Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94865 is a reply to message #94858] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 08:56   |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
"I’m walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could easily
be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the MacBook
Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he blows his
credibility right off the top with that exaggerated comparison.
"It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody who
needs a computer would have to set it up, it’s a $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB
box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin’ MacBook
Pro."
Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive. This
makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the price
WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less than street
price to add that drive.
If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state drive on
ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the MacBook Air
and then compares that configuration to laptops without an SSD. If
that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700 non-SSD version
of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that point he has little point.
He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused about the
need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
"The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn’t
seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04 the day
after Steve’s speech."
The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually go
down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on Wednesday
for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
"I really wanted to see something really great and useful from Apple
this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook. Something
I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why the
Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to buy the
base version with the hard drive.
He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most important
announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's growth. He did
like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting. He hates the
iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining about that until
their exclusive relationship ends.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
Neil wrote:
> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>
>
> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94866 is a reply to message #94865] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 09:24 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of every PC
user who's passed on going the Mac route:
There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more computer
is more computer, but most people just don't need
the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family photo
album.
The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't really out
of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's sub $2k price
point in the Apple lineup. My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to
the Macbook, but with more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature
set - not psyched about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job
done for a lot less money).
The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening comments
about being enamoured with all things Apple.
Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for Shelly
considering his success - it's just a reference point
that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the same amount
of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the gold instead. In
other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting you to buy way more
than you need or want.
When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job done
(depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course), vs. going
with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having no choice under
$2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is right -
when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to Air vs a
regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left with a much
smaller drive for a lot more money.
Regards,
Dedric
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>
> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>
> "I’m walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could easily be
> replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>
> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the MacBook Pro
> and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he blows his
> credibility right off the top with that exaggerated comparison.
>
>
>
> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody who needs
> a computer would have to set it up, it’s a $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB box. The
> same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin’ MacBook Pro."
>
> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive. This
> makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the price WITH
> the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less than street price
> to add that drive.
>
> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state drive on
> ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the MacBook Air and
> then compares that configuration to laptops without an SSD. If that's the
> comparison, then he should compare the $1700 non-SSD version of the Air to
> the other subnotebooks. And at that point he has little point.
>
> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused about the
> need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>
>
>
> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn’t seem
> to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04 the day after
> Steve’s speech."
>
> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually go
> down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on Wednesday
> for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
>
>
>
> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from Apple this
> week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook. Something I could
> throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>
> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why the Air
> doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to buy the base
> version with the hard drive.
>
> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most important
> announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's growth. He did like
> the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting. He hates the iPhone and
> AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining about that until their
> exclusive relationship ends.
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
> Neil wrote:
>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>
>>
>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94867 is a reply to message #94866] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 10:09 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dedric Terry wrote:
> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of every
> PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
> photo album.
I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining about
_is_ under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price
would buy it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't
mean others will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for less
than $2k.
If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be noted
that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the new
super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K in the
standard configuration).
> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't really
> out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's sub $2k
> price point in the Apple lineup.
Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except for
the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive. As
for "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my wife
has one (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up well.
It also gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable
> specs to the Macbook, but with more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro
> in feature set - not psyched about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets
> the same job done for a lot less money).
It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another choice
is better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac, Apple
would be insufferable. :^)
Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes would
be less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what moves
you, be it Apple or someone else.
> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the same
> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the gold
> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting
> you to buy way more than you need or want.
I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or want,
and I have a Mac.
> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job done
> (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course), vs.
> going with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having no
> choice under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be "brand
loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the Mac
users I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the
preferred tool given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using BeOS
but that choice was torpedoed.
> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is right -
> when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to Air vs a
> regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left with a much
> smaller drive for a lot more money.
Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light. This
will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a compelling
enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side. :^)
It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people outside
of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in because he
complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly exaggerating to do
so, while missing real issues with the Air.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
> Regards,
> Dedric
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>
>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>
>> "I’m walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could easily
>> be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>
>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the MacBook
>> Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he blows his
>> credibility right off the top with that exaggerated comparison.
>>
>>
>>
>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody who
>> needs a computer would have to set it up, it’s a $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB
>> box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin’
>> MacBook Pro."
>>
>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive.
>> This makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the
>> price WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less
>> than street price to add that drive.
>>
>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state drive
>> on ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the MacBook
>> Air and then compares that configuration to laptops without an SSD. If
>> that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700 non-SSD
>> version of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that point he has
>> little point.
>>
>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused about
>> the need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>
>>
>>
>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn’t
>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04 the
>> day after Steve’s speech."
>>
>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually go
>> down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on
>> Wednesday for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
>>
>>
>>
>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from Apple
>> this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook.
>> Something I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>>
>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why the
>> Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to buy the
>> base version with the hard drive.
>>
>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most important
>> announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's growth. He did
>> like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting. He hates the
>> iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining about that
>> until their exclusive relationship ends.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>> Neil wrote:
>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>
>>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94869 is a reply to message #94867] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 11:18 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac release, there
are three desktop models,
usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the starting
price, and only options for dual quad cores,
no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write book
reports ;-).
There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for one of
the six base models. In the PC world
there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on, costing
significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current) and only a
slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last year), for $400 less
than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise, pretty much identical (it does
have a partially aluminum case, and feels better than the Macbooks I've
tried).
There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the personal
computer market... ;-)
I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other than
the significant investment in software that is costly to replace or
crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based on the fact
that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than just getting
what he needs, and that without a mystical, glorious Keynote unveiling of
trend setting products, that chique doesn't last long. Imho, that chique is
hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product prices higher, with less range
of price point competition, but for Apple customers, price doesn't seem to
be a concern. Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants them.
Imho, it should be the other way around, and then we would truly have more
choices.
re: BeOS.... same here.
Dedric
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790eeca@linux...
> Dedric Terry wrote:
>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of every
>> PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
>> photo album.
>
> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining about _is_
> under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price would buy
> it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't mean others
> will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for less than $2k.
>
> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be noted
> that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the new
> super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K in the
> standard configuration).
>
>
>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't really
>> out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's sub $2k
>> price point in the Apple lineup.
>
> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except for
> the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive. As for
> "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my wife has one
> (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up well. It also
> gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>
>
>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but with
>> more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not psyched
>> about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job done for a lot
>> less money).
>
> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another choice is
> better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac, Apple would
> be insufferable. :^)
>
> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes would be
> less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what moves you,
> be it Apple or someone else.
>
>
>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the same
>> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the gold
>> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting you
>> to buy way more than you need or want.
>
> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or want, and
> I have a Mac.
>
>
>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job done
>> (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course), vs. going
>> with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having no choice
>> under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
>
> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be "brand
> loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the Mac users
> I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the preferred tool
> given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using BeOS but that choice
> was torpedoed.
>
>
>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is right -
>> when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to Air vs a
>> regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left with a much
>> smaller drive for a lot more money.
>
> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light. This
> will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a compelling
> enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side. :^)
>
> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people outside
> of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in because he
> complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly exaggerating to do so,
> while missing real issues with the Air.
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
>>
>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>
>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>
>>> "I’m walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could easily
>>> be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>
>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the MacBook
>>> Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he blows his
>>> credibility right off the top with that exaggerated comparison.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody who
>>> needs a computer would have to set it up, it’s a $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB
>>> box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin’ MacBook
>>> Pro."
>>>
>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive. This
>>> makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the price
>>> WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less than street
>>> price to add that drive.
>>>
>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state drive on
>>> ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the MacBook Air
>>> and then compares that configuration to laptops without an SSD. If
>>> that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700 non-SSD version
>>> of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that point he has little
>>> point.
>>>
>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused about the
>>> need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn’t
>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04 the day
>>> after Steve’s speech."
>>>
>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually go
>>> down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on Wednesday
>>> for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from Apple
>>> this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook. Something
>>> I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>>>
>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why the
>>> Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to buy the
>>> base version with the hard drive.
>>>
>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most important
>>> announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's growth. He did
>>> like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting. He hates the
>>> iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining about that until
>>> their exclusive relationship ends.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Neil wrote:
>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>
>>>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94871 is a reply to message #94869] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 11:32 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dedric Terry wrote:
> I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac release,
> there are three desktop models,
> usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the starting
> price, and only options for dual quad cores,
> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write
> book reports ;-).
Sure, but you don't need a tower to write book reports. A Mac Mini will
do fine for under $1k.
It's entirely possible to criticize the Mac without hyperbole, ya know. :^)
> There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for
> one of the six base models. In the PC world
> there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
Right, because there are more companies making hardware for MSWindows
boxes. That's an advantage because there is more range of choice, and a
disadvantage because they all have to dance to the MSWindows beat.
Apple has fewer boxes but they control everything on those boxes. That's
a disadvantage because of the fewer choices, and an advantage because
there is less to go wrong or be incompatible, and if anything does goes
wrong, a single company can fix it.
> starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
> desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on, costing
> significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current) and only a
> slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last year), for $400
> less than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise, pretty much identical
> (it does have a partially aluminum case, and feels better than the
> Macbooks I've tried).
Sounds like you like your computer. Great!
> There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the personal
> computer market... ;-)
There are many reasons. It would take too long to recount the history here.
> I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other
> than the significant investment in software that is costly to replace or
> crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based on the
> fact that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than
> just getting what he needs, and that without a mystical, glorious
> Keynote unveiling of trend setting products, that chique doesn't last
> long.
Poor guy. But his claims went beyond that. I zinged him for his hyperbole.
> Imho, that chique is hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's
> product prices higher, with less range of price point competition, but
> for Apple customers, price doesn't seem to be a concern.
Maybe for some, but not overall. Apple is competing on features and
implementation. And even, lately, on price.
> Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants them. Imho, it should be
> the other way around, and then we would truly have more choices.
Choice is good. Competition is good.
Apple no more has its customers where it wants them than Microsoft has
theirs well thumbed over. For example you yourself are trapped in
Microsoftland by your committed investments there.
> re: BeOS.... same here.
Yep. Sigh... Yet another reason to mistrust Apple, to an extent, and
Microsoft to a much larger extent.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
> Dedric
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790eeca@linux...
>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of
>>> every PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
>>> photo album.
>>
>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining about
>> _is_ under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price
>> would buy it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't
>> mean others will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for
>> less than $2k.
>>
>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be noted
>> that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the new
>> super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K in
>> the standard configuration).
>>
>>
>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't
>>> really out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's
>>> sub $2k price point in the Apple lineup.
>>
>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except
>> for the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive.
>> As for "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my
>> wife has one (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up
>> well. It also gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad
>> Powerbook.
>>
>>
>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but with
>>> more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not psyched
>>> about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job done for a
>>> lot less money).
>>
>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another choice
>> is better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac,
>> Apple would be insufferable. :^)
>>
>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes would
>> be less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what
>> moves you, be it Apple or someone else.
>>
>>
>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the same
>>> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the gold
>>> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting
>>> you to buy way more than you need or want.
>>
>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or want,
>> and I have a Mac.
>>
>>
>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job
>>> done (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course),
>>> vs. going with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having
>>> no choice under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
>>
>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be
>> "brand loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the
>> Mac users I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the
>> preferred tool given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using
>> BeOS but that choice was torpedoed.
>>
>>
>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is
>>> right - when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to
>>> Air vs a regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left
>>> with a much smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>
>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light. This
>> will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a
>> compelling enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side. :^)
>>
>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people
>> outside of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in
>> because he complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly
>> exaggerating to do so, while missing real issues with the Air.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dedric
>>>
>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>
>>>> "I’m walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could
>>>> easily be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>
>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the
>>>> MacBook Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he
>>>> blows his credibility right off the top with that exaggerated
>>>> comparison.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody who
>>>> needs a computer would have to set it up, it’s a $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB
>>>> box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin’
>>>> MacBook Pro."
>>>>
>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive.
>>>> This makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the
>>>> price WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less
>>>> than street price to add that drive.
>>>>
>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state drive
>>>> on ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the
>>>> MacBook Air and then compares that configuration to laptops without
>>>> an SSD. If that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700
>>>> non-SSD version of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that
>>>> point he has little point.
>>>>
>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused about
>>>> the need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn’t
>>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04 the
>>>> day after Steve’s speech."
>>>>
>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually
>>>> go down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on
>>>> Wednesday for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs.
>>>> :^)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from Apple
>>>> this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook.
>>>> Something I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>>>>
>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why
>>>> the Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to
>>>> buy the base version with the hard drive.
>>>>
>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most
>>>> important announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's
>>>> growth. He did like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting.
>>>> He hates the iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining
>>>> about that until their exclusive relationship ends.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94872 is a reply to message #94871] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 11:48 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Now why did you think I was criticizing Apple with hyperbole? Could it be
that Apple skin is just a little thin? And... I don't recall a desktop
release with more than
3 models... so, "every" means "every". That's not called hyperbole, it's
called history. ;-))
By "blinding speed" I seriously meant a dual quad in general - any dual
quad. You are missing
the whole market of families that on average probably have about $1k to
spend on a computer to serve
everyone, and when faced with a full desktop with monitor included, or a
cube with limited expansion and
I/O capabilities, and monitor additional, where do you think they will go?
Just sayin' that the PC aisle at CompUSA
and BestBuy are always busier than the Apple sections, and the number of PC
options dwarfs the Mac shelves
significantly. This isn't our market, so it's easy to overlook it.
Nothing wrong with Macs, but you have to admit that the general culture and
approach of Apple is "build loyalty by limiting choices
both on the way in and when it comes time to upgrade".
DT
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4791026d@linux...
> Dedric Terry wrote:
>> I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac release,
>> there are three desktop models,
>> usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the starting
>> price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write
>> book reports ;-).
>
> Sure, but you don't need a tower to write book reports. A Mac Mini will do
> fine for under $1k.
>
> It's entirely possible to criticize the Mac without hyperbole, ya know.
> :^)
>
>
>> There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for one
>> of the six base models. In the PC world
>> there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
>
> Right, because there are more companies making hardware for MSWindows
> boxes. That's an advantage because there is more range of choice, and a
> disadvantage because they all have to dance to the MSWindows beat.
>
> Apple has fewer boxes but they control everything on those boxes. That's a
> disadvantage because of the fewer choices, and an advantage because there
> is less to go wrong or be incompatible, and if anything does goes wrong, a
> single company can fix it.
>
>
>> starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
>> desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on, costing
>> significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current) and only a
>> slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last year), for $400
>> less than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise, pretty much identical
>> (it does have a partially aluminum case, and feels better than the
>> Macbooks I've tried).
>
> Sounds like you like your computer. Great!
>
>
>> There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the personal
>> computer market... ;-)
>
> There are many reasons. It would take too long to recount the history
> here.
>
>
>> I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other
>> than the significant investment in software that is costly to replace or
>> crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based on the
>> fact that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than just
>> getting what he needs, and that without a mystical, glorious Keynote
>> unveiling of trend setting products, that chique doesn't last long.
>
> Poor guy. But his claims went beyond that. I zinged him for his hyperbole.
>
>
>> Imho, that chique is hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product prices
>> higher, with less range of price point competition, but for Apple
>> customers, price doesn't seem to be a concern.
>
> Maybe for some, but not overall. Apple is competing on features and
> implementation. And even, lately, on price.
>
>
>> Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants them. Imho, it
>> should be the other way around, and then we would truly have more
>> choices.
>
> Choice is good. Competition is good.
>
> Apple no more has its customers where it wants them than Microsoft has
> theirs well thumbed over. For example you yourself are trapped in
> Microsoftland by your committed investments there.
>
>
>> re: BeOS.... same here.
>
> Yep. Sigh... Yet another reason to mistrust Apple, to an extent, and
> Microsoft to a much larger extent.
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
>> Dedric
>>
>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790eeca@linux...
>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of
>>>> every PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
>>>> photo album.
>>>
>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining about
>>> _is_ under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price
>>> would buy it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't
>>> mean others will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for less
>>> than $2k.
>>>
>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be noted
>>> that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the new
>>> super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K in the
>>> standard configuration).
>>>
>>>
>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't really
>>>> out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's sub $2k
>>>> price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>
>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except for
>>> the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive. As
>>> for "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my wife
>>> has one (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up well.
>>> It also gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>
>>>
>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but with
>>>> more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not psyched
>>>> about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job done for a lot
>>>> less money).
>>>
>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another choice
>>> is better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac, Apple
>>> would be insufferable. :^)
>>>
>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes would
>>> be less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what moves
>>> you, be it Apple or someone else.
>>>
>>>
>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the same
>>>> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the gold
>>>> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting
>>>> you to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>
>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or want,
>>> and I have a Mac.
>>>
>>>
>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job done
>>>> (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course), vs.
>>>> going with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having no
>>>> choice under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
>>>
>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be "brand
>>> loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the Mac
>>> users I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the
>>> preferred tool given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using BeOS
>>> but that choice was torpedoed.
>>>
>>>
>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is
>>>> right - when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to
>>>> Air vs a regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left with
>>>> a much smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>
>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light. This
>>> will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a compelling
>>> enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side. :^)
>>>
>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people outside
>>> of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in because he
>>> complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly exaggerating to do
>>> so, while missing real issues with the Air.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>
>>>>> "I’m walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could easily
>>>>> be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>
>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the MacBook
>>>>> Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he blows his
>>>>> credibility right off the top with that exaggerated comparison.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody who
>>>>> needs a computer would have to set it up, it’s a $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB
>>>>> box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin’
>>>>> MacBook Pro."
>>>>>
>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive.
>>>>> This makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the
>>>>> price WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less
>>>>> than street price to add that drive.
>>>>>
>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state drive
>>>>> on ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the MacBook
>>>>> Air and then compares that configuration to laptops without an SSD. If
>>>>> that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700 non-SSD
>>>>> version of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that point he has
>>>>> little point.
>>>>>
>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused about
>>>>> the need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn’t
>>>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04 the
>>>>> day after Steve’s speech."
>>>>>
>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually go
>>>>> down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on
>>>>> Wednesday for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs.
>>>>> :^)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from Apple
>>>>> this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook.
>>>>> Something I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>>>>>
>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why the
>>>>> Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to buy the
>>>>> base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>
>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most important
>>>>> announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's growth. He did
>>>>> like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting. He hates the
>>>>> iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining about that
>>>>> until their exclusive relationship ends.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94873 is a reply to message #94869] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 13:23 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac release, there
>are three desktop models,
>usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the starting
>price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write
book
>reports ;-).
>
>There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for one
of
>the six base models. In the PC world
>there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
>starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
>desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on, costing
>significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current) and only a
>slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last year), for $400
less
>than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise, pretty much identical (it does
>have a partially aluminum case, and feels better than the Macbooks I've
>tried).
>
>There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the personal
>computer market... ;-)
>
>I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other than
>the significant investment in software that is costly to replace or
>crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based on the
fact
>that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than just getting
>what he needs, and that without a mystical, glorious Keynote unveiling of
>trend setting products, that chique doesn't last long. Imho, that chique
is
>hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product prices higher, with less range
>of price point competition, but for Apple customers, price doesn't seem
to
>be a concern. Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants them.
>Imho, it should be the other way around, and then we would truly have more
>choices.
>
>re: BeOS.... same here.
>
>Dedric
Here we go again! Apple has desk top models under 2K. Apple's market share
probably has more to do with ignorant people spewing ignorant things about
Apple.
Apple desk top models that start under 2K:
• 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
• 1GB memory
• 80GB hard drive1
$599.00
or as low as $15 a month
• 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
• 1GB memory
• 120GB hard drive1
$799.00
or as low as $19 a month
• 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
• 1GB memory
• 250GB hard drive1
• 8x double-layer SuperDrive
• ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
$1,199.00
or as low as $29 a month
• 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
• 1GB memory
• 320GB hard drive1
• 8x double-layer SuperDrive
• ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
$1,499.00
or as low as $36 a month
• 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
• 1GB memory
• 320GB hard drive1
• 8x double-layer SuperDrive
• ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
$1,799.00
or as low as $43 a month
Or are we going to argue form factor?
>
>"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790eeca@linux...
>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of every
>>> PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
>>> photo album.
>>
>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining about
_is_
>> under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price would buy
>> it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't mean others
>> will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for less than $2k.
>>
>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be noted
>> that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the new
>> super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K in the
>> standard configuration).
>>
>>
>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't really
>>> out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's sub $2k
>>> price point in the Apple lineup.
>>
>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except for
>> the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive. As
for
>> "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my wife has
one
>> (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up well. It also
>> gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>>
>>
>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but with
>>> more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not psyched
>>> about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job done for a lot
>>> less money).
>>
>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another choice
is
>> better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac, Apple would
>> be insufferable. :^)
>>
>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes would
be
>> less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what moves you,
>> be it Apple or someone else.
>>
>>
>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the same
>>> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the gold
>>> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting
you
>>> to buy way more than you need or want.
>>
>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or want,
and
>> I have a Mac.
>>
>>
>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job done
>>> (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course), vs. going
>>> with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having no choice
>>> under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
>>
>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be "brand
>> loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the Mac users
>> I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the preferred
tool
>> given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using BeOS but that choice
>> was torpedoed.
>>
>>
>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is right
-
>>> when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to Air vs a
>>> regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left with a much
>>> smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>
>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light. This
>> will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a compelling
>> enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side. :^)
>>
>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people outside
>> of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in because he
>> complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly exaggerating to do
so,
>> while missing real issues with the Air.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dedric
>>>
>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>
>>>> "I’m walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could easily
>>>> be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>
>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the MacBook
>>>> Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he blows his
>>>> credibility right off the top with that exaggerated comparison.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody who
>>>> needs a computer would have to set it up, it’s a $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB
>>>> box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin’ MacBook
>>>> Pro."
>>>>
>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive.
This
>>>> makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the price
>>>> WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less than street
>>>> price to add that drive.
>>>>
>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state drive
on
>>>> ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the MacBook Air
>>>> and then compares that configuration to laptops without an SSD. If
>>>> that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700 non-SSD version
>>>> of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that point he has little
>>>> point.
>>>>
>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused about
the
>>>> need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn’t
>>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04 the
day
>>>> after Steve’s speech."
>>>>
>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually
go
>>>> down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on Wednesday
>>>> for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from Apple
>>>> this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook. Something
>>>> I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>>>>
>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why the
>>>> Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to buy the
>>>> base version with the hard drive.
>>>>
>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most important
>>>> announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's growth. He did
>>>> like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting. He hates the
>>>> iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining about that until
>>>> their exclusive relationship ends.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94874 is a reply to message #94873] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 12:29 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey James,
No, it isn't another "one of those" :-)
Where are their desktops you quoted? I didn't see them in the Apple store
under "Mac Pro".
I wasn't talking about Mac minis. They are cool, but limited since they
can't be upgraded with extra ram
(or so I've been told), and no PCIe slots. Is that true?
They seem like a potentially nice solution for a sample library farm
machine, but if Ram is limited to 2G, then
it wouldn't work for what I need. I know other composers that considered
the same, but had to pass on them for that
reason alone.... again, choice... can't upgrade it to fit what you want. I
specifically said those weren't what I was comparing.
HP and Dell both have minitowers/cubes now, so those would be a more
consistent comparison, if we were
making that comparison, but we aren't.
