in market volume, as I have stated, is the bread-and-butter information that really matters to Apple, market-share be damned. Read the whole article (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1829) and you will find Mr. Reitzes’ PC market analysis of a dampening demand. Could those folks be going the Mac-way. The increase in Mac volume can’t be accounted to those Macophytes under the upgrade cycle’s through (that’s the minima of a sinusoidal wave for those wondering). No it isn’t possible.
So, are Mac prices at the low-end really that expensive, even to PC folks who are merely average Joes or Wallys? So, why this increase in demand driven mostly by PC fanatics trying their first Mac? They may be intelligent and sensible enough to realize the true value of the Mac - the Mac Value Proposition (hey, MVP!) that is being discussed heatedly somewhere else in A.M.
So, if this continues and it will according to Mr. Reitzes, the chance of Apple lowering their overall price structures to pacify and satisfy the bottom-feeders of the PC market is wishful thinking. Hear that Beeb? I for one, would like them to keep what is working, just give us more selections in between $500 and $1000. That is the sweet spot in this hypothetical “low-end” market. That is the spot where Apple is and will be concentrating to grow its market volume year-in and year-out. This is exactly the place that revived Apple’s very existence (note: iPod’s revenue share is now at half of overall take) and will continue to be so.
Come back to me in 5 years and tell me that I was completely an idiot to believe in the Apple business model. That it didn’t have a chance of success in a sea, make that ocean, of “mee too” PC clones.
Marketshare is important because we need more software development. That what developers seem to pay attention to.
The other indicator is browser traffic. Given Mac installed base is higher than 4%, it’s still not having impact on webmasters.
As an example, I loked at three sites that offer online digital photo [printing services (one was Kmart Oz). All required you to download a program to manage the process. All were Windows only. (Ironically - and maybe sadistically - the Kmart site showed a computer… a Mac)
Unless there is a big Mac market-share increase this situation is going to persist.
And how do I tell someone to buy a Mac, knowing they are going to continually come up against these hurdles? (Unless I’m going to be nearby to support them).
Now there’s a quote from someone who hasn’t followed the PC market too closely. In the latest quarter, Dell’s marketshare percentage dropped somewhat, from competitive pricing by Hewlett Packard. Which means the fight for the low cost consumer has yet to be conceded. Plus, PC makers will be getting an assist by AMD and Intel as they enter into a competitive price war. But that doesn’t mean HP is abandoning its higher priced machines for higher end customers. Likewise, it doesn’t mean Apple can’t compete better for the cost conscious market while still going after the upscale market as well.
“Marketshare is important because we need more software development. That what developers seem to pay attention to.” -C.H.
Sure it is important but it isn’t the “be all, end all” that some would try to gun-down to the ground. If that is so important, Microsoft (of all Mac developers) would have fled eons ago. Some would argue they aided Apple back from the brink in 1997 by investing $100 mils but that is chump change compared to then revenue losses of $1.6 bln. Yes we Mac folks are grateful to that gesture but you can’t use that as ammo in your arguments to defend your stance that Apple is alive today because of Bill’s gratuity.
“The other indicator is browser traffic. Given Mac installed base is higher than 4%, it’s still not having impact on webmasters.” -C.H.
I still have to see this indicator to determine companies’ and developers’ stance on supporting the Mac as a platform. Their decisions are mostly affected at how their relations with Steve and the gang in general. He is deemed unapproachable and uncompromising by some and they leave the platform.
Providing good, well-designed, applications to the Mac platform is very profitable (ask M$ MBU). Some would contend that Steve is killing the very developers by releasing iWork and iLife apps. I do not think this is his intentions. He is telling these devs that that is the way you design Mac apps - simple, appealing, practical, unobtrusive, and not assimilate Windows apps - cluttered, too many ways to do same thing, most with obnoxious UI (I do like M$ Office 2003 UI - mind you), and feature blot just to be sellable from the last edition.
Two other factors I feel that often get left out of the Mac market share discussion.
Apple has only 5% US and 2% global market. The good part is that Apple generally attracts juiciest part of the market. Generally Apple users are very loyal to Apple products.
A large percentage of Apple’s user base will buy newer expensive machines in a shorter amount of time.
Software developers know a large part of Apple’s market is more likely to buy expensive and professional hardware and software. As well as buy upgrades and new software versions.
The majority of the budget PC world will not buy expensive software. Many will not buy a new computer until their old one simply no longer works. Because so many different brands of Windows computers their is little reason why any consumer needs to stay loyal to one brand. They will then shop on price.
The other part of the market share discussion is the fact that there are large parts of the computer market that Apple does not really cater too at all. Such as point of sales or kiosk machines.
There are millions of these types of computers in the world and Apple does not make machines that directly target these markets.
If the overall global computer market were segmented further into media, video, photography, music recording, graphic design, audio mixing, web development, publishing there would be a huge swing in market share numbers in Apple’s favor.
Because these are the markets Apple is strong in.
“A large percentage of Apple’s user base will buy newer expensive machines in a shorter amount of time.” -T.B.
I doubt that is true. Most Mac folks are pretty happy with that sweet Mac they bought a year or so ago. Mac’s just have that inherent MVP (scroll up for definition). That is one of those good reasons they brought home a Mac in the first place. Mac buyers (Mac spies excluding) tend to have this unique expectation that their Mac will outlast most other PC offerings out there.
What you are referring to are the creative professionals, which by the way, does not make up the majority of today’s Apple revenue. Important as they are to Apple for their influential appeal, they will forever be a minority. Apple would not be alive and thriving today because of these pros’ allegiances to the Mac platform. Credit that to the new Macosphere citizens and transplants from the other force of Cybersphere.
