Sandy McMurray is a long-time technology journalist whose work has appeared in Time, the Globe & Mail, the Toronto Sun, Report on Business, Profit, and other sources. Between 1995 - 2002, Sandy wrote a weekly column about technology for the Toronto Sun, and served as Technology Editor for five Sun Media newspapers. He has been publishing on the Web since 1996.
Demonstrate, communicate and collaborate with GoToMeeting – the easiest-to-use and most affordable online meeting solution.
Free 30-day trial.
Check out IdeaFlow by Renee Hopkins Callahan for the latest on innovation trends and practices. On her radar screen: the creativity of bipolar children, Democrats' call for an "Innovation Agenda", grocery store innovations, creating a culture of business experimentation, and more.
I've been thinking about this question (again) since reading Alex Salkever's Six-Step Plan for Apple.
Salkever suggests that lower prices are the key to increasing Apple's market share. He says Apple can conquer the world by making Mac computers that are stylish and cheap.
That sounds good, but it won't happen.
The problem (if there is a problem) is Apple's no-compromise approach to the features and components included in every Mac computer. It seems obvious that the company has no interest in competing in the low end of the market. Simply put, there is no cheap Macintosh.
When I say "cheap" I'm not just talking about the price; I'm talking about the components used to build the computer.
If you buy a cheap PC, you may find out the hard way that the manufacturer or assembler has cut some corners. The faults are hidden in places you may not suspect or discover right away. Here are a few common problems in cheap PCs:
- cheap or inadequate power supply
- cheap or inadequate fan for cooling
- "integrated video" instead of ATI or NVIDIA video card
- "integrated audio" instead of a real sound card
- plain CD-ROM player instead of CD-RW/DVD or DVD-RW
- cheap, no-name CRT monitor
- no modem or fax/modem
- no speakers
- Windows XP Home instead of XP Pro
Unfortunately, many consumers never get past the price tag.
Consider this comparison: Apple's cheapest desktop machine (the eMac) vs. Dell's cheapest desktop (the Dimension 2400).
Dell has Apple beat on price -- $449 vs. $799, but consider what's inside each box. To match the tech specs of the eMac, take the Dell and double the RAM to 256 MB ($18), upgrade the CD drive to a combo drive ($71), add basic CD burning software ($36), and the Dell recommended speakers ($36). Upgrade from Celeron to Pentium processor ($45), and upgrade the monitor to a flat-screen CRT ($314).
The Dell has "integrated" video and audio cards that can't be upgraded. It has no microphone, no Firewire ports, no video output port, and no built-in support for wireless (WiFi or Bluetooth).
Then there's the software. Dell recommends that you upgrade to XP Pro ($70) and buy Norton Internet Security 2004 ($65). Add a copy of Roxio's Easy Media Creator ($79) and a copy of Acid Xpress and you'll have something like Apple's iLife software, which comes free with every new Mac.
Which computer looks like a better deal now?
Cheap or good - pick one.
Ultimately, this little exercise is a waste of time. If the customer has $500 to spend, they can't buy a Mac. They can buy the Dell, regret their purchase for 18 months, then start again. That's what many people seem to do.
Perhaps what Apple really needs is a $99 Mac that does nothing except explain all the reasons why their next computer should be a $799 eMac.
I understand the argument, but for many people the $449 Dell is just fine. My parents, for example... There's no neeed to upgrade if all you do is check your e-mail, browse eBay and write a few letters occasionally. Casual users like that don't need firewire drives or to upgrade their sound and graphics cards. To them, the computer is just another appliance.
Also, I don't see why there is so much concern over Apple's market share. It's been years since Apple was on the verge of bankruptcy, And as a relatively smaller company responsible to their vocal and loyal following Apple has to maintain a high level of customer service. Do we really want them to be a Microsoft or Dell, who make the lowest-cost products as cheap as they can and make customer service if something goes wrong a nightmare? Because if they expand to 20% of the market, that's what they're going to be.
Posted by Huchida on September 1, 2004 07:10 PM | Permalink to CommentArguments that have been at the fore-front of the Mac vs. Pc world since the beginning. Will it resolve itself now? Not likely.
As an average user (email, internet, and the few letters to write) the mac is good but too expensive. For the poweruser (3D, video prod, intense graphics) it's still too expensive.
Here is what I would want from Apple. Give me a dual processor G5 stripped to the bone. Let me choose the memory, the hard drive, the optical drives, video card and whatever else I need for my work. I'll install it myself and save a whole lot of money in the process. Until then, it's still too damn expensive.
Posted by Steph on September 2, 2004 09:25 AM | Permalink to Comment