This is the first time in the history of My Turn that
we've published a mailbag column, but with the level of email received
in response to Monday's Resurrecting the Low Cost
Mac by Ben Wells, it seemed the right time to do our first My Turn
Mailbag.
Dan Knight, publisher
From David:
Ben Wells makes some interesting arguments, but his automobile
analogies are not quite applicable.
I don't know what part of the world Mr. Wells lives in, but some
Japanese sedans here in So. Cal. are very expensive and extremely well
built. Depending on the particular manufacturer and model, they are as
well engineered or better than their German counterparts (cf. Lexus).
It is true that at the very high-end, the Benzs dominate, but this is
rarely a quality issue but rather one of branding and service (at those
prices, service better be good!)
Apple's Mac computers are more like Jaguars than Benzs. They look
good, and have a brand association, but the mechanics are not the best
in the world, and in fact, some models have to be taken into the shop
every month for servicing (cf. eMacs, iMacs, transformer issues,
adapter issues, etc.)
For most people, Toyotas work and ride extremely well, and are
priced realistically. Why, oh why, would they want to pay the price of
a Lexus or Benz, much less that of a Jaguar, when all they want to do
is move from point A to point B in reasonable comfort, safety, and
style? It is not as if they are resigning themselves to driving in
golf-carts.
Similarly, most people I have talked to who use Windows on
inexpensive machines say that all they want to do is surf the Web, do
some word processing, and play a few games. With Win2k (but not Win98,
and definitely not WinMe), the Toyota analogy fits - good solid
performance, decent stability, reasonable price. Why, oh why, would
they want to switch to a Jaguar and pay an enormous premium to obtain a
car whose engine goes kaput and whose parts are expensive and difficult
to obtain?
Even with a lower price from Apple, I believe that given the current
Win stability, and pervasiveness, there will be very little incentive
for most people to switch platforms. Unlike expensive foreign cars
which maintain an air of sophistication, Macs are often derided as
computers for "dummies". The only hope for salvation is that MS p*sses
everyone off so much that they will send people in droves looking
elsewhere. My observation is that MS manages to p*ss people off just
enough to get what they want but not enough to send them packing. I
doubt this will change.
From Bill Doty:
These are my thoughts on the recent articles about low cost
Macintosh computers.
First, bring the iMac price tag to $450, make it a nice shade of
blue that says hello when its turned on. CD read only; no CD burner or
DVD. 10 GB hard drive, 128 MB RAM, 600 MHz G3 processor, built in 56k
modem, 17" screen, USB ports no FireWire, OS 10.2 and 9.2, make it
directly networkable to a windows PC. Mom and dad will buy it for the
kids (and the schools will buy them by the hundreds for computer
lab.)
Second, do not drop OS 9.2 from education market computers.
Schools run a pathetic mix of software, and if your new Mac can't run
the old software, those schools that haven't already switched to cheap
PCs will.
Third, develop OS 10.2 for Windows PCs. Design it like 10.2/9.2 is
now. The PC would be able to switch operating systems like my G4.
Fourth, recruit more dealers. Go after local dealers, not
necessarily the big electronics chain stores. Train them in build to
order and let them service the education market. School boards like to
buy local and trust local service people.
Fifth, Apple should make more of their own software. Virus checkers,
utility programs. Develop a software package tailored for the intended
home market. Bill Gates et al realized long ago that the money is in
software, not hardware.
Lastly - now for the hat trick: It's time to license the operating
system. Do it now while you have a superior product, work with
licensees, and don't screw them (like last time).
Any idiot with a screwdriver can build a PC. Modern Macs use almost
all the same parts as PCs. We are rapidly approaching the day when
there will be no mechanical difference between the PC and the Mac.
Apple can gain market share, but they have to be aggressive. They have
to decide if there is more money in selling two BMWs or if there is
more money in selling 1000 Chevys.
From E McCann:
I've been reading the cube/no cube/low cost Mac for schools items
with interest, and something ended up coming to me:
The Quadra 605. Tiny, sure.
Needs an external display. Sure. Cheap...?
Take the G3 iMac "gumdrops," cut off the CRT, possibly go for the
external [power] brick, and what you have sitting in front of you looks
amazingly similar. With a CD-RW instead of a floppy, and speakers in
the front.
Take the latest idea of selling laptop 12" and 14" screens
separately (give some secure, built in mount to them) and, for general
use, you've got what could well be a cheap, school-lab or classroom
Mac. Set up an upgraded (G4) version for areas that *really* need it
(video production classes, teacher units). Other than that, is a G4
*really* needed for en masse paper typing, 'net searching, and the
like?
I hope to post more personal thoughts on this issue next week. I really
like some of the ideas I'm seeing posted on Low End Mac and elsewhere.
I do wonder, though, whether some sort of low-cost Mac design
convergence here on the Mac Web has any chance of impacting the people
at One Infinite Loop who make the decisions.
Keeping my fingers crossed that we do make a difference.
Dan Knight, publisher
Share your perspective on the Mac by emailing with "My Turn" as your subject.
