Why Apple can afford to rock

[ring_wraith]

What sets Apple apart from everyone else? What makes it the most admired company in America, if not the world. Once you look past the fanboyism that Apple manages to incite in their customers, the entire hype boils down to two simple reasons.

Design and Ease of Use.

Every Apple product, be it the seemingly infallible iPod or the mighty iMac, oozes these two in a degree unforeseen ever before. Take away these two factors and what you have is a relatively ordinary company.

But why? Surely, Apple is not hoarding a secret bunch of devs who they kidnapped from MIT and Harvard, and every other company hires smart monkeys. It's really simple actually, it's because they can afford to. Allow me to elaborate.

First off, why can Apple afford to have the most amazing Design? There are two kinds of "afford" really, technically and monetarily. Design of course thrives on the latter. Let's dig deeper.

The iMac 20" 2.0Ghz C2d costs 64,600 on the Apple store. Now, we're going to find out how much an ordinary PC of a similar config would cost.

CPU 2.33 Ghz E6550 - Rs. 7050
Display Samsung 19" - Rs. 10,100 [So it's one inch less. So sue me]
RAM 1 GB - Rs. 1075
HDD 250 GB SATA 2 - Rs. 2800
Optical Drive 20x SATA - Rs. 1400
GPU HD 2400XT 256 MB - Rs. 5100
Mobo Any half-decent mobo - Rs. 4000
MS Kb+mouse Rs. 750
Webcam You choose - Rs. 1000

Now this totals up to around Rs. 33,000. Let's not forget Apple is getting all this at really low direct from manufacturer rates. While the above are retail prices. So I can comfortably deduct ~Rs. 5000 from the price, bringing it down to just Rs. 28000. Let's throw in Vista Home Premium. This bring the price back to 33,000. Adding for the cabinet and what not, you get a system with Vista and a config that is actually better than the iMac for Rs. 35,000.

So where is the remaining ~30,000 going?

You guessed it. Design. Apple is charging you 47% of the Price for Design. Now some people might argue that the software included with the iMac is what you are paying 30k for. But there is a really good chance that whatever feature you care to name that comes on OSX, can be had for free or for a price way lesser than 30k on Windows.

This should really put things in perspective. With 47% of the price dedicated to Design, name one company that couldn't design a product that would floor anyone.

Now let's move on to their ease of use and stability. Why is a Mac simple to use? Let's assume a different scenario. Let's say that Mac is what Windows is and vice versa. So a very large % of the world is running Mac. So an insane number of programs are written for it, and there is a good number that aren't all that well designed. The ease of use of any piece of technology is mainly Dependant on the software. Chuck in several pieces of badly written software into OSX and see what happens. Don't forget the viruses that in the back of our heads we all know would have eventually been written. Usability and "rock-solid" stability suddenly seem like far off dreams.

[update:for some solid proof, look at post #16]

This is exactly what Windows has been dealing with for so, so long. Give MS some credit...

Some people might argue that OSX itself is more intuitive and easy to navigate. This is just a point of view. To me, Windows is more natural than OSX, but that's only because my entire life i have been living on Windows. Similarly, someone who spent most of their time on Mac will find Windows a bizzare and unnecessary concept.

At the end of the day, I'm not saying that Apple sucks, I am just saying that can afford to rock. The day the iMac drops to 35k, I will stand corrected.

So, post away pointing out what I myself hope are several errors I have made, for to me Apple was an ideal company, and I curse this stream of logic that flowed through my mind.

 

[contactpraven2001]

well it's true we pat 47% cost of apple product for design but apple is only company who dear to charge so high for that because they made great product and other companies know that they cannot make that great design, how much money they spend on that, dude it's all about confidence not how much money you can spend.

 

[ring_wraith]

So according to your theory, no other company except Apple is capable of designing amazing products?

I don't agree, really. There are lots of companies with design heads as skilled or even more skilled than Apple.

 

[desiibond]

^^ agree with ring_wraith.

Take Creative Zen, for example. This new flash based player is gorgeous, fast, loads of features, Credit card sized, ultra thin, can play avi, mpeg videos, loads of audio format support, looks sexy

Still you get a 32Gb flash based player for 299$. If Apple had such product, they will charge atleast a hundred dollars more.

