Message-ID: <1267@unm-cvax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 18-Sep-84 13:21:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: unm-cvax.1267
Posted: Tue Sep 18 13:21:58 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 25-Sep-84 09:28:31 EDT
Organization: Univ. of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Lines: 94

[It is pitch black.  You are likely to be eaten by a -- ]


	The following is a massive diatribe levelled at Steve Jobs and his
band of merry highwaymen down in Cupertino.  Apple fans with sensitive 
constitutions, consider yourselves warned.

	I just received news concerning the Fat Mac, of which we have all
heard so much: the Macintosh, with 512K.  It has been released and is 
on its way, delivery date approximately three weeks (or thereabouts;
delivery dates haven't been Apple's strong point lately).

	I also received news about its price.

	Brace yourselves.

	$995.  Yes, you read right: that's nine hundred ninety-five big ones,
to be removed deftly from your wallet and placed just as deftly into theirs.
All that on top of the $2495 (or $2195, if you happened to get it in one
of the recent sales that have started to spring up here and there) which all
us Macfans have already shelled out.

	[Background:  My friends and I who purchased Macs are not the
businessmen-types that the Mac seems to be aimed at.  We are but simple
college students, not fortunate enough (or rich enough, as the case may be)
to attend one of the schools in the Apple University Consortium, and get
our Macs for dirt cheap.  No, we go to the University of New Mexico, in
the Land of Enchantment (Land of Enchantment? You've got to be kidding.
Do you know what it feels like to live in one of the few places in the 
civilized world where you can still catch the bubonic plague?  The PLAGUE,
for God's sake!!!).  Therefore, we had to spring for the big bucks, and 
don't get off on this account.  OK, back to righteous indignation.]

	They have got to be kidding!  When the Mac was first announced, the
price was $1995; not bad, considering what you get in a Mac.  Then, when it
finally saw the light of day, filtered through display windows, the price
had somehow escalated to $2495 -- for the bare-bones system, of course.
Steep, but still within the range of those of us fortunate enough to have
that kind of cash handy or to have a sympathetic loan officer.  This, of 
course, was the 128K Mac; the fully-realized Mac was on its way, by
the end of the year, just hang on, we'll get it to you, 512K, Real Soon 
Now, wow, gosh ...

	Well, they sure got it to us, all right.  For the measly sum of 
damn near a thousand bucks extra, we plebes can get ourselves the system
that should have come out in the first place.  So now Apple has us all
over a barrel.  We all sprung our $2995 for the Mac and the printer, and 
shortly afterwards realized that the thing was absolutely useless without 
the second disk drive.  So, another $495 went down the drain.  Next comes 
the realization that with the basic 128K, the user is left with too little 
memory to accomplish anything significant.  So, another $995 down the tubes.
Thus Steve Jobs' vision of the computer that anyone can use has become the 
computer that no one can afford, because a workable system sells for $4485.  
What a bargain! 

	Looks like Steve & Co. are standing by to rake in the big bucks; The
Rest of Us can all bend over and grab our ankles.  It's coming in dry, folks;
no Vaseline on this one.

	Now, damn it, I really like the Mac -- I really do.  It's got a few
rough spots, but nothing a little software and minor hardware changes 
couldn't fix.  That's what the Fat Mac was supposed to be all about, at least
as far as hardware went.  I, personally, wouldn't own anything else, certainly
not another faceless, amorphous blob from the IBM PC CloneMakers.  All in all,
I think it's the best thing to hit the market since -- well, since the
Apple II.  And buying Apple is like buying Hewlett-Packard: once you buy one,
you tend to stick with it.  At least, I do, and I'm sure there's a lot of
people out there like me.

	But pulling little stunts like this is not going to earn old Stevie
Boy any new friends.  I can hear Jerry Pournelle cackling away in the 
depths of Chaos Manor now, chortling, "I told you so!"  Oh, sure, eventually
the price of the changeover will probably drop -- maybe to $500.  The point
is, however, that it shouldn't have to.  $500 is the price they should be
charging now -- and even that's excessive.  They should properly be giving
the damn thing away for the price of labor, since the price hike in the 
beginning covers what the upgrade should be costing now.  But they won't.
And by delivering yet another shaft to the long-suffering-but-loyal followers
of the Macintosh, Apple has shown that, in the end, they're not that much
different from any other computer company, that they don't really give a
damn about the end-user, and that the final arbiter is, as we all suspected
but hoped against hope was not true, the bottom line on the ledger books.

