lbotez@pnet02.gryphon.com (Lynda Botez) (01/10/90)
I thought the loss of Call-A.P.P.L.E. was bad enough; but then the news of the
demise of Applefest concerns me more than the collapse of a magazine. To
think that last September was the "last Applefest". I thought the addition of
Macs to the last of the Apple II tradeshows was deplorable, but now...
I really wonder if Apple is aware of how crucial the Apple II computer is to
the existence of Apple Computer, Inc. It looks like they are about to find
out. All last year the Apple II was ignored (at least from a Marketing point
of view); while a new Macintosh CPU appeared on the scene nearly every two
months. Numerous reincarnations of Mac IIci's, portables, etc. seemed to be
the main focus of Apple Computer. With every new CPU, the prices kept going
up... out of most people's reach! Meanwhile, the IBM clones kept getting
better and less expensive!
Apple has lost track of it's original user base! It seems to be interested
mainly in targeting businesses and the "workstation" market; it's dropped to
home computer user entirely! Well, the figures speak for themselves. While
Apple is still making more money than ever, it is selling fewer computers.
The market it used to control is now being absorbed by IBM clones and Amiga
computers.
When a company sells less product than in previous years, there is an
indication of a problem. Stock prices for Apple have dropped considerably in
the last 12 months.
The Apple II and the Macintosh have had a bizarre, almost incestuous symbiotic
relationship with each other. The Macintosh survived and blossomed because of
the financial support provided by the Apple II; and also because of the
established user base of the Apple II. Users of Apples eventually migrated
towards the Macintosh; mainly because of the user -friendly interface and the
familiarity and trustworthiness of Apple Computer, Inc. The Apple IIGS (the
latest reincarnation of the Apple II line) has taken advantage of many of the
Macintosh features; especially the GUI.
The biggest advantage of keeping the Apple II line alive is the fact that
users of the Apple II tend to migrate toward the MacIntosh when "moving up".
Scores of children raised on Apple II computers want their "Mac" when they
move to colleges and corporations.
If the IBM-compatibles take over the school and home computer market; Apple
will have placed themselves in a small, segmented market share of
workstations. The next generation of MacIntosh computers (the Mac IIxi ?)
will be even more expensive than the current ones. Who can afford these
"Lamborgini's" of the computer world?
The Apple II is a "people's machine". It's affordable, and with it's open
architecture, it can be customized to a user's needs. However, it lacks the
speed and the graphics that it should have been born with.
1990 will be an interesting year. Will the Apple II survive? Will Apple
Computer, Inc. move on without the II? Will MacIntosh be "forever"?
UUCP: {ames!elroy, <routing site>}!gryphon!pnet02!lbotez
INET: lbotez@pnet02.gryphon.comrich@pro-exchange.cts.com (Rich Sims) (01/11/90)
In-Reply-To: message from lbotez@pnet02.gryphon.com (Lynda Botez) > Numerous reincarnations of Mac IIci's, portables, etc. seemed to be > the main focus of Apple Computer. With every new CPU, the prices kept going > up... out of most people's reach! Meanwhile, the IBM clones kept getting > better and less expensive! Well, since you toss in the point about "IBM clones" in your message, you might note that Mac clones are quite inexpensive too! :-)
huang@husc4.HARVARD.EDU (Howard Huang) (01/13/90)
In article <24529@gryphon.COM> lbotez@pnet02.gryphon.com (Lynda Botez) writes: >... All last year the Apple II was ignored (at least from a Marketing point >of view); while a new Macintosh CPU appeared on the scene nearly every two >months. The Apple 89 year-end stock report mentions the Apple II line twice -- once to mention the new products that strengthened the II (e.g., the Video Overlay Card), and once to mention the strength of Apple IIs in schools. But that latter part also included a blurb about how the Macintosh was being more and more accepted into schools, sort of hinting that there's nothing the Apple II can do that the Mac can't. >Apple has lost track of it's original user base! It seems to be interested >mainly in targeting businesses and the "workstation" market; it's dropped to >home computer user entirely! No, no, of course Apple hasn't dropped the home base! As MacWEEK reports, there should be a new, low-cost color Macintosh available in 1990. Perfect for the average home user. I can see it now -- "all the power of a Macintosh at a price every family can afford." >The Apple II and the Macintosh have had a bizarre, almost incestuous symbiotic >relationship with each other. I can't say I've ever thought of it in those terms, but... :^) >The Apple II is a "people's machine". It's affordable, and with it's open >architecture, it can be customized to a user's needs. You'll note the same thing can be said about the Macintoshes. (Affordable is one of those popular computer adjectives that every manufacturer uses.) Now there's really nothing wrong with the Macintosh -- it's a nice machine -- but I wish the Apple II got a little more attention (and a built-in Transwarp). >UUCP: {ames!elroy, <routing site>}!gryphon!pnet02!lbotez >INET: lbotez@pnet02.gryphon.com Howard C. Huang huang@husc4.harvard.edu