FYI, the apple's menu layout for ipod's is taken from Creative and we all know how Apple struck a deal with Creative when creative filed a case against Apple for using their menu layout.

 

[ring_wraith]

Well that is news to me! I had no idea Apple's revolutionary interface was ripped off.

 

[desiibond]

^^yes. Apple paid $100 million to use the interface and also gave license to creative to manufacture accessories for ipod's.

*www.news.com/Apple-settles-with-Creative-for-100-million/2100-1047_3-6108901.html

 

[MetalheadGautham]

quite an obvious logic. Indeed, you might as well add the cost Rs. 3800/- for the iLife that comes bundled in.

And as you might know, there are lits of guys intrested in emulating MacOSX to run iLife. So it won't be long before people may start using eMac(emulator du macintosh - the name I would like to give concidering windows emulator is called wine, and also to make fun of iMac) as much as they use Wine.

 

[desiibond]

Not just Mac, take ipod's, iphones. There has been lot of reports that say that apple sells it's products 3-4 times the cost it takes for production.

and one more thing is brand value.

Take for example, in India, go to any store Apple products are sold for the price on the box (a.k.a. MRP) but for other electronics, the selling price is way lower than what's on the box.

 

[aditya.shevade]

End of the day.... apple still wins majority of design awards.... meaning that even if other companies design well... they do not do it the best.

And apple wins...

 

[ring_wraith]

atlease read the first post before commenting...

 

[cooldudie3]

End of the day.... apple still wins majority of design awards.... meaning that even if other companies design well... they do not do it the best.

And apple wins...

apple doesn't really win
other companies do really well too. It's not like Sony or HP doesn't do good. In fact, every company can afford to rock. I think Apple only got the looks. What you really need to say whether it is good or bad is the specs

 

[aditya.shevade]

^^ Agreed. I was talking about the style only. If you want specks and cheap... go and assemble one yourself....

Aditya

 

[Pathik]

If people are willing to give 47%more money to Apple for their products, then why shouldn't they sell them? They aren't here for charity..
BTW the components used in iMacs are not standard desktop components, they are a mix of lappy+desktop components..
Great article tho.

 

[aryayush]

What sets Apple apart from everyone else? What makes it the most admired company in America, if not the world. Once you look past the fanboyism that Apple manages to incite in their customers, the entire hype boils down to two simple reasons.

Design and Ease of Use.

Every Apple product, be it the seemingly infallible iPod or the mighty iMac, oozes these two in a degree unforeseen ever before. Take away these two factors and what you have is a relatively ordinary company.

But why? Surely, Apple is not hoarding a secret bunch of devs who they kidnapped from MIT and Harvard, and every other company hires smart monkeys. It's really simple actually, it's because they can afford to. Allow me to elaborate.

First off, why can Apple afford to have the most amazing Design? There are two kinds of "afford" really, technically and monetarily. Design of course thrives on the latter. Let's dig deeper.

The iMac 20" 2.0Ghz C2d costs 64,600 on the Apple store. Now, we're going to find out how much an ordinary PC of a similar config would cost.

CPU 2.33 Ghz E6550 - Rs. 7050
Display Samsung 19" - Rs. 10,100 [So it's one inch less. So sue me]
RAM 1 GB - Rs. 1075
HDD 250 GB SATA 2 - Rs. 2800
Optical Drive 20x SATA - Rs. 1400
GPU HD 2400XT 256 MB - Rs. 5100
Mobo Any half-decent mobo - Rs. 4000
MS Kb+mouse Rs. 750
Webcam You choose - Rs. 1000

Now this totals up to around Rs. 33,000. Let's not forget Apple is getting all this at really low direct from manufacturer rates. While the above are retail prices. So I can comfortably deduct ~Rs. 5000 from the price, bringing it down to just Rs. 28000. Let's throw in Vista Home Premium. This bring the price back to 33,000. Adding for the cabinet and what not, you get a system with Vista and a config that is actually better than the iMac for Rs. 35,000.

So where is the remaining ~30,000 going?

You guessed it. Design.