	I guess 1984 is a little more like _1984_ than we might've hoped.

	From The Rest of Us to Apple: one extremely loud and heartfelt Bronx 
cheer.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Mike Conley @ University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
{ucbvax!unmvax!cvax:cs4911ay}

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Message-ID: <323@hoxna.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 20-Sep-84 13:52:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: hoxna.323
Posted: Thu Sep 20 13:52:21 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 25-Sep-84 20:21:08 EDT
References: <1267@unm-cvax.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 7

xxx
Come on guys, be real.  A 512KB dynamic board for ANY personal
computer is going to cost around $1000.  Maybe a little less from
the discount joints, but still not cheap.
-- 
Kenton Lee, Bell Labs - WB
wb3g!kfl or hoxna!kfl

Message-ID: <2395@ihuxf.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 21-Sep-84 09:20:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxf.2395
Posted: Fri Sep 21 09:20:57 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 25-Sep-84 20:58:50 EDT
References: <1267@unm-cvax.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 13


My favorite is the Lisa.  Some 4 or 5 thousand bucks = half meg
memory and NO operating system!  Of course for a measily grand
more you can have the other half meg of ram that the Lisa OS
takes and two hundred gets you the OS.

			Mike Nelson
			AT&T Bell Labs
			ihuxf!cuda

PS My office mate has a Lisa she uses for graphics.  It is one
of the best machines around for that.  I just don't like the
way they market it.

Message-ID: <2396@ihuxf.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 21-Sep-84 13:04:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxf.2396
Posted: Fri Sep 21 13:04:13 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 25-Sep-84 21:25:03 EDT
References: <1267@unm-cvax.UUCP> <323@hoxna.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 8

A megabyte upgrade for a 5620 DMD terminal is $1300.
This is using the same 256K chips. I belive that if you 
buy a new unit with the 1Meg option, it is only
$1000 extra. 

Maybe Teletype should raise their prices to compete, eh?

andy ihuxf!schnable

Message-ID: <3174@rabbit.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 21-Sep-84 18:05:29 EDT
Article-I.D.: rabbit.3174
Posted: Fri Sep 21 18:05:29 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 25-Sep-84 21:36:20 EDT
References: <2396@ihuxf.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 5

This is a free country.  If you think someone charges too
much for a product or service, DON'T BUY IT.  The only
thing that makes it possible to charge anything at all
is CUSTOMERS.  It is silly to charge $500 for a product
if you can sell all you can make for $1,000.

Message-ID: <1695@sun.uucp>
Date: Thu, 20-Sep-84 11:43:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.1695
Posted: Thu Sep 20 11:43:04 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 01:24:51 EDT
References: <1267@unm-cvax.UUCP>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 15

Seethings:

	After all those wonderful words of love for Mackintosh marketing,
I could only feel a lack of extreme sympathy, having shelled out $7K for
a Lisa I with the intent of buying LisaPascal to do some programming with...
Well, first there's the problem of you couldn't get LisaPascal from the
dealers, because Apple pretty much stopped distributing the Twiggy version,
in anticipation of the "upgrade" from two 800KB Twiggy drives to 1 400KB Sony.
Of course I'm still waiting, a year later, for my dealer to get a free
"upgrade" kit to upgrade my Lisa I to a Lisa II so I can buy a programming
language for the bitch.  (are you listening, Apple?)
	On the other hand, I wouldn't trade my Lisa for anything but a
Sun workstation.
-- 
{ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4}!sun!sunny (Sunny :-> Kirsten of Sun Microsystems Inc.)

Message-ID: <194@ssc-bee.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 21-Sep-84 12:44:38 EDT
Article-I.D.: ssc-bee.194
Posted: Fri Sep 21 12:44:38 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 01:39:38 EDT
References: <755@ihuxk.UUCP>
Organization: Boeing Aerospace, Seattle
Lines: 52

...
	While the prose in the original flame waxed a little
	excessive, I agree with the substance: Apple Computer
	Company is no longer the computer company for the rest
	of us.

	As a longtime owner of an Apple ][, I am very disappointed
	by the evolution of Apple's corporate philosophy.  The
	early Apple believed in the masses.  A general purpose
	machine was offered, and complete specs were given with
	the machine to ENCOURAGE independent work.  Now, except
	for the ][e, Apple is attempting to force a closed
	architecture upon the market, and the thought of
	telling the mere, average person what is going on
	inside sends shudders through the corporate structure.
	Detailed specs are sold at a hefty price.  Substance
	in manuals has been replaced with Madison Ave, gee-whiz
	fluff.   Software developers are "certified" because
	everyone knows John Q. Public can't program and shouldn't
	be encouraged to program.