I had also heard the MacMinis might not be around much longer - fact or
rumor?
Btw - my comments were just an observation, not a slam, or hyperbole, or
dig - just following up with what Shelly Palmer said, pointing out that his
comments
make sense to those of us who aren't Mac fanatics, even if he was
technically generalizing,
and he's a self proclaimed Mac fanatic.
It is interesting how such an observation brings such strong reactions from
Mac users. Kind of proves my point on
the marketing vs. choice issue: when your customers love you, don't
question anything, and will buy anything you sell,
you can charge whatever you want and limit the customer's options as well.
Case in point: Shelly's comment on
AT&T and the iPhone - I'm sure their coverage is fine for most people (it
was for us) - but we're on Verizon with no
choice to even use an iPhone, so there's a pretty big missed market for
Apple - not my problem though, but it is a limited choice situation that
favors AT&T even if iPhone users don't like AT&T.
I thought we all agreed choice was a good thing? Was I wrong in that
assumption?
I really never intended this to be a Mac/PC debate. It was just my
interpretation of Shelly's comments,
nothing more. Let's leave it there please.
Regards,
Dedric
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:47910acd$1@linux...
>
> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac release,
>>there
>
>>are three desktop models,
>>usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the starting
>
>>price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write
> book
>>reports ;-).
>>
>>There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for one
> of
>>the six base models. In the PC world
>>there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
>
>>starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
>>desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on, costing
>
>>significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current) and only a
>
>>slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last year), for $400
> less
>>than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise, pretty much identical (it does
>
>>have a partially aluminum case, and feels better than the Macbooks I've
>
>>tried).
>>
>>There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the personal
>
>>computer market... ;-)
>>
>>I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other than
>
>>the significant investment in software that is costly to replace or
>>crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based on the
> fact
>>that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than just
>>getting
>
>>what he needs, and that without a mystical, glorious Keynote unveiling of
>
>>trend setting products, that chique doesn't last long. Imho, that chique
> is
>>hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product prices higher, with less
>>range
>
>>of price point competition, but for Apple customers, price doesn't seem
> to
>>be a concern. Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants
>>them.
>
>>Imho, it should be the other way around, and then we would truly have more
>
>>choices.
>>
>>re: BeOS.... same here.
>>
>>Dedric
>
>
> Here we go again! Apple has desk top models under 2K. Apple's market
> share
> probably has more to do with ignorant people spewing ignorant things about
> Apple.
>
> Apple desk top models that start under 2K:
>
>
> . 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
> . 1GB memory
> . 80GB hard drive1
>
>
> $599.00
> or as low as $15 a month
>
> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
> . 1GB memory
> . 120GB hard drive1
>
>
> $799.00
> or as low as $19 a month
>
>
>
> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
> . 1GB memory
> . 250GB hard drive1
> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
> . ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
>
>
> $1,199.00
> or as low as $29 a month
>
> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
> . 1GB memory
> . 320GB hard drive1
> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>
> $1,499.00
> or as low as $36 a month
>
> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
> . 1GB memory
> . 320GB hard drive1
> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>
> $1,799.00
> or as low as $43 a month
>
>
> Or are we going to argue form factor?
>
>>
>>"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790eeca@linux...
>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of
>>>> every
>
>>>> PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
>
>>>> photo album.
>>>
>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining about
> _is_
>>> under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price would buy
>
>>> it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't mean others
>
>>> will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for less than $2k.
>>>
>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be noted
>
>>> that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the new
>
>>> super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K in the
>
>>> standard configuration).
>>>
>>>
>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't really
>
>>>> out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's sub $2k
>
>>>> price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>
>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except for
>
>>> the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive. As
> for
>>> "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my wife has
> one
>>> (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up well. It also
>
>>> gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>
>>>
>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but with
>
>>>> more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not psyched
>
>>>> about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job done for a lot
>
>>>> less money).
>>>
>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another choice
> is
>>> better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac, Apple
>>> would
>
>>> be insufferable. :^)
>>>
>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes would
> be
>>> less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what moves
>>> you,
>
>>> be it Apple or someone else.
>>>
>>>
>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the same
>
>>>> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the gold
>
>>>> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting
> you
>>>> to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>
>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or want,
> and
>>> I have a Mac.
>>>
>>>
>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job done
>
>>>> (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course), vs.
>>>> going
>
>>>> with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having no choice
>
>>>> under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
>>>
>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be "brand
>
>>> loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the Mac
>>> users
>
>>> I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the preferred
> tool
>>> given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using BeOS but that choice
>
>>> was torpedoed.
>>>
>>>
>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is right
> -
>>>> when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to Air vs a
>
>>>> regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left with a much
>
>>>> smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>
>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light. This
>
>>> will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a compelling
>
>>> enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side. :^)
>>>
>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people outside
>
>>> of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in because he
>
>>> complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly exaggerating to do
> so,
>>> while missing real issues with the Air.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>
>>>>> "I'm walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could easily
>
>>>>> be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>
>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the MacBook
>
>>>>> Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he blows his
>
>>>>> credibility right off the top with that exaggerated comparison.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody who
>
>>>>> needs a computer would have to set it up, it's a $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB
>
>>>>> box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin'
>>>>> MacBook
>
>>>>> Pro."
>>>>>
>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive.
> This
>>>>> makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the price
>
>>>>> WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less than
>>>>> street
>
>>>>> price to add that drive.
>>>>>
>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state drive
> on
>>>>> ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the MacBook Air
>
>>>>> and then compares that configuration to laptops without an SSD. If
>>>>> that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700 non-SSD
>>>>> version
>
>>>>> of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that point he has little
>
>>>>> point.
>>>>>
>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused about
> the
>>>>> need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn't
>
>>>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04 the
> day
>>>>> after Steve's speech."
>>>>>
>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually
> go
>>>>> down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on
>>>>> Wednesday
>
>>>>> for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from Apple
>
>>>>> this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook.
>>>>> Something
>
>>>>> I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>>>>>
>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why the
>
>>>>> Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to buy the
>
>>>>> base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>
>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most important
>
>>>>> announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's growth. He did
>
>>>>> like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting. He hates the
>>>>> iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining about that
>>>>> until
>
>>>>> their exclusive relationship ends.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94877 is a reply to message #94872] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 13:40 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dedric Terry wrote:
> Now why did you think I was criticizing Apple with hyperbole? Could it be
> that Apple skin is just a little thin? And... I don't recall a desktop
> release with more than
> 3 models... so, "every" means "every". That's not called hyperbole,
> it's called history. ;-))
Maybe I misunderstood you. I saw "hyperbole" in your statement only
because you switched from talking about laptops, to talking about
"desktop models," claimed they were only 2K and up, and said there's no
range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write
book reports.
In fact there is a range of suitable Macs below that. In both laptops
and "desktops." Plenty fast for writing reports. Overkill even.
BTW, both iMacs and Mac Minis are desktop machines.
Now about that skin thing. I don't know how thick Apple's skin is, but
on a regular apple it's thin enough to eat. Thinner than a Macbook Air. ;^)
I personally don't care if you criticize Apple. I love that you buy
non-Mac boxes, somebody has to.
But if your claims aren't consistent, logical and true then I can't
protect you in the wild world of time wasting computer bashing
conversations. :^)
There are plenty of criticisms to be made without hype. For example, the
lack of firewire on the Air limits its market. Also, and this is my
biggest criticism right now, WHERE'S MY #(*$&@#$ing UPDATED MACBOOK PRO
WITH THE LED BACKLIT 17" HD SCREEN!!!!!!???? :^)
> By "blinding speed" I seriously meant a dual quad in general - any dual
> quad. You are missing
> the whole market of families that on average probably have about $1k to
> spend on a computer to serve
> everyone, and when faced with a full desktop with monitor included, or a
> cube with limited expansion and
> I/O capabilities, and monitor additional, where do you think they will
> go?
Well lessee, I'm not missing any markets. I don't sell computers.
If I were that struggling young family I'd buy a Linux box and be done
with it.
So it sounds like what you would like to see is a Mac under $1000 with
dual quad chips? In time we'll probably see that. But right now, not.
However, the core 2 duos in the low end Macs are no slouches.
> Just sayin' that the PC aisle at CompUSA
> and BestBuy are always busier than the Apple sections, and the number of
> PC options dwarfs the Mac shelves
> significantly. This isn't our market, so it's easy to overlook it.
I haven't overlooked the obvious. I'm not arguing that point. Did you
think I was claiming that Macs outsell all other computers? Not hardly.
But as long as we're digressing, notice that the aisles at CompUSA are
shrinking fast, while Apple stores are popping up like flies. Apple's
market share is growing, FWIW. It's scary. PEOPLE, STOP BUYING MACS! :^)
> Nothing wrong with Macs,
LOL! OK, that's BS. :^)
There's plenty wrong with Macs. Just less than some of the other
options, depending on your needs.
> but you have to admit that the general culture
> and approach of Apple is "build loyalty by limiting choices
> both on the way in and when it comes time to upgrade".
Heh. Now I think you're projecting because you choose to use MSWindows,
from a company that has been _convicted_ of limiting choices in the
marketplace.
How far off topic are we now? This is turning into a boring PC/Mac
bashfest. Woo.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
> DT
>
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4791026d@linux...
>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>> I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac
>>> release, there are three desktop models,
>>> usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the
>>> starting price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to
>>> write book reports ;-).
>>
>> Sure, but you don't need a tower to write book reports. A Mac Mini
>> will do fine for under $1k.
>>
>> It's entirely possible to criticize the Mac without hyperbole, ya
>> know. :^)
>>
>>
>>> There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for
>>> one of the six base models. In the PC world
>>> there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
>>
>> Right, because there are more companies making hardware for MSWindows
>> boxes. That's an advantage because there is more range of choice, and
>> a disadvantage because they all have to dance to the MSWindows beat.
>>
>> Apple has fewer boxes but they control everything on those boxes.
>> That's a disadvantage because of the fewer choices, and an advantage
>> because there is less to go wrong or be incompatible, and if anything
>> does goes wrong, a single company can fix it.
>>
>>
>>> starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
>>> desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on,
>>> costing significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current)
>>> and only a slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last
>>> year), for $400 less than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise,
>>> pretty much identical (it does have a partially aluminum case, and
>>> feels better than the Macbooks I've tried).
>>
>> Sounds like you like your computer. Great!
>>
>>
>>> There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the
>>> personal computer market... ;-)
>>
>> There are many reasons. It would take too long to recount the history
>> here.
>>
>>
>>> I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other
>>> than the significant investment in software that is costly to replace
>>> or crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based
>>> on the fact that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple,
>>> rather than just getting what he needs, and that without a mystical,
>>> glorious Keynote unveiling of trend setting products, that chique
>>> doesn't last long.
>>
>> Poor guy. But his claims went beyond that. I zinged him for his
>> hyperbole.
>>
>>
>>> Imho, that chique is hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product
>>> prices higher, with less range of price point competition, but for
>>> Apple customers, price doesn't seem to be a concern.
>>
>> Maybe for some, but not overall. Apple is competing on features and
>> implementation. And even, lately, on price.
>>
>>
>>> Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants them. Imho,
>>> it should be the other way around, and then we would truly have more
>>> choices.
>>
>> Choice is good. Competition is good.
>>
>> Apple no more has its customers where it wants them than Microsoft has
>> theirs well thumbed over. For example you yourself are trapped in
>> Microsoftland by your committed investments there.
>>
>>
>>> re: BeOS.... same here.
>>
>> Yep. Sigh... Yet another reason to mistrust Apple, to an extent, and
>> Microsoft to a much larger extent.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> Dedric
>>>
>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of
>>>>> every PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the
>>>>> family photo album.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining
>>>> about _is_ under $2K (configured the way most people who care about
>>>> price would buy it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac
>>>> doesn't mean others will. But if that's your complaint, there are
>>>> Macs for less than $2k.
>>>>
>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be
>>>> noted that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and
>>>> the new super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and
>>>> under 2K in the standard configuration).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't
>>>>> really out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in
>>>>> it's sub $2k price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>
>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except
>>>> for the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash
>>>> drive. As for "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case.
>>>> But my wife has one (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has
>>>> held up well. It also gets better wireless reception than my
>>>> metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but
>>>>> with more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not
>>>>> psyched about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job
>>>>> done for a lot less money).
>>>>
>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another
>>>> choice is better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a
>>>> Mac, Apple would be insufferable. :^)
>>>>
>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>>>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes
>>>> would be less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying
>>>> what moves you, be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>>>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the
>>>>> same amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for
>>>>> the gold instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever
>>>>> marketing - getting you to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>>
>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or
>>>> want, and I have a Mac.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job
>>>>> done (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of
>>>>> course), vs. going with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip
>>>>> while having no choice under $2-4k or more, how else do you
>>>>> evaluate the two options?
>>>>
>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be
>>>> "brand loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of
>>>> the Mac users I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them
>>>> as the preferred tool given the options. Frankly, I would rather be
>>>> using BeOS but that choice was torpedoed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is
>>>>> right - when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage
>>>>> to Air vs a regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are
>>>>> left with a much smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>>
>>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light.
>>>> This will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a
>>>> compelling enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side.
>>>> :^)
>>>>
>>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people
>>>> outside of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in
>>>> because he complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly
>>>> exaggerating to do so, while missing real issues with the Air.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>
>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "I’m walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could
>>>>>> easily be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the
>>>>>> MacBook Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he
>>>>>> blows his credibility right off the top with that exaggerated
>>>>>> comparison.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody
>>>>>> who needs a computer would have to set it up, it’s a $4,000
>>>>>> 1.6Ghz, 64GB box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or
>>>>>> a smokin’ MacBook Pro."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state
>>>>>> drive. This makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains
>>>>>> about is the price WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually
>>>>>> charges less than street price to add that drive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state
>>>>>> drive on ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to
>>>>>> the MacBook Air and then compares that configuration to laptops
>>>>>> without an SSD. If that's the comparison, then he should compare
>>>>>> the $1700 non-SSD version of the Air to the other subnotebooks.
>>>>>> And at that point he has little point.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused
>>>>>> about the need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street
>>>>>> didn’t seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to
>>>>>> $169.04 the day after Steve’s speech."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares
>>>>>> usually go down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a
>>>>>> hit on Wednesday for issues not directly related to a speech by
>>>>>> Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from
>>>>>> Apple this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true
>>>>>> sub-notebook. Something I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase
>>>>>> for short hops."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why
>>>>>> the Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to
>>>>>> buy the base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most
>>>>>> important announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's
>>>>>> growth. He did like the Time Capsule, which is at least
>>>>>> interesting. He hates the iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to
>>>>>> keep complaining about that until their exclusive relationship ends.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94879 is a reply to message #94874] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 13:54 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dedric Terry wrote:
> Where are their desktops you quoted? I didn't see them in the Apple
> store under "Mac Pro".
> I wasn't talking about Mac minis. They are cool, but limited since they
> can't be upgraded with extra ram
> (or so I've been told), and no PCIe slots. Is that true?
>
> They seem like a potentially nice solution for a sample library farm
> machine, but if Ram is limited to 2G, then
> it wouldn't work for what I need. I know other composers that
> considered the same, but had to pass on them for that
> reason alone.... again, choice... can't upgrade it to fit what you
> want. I specifically said those weren't what I was comparing.
> HP and Dell both have minitowers/cubes now, so those would be a more
> consistent comparison, if we were
> making that comparison, but we aren't.
So you ARE arguing form factor. Why didn't you say so? Well, OK. But
that's pretty far afield from the Shelly article.
The cheapest Mac Pro is just over $2K and is a quad box. If you need
that kind of expansion, that's your least expensive option other than
buying a refurb, or getting an educational or developer deal. Or getting
a rebate from Amazon or a bundle from a dealer.
> I had also heard the MacMinis might not be around much longer - fact or
> rumor?
Who knows. I guess "rumor" by definition. :^)
> Btw - my comments were just an observation, not a slam, or hyperbole, or
> dig - just following up with what Shelly Palmer said, pointing out that
> his comments
> make sense to those of us who aren't Mac fanatics, even if he was
> technically generalizing,
> and he's a self proclaimed Mac fanatic.
As I pointed out, the claims I called him on only make sense if you
don't look at his logic. Read my original message more closely.
> It is interesting how such an observation brings such strong reactions
> from Mac users. Kind of proves my point on
> the marketing vs. choice issue: when your customers love you, don't
> question anything, and will buy anything you sell,
> you can charge whatever you want and limit the customer's options as
> well.
I don't see that around here. For example, while I use a Mac, I don't
have an iPod, iPhone or even a new Intel Mac. I don't buy things until
they do what I want. Hence the wait for the new laptop. I also have used
many non-Mac computers over the years and don't think Apple is perfect.
> Case in point: Shelly's comment on
> AT&T and the iPhone - I'm sure their coverage is fine for most people
> (it was for us) - but we're on Verizon with no
> choice to even use an iPhone, so there's a pretty big missed market for
> Apple - not my problem though, but it is a limited choice situation that
> favors AT&T even if iPhone users don't like AT&T.
Yes, a gamble by Apple to go big with one company instead of trying to
hit the wider market. It didn't make me switch either.
OTOH, maybe it was a way to ramp up production and hit the new market on
favorable terms. The exclusive will be over after the two year (I think)
period. By then maybe Apple will be better prepared to make necessary
further agreements with more carriers, have more production capability,
have proven the iPhone design and improved it, and will be ready to
serve wider markets. I imagine the logistics of creating, manufacturing
and marketing a new product like that is nothing to sneeze at.
> I thought we all agreed choice was a good thing? Was I wrong in that
> assumption?
No. While I can understand why Apple would choose to start out that way
with the iPhone in a crowded new market, I am content to wait out the
iPhone and see what happens down the line. Also, there are changes afoot
with regulations, other competiton, and available frequencies.
> I really never intended this to be a Mac/PC debate. It was just my
> interpretation of Shelly's comments,
> nothing more. Let's leave it there please.
No, wait, your mom wears army boots and can't cook onions worth beans!
Just wanted to get that in. ;^)
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
> Regards,
> Dedric
>
> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:47910acd$1@linux...
>>
>> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>> I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac
>>> release, there
>>
>>> are three desktop models,
>>> usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the starting
>>
>>> price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write
>> book
>>> reports ;-).
>>>
>>> There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for
>>> one
>> of
>>> the six base models. In the PC world
>>> there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
>>
>>> starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
>>> desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on, costing
>>
>>> significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current) and only a
>>
>>> slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last year), for $400
>> less
>>> than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise, pretty much identical (it
>>> does
>>
>>> have a partially aluminum case, and feels better than the Macbooks I've
>>
>>> tried).
>>>
>>> There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the personal
>>
>>> computer market... ;-)
>>>
>>> I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other
>>> than
>>
>>> the significant investment in software that is costly to replace or
>>> crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based on the
>> fact
>>> that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than just
>>> getting
>>
>>> what he needs, and that without a mystical, glorious Keynote
>>> unveiling of
>>
>>> trend setting products, that chique doesn't last long. Imho, that
>>> chique
>> is
>>> hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product prices higher, with
>>> less range
>>
>>> of price point competition, but for Apple customers, price doesn't seem
>> to
>>> be a concern. Basically Apple has its' customers right where it
>>> wants them.
>>
>>> Imho, it should be the other way around, and then we would truly have
>>> more
>>
>>> choices.
>>>
>>> re: BeOS.... same here.
>>>
>>> Dedric
>>
>>
>> Here we go again! Apple has desk top models under 2K. Apple's market
>> share
>> probably has more to do with ignorant people spewing ignorant things
>> about
>> Apple.
>>
>> Apple desk top models that start under 2K:
>>
>>
>> . 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>> . 1GB memory
>> . 80GB hard drive1
>>
>>
>> $599.00
>> or as low as $15 a month
>>
>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>> . 1GB memory
>> . 120GB hard drive1
>>
>>
>> $799.00
>> or as low as $19 a month
>>
>>
>>
>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>> . 1GB memory
>> . 250GB hard drive1
>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>> . ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
>>
>>
>> $1,199.00
>> or as low as $29 a month
>>
>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>> . 1GB memory
>> . 320GB hard drive1
>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>
>> $1,499.00
>> or as low as $36 a month
>>
>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>> . 1GB memory
>> . 320GB hard drive1
>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>
>> $1,799.00
>> or as low as $43 a month
>>
>>
>> Or are we going to argue form factor?
>>
>>>
>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of
>>>>> every
>>
>>>>> PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
>>
>>>>> photo album.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining about
>> _is_
>>>> under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price would
>>>> buy
>>
>>>> it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't mean others
>>
>>>> will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for less than $2k.
>>>>
>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be noted
>>
>>>> that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the new
>>
>>>> super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K in the
>>
>>>> standard configuration).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't really
>>
>>>>> out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's sub $2k
>>
>>>>> price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>
>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except for
>>
>>>> the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive. As
>> for
>>>> "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my wife has
>> one
>>>> (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up well. It also
>>
>>>> gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but with
>>
>>>>> more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not psyched
>>
>>>>> about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job done for a
>>>>> lot
>>
>>>>> less money).
>>>>
>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another choice
>> is
>>>> better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac, Apple
>>>> would
>>
>>>> be insufferable. :^)
>>>>
>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>>>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes would
>> be
>>>> less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what moves
>>>> you,
>>
>>>> be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>>>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the same
>>
>>>>> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the gold
>>
>>>>> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting
>> you
>>>>> to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>>
>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or want,
>> and
>>>> I have a Mac.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job
>>>>> done
>>
>>>>> (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course), vs.
>>>>> going
>>
>>>>> with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having no choice
>>
>>>>> under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
>>>>
>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be "brand
>>
>>>> loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the Mac
>>>> users
>>
>>>> I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the preferred
>> tool
>>>> given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using BeOS but that
>>>> choice
>>
>>>> was torpedoed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is right
>> -
>>>>> when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to Air vs a
>>
>>>>> regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left with a much
>>
>>>>> smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>>
>>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light. This
>>
>>>> will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a compelling
>>
>>>> enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side. :^)
>>>>
>>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people
>>>> outside
>>
>>>> of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in because he
>>
>>>> complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly exaggerating to do
>> so,
>>>> while missing real issues with the Air.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>
>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "I'm walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could
>>>>>> easily
>>
>>>>>> be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the
>>>>>> MacBook
>>
>>>>>> Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he blows his
>>
>>>>>> credibility right off the top with that exaggerated comparison.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody who
>>
>>>>>> needs a computer would have to set it up, it's a $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB
>>
>>>>>> box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin'
>>>>>> MacBook
>>
>>>>>> Pro."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive.
>> This
>>>>>> makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the price
>>
>>>>>> WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less than
>>>>>> street
>>
>>>>>> price to add that drive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state drive
>> on
>>>>>> ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the MacBook
>>>>>> Air
>>
>>>>>> and then compares that configuration to laptops without an SSD. If
>>>>>> that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700 non-SSD
>>>>>> version
>>
>>>>>> of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that point he has little
>>
>>>>>> point.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused about
>> the
>>>>>> need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn't
>>
>>>>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04 the
>> day
>>>>>> after Steve's speech."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually
>> go
>>>>>> down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on
>>>>>> Wednesday
>>
>>>>>> for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from Apple
>>
>>>>>> this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook.
