[Ti] Re: PowerBook competition

[Chris Olson]

On Sep 21, 2005, at 6:40 PM, Steve Wozniak wrote:


> Basically, you don't go to a store and compare PC's to Macintoshes,  
> or, as in this case, vice-versa. You have other strong reasons for  
> which platform you will buy.
>

There's a big "BUT" involved IMHO.  If you want to increase your  
market share significantly you're going to have to get people to  
"switch" the thinking on their strong reasons.  Windows is the  
defacto standard in desktop operating systems.  The majority of  
computer buyers will buy Windows *because* it's the defacto  
standard.  You can go to OfficeMax and select from a multitude of  
Windows applications for your Windows computer while the shelves are  
void of any Mac applications.  And all the other things that go with  
being the defacto standard.......

So now you have a person who's thinking he/she may want to  
"switch" (unhappy with Windows, friend has a Mac and likes it, or a  
multitude of other justifications).  The first step is going to be  
some sort of comparison, not only of the software, but the hardware  
that runs it.  The price is perhaps the single most significant  
comparison that's going to be made.  The Mac comes with built-in  
"sticker shock" because the hardware is vastly overpriced compared to  
today's PC hardware.  Gone are the days when you could say "if you  
equip your PC with everything a Mac comes with standard it'll cost  
just as much".  This new Lenovo notebook is living proof that's not  
the case anymore.  So now justify why Mac OS and it suite of  
applications is worth $700 more to the average computer buyer.

I think the big difference is that Apple commands 20+% margins on  
their hardware while PC builders live with *much* lower margins than  
that.  That's why I said originally that Apple, IMHO, needs to do two  
things;

1.)  The PowerBook is due for an overhaul in design.  It's showing  
its age and even the best designs eventually become outdated.

2.)  Apple needs to restructure their margins on their hardware.

IMHO, Apple doesn't need to do things like buying Steve (Jobs) a  
Gulfstream V as a token of "appreciation".  For pete's sake, I'm a  
pilot and plane owner and my Seneca III gets me around just fine.   
Maybe not quite as much "class" as a Gulfstream, but it's got a full  
IFR panel, full de-ice including hot props and screen, and the  
engines are even turbocharged so I can fly with the big boys at FL180  
if I want to.  So it's not pressurized and I have to suck on O2 above  
10,000 MSL.  Big deal.  The point is, how much money gets spent on  
stuff at Apple, like a G-V, that couldn't be served just as well by  
charter or commercial services?  Or even something more practical if  
you want a private aircraft?

Apple dumps a considerable amount of their profit into R&D, but if  
they're really interested in breaking 5% on market share, IMHO they  
could afford to spend a little on education of the general public,  
and advertising.  I've seen that they have no problems spending it in  
other places.
--
Chris