But you guessed it wrong. As unbelievable as it may sound to you, the cost of selling a product to a customer is not equal to the sum total of the cost of all the parts it is made up of. Can you, for instance, show me a pre-assembled computer from any other company with the specifications you have posted above for the price you've reached?

No, you cannot. That's because bringing that computer to the company has involved a lot of other things (not in the same order) – marketing, packaging, R&D, employee salaries, shipping, profits of the middlemen, taxes and duties, the list goes on...

Apple's computers are better designed because they focus on that. Design is one of the most important parts of the product for them, unlike other companies which regard it as an afterthought.

You're making the same mistake that iFixit does. You cannot compare a pre-assembled computer to a custom built one. The custom built one will always be significantly cheaper. That's no secret.

Now let's move on to their ease of use and stability. Why is a Mac simple to use? Let's assume a different scenario. Let's say that Mac is what Windows is and vice versa. So a very large % of the world is running Mac. So an insane number of programs are written for it, and there is a good number that aren't all that well designed. The ease of use of any piece of technology is mainly Dependant on the software. Chuck in several pieces of badly written software into OSX and see what happens. Don't forget the viruses that in the back of our heads we all know would have eventually been written. Usability and "rock-solid" stability suddenly seem like far off dreams.

The "What if" scenario is easy to write (because you can assume anything you want to) and sounds convincing on paper, but that does not reflect the truth in any way. Sure, if Apple has this and Microsoft had this, that would have resulted due to the combination of this and that factor... blah blah blah – what matters is what is the present scenario.

Today, it's a fact (no matter how you spin it) that Mac OS X has zero viruses out in the wild and unaccounted for compared to Windows, which has an innumerable number of them. Crashes and driver issues are common on Windows compared to Mac OS X which almost never crashes and connects to almost anything you plug in instantly.

I don't agree with your opinion that were the roles reversed, Mac OS X would have been in the same pickle that Windows is in now. But I won't argue on it because it is baseless and does not have any relation to reality. What is unfortunate, however, is that you realise how much better Mac OS X is to Windows and are yet insistent on sticking to the latter because, in your opinion, it's flaws are justified. What sort of logic is that!

"I won't buy the Bajaj even though I know it is better than Hero Honda because I know that if Hero Honda wasn't prevented from using that modern assembling machine by the government, their bikes would have been of the same standard too."

I know that's not the perfect comparison but I hope you get the point. Why do you, as a consumer, care about the logistics behind the "suckiness" of the product in question? What should matter to you is that there is a product A and product B and you want to have the better one.

If you're on a tight budget, of course, you'll have to keep that in mind when making your decision so you can't always opt for the best one. I'm not disputing that. If you can't afford Apple products, by all means, don't buy them. Even if you can and don't want to for idealistic reasons, that's up to you. But badmouthing them just because they're expensive (for you), that's what results in all these flame wars (and not only on this forum).

This is exactly what Windows has been dealing with for so, so long. Give MS some credit...

Credit for what? Not being able to deal with it? They made the decision to sell their software and run their ecosystem in such a way that has resulted in them raking in a huge market share and becoming the richest and largest software company in the world.

If that has resulted in their product becoming bulleted with problems to the point of being unusable, it's their fault. They should have had this foresight. People here are criticising Jobs' decision to make the App Store the exclusive place to get applications for the iPhone. He's doing that because he expects the iPhone to become the next great platform and he wants to ensure that users of his platform don't have to deal with malicious applications.

It's obvious that restricting the potential market for the device by making it a controlled infrastructure will lose him a lot of customers but he's still doing it. Microsoft chose not to. At the time when they could have made the decision to think of the customer first, they chose to think of themselves. They just thoughts of ways to sell as many copies as possible.

Now when that has resulted in all this mess, you want us to give them credit for not being able to handle it?

Some people might argue that OSX itself is more intuitive and easy to navigate. This is just a point of view. To me, Windows is more natural than OSX, but that's only because my entire life i have been living on Windows. Similarly, someone who spent most of their time on Mac will find Windows a bizzare and unnecessary concept.

