Banwatch: I'm starting an iPhone thread

[Asher]

I'll be keeping an eye on your personally, one wrong move and I'll report you straight to the cops.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Asher: Apolyton's Neighborhood Watch

[Asher]

This place is just out of control. People using the upload features for community-building fun and games. What's next, hangman threads? Oi!

[-Jrabbit]

Originally posted by Asher
I'll be keeping an eye on your personally, one wrong move and I'll report you straight to the cops.

You mean like if I accidentally attack you personally, you self-important, homo intellelligentsia?
I appreciate you keeping me on the straight and narrow. Thanks.

[Asher]

Originally posted by -Jrabbit

You mean like if I accidentally attack you personally, you self-important, homo intellelligentsia?

I am all of "important", "homo", and "intelligent" so I thank you for the compliment.

[snoopy369]

But are you self?

Back on topic: **** Apple for making me wait another month for my iPhone :wiglaf:

[Verto]

I've about 80% convinced myself that not only can I afford an iPhone, but I'm entitled to it! It's the American Way.

[MarkG]

there are deal brakers for me:
no 3.2 camera with flash
no copy/paste

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

So you think it's cool to pay more for something gimped. Apple's Mac Pros are cheaper than the gimped Xeon based ones. You can buy a Core 2 Duo Dell workstation for a whopping $200 cheaper than the Mac Pro, but why would you bother.

You'd bother if that's what you want. Most people don't need a Xeon processor or even want one. People don't need a 900+W power supply. Why not give them a less powerful option, so they can save money?

Most people have no business buying a Mac Pro. As I've tried explaining to you before, it's a workstation class computer, using Intel's workstation class processor, and is horribly overpowered for home use (unless you are editing a major motion picture at your house, but if you aren't George Lucas, that is unlikely to be the case).

As I've said before, buying one for domestic use would be like buying a 16 wheel truck to pick up your kids from school. Buying one to game on would be similarly daft. It isn't a home computer: it is designed for professional use. So are the Dell workstations. Only a nut would buy one to play COD4 on.

What does Apple offer that is an easily upgradable home use desktop option? Oh wait... it doesn't exist... you have to buy a Mac Pro, which includes a ton of things you just don't need.

You don't have to buy a Mac Pro. Apple doesn't offer a computer in that category probably because they have decided there is no money for them in it (the mac isn't really a gaming platform, and those systems tend to be bought by gamers). If you don't like Apple's offerings, go spend your money on something else. None of that changes the fact that the Mac Pro is cheaper than equivalent machines from Dell.

No, not end of story. That was never the argument. That's the argument you tried to make it become. The argument was that Apple, especially Mac Pros are overpriced.

How can they be overpriced when the same hardware from other manufacturers costs a grand more? What definition of "overpriced" are you using? It usually means "unjustifiably more expensive than similar products offered by others". But you aren't comparing similar products. You are saying that the Mac Pro is overpriced because you can buy a much crappier computer for less if you want one. But if you want a crappier computer, then what the hell do you care how much the Mac Pro costs?

You wanted to turn it into a "competitive on price given equivalent hardware", ignoring the fact that Apple offers a highly limited set of hardware meaning that if you want something a bit less powerful because you don't need all that juice under the hood or want less features because you don't need it, then tough, with Apple, you pay for it all.

Can you point me to a place in this thread where I said that you have to buy an Apple computer? If Apple doesn't make what you want, then you are SOOL and can go elsewhere. None of that changes the fact that the Mac Pro workstations give you a lot more bang for your buck than Dell's Xeon based machines.

If you want Apple to make a low end upgradeable tower, then write them and express your interest in such a product. If enough people show interest, they'll make one.

None of this means that Apple's current towers are overpriced. It simply means that they don't make a computer that would interest you. So what? Car companies make nice cars that I'm not interested in, but that doesn't make their cars overpriced.

With the PC, you can save money by picking something that's right for you, not what Apple thinks is right for you.