	[2 paragraphs of execessive prose deleted.]

	What really takes the cake, is Apple's refusal to
	stand behind the consumer.  First, there was the
	rev. A/ rev. B ][e where the owner had to prove 
	he needed the rev. B board.  More recently, ][c
	owners find the serial port is improperly designed,
	and Apple says "Prove you need it" before they will
	fix it.  Now, the poorly conceived memory board of
	the Mac has finally proven to be inadequate, and the
	user must pay the price (and then some). 

	Having vented my wrath, I have a suggestion for
	Apple (who is on the NET, right?):
	Form a review board of users to comment upon the
	design at various steps.  Keep honest reviewers,
	and don't get rid of the strident voices.  (As
	a public service, I reluctantly volunteer :=)

	To the Apple apologists on the net:  What Apple doesn't
	need now is a pat on the back.  They have made several
	obvious mistakes both in design and support.  Only a
	mass outcry and consumer boycott can penetrate their
	smugness.

	mike eve

-- 
	Mike Eve     Boeing Aerospace, Seattle
	...uw-beaver!ssc-vax!ssc-bee!eve

Message-ID: <1164@hao.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 21-Sep-84 23:57:48 EDT
Article-I.D.: hao.1164
Posted: Fri Sep 21 23:57:48 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 02:21:38 EDT
References: <755@ihuxk.UUCP>
Organization: High Altitude Obs./NCAR, Boulder CO
Lines: 22

[]
Why is it that any sleezy, slimy, dirty action by a corporation
is excused as the corporation's obligation to it's stockholders?
Are there no decent owners of stock in this country?  Is it really
a businessman's ethic to be a greedy, moneygrubbing SOB at the
expense of his customers?

For some reason, I thought Apple was a little different.  Note
the past tense.

I paid list price because when I got mine that's all there was.
If I had thought the $2400 machine I was buying would devaluate ~$1000
in six months, I can assure you that I would have waited.
But then if I and all the others who bought in the first 100
days had waited, all the rest of you would have been able to
pick up the Mac for $100 - and you would have said no, thank you.
-- 
Michael Ward, NCAR/SCD
UUCP: {hplabs,nbires,brl-bmd,seismo,menlo70,stcvax}!hao!ward
ARPA: hplabs!hao!sa!ward@Berkeley
BELL: 303-497-1252
USPS: POB 3000, Boulder, CO  80307

Message-ID: <1198@eagle.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Sep-84 01:05:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: eagle.1198
Posted: Mon Sep 24 01:05:52 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 05:17:16 EDT
References: <755@ihuxk.UUCP> <194@ssc-bee.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Summit, NJ
Lines: 23

I suspect the marketing style of Apple was a result of the success
of a boring machine, the IBM PC. At least Apple did not produce another
PC compatible. The macintosh is a good bit-mapped graphics show-piece.
It is not easy to get that much code working that reliably.

I think it is a mistake to buy a nice machine and a bunch of promises.
If you want a machine to help you get some work done, there are probably
other people already doing similar work with an old machine with
fulfilled promises.

The exciting thing about the Macintosh is that people are seriously thinking
how to build systems with good user interfaces and which are well
integrated as well as modular.
I think we will see alot of nice bit-mapped graphics machines around
in the next few years. What will be the standard bit-mapped operating system?
Who will define it? A big corperation or someone working in their garage?
How can we write portable bit-mapped software? 
In the meantime, the Mac. is not a bad terminal to my favourite
operating system and it is food for thought. Can anyone figure out
how their Icons can be non-rectangular and how to do a non XOR mouse?
A good exercise in bit-map arithmetic.

The above views are my own.

Message-ID: <142@dmsd.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 23-Sep-84 08:54:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: dmsd.142
Posted: Sun Sep 23 08:54:47 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 05:44:03 EDT
References: <1267@unm-cvax.UUCP>
Lines: 37

I am not associated with Apple, but the childish flaming at Apple for
charging a FAIR price for the FAT MAC requires a defense.

