Re: Apple posted a $55 million Q2 profit

[Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>]

Rick Hatton writes ...
> 
> Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net> wrote:
> 
> >  Clearly, Apple is not remotely close to competing with PC for the
> > home shopper market. It is mildly astonishing that some business and
> > educational buyers so easily pass up major cost savings;
> 
> You are still comparing Name Brands (Apple) and clone prices. IBM and
> Compaq fail those same comparisons. Compare Umax proces to Wintel clone
> prices, and Apple prices with IBM.


     To some extent, we may be 'talking past' each other. Evidently,
your point is that Apple does what IBM and Compaq do-- sell and maintain
installations for businesses, universities, and similar institutions-- 
and this is where price comparisons should be made.

     The original assertion was that Apple is a maker of high-priced
PC's. Your comment that comparisons should be made only against other
high-priced computer sellers appears to constitute agreement.


     Why should we consider other, lower price PC makers? Were it
possible to carve out, say, 15% of the pie and say "this belongs forever
to big-spender, hold-my-hand-while-you-install-my-machines suppliers",
then we could conclude that Apple, Compaq, and IBM might never be
concerned much about competition from lower price sellers. They would
just need to battle one another.

     It is becoming clear that no 'piece of the pie' is guaranteed.
Compaq, IBM, and Apple are destined to fight over a shrinking market.
More and more mid-range and local low-range PC sellers are supplying set
up, maintenance, etc. services. A "brand name" on a PC will soon mean
about as much as a brand name on a toaster.

     It is correct and fair to compare Apple prices to popular PC prices
because the reality is that Apple _is_ in competition with many other PC
makers. So are Compaq and IBM.

     Unfortunately, all indications are that Apple is likely to be the
first big loser among the "cadillac" PC makers. "Big loser" means "out",
"gone", "dead".


     In its press release Apple says that ... 

>>

     Apple is now recommitted to its original mission - to bring the
best personal computing products and support to students, educators,
designers, scientists, engineers, businesspersons and consumers in over
140 countries around the world. 

<<


     The above statement sounds nice; but, it is untrue. Apple's
original mission was to sell computers to everybody. Lots of people
bought Apple II's and II+'s because, all things considered, they were
the best personal computers you could buy for the money. Apple, Inc.
1998 knows very well that, for 90% of those shopping for a computer, its
prices and value are not at all competitive.

     Many Apple II users would like to see Apple change course in time
to avert disaster. We would like for Apple to, in fact, "recommit to its
original mission" and deliver a for-real new, non-PC, Apple II home
computer lots of people would buy because it is a great value.



Rubywand