Only if you don't want a hardware configuration that Apple offers. If you do, then it's much cheaper to buy the Apple machine. In fact, you can buy the entry level dual processor Mac Pro for only $200 more than Dell's low end workstation that doesn't offer the Xeon and is considerably underpowered compared to Apple's machine. Apple's high end workstations are about the same price or much cheaper than pretty much any standard model of workstation that Dell offers.

Your whole argument is absurd. Apple is expensive because if you want to buy an inferior computer than the ones they sell, you can pay less from some other manufacturer for inferior hardware. But if you wanted inferior hardware at a lower price, why would you be bothered about what Apple charges? If you wanted the same hardware as the Apple, then it would be cheaper to buy the Apple machine, even if you used boot camp banged a copy of XP on it.

It's like complaining that BMW is overpriced because you want to buy a Toyota, even though the BMW is cheaper than other cars in its class.

You're being desperate now.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You do realize that there is a reason that Apple = overpriced meme exists and you can't explain it away by saying its silly brainwashing or something (who'd be doing the brainwashing first of all). Its because a consumer will ask, ok, I want a desktop computer, but I'd like to upgrade the video card after 4 years or so... wait, the cheapest option from Apple is a $2700 Mac Pro?! WTF?!

Taking your BMW vs. Toyota example. It'd be like if BMW said we're competing for the same customers and then when someone wanted a Corolla type car, BMW said, well we don't have exactly that, but we do have an entry level car about $20k more... wait, it has all these other features that Toyota doesn't! As you said, BMW's are cheaper than other cars "in its class"... if they act like they belong in the class of car that Toyota Camry or Corolla is in, they are going to get slammed with charges of being overpriced as well.

No one says much of anything about the prices boutique dealers like Falcon Northwest charges, because everyone knows they are selling to the high end consumers. Apple wants to act like they are selling to the same people who are buying Dells, so they better get used to charges of being overpriced when they don't offer cheaper versions.

Or you can just call most people brainwashed, or dumb, or whatever... you will anyway.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
You do realize that there is a reason that Apple = overpriced meme exists and you can't explain it away by saying its silly brainwashing or something (who'd be doing the brainwashing first of all). Its because a consumer will ask, ok, I want a desktop computer, but I'd like to upgrade the video card after 4 years or so... wait, the cheapest option from Apple is a $2700 Mac Pro?! WTF?!

Except the Mac Pro is not a consumer machine. I accept that people who want a consumer machine with an upgradeable video card will not be able to find a Mac that suits them. Apple just doesn't make such a machine, so there's nothing to compare to.

What people should be saying is not that the Mac Pro is overpriced for what it is, but that Apple should offer a cheaper mid range upgradeable tower. Such a machine, were it to be released tomorrow would probably use a single Core 2 Duo processor and come in a smaller tower with fewer hard drive bays.

I struggle to see why a consumer would buy a Mac Pro. You could buy an iMac and then replace the whole machine in 4 years time and still not spend $2700 and get the upgrades to everything.

Come on man. What is a consumer going to do with a machine that is huge (and they're monstrous things) and designed for heavy and extended workloads like video editing and photoshop? Are they going to fill up all four of the drive bays with 1TB drives? What about putting 32 GB of memory in it? How many consumer apps need that much juice or are going to take advantage of the dual quad cores?

Apple sells apps that are meant to be used on these machines. Things like Final Cut, Aperture, Shake and Logic Pro. These are expensive pro apps (regular folks get iLife for free). Adobe also sells expensive pro apps for use on these machines. That's the intended market for Mac Pros.

Taking your BMW vs. Toyota example. It'd be like if BMW said we're competing for the same customers

There's your answer. Apple isn't competing for the same customers. Apple sells to very few segments of the market. They are into the high end professional sector, home users (the non gamer portion), and education. The pro machines are for the professionals (although people with a lot of money like the MacBook Pro), and the consumer machines are for everyone else. Apple doesn't make a high performance mid range machine, because I guess they don't think it will sell (gamers use Windows). I guess if people who want one of those are then dumb enough to shell out for a Mac Pro, then that's their problem.

