Will Apple Really Abandon the Low-End Desktop Computer Market?
Recent rumors suggest that Apple is to cut the 17-inch iMac from its range and drop the Mac mini, making the entry level desktop Mac a 20-inch iMac. But is it fanciful to think Apple would drop its low-end computers?
Long, long ago, in a cave without broadband, Steve Zog strode out, held up a burning twig, and proclaimed “I fire!” No need for reality distortion, the appreciative oohs and ahhs confirmed this capturing of fire to be a significant advancement—as well as beating Bill Zutz who was still chasing lightning around, trying to catch it in a bowl.
Some weeks later, Steve comes back with a burning stick and proclaims “No more twigs, I fire!” More appreciation.
A couple of months later, Steve starts waving a burning branch, shouting, “No more sticks, I fire!” However, this one isn’t as warmly received. “Come on, Steve,” says one of Steve’s usually faithful clan, “the twig was useful, the stick was great, but do we really need a whole branch? What next? The whole tree?” Steve’s eyes sparkled as his mind drifted off to its thinking place. Other members of the clan, however, liked the burning branch and begged Steve to go bigger and better. Fortunately Steve got a bit distracted by his work on the wheel, and the local forests were saved. “Just need to invent wheel so can make iPod,” Steve was heard muttering.
Fast forward a few thousand generations: Bill’s descendant is still trying to catch lightning and Steve’s is still replacing technology faster than we can get used to it, egged on by his mostly faithful clan.
Today it’s not burning sticks, it’s computer monitors. The first Macs Steve waved at us proudly sported a 9-inch screen. The latest rumors are saying that the next iMac will come with 20 inches as a minimum. Is that a burning branch?
The 20-inch iMac would likely drop in price significantly as LCD monitor prices are plummeting, and it could even come into line with the current pricing of the 17-inch iMacs.
However, retaining a 17-inch iMac would give Apple a very affordable iMac, let’s say US$699. At the same time, the cost of the Mac mini could be further cut to, say, US$499.
Without these two units, at best, the entry level Mac would be a US$999, 20-inch iMac. And that would put Macs back in the “Macs are expensive” basket.
Is this just consumerism? Or is there a real need for larger monitors? Do we really need a burning branch? How long before we demand a burning tree?
Sales are the indicator, so if Apple drops the 17” iMac, that would be some indication that consumerism is demanding larger monitors. And really, when you see a 20-inch or 24-inch iMac, it’s hard not to lust.
Whatever Apple decides on the iMac, dropping the Mac mini without replacing it would be bad for Apple’s image. Imagine if the entry level iPod was the 8GB nano at US$249. Sure they’d still sell, but Apple would be missing a massive part of the market.
Apple seems to have little interest in the corporate desktop market, and if these rumors are correct, then it’s also losing interest in the next biggest segment of the desktop computer market. And that can’t be a good thing.
Faithful aside, many consumers don’t want a burning branch that’s going to cost them their best rocks. They just need to light a fire.
If Apple is having challenges in the low-end market, is abandoning it really the best solution? What happened to innovation? Can’t we get an affordable, even if smaller, burning branch?
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Comments
Folks, you really have to work on your headlines. This one falls in line with all the other GEE! GOSH! TERROR! OMG!-baits on Apple Matters. The article is okay, but the headline almost had me skip it. “Not another one of those, end in itself articles”. Please, you can do better than that.
On topic: Apple would be stupid to drop the lower end, and everybody knows that. No entry level is a bad thing to have. Nevertheless, I do not know the sales numbers, but I know I would not buy a 17” desktop. Even 20” is a little small if you want to use it as a TV-replacement (say in a dorm). You can never have too much screen real-estate in a stationary unit. No matter what Apple finally does, it is high timed for them to do it. Both the iMac as well as the Mini are long overdue for an update.
There’s a nook in our kitchen that can only fit a 17” screen. Anything bigger and the computer will have to go somewhere else. Yes, you can have too much screen.
The only way I could afford to buy a Mac last year for my home was to buy a Mac mini. IMHO, it would be a mistake for Apple to drop the mini.
I for one do not want to watch TV on any screen less than 40 inches. So I would NEVER buy a computer to watch TV. Bad Beaver, not every Mac user is a college kid. For Apple to base it product placement on a small segment of its user base is foolish.
I think Apple is hinting at “bigger is better” in Leopard with Spaces. If Apple really did drop the 17 inch iMac it would mean yes Apple would want to focus on larger displays and they’re implying that we can no longer do all the things we need to do in one 15 inch screen but up to 16 15 inch screens or whatever amount Spaces supports.
