I blame the top brass at all PC companies, except Apple. If Dell wanted to, they could produce a notebook that:
- Had no crap software pre-installed and came with solid hardware guaranteed to have good drivers for linux. You can choose windows or linux. The price difference between those choices is just not relevant. It's about the hardware. - Had a well designed case that doesn't creak. One of the things that really annoys me about dell notebooks is that they feel like they could fall apart at any moment. They don't, but that doesn't help me when I cringe every time the plastic creaks when I stuff one in a bag or lift one up while its open. - Introduced a host of features even apple doesn't have: A black and white screenmode (copied from the XO specs, which are, after all, 'open source'), where readability -improves- in direct sunlight. You can even spin this notebook as a 'lifestyle choice - let all those other idiots wither away in offices, you're out in the sun!' without seeming like a blowhard marketing jackass. There's no real equivalent to the macbook air (full size, but light, even at the cost of ports and the CD drive) in the PC market at all. Why isn't dell or sony releasing one? Even a half arsed attempt would get some buyers. There have to be people out there that want the options of a macbook but don't buy apple. So far I haven't seen anyone that seriously buys apple hardware and then installs windows on it, even though you clearly can. Add a really good set of speakers (meshes nicely with the outdoors theme). You're lagging apple's research, but do your best to put as good a keyboard and trackpad as you can manage on the device. - Has a shiny name, and no serial code (no X500 stuff), and a unique design aspect. If you're going to build a notebook that differentiates on immeasurables, you need to make sure people take notice of the success in the field. You can't trust just the ads as a consumer, and you're now targeting people that do not care only about the Mhz, MB, and screen size. I think this bit is something they all missed. Yes, marketing departments try to add some differentiating gimmicks from time to time, but I never get the feeling that a company's heart and soul has been poured into coming up with a functional, yet unique design. They simply don't get that this is important if you want to elevate yourself above the spec rat race. You said it, Joshua: There's no reason why they couldn't do it. The only way I see this changing is with upstarts. The software startup market is getting a bit saturated, and I think this is a -great- area to operate in. It's hard to get good deals for parts as a small company, and it's even harder to custom-build notebooks, but at this point dell, sony, HP, lenovo, and the rest is starting to get a bit scared of apple's notebook market, and they are frothing at the mouth thinking about how much they'd make if they could take a significant piece of that pie home. If you can sell a few notebooks with the right properties at ridiculous prices (because you're paying far too much to order the parts, as a small company, and you need far bigger profit margins), one of those big manufacturers might make like dell/ alienware and buy you, knowing they can slash the price without losing any margin, and make millions. There's your quick exit. I'm already helming a software startup, so for me the timing isn't there. For any other reasons: What's your excuse? :) On Sep 2, 9:35 pm, Joshua Marinacci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No. The question is why do HP and Dell only make low margin (often > crappy) computers, and struggle to turn a profit, when Apple is able > to make 20->30% margins on products that are functionally equivalent > (desktop and laptop PCs that do the same basic things from a consumer > perspective). This is a very interesting economics question that, I > think, reveals a great deal about how computers are manufactured and > sold, and suggests new opportunities for the existing hardware makers > (or opportunities for new upstarts). Or it could reveal barriers to > fixing the problem, such as certain features of the MS Windows > monopoly that discourage creating Mac like computers. > > I find it an interesting topic. :) > > - Josh > > On Sep 2, 2008, at 12:28 PM, Alexey Zinger wrote: > > > > > But what is the question that answer is for? Is it that there > > aren't enough easy ways to get a high-end laptop? Or that there > > aren't enough choices in the high-end laptop market? > > > Alexey > > 2001 Honda CBR600F4i (CCS) > > 1992 Kawasaki EX500 > >http://azinger.blogspot.com > >http://bsheet.sourceforge.net > >http://wcollage.sourceforge.net > > > --- On Tue, 9/2/08, Joshua Marinacci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> From: Joshua Marinacci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Subject: [The Java Posse] Re: Mac vs