Inside that 5% US share, you are saying over half of those are happily upgrading to the upper-end of the Apple product spectrum? Nonsense. Even if they are in the market, they are more likely sniffing the lower-end cuties - the Mac minis, iMacs, MacBooks. It would be much wiser for Apple to invest more time at attracting new Mac buyers and PC mutineers at the lower-end, rather than new creative pros, for that is the sweet spot.
“Software developers know a large part of Apple’s market is more likely to buy expensive and professional hardware and software. As well as buy upgrades and new software versions.” -TB
This has some truth in this. M$ Mac Office is a good example. But, in general sense, it won’t hold water. It is a market where only one or two well-heeled companies can play. Therefore, new creative startups have no incentive to enter that market. So, creativity stalls and you have crappy software.
“The other part of the market share discussion is the fact that there are large parts of the computer market that Apple does not really cater too at all. Such as point of sales or kiosk machines.”-TB
Macs can be used as P.O.S. computers now. I have seen trendy restaurants using them. This market segment though are served by VARs (value added resellers) that cater to this industry - retail shops, supermarkets, video rentals, and such. The existing VARs want configurable, modular hardware. Also, they want vendor selection of these same parts. Considering these, Apple with their closed, proprietary designs and solutions are not even on VARs menus.
Nice catch TB but it’s hopeless there. I doubt Apple will ever cater to the POS industry. They have enough on their plate just supporting the professional crowds and the homebodies.
Kiosks are another matter. Any OS is capable of supporting kiosks. Here, the lowest cost always win. Most kiosks are Linux based nowadays due it being no cost. Macs can be a great ad-display device too using the minis since their sizes and heat production are minimal unlike PCs (yes, even uITX and miniITX form-factors. It’s the CPU that produce the most of the heat and consume most of the power, not the size of the MoBo.
Note: the Core Intel CPUs in the minis are designed for notebooks. I just want to put that out for argument’s sake.
Yes I was talking about creative professionals. I did not say they were the majority of Mac users, but they are a sizable portion who spend a lot of money on Mac products. From my life observation (I travel often) most everyone I know using a Mac is in the creative professional. Most everyone I know who has a general computer has a PC.
I work in the creative fields and am around people who use Mac on a daily basis. Many of the creative professional businesses I am in contact with from New York, to LA, to Chicago and Miami. All of these businesses use Mac in some form and several of them are completely all Mac shops. From around mid 2003 to the end of 2004 they all changed from various flavors of PowerMac G4 to the PowerMac G5.
Apple is rare in the computer industry to have loyal customer base that will spend $2000 to $3000 for an office full of new workstations. That loyalty is not based on price but on quality and functionality.
The same will happen with the Mac Pro over late 2006 into 2007. Businesses will spend millions to transition from the old PowerMac G5 to the new Intel Mac Pro. Professional people will trade their old Power Books for MacBook Pro.
Honestly the far majority of people I know using Mac have Power Macs and Powerbooks. A few who have the iMac G5, I’ve only ever seen two Mac minis outside of an Apple Store.
I would disagree on this one, in many ways software development on the Mac is driving software development on the PC. In spite of the small marketshare Mac has very excellent software. Partially because Apple leads the way in its own software development to provide an example. I cannot count the times I’ve been able to do something simply on a Mac that was difficult to do on a PC.
I did not not say Macs cannot be used for point of sales. There are small stores in my Brooklyn neighborhood that use Macs as point of sale computers. Largely this is because they are small record stores or book stores, and the Mac fits the artist mythos.
What I was saying is that you will not see a major retail chain or grocery store chain buying millions of Macs to be used as their point of sales computers. That is the real point of sales market.
“...in many ways software development on the Mac is driving software development on the PC”-TB
How I wish that was true then I can develop test software in my consultancy biz with my Macs. But however I complain to Agilent or National Instrument, they give me the “not enough market value for us”, rebuttal. So, they instead support Linux and Win32. Not a live-or-die kind of proposition but I can earn my living with my XP white-boxes. I leave my Macs for the enjoyable part of my life.
Still, games for example, that is already dead-on-the-water argument. When was the last time the Mac has lead in that category since Myst I?
Another, creative professional applications. I don’t recall Macromedia (now Adobe), InDesign, and even Photoshop CS are no longer first on the Mac. Oh, how I wish that was true but reality is it isn’t. So stop all this wishful thinking on the software front until Apple’s market share tops 10% at minimum.
Apple creates magical software, on their terms, to pacify and nurture their professional crowds. I agree, you guys are very good at what you do with a Mac <hands in the air, doing the tiki worship> but lets admit it, the Mac needs to pick up the ball again in PC leadership and that will start happening only with market clout. If the other guy is holding a bigger set of balls than you, wait until yours is sizable. For Apple even with Steve’s heavy ones does not matter much in the vast Cyberspherian universe where gigantors are the norm (Bill? Google? are just few examples).
“What I was saying is that you will not see a major retail chain or grocery store chain buying millions of Macs to be used as their point of sales computers. That is the real point of sales market.” -TB
Did you understand my V.A.R.s counter-argument to your proposition? Read again.
“I did not say they were the majority of Mac users, but they are a sizable portion who spend a lot of money on Mac products”-TB
Sizable in terms of profit share maybe but will no longer comprise bigger than a third of all Apple revenue from this point on. Sorry to inform you that, TB. Just be glad Apple is still trying its very best and a very good one at that to give you their line of professional applications because others, I am afraid, are less than enthusiastic at giving you guys the back rub any longer.
So, creative pros everywhere, please take T.B.‘s commendable proposition to buy every expensive MacPros, MB 17’s, the MacServer, and other super-high-end stuff that Steve’s got dangling for y’all to bite, at every possible chance your current Big Mac becomes a little sluggish. That always justifies the Big Boss into taking you to the Apple Store uptown.