>>>>>> Something
>>
>>>>>> I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why
>>>>>> the
>>
>>>>>> Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to buy the
>>
>>>>>> base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most
>>>>>> important
>>
>>>>>> announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's growth. He did
>>
>>>>>> like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting. He hates the
>>>>>> iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining about that
>>>>>> until
>>
>>>>>> their exclusive relationship ends.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94883 is a reply to message #94877] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 14:57 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey Jamie - I really didn't intend to get this far into this, and don't
really have time
to continue much more. I was just sharing my opinion on Shelly Palmer's
report
saying that while I'm sure there was quite a bit of tongue in cheek to his
opening comments,
he at least was pointing out why people spend more on Macs when they could
get the
job done for much less - marketing, pure and simple.
Just to get more to the point of options - show me where I can get a Mac
desktop tower with a single quad
core cpu system. It's faster than a dual dual core, but much less
expensive - why it isn't a sweet spot for
off the shelf systems is a mystery. It's really popular with a lot of
Nuendo guys (I'm upgrading my core 2
to a quad - just drop it in and double the power - nice - doesn't happen
that easily too often). Probably
one that just didn't have mass quantity build appeal for whatever reason -
supply of cpus, boards - who knows.
Btw - I was in Best Buy today - there were probably 20 different laptop
models, and 30 desktop models there
to choose from. 2 iMacs, 1 desktop, and 3 laptops. Regardless of
preference, the distinct differences imho,
are 1) that Apple sells "cool" better than anyone, and 2) that the others
sell "choice" much better simply
but putting more obvious choices in front of you (most of which are at least
partially redundant of course, but
it's still a marketing tactic - and HP and Sony have some seriously cool
looking self-contained monitor/cpu systems with very nice wireless
keyboards - including a touch screen model from HP for about $1500 that is a
blast to use). Again, just an observation.
If I could get a MacMini with the option to trick it out with 8G and a
second SATA drive it would be seriously enticing
for peripheral sample libraries (you need to come down and see this in
action - it's a beautiful thing to offload that much
processing). I know other composers that would have gone that route as
well, were it not
for the ram limitation. Seriously - it's a good deal for that purpose since
it isn't overstocked with extras one wouldn't need for
such a use, and the form factor would be really nice for stacking away in a
computer room.
Thanks,
Dedric
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4791204e@linux...
> Dedric Terry wrote:
>> Now why did you think I was criticizing Apple with hyperbole? Could it
>> be
>> that Apple skin is just a little thin? And... I don't recall a desktop
>> release with more than
>> 3 models... so, "every" means "every". That's not called hyperbole, it's
>> called history. ;-))
>
> Maybe I misunderstood you. I saw "hyperbole" in your statement only
> because you switched from talking about laptops, to talking about "desktop
> models," claimed they were only 2K and up, and said there's no range below
> that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write book reports.
>
> In fact there is a range of suitable Macs below that. In both laptops and
> "desktops." Plenty fast for writing reports. Overkill even.
>
> BTW, both iMacs and Mac Minis are desktop machines.
>
> Now about that skin thing. I don't know how thick Apple's skin is, but on
> a regular apple it's thin enough to eat. Thinner than a Macbook Air. ;^)
>
> I personally don't care if you criticize Apple. I love that you buy
> non-Mac boxes, somebody has to.
>
> But if your claims aren't consistent, logical and true then I can't
> protect you in the wild world of time wasting computer bashing
> conversations. :^)
>
> There are plenty of criticisms to be made without hype. For example, the
> lack of firewire on the Air limits its market. Also, and this is my
> biggest criticism right now, WHERE'S MY #(*$&@#$ing UPDATED MACBOOK PRO
> WITH THE LED BACKLIT 17" HD SCREEN!!!!!!???? :^)
>
>
>> By "blinding speed" I seriously meant a dual quad in general - any dual
>> quad. You are missing
>> the whole market of families that on average probably have about $1k to
>> spend on a computer to serve
>> everyone, and when faced with a full desktop with monitor included, or a
>> cube with limited expansion and
>> I/O capabilities, and monitor additional, where do you think they will
>> go?
>
> Well lessee, I'm not missing any markets. I don't sell computers.
>
> If I were that struggling young family I'd buy a Linux box and be done
> with it.
>
> So it sounds like what you would like to see is a Mac under $1000 with
> dual quad chips? In time we'll probably see that. But right now, not.
> However, the core 2 duos in the low end Macs are no slouches.
>
>
>> Just sayin' that the PC aisle at CompUSA
>> and BestBuy are always busier than the Apple sections, and the number of
>> PC options dwarfs the Mac shelves
>> significantly. This isn't our market, so it's easy to overlook it.
>
> I haven't overlooked the obvious. I'm not arguing that point. Did you
> think I was claiming that Macs outsell all other computers? Not hardly.
>
> But as long as we're digressing, notice that the aisles at CompUSA are
> shrinking fast, while Apple stores are popping up like flies. Apple's
> market share is growing, FWIW. It's scary. PEOPLE, STOP BUYING MACS! :^)
>
>
>> Nothing wrong with Macs,
>
> LOL! OK, that's BS. :^)
>
> There's plenty wrong with Macs. Just less than some of the other options,
> depending on your needs.
>
>
> > but you have to admit that the general culture
>> and approach of Apple is "build loyalty by limiting choices
>> both on the way in and when it comes time to upgrade".
>
> Heh. Now I think you're projecting because you choose to use MSWindows,
> from a company that has been _convicted_ of limiting choices in the
> marketplace.
>
> How far off topic are we now? This is turning into a boring PC/Mac
> bashfest. Woo.
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
>> DT
>>
>>
>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4791026d@linux...
>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>> I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac release,
>>>> there are three desktop models,
>>>> usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the
>>>> starting price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write
>>>> book reports ;-).
>>>
>>> Sure, but you don't need a tower to write book reports. A Mac Mini will
>>> do fine for under $1k.
>>>
>>> It's entirely possible to criticize the Mac without hyperbole, ya know.
>>> :^)
>>>
>>>
>>>> There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for
>>>> one of the six base models. In the PC world
>>>> there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
>>>
>>> Right, because there are more companies making hardware for MSWindows
>>> boxes. That's an advantage because there is more range of choice, and a
>>> disadvantage because they all have to dance to the MSWindows beat.
>>>
>>> Apple has fewer boxes but they control everything on those boxes. That's
>>> a disadvantage because of the fewer choices, and an advantage because
>>> there is less to go wrong or be incompatible, and if anything does goes
>>> wrong, a single company can fix it.
>>>
>>>
>>>> starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
>>>> desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on,
>>>> costing significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current)
>>>> and only a slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last
>>>> year), for $400 less than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise, pretty
>>>> much identical (it does have a partially aluminum case, and feels
>>>> better than the Macbooks I've tried).
>>>
>>> Sounds like you like your computer. Great!
>>>
>>>
>>>> There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the
>>>> personal computer market... ;-)
>>>
>>> There are many reasons. It would take too long to recount the history
>>> here.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other
>>>> than the significant investment in software that is costly to replace
>>>> or crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based on
>>>> the fact that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple, rather
>>>> than just getting what he needs, and that without a mystical, glorious
>>>> Keynote unveiling of trend setting products, that chique doesn't last
>>>> long.
>>>
>>> Poor guy. But his claims went beyond that. I zinged him for his
>>> hyperbole.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Imho, that chique is hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product
>>>> prices higher, with less range of price point competition, but for
>>>> Apple customers, price doesn't seem to be a concern.
>>>
>>> Maybe for some, but not overall. Apple is competing on features and
>>> implementation. And even, lately, on price.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants them. Imho, it
>>>> should be the other way around, and then we would truly have more
>>>> choices.
>>>
>>> Choice is good. Competition is good.
>>>
>>> Apple no more has its customers where it wants them than Microsoft has
>>> theirs well thumbed over. For example you yourself are trapped in
>>> Microsoftland by your committed investments there.
>>>
>>>
>>>> re: BeOS.... same here.
>>>
>>> Yep. Sigh... Yet another reason to mistrust Apple, to an extent, and
>>> Microsoft to a much larger extent.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of
>>>>>> every PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>>>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
>>>>>> photo album.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining about
>>>>> _is_ under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price
>>>>> would buy it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't
>>>>> mean others will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for
>>>>> less than $2k.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be noted
>>>>> that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the new
>>>>> super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K in
>>>>> the standard configuration).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't
>>>>>> really out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's
>>>>>> sub $2k price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>>
>>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except
>>>>> for the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive.
>>>>> As for "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my
>>>>> wife has one (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up
>>>>> well. It also gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad
>>>>> Powerbook.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but with
>>>>>> more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not psyched
>>>>>> about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job done for a
>>>>>> lot less money).
>>>>>
>>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another choice
>>>>> is better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac,
>>>>> Apple would be insufferable. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>>>>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes would
>>>>> be less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what
>>>>> moves you, be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>>>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>>>>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the same
>>>>>> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the gold
>>>>>> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting
>>>>>> you to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or want,
>>>>> and I have a Mac.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job
>>>>>> done (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course),
>>>>>> vs. going with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having
>>>>>> no choice under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two
>>>>>> options?
>>>>>
>>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be
>>>>> "brand loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the
>>>>> Mac users I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the
>>>>> preferred tool given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using
>>>>> BeOS but that choice was torpedoed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is
>>>>>> right - when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to
>>>>>> Air vs a regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left
>>>>>> with a much smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>>>
>>>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light. This
>>>>> will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a
>>>>> compelling enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side.
>>>>> :^)
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people
>>>>> outside of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in
>>>>> because he complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly
>>>>> exaggerating to do so, while missing real issues with the Air.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "I’m walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could
>>>>>>> easily be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the
>>>>>>> MacBook Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he
>>>>>>> blows his credibility right off the top with that exaggerated
>>>>>>> comparison.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody who
>>>>>>> needs a computer would have to set it up, it’s a $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB
>>>>>>> box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin’
>>>>>>> MacBook Pro."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive.
>>>>>>> This makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the
>>>>>>> price WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less
>>>>>>> than street price to add that drive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state drive
>>>>>>> on ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the
>>>>>>> MacBook Air and then compares that configuration to laptops without
>>>>>>> an SSD. If that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700
>>>>>>> non-SSD version of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that
>>>>>>> point he has little point.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused about
>>>>>>> the need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn’t
>>>>>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04 the
>>>>>>> day after Steve’s speech."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually
>>>>>>> go down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on
>>>>>>> Wednesday for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs.
>>>>>>> :^)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from Apple
>>>>>>> this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook.
>>>>>>> Something I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why
>>>>>>> the Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to
>>>>>>> buy the base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most
>>>>>>> important announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's
>>>>>>> growth. He did like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting.
>>>>>>> He hates the iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining
>>>>>>> about that until their exclusive relationship ends.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94890 is a reply to message #94883] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 15:31 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dedric Terry wrote:
> Hey Jamie - I really didn't intend to get this far into this, and don't
> really have time
> to continue much more.
I'm with ya, bro.
> I was just sharing my opinion on Shelly Palmer's
> report
> saying that while I'm sure there was quite a bit of tongue in cheek to
> his opening comments,
> he at least was pointing out why people spend more on Macs when they
> could get the
> job done for much less - marketing, pure and simple.
OK, but I didn't get that from his piece, my complaint is about his
illogic and hyperbole, kinda takes away from his credibility.
But anyway we can kick around the relative value another time...from a
bigger picture perspective that includes initial price, capabilities,
subjective feel, administration time, longevity and resale.
If it were just simply marketing they wouldn't have me as a customer.
> Just to get more to the point of options - show me where I can get a Mac
> desktop tower with a single quad
> core cpu system.
Go to the Apple store online. Take the stock duo quad and subtract a
quad in the configuration options. Drops the price a bit...$500.
But I think the default 2.8GHZ dual quad is the sweet spot this time
around for value - if you can use the power. The price is significantly
lower than last month, and it's an improved version (new chipset, faster
buses, better graphics).
> Btw - I was in Best Buy today - there were probably 20 different laptop
> models, and 30 desktop models there
> to choose from. 2 iMacs, 1 desktop, and 3 laptops. Regardless of
> preference, the distinct differences imho,
> are 1) that Apple sells "cool" better than anyone, and 2) that the
> others sell "choice" much better simply
> but putting more obvious choices in front of you (most of which are at
> least partially redundant of course, but
> it's still a marketing tactic - and HP and Sony have some seriously cool
> looking self-contained monitor/cpu systems with very nice wireless
> keyboards - including a touch screen model from HP for about $1500 that
> is a blast to use). Again, just an observation.
Choices are good.
It'd be even better if all those laptops weren't locked into one of the
biggest monopolies (and yes, marketing organizations) on earth. As you
imply, some of that choice is illusionary. But not all.
If Apple still had clones there would be more choice for OSX boxes, if
Apple could have survived that (I think yes but those who justify
dropping the Mac clones long ago think it saved the company).
> If I could get a MacMini with the option to trick it out with 8G and a
> second SATA drive it would be seriously enticing
> for peripheral sample libraries (you need to come down and see this in
> action - it's a beautiful thing to offload that much
> processing). I know other composers that would have gone that route as
> well, were it not
> for the ram limitation. Seriously - it's a good deal for that purpose
> since it isn't overstocked with extras one wouldn't need for
> such a use, and the form factor would be really nice for stacking away
> in a computer room.
I'm looking forward to seeing your setup!
I don't know much about the Mac Mini's expansion options. Lessee...looks
like 2GB is it.
But wouldn't an 8 core box with a ton of RAM (holds up to 32GB now) be
able to keep up with separate smaller computers, and be a bit more
convenient at that?
I'd prefer to have it all in one box (like I do now with the dual G5,
although I'm not using some of the more demanding libraries like you are).
When I get the new laptop I might experiment with Logic's networking
feature, just to see how well it works to have some instruments and FX
running on another box. But the dual G5 is holding its own, so far.
Might be able to hold out for a 16 core box to replace the G5, in
another year or so... :^)
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
> Thanks,
> Dedric
>
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4791204e@linux...
>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>> Now why did you think I was criticizing Apple with hyperbole? Could
>>> it be
>>> that Apple skin is just a little thin? And... I don't recall a
>>> desktop release with more than
>>> 3 models... so, "every" means "every". That's not called hyperbole,
>>> it's called history. ;-))
>>
>> Maybe I misunderstood you. I saw "hyperbole" in your statement only
>> because you switched from talking about laptops, to talking about
>> "desktop models," claimed they were only 2K and up, and said there's
>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to
>> write book reports.
>>
>> In fact there is a range of suitable Macs below that. In both laptops
>> and "desktops." Plenty fast for writing reports. Overkill even.
>>
>> BTW, both iMacs and Mac Minis are desktop machines.
>>
>> Now about that skin thing. I don't know how thick Apple's skin is, but
>> on a regular apple it's thin enough to eat. Thinner than a Macbook
>> Air. ;^)
>>
>> I personally don't care if you criticize Apple. I love that you buy
>> non-Mac boxes, somebody has to.
>>
>> But if your claims aren't consistent, logical and true then I can't
>> protect you in the wild world of time wasting computer bashing
>> conversations. :^)
>>
>> There are plenty of criticisms to be made without hype. For example,
>> the lack of firewire on the Air limits its market. Also, and this is
>> my biggest criticism right now, WHERE'S MY #(*$&@#$ing UPDATED MACBOOK
>> PRO WITH THE LED BACKLIT 17" HD SCREEN!!!!!!???? :^)
>>
>>
>>> By "blinding speed" I seriously meant a dual quad in general - any
>>> dual quad. You are missing
>>> the whole market of families that on average probably have about $1k
>>> to spend on a computer to serve
>>> everyone, and when faced with a full desktop with monitor included,
>>> or a cube with limited expansion and
>>> I/O capabilities, and monitor additional, where do you think they
>>> will go?
>>
>> Well lessee, I'm not missing any markets. I don't sell computers.
>>
>> If I were that struggling young family I'd buy a Linux box and be done
>> with it.
>>
>> So it sounds like what you would like to see is a Mac under $1000 with
>> dual quad chips? In time we'll probably see that. But right now, not.
>> However, the core 2 duos in the low end Macs are no slouches.
>>
>>
>>> Just sayin' that the PC aisle at CompUSA
>>> and BestBuy are always busier than the Apple sections, and the number
>>> of PC options dwarfs the Mac shelves
>>> significantly. This isn't our market, so it's easy to overlook it.
>>
>> I haven't overlooked the obvious. I'm not arguing that point. Did you
>> think I was claiming that Macs outsell all other computers? Not hardly.
>>
>> But as long as we're digressing, notice that the aisles at CompUSA are
>> shrinking fast, while Apple stores are popping up like flies. Apple's
>> market share is growing, FWIW. It's scary. PEOPLE, STOP BUYING MACS! :^)
>>
>>
>>> Nothing wrong with Macs,
>>
>> LOL! OK, that's BS. :^)
>>
>> There's plenty wrong with Macs. Just less than some of the other
>> options, depending on your needs.
>>
>>
>> > but you have to admit that the general culture
>>> and approach of Apple is "build loyalty by limiting choices
>>> both on the way in and when it comes time to upgrade".
>>
>> Heh. Now I think you're projecting because you choose to use
>> MSWindows, from a company that has been _convicted_ of limiting
>> choices in the marketplace.
>>
>> How far off topic are we now? This is turning into a boring PC/Mac
>> bashfest. Woo.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> DT
>>>
>>>
>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4791026d@linux...
>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>> I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac
>>>>> release, there are three desktop models,
>>>>> usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the
>>>>> starting price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>>>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to
>>>>> write book reports ;-).
>>>>
>>>> Sure, but you don't need a tower to write book reports. A Mac Mini
>>>> will do fine for under $1k.
>>>>
>>>> It's entirely possible to criticize the Mac without hyperbole, ya
>>>> know. :^)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800
>>>>> for one of the six base models. In the PC world
>>>>> there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100
>>>>> increment,
>>>>
>>>> Right, because there are more companies making hardware for
>>>> MSWindows boxes. That's an advantage because there is more range of
>>>> choice, and a disadvantage because they all have to dance to the
>>>> MSWindows beat.
>>>>
>>>> Apple has fewer boxes but they control everything on those boxes.
>>>> That's a disadvantage because of the fewer choices, and an advantage
>>>> because there is less to go wrong or be incompatible, and if
>>>> anything does goes wrong, a single company can fix it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a
>>>>> $300 desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this
>>>>> on, costing significantly less than the least expensive Macbook
>>>>> (current) and only a slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from
>>>>> early last year), for $400 less than the comparable Macbook, but
>>>>> otherwise, pretty much identical (it does have a partially aluminum
>>>>> case, and feels better than the Macbooks I've tried).
>>>>
>>>> Sounds like you like your computer. Great!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the
>>>>> personal computer market... ;-)
>>>>
>>>> There are many reasons. It would take too long to recount the
>>>> history here.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs
>>>>> (other than the significant investment in software that is costly
>>>>> to replace or crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's
>>>>> reasoning is based on the fact that he's enamoured with the chique
>>>>> (sp?) of Apple, rather than just getting what he needs, and that
>>>>> without a mystical, glorious Keynote unveiling of trend setting
>>>>> products, that chique doesn't last long.
>>>>
>>>> Poor guy. But his claims went beyond that. I zinged him for his
>>>> hyperbole.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Imho, that chique is hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product
>>>>> prices higher, with less range of price point competition, but for
>>>>> Apple customers, price doesn't seem to be a concern.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe for some, but not overall. Apple is competing on features and
>>>> implementation. And even, lately, on price.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants them. Imho,
>>>>> it should be the other way around, and then we would truly have
>>>>> more choices.
>>>>
>>>> Choice is good. Competition is good.
>>>>
>>>> Apple no more has its customers where it wants them than Microsoft
>>>> has theirs well thumbed over. For example you yourself are trapped
>>>> in Microsoftland by your committed investments there.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> re: BeOS.... same here.
>>>>
>>>> Yep. Sigh... Yet another reason to mistrust Apple, to an extent, and
>>>> Microsoft to a much larger extent.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>
>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that
>>>>>>> of every PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure,
>>>>>>> more computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the
>>>>>>> family photo album.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining
>>>>>> about _is_ under $2K (configured the way most people who care
>>>>>> about price would buy it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for
>>>>>> his Mac doesn't mean others will. But if that's your complaint,
>>>>>> there are Macs for less than $2k.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be
>>>>>> noted that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's,
>>>>>> and the new super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's
>>>>>> (and under 2K in the standard configuration).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't
>>>>>>> really out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in
>>>>>>> it's sub $2k price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes,
>>>>>> except for the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans
>>>>>> flash drive. As for "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a
>>>>>> plastic case. But my wife has one (G4 version); it seems
>>>>>> reasonably rugged and has held up well. It also gets better
>>>>>> wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but
>>>>>>> with more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set -
>>>>>>> not psyched about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same
>>>>>>> job done for a lot less money).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another
>>>>>> choice is better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought
>>>>>> a Mac, Apple would be insufferable. :^)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing
>>>>>> the envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows
>>>>>> boxes would be less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep
>>>>>> buying what moves you, be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his
>>>>>>> opening comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern
>>>>>>> for Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the
>>>>>>> same amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for
>>>>>>> the gold instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever
>>>>>>> marketing - getting you to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or
>>>>>> want, and I have a Mac.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same
>>>>>>> job done (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of
>>>>>>> course), vs. going with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip
>>>>>>> while having no choice under $2-4k or more, how else do you
>>>>>>> evaluate the two options?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be
>>>>>> "brand loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of
>>>>>> the Mac users I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them
>>>>>> as the preferred tool given the options. Frankly, I would rather
>>>>>> be using BeOS but that choice was torpedoed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is
>>>>>>> right - when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage
>>>>>>> to Air vs a regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are
>>>>>>> left with a much smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light.
>>>>>> This will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a
>>>>>> compelling enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down
>>>>>> side. :^)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people
>>>>>> outside of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it
>>>>>> in because he complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly
>>>>>> exaggerating to do so, while missing real issues with the Air.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "I’m walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could
>>>>>>>> easily be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the
>>>>>>>> MacBook Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So
>>>>>>>> he blows his credibility right off the top with that exaggerated
>>>>>>>> comparison.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody
>>>>>>>> who needs a computer would have to set it up, it’s a $4,000
>>>>>>>> 1.6Ghz, 64GB box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box
>>>>>>>> or a smokin’ MacBook Pro."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state
>>>>>>>> drive. This makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains
>>>>>>>> about is the price WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple
>>>>>>>> actually charges less than street price to add that drive.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state
>>>>>>>> drive on ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to
>>>>>>>> the MacBook Air and then compares that configuration to laptops
>>>>>>>> without an SSD. If that's the comparison, then he should compare
>>>>>>>> the $1700 non-SSD version of the Air to the other subnotebooks.
