Re: So what!

[rubywand@aol.com (RUBYWAND)]

In article <swjackso-1107962029060001@ad08-088.compuserve.com>,
swjackso@sprynet.com (Steve W. Jackson) writes:

>.... No one who is an enthusiast of
>Macintosh or Apple II computers (and who is an intelligent individual)
>denies that Apple made some poor (read:  stupid) marketing moves over the
>years;

     Obviously, they made some errors; but, in most cases, Apple
leadership has been pretty skillful in targeting and milking small,
high-profit markets. This is reflected in their stock price history.

     The problem with observations like "Apple made some poor (read: 
stupid) marketing moves" is that they gloss over reality. Chasing small,
high-profit markets becomes a very high-risk strategy as the number of
such markets shrinks. You can rake it in when you 'hit'; but a few
consecutive 'misses' and you're facing collapse.

     Apple's big error was to under-support its massive II user base. Like
Atari and Commodore, Apple saw only diminishing profitability in a market
that was 'mined out'. It was a stupendous mistake.

     Only today are major manufacturers and so-called "industry analysts"
coming to grips with a fundamental truth: the often ignored, much-abused
Home Market is "where it's at". The home user is the one who demands the
hottest, most feature-packed machine. While big oil companies and
universities buy machines in the thousands, home users buy them in the
millions. Home users also update more frequently and, when they do, they
go for the 'frills' necessary to run the newest entertainment products.

     The Apple II series was worth much more than its, at times, small
profitability would suggest. So long as millions of Apple II home users
were satisfied, the PC remained a rather plain business machine running
second-rate software. (The same was true of Mac. Mac users were satisfied
with monochrome, dinky sound, and minimal game wares for years.) Once it
became clear that Apple was abandoning the II series, PC clone makers
swooped into the vacuum with machines boasting AdLib sound and VGA
graphics.

     Evidently, Apple never really considered the consequences of ending a
strong Apple II presence in the home market. (Certainly, they were
adequately and explicitly warned in the pages of Computist.)  What
happened was not just the loss of unprofitable, troublesome II users.

     What happened was unification of home and business markets under a
single platform. Suddenly, Apple, along with Atari, and Commodore,
discovered the big difference between a diversified market and one which
recognizes a Standard Machine. Mac's, ST's, and Amiga's were (gasp)
incompatible!

     Even worse, no manufacturer controlled the 'Standard PC'. IBM had
created an Apple II-like monster and allowed the 'creation spell' to fall
into the hands of nameless grud clone makers ready to engage in price
competition at razor-thin profit margins.

     To say that Apple made some dumb mistakes is a gross understatement.
Apple made THE dumb mistake.


>I personally think they missed a golden opportunity to bridge Apple
>II users toward the Macintosh line with the IIGS, which was Mac-like and
>had color when Macs still had only B&W.

     Well, then, why not "bridge" Mac users to a souped-up Apple IIGS?

     Really, there was no way Apple could bridge II users to Mac so long
as Mac cost more and did less than IIgs or PC. By the time the first
"color Macs" arrived, it was too late. Why should II users shell out $$$
to replace a favorite non-mainstream machine with an alien non-mainstream
machine?


>But to come in here suggesting
>that Apple computer "deserves a comeuppence"

     That Apple failed to support the one barrier to PC domination is
'water under the bridge'. That dropping II support led to collapse of many
small businesses and torpedoed investments by uncountable users has been
amply documented. But, that Apple, Inc should continue to attempt
competition with grud machines in running grud machine software,
illustrates, better than any history of user abuse, Why the company
'deserves' a bit of tribulation. For now, at least, Apple has earned the
"loser" label.


Rubywand