For the kitchen issue, you want a Mini anyway
See here:
http://www.caffeine-junkies.com/?mode=articles&page=article&id=7&sort=2
Island in the Net, the dorm situation is just an example of were an all-in-one with a screen as big as possible/affordable is well applied. You buy it because it can serve as both PC, TV, DVD-Player and music player without taking up the space of all those devices.
If you look around you will find that a great many Mac users are in fact college kids, and that demographic is very important.
Problem is, we’re beginning a new upgrade cycle at the office. We’ve already planned for about half the staff to have top-of-line MacMini’s. If the Mini’s are discontinued, then the low-end iMac would be next on the list, which would add about $500 to the purchase price per unit. Unfortunately, IT already invested in new 17-20” flatpanels for everybody, as Mini’s were the decided way to go. I guess we really need to buy NOW…lol
BB, I thought laptops were the go at uni/colleg, which the students then take to class/tutes/lectures, library, home etc.
On laptops, it’s interesting that Apple has stopped them at 17 inches. Are we seeing a distinct split in the market where Apple is driving desktops towards home entertainment, and laptops to general computing?
BTW: What headline would you have written? I really wanted to write one that tied in with the burning branch, but it would have been too obscure without reading the article. I thought the headline I wrote captured the content quite nicely, although not as succinctly as I would have liked. I supposed I could have toned it down slightly by asking “Is Apple…”; however, that wouldn’t have been as accurate to the content.
Was the word “abandon” too strong? Maybe so. I shoulda said “Quit” which is probably gentler.
Although I liked the word abandon coz it carries that dual sense of both quitting the market, and letting down the users in that market - which I suspect is what many would feel.
Frankly I don’t see the purpose of a 17” desktop, when you can get the same thing size screen in a much more portable laptop (as Chris has mentioned).
While cost maybe an issues to some, it has never seemed been the driver of Apples decisions. On the other have ‘form’ has, and even the lower cost items seem to have been driven by form over price.
The decision to produce the ipod shuffle and the Mac mini seem to have been driven as much as designing the smallest possible functioning music player and computer as by the desire for producing entry level products.
The decision to produce the ipod shuffle and the Mac mini seem to have been driven as much as designing the smallest possible functioning music player and computer as by the desire for producing entry level products.
I think Apple is hinting at “bigger is better” in Leopard with Spaces.
Good point, Tanner.
Yaaa, “abandon” is good drama
Maybe “Where is Apple going with the Low-End?” or “What is the fate of Apple’s Low-End?”.
I like those, BB.
Well 2 things really. I said it last year the 17” is a no show anymore. The cost between 17” and 20” screens is a mere $24-27 depending on supplier so drop the 17 all together and use the guts in a 20”. With the current Santa Rosa chips averaging 22% less to produce thus 22% less to buy for Apple and other manufactures the current Merom line will be phased out once the last run of OEM chips are depleated. Apple isn’t about making last years tech, there about making next years. Obvious I think, but sometimes needs restated.
As for the Mini it’s going to go 3 ways. It will either become more of a desktop with a 3.5” SATA II drive running 2.0+ chips or it goes in the trash. Personally I’d like to see it grow a bit in size to accomodate a desktop hard drive. The third way really is an extension of the beefy desktop and that’s a Mac Pro Mini variant. Drop the 4 core Mac Pro, 8 cores only please and put the 4 core chip (that’s 1 cpu) in the Mini with a 256mb dedicated video card. What you have is the missing link.
Going this route you’ll want to keep the current mini size and stature, leave it in the low price point, Santa Rosa chips, 2.5” SATA II drives Intels new X300 video chipset etc… Then have the MMP fit in between the Mini and the Mac Pro. Someone or Small Biz that needs a hard core proccesing desktop but doesn’t want to fork out $3000. Price it around $999 - $1499 and you got a winner IF it can stack up and over the MM.
Remember not everyone wants to buy an All-In-One machine as some of use like to use our own monitors. I’ve got 4 Mini’s in the office attached to Apple input’s and Xerox LCD’s. Last year these mini’s had different monitors but as LCD prices go down, quality goes up I can replace them without replacing the computer.
So Keep the Mini, and stop calling it a bastard. But to sway some new users you’ll need to include or package a Keyboard and Mouse into the deal… Most PC’s still use Legacy PS/2 ports Circa 1985 (IBM PS/2).