>>>>>>>> And at that point he has little point.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused
>>>>>>>> about the need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street
>>>>>>>> didn’t seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to
>>>>>>>> $169.04 the day after Steve’s speech."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares
>>>>>>>> usually go down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took
>>>>>>>> a hit on Wednesday for issues not directly related to a speech
>>>>>>>> by Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from
>>>>>>>> Apple this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true
>>>>>>>> sub-notebook. Something I could throw in a portfolio or
>>>>>>>> briefcase for short hops."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know
>>>>>>>> why the Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too
>>>>>>>> cool to buy the base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most
>>>>>>>> important announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's
>>>>>>>> growth. He did like the Time Capsule, which is at least
>>>>>>>> interesting. He hates the iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to
>>>>>>>> keep complaining about that until their exclusive relationship
>>>>>>>> ends.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94895 is a reply to message #94874] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 16:54 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>Hey James,
>
>No, it isn't another "one of those" :-)
>
>Where are their desktops you quoted? I didn't see them in the Apple store
>under "Mac Pro".
>I wasn't talking about Mac minis. They are cool, but limited since they
>can't be upgraded with extra ram
>(or so I've been told), and no PCIe slots. Is that true?
No PCI slots, but you were talking home users, now you are talking pro users.
You can still do some pro work even on a Mac Mini. The Mac Mini can be
up graded to 2GB of RAM, and you can up grade the processor. The iMac can
be upgraded to 4GB of RAM, and it comes with a higher quality 20" monitor
that you will find bundled with the typical PC in the same price range.
A single Quad core MacPro tower costs $2299.00, and there are discounts off
that price.
>
>They seem like a potentially nice solution for a sample library farm
>machine, but if Ram is limited to 2G, then
>it wouldn't work for what I need. I know other composers that considered
>the same, but had to pass on them for that
>reason alone.... again, choice... can't upgrade it to fit what you want.
I
>specifically said those weren't what I was comparing.
>HP and Dell both have minitowers/cubes now, so those would be a more
>consistent comparison, if we were
>making that comparison, but we aren't.
You said desk top computers under 2K. Now your talking sample library machines,
for pro users. Show us your idea of a sample library machine for under 2K?
I bet you can't run Mac software on out of the box with out having to hack
it. You can always argue something.
>
>I had also heard the MacMinis might not be around much longer - fact or
>rumor?
Rumor are rumors.
>
>Btw - my comments were just an observation, not a slam, or hyperbole, or
>dig - just following up with what Shelly Palmer said, pointing out that
his
>comments
>make sense to those of us who aren't Mac fanatics, even if he was
>technically generalizing,
>and he's a self proclaimed Mac fanatic.
Sure seemed like a slam.
>
>It is interesting how such an observation brings such strong reactions from
>Mac users. Kind of proves my point on
>the marketing vs. choice issue: when your customers love you, don't
>question anything, and will buy anything you sell,
>you can charge whatever you want and limit the customer's options as well.
>Case in point: Shelly's comment on
>AT&T and the iPhone - I'm sure their coverage is fine for most people (it
>was for us) - but we're on Verizon with no
>choice to even use an iPhone, so there's a pretty big missed market for
>Apple - not my problem though, but it is a limited choice situation that
>favors AT&T even if iPhone users don't like AT&T.
It's always an insult to mac users when somebody insinuates that we are stupid
because we gullibly drink the SJ marketing Cool Aid. Apple stuff Rocks,
however, not all of it appeals to me and some of it is over priced.
>
>I thought we all agreed choice was a good thing? Was I wrong in that
>assumption?
Choice is a good thing. Apple will offer other plans in time. You can unlock
the iPhone and use other carriers now.
>
>I really never intended this to be a Mac/PC debate. It was just my
>interpretation of Shelly's comments,
>nothing more. Let's leave it there please.
>
>Regards,
>Dedric
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:47910acd$1@linux...
>>
>> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac release,
>>>there
>>
>>>are three desktop models,
>>>usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the starting
>>
>>>price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>>no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write
>> book
>>>reports ;-).
>>>
>>>There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for
one
>> of
>>>the six base models. In the PC world
>>>there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
>>
>>>starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
>>>desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on, costing
>>
>>>significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current) and only
a
>>
>>>slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last year), for $400
>> less
>>>than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise, pretty much identical (it
does
>>
>>>have a partially aluminum case, and feels better than the Macbooks I've
>>
>>>tried).
>>>
>>>There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the personal
>>
>>>computer market... ;-)
>>>
>>>I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other
than
>>
>>>the significant investment in software that is costly to replace or
>>>crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based on the
>> fact
>>>that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than just
>>>getting
>>
>>>what he needs, and that without a mystical, glorious Keynote unveiling
of
>>
>>>trend setting products, that chique doesn't last long. Imho, that chique
>> is
>>>hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product prices higher, with less
>>>range
>>
>>>of price point competition, but for Apple customers, price doesn't seem
>> to
>>>be a concern. Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants
>>>them.
>>
>>>Imho, it should be the other way around, and then we would truly have
more
>>
>>>choices.
>>>
>>>re: BeOS.... same here.
>>>
>>>Dedric
>>
>>
>> Here we go again! Apple has desk top models under 2K. Apple's market
>> share
>> probably has more to do with ignorant people spewing ignorant things about
>> Apple.
>>
>> Apple desk top models that start under 2K:
>>
>>
>> . 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>> . 1GB memory
>> . 80GB hard drive1
>>
>>
>> $599.00
>> or as low as $15 a month
>>
>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>> . 1GB memory
>> . 120GB hard drive1
>>
>>
>> $799.00
>> or as low as $19 a month
>>
>>
>>
>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>> . 1GB memory
>> . 250GB hard drive1
>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>> . ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
>>
>>
>> $1,199.00
>> or as low as $29 a month
>>
>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>> . 1GB memory
>> . 320GB hard drive1
>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>
>> $1,499.00
>> or as low as $36 a month
>>
>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>> . 1GB memory
>> . 320GB hard drive1
>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>
>> $1,799.00
>> or as low as $43 a month
>>
>>
>> Or are we going to argue form factor?
>>
>>>
>>>"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of
>>>>> every
>>
>>>>> PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
>>
>>>>> photo album.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining about
>> _is_
>>>> under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price would
buy
>>
>>>> it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't mean others
>>
>>>> will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for less than $2k.
>>>>
>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be noted
>>
>>>> that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the new
>>
>>>> super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K in
the
>>
>>>> standard configuration).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't really
>>
>>>>> out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's sub
$2k
>>
>>>>> price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>
>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except
for
>>
>>>> the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive. As
>> for
>>>> "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my wife has
>> one
>>>> (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up well. It also
>>
>>>> gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but with
>>
>>>>> more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not psyched
>>
>>>>> about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job done for a
lot
>>
>>>>> less money).
>>>>
>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another choice
>> is
>>>> better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac, Apple
>>>> would
>>
>>>> be insufferable. :^)
>>>>
>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>>>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes would
>> be
>>>> less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what moves
>>>> you,
>>
>>>> be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>>>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the same
>>
>>>>> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the gold
>>
>>>>> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting
>> you
>>>>> to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>>
>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or want,
>> and
>>>> I have a Mac.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job
done
>>
>>>>> (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course), vs.
>>>>> going
>>
>>>>> with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having no choice
>>
>>>>> under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
>>>>
>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be "brand
>>
>>>> loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the Mac
>>>> users
>>
>>>> I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the preferred
>> tool
>>>> given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using BeOS but that choice
>>
>>>> was torpedoed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is right
>> -
>>>>> when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to Air vs
a
>>
>>>>> regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left with a much
>>
>>>>> smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>>
>>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light. This
>>
>>>> will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a compelling
>>
>>>> enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side. :^)
>>>>
>>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people outside
>>
>>>> of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in because
he
>>
>>>> complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly exaggerating to
do
>> so,
>>>> while missing real issues with the Air.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>
>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "I'm walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could easily
>>
>>>>>> be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the MacBook
>>
>>>>>> Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he blows his
>>
>>>>>> credibility right off the top with that exaggerated comparison.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody who
>>
>>>>>> needs a computer would have to set it up, it's a $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB
>>
>>>>>> box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin'
>>>>>> MacBook
>>
>>>>>> Pro."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive.
>> This
>>>>>> makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the price
>>
>>>>>> WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less than
>>>>>> street
>>
>>>>>> price to add that drive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state drive
>> on
>>>>>> ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the MacBook
Air
>>
>>>>>> and then compares that configuration to laptops without an SSD. If
>>>>>> that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700 non-SSD
>>>>>> version
>>
>>>>>> of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that point he has little
>>
>>>>>> point.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused about
>> the
>>>>>> need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn't
>>
>>>>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04 the
>> day
>>>>>> after Steve's speech."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually
>> go
>>>>>> down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on
>>>>>> Wednesday
>>
>>>>>> for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from Apple
>>
>>>>>> this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook.
>>>>>> Something
>>
>>>>>> I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why
the
>>
>>>>>> Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to buy
the
>>
>>>>>> base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most important
>>
>>>>>> announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's growth. He did
>>
>>>>>> like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting. He hates the
>>>>>> iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining about that
>>>>>> until
>>
>>>>>> their exclusive relationship ends.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94899 is a reply to message #94890] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 16:41 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey Jamie - I agree completely - Shelly was venting more than reviewing.
Regarding the tricked out Mac pro vs. satellites, yes, it would make sense
to go with a single machine, if the host apps could allocate a full 64-bit
address space to Kontakt, etc, but from what I've read so far on the East
West/Soundsonline forum, they can't (Logic included I think). That's only a
matter of time though - just not sure when or how long it will be.
There may be a few other limitations to running a full blown orchestral lib
a la VSL or EWQL Symphonic Platinum
on a single machine, but we are getting closer no doubt. Such a rig would
need at least 16G - 32 preferrably, so it's not
a cheap move when there are working satellite systems already in place.
On the single quad - didn't even see that. Still a bit pricey compared to a
single-quad, single socket PC (I'm guessing the MacPro motherboard is still
a dual socket with a single quad - those boards are around $400 I think, and
the single Xeon is more than the conroe Quad, which I can get for $300).
For the difference with the Mac Pro, even at $500, I would go dual quad.
It's a difference of allocating a machine for samples, or video playback
(which is hard to justify in the $2k and up range), vs. buying a host
system. For a host though, dual quad would be the way to go, and I probably
will this year. There the Mac prices are certainly competitive.... I just
can't get Sequoia ported to Mac.....and my Adobe CS3 web suite that I need
to manage my site has no platform crossgrade plan (pretty lame imho -
probably the only company I know of that has either/or platform licensing).
The other issue for the time being is that Nuendo is running 10-15% faster
on XP than Leopard. Hopefully that will change though.
I'd love to have a 1:1 choice between them - then it comes down to fun and
convenience. Mac wins there.
Btw - I really do admire Apple's attention to design, form and function and
making products that do in fact set a high standard for
the industry in general. It's really a great product line. Lovin' my iPod
Touch.
Regards,
Dedric
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:47913a5b@linux...
> Dedric Terry wrote:
>> Hey Jamie - I really didn't intend to get this far into this, and don't
>> really have time
>> to continue much more.
>
> I'm with ya, bro.
>
>
>> I was just sharing my opinion on Shelly Palmer's report
>> saying that while I'm sure there was quite a bit of tongue in cheek to
>> his opening comments,
>> he at least was pointing out why people spend more on Macs when they
>> could get the
>> job done for much less - marketing, pure and simple.
>
> OK, but I didn't get that from his piece, my complaint is about his
> illogic and hyperbole, kinda takes away from his credibility.
>
> But anyway we can kick around the relative value another time...from a
> bigger picture perspective that includes initial price, capabilities,
> subjective feel, administration time, longevity and resale.
>
> If it were just simply marketing they wouldn't have me as a customer.
>
>
>> Just to get more to the point of options - show me where I can get a Mac
>> desktop tower with a single quad
>> core cpu system.
>
> Go to the Apple store online. Take the stock duo quad and subtract a quad
> in the configuration options. Drops the price a bit...$500.
>
> But I think the default 2.8GHZ dual quad is the sweet spot this time
> around for value - if you can use the power. The price is significantly
> lower than last month, and it's an improved version (new chipset, faster
> buses, better graphics).
>
>
>> Btw - I was in Best Buy today - there were probably 20 different laptop
>> models, and 30 desktop models there
>> to choose from. 2 iMacs, 1 desktop, and 3 laptops. Regardless of
>> preference, the distinct differences imho,
>> are 1) that Apple sells "cool" better than anyone, and 2) that the others
>> sell "choice" much better simply
>> but putting more obvious choices in front of you (most of which are at
>> least partially redundant of course, but
>> it's still a marketing tactic - and HP and Sony have some seriously cool
>> looking self-contained monitor/cpu systems with very nice wireless
>> keyboards - including a touch screen model from HP for about $1500 that
>> is a blast to use). Again, just an observation.
>
> Choices are good.
>
> It'd be even better if all those laptops weren't locked into one of the
> biggest monopolies (and yes, marketing organizations) on earth. As you
> imply, some of that choice is illusionary. But not all.
>
> If Apple still had clones there would be more choice for OSX boxes, if
> Apple could have survived that (I think yes but those who justify dropping
> the Mac clones long ago think it saved the company).
>
>
>> If I could get a MacMini with the option to trick it out with 8G and a
>> second SATA drive it would be seriously enticing
>> for peripheral sample libraries (you need to come down and see this in
>> action - it's a beautiful thing to offload that much
>> processing). I know other composers that would have gone that route as
>> well, were it not
>> for the ram limitation. Seriously - it's a good deal for that purpose
>> since it isn't overstocked with extras one wouldn't need for
>> such a use, and the form factor would be really nice for stacking away in
>> a computer room.
>
> I'm looking forward to seeing your setup!
>
> I don't know much about the Mac Mini's expansion options. Lessee...looks
> like 2GB is it.
>
> But wouldn't an 8 core box with a ton of RAM (holds up to 32GB now) be
> able to keep up with separate smaller computers, and be a bit more
> convenient at that?
>
> I'd prefer to have it all in one box (like I do now with the dual G5,
> although I'm not using some of the more demanding libraries like you are).
>
> When I get the new laptop I might experiment with Logic's networking
> feature, just to see how well it works to have some instruments and FX
> running on another box. But the dual G5 is holding its own, so far. Might
> be able to hold out for a 16 core box to replace the G5, in another year
> or so... :^)
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
>> Thanks,
>> Dedric
>>
>>
>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4791204e@linux...
>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>> Now why did you think I was criticizing Apple with hyperbole? Could it
>>>> be
>>>> that Apple skin is just a little thin? And... I don't recall a desktop
>>>> release with more than
>>>> 3 models... so, "every" means "every". That's not called hyperbole,
>>>> it's called history. ;-))
>>>
>>> Maybe I misunderstood you. I saw "hyperbole" in your statement only
>>> because you switched from talking about laptops, to talking about
>>> "desktop models," claimed they were only 2K and up, and said there's no
>>> range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write
>>> book reports.
>>>
>>> In fact there is a range of suitable Macs below that. In both laptops
>>> and "desktops." Plenty fast for writing reports. Overkill even.
>>>
>>> BTW, both iMacs and Mac Minis are desktop machines.
>>>
>>> Now about that skin thing. I don't know how thick Apple's skin is, but
>>> on a regular apple it's thin enough to eat. Thinner than a Macbook Air.
>>> ;^)
>>>
>>> I personally don't care if you criticize Apple. I love that you buy
>>> non-Mac boxes, somebody has to.
>>>
>>> But if your claims aren't consistent, logical and true then I can't
>>> protect you in the wild world of time wasting computer bashing
>>> conversations. :^)
>>>
>>> There are plenty of criticisms to be made without hype. For example, the
>>> lack of firewire on the Air limits its market. Also, and this is my
>>> biggest criticism right now, WHERE'S MY #(*$&@#$ing UPDATED MACBOOK PRO
>>> WITH THE LED BACKLIT 17" HD SCREEN!!!!!!???? :^)
>>>
>>>
>>>> By "blinding speed" I seriously meant a dual quad in general - any dual
>>>> quad. You are missing
>>>> the whole market of families that on average probably have about $1k to
>>>> spend on a computer to serve
>>>> everyone, and when faced with a full desktop with monitor included, or
>>>> a cube with limited expansion and
>>>> I/O capabilities, and monitor additional, where do you think they will
>>>> go?
>>>
>>> Well lessee, I'm not missing any markets. I don't sell computers.
>>>
>>> If I were that struggling young family I'd buy a Linux box and be done
>>> with it.
>>>
>>> So it sounds like what you would like to see is a Mac under $1000 with
>>> dual quad chips? In time we'll probably see that. But right now, not.
>>> However, the core 2 duos in the low end Macs are no slouches.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Just sayin' that the PC aisle at CompUSA
>>>> and BestBuy are always busier than the Apple sections, and the number
>>>> of PC options dwarfs the Mac shelves
>>>> significantly. This isn't our market, so it's easy to overlook it.
>>>
>>> I haven't overlooked the obvious. I'm not arguing that point. Did you
>>> think I was claiming that Macs outsell all other computers? Not hardly.
>>>
>>> But as long as we're digressing, notice that the aisles at CompUSA are
>>> shrinking fast, while Apple stores are popping up like flies. Apple's
>>> market share is growing, FWIW. It's scary. PEOPLE, STOP BUYING MACS! :^)
>>>
>>>
>>>> Nothing wrong with Macs,
>>>
>>> LOL! OK, that's BS. :^)
>>>
>>> There's plenty wrong with Macs. Just less than some of the other
>>> options, depending on your needs.
>>>
>>>
>>> > but you have to admit that the general culture
>>>> and approach of Apple is "build loyalty by limiting choices
>>>> both on the way in and when it comes time to upgrade".
>>>
>>> Heh. Now I think you're projecting because you choose to use MSWindows,
>>> from a company that has been _convicted_ of limiting choices in the
>>> marketplace.
>>>
>>> How far off topic are we now? This is turning into a boring PC/Mac
>>> bashfest. Woo.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> DT
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:4791026d@linux...
>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>> I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac
>>>>>> release, there are three desktop models,
>>>>>> usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the
>>>>>> starting price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>>>>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to
>>>>>> write book reports ;-).
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure, but you don't need a tower to write book reports. A Mac Mini
>>>>> will do fine for under $1k.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's entirely possible to criticize the Mac without hyperbole, ya
>>>>> know. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for
>>>>>> one of the six base models. In the PC world
>>>>>> there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100
>>>>>> increment,
>>>>>
>>>>> Right, because there are more companies making hardware for MSWindows
>>>>> boxes. That's an advantage because there is more range of choice, and
>>>>> a disadvantage because they all have to dance to the MSWindows beat.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apple has fewer boxes but they control everything on those boxes.
>>>>> That's a disadvantage because of the fewer choices, and an advantage
>>>>> because there is less to go wrong or be incompatible, and if anything
>>>>> does goes wrong, a single company can fix it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
>>>>>> desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on,
>>>>>> costing significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current)
>>>>>> and only a slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last
>>>>>> year), for $400 less than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise,
>>>>>> pretty much identical (it does have a partially aluminum case, and
>>>>>> feels better than the Macbooks I've tried).
>>>>>
>>>>> Sounds like you like your computer. Great!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the
>>>>>> personal computer market... ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> There are many reasons. It would take too long to recount the history
>>>>> here.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other
>>>>>> than the significant investment in software that is costly to replace
>>>>>> or crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based
>>>>>> on the fact that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple,
>>>>>> rather than just getting what he needs, and that without a mystical,
>>>>>> glorious Keynote unveiling of trend setting products, that chique
>>>>>> doesn't last long.
>>>>>
>>>>> Poor guy. But his claims went beyond that. I zinged him for his
>>>>> hyperbole.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Imho, that chique is hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product
>>>>>> prices higher, with less range of price point competition, but for
>>>>>> Apple customers, price doesn't seem to be a concern.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe for some, but not overall. Apple is competing on features and
>>>>> implementation. And even, lately, on price.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants them. Imho,
>>>>>> it should be the other way around, and then we would truly have more
>>>>>> choices.
>>>>>
>>>>> Choice is good. Competition is good.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apple no more has its customers where it wants them than Microsoft has
>>>>> theirs well thumbed over. For example you yourself are trapped in
>>>>> Microsoftland by your committed investments there.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> re: BeOS.... same here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yep. Sigh... Yet another reason to mistrust Apple, to an extent, and
>>>>> Microsoft to a much larger extent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of
>>>>>>>> every PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>>>>>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the
>>>>>>>> family photo album.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining
>>>>>>> about _is_ under $2K (configured the way most people who care about
>>>>>>> price would buy it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac
>>>>>>> doesn't mean others will. But if that's your complaint, there are
>>>>>>> Macs for less than $2k.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be
>>>>>>> noted that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and
>>>>>>> the new super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and
>>>>>>> under 2K in the standard configuration).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't
>>>>>>>> really out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in
>>>>>>>> it's sub $2k price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except
>>>>>>> for the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash
>>>>>>> drive. As for "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case.
>>>>>>> But my wife has one (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has
>>>>>>> held up well. It also gets better wireless reception than my
>>>>>>> metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but
>>>>>>>> with more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not
>>>>>>>> psyched about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job
>>>>>>>> done for a lot less money).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another
>>>>>>> choice is better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a
>>>>>>> Mac, Apple would be insufferable. :^)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>>>>>>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes
>>>>>>> would be less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying
>>>>>>> what moves you, be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>>>>>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>>>>>>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the
>>>>>>>> same amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for
>>>>>>>> the gold instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever
>>>>>>>> marketing - getting you to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or
>>>>>>> want, and I have a Mac.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job
>>>>>>>> done (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of
>>>>>>>> course), vs. going with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip
>>>>>>>> while having no choice under $2-4k or more, how else do you
>>>>>>>> evaluate the two options?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be
>>>>>>> "brand loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of
>>>>>>> the Mac users I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them
>>>>>>> as the preferred tool given the options. Frankly, I would rather be
>>>>>>> using BeOS but that choice was torpedoed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is
>>>>>>>> right - when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage
>>>>>>>> to Air vs a regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are
>>>>>>>> left with a much smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light.
>>>>>>> This will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a
>>>>>>> compelling enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side.
>>>>>>> :^)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people
>>>>>>> outside of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in
>>>>>>> because he complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly
>>>>>>> exaggerating to do so, while missing real issues with the Air.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "I’m walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could
>>>>>>>>> easily be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the
>>>>>>>>> MacBook Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he
>>>>>>>>> blows his credibility right off the top with that exaggerated
>>>>>>>>> comparison.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody
>>>>>>>>> who needs a computer would have to set it up, it’s a $4,000
>>>>>>>>> 1.6Ghz, 64GB box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or
>>>>>>>>> a smokin’ MacBook Pro."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state
>>>>>>>>> drive. This makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains
>>>>>>>>> about is the price WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually
>>>>>>>>> charges less than street price to add that drive.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state
>>>>>>>>> drive on ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to
>>>>>>>>> the MacBook Air and then compares that configuration to laptops
>>>>>>>>> without an SSD. If that's the comparison, then he should compare
>>>>>>>>> the $1700 non-SSD version of the Air to the other subnotebooks.