TESTED 64k DRAMs are under $3.50 each in volume ... TESTED 256k DRAMS are
still floating around or above $30.00 each and the price market COULD easily
suffer the increases caused by heavy demand as people switch from 64 to 256
parts .... just as the prices on 64k parts soared in 1981 as people switched
from 16k parts.

simple math is 18*$30 = $540. Dealers discounts are typically %40 off list
so an expected dealer can recieve the upgrade at about $999*0.6 = $600.

The remaining $60 plus or minus $50 is not enough to cover the paper work
and testing/restocking of old digital boards ... which CAN NOT be simply stuffed
into a new machine (used parts in new equip is against the law I understand).
Apple is going to end up with a lifetime supply of spares on the 128k mac
boards.

In realistic terms Apple is probably EATing $300-500 dollars by offering
the upgrade at near componet costs ... and may eat a lot more if the
price on 256k parts soars back above $40.00 a part.

The upgrade price is the nearest thing to a free lunch I have seen ... in
an industry where multiples of x2.5 to x3.5 are min list prices above
costs .... thus a fair price for the upgrade today would be above
$30 * 18 * 3 = $1,620.00 plus installation labor and a restocking charge
(and testing) for the old board ... a real value of closer to $2,000 even.

Apple is both VERY kind to its installed base ... and praying that the
prices of the rams drop before it looses it's shirt on both the upgrade
and the NEW price for the 512k MAC.

Go try to by 256k parts on the salvage/hobby market ... about $50 a chip
including tax/shipping is common for untested parts. 18 * $50 = $900 ...
take a batch of those and do your own upgrade ... hope it works ...

John Bass

Message-ID: <4814@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 22-Sep-84 07:19:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.4814
Posted: Sat Sep 22 07:19:21 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 06:27:10 EDT
References: <1267@unm-cvax.UUCP> <323@hoxna.UUCP>, <2396@ihuxf.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistics Research Lab
Lines: 3

Let's hear more about this Megabyte upgrade for the 5620.
Also, what do the internal switches do?
When is a tech manual going to be available??

Message-ID: <4820@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 22-Sep-84 11:53:23 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.4820
Posted: Sat Sep 22 11:53:23 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 07:00:45 EDT
References: <755@ihuxk.UUCP> <1164@hao.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistics Research Lab
Lines: 15

If you didn't think that the Mac was going to drop $1000 from
the list price you are overly naive.  You could have expected
it to drop 20% alone from list as soon as the distribution got
set up such that they were fairly available.  Technology in this
industry marches fast and now Apple has a new computer that they
can productively sell for a comparable price as the old one.  This
is the only way a company can stay in business in this market.  DEC
will be in this boat if they don't come out with a newer computer
soon, they are getting walked all over by people with brand new
fast and cheap minis that beat the shit out of the 780 family.

What would you have had Apple do?  Inflate the price of their new
product so it would devalue the existing products selling price?

-Ron

Message-ID: <1166@hao.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 22-Sep-84 23:55:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: hao.1166
Posted: Sat Sep 22 23:55:15 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 07:10:42 EDT
References: <755@ihuxk.UUCP>, <194@ssc-bee.UUCP>
Organization: High Altitude Obs./NCAR, Boulder CO
Lines: 21

[]

>What would you have had Apple do?  Inflate the price of their new
>product so it would devalue the existing products selling price?

I would have Apple recognize that those of who bought early,
at list price, were a little freindlier than the Pournelles who
waited.  I would have Apple give us a break on the price of the
upgrade.

I agree that I was just incredibly naive to think that Apple
was any different than any other money-grubbing corporation.
I hope Apple realizes what they've given away when the Japanese
drive them out of business.

-- 
Michael Ward, NCAR/SCD
UUCP: {hplabs,nbires,brl-bmd,seismo,menlo70,stcvax}!hao!ward
ARPA: hplabs!hao!sa!ward@Berkeley
BELL: 303-497-1252
USPS: POB 3000, Boulder, CO  80307

Message-ID: <2309@sdcc3.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 25-Sep-84 03:07:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: sdcc3.2309
Posted: Tue Sep 25 03:07:25 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 27-Sep-84 02:43:15 EDT
References: <755@ihuxk.UUCP>, <1164@hao.UUCP>
Organization: U.C. San Diego, Computer Center
Lines: 12

Come on. Apple is a company that may soon fold, so quit crying
about how Apple is shafting America.
The thing with Apple is that the managers there may not be
producing macintosh's at the optimal point, ie. where
the rate of return on investment equals the market determined
rate of interest.

