On Apr 17, 2012, at 1:25 PM, Douglas Mencken wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Bruce Johnson
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> On Apr 17, 2012, at 12:49 PM, Douglas Mencken wrote:
>> 
>>>>> Since they killed ppc and put profit above quality,
>>>> 
>>>> Oh puleeeze. Look at the service history of the G5 iMac versus even the 
>>>> first-gen Intel one, it's no contest.
>> I was around at the time, performance was very MUCH on Apple's mind because 
>> nearly every review of any new Powerbook was 'well, still no G5 powerbook 
>> and cheaper Wintel laptops are much faster, longer battery life, etc. Apple, 
>> was losing their place rapidly/
> 
> At that time, Apple had iPod, had iPhone. Now *they* are Apple's
> market. Macs are only decimals of a single percent in their profit.

Actually, per their own reports. The quarter including the Holiday 2011, they 
sold 37 million iPhones, 15 million iPads, 15.4 million iPods and 5.2 million 
Macs. The iPhone goes for about $400, the iPad about $600, the iPod (which 
includes the shuffle, classic, nano and touch) lets say $250, Macs average 
around $1200. 

Per their quarterly report last January, last quarter (their biggest, the 
holiday one) Apple made 46.3 billion gross sales, with a profit of 13.06 
billion, a 28% profit margin.

<http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2012/01/24Apple-Reports-First-Quarter-Results.html>

Using those rough prices and numbers apple made (again, very roughly)

$4.1 b on iPhones
$2.6 b on iPads
$2.2 b on Macs
$1.1 b on iPods

This comes to 10 billion, leaving 3.6 billion profit for everything else they 
sell, like iTunes stuff and software.

This means the %profit breakdown per platform is:

30% iPhone
19% iPad
16% Macs
 8% iPods

Hardly 'decimals of a single percent'


> So it was okay to go "everybody is using" side, against "think
> different". Because *Apple doesn't care for Macs anymore*. Just a
> tradition. I bet they would abandon Mac Pros and Xserve in upcoming
> years.

The XServe is now the Mac Pro, and maybe they will. Depends on how well they 
sell. 

OTOH they're selling enough MacBook Airs to make the rest of the industry 
invent a new category to compete...the "ultrabooks"...that Apple is still 
crushing them in.

> 
>> (some wikipedia quotation)
> 
> If you are with macs for, say, at least 7 years, as you said, then you
> should know. Pentium IV 4GHz vs 2xdual-core ("quad') G5 970MP 2.5GHz.
> "Megahertz myth".
> And then even x86 Window® systems were started to ship with
> single/dual-core 1.6GHz x86 CPUs.
> 

WHile I'm sure that's an answer to some question, it's not germane to the 
discussion at hand. No Mac laptop used either a Pentium 4 OR a G5. Again, in 
2005 when the switch to Intel was announced, laptops were and increasingly 
larger portion of the total computer sales and the trend was accelerating. 

There is no doubt that the PPC out-performed Intel's offerings in the early 
00's. The questions is: has anyone done so SINCE 2005 and Intel's introduction 
of their new, post-'pentium' lines. The answer both in the Apple market and the 
larger computing market is a fairly resounding 'No!'.


>> These were indeed LOWER power than previous designs but for FSM sake those 
>> WERE the CPUS put into the last gen G5's. Have you ever been into a G5? Seen 
>> the gargantuan amount of engineering that went into keeping those space 
>> heaters cool?
> 
> I see a "gargantuan amount of engineering that went into keeping those
> space heaters" for all x86 systems since 2006-7. Don't you see them?
> No more single cooler on power supply. Now it is a lot of coolers
> everywhere.
> 

I've yet to see a standard business PC (as opposed to some gamerz overclocked 
rig) that required liquid cooling.


>> NO THEY WOULDN'T. Have you actually USED any Intel-based macs, head to head 
>> against a PPC system? Even the first MacBooks crushed the previous top-end 
>> Powerbooks, let along the iBooks they allegedly replaced.
> 
> I'm using x86 system (i7 quad core) on work. And it is slower
> (everywhere: browsing web, watching movies) than my G5 dual 2.3GHz
> made back in "late" 2005.

ORLY? 

Actual benchmarking begs to differ:

<http://browse.geekbench.ca/mac-benchmark/>

-- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs


-- 
You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for 
those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs.
The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette 
guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list

Reply via email to