>>>>>>>>> And at that point he has little point.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused
>>>>>>>>> about the need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn’t
>>>>>>>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04
>>>>>>>>> the day after Steve’s speech."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares
>>>>>>>>> usually go down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a
>>>>>>>>> hit on Wednesday for issues not directly related to a speech by
>>>>>>>>> Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from
>>>>>>>>> Apple this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true
>>>>>>>>> sub-notebook. Something I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase
>>>>>>>>> for short hops."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why
>>>>>>>>> the Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to
>>>>>>>>> buy the base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most
>>>>>>>>> important announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's
>>>>>>>>> growth. He did like the Time Capsule, which is at least
>>>>>>>>> interesting. He hates the iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to
>>>>>>>>> keep complaining about that until their exclusive relationship
>>>>>>>>> ends.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94902 is a reply to message #94895] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 17:15 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi James,
No intent to inflame or insult at all - let's try to be a little less
sensitive and not read into
PC users' posts.
See my other post to Jamie - I do think Apple makes a great line of
products.
The conversation really detoured way too much from the
original point, because, of course, you can argue anything, and we all tend
to read
from our own persectives, not always understanding the intent of what we are
replying
to, and too often looking for an angle to refute the other's opinion.
Curiosity question: can you unlock an iPhone within Apple's license? i.e.,
I know it can be done, but
Apple previously issued updates that reportedly wiped out 3rd party apps in
an effort to
plug that hole - have they recanted, or is it still the same as OSX - you
"can" install
it on any hardware, but you can't upgrade it since it violates the EULA. I
might consider one
at some point if it's truly open now.
Btw - I saw a super slim/mini wireless Mac keyboard at Best Buy - not too
bad at $79.
If I had a Mac, that would be a superb space saver esp. for studio use. My
Logitech wireless
is great and a real space saver, but not as small or thin. Really
impressive - coolest mini keyboard with
full sized keys I've seen - aluminum bed too so it seemed really solid, but
with a great feel to the keys.
Thanks,
Dedric
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:47913c4a$1@linux...
>
> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>Hey James,
>>
>>No, it isn't another "one of those" :-)
>>
>>Where are their desktops you quoted? I didn't see them in the Apple store
>
>>under "Mac Pro".
>>I wasn't talking about Mac minis. They are cool, but limited since they
>
>>can't be upgraded with extra ram
>>(or so I've been told), and no PCIe slots. Is that true?
>
> No PCI slots, but you were talking home users, now you are talking pro
> users.
> You can still do some pro work even on a Mac Mini. The Mac Mini can be
> up graded to 2GB of RAM, and you can up grade the processor. The iMac can
> be upgraded to 4GB of RAM, and it comes with a higher quality 20" monitor
> that you will find bundled with the typical PC in the same price range.
> A single Quad core MacPro tower costs $2299.00, and there are discounts
> off
> that price.
>>
>>They seem like a potentially nice solution for a sample library farm
>>machine, but if Ram is limited to 2G, then
>>it wouldn't work for what I need. I know other composers that considered
>
>>the same, but had to pass on them for that
>>reason alone.... again, choice... can't upgrade it to fit what you want.
> I
>>specifically said those weren't what I was comparing.
>>HP and Dell both have minitowers/cubes now, so those would be a more
>>consistent comparison, if we were
>>making that comparison, but we aren't.
>
> You said desk top computers under 2K. Now your talking sample library
> machines,
> for pro users. Show us your idea of a sample library machine for under
> 2K?
> I bet you can't run Mac software on out of the box with out having to hack
> it. You can always argue something.
>
>>
>>I had also heard the MacMinis might not be around much longer - fact or
>
>>rumor?
>
> Rumor are rumors.
>>
>>Btw - my comments were just an observation, not a slam, or hyperbole, or
>>dig - just following up with what Shelly Palmer said, pointing out that
> his
>>comments
>>make sense to those of us who aren't Mac fanatics, even if he was
>>technically generalizing,
>>and he's a self proclaimed Mac fanatic.
>
> Sure seemed like a slam.
>>
>>It is interesting how such an observation brings such strong reactions
>>from
>
>>Mac users. Kind of proves my point on
>>the marketing vs. choice issue: when your customers love you, don't
>>question anything, and will buy anything you sell,
>>you can charge whatever you want and limit the customer's options as well.
>
>>Case in point: Shelly's comment on
>>AT&T and the iPhone - I'm sure their coverage is fine for most people (it
>
>>was for us) - but we're on Verizon with no
>>choice to even use an iPhone, so there's a pretty big missed market for
>
>>Apple - not my problem though, but it is a limited choice situation that
>
>>favors AT&T even if iPhone users don't like AT&T.
>
> It's always an insult to mac users when somebody insinuates that we are
> stupid
> because we gullibly drink the SJ marketing Cool Aid. Apple stuff Rocks,
> however, not all of it appeals to me and some of it is over priced.
>>
>>I thought we all agreed choice was a good thing? Was I wrong in that
>>assumption?
>
> Choice is a good thing. Apple will offer other plans in time. You can
> unlock
> the iPhone and use other carriers now.
>
>>
>>I really never intended this to be a Mac/PC debate. It was just my
>>interpretation of Shelly's comments,
>>nothing more. Let's leave it there please.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Dedric
>>
>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:47910acd$1@linux...
>>>
>>> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac release,
>
>>>>there
>>>
>>>>are three desktop models,
>>>>usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the starting
>>>
>>>>price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>>>no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write
>>> book
>>>>reports ;-).
>>>>
>>>>There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for
> one
>>> of
>>>>the six base models. In the PC world
>>>>there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
>>>
>>>>starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
>>>>desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on, costing
>>>
>>>>significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current) and only
> a
>>>
>>>>slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last year), for $400
>>> less
>>>>than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise, pretty much identical (it
> does
>>>
>>>>have a partially aluminum case, and feels better than the Macbooks I've
>>>
>>>>tried).
>>>>
>>>>There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the personal
>>>
>>>>computer market... ;-)
>>>>
>>>>I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other
> than
>>>
>>>>the significant investment in software that is costly to replace or
>>>>crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based on the
>>> fact
>>>>that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than just
>>>>getting
>>>
>>>>what he needs, and that without a mystical, glorious Keynote unveiling
> of
>>>
>>>>trend setting products, that chique doesn't last long. Imho, that
>>>>chique
>>> is
>>>>hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product prices higher, with less
>
>>>>range
>>>
>>>>of price point competition, but for Apple customers, price doesn't seem
>>> to
>>>>be a concern. Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants
>
>>>>them.
>>>
>>>>Imho, it should be the other way around, and then we would truly have
> more
>>>
>>>>choices.
>>>>
>>>>re: BeOS.... same here.
>>>>
>>>>Dedric
>>>
>>>
>>> Here we go again! Apple has desk top models under 2K. Apple's market
>
>>> share
>>> probably has more to do with ignorant people spewing ignorant things
>>> about
>>> Apple.
>>>
>>> Apple desk top models that start under 2K:
>>>
>>>
>>> . 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 80GB hard drive1
>>>
>>>
>>> $599.00
>>> or as low as $15 a month
>>>
>>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 120GB hard drive1
>>>
>>>
>>> $799.00
>>> or as low as $19 a month
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 250GB hard drive1
>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
>>>
>>>
>>> $1,199.00
>>> or as low as $29 a month
>>>
>>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 320GB hard drive1
>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>>
>>> $1,499.00
>>> or as low as $36 a month
>>>
>>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 320GB hard drive1
>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>>
>>> $1,799.00
>>> or as low as $43 a month
>>>
>>>
>>> Or are we going to argue form factor?
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of
>
>>>>>> every
>>>
>>>>>> PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>>>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
>>>
>>>>>> photo album.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining about
>>> _is_
>>>>> under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price would
> buy
>>>
>>>>> it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't mean others
>>>
>>>>> will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for less than $2k.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be noted
>>>
>>>>> that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the new
>>>
>>>>> super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K in
> the
>>>
>>>>> standard configuration).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't
>>>>>> really
>>>
>>>>>> out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's sub
> $2k
>>>
>>>>>> price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>>
>>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except
> for
>>>
>>>>> the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive. As
>>> for
>>>>> "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my wife has
>>> one
>>>>> (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up well. It also
>>>
>>>>> gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but with
>>>
>>>>>> more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not psyched
>>>
>>>>>> about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job done for a
> lot
>>>
>>>>>> less money).
>>>>>
>>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another choice
>>> is
>>>>> better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac, Apple
>
>>>>> would
>>>
>>>>> be insufferable. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>>>>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes would
>>> be
>>>>> less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what moves
>
>>>>> you,
>>>
>>>>> be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>>>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>>>>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the same
>>>
>>>>>> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the gold
>>>
>>>>>> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting
>>> you
>>>>>> to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or want,
>>> and
>>>>> I have a Mac.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job
> done
>>>
>>>>>> (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course), vs.
>
>>>>>> going
>>>
>>>>>> with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having no choice
>>>
>>>>>> under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
>>>>>
>>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be
>>>>> "brand
>>>
>>>>> loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the Mac
>
>>>>> users
>>>
>>>>> I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the preferred
>>> tool
>>>>> given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using BeOS but that
>>>>> choice
>>>
>>>>> was torpedoed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is
>>>>>> right
>>> -
>>>>>> when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to Air vs
> a
>>>
>>>>>> regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left with a much
>>>
>>>>>> smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>>>
>>>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light. This
>>>
>>>>> will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a
>>>>> compelling
>>>
>>>>> enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people
>>>>> outside
>>>
>>>>> of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in because
> he
>>>
>>>>> complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly exaggerating to
> do
>>> so,
>>>>> while missing real issues with the Air.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "I'm walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could
>>>>>>> easily
>>>
>>>>>>> be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the
>>>>>>> MacBook
>>>
>>>>>>> Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he blows his
>>>
>>>>>>> credibility right off the top with that exaggerated comparison.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody who
>>>
>>>>>>> needs a computer would have to set it up, it's a $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB
>>>
>>>>>>> box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin'
>>>>>>> MacBook
>>>
>>>>>>> Pro."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive.
>>> This
>>>>>>> makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the
>>>>>>> price
>>>
>>>>>>> WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less than
>
>>>>>>> street
>>>
>>>>>>> price to add that drive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state drive
>>> on
>>>>>>> ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the MacBook
> Air
>>>
>>>>>>> and then compares that configuration to laptops without an SSD. If
>>>>>>> that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700 non-SSD
>>>>>>> version
>>>
>>>>>>> of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that point he has
>>>>>>> little
>>>
>>>>>>> point.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused about
>>> the
>>>>>>> need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn't
>>>
>>>>>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04 the
>>> day
>>>>>>> after Steve's speech."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually
>>> go
>>>>>>> down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on
>>>>>>> Wednesday
>>>
>>>>>>> for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from Apple
>>>
>>>>>>> this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook.
>>>>>>> Something
>>>
>>>>>>> I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why
> the
>>>
>>>>>>> Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to buy
> the
>>>
>>>>>>> base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most
>>>>>>> important
>>>
>>>>>>> announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's growth. He did
>>>
>>>>>>> like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting. He hates the
>>>>>>> iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining about that
>
>>>>>>> until
>>>
>>>>>>> their exclusive relationship ends.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94906 is a reply to message #94899] |
Fri, 18 January 2008 18:04 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dedric Terry wrote:
> Hey Jamie - I agree completely - Shelly was venting more than reviewing.
>
> Regarding the tricked out Mac pro vs. satellites, yes, it would make
> sense to go with a single machine, if the host apps could allocate a
> full 64-bit address space to Kontakt, etc, but from what I've read so
> far on the East West/Soundsonline forum, they can't (Logic included I
> think). That's only a matter of time though - just not sure when or how
> long it will be.
Don't audio unit plugins get their own address space (I don't know, just
wondering)? But anyway since OSX has 64 bit memory addressing, you're
probably right that over time more apps will take advantage of it.
> There may be a few other limitations to running a full blown orchestral
> lib a la VSL or EWQL Symphonic Platinum
> on a single machine, but we are getting closer no doubt. Such a rig
> would need at least 16G - 32 preferrably, so it's not
> a cheap move when there are working satellite systems already in place.
No, not cheap, but it's probably more flexible use of the RAM than
spreading it out over multiple boxes. If it's in one box you can use it
for other apps more easily.
> On the single quad - didn't even see that. Still a bit pricey compared
> to a single-quad, single socket PC (I'm guessing the MacPro motherboard
> is still a dual socket with a single quad - those boards are around $400
> I think, and the single Xeon is more than the conroe Quad, which I can
> get for $300). For the difference with the Mac Pro, even at $500, I
> would go dual quad. It's a difference of allocating a machine for
> samples, or video playback (which is hard to justify in the $2k and up
> range), vs. buying a host system. For a host though, dual quad would be
> the way to go, and I probably will this year. There the Mac prices are
> certainly competitive.... I just can't get Sequoia ported to Mac.....and
> my Adobe CS3 web suite that I need to manage my site has no platform
> crossgrade plan (pretty lame imho - probably the only company I know of
> that has either/or platform licensing).
Yep, that is lame. Luckily the Mac can run MSWindows in another, uh,
window, via Parallels or that other VM.
With the single quad, you could presumably add the other quad later to
almost double the speed. Nice expandability for anyone who's $500 short
of affording the dual quad. But yeah, I'd buy the dual quad from the
getgo if I were buying right now.
> The other issue for the time being is that Nuendo is running 10-15%
> faster on XP than Leopard. Hopefully that will change though.
> I'd love to have a 1:1 choice between them - then it comes down to fun
> and convenience. Mac wins there.
Interesting, I wonder if the optimizations are needed on the OSX side,
if it's a Nuendo porting problem, or both.
> Btw - I really do admire Apple's attention to design, form and function
> and making products that do in fact set a high standard for
> the industry in general. It's really a great product line. Lovin' my
> iPod Touch.
Glad to hear you made up with your errant Touch! I hope it learned a
valuable lesson by being left at home for a while. :^)
Don't show it to me when I come over or I might be tempted to get the
next rev. :^)
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
> Regards,
> Dedric
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:47913a5b@linux...
>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>> Hey Jamie - I really didn't intend to get this far into this, and
>>> don't really have time
>>> to continue much more.
>>
>> I'm with ya, bro.
>>
>>
>>> I was just sharing my opinion on Shelly Palmer's report
>>> saying that while I'm sure there was quite a bit of tongue in cheek
>>> to his opening comments,
>>> he at least was pointing out why people spend more on Macs when they
>>> could get the
>>> job done for much less - marketing, pure and simple.
>>
>> OK, but I didn't get that from his piece, my complaint is about his
>> illogic and hyperbole, kinda takes away from his credibility.
>>
>> But anyway we can kick around the relative value another time...from a
>> bigger picture perspective that includes initial price, capabilities,
>> subjective feel, administration time, longevity and resale.
>>
>> If it were just simply marketing they wouldn't have me as a customer.
>>
>>
>>> Just to get more to the point of options - show me where I can get a
>>> Mac desktop tower with a single quad
>>> core cpu system.
>>
>> Go to the Apple store online. Take the stock duo quad and subtract a
>> quad in the configuration options. Drops the price a bit...$500.
>>
>> But I think the default 2.8GHZ dual quad is the sweet spot this time
>> around for value - if you can use the power. The price is
>> significantly lower than last month, and it's an improved version (new
>> chipset, faster buses, better graphics).
>>
>>
>>> Btw - I was in Best Buy today - there were probably 20 different
>>> laptop models, and 30 desktop models there
>>> to choose from. 2 iMacs, 1 desktop, and 3 laptops. Regardless of
>>> preference, the distinct differences imho,
>>> are 1) that Apple sells "cool" better than anyone, and 2) that the
>>> others sell "choice" much better simply
>>> but putting more obvious choices in front of you (most of which are
>>> at least partially redundant of course, but
>>> it's still a marketing tactic - and HP and Sony have some seriously
>>> cool looking self-contained monitor/cpu systems with very nice
>>> wireless keyboards - including a touch screen model from HP for about
>>> $1500 that is a blast to use). Again, just an observation.
>>
>> Choices are good.
>>
>> It'd be even better if all those laptops weren't locked into one of
>> the biggest monopolies (and yes, marketing organizations) on earth. As
>> you imply, some of that choice is illusionary. But not all.
>>
>> If Apple still had clones there would be more choice for OSX boxes, if
>> Apple could have survived that (I think yes but those who justify
>> dropping the Mac clones long ago think it saved the company).
>>
>>
>>> If I could get a MacMini with the option to trick it out with 8G and
>>> a second SATA drive it would be seriously enticing
>>> for peripheral sample libraries (you need to come down and see this
>>> in action - it's a beautiful thing to offload that much
>>> processing). I know other composers that would have gone that route
>>> as well, were it not
>>> for the ram limitation. Seriously - it's a good deal for that
>>> purpose since it isn't overstocked with extras one wouldn't need for
>>> such a use, and the form factor would be really nice for stacking
>>> away in a computer room.
>>
>> I'm looking forward to seeing your setup!
>>
>> I don't know much about the Mac Mini's expansion options.
>> Lessee...looks like 2GB is it.
>>
>> But wouldn't an 8 core box with a ton of RAM (holds up to 32GB now) be
>> able to keep up with separate smaller computers, and be a bit more
>> convenient at that?
>>
>> I'd prefer to have it all in one box (like I do now with the dual G5,
>> although I'm not using some of the more demanding libraries like you
>> are).
>>
>> When I get the new laptop I might experiment with Logic's networking
>> feature, just to see how well it works to have some instruments and FX
>> running on another box. But the dual G5 is holding its own, so far.
>> Might be able to hold out for a 16 core box to replace the G5, in
>> another year or so... :^)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Dedric
>>>
>>>
>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4791204e@linux...
>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>> Now why did you think I was criticizing Apple with hyperbole?
>>>>> Could it be
>>>>> that Apple skin is just a little thin? And... I don't recall a
>>>>> desktop release with more than
>>>>> 3 models... so, "every" means "every". That's not called
>>>>> hyperbole, it's called history. ;-))
>>>>
>>>> Maybe I misunderstood you. I saw "hyperbole" in your statement only
>>>> because you switched from talking about laptops, to talking about
>>>> "desktop models," claimed they were only 2K and up, and said there's
>>>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to
>>>> write book reports.
>>>>
>>>> In fact there is a range of suitable Macs below that. In both
>>>> laptops and "desktops." Plenty fast for writing reports. Overkill even.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, both iMacs and Mac Minis are desktop machines.
>>>>
>>>> Now about that skin thing. I don't know how thick Apple's skin is,
>>>> but on a regular apple it's thin enough to eat. Thinner than a
>>>> Macbook Air. ;^)
>>>>
>>>> I personally don't care if you criticize Apple. I love that you buy
>>>> non-Mac boxes, somebody has to.
>>>>
>>>> But if your claims aren't consistent, logical and true then I can't
>>>> protect you in the wild world of time wasting computer bashing
>>>> conversations. :^)
>>>>
>>>> There are plenty of criticisms to be made without hype. For example,
>>>> the lack of firewire on the Air limits its market. Also, and this is
>>>> my biggest criticism right now, WHERE'S MY #(*$&@#$ing UPDATED
>>>> MACBOOK PRO WITH THE LED BACKLIT 17" HD SCREEN!!!!!!???? :^)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> By "blinding speed" I seriously meant a dual quad in general - any
>>>>> dual quad. You are missing
>>>>> the whole market of families that on average probably have about
>>>>> $1k to spend on a computer to serve
>>>>> everyone, and when faced with a full desktop with monitor included,
>>>>> or a cube with limited expansion and
>>>>> I/O capabilities, and monitor additional, where do you think they
>>>>> will go?
>>>>
>>>> Well lessee, I'm not missing any markets. I don't sell computers.
>>>>
>>>> If I were that struggling young family I'd buy a Linux box and be
>>>> done with it.
>>>>
>>>> So it sounds like what you would like to see is a Mac under $1000
>>>> with dual quad chips? In time we'll probably see that. But right
>>>> now, not. However, the core 2 duos in the low end Macs are no slouches.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Just sayin' that the PC aisle at CompUSA
>>>>> and BestBuy are always busier than the Apple sections, and the
>>>>> number of PC options dwarfs the Mac shelves
>>>>> significantly. This isn't our market, so it's easy to overlook it.
>>>>
>>>> I haven't overlooked the obvious. I'm not arguing that point. Did
>>>> you think I was claiming that Macs outsell all other computers? Not
>>>> hardly.
>>>>
>>>> But as long as we're digressing, notice that the aisles at CompUSA
>>>> are shrinking fast, while Apple stores are popping up like flies.
>>>> Apple's market share is growing, FWIW. It's scary. PEOPLE, STOP
>>>> BUYING MACS! :^)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Nothing wrong with Macs,
>>>>
>>>> LOL! OK, that's BS. :^)
>>>>
>>>> There's plenty wrong with Macs. Just less than some of the other
>>>> options, depending on your needs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > but you have to admit that the general culture
>>>>> and approach of Apple is "build loyalty by limiting choices
>>>>> both on the way in and when it comes time to upgrade".
>>>>
>>>> Heh. Now I think you're projecting because you choose to use
>>>> MSWindows, from a company that has been _convicted_ of limiting
>>>> choices in the marketplace.
>>>>
>>>> How far off topic are we now? This is turning into a boring PC/Mac
>>>> bashfest. Woo.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> DT
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:4791026d@linux...
>>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>>> I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac
>>>>>>> release, there are three desktop models,
>>>>>>> usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the
>>>>>>> starting price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>>>>>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to
>>>>>>> write book reports ;-).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure, but you don't need a tower to write book reports. A Mac Mini
>>>>>> will do fine for under $1k.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's entirely possible to criticize the Mac without hyperbole, ya
>>>>>> know. :^)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800
>>>>>>> for one of the six base models. In the PC world
>>>>>>> there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100
>>>>>>> increment,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right, because there are more companies making hardware for
>>>>>> MSWindows boxes. That's an advantage because there is more range
>>>>>> of choice, and a disadvantage because they all have to dance to
>>>>>> the MSWindows beat.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apple has fewer boxes but they control everything on those boxes.
>>>>>> That's a disadvantage because of the fewer choices, and an
>>>>>> advantage because there is less to go wrong or be incompatible,
>>>>>> and if anything does goes wrong, a single company can fix it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a
>>>>>>> $300 desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this
>>>>>>> on, costing significantly less than the least expensive Macbook
>>>>>>> (current) and only a slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from
>>>>>>> early last year), for $400 less than the comparable Macbook, but
>>>>>>> otherwise, pretty much identical (it does have a partially
>>>>>>> aluminum case, and feels better than the Macbooks I've tried).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sounds like you like your computer. Great!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the
>>>>>>> personal computer market... ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are many reasons. It would take too long to recount the
>>>>>> history here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs
>>>>>>> (other than the significant investment in software that is costly
>>>>>>> to replace or crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's
>>>>>>> reasoning is based on the fact that he's enamoured with the
>>>>>>> chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than just getting what he needs,
>>>>>>> and that without a mystical, glorious Keynote unveiling of trend
>>>>>>> setting products, that chique doesn't last long.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Poor guy. But his claims went beyond that. I zinged him for his
>>>>>> hyperbole.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Imho, that chique is hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's
>>>>>>> product prices higher, with less range of price point
>>>>>>> competition, but for Apple customers, price doesn't seem to be a
>>>>>>> concern.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe for some, but not overall. Apple is competing on features
>>>>>> and implementation. And even, lately, on price.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants them.
