5 ms·

But I think the exception to Apple's behavior is that there are large numbers of customers who would be more than happy to fork over another wad of cash for an

by Zev 17y ago

But I think the exception to Apple's behavior is that there are large numbers of customers who would be more than happy to fork over another wad of cash for an Apple branded netbook (in addition to their existing systems) and Apple has (yet again) failed to listen to their consumer. So, companies are free to make their own products up, but only as long as there isn't another product that may be in demand, in which case, they should be forced to spend time developing said product based on a hunch of someone who isn't familiar with intimate details of Apple's business? The problem is that not only is Apple saying "we can't be bothered with this netbook thing right now" but they are saying it with a middle finger, fully extended, at their customers. They've gone and put themselves out, expended effort, to ensure their users can't operate as they want to. Apple is a company who's goal is to make lots of money. If they want to shun one area and focus on other areas instead — perhaps because one area isn't as profitable as another area — why shouldn't they be able to? To Apple, their users are the people who buy their hardware. If you buy a Dell netbook, download an osx86 image off of the Internet and then install it, you're not an Apple users. So really it's "give us your money for our overpriced commodity hardware and we don't care what you think or actually want, you'll think and want what we tell you to, how dare you try and step outside of our carefully crafted ecosystem" So its a business. Whats wrong with that? If you disagree with their policies, dont use their products. Pirating it and using it isn't "sticking it to the man" somehow.

elblanco 17y ago
>If you buy a Dell netbook, download an osx86 image off of the Internet and then install it, you're not an Apple users. Precisely. There aren't many non-apple users (classifying them as people who already own an Apple system, but want the improved portability the netbook formfactor affords) who are interesting in taking the time or energy to hackintosh their netbook. These people are saying, as loud as they can "Apple! We love your platform, make some hardware like a netbook and we will buy it! For goodness sakes, look at all the trouble we're going through to simulate it!" Apple doesn't even have to R&D the netbook formfactor. They don't have to work with chip vendors to come up with lowpower chips and chipsets, or downgraded low power GPUs. They literally have to do nothing except get Jonny Ive to cook up a unibody case and put OSX on them. Charge $400 instead of $350 and they have and Apple netbook. But Apple can't find the margins in the product line and the equation means that they have no offering for this huge hole in their lineup.
- tptacek 17y ago
  I'm trying as hard as I can to figure out what your point is. Apple isn't selling this stuff because they've decided not to. No matter how big you think this "hole" is and what your "equation" says, they get to pick what their product line is, not you.
  - elblanco 17y ago
    So in your world, Apple has a big decision dartboard in the board room, and Steve goes there everyday and asks "should we sell a netbook?". The darts so far have landed on "No" or "Play Golf". http://www.s2999.com/images/dartboard_decision_maker.jpg http://www.s2999.com/images/dartboard_decision_maker.jpg "Apple decided not to sell them." is not a reason, it's an effect of a long line of decision making. The first part of your statement is missing. "Netbooks _____, so Apple decided not to sell them". Fill in the blank with something that makes business sense and you'll probably be not too far off the mark. You have offered absolutely 0 to the analysis of why Apple is not in this space. My point, since you have failed to deduce it, is that I think Apple couldn't make their margin goals on that product line (netbooks). They sell for between $300-400. Apple's absolutely bottom of the barrel offering is $500 with no peripherals whatsoever. Margins on netbooks are pitiful, probably close to break even. Apple wants to sell commodity hardware at 20% markup, they can't do that in the netbook space. Common, this is Business and Products 101. I can see no other rational business reason not to get into that space. There may be one, but I don't see it. You are certainly not offering a compelling analysis. It introduces a product gap that their analysis should have spotted but they were willing to chance. The effect of that product gap is that something filled the hole via consumer demand and that was either: a) People bought vanilla netbooks and "suffered" with XP. b) People bought netbooks and turned them into hackintoshes. Either way, Apple didn't realize revenue from these purchases. Smart business would have tried to capitalize on this form factor, which is why every major manufacturer other than Apple has some kind of netbook offering. My claim is that this is an oversight on the part of Apple. Sure they wouldn't have realized revenue from these sales, but they would have kept their consumers "in the fold" since netbooks are usually a second purchase. Apple's response so far has not been to fill the hole in the product line with a product (even an overpriced one), but by crippling their software. It's a scorched earth policy, if they can't have the consumer's money, nobody can.

by Zev 17y ago

elblanco 17y ago

>If you buy a Dell netbook, download an osx86 image off of the Internet and then install it, you're not an Apple users. Precisely. There aren't many non-apple users (classifying them as people who already own an Apple system, but want the improved portability the netbook formfactor affords) who are interesting in taking the time or energy to hackintosh their netbook. These people are saying, as loud as they can "Apple! We love your platform, make some hardware like a netbook and we will buy it! For goodness sakes, look at all the trouble we're going through to simulate it!" Apple doesn't even have to R&D the netbook formfactor. They don't have to work with chip vendors to come up with lowpower chips and chipsets, or downgraded low power GPUs. They literally have to do nothing except get Jonny Ive to cook up a unibody case and put OSX on them. Charge $400 instead of $350 and they have and Apple netbook. But Apple can't find the margins in the product line and the equation means that they have no offering for this huge hole in their lineup.

tptacek 17y ago
I'm trying as hard as I can to figure out what your point is. Apple isn't selling this stuff because they've decided not to. No matter how big you think this "hole" is and what your "equation" says, they get to pick what their product line is, not you.
- elblanco 17y ago
  So in your world, Apple has a big decision dartboard in the board room, and Steve goes there everyday and asks "should we sell a netbook?". The darts so far have landed on "No" or "Play Golf". http://www.s2999.com/images/dartboard_decision_maker.jpg http://www.s2999.com/images/dartboard_decision_maker.jpg "Apple decided not to sell them." is not a reason, it's an effect of a long line of decision making. The first part of your statement is missing. "Netbooks _____, so Apple decided not to sell them". Fill in the blank with something that makes business sense and you'll probably be not too far off the mark. You have offered absolutely 0 to the analysis of why Apple is not in this space. My point, since you have failed to deduce it, is that I think Apple couldn't make their margin goals on that product line (netbooks). They sell for between $300-400. Apple's absolutely bottom of the barrel offering is $500 with no peripherals whatsoever. Margins on netbooks are pitiful, probably close to break even. Apple wants to sell commodity hardware at 20% markup, they can't do that in the netbook space. Common, this is Business and Products 101. I can see no other rational business reason not to get into that space. There may be one, but I don't see it. You are certainly not offering a compelling analysis. It introduces a product gap that their analysis should have spotted but they were willing to chance. The effect of that product gap is that something filled the hole via consumer demand and that was either: a) People bought vanilla netbooks and "suffered" with XP. b) People bought netbooks and turned them into hackintoshes. Either way, Apple didn't realize revenue from these purchases. Smart business would have tried to capitalize on this form factor, which is why every major manufacturer other than Apple has some kind of netbook offering. My claim is that this is an oversight on the part of Apple. Sure they wouldn't have realized revenue from these sales, but they would have kept their consumers "in the fold" since netbooks are usually a second purchase. Apple's response so far has not been to fill the hole in the product line with a product (even an overpriced one), but by crippling their software. It's a scorched earth policy, if they can't have the consumer's money, nobody can.