I spent a good part of my life with Windows too but as soon as I switched, the different was as clear to me as day and night. You don't have to take my word for it. Look around – the whole Internet is rife with stories of scores of switchers, from small time bloggers to respected authors in leading publications, who've found the Mac to be a much better platform than Windows based computers.

It's a fact that "once you go Mac, you never go back". Why is it so? Is everyone who is switching to Mac OS X, giving up most of their entire life's experience, and acclimatising themselves to the new platform a stupid person? Why aren't there people on the Internet posting accounts of their having regretted the decision and switched back? I think you must know that dissatisfied customers are a lot more vocal than satisfied ones. You're more likely to write a blog post complaining about your horrible experience than giving credit to some company for a wonderful one. That's just the way it works.

And yet, you hardly find anyone complaining about their Mac (or their iPhone or iPod, for that matter). Doesn't that mean only one thing? Doesn't it indicate that Apple enjoys an extremely high level of customer satisfaction? And since we've paid more for a quality product, compared to competing vendors' products, don't you think we'd be much more pissed off if the product wasn't actually better?

If you paid for the 2-tier AC compartment in a train, wouldn't you complain to the authorities if the experience isn't better than sleeper class? Wouldn't you warn your friends to stay away from that train?

Think about it.

So, post away pointing out what I myself hope are several errors I have made, for to me Apple was an ideal company, and I curse this stream of logic that flowed through my mind.

So, there are your several errors. I hope you read this objectively, twice if need be, and really give it some thought. If you don't agree with me on any point, feel free to peacefully question them? I love nothing quite as much as a healthy debate with someone who has a good grasp on English (like you do – keep it up).


I'm sorry for the lengthy monologue but what can I do – when you're an author, it comes with the territory.

(I know that some points are repetitive while I've missed some other more compelling ones. I'm actually experiencing a severe headache right now, so pardon any mistakes.)

 

[aryayush]

An addendum: One mistake everyone here makes is regarding the definition of good design. Good design does not just refer to a pleasant exterior. That is called decoration and is just one aspect of good design.

More importantly, design refers to how a product works overall. Here are just four small examples of good design from Apple products:

1. The MagSafe Connecter: I read on Low End Mac that when Jobs came up with the idea of the MagSafe adapter, the marketing department (they did not name any specific individual) advised him not to have that implemented in the notebooks because it would severely restrict the income from after sales support of notebooks with voided warranties. Jobs overruled that saying that Apple's first intention should be to design the product well and then think of ways to maximise profits by selling it. He didn't want the company compromising on design for the sake of more income. That's how important good design is to Apple.

It is such a simple thing and yet it has saved my notebook on so many occasions. Apple does not even gain a significant amount of sales due to it. Who buys a notebook because it has a more advanced power connecter? But it's still there because it is good design.

2. The Caps Lock and Eject keys: These two keys on Apple notebooks only get activated when you want them to be. In other words, if you're typing fast and accidentally hit the Caps Lock or Eject keys, they don't work. However, if you want them to work when you hit them, they never fail. There's a precisely measured amount of delay built into these keys that prevents them from being activated when hit unintentionally and it works brilliantly. My notebook does not have the Caps Lock key with this feature (it first appeared on the new aluminium keyboards and is now standard on all Mac notebooks) but I do have the Eject key and I can testify that it works as advertised (this isn't advertised, actually, but you get the point).

3. The trackpad: Apple does not advertise it much but they have simply the best trackpad in the business and I'm talking about the non-Multi-Touch enabled one here. Single finger tap for clicking and double finger tap for a right click. Put two fingers on the trackpad and drag them around to pan anywhere you want (full 360º support). Double tap and drag to drag and drop stuff with built-in click lock that is difficult to explain but works wonderfully well. You have to use it to experience it. I can say with hundred percent confidence that, except for gamers and graphic designers, this trackpad works better than the best mice out there. I actually bought one for myself but have never used it even once.

4. Exterior design: Here are two examples of design that improves the looks without compromising the functionality in any way at all. There's a tiny green light next to the iSight camera on Macs but it is designed in such a way that it is clearly visible when on but completely disappears when turned off. No one in the world can tell that there is a light there unless it is turned on. Similarly, my MacBook Pro has two latches that hold the lid in place when you shut it but, here's the genius of it, they don't hang out like ugly little eyesores all the time. Only when the lid is almost fully closed do they pop out and click into place. And they never fail. Never ever.