>>>>>>> Imho, it should be the other way around, and then we would truly
>>>>>>> have more choices.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Choice is good. Competition is good.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apple no more has its customers where it wants them than Microsoft
>>>>>> has theirs well thumbed over. For example you yourself are trapped
>>>>>> in Microsoftland by your committed investments there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> re: BeOS.... same here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yep. Sigh... Yet another reason to mistrust Apple, to an extent,
>>>>>> and Microsoft to a much larger extent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that
>>>>>>>>> of every PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure,
>>>>>>>>> more computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the
>>>>>>>>> family photo album.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining
>>>>>>>> about _is_ under $2K (configured the way most people who care
>>>>>>>> about price would buy it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for
>>>>>>>> his Mac doesn't mean others will. But if that's your complaint,
>>>>>>>> there are Macs for less than $2k.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be
>>>>>>>> noted that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's,
>>>>>>>> and the new super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's
>>>>>>>> (and under 2K in the standard configuration).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't
>>>>>>>>> really out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone
>>>>>>>>> in it's sub $2k price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes,
>>>>>>>> except for the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans
>>>>>>>> flash drive. As for "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a
>>>>>>>> plastic case. But my wife has one (G4 version); it seems
>>>>>>>> reasonably rugged and has held up well. It also gets better
>>>>>>>> wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook,
>>>>>>>>> but with more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature
>>>>>>>>> set - not psyched about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets
>>>>>>>>> the same job done for a lot less money).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another
>>>>>>>> choice is better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone
>>>>>>>> bought a Mac, Apple would be insufferable. :^)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing
>>>>>>>> the envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows
>>>>>>>> boxes would be less motivated to give you stuff you like. So
>>>>>>>> keep buying what moves you, be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his
>>>>>>>>> opening comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern
>>>>>>>>> for Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished
>>>>>>>>> the same amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he
>>>>>>>>> goes for the gold instead. In other words, he's a victim of
>>>>>>>>> clever marketing - getting you to buy way more than you need or
>>>>>>>>> want.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or
>>>>>>>> want, and I have a Mac.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same
>>>>>>>>> job done (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of
>>>>>>>>> course), vs. going with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and
>>>>>>>>> hip while having no choice under $2-4k or more, how else do you
>>>>>>>>> evaluate the two options?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be
>>>>>>>> "brand loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most
>>>>>>>> of the Mac users I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose
>>>>>>>> them as the preferred tool given the options. Frankly, I would
>>>>>>>> rather be using BeOS but that choice was torpedoed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he
>>>>>>>>> is right - when it comes down to getting the job done, any
>>>>>>>>> advantage to Air vs a regular laptop fade away pretty quickly,
>>>>>>>>> and you are left with a much smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and
>>>>>>>> light. This will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and
>>>>>>>> light is a compelling enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak)
>>>>>>>> any down side. :^)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people
>>>>>>>> outside of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned
>>>>>>>> it in because he complained about non-Air-specific-issues,
>>>>>>>> blatantly exaggerating to do so, while missing real issues with
>>>>>>>> the Air.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "I’m walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that
>>>>>>>>>> could easily be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the
>>>>>>>>>> MacBook Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings.
>>>>>>>>>> So he blows his credibility right off the top with that
>>>>>>>>>> exaggerated comparison.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way
>>>>>>>>>> anybody who needs a computer would have to set it up, it’s a
>>>>>>>>>> $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing
>>>>>>>>>> Vista box or a smokin’ MacBook Pro."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state
>>>>>>>>>> drive. This makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains
>>>>>>>>>> about is the price WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple
>>>>>>>>>> actually charges less than street price to add that drive.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state
>>>>>>>>>> drive on ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD
>>>>>>>>>> to the MacBook Air and then compares that configuration to
>>>>>>>>>> laptops without an SSD. If that's the comparison, then he
>>>>>>>>>> should compare the $1700 non-SSD version of the Air to the
>>>>>>>>>> other subnotebooks. And at that point he has little point.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused
>>>>>>>>>> about the need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street
>>>>>>>>>> didn’t seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to
>>>>>>>>>> $169.04 the day after Steve’s speech."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares
>>>>>>>>>> usually go down after the keynote. Also, the entire market
>>>>>>>>>> took a hit on Wednesday for issues not directly related to a
>>>>>>>>>> speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from
>>>>>>>>>> Apple this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true
>>>>>>>>>> sub-notebook. Something I could throw in a portfolio or
>>>>>>>>>> briefcase for short hops."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know
>>>>>>>>>> why the Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too
>>>>>>>>>> cool to buy the base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most
>>>>>>>>>> important announcement of MacWorld for future impact on
>>>>>>>>>> Apple's growth. He did like the Time Capsule, which is at
>>>>>>>>>> least interesting. He hates the iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just
>>>>>>>>>> have to keep complaining about that until their exclusive
>>>>>>>>>> relationship ends.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94921 is a reply to message #94895] |
Sat, 19 January 2008 08:12 |
Chris Ludwig
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
HI James,
I sure wish the next Gen of I-Macs or Mac Minis come with a express slot
at least. That would make them extremely attractive when it come to
expandability.
All the Air needs is either an express slot or a firewire slot and it
would be damn cool. The way it is now I got a feeling its gonna bomb.
Chris
James McCloskey wrote:
> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>
>> Hey James,
>>
>> No, it isn't another "one of those" :-)
>>
>> Where are their desktops you quoted? I didn't see them in the Apple store
>>
>
>
>> under "Mac Pro".
>> I wasn't talking about Mac minis. They are cool, but limited since they
>>
>
>
>> can't be upgraded with extra ram
>> (or so I've been told), and no PCIe slots. Is that true?
>>
>
> No PCI slots, but you were talking home users, now you are talking pro users.
> You can still do some pro work even on a Mac Mini. The Mac Mini can be
> up graded to 2GB of RAM, and you can up grade the processor. The iMac can
> be upgraded to 4GB of RAM, and it comes with a higher quality 20" monitor
> that you will find bundled with the typical PC in the same price range.
> A single Quad core MacPro tower costs $2299.00, and there are discounts off
> that price.
>
>> They seem like a potentially nice solution for a sample library farm
>> machine, but if Ram is limited to 2G, then
>> it wouldn't work for what I need. I know other composers that considered
>>
>
>
>> the same, but had to pass on them for that
>> reason alone.... again, choice... can't upgrade it to fit what you want.
>>
> I
>
>> specifically said those weren't what I was comparing.
>> HP and Dell both have minitowers/cubes now, so those would be a more
>> consistent comparison, if we were
>> making that comparison, but we aren't.
>>
>
> You said desk top computers under 2K. Now your talking sample library machines,
> for pro users. Show us your idea of a sample library machine for under 2K?
> I bet you can't run Mac software on out of the box with out having to hack
> it. You can always argue something.
>
>
>> I had also heard the MacMinis might not be around much longer - fact or
>>
>
>
>> rumor?
>>
>
> Rumor are rumors.
>
>> Btw - my comments were just an observation, not a slam, or hyperbole, or
>> dig - just following up with what Shelly Palmer said, pointing out that
>>
> his
>
>> comments
>> make sense to those of us who aren't Mac fanatics, even if he was
>> technically generalizing,
>> and he's a self proclaimed Mac fanatic.
>>
>
> Sure seemed like a slam.
>
>> It is interesting how such an observation brings such strong reactions from
>>
>
>
>> Mac users. Kind of proves my point on
>> the marketing vs. choice issue: when your customers love you, don't
>> question anything, and will buy anything you sell,
>> you can charge whatever you want and limit the customer's options as well.
>>
>
>
>> Case in point: Shelly's comment on
>> AT&T and the iPhone - I'm sure their coverage is fine for most people (it
>>
>
>
>> was for us) - but we're on Verizon with no
>> choice to even use an iPhone, so there's a pretty big missed market for
>>
>
>
>> Apple - not my problem though, but it is a limited choice situation that
>>
>
>
>> favors AT&T even if iPhone users don't like AT&T.
>>
>
> It's always an insult to mac users when somebody insinuates that we are stupid
> because we gullibly drink the SJ marketing Cool Aid. Apple stuff Rocks,
> however, not all of it appeals to me and some of it is over priced.
>
>> I thought we all agreed choice was a good thing? Was I wrong in that
>> assumption?
>>
>
> Choice is a good thing. Apple will offer other plans in time. You can unlock
> the iPhone and use other carriers now.
>
>
>> I really never intended this to be a Mac/PC debate. It was just my
>> interpretation of Shelly's comments,
>> nothing more. Let's leave it there please.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
>>
>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:47910acd$1@linux...
>>
>>> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac release,
>>>>
>
>
>>>> there
>>>>
>>>> are three desktop models,
>>>> usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the starting
>>>>
>>>> price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write
>>>>
>>> book
>>>
>>>> reports ;-).
>>>>
>>>> There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for
>>>>
> one
>
>>> of
>>>
>>>> the six base models. In the PC world
>>>> there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
>>>>
>>>> starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
>>>> desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on, costing
>>>>
>>>> significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current) and only
>>>>
> a
>
>>>> slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last year), for $400
>>>>
>>> less
>>>
>>>> than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise, pretty much identical (it
>>>>
> does
>
>>>> have a partially aluminum case, and feels better than the Macbooks I've
>>>>
>>>> tried).
>>>>
>>>> There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the personal
>>>>
>>>> computer market... ;-)
>>>>
>>>> I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other
>>>>
> than
>
>>>> the significant investment in software that is costly to replace or
>>>> crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based on the
>>>>
>>> fact
>>>
>>>> that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than just
>>>> getting
>>>>
>>>> what he needs, and that without a mystical, glorious Keynote unveiling
>>>>
> of
>
>>>> trend setting products, that chique doesn't last long. Imho, that chique
>>>>
>>> is
>>>
>>>> hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product prices higher, with less
>>>>
>
>
>>>> range
>>>>
>>>> of price point competition, but for Apple customers, price doesn't seem
>>>>
>>> to
>>>
>>>> be a concern. Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants
>>>>
>
>
>>>> them.
>>>>
>>>> Imho, it should be the other way around, and then we would truly have
>>>>
> more
>
>>>> choices.
>>>>
>>>> re: BeOS.... same here.
>>>>
>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>> Here we go again! Apple has desk top models under 2K. Apple's market
>>>
>
>
>>> share
>>> probably has more to do with ignorant people spewing ignorant things about
>>> Apple.
>>>
>>> Apple desk top models that start under 2K:
>>>
>>>
>>> . 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 80GB hard drive1
>>>
>>>
>>> $599.00
>>> or as low as $15 a month
>>>
>>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 120GB hard drive1
>>>
>>>
>>> $799.00
>>> or as low as $19 a month
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 250GB hard drive1
>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
>>>
>>>
>>> $1,199.00
>>> or as low as $29 a month
>>>
>>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 320GB hard drive1
>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>>
>>> $1,499.00
>>> or as low as $36 a month
>>>
>>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> . 1GB memory
>>> . 320GB hard drive1
>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>>
>>> $1,799.00
>>> or as low as $43 a month
>>>
>>>
>>> Or are we going to argue form factor?
>>>
>>>
>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>>
>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of
>>>>>>
>
>
>>>>>> every
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>>>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
>>>>>>
>>>>>> photo album.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining about
>>>>>
>>> _is_
>>>
>>>>> under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price would
>>>>>
> buy
>
>>>>> it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't mean others
>>>>>
>>>>> will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for less than $2k.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be noted
>>>>>
>>>>> that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the new
>>>>>
>>>>> super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K in
>>>>>
> the
>
>>>>> standard configuration).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't really
>>>>>>
>>>>>> out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's sub
>>>>>>
> $2k
>
>>>>>> price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except
>>>>>
> for
>
>>>>> the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive. As
>>>>>
>>> for
>>>
>>>>> "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my wife has
>>>>>
>>> one
>>>
>>>>> (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up well. It also
>>>>>
>>>>> gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but with
>>>>>>
>>>>>> more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not psyched
>>>>>>
>>>>>> about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job done for a
>>>>>>
> lot
>
>>>>>> less money).
>>>>>>
>>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another choice
>>>>>
>>> is
>>>
>>>>> better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac, Apple
>>>>>
>
>
>>>>> would
>>>>>
>>>>> be insufferable. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>>>>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes would
>>>>>
>>> be
>>>
>>>>> less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what moves
>>>>>
>
>
>>>>> you,
>>>>>
>>>>> be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>>>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>>>>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the same
>>>>>>
>>>>>> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the gold
>>>>>>
>>>>>> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting
>>>>>>
>>> you
>>>
>>>>>> to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or want,
>>>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>>>> I have a Mac.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job
>>>>>>
> done
>
>>>>>> (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course), vs.
>>>>>>
>
>
>>>>>> going
>>>>>>
>>>>>> with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having no choice
>>>>>>
>>>>>> under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
>>>>>>
>>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be "brand
>>>>>
>>>>> loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the Mac
>>>>>
>
>
>>>>> users
>>>>>
>>>>> I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the preferred
>>>>>
>>> tool
>>>
>>>>> given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using BeOS but that choice
>>>>>
>>>>> was torpedoed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is right
>>>>>>
>>> -
>>>
>>>>>> when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to Air vs
>>>>>>
> a
>
>>>>>> regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left with a much
>>>>>>
>>>>>> smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light. This
>>>>>
>>>>> will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a compelling
>>>>>
>>>>> enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people outside
>>>>>
>>>>> of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in because
>>>>>
> he
>
>>>>> complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly exaggerating to
>>>>>
> do
>
>>> so,
>>>
>>>>> while missing real issues with the Air.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "I'm walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could easily
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the MacBook
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he blows his
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> credibility right off the top with that exaggerated comparison.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody who
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> needs a computer would have to set it up, it's a $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin'
>>>>>>> MacBook
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pro."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive.
>>>>>>>
>>> This
>>>
>>>>>>> makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the price
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less than
>>>>>>>
>
>
>>>>>>> street
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> price to add that drive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state drive
>>>>>>>
>>> on
>>>
>>>>>>> ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the MacBook
>>>>>>>
> Air
>
>>>>>>> and then compares that configuration to laptops without an SSD. If
>>>>>>> that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700 non-SSD
>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that point he has little
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> point.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused about
>>>>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>>> need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn't
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04 the
>>>>>>>
>>> day
>>>
>>>>>>> after Steve's speech."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually
>>>>>>>
>>> go
>>>
>>>>>>> down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on
>>>>>>> Wednesday
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from Apple
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook.
>>>>>>> Something
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why
>>>>>>>
> the
>
>>>>>>> Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to buy
>>>>>>>
> the
>
>>>>>>> base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most important
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's growth. He did
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting. He hates the
>>>>>>> iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining about that
>>>>>>>
>
>
>>>>>>> until
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> their exclusive relationship ends.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>
>
--
Chris Ludwig
ADK
chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
(859) 635-5762
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94925 is a reply to message #94921] |
Sat, 19 January 2008 12:30 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>HI James,
>I sure wish the next Gen of I-Macs or Mac Minis come with a express slot
>at least. That would make them extremely attractive when it come to
>expandability.
>All the Air needs is either an express slot or a firewire slot and it
>would be damn cool. The way it is now I got a feeling its gonna bomb.
>
>Chris
>
Chris, I'm with you, I think it will bomb, but I think they will sell a bunch
at first. It's kind of weird, even psychologically it seems like your not
getting as much for the money because it's so thin. For the last year the
Apple TV bombed because it wasn't HD, now it is. Hopefully they will up
date the MacBook Air sooner than later. I'm glad I didn't pay thousands
to be at MacWorld, what a disappointment.
>
>
>James McCloskey wrote:
>> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey James,
>>>
>>> No, it isn't another "one of those" :-)
>>>
>>> Where are their desktops you quoted? I didn't see them in the Apple
store
>>>
>>
>>
>>> under "Mac Pro".
>>> I wasn't talking about Mac minis. They are cool, but limited since they
>>>
>>
>>
>>> can't be upgraded with extra ram
>>> (or so I've been told), and no PCIe slots. Is that true?
>>>
>>
>> No PCI slots, but you were talking home users, now you are talking pro
users.
>> You can still do some pro work even on a Mac Mini. The Mac Mini can
be
>> up graded to 2GB of RAM, and you can up grade the processor. The iMac
can
>> be upgraded to 4GB of RAM, and it comes with a higher quality 20" monitor
>> that you will find bundled with the typical PC in the same price range.
>> A single Quad core MacPro tower costs $2299.00, and there are discounts
off
>> that price.
>>
>>> They seem like a potentially nice solution for a sample library farm
>>> machine, but if Ram is limited to 2G, then
>>> it wouldn't work for what I need. I know other composers that considered
>>>
>>
>>
>>> the same, but had to pass on them for that
>>> reason alone.... again, choice... can't upgrade it to fit what you want.
>>>
>> I
>>
>>> specifically said those weren't what I was comparing.
>>> HP and Dell both have minitowers/cubes now, so those would be a more
>>> consistent comparison, if we were
>>> making that comparison, but we aren't.
>>>
>>
>> You said desk top computers under 2K. Now your talking sample library
machines,
>> for pro users. Show us your idea of a sample library machine for under
2K?
>> I bet you can't run Mac software on out of the box with out having to
hack
>> it. You can always argue something.
>>
>>
>>> I had also heard the MacMinis might not be around much longer - fact
or
>>>
>>
>>
>>> rumor?
>>>
>>
>> Rumor are rumors.
>>
>>> Btw - my comments were just an observation, not a slam, or hyperbole,
or
>>> dig - just following up with what Shelly Palmer said, pointing out that
>>>
>> his
>>
>>> comments
>>> make sense to those of us who aren't Mac fanatics, even if he was
>>> technically generalizing,
>>> and he's a self proclaimed Mac fanatic.
>>>
>>
>> Sure seemed like a slam.
>>
>>> It is interesting how such an observation brings such strong reactions
from
>>>
>>
>>
>>> Mac users. Kind of proves my point on
>>> the marketing vs. choice issue: when your customers love you, don't
>>> question anything, and will buy anything you sell,
>>> you can charge whatever you want and limit the customer's options as
well.
>>>
>>
>>
>>> Case in point: Shelly's comment on
>>> AT&T and the iPhone - I'm sure their coverage is fine for most people
(it
>>>
>>
>>
>>> was for us) - but we're on Verizon with no
>>> choice to even use an iPhone, so there's a pretty big missed market for
>>>
>>
>>
>>> Apple - not my problem though, but it is a limited choice situation that
>>>
>>
>>
>>> favors AT&T even if iPhone users don't like AT&T.
>>>
>>
>> It's always an insult to mac users when somebody insinuates that we are
stupid
>> because we gullibly drink the SJ marketing Cool Aid. Apple stuff Rocks,
>> however, not all of it appeals to me and some of it is over priced.
>>
>>> I thought we all agreed choice was a good thing? Was I wrong in that
>>> assumption?
>>>
>>
>> Choice is a good thing. Apple will offer other plans in time. You can
unlock
>> the iPhone and use other carriers now.
>>
>>
>>> I really never intended this to be a Mac/PC debate. It was just my
>>> interpretation of Shelly's comments,
>>> nothing more. Let's leave it there please.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dedric
>>>
>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:47910acd$1@linux...
>>>
>>>> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac release,
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> there
>>>>>
>>>>> are three desktop models,
>>>>> usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the starting
>>>>>
>>>>> price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>>>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to write
>>>>>
>>>> book
>>>>
>>>>> reports ;-).
>>>>>
>>>>> There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800 for
>>>>>
>> one
>>
>>>> of
>>>>
>>>>> the six base models. In the PC world
>>>>> there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
>>>>>
>>>>> starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
>>>>> desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on, costing
>>>>>
>>>>> significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current) and only
>>>>>
>> a
>>
>>>>> slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last year), for
$400
>>>>>
>>>> less
>>>>
>>>>> than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise, pretty much identical (it
>>>>>
>> does
>>
>>>>> have a partially aluminum case, and feels better than the Macbooks
I've
>>>>>
>>>>> tried).
>>>>>
>>>>> There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the personal
>>>>>
>>>>> computer market... ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other
>>>>>
>> than
>>
>>>>> the significant investment in software that is costly to replace or
>>>>> crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based on
the
>>>>>
>>>> fact
>>>>
>>>>> that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than just
>>>>> getting
>>>>>
>>>>> what he needs, and that without a mystical, glorious Keynote unveiling
>>>>>
>> of
>>
>>>>> trend setting products, that chique doesn't last long. Imho, that
chique
>>>>>
>>>> is
>>>>
>>>>> hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product prices higher, with less
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> range
>>>>>
>>>>> of price point competition, but for Apple customers, price doesn't
seem
>>>>>
>>>> to
>>>>
>>>>> be a concern. Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Imho, it should be the other way around, and then we would truly have
>>>>>
>> more
>>
>>>>> choices.
>>>>>
>>>>> re: BeOS.... same here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>
>>>> Here we go again! Apple has desk top models under 2K. Apple's market
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>> share
>>>> probably has more to do with ignorant people spewing ignorant things
about
>>>> Apple.
>>>>
>>>> Apple desk top models that start under 2K:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> . 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>> . 80GB hard drive1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> $599.00
>>>> or as low as $15 a month
>>>>
>>>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>> . 120GB hard drive1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> $799.00
>>>> or as low as $19 a month
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>> . 250GB hard drive1
>>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> $1,199.00
>>>> or as low as $29 a month
>>>>
>>>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>> . 320GB hard drive1
>>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>>>
>>>> $1,499.00
>>>> or as low as $36 a month
>>>>
>>>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>> . 320GB hard drive1
>>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>>>
>>>> $1,799.00
>>>> or as low as $43 a month
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Or are we going to argue form factor?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that of
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> every
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>>>>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> photo album.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining about
>>>>>>
>>>> _is_
>>>>
>>>>>> under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price would
>>>>>>
>> buy
>>
>>>>>> it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't mean others
>>>>>>
>>>>>> will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for less than $2k.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be noted
>>>>>>
>>>>>> that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the
new
>>>>>>
>>>>>> super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K in
>>>>>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>> standard configuration).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't really
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's sub
>>>>>>>
>> $2k
>>
>>>>>>> price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except
>>>>>>
>> for
>>
>>>>>> the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive.
As
>>>>>>
>>>> for
>>>>
>>>>>> "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my wife
has
>>>>>>
>>>> one
>>>>
>>>>>> (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up well. It
also
>>>>>>
>>>>>> gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but
with
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not psyched
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job done for
a
>>>>>>>
>> lot
>>
>>>>>>> less money).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another choice
>>>>>>
>>>> is
>>>>
>>>>>> better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac, Apple
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> would
>>>>>>
>>>>>> be insufferable. :^)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>>>>>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes would
>>>>>>
>>>> be
>>>>
>>>>>> less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what moves
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> you,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>>>>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern for
>>>>>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the
same
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the gold
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting
>>>>>>>
>>>> you
>>>>
>>>>>>> to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or want,
>>>>>>
>>>> and
>>>>
>>>>>> I have a Mac.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job
>>>>>>>
>> done
>>
>>>>>>> (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course), vs.
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> going
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having no choice
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be "brand
>>>>>>
>>>>>> loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the Mac
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> users
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the preferred
>>>>>>
>>>> tool
>>>>
>>>>>> given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using BeOS but that
choice
>>>>>>
>>>>>> was torpedoed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is
right
>>>>>>>
>>>> -
>>>>
>>>>>>> when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to Air
vs
>>>>>>>
>> a
>>
>>>>>>> regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left with a
much
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light.