(Apple lovers please send Flames to
  /dev/ULTIMATE-NULLIFIER)

-non-economist.

Message-ID: <505@loral.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Sep-84 15:01:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: loral.505
Posted: Mon Sep 24 15:01:14 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 27-Sep-84 03:31:14 EDT
References: <1267@unm-cvax.UUCP>
Organization: Loral Instrumentation, San Diego, CA
Lines: 85

>	I just received news concerning the Fat Mac, of which we have all
>heard so much: the Macintosh, with 512K.  It has been released and is 
>on its way, delivery date approximately three weeks (or thereabouts;
>delivery dates haven't been Apple's strong point lately).
>
>	I also received news about its price.
>
>	Brace yourselves.
>
>	$995.  Yes, you read right: that's nine hundred ninety-five big ones,
>to be removed deftly from your wallet and placed just as deftly into theirs.
>All that on top of the $2495 (or $2195, if you happened to get it in one
>of the recent sales that have started to spring up here and there) which all
>us Macfans have already shelled out.

	Question: is the item worth $995?  If it isn't few if any
persons will pay it.  If it is, what's the gripe?


>	[Background:  My friends and I who purchased Macs are not the
>businessmen-types that the Mac seems to be aimed at.  We are but simple
>college students, not fortunate enough (or rich enough, as the case may be)
>to attend one of the schools in the Apple University Consortium, and get
>our Macs for dirt cheap.

	Ok, that's the gripe.  This thing is priced at its presumed value,
rather than what those who would like to have one can afford.

>	Well, they sure got it to us, all right.  For the measly sum of 
>damn near a thousand bucks extra, we plebes can get ourselves the system
>that should have come out in the first place.  So now Apple has us all
>over a barrel.  We all sprung our $2995 for the Mac and the printer, and 
>shortly afterwards realized that the thing was absolutely useless without 
>the second disk drive.  So, another $495 went down the drain.  Next comes 
>the realization that with the basic 128K, the user is left with too little 
>memory to accomplish anything significant.  So, another $995 down the tubes.
>Thus Steve Jobs' vision of the computer that anyone can use has become the 
>computer that no one can afford, because a workable system sells for $4485.  
>What a bargain! 

	The question remains: what was the basic Mac system worth?  If
is wasn't worth the $2995 it cost, why did anyone buy it?  If it was,
what's the gripe?

	$995 for 384K of memory doesn't strike me as exorbitant.


>	Looks like Steve & Co. are standing by to rake in the big bucks; The
>Rest of Us can all bend over and grab our ankles.  It's coming in dry, folks;
>no Vaseline on this one.

>...Apple has shown that, in the end, they're not that much
>different from any other computer company, that they don't really give a
>damn about the end-user, and that the final arbiter is, as we all suspected
>but hoped against hope was not true, the bottom line on the ledger books.

	Looks to me a bit like the old "I want it, I can't afford it,
therefore those who sell it at the price I can't afford are money-grubbing
hogs" line.  I am sure of one thing; the author of this complaint will
eventually depend on some business institution for his bread and butter
(he does now, but perhaps doesn't realize it).  If that company prices
its products higher than their worth (to the market that buys them),
they won't sell, and someone will come up with the same thing at a better
price and capture the market.  On the other hand, if it sells at prices
that do not respect that "bottom line", they won't exist; and this
person will find his employer bankrupt.

Businesses (including Apple) exist ONLY because they are able to
market a product at a price that satisfies that market and produces
revenues sufficient to pay its bills, its employees and management,
and produces with some regularity a profit for the owners of the
business.  If you want to get something for less than it costs
to produce it, who are you expecting to take up the loss,
to subsidize you?

If you believe, as you indicated, that the price will drop, then perhaps
the thing to do is to wait until that time.  Until then, I can't see
any basis for criticizing Apple.
-- 
[     I am not a stranger, but a friend you haven't met yet     ]

Ray Simard
Loral Instrumentation, San Diego
{ucbvax, ittvax!dcdwest}!sdcsvax!sdcc6!loral!simard

Message-ID: <508@loral.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Sep-84 16:01:06 EDT
Article-I.D.: loral.508
Posted: Mon Sep 24 16:01:06 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 27-Sep-84 03:31:50 EDT
References: <1164@hao.UUCP>
Organization: Loral Instrumentation, San Diego, CA
Lines: 42

>     Why is it that any sleezy, (sic) slimy, dirty action by a corporation  is
>excused  as  the  corporation's obligation to it's stockholders?  Are there no
>decent owners of stock in this country?  Is it really a businessman's ethic to
>be a greedy, moneygrubbing SOB at the expense of his customers?