No one says much of anything about the prices boutique dealers like Falcon Northwest charges, because everyone knows they are selling to the high end consumers. Apple wants to act like they are selling to the same people who are buying Dells, so they better get used to charges of being overpriced when they don't offer cheaper versions.

Apple does not act like that. Apple is not interested in the low end, marginal sector of the PC market. Apple's consumer machines are in the same class as Dell's premium consumer machines (the XPS series, I think it is called). Those sell for about a grand to a grand fifty. I've compared these machines myself. When you make the machines and software bundle roughly equal it usually comes out to a difference of 100-150 either way.

This strategy works. According to NPD Apple has about 2/3 of the high end retail PC market for consumers. Of course this isn't counting online sales (including Apple's own online sales), but it means they are taking a pretty big chunk of the consumer market where the money is.

http://blogs.eweek.com/applewatch/content/channel/macs_defy_windows-gravity.html

Apple just doesn't cater to the lower end of the market. But that doesn't mean they are massively more expensive for similar hardware, it just means you can't buy a junk PC from Apple.

Or you can just call most people brainwashed, or dumb, or whatever... you will anyway.

I don't really believe in brainwashing, so I don't see your point. People may have good reasons for buying different computers, or may be unaware that alternatives to Windows exist, or may be in a different price bracket or be gamers or whatever.

For a premium consumer computer that you aren't going to game on, sure I'd recommend a Mac. Who wouldn't? The OS is far better than the suckfest that is Vista (which isn't even as good as the previous version of OS X), the software bundle is really great, and the service and support is constantly voted the best in the industry.

[Asher]

The pro machines are for the professionals

Real professionals would scoff at the lack of a high-end GPU in the units. GPUs are used for more than graphics these days, as Apple has just figured out with OS X 10.6.

For instance, the next Photoshop will be heavily GPU-accelerated to the tunes of orders of magnitude improvements in speed. As of now, you can't get high end GPUs on Mac Pros which make them pretty useless for the next Photoshop.

A real professional would get a system with high-end parts from start to finish, not just in one area.

Similarly, real professionals use ThinkPad T6x p series laptops and not MacBook Pros.

Apple markets to the quasi-professional market. Mostly to people who think they're pros when they're not, because they photoshop Bill Gates head onto objects for fark.com or somethingawful.com, or use GarageBand to make insufferable emo music.

[Imran Siddiqui]

There's your answer. Apple isn't competing for the same customers.

I can't be the only one that has seen the Mac vs. PC commericals.

The "brainwashed" is in reference, not to purchasing a PC, but to the general idea that Macs are overpriced. The reason is that, contrary to your assertion, Apple is portraying itself as competing for same customers as Dell, Gateway, HP, etc. go for. So when those type of customers, after seeing all those ads, thinking they are marketing to them, see the price, they say, WTF!

After all, a number of the problems in the Mac vs. PC ads only affect the low end sector of the PC market.

[snoopy369]

To be fair, Mac is competing for the customers who buy expensive things that are status symbols... and the Mac vs PC commercials pretty much emphasize that

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

There's your answer. Apple isn't competing for the same customers.

I can't be the only one that has seen the Mac vs. PC commericals.

The "brainwashed" is in reference, not to purchasing a PC, but to the general idea that Macs are overpriced. The reason is that, contrary to your assertion, Apple is portraying itself as competing for same customers as Dell, Gateway, HP, etc. go for. So when those type of customers, after seeing all those ads, thinking they are marketing to them, see the price, they say, WTF!.

So they should say, only people with reasonable incomes should apply? Advertisements for premium cars don't tend to specify "Poor people **** off!". How is this any different? Apple does market to some of the same customers as the others, but not all. The iPods, on the other hand, are marketed to all and sundry.

It really isn't a big deal.

I don't like those ads either. I liked it when Jeff Goldblum was the spokesperson for Apple, because he was actually funny. The only recent Apple ad I liked was the one with Wynton Marsalis in it, and that's because I'm a fan of his.

I don't really care that much who buys Macs, as long as Apple stays in business. The only way it bother me is the continual flood of noobs into the Mac sites I post at.