Neither of the above things requires a lot of money to implement and yet they are all there, along with several other little features of both Apple's hardware and software that exude class. One look at them and you know that these have been designed by a company that takes their work seriously. If design hadn't been central to Apple's product philosophy, no amount of money could have made it so evident in their products.

 

[ring_wraith]

First off, the only thing I agree with you on is that a healthy debate is far more preferable to a reckless fanboy discussion. And please don't ask me "keep it up" on my English skills, I feel like a 12 year old. The only reason my fluency over English appears weak on the forums is because I am drawn and in fact, quite enjoy the casual nature everyone [but you] chooses to post in.

First off, yes I can find a pre-assembled PC that surpasses the config by quite a bit actually, for around the same cost. And it's by dell. Here you go:

*www1.ap.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/featured_desktop1?c=in&cs=indhs1&l=en&s=dhs

That happens to be a Quad-core, by the way. And I'm sure you'd find several more if you look.

Moving on, the sole reason I used the what if situation is because I admit that I have no other means to give anyone an idea of what would happen. But now I'm going to try anyway.

Everyday, several people spend several hours doing nothing other than looking for explots in Windows. How are exploits created? Programming error. And of course because the programmer cannot account for every possible situation.

Now tell me, how many people do you think are doing this to OSX? Don't give me the "that's because it's too difficult to crack" bulls***. Every OS can be exploited, whether you choose to accept it or not.

And Windows has handled it admirably. Unusable??? I really do not think so. Take a look at MS's stock quote and then please explain as to how they became the world's largest software company with a product that no one can use.

Just to prove myself further, I give you this:
*www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Mac-OS-X-hacked-under-30-minutes/0,130061744,139241748,00.htm

Apple foolishly put forth an OSX hacking challenge. It took the winner under half an hour to gain root control of an OSX system. Some choice quotes :

"This sucks. Six hours later this poor little Mac was owned and this page got defaced".

"It probably took about 20 or 30 minutes to get root on the box. Initially I tried looking around the box for certain mis-configurations and other obvious things but then I decided to use some unpublished exploits -- of which there are a lot for Mac OS X,"

"Mac OS X is easy pickings for bug finders. That said, it doesn't have the market share to really interest most serious bug finders," added gwerdna.

"The only thing which has kept Mac OS X relatively safe up until now is the fact that the market share is significantly lower than that of Microsoft Windows or the more common UNIX platforms.… If this situation was to change, in my opinion, things could be a lot worse on Mac OS X than they currently are on other operating systems," said Archibald at the time.

Read the last two several times. This is the hard and real truth.

Turns out my "What if" is a lot more real than any Mac fanboy will choose to accept.

You claim that it's fantastic that Jobs has locked up the iPhone, and only App centre can be used to download stuff. I really don't feel the need to even argue on how annoyingly stupid this sounds. It's like tying up a kid in a strafe jacket and locking him in a room and saying that it's best for him, as he will be safe.

You say I'm badmouthing Apple products for being expensive. Please re-read the title of the thread. The only reason I went all out to make a side by side comparision was to prove that Apple products only have amazing design because they are charging you so darn much, and not because they are the all-exalted design geniuses some people call them to be.

No one complaining about the Mac? People hate the mac so much that it's lead to almost a fond hatred towards Apple itself. Convenient how you choose to surf only one side of the internet.

Finally, don't apologize for the lengthy post. I enjoy them and appreciate you taking the time to put them together.

 

[a_k_s_h_a_y]

About R&D

Apple has ZERO R&D in The Computer* they sell as MAC That run Intel ! Maybe its some percent in the architecture they used previously !
Design ! agreed, its excellent !

The Design is not Mind blowing like an AlienWare or Something
But its aesthetic and suitable for desktop PC !! For office and home !

Of course given a theme any creative guy can design something better then the apple ..!

Apple high price because BRAND NAME ! Hope you get this fact right ! High brand valued stuff always cost high !