This
>>>>>>
>>>>>> will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a compelling
>>>>>>
>>>>>> enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side. :^)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people outside
>>>>>>
>>>>>> of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in because
>>>>>>
>> he
>>
>>>>>> complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly exaggerating to
>>>>>>
>> do
>>
>>>> so,
>>>>
>>>>>> while missing real issues with the Air.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "I'm walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could
easily
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the MacBook
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he blows
his
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> credibility right off the top with that exaggerated comparison.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody
who
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> needs a computer would have to set it up, it's a $4,000 1.6Ghz,
64GB
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin'
>>>>>>>> MacBook
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pro."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive.
>>>>>>>>
>>>> This
>>>>
>>>>>>>> makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the
price
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less than
>>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>> street
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> price to add that drive.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state drive
>>>>>>>>
>>>> on
>>>>
>>>>>>>> ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the MacBook
>>>>>>>>
>> Air
>>
>>>>>>>> and then compares that configuration to laptops without an SSD.
If
>>>>>>>> that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700 non-SSD
>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that point he has little
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> point.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused about
>>>>>>>>
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>>>>> need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn't
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04
the
>>>>>>>>
>>>> day
>>>>
>>>>>>>> after Steve's speech."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually
>>>>>>>>
>>>> go
>>>>
>>>>>>>> down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on
>>>>>>>> Wednesday
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from Apple
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook.
>>>>>>>> Something
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know why
>>>>>>>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>>>> Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to buy
>>>>>>>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>>>> base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most important
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's growth. He
did
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting. He hates the
>>>>>>>> iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining about that
>>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>> until
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> their exclusive relationship ends.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>
>--
>Chris Ludwig
>ADK
>chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>(859) 635-5762
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94932 is a reply to message #94925] |
Sat, 19 January 2008 15:22 |
chuck duffy
Messages: 453
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Guys,
There's no way the Air is going to bomb. Cost is not a barrier to a DINK
setup with tons of disposable income. You guys are thinking way way way too
techie.
The people that are going to lap this thing up wouldn't even know where to
stick a CAT5 cable. All an apple rep will have to do is walk into a starbuks
and whip out the Air. Shit, they'll be selling the thing with lattes and
a gucci bag before the end of the year, Guaranteed :-)
Chuck
Chuck
"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>>HI James,
>>I sure wish the next Gen of I-Macs or Mac Minis come with a express slot
>
>>at least. That would make them extremely attractive when it come to
>>expandability.
>>All the Air needs is either an express slot or a firewire slot and it
>>would be damn cool. The way it is now I got a feeling its gonna bomb.
>>
>>Chris
>>
>
>Chris, I'm with you, I think it will bomb, but I think they will sell a
bunch
>at first. It's kind of weird, even psychologically it seems like your not
>getting as much for the money because it's so thin. For the last year the
>Apple TV bombed because it wasn't HD, now it is. Hopefully they will up
>date the MacBook Air sooner than later. I'm glad I didn't pay thousands
>to be at MacWorld, what a disappointment.
>
>>
>>
>>James McCloskey wrote:
>>> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey James,
>>>>
>>>> No, it isn't another "one of those" :-)
>>>>
>>>> Where are their desktops you quoted? I didn't see them in the Apple
>store
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> under "Mac Pro".
>>>> I wasn't talking about Mac minis. They are cool, but limited since
they
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> can't be upgraded with extra ram
>>>> (or so I've been told), and no PCIe slots. Is that true?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No PCI slots, but you were talking home users, now you are talking pro
>users.
>>> You can still do some pro work even on a Mac Mini. The Mac Mini can
>be
>>> up graded to 2GB of RAM, and you can up grade the processor. The iMac
>can
>>> be upgraded to 4GB of RAM, and it comes with a higher quality 20" monitor
>>> that you will find bundled with the typical PC in the same price range.
>
>>> A single Quad core MacPro tower costs $2299.00, and there are discounts
>off
>>> that price.
>>>
>>>> They seem like a potentially nice solution for a sample library farm
>
>>>> machine, but if Ram is limited to 2G, then
>>>> it wouldn't work for what I need. I know other composers that considered
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> the same, but had to pass on them for that
>>>> reason alone.... again, choice... can't upgrade it to fit what you want.
>>>>
>>> I
>>>
>>>> specifically said those weren't what I was comparing.
>>>> HP and Dell both have minitowers/cubes now, so those would be a more
>
>>>> consistent comparison, if we were
>>>> making that comparison, but we aren't.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You said desk top computers under 2K. Now your talking sample library
>machines,
>>> for pro users. Show us your idea of a sample library machine for under
>2K?
>>> I bet you can't run Mac software on out of the box with out having to
>hack
>>> it. You can always argue something.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I had also heard the MacMinis might not be around much longer - fact
>or
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> rumor?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Rumor are rumors.
>>>
>>>> Btw - my comments were just an observation, not a slam, or hyperbole,
>or
>>>> dig - just following up with what Shelly Palmer said, pointing out that
>>>>
>>> his
>>>
>>>> comments
>>>> make sense to those of us who aren't Mac fanatics, even if he was
>>>> technically generalizing,
>>>> and he's a self proclaimed Mac fanatic.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sure seemed like a slam.
>>>
>>>> It is interesting how such an observation brings such strong reactions
>from
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Mac users. Kind of proves my point on
>>>> the marketing vs. choice issue: when your customers love you, don't
>
>>>> question anything, and will buy anything you sell,
>>>> you can charge whatever you want and limit the customer's options as
>well.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Case in point: Shelly's comment on
>>>> AT&T and the iPhone - I'm sure their coverage is fine for most people
>(it
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> was for us) - but we're on Verizon with no
>>>> choice to even use an iPhone, so there's a pretty big missed market
for
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Apple - not my problem though, but it is a limited choice situation
that
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> favors AT&T even if iPhone users don't like AT&T.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's always an insult to mac users when somebody insinuates that we are
>stupid
>>> because we gullibly drink the SJ marketing Cool Aid. Apple stuff Rocks,
>>> however, not all of it appeals to me and some of it is over priced.
>>>
>>>> I thought we all agreed choice was a good thing? Was I wrong in that
>
>>>> assumption?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Choice is a good thing. Apple will offer other plans in time. You can
>unlock
>>> the iPhone and use other carriers now.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I really never intended this to be a Mac/PC debate. It was just my
>>>> interpretation of Shelly's comments,
>>>> nothing more. Let's leave it there please.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:47910acd$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>>> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac release,
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> there
>>>>>>
>>>>>> are three desktop models,
>>>>>> usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the starting
>>>>>>
>>>>>> price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>>>>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to
write
>>>>>>
>>>>> book
>>>>>
>>>>>> reports ;-).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800
for
>>>>>>
>>> one
>>>
>>>>> of
>>>>>
>>>>>> the six base models. In the PC world
>>>>>> there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a $300
>>>>>> desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on, costing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current) and
only
>>>>>>
>>> a
>>>
>>>>>> slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last year), for
>$400
>>>>>>
>>>>> less
>>>>>
>>>>>> than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise, pretty much identical
(it
>>>>>>
>>> does
>>>
>>>>>> have a partially aluminum case, and feels better than the Macbooks
>I've
>>>>>>
>>>>>> tried).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the personal
>>>>>>
>>>>>> computer market... ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other
>>>>>>
>>> than
>>>
>>>>>> the significant investment in software that is costly to replace or
>>>>>> crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based on
>the
>>>>>>
>>>>> fact
>>>>>
>>>>>> that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than just
>
>>>>>> getting
>>>>>>
>>>>>> what he needs, and that without a mystical, glorious Keynote unveiling
>>>>>>
>>> of
>>>
>>>>>> trend setting products, that chique doesn't last long. Imho, that
>chique
>>>>>>
>>>>> is
>>>>>
>>>>>> hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product prices higher, with
less
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> range
>>>>>>
>>>>>> of price point competition, but for Apple customers, price doesn't
>seem
>>>>>>
>>>>> to
>>>>>
>>>>>> be a concern. Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Imho, it should be the other way around, and then we would truly have
>>>>>>
>>> more
>>>
>>>>>> choices.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> re: BeOS.... same here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>
>>>>> Here we go again! Apple has desk top models under 2K. Apple's market
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> share
>>>>> probably has more to do with ignorant people spewing ignorant things
>about
>>>>> Apple.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apple desk top models that start under 2K:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> . 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>>> . 80GB hard drive1
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> $599.00
>>>>> or as low as $15 a month
>>>>>
>>>>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>>> . 120GB hard drive1
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> $799.00
>>>>> or as low as $19 a month
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>>> . 250GB hard drive1
>>>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> $1,199.00
>>>>> or as low as $29 a month
>>>>>
>>>>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>>> . 320GB hard drive1
>>>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>>>>
>>>>> $1,499.00
>>>>> or as low as $36 a month
>>>>>
>>>>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>>> . 320GB hard drive1
>>>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>>>>
>>>>> $1,799.00
>>>>> or as low as $43 a month
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Or are we going to argue form factor?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that
of
>>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>> every
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure, more
>>>>>>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> photo album.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining about
>>>>>>>
>>>>> _is_
>>>>>
>>>>>>> under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price would
>>>>>>>
>>> buy
>>>
>>>>>>> it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't mean others
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for less than
$2k.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be
noted
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the
>new
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K
in
>>>>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>>> standard configuration).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't
really
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's sub
>>>>>>>>
>>> $2k
>>>
>>>>>>>> price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except
>>>>>>>
>>> for
>>>
>>>>>>> the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive.
>As
>>>>>>>
>>>>> for
>>>>>
>>>>>>> "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my wife
>has
>>>>>>>
>>>>> one
>>>>>
>>>>>>> (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up well. It
>also
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but
>with
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not psyched
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job done for
>a
>>>>>>>>
>>> lot
>>>
>>>>>>>> less money).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another choice
>>>>>>>
>>>>> is
>>>>>
>>>>>>> better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac, Apple
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> be insufferable. :^)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing the
>>>>>>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes
would
>>>>>>>
>>>>> be
>>>>>
>>>>>>> less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what moves
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>> you,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>>>>>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern
for
>>>>>>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the
>same
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the
gold
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> you
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or want,
>>>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have a Mac.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same job
>>>>>>>>
>>> done
>>>
>>>>>>>> (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course),
vs.
>>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>> going
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having no choice
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be
"brand
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the Mac
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>> users
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the preferred
>>>>>>>
>>>>> tool
>>>>>
>>>>>>> given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using BeOS but that
>choice
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> was torpedoed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is
>right
>>>>>>>>
>>>>> -
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to Air
>vs
>>>>>>>>
>>> a
>>>
>>>>>>>> regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left with a
>much
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light.
>This
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a compelling
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side. :^)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people
outside
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in because
>>>>>>>
>>> he
>>>
>>>>>>> complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly exaggerating
to
>>>>>>>
>>> do
>>>
>>>>> so,
>>>>>
>>>>>>> while missing real issues with the Air.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "I'm walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could
>easily
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the
MacBook
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he blows
>his
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> credibility right off the top with that exaggerated comparison.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody
>who
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> needs a computer would have to set it up, it's a $4,000 1.6Ghz,
>64GB
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin'
>
>>>>>>>>> MacBook
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Pro."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> This
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the
>price
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less than
>>>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>> street
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> price to add that drive.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state
drive
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> on
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the MacBook
>>>>>>>>>
>>> Air
>>>
>>>>>>>>> and then compares that configuration to laptops without an SSD.
>If
>>>>>>>>> that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700 non-SSD
>
>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that point he has
little
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> point.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused
about
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street didn't
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04
>the
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> day
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> after Steve's speech."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> go
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on
>>>>>>>>> Wednesday
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from
Apple
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook.
>>>>>>>>> Something
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know
why
>>>>>>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>>>>> Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to buy
>>>>>>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>>>>> base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most important
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's growth. He
>did
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting. He hates
the
>>>>>>>>> iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining about that
>>>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>> until
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> their exclusive relationship ends.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>--
>>Chris Ludwig
>>ADK
>>chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>>www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>>(859) 635-5762
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94934 is a reply to message #94932] |
Sat, 19 January 2008 16:23 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote:
>
>Guys,
>
>There's no way the Air is going to bomb. Cost is not a barrier to a DINK
>setup with tons of disposable income. You guys are thinking way way way
too
>techie.
>
>The people that are going to lap this thing up wouldn't even know where
to
>stick a CAT5 cable. All an apple rep will have to do is walk into a starbuks
>and whip out the Air. Shit, they'll be selling the thing with lattes and
>a gucci bag before the end of the year, Guaranteed :-)
>
>Chuck
>
Ok Chuck, your right: )
>Chuck
>
>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>Chris Ludwig <chrisl@adkproaudio.com> wrote:
>>>HI James,
>>>I sure wish the next Gen of I-Macs or Mac Minis come with a express slot
>>
>>>at least. That would make them extremely attractive when it come to
>>>expandability.
>>>All the Air needs is either an express slot or a firewire slot and it
>>>would be damn cool. The way it is now I got a feeling its gonna bomb.
>>>
>>>Chris
>>>
>>
>>Chris, I'm with you, I think it will bomb, but I think they will sell a
>bunch
>>at first. It's kind of weird, even psychologically it seems like your
not
>>getting as much for the money because it's so thin. For the last year
the
>>Apple TV bombed because it wasn't HD, now it is. Hopefully they will up
>>date the MacBook Air sooner than later. I'm glad I didn't pay thousands
>>to be at MacWorld, what a disappointment.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>James McCloskey wrote:
>>>> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hey James,
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it isn't another "one of those" :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Where are their desktops you quoted? I didn't see them in the Apple
>>store
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> under "Mac Pro".
>>>>> I wasn't talking about Mac minis. They are cool, but limited since
>they
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> can't be upgraded with extra ram
>>>>> (or so I've been told), and no PCIe slots. Is that true?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No PCI slots, but you were talking home users, now you are talking pro
>>users.
>>>> You can still do some pro work even on a Mac Mini. The Mac Mini can
>>be
>>>> up graded to 2GB of RAM, and you can up grade the processor. The iMac
>>can
>>>> be upgraded to 4GB of RAM, and it comes with a higher quality 20" monitor
>>>> that you will find bundled with the typical PC in the same price range.
>>
>>>> A single Quad core MacPro tower costs $2299.00, and there are discounts
>>off
>>>> that price.
>>>>
>>>>> They seem like a potentially nice solution for a sample library farm
>>
>>>>> machine, but if Ram is limited to 2G, then
>>>>> it wouldn't work for what I need. I know other composers that considered
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> the same, but had to pass on them for that
>>>>> reason alone.... again, choice... can't upgrade it to fit what you
want.
>>>>>
>>>> I
>>>>
>>>>> specifically said those weren't what I was comparing.
>>>>> HP and Dell both have minitowers/cubes now, so those would be a more
>>
>>>>> consistent comparison, if we were
>>>>> making that comparison, but we aren't.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You said desk top computers under 2K. Now your talking sample library
>>machines,
>>>> for pro users. Show us your idea of a sample library machine for under
>>2K?
>>>> I bet you can't run Mac software on out of the box with out having
to
>>hack
>>>> it. You can always argue something.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I had also heard the MacMinis might not be around much longer - fact
>>or
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> rumor?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rumor are rumors.
>>>>
>>>>> Btw - my comments were just an observation, not a slam, or hyperbole,
>>or
>>>>> dig - just following up with what Shelly Palmer said, pointing out
that
>>>>>
>>>> his
>>>>
>>>>> comments
>>>>> make sense to those of us who aren't Mac fanatics, even if he was
>>>>> technically generalizing,
>>>>> and he's a self proclaimed Mac fanatic.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sure seemed like a slam.
>>>>
>>>>> It is interesting how such an observation brings such strong reactions
>>from
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Mac users. Kind of proves my point on
>>>>> the marketing vs. choice issue: when your customers love you, don't
>>
>>>>> question anything, and will buy anything you sell,
>>>>> you can charge whatever you want and limit the customer's options as
>>well.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Case in point: Shelly's comment on
>>>>> AT&T and the iPhone - I'm sure their coverage is fine for most people
>>(it
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> was for us) - but we're on Verizon with no
>>>>> choice to even use an iPhone, so there's a pretty big missed market
>for
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Apple - not my problem though, but it is a limited choice situation
>that
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> favors AT&T even if iPhone users don't like AT&T.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's always an insult to mac users when somebody insinuates that we
are
>>stupid
>>>> because we gullibly drink the SJ marketing Cool Aid. Apple stuff Rocks,
>>>> however, not all of it appeals to me and some of it is over priced.
>
>>>>
>>>>> I thought we all agreed choice was a good thing? Was I wrong in that
>>
>>>>> assumption?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Choice is a good thing. Apple will offer other plans in time. You
can
>>unlock
>>>> the iPhone and use other carriers now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I really never intended this to be a Mac/PC debate. It was just my
>
>>>>> interpretation of Shelly's comments,
>>>>> nothing more. Let's leave it there please.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>
>>>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:47910acd$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac release,
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> are three desktop models,
>>>>>>> usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the starting
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>>>>>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to
>write
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> book
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> reports ;-).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800
>for
>>>>>>>
>>>> one
>>>>
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the six base models. In the PC world
>>>>>>> there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100 increment,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a
$300
>>>>>>> desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this on,
costing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> significantly less than the least expensive Macbook (current) and
>only
>>>>>>>
>>>> a
>>>>
>>>>>>> slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from early last year), for
>>$400
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> less
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> than the comparable Macbook, but otherwise, pretty much identical
>(it
>>>>>>>
>>>> does
>>>>
>>>>>>> have a partially aluminum case, and feels better than the Macbooks
>>I've
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tried).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the personal
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> computer market... ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs (other
>>>>>>>
>>>> than
>>>>
>>>>>>> the significant investment in software that is costly to replace
or
>>>>>>> crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's reasoning is based
on
>>the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> fact
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> that he's enamoured with the chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than just
>>
>>>>>>> getting
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> what he needs, and that without a mystical, glorious Keynote unveiling
>>>>>>>
>>>> of
>>>>
>>>>>>> trend setting products, that chique doesn't last long. Imho, that
>>chique
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> is
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's product prices higher, with
>less
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> range
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> of price point competition, but for Apple customers, price doesn't
>>seem
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> be a concern. Basically Apple has its' customers right where it
wants
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Imho, it should be the other way around, and then we would truly
have
>>>>>>>
>>>> more
>>>>
>>>>>>> choices.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> re: BeOS.... same here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here we go again! Apple has desk top models under 2K. Apple's market
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> share
>>>>>> probably has more to do with ignorant people spewing ignorant things
>>about
>>>>>> Apple.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apple desk top models that start under 2K:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> . 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>>>> . 80GB hard drive1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $599.00
>>>>>> or as low as $15 a month
>>>>>>
>>>>>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>>>> . 120GB hard drive1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $799.00
>>>>>> or as low as $19 a month
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> . 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>>>> . 250GB hard drive1
>>>>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>>>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $1,199.00
>>>>>> or as low as $29 a month
>>>>>>
>>>>>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>>>> . 320GB hard drive1
>>>>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>>>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $1,499.00
>>>>>> or as low as $36 a month
>>>>>>
>>>>>> . 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
>>>>>> . 1GB memory
>>>>>> . 320GB hard drive1
>>>>>> . 8x double-layer SuperDrive
>>>>>> . ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $1,799.00
>>>>>> or as low as $43 a month
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or are we going to argue form factor?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that
>of
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> every
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure,
more
>>>>>>>>> computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the family
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> photo album.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining
about
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _is_
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> under $2K (configured the way most people who care about price would
>>>>>>>>
>>>> buy
>>>>
>>>>>>>> it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for his Mac doesn't mean
others
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> will. But if that's your complaint, there are Macs for less than
>$2k.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be
>noted
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's, and the
>>new
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's (and under 2K
>in
>>>>>>>>
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>>>>> standard configuration).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't
>really
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone in it's
sub
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> $2k
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes, except
>>>>>>>>
>>>> for
>>>>
>>>>>>>> the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans flash drive.
>>As
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> for
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a plastic case. But my wife
>>has
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> one
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (G4 version); it seems reasonably rugged and has held up well. It
>>also
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> gets better wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook, but
>>with
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature set - not psyched
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets the same job done for
>>a
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> lot
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> less money).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another
choice
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> is
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone bought a Mac, Apple
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> be insufferable. :^)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing
the
>>>>>>>> envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows boxes
>would
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> be
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> less motivated to give you stuff you like. So keep buying what moves
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> you,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his opening
>>>>>>>>> comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern
>for
>>>>>>>>> Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished the
>>same
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he goes for the
>gold
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> instead. In other words, he's a victim of clever marketing - getting
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> you
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> to buy way more than you need or want.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or
want,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have a Mac.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same
job
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> done
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of course),
>vs.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> going
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and hip while having no choice
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> under $2-4k or more, how else do you evaluate the two options?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be
>"brand
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most of the
Mac
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> users
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose them as the preferred
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> tool
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> given the options. Frankly, I would rather be using BeOS but that
>>choice
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> was torpedoed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he is
>>right
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> -
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> when it comes down to getting the job done, any advantage to Air
>>vs
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> a
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> regular laptop fade away pretty quickly, and you are left with
a
>>much
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and light.
>>This
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and light is a compelling
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak) any down side. :^)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people
>outside
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned it in because
>>>>>>>>
>>>> he
>>>>
>>>>>>>> complained about non-Air-specific-issues, blatantly exaggerating
>to
>>>>>>>>
>>>> do
>>>>
>>>>>> so,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> while missing real issues with the Air.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "I'm walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that could
>>easily
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the
>MacBook
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings. So he blows
>>his
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> credibility right off the top with that exaggerated comparison.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way anybody
>>who
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> needs a computer would have to set it up, it's a $4,000 1.6Ghz,
>>64GB
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing Vista box or a smokin'
>>
>>>>>>>>>> MacBook
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Pro."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state drive.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> This
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains about is the
>>price
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple actually charges less than
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> street
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> price to add that drive.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state
>drive
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> on
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD to the MacBook
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> Air
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and then compares that configuration to laptops without an SSD.
>>If
>>>>>>>>>> that's the comparison, then he should compare the $1700 non-SSD
>>
>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> of the Air to the other subnotebooks. And at that point he has
>little
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> point.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused
>about
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street
didn't
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to $169.04
>>the
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> day
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> after Steve's speech."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares usually
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> go
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> down after the keynote. Also, the entire market took a hit on
>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> for issues not directly related to a speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from
>Apple
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true sub-notebook.
>>>>>>>>>> Something
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I could throw in a portfolio or briefcase for short hops."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know
>why
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too cool to
buy
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most important
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> announcement of MacWorld for future impact on Apple's growth.
He
>>did
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> like the Time Capsule, which is at least interesting. He hates
>the
>>>>>>>>>> iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just have to keep complaining about
that
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> until
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> their exclusive relationship ends.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>Chris Ludwig
>>>ADK
>>>chrisl@adkproaudio.com <mailto:chrisl@adkproaudio.com>
>>>www.adkproaudio.com <http://www.adkproaudio.com/>
>>>(859) 635-5762
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94936 is a reply to message #94906] |
Sat, 19 January 2008 16:41 |
chuck duffy
Messages: 453
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jamie,
"Don't audio unit plugins get their own address space (I don't know, just
>wondering)? "
This is a good question, and the short answer is no AFAIK... Plugins live
within the resource constraints of the host application.
