Quote:
|
Originally Posted by fryke I also didn't say this would change with a simple (*cough*) processor change. |
That was a general comment on the course of the topic, not aimed at anyone in particular.
Quote:
|
I think for a really "cheap" machine like the Mac mini, it's more than acceptable that you can't really expand them (internally). But the iMac is _no_ cheap computer. Its display stays new a lot longer than its processor.
|
Apple has had more problems (with market share) because of the expandability of their systems in the past (which was why they dropped the design of the PowerBook G3 series). Market share is more of a measure of how often people buy a new system rather than how many people are using a platform. Expandability slows the rate at which people buy new systems... so Apple has been moving away from that.
I'm a good example of the type of person that doesn't help market share. I haven't bought a new Mac since 2000... so when you read market share numbers, they have nothing to do with anyone who hasn't bought a system within that quarter.
I would have replaced my iMac a couple years ago if it wasn't for the fact that I was able to upgrade my PowerBook to the point of not needing a new system. The expandability of my PowerBook has cost Apple my purchase of a new system.
Besides, with the current state of mind in the Windows world, a lack of expandability isn't going to hurt Apple at all. Right now it is to the point where people are willing to buy a new PC every 9 months to a year rather than deal with the problems on their systems. With a market mentality like that, the iMac, eMac and Mac Mini are perfect products.
Apple is already gaining market share even without the processor change, that won't change with the addition of expandable consumer models. And as I pointed out, the last time Apple had expandable consumer models, they were left with overstock.