* Any device that works by manipulating numbers, is a Computer, MAC is a computer anyday !
Another Fact ! Any DAMN Processor basic operations are MOV, ADD, SUB etc ! All operations are complicated steps of these simple instructions !


*en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_instruction_listings

 

[ring_wraith]

Comparing R&D is not really fair. Existing architecture is used by most manafactureres.

Brand name? Dell not good enough for you?

I think we all realize that a Mac is still a computer... this are the Digit Forums, not Noobs Unlimited.

An addendum: One mistake everyone here makes is regarding the definition of good design. Good design does not just refer to a pleasant exterior. That is called decoration and is just one aspect of good design.

More importantly, design refers to how a product works overall. Here are just four small examples of good design from Apple products:

1. The MagSafe Connecter: I read on Low End Mac that when Jobs came up with the idea of the MagSafe adapter, the marketing department (they did not name any specific individual) advised him not to have that implemented in the notebooks because it would severely restrict the income from after sales support of notebooks with voided warranties. Jobs overruled that saying that Apple's first intention should be to design the product well and then think of ways to maximise profits by selling it. He didn't want the company compromising on design for the sake of more income. That's how important good design is to Apple.

It is such a simple thing and yet it has saved my notebook on so many occasions. Apple does not even gain a significant amount of sales due to it. Who buys a notebook because it has a more advanced power connecter? But it's still there because it is good design.

2. The Caps Lock and Eject keys: These two keys on Apple notebooks only get activated when you want them to be. In other words, if you're typing fast and accidentally hit the Caps Lock or Eject keys, they don't work. However, if you want them to work when you hit them, they never fail. There's a precisely measured amount of delay built into these keys that prevents them from being activated when hit unintentionally and it works brilliantly. My notebook does not have the Caps Lock key with this feature (it first appeared on the new aluminium keyboards and is now standard on all Mac notebooks) but I do have the Eject key and I can testify that it works as advertised (this isn't advertised, actually, but you get the point).

3. The trackpad: Apple does not advertise it much but they have simply the best trackpad in the business and I'm talking about the non-Multi-Touch enabled one here. Single finger tap for clicking and double finger tap for a right click. Put two fingers on the trackpad and drag them around to pan anywhere you want (full 360º support). Double tap and drag to drag and drop stuff with built-in click lock that is difficult to explain but works wonderfully well. You have to use it to experience it. I can say with hundred percent confidence that, except for gamers and graphic designers, this trackpad works better than the best mice out there. I actually bought one for myself but have never used it even once.

4. Exterior design: Here are two examples of design that improves the looks without compromising the functionality in any way at all. There's a tiny green light next to the iSight camera on Macs but it is designed in such a way that it is clearly visible when on but completely disappears when turned off. No one in the world can tell that there is a light there unless it is turned on. Similarly, my MacBook Pro has two latches that hold the lid in place when you shut it but, here's the genius of it, they don't hang out like ugly little eyesores all the time. Only when the lid is almost fully closed do they pop out and click into place. And they never fail. Never ever.

Neither of the above things requires a lot of money to implement and yet they are all there, along with several other little features of both Apple's hardware and software that exude class. One look at them and you know that these have been designed by a company that takes their work seriously. If design hadn't been central to Apple's product philosophy, no amount of money could have made it so evident in their products.

I almost completely agree with you on this. Sadly, not on the Steve Jobs' quote thing. Come on Aayush, we live in the real world. That's probably a Marketing gimmick from the one-man marketing army that is Steve Jobs.

Also, as I've said earlier, just about any company could have come up with these "innovations" If they would have been earning so much to be able to put a large amount on R&D.

 

[abhinav.sharma]

I am an Apple user myself and own a MacBook and an iPhone, but interface is what Apple is all about, although they're not always the do-gooders of this world.

You may be knowing Bang & Olufsen, these guys created the clickwheel before Apple, if you dont believe me go look at one of their 1990s catalogues, but since they were such a niche company, they didnt bother to patent it. Along came Apple and the rest is history, Steve Jobs keep blaring about how "revolutionary" the clickwheel was!

 

[ring_wraith]

0 posts and an actual contribution to a discussion??! You have a bright future here young skywalker.

Thank you God!