Chuck
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>Dedric Terry wrote:
>> Hey Jamie - I agree completely - Shelly was venting more than reviewing.
>>
>> Regarding the tricked out Mac pro vs. satellites, yes, it would make
>> sense to go with a single machine, if the host apps could allocate a
>> full 64-bit address space to Kontakt, etc, but from what I've read so
>> far on the East West/Soundsonline forum, they can't (Logic included I
>> think). That's only a matter of time though - just not sure when or how
>> long it will be.
>
>Don't audio unit plugins get their own address space (I don't know, just
>wondering)? But anyway since OSX has 64 bit memory addressing, you're
>probably right that over time more apps will take advantage of it.
>
>
>> There may be a few other limitations to running a full blown orchestral
>> lib a la VSL or EWQL Symphonic Platinum
>> on a single machine, but we are getting closer no doubt. Such a rig
>> would need at least 16G - 32 preferrably, so it's not
>> a cheap move when there are working satellite systems already in place.
>
>No, not cheap, but it's probably more flexible use of the RAM than
>spreading it out over multiple boxes. If it's in one box you can use it
>for other apps more easily.
>
>
>> On the single quad - didn't even see that. Still a bit pricey compared
>> to a single-quad, single socket PC (I'm guessing the MacPro motherboard
>> is still a dual socket with a single quad - those boards are around $400
>> I think, and the single Xeon is more than the conroe Quad, which I can
>> get for $300). For the difference with the Mac Pro, even at $500, I
>> would go dual quad. It's a difference of allocating a machine for
>> samples, or video playback (which is hard to justify in the $2k and up
>> range), vs. buying a host system. For a host though, dual quad would be
>> the way to go, and I probably will this year. There the Mac prices are
>> certainly competitive.... I just can't get Sequoia ported to Mac.....and
>> my Adobe CS3 web suite that I need to manage my site has no platform
>> crossgrade plan (pretty lame imho - probably the only company I know of
>> that has either/or platform licensing).
>
>Yep, that is lame. Luckily the Mac can run MSWindows in another, uh,
>window, via Parallels or that other VM.
>
>With the single quad, you could presumably add the other quad later to
>almost double the speed. Nice expandability for anyone who's $500 short
>of affording the dual quad. But yeah, I'd buy the dual quad from the
>getgo if I were buying right now.
>
>
>> The other issue for the time being is that Nuendo is running 10-15%
>> faster on XP than Leopard. Hopefully that will change though.
>> I'd love to have a 1:1 choice between them - then it comes down to fun
>> and convenience. Mac wins there.
>
>Interesting, I wonder if the optimizations are needed on the OSX side,
>if it's a Nuendo porting problem, or both.
>
>
>> Btw - I really do admire Apple's attention to design, form and function
>> and making products that do in fact set a high standard for
>> the industry in general. It's really a great product line. Lovin' my
>> iPod Touch.
>
>Glad to hear you made up with your errant Touch! I hope it learned a
>valuable lesson by being left at home for a while. :^)
>
>Don't show it to me when I come over or I might be tempted to get the
>next rev. :^)
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
>> Regards,
>> Dedric
>>
>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:47913a5b@linux...
>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>> Hey Jamie - I really didn't intend to get this far into this, and
>>>> don't really have time
>>>> to continue much more.
>>>
>>> I'm with ya, bro.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I was just sharing my opinion on Shelly Palmer's report
>>>> saying that while I'm sure there was quite a bit of tongue in cheek
>>>> to his opening comments,
>>>> he at least was pointing out why people spend more on Macs when they
>>>> could get the
>>>> job done for much less - marketing, pure and simple.
>>>
>>> OK, but I didn't get that from his piece, my complaint is about his
>>> illogic and hyperbole, kinda takes away from his credibility.
>>>
>>> But anyway we can kick around the relative value another time...from
a
>>> bigger picture perspective that includes initial price, capabilities,
>>> subjective feel, administration time, longevity and resale.
>>>
>>> If it were just simply marketing they wouldn't have me as a customer.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Just to get more to the point of options - show me where I can get a
>>>> Mac desktop tower with a single quad
>>>> core cpu system.
>>>
>>> Go to the Apple store online. Take the stock duo quad and subtract a
>>> quad in the configuration options. Drops the price a bit...$500.
>>>
>>> But I think the default 2.8GHZ dual quad is the sweet spot this time
>>> around for value - if you can use the power. The price is
>>> significantly lower than last month, and it's an improved version (new
>>> chipset, faster buses, better graphics).
>>>
>>>
>>>> Btw - I was in Best Buy today - there were probably 20 different
>>>> laptop models, and 30 desktop models there
>>>> to choose from. 2 iMacs, 1 desktop, and 3 laptops. Regardless of
>>>> preference, the distinct differences imho,
>>>> are 1) that Apple sells "cool" better than anyone, and 2) that the
>>>> others sell "choice" much better simply
>>>> but putting more obvious choices in front of you (most of which are
>>>> at least partially redundant of course, but
>>>> it's still a marketing tactic - and HP and Sony have some seriously
>>>> cool looking self-contained monitor/cpu systems with very nice
>>>> wireless keyboards - including a touch screen model from HP for about
>>>> $1500 that is a blast to use). Again, just an observation.
>>>
>>> Choices are good.
>>>
>>> It'd be even better if all those laptops weren't locked into one of
>>> the biggest monopolies (and yes, marketing organizations) on earth. As
>>> you imply, some of that choice is illusionary. But not all.
>>>
>>> If Apple still had clones there would be more choice for OSX boxes, if
>>> Apple could have survived that (I think yes but those who justify
>>> dropping the Mac clones long ago think it saved the company).
>>>
>>>
>>>> If I could get a MacMini with the option to trick it out with 8G and
>>>> a second SATA drive it would be seriously enticing
>>>> for peripheral sample libraries (you need to come down and see this
>>>> in action - it's a beautiful thing to offload that much
>>>> processing). I know other composers that would have gone that route
>>>> as well, were it not
>>>> for the ram limitation. Seriously - it's a good deal for that
>>>> purpose since it isn't overstocked with extras one wouldn't need for
>>>> such a use, and the form factor would be really nice for stacking
>>>> away in a computer room.
>>>
>>> I'm looking forward to seeing your setup!
>>>
>>> I don't know much about the Mac Mini's expansion options.
>>> Lessee...looks like 2GB is it.
>>>
>>> But wouldn't an 8 core box with a ton of RAM (holds up to 32GB now) be
>>> able to keep up with separate smaller computers, and be a bit more
>>> convenient at that?
>>>
>>> I'd prefer to have it all in one box (like I do now with the dual G5,
>>> although I'm not using some of the more demanding libraries like you
>>> are).
>>>
>>> When I get the new laptop I might experiment with Logic's networking
>>> feature, just to see how well it works to have some instruments and FX
>>> running on another box. But the dual G5 is holding its own, so far.
>>> Might be able to hold out for a 16 core box to replace the G5, in
>>> another year or so... :^)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Dedric
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4791204e@linux...
>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>> Now why did you think I was criticizing Apple with hyperbole?
>>>>>> Could it be
>>>>>> that Apple skin is just a little thin? And... I don't recall a
>>>>>> desktop release with more than
>>>>>> 3 models... so, "every" means "every". That's not called
>>>>>> hyperbole, it's called history. ;-))
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe I misunderstood you. I saw "hyperbole" in your statement only
>>>>> because you switched from talking about laptops, to talking about
>>>>> "desktop models," claimed they were only 2K and up, and said there's
>>>>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to
>>>>> write book reports.
>>>>>
>>>>> In fact there is a range of suitable Macs below that. In both
>>>>> laptops and "desktops." Plenty fast for writing reports. Overkill even.
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, both iMacs and Mac Minis are desktop machines.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now about that skin thing. I don't know how thick Apple's skin is,
>>>>> but on a regular apple it's thin enough to eat. Thinner than a
>>>>> Macbook Air. ;^)
>>>>>
>>>>> I personally don't care if you criticize Apple. I love that you buy
>>>>> non-Mac boxes, somebody has to.
>>>>>
>>>>> But if your claims aren't consistent, logical and true then I can't
>>>>> protect you in the wild world of time wasting computer bashing
>>>>> conversations. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>> There are plenty of criticisms to be made without hype. For example,
>>>>> the lack of firewire on the Air limits its market. Also, and this is
>>>>> my biggest criticism right now, WHERE'S MY #(*$&@#$ing UPDATED
>>>>> MACBOOK PRO WITH THE LED BACKLIT 17" HD SCREEN!!!!!!???? :^)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> By "blinding speed" I seriously meant a dual quad in general - any
>>>>>> dual quad. You are missing
>>>>>> the whole market of families that on average probably have about
>>>>>> $1k to spend on a computer to serve
>>>>>> everyone, and when faced with a full desktop with monitor included,
>>>>>> or a cube with limited expansion and
>>>>>> I/O capabilities, and monitor additional, where do you think they
>>>>>> will go?
>>>>>
>>>>> Well lessee, I'm not missing any markets. I don't sell computers.
>>>>>
>>>>> If I were that struggling young family I'd buy a Linux box and be
>>>>> done with it.
>>>>>
>>>>> So it sounds like what you would like to see is a Mac under $1000
>>>>> with dual quad chips? In time we'll probably see that. But right
>>>>> now, not. However, the core 2 duos in the low end Macs are no slouches.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Just sayin' that the PC aisle at CompUSA
>>>>>> and BestBuy are always busier than the Apple sections, and the
>>>>>> number of PC options dwarfs the Mac shelves
>>>>>> significantly. This isn't our market, so it's easy to overlook it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I haven't overlooked the obvious. I'm not arguing that point. Did
>>>>> you think I was claiming that Macs outsell all other computers? Not
>>>>> hardly.
>>>>>
>>>>> But as long as we're digressing, notice that the aisles at CompUSA
>>>>> are shrinking fast, while Apple stores are popping up like flies.
>>>>> Apple's market share is growing, FWIW. It's scary. PEOPLE, STOP
>>>>> BUYING MACS! :^)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Nothing wrong with Macs,
>>>>>
>>>>> LOL! OK, that's BS. :^)
>>>>>
>>>>> There's plenty wrong with Macs. Just less than some of the other
>>>>> options, depending on your needs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> > but you have to admit that the general culture
>>>>>> and approach of Apple is "build loyalty by limiting choices
>>>>>> both on the way in and when it comes time to upgrade".
>>>>>
>>>>> Heh. Now I think you're projecting because you choose to use
>>>>> MSWindows, from a company that has been _convicted_ of limiting
>>>>> choices in the marketplace.
>>>>>
>>>>> How far off topic are we now? This is turning into a boring PC/Mac
>>>>> bashfest. Woo.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> DT
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:4791026d@linux...
>>>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>>>> I was actually just referring to the fact that with every Mac
>>>>>>>> release, there are three desktop models,
>>>>>>>> usually starting at $2k and going up - this round, $2799 is the
>>>>>>>> starting price, and only options for dual quad cores,
>>>>>>>> no range below that for people who don't need "blinding speed" to
>>>>>>>> write book reports ;-).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sure, but you don't need a tower to write book reports. A Mac Mini
>>>>>>> will do fine for under $1k.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's entirely possible to criticize the Mac without hyperbole, ya
>>>>>>> know. :^)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There are 2 laptop model choices, ranging between $1100 and $2800
>>>>>>>> for one of the six base models. In the PC world
>>>>>>>> there are choices in each category at pretty much every $100
>>>>>>>> increment,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right, because there are more companies making hardware for
>>>>>>> MSWindows boxes. That's an advantage because there is more range
>>>>>>> of choice, and a disadvantage because they all have to dance to
>>>>>>> the MSWindows beat.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Apple has fewer boxes but they control everything on those boxes.
>>>>>>> That's a disadvantage because of the fewer choices, and an
>>>>>>> advantage because there is less to go wrong or be incompatible,
>>>>>>> and if anything does goes wrong, a single company can fix it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> starting at $300 and going up to $10k+. Not that I would buy a
>>>>>>>> $300 desktop, but I still come back to the laptop I'm typing this
>>>>>>>> on, costing significantly less than the least expensive Macbook
>>>>>>>> (current) and only a slightly slower cpu (since it's a model from
>>>>>>>> early last year), for $400 less than the comparable Macbook, but
>>>>>>>> otherwise, pretty much identical (it does have a partially
>>>>>>>> aluminum case, and feels better than the Macbooks I've tried).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sounds like you like your computer. Great!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There has to be a reason Apple only has a minority share of the
>>>>>>>> personal computer market... ;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are many reasons. It would take too long to recount the
>>>>>>> history here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I wasn't trying to knock Apple, and I'm not attached to my PCs
>>>>>>>> (other than the significant investment in software that is costly
>>>>>>>> to replace or crossgrade) - just saying that imho, Shelly's
>>>>>>>> reasoning is based on the fact that he's enamoured with the
>>>>>>>> chique (sp?) of Apple, rather than just getting what he needs,
>>>>>>>> and that without a mystical, glorious Keynote unveiling of trend
>>>>>>>> setting products, that chique doesn't last long.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Poor guy. But his claims went beyond that. I zinged him for his
>>>>>>> hyperbole.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Imho, that chique is hurting consumers as it keeps Apple's
>>>>>>>> product prices higher, with less range of price point
>>>>>>>> competition, but for Apple customers, price doesn't seem to be a
>>>>>>>> concern.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe for some, but not overall. Apple is competing on features
>>>>>>> and implementation. And even, lately, on price.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Basically Apple has its' customers right where it wants them.
>>>>>>>> Imho, it should be the other way around, and then we would truly
>>>>>>>> have more choices.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Choice is good. Competition is good.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Apple no more has its customers where it wants them than Microsoft
>>>>>>> has theirs well thumbed over. For example you yourself are trapped
>>>>>>> in Microsoftland by your committed investments there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> re: BeOS.... same here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yep. Sigh... Yet another reason to mistrust Apple, to an extent,
>>>>>>> and Microsoft to a much larger extent.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:4790eeca@linux...
>>>>>>>>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Shelly's complaints, however generalized, pretty much echo that
>>>>>>>>>> of every PC user who's passed on going the Mac route:
>>>>>>>>>> There is one price point with Apple Macs: $2000 and up. Sure,
>>>>>>>>>> more computer is more computer, but most people just don't need
>>>>>>>>>> the bleeding edge for $2-4k to email Aunt Sally and store the
>>>>>>>>>> family photo album.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't think that's what he's saying. The box he's complaining
>>>>>>>>> about _is_ under $2K (configured the way most people who care
>>>>>>>>> about price would buy it). Just because he stupidly overpaid for
>>>>>>>>> his Mac doesn't mean others will. But if that's your complaint,
>>>>>>>>> there are Macs for less than $2k.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If the general complaint about Apple is price, then it should be
>>>>>>>>> noted that the new desktop boxes are less expensive than Dell's,
>>>>>>>>> and the new super light notebook is less expensive than Sony's
>>>>>>>>> (and under 2K in the standard configuration).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The MacBook, feels cheap, and while it has good specs and isn't
>>>>>>>>>> really out of line with a comparable PC laptop, it sits alone
>>>>>>>>>> in it's sub $2k price point in the Apple lineup.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Other than the Mac Mini and iMac. Oh, you mean laptops. Yes,
>>>>>>>>> except for the low end MacBook Pro and the new MacBook Air, sans
>>>>>>>>> flash drive. As for "feeling cheap," the MacBook does have a
>>>>>>>>> plastic case. But my wife has one (G4 version); it seems
>>>>>>>>> reasonably rugged and has held up well. It also gets better
>>>>>>>>> wireless reception than my metal-clad Powerbook.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My laptop cost $750 and has comparable specs to the Macbook,
>>>>>>>>>> but with more I/O (it's closer to the Macbook pro in feature
>>>>>>>>>> set - not psyched about Vista on it, but I can't deny it gets
>>>>>>>>>> the same job done for a lot less money).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's good to have choices. Apple is only one choice. If another
>>>>>>>>> choice is better for you, by all means buy it. If everyone
>>>>>>>>> bought a Mac, Apple would be insufferable. :^)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Competition is good. On the flip side, if Apple weren't pushing
>>>>>>>>> the envelope, the other companies building commodity MSWindows
>>>>>>>>> boxes would be less motivated to give you stuff you like. So
>>>>>>>>> keep buying what moves you, be it Apple or someone else.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The same is true of desktops. So his point is based on his
>>>>>>>>>> opening comments about being enamoured with all things Apple.
>>>>>>>>>> Sure, he could have gone cheaper, but money is hardly a concern
>>>>>>>>>> for Shelly considering his success - it's just a reference point
>>>>>>>>>> that he could have spent 1/3 of what he did and accomplished
>>>>>>>>>> the same amount of work, but being enamoured with Apple, he
>>>>>>>>>> goes for the gold instead. In other words, he's a victim of
>>>>>>>>>> clever marketing - getting you to buy way more than you need or
>>>>>>>>>> want.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I can't speak for him, but I didn't buy way more than I need or
>>>>>>>>> want, and I have a Mac.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When you have the option to pay $1000 or less and get the same
>>>>>>>>>> job done (depending on what job you are trying to accomplish of
>>>>>>>>>> course), vs. going with a brand mainly to be brand loyal and
>>>>>>>>>> hip while having no choice under $2-4k or more, how else do you
>>>>>>>>>> evaluate the two options?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you're implying that the only reason people buy Macs is to be
>>>>>>>>> "brand loyal and hip," you're wrong. That doesn't apply to most
>>>>>>>>> of the Mac users I know, who own Macs to get work done and chose
>>>>>>>>> them as the preferred tool given the options. Frankly, I would
>>>>>>>>> rather be using BeOS but that choice was torpedoed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> His comparison may not be technically fair on the Air, but he
>>>>>>>>>> is right - when it comes down to getting the job done, any
>>>>>>>>>> advantage to Air vs a regular laptop fade away pretty quickly,
>>>>>>>>>> and you are left with a much smaller drive for a lot more money.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Obviously the Air made compromises in order to be thin and
>>>>>>>>> light. This will only be a benefit for those to whom thin and
>>>>>>>>> light is a compelling enough advantage to outweigh (so to speak)
>>>>>>>>> any down side. :^)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's a narrowly aimed product, and I'm not surprised that people
>>>>>>>>> outside of the target market miss the point. I think he phoned
>>>>>>>>> it in because he complained about non-Air-specific-issues,
>>>>>>>>> blatantly exaggerating to do so, while missing real issues with
>>>>>>>>> the Air.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Dedric
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:4790ddca$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> A good read but not a great analysis. He phoned it in.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "I’m walking around with a $4,700 MacBook Pro laptop that
>>>>>>>>>>> could easily be replaced by $1,500 Windows kit."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If price were the issue, he would have paid a lot less for the
>>>>>>>>>>> MacBook Pro and added 3rd party RAM at considerable savings.
>>>>>>>>>>> So he blows his credibility right off the top with that
>>>>>>>>>>> exaggerated comparison.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "It costs $1,799 for the base model. But, set up the way
>>>>>>>>>>> anybody who needs a computer would have to set it up, it’s a
>>>>>>>>>>> $4,000 1.6Ghz, 64GB box. The same 4k buys you a mind-blowing
>>>>>>>>>>> Vista box or a smokin’ MacBook Pro."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hypberbole. He's blaming Apple for the cost of a solid state
>>>>>>>>>>> drive. This makes no sense. Notice that the price he complains
>>>>>>>>>>> about is the price WITH the flash drive option. Yet Apple
>>>>>>>>>>> actually charges less than street price to add that drive.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If price is the issue, it's too soon to buy a 54GB solid state
>>>>>>>>>>> drive on ANY laptop, not just Apple's. Also, he adds the SSD
>>>>>>>>>>> to the MacBook Air and then compares that configuration to
>>>>>>>>>>> laptops without an SSD. If that's the comparison, then he
>>>>>>>>>>> should compare the $1700 non-SSD version of the Air to the
>>>>>>>>>>> other subnotebooks. And at that point he has little point.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> He could have complained about the lack of firewire or groused
>>>>>>>>>>> about the need for an adapter to use ethernet, but he didn't.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "The movie studios like this, I like it! However, Wall Street
>>>>>>>>>>> didn’t seem to like it at all. Apple shares were down $9.74 to
>>>>>>>>>>> $169.04 the day after Steve’s speech."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The article I linked the other day showed that Apple shares
>>>>>>>>>>> usually go down after the keynote. Also, the entire market
>>>>>>>>>>> took a hit on Wednesday for issues not directly related to a
>>>>>>>>>>> speech by Steve Jobs. :^)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "I really wanted to see something really great and useful from
>>>>>>>>>>> Apple this week. On the top of my wishlist was a true
>>>>>>>>>>> sub-notebook. Something I could throw in a portfolio or
>>>>>>>>>>> briefcase for short hops."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Since he's not complaining about a lack of ports, I don't know
>>>>>>>>>>> why the Air doesn't fulfill that role for him. Maybe he's too
>>>>>>>>>>> cool to buy the base version with the hard drive.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> He did like the movie rentals, which I think may be the most
>>>>>>>>>>> important announcement of MacWorld for future impact on
>>>>>>>>>>> Apple's growth. He did like the Time Capsule, which is at
>>>>>>>>>>> least interesting. He hates the iPhone and AT&T, so he'll just
>>>>>>>>>>> have to keep complaining about that until their exclusive
>>>>>>>>>>> relationship ends.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Neil wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> A great read once again from Mr. Palmer...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/shelly-palmer-report/138 65472.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Latest Shelly Palmer report on Mac stuff [message #94940 is a reply to message #94936] |
Sat, 19 January 2008 17:56 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
East West's Play will use the full address space on a Mac in standalone
mode, and can circumvent the limit within 32-bit hosts running on a 64-bit
Mac and use the extra RAM. The host still has the limit and other plugins
are limited to the usual 3.2G or so.
Afaik, this is the only VSTi plugin at the moment, other than some
standalone options, that can do this.
Dedric
On 1/19/08 5:41 PM, in article 47928a8f$1@linux, "chuck duffy" <c@c.com>
wrote:
>
> Jamie,
>
> "Don't audio unit plugins get their own address space (I don't know, just
>> wondering)? "
>
> This is a good question, and the short answer is no AFAIK... Plugins live
> within the resource constraints of the host application.
>
> Chuck
>
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>> Dedric Terry wrote:
>>> Hey Jamie - I agree completely - Shelly was venting more than reviewing.
>>>
>>> Regarding the tricked out Mac pro vs. satellites, yes, it would make
>>> sense to go with a single machine, if the host apps could allocate a
>>> full 64-bit address space to Kontakt, etc, but from what I've read so
>
>>> far on the East West/Soundsonline forum, they can't (Logic included I
>
>>> think). That's only a matter of time though - just not sure when or how
>
>>> long it will be.
>>
>> Don't audio unit plugins get their own address space (I don't know, just
>
>> wondering)? But anyway since OSX has 64 bit memory addressing, you're
>> probably right that over time more apps will take advantage of it.
>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Dec 19 00:02:55 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.06363 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
