minich@d.cs.okstate.edu (Robert Minich) (07/03/90)
It has been largely ignored in the on going MCIBTYC junk flying around, but Win 3 _is_ in fact a great threat to the Mac, but not at all necessarily based on its merits. If we learn nothing else about technology and the bleeding edge, it is that perception is much much more important to success than technical merits. (Aside: this also applies to a GUI's "feel".) Because there will most certainly be many more PC bigots saying Windows is >= the Mac than the other way around, it is very likely that Windows will be bought up more readily. No matter which is better, Win 3 is definitely (IMHO) affecting Apple, mainly to start eating margins since PC's are now _perceived_ [whether or not this is true] as being a reasonable equivalent to the Mac for less $$$. I personally think it is in Apple's best interests to come as close to giving away Macs as is possible to increase the installed base. In the long run, this would be very beneficial. (Look what it did for something as icky as DOS and the 8086! [or is it 8088?]) I also don't think Windows is at all any sort of successor to the Mac. It is at best on a parallel. Now OS/2 is more interesting, yet still infintile. The biggest threat I see to OS/2 is Windows, which will only serve to hamper efforts to make the switch. But then people perceive certain things there that i won't even start to get into. -- | _ /| | Robert Minich |Q: Why is the food so lousy, and | \'o.O' | Oklahoma State University |the service so bad? Time traveler: | =(___)= | minich@d.cs.okstate.edu |A:The waiters know in advance what | U | - Bill sez "Ackphtth" |kind of tip they'll be getting.
doner@aerospace.aero.org (John Doner) (07/07/90)
In article <1990Jul3.113921.1299@d.cs.okstate.edu> minich@d.cs.okstate.edu (Robert Minich) writes: > I personally think it is in Apple's best interests to come as close to >giving away Macs as is possible to increase the installed base. In the >long run, this would be very beneficial. Do that, and they won't be around for the long run, or if they are, we won't care. The money for all that R & D, developing and improving user interfaces, innovative software like Hypercard, etc., let alone the hardware, has to come from somewhere. The only way Apple could sell computers at PC-clone prices would be to give up its future; they could lay off the research staff, and start pumping out lots of cheap variations on the SE. This would expand market share for a while. Then what?
derek@leah.Albany.Edu (Derek L. / MacLover) (07/07/90)
In article <77516@aerospace.AERO.ORG>, doner@spot.UUCP (John Doner) spilled his guts, writing: >In article <1990Jul3.113921.1299@d.cs.okstate.edu> minich@d.cs.okstate.edu (Robert Minich) writes: >> I personally think it is in Apple's best interests to come as close to >>giving away Macs as is possible to increase the installed base. In the >>long run, this would be very beneficial. >Do that, and they won't be around for the long run, or if they are, we won't >care. The money for all that R & D, developing and improving user interfaces, >innovative software like Hypercard, etc., let alone the hardware, has to come >from somewhere. The only way Apple could sell computers at PC-clone prices >would be to give up its future; they could lay off the research staff, and >start pumping out lots of cheap variations on the SE. This would expand >market share for a while. Then what? Well, first of all I don't think selling a low-end machine would hurt either their high-end sales or their profit margin. And even if major across-the-board price cuts aren't forthcoming, they could concentrate on selling at much lower prices to certain markets: they should REALLY attack the higher-education market much more strongly than they are. A campus rep is something that is very missed -- going to a dealer with questions is a big mistake, and I think it loses more sales than it gains (especially OUR dealer! Argh!). I'll just use one example to illustrate my point: we've only had an on-campus (student) Amiga rep for a month or so, and I'd say he's worked out more than a dozen deals. This is part-time work only, too. Amigas are, of course, more competatively priced (and what are they competing with? -- Macs), but even so it could make a real difference. Ahh, I'm no corporate marketing strategist... Derek L. -- + + One Mac is worth exactly 2.317 PCs (based on current price indices) + + Disclaimer: I was asleep. ---}=-------------------------` ++ All the busy little creatures / Chasing out their destinies --Peart ++
drd@siia.mv.com (David Dick) (07/11/90)
In <77516@aerospace.AERO.ORG> doner@aerospace.aero.org (John Doner) writes: >In article <1990Jul3.113921.1299@d.cs.okstate.edu> minich@d.cs.okstate.edu (Robert Minich) writes: >> I personally think it is in Apple's best interests to come as close to >>giving away Macs as is possible to increase the installed base. In the >>long run, this would be very beneficial. >Do that, and they won't be around for the long run, or if they are, we won't >care. The money for all that R & D, developing and improving user interfaces, >innovative software like Hypercard, etc., let alone the hardware, has to come >from somewhere. The only way Apple could sell computers at PC-clone prices >would be to give up its future; they could lay off the research staff, and >start pumping out lots of cheap variations on the SE. This would expand >market share for a while. Then what? Japanese companies seem to have been doing just fine concentrating on market share instead of taking the immediate profits. Do they "give up [their] future" when they do this? I don't think so. David Dick Software Innovations, Inc. [the Software Moving Company (sm)]
russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) (07/11/90)
In article <1990Jul10.184527.4259@siia.mv.com> drd@siia.mv.com (David Dick) writes: >In <77516@aerospace.AERO.ORG> doner@aerospace.aero.org (John Doner) writes: > >>In article <1990Jul3.113921.1299@d.cs.okstate.edu> minich@d.cs.okstate.edu (Robert Minich) writes: >>> I personally think it is in Apple's best interests to come as close to >>>giving away Macs as is possible to increase the installed base. In the >>>long run, this would be very beneficial. > >>Do that, and they won't be around for the long run, or if they are, we won't >>care. The money for all that R & D, developing and improving user interfaces, >>innovative software like Hypercard, etc., let alone the hardware, has to come >>from somewhere. The only way Apple could sell computers at PC-clone prices >>would be to give up its future; they could lay off the research staff, and >>start pumping out lots of cheap variations on the SE. This would expand >>market share for a while. Then what? > >Japanese companies seem to have been doing just fine concentrating on >market share instead of taking the immediate profits. Do they >"give up [their] future" when they do this? I don't think so. > How many Japanese microcomputer companies (besides clone-makers, which are a different animal) are there? What is their market share, relative to Apple, IBM, and Compaq. Sure, Apple could turn into a clone-maker-- I doubt many of Apple's customers or shareholders want that, though. -- Matthew T. Russotto russotto@eng.umd.edu russotto@wam.umd.edu ][, ][+, ///, ///+, //e, //c, IIGS, //c+ --- Any questions? Hey! Bush has NO LIPS!
drd@siia.mv.com (David Dick) (07/12/90)
In <1990Jul11.133528.18467@eng.umd.edu> russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes: >In article <1990Jul10.184527.4259@siia.mv.com> drd@siia.mv.com (David Dick) writes: >>Japanese companies seem to have been doing just fine concentrating on >>market share instead of taking the immediate profits. Do they >>"give up [their] future" when they do this? I don't think so. >> >How many Japanese microcomputer companies (besides clone-makers, which are >a different animal) are there? What is their market share, relative to >Apple, IBM, and Compaq. Japanese companies are not dominant in the computer (personal or otherwise) market here, but I bet you can think of some other markets they're in. How about the car market? And if you think they're just "clone-makers" how about the consumer electronics market? The point is that it is perfectly possible to trade off current profits for market share and still be innovative and maintain a long-term presence in a market. It may be a valid business decision for Apple to forego market share in exchange for current profits, but saying that it is mandatory in order to stay in the market for the long term doesn't wash with me. There are just too many counter-examples. David Dick Software Innovations, Inc. [the Software Moving Company (sm)]