🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 09:05:31 -0700, in
<fxk0o.78044$Lj2.53511@newsfe05.iad>, John Slade <hhitman86@pacbell.net>
wrote:

>On 7/17/2010 5:34 AM, SMS wrote:

>> It's really only an issue to those that are upset about OS-X's market
>> share, and interestingly enough, Apple isn't one of those upset. They
>> have margins on their hardware that Dell, HP, Toshiba, etc can only
>> dream of because Apple can charge premium prices for hardware while the
>> Windows systems vendors are in a race to the bottom on prices. Apple
>> also never felt the need to compete at the low end where the margins
>> really suck. The iPad was a brilliant move, selling for much more than a
>> netbook with a bill of materials that's far lower. Those that complain
>> that it's "not a real computer" do not understand what drives the
>> consumer electronics business.
>
>     The iPad, iPhone, iPod and iPod touch are brilliant moves 
>by Apple. They make great devices despite this problem with the 
>iPhone 4. As for their low end offerings, it's the Mini and 
>iMac. They both have low-end performance but Apple can sell them 
>at mid-range to high-end prices because they make them cute and 
>small. Most people want practical and cheap over cute and small.

My own take is just the opposite.
Cachet has been a big part of the Apple's success under Jobs.

>        As for the hardware costs of Apple. I don't see where 
>the extra cost is since they have proprietary parts like HP and 
>Dell have/had. They get them made by the same people at the same 
>quality. IMO Apple's extra costs come mainly from the way their 
>machines look and OS X. OS X is like by a niche and they will 
>pay a premium for it.

Apple tends to push design more than most Wintel computers (e.g.,
thinness) which does increase costs.

>> The transition from "Apple Computer" to just "Apple" shows that the
>> company understands that their future success is in achieving commanding
>> market positions in high margin consumer products like the iPod, iPad
>> and iPhone, as well as selling content.
>
>     Last time I checked their iPhone and other small devices 
>made up about 40% of Apples revenue intake. But the content in 
>the future will be the big moneymaker IMO. I see XBox Live 
>making money and online games making money. I see music and 
>video sales moving in the right direction.

I think Apple will remain a device company for the foreseeable future,
with content mostly driving the device business.

-- 
John

"Assumption is the mother of all screw ups."
[Wethern�s Law of Suspended Judgement]