PC - $1075 premium for a > >> comparable Mac > >> To: [email protected] > >> Date: Tuesday, September 2, 2008, 2:59 PM > >> So then it seems the answer is to turn computers into a more > >> consumer > >> friendly buying market. ie: reduce the number of available > >> models, > >> give them better names, maximize compatibility with the > >> most common > >> hardware/software/network-infrastructure/devices, then > >> focus on > >> advertising a few core features that are differentiators. > >> This makes > >> the choice an easier one for consumers by effectively > >> making the > >> computer a simpler choice (at least in terms of buying > >> one). > > >> Clearly Apple has done this, so the question is why > >> hasn't anyone > >> else. It doesn't seem like it would be that difficult. > > >> - J > > >> On Sep 2, 2008, at 11:40 AM, Alexey Zinger wrote: > > >>> Coke and Pepsi have spent untold amounts of money on > >> advertising and > >>> continue to be at each other's throats, both with > >> their flagship > >>> brands and new ones (Gatorade vs Powerade). But soft > >> drinks are a > >>> lot simpler for the consumer to think about than > >> computers. For > >>> one, computers encompass software, hardware, and > >> surrounding > >>> infrastructure (network connections, devices they > >> integrate with, > >>> etc.). And those things can change independently from > >> model to > >>> model, from year to year, from place to place. > >> It's tough to nail > >>> down what features you can push on the consumer as THE > >> answer to why > >>> they should pay extra, when the consumer may not > >> understand it, may > >>> not care, or may be using your product or some of your > >> products in a > >>> totally unexpected way. Just think of iTunes running > >> on Windows. > >>> Is it good for Apple because it brings iTunes Store > >> revenue, or is > >>> it bad for them because it reduces the need for some > >> people to > >>> switch brands. Is it good for Apple > >>> because it shows Windows users how different Apple > >> software can be > >>> or does it detract people from Apple's products > >> for the same > >>> reason? I think the fact that Apple has to some > >> extent infiltrated > >>> the hipster generation and made it a bit of a status > >> symbol is quite > >>> remarkable. > > >>> Alexey > >>> 2001 Honda CBR600F4i (CCS) > >>> 1992 Kawasaki EX500 > >>>http://azinger.blogspot.com > >>>http://bsheet.sourceforge.net > >>>http://wcollage.sourceforge.net > > >>> --- On Tue, 9/2/08, Joshua Marinacci > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>>> From: Joshua Marinacci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>> Subject: [The Java Posse] Re: Mac vs PC - $1075 > >> premium for a > >>>> comparable Mac > >>>> To: [email protected] > >>>> Date: Tuesday, September 2, 2008, 1:37 PM > >>>> But why is this the case? There are plenty of > >> essentially > >>>> 'commodity' > >>>> products that have monopolistic competition and > >> don't > >>>> eventually > >>>> collapse to 0% margin. Coke and Pepsi sell for > >> many many > >>>> times the > >>>> price that pure costs would suggest. Automobiles > >> are > >>>> functionally > >>>> equivalent in that any given category has the same > >> basic > >>>> features (all > >>>> 4 door sedans will carry 4 or 5 people, all pickup > >> trucks > >>>> will carry > >>>> furniture and dirt, etc.). And yet BMW has > >> clearly figured > >>>> out what > >>>> things to improve in their cars that will convince > >> someone > >>>> to spend > >>>> twice as much or more for a 4 door sedan, even > >> though it > >>>> doesn't cost > >>>> them twice as much to produce (thus raising their > >> profit > >>>> margin). So > >>>> what have car and sugar water makers figured out > >> that > >>>> computer makers > >>>> haven't? Is there something intrinsic to > >> computers that > >>>> resist product > >>>> differentiation? Clearly Apple (and to some > >> extent Sony) > >>>> have proven > >>>> that it's not completely impossible. > > >>>> - Josh > > >>>>> My take on this is that most people don't > >> care > >>>> about those certain > >>>>> ethereal features, such as "overall > >>>> experience". Maybe it makes > >>>>> sense to care about that, or maybe it > >> doesn't, but > >>>> just like > >>>>> airlines are starting to feel a new hurt of > >> competing > >>>> on price and > >>>>> specific features alone because of the > >> internet and > >>>> product search > >>>>> engines like Google Products/Shopping, > >> it's harder > >>>> and harder for > >>>>> anyone to demand a higher price without an > >> extra > >>>> number of checkmark > >>>>> to justify it. The only other thing that > >> people seem > >>>> to be willing > >>>>> to pay for is brand name. Besides, no one is > >>>> impressed with a fancy > >>>>> laptop anymore. Long live fancy phones! (for > >> now) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
