Subject | Re: mac sales down |
From | Mayor Of R'lyeh |
Date | 05/15/2008 05:08 (05/14/2008 23:08) |
Message-ID | <06an24lbldv31g89gr1gji96sfdb1ditmp@4ax.com> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | comp.sys.mac.advocacy |
Follows | ZnU |
Followups | ZnU (4h & 50m) > Mayor Of R'lyeh |
ZnUWhich explains why the Mini outsells low end mid tower PCs with similar specs 10 to 1.
In article <9d3ba$482b0713$7863@news.teranews.com>, Glorb <Glorb@orb.com>wrote:Glorb
ZnU wrote:ZnUZnUGlorb
Most customers in the market for a $300 or $400 computer aren't what we might call "performance enthusiasts". They want a basic computer for web browsing and other simple tasks. This is basically what the Mac mini is... it just costs more because it has a somewhat better processor than many machines in the sub-$400 range, and there are costs associated with making it so small.
Why are you going to the "sub-$400 range?" Why not look at the $400 - $600 range, that gives the same or better processors than the mini, and lots more other hardware, for the same price as a Mini or less?
I think a lot of low-end users don't care much more about tech specs than they do about form factor.
So, making the low-end model larger and cheaper would probably create more interest than making it larger and faster.Are you really this deluded?
I know there's a constituency on Usenet that desperately wants a reasonably fast sub-$1000 expandable tower from Apple. But my impression is that these folks are mostly computer enthusiasts, and that general users have different priorities.Like getting $500 wiorth of computer for $500 and not really thinking that the Mini's form factor is any kind of advantage over a mid tower.