     What do you mean by sleazy?  If you mean that you think everyone in those
glass  towers is another J. R. Ewing, you're entertaining a myth.  If you mean
that the management won't sell something unless the sale  is  profitable  then
that is not sleazy, it's inevitable, and desirable.

     There is a word for businesses that are not run that way: bankrupt.

>     For some reason, I thought Apple was a little different.  Note  the  past
>tense.

     No, it follows the same rules.  You can tell because they  are  still  in
business.

>     I paid list price because when I got mine that's all there was.  If I had
>thought the $2400 machine I was buying would devaluate ~$1000 in six months, I
>can assure you that I would have waited.  But then if I and all the others who
>bought  in  the first 100 days had waited, all the rest of you would have been
>able to pick up the Mac for $100 - and you would have said no, thank you.

     Most new items are placed on the market at a price gauged by the  manage-
ment  to be appropriate.  When sales figures arrive that show the decision was
inappropriate, adjustments are made.  Sure it's annoying to see the sale price
drop  after  you've paid the higher price, but consider this: if the price had
not dropped, would you now be any richer?  What would the cost be?   You  must
have  felt  that  the item was worth what you paid for it, otherwise you'd not
have made the purchase. Has the item changed?

     Neither Apple nor the company you work for can exist without engaging  in
profitable  enterprise.   Your  paycheck  attests to that.  If it were not for
"moneygrubbers", you'd be out of work.
-- 
[     I am not a stranger, but a friend you haven't met yet     ]

Ray Simard
Loral Instrumentation, San Diego
{ucbvax, ittvax!dcdwest}!sdcsvax!sdcc6!loral!simard

Message-ID: <4346@fortune.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 26-Sep-84 15:04:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: fortune.4346
Posted: Wed Sep 26 15:04:58 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 27-Sep-84 05:01:08 EDT
Sender: notes@fortune.UUCP
Organization: Fortune Systems, Redwood City, CA
Lines: 67
Nf-ID: #R:unm-cvax:-126700:fortune:28000049:000:3433
Nf-From: fortune!yamauchi    Sep 26 11:48:00 1984


>TESTED 64k DRAMs are under $3.50 each in volume ... TESTED 256k DRAMS are
>still floating around or above $30.00 each and the price market COULD easily
>suffer the increases caused by heavy demand as people switch from 64 to 256
>parts .... just as the prices on 64k parts soared in 1981 as people switched
>from 16k parts.

First off $30.00 is off mark.  You have to remember that said company can buy
LARGE quantities of DRAM's and their current pricing is closer to 
$25/DRAM.  You can expect that to go down in '85 due to the increasing number
of DRAM manufacturers "coming on line".  So more than likely said company will
be buying 256K's at under $20, probably somewhere near $18.  Various 
manufacturers are quoting prices near $20 for 1Q85.

>simple math is 18*$30 = $540. Dealers discounts are typically %40 off list
>so an expected dealer can recieve the upgrade at about $999*0.6 = $600.
>The remaining $60 plus or minus $50 is not enough to cover the paper work
>and testing/restocking of old digital boards ... 

Lets see now;  18*$25 = $450.  The remaining $150 may not be enough to cover all
of the paper work, etc.  but they are getting close to breaking even.  
Now at $18/DRAM 18*18= $324, leaving $276 for the other expenses.

>In realistic terms Apple is probably EATing $300-500 dollars by offering
>the upgrade at near componet costs ... and may eat a lot more if the
>price on 256k parts soars back above $40.00 a part.

It's doubtful that Axxxx is EATING as much as you estimate, but at the 
present time they are more than likely taking some loss.  It is also 
doubtful that they would offer an upgrade at that price without forseeing
some future profit or at least break even in the near future.

>The upgrade price is the nearest thing to a free lunch I have seen ... in
>an industry where multiples of x2.5 to x3.5 are min list prices above
>costs .... thus a fair price for the upgrade today would be above
>$30 * 18 * 3 = $1,620.00 plus installation labor and a restocking charge
>(and testing) for the old board ... a real value of closer to $2,000 even.

It may be a free lunch now, but by 2Q85 they'll be making money on the 
upgrade, pricing on 256k's has already taken some sharp drops due to 
new companies coming on line.  A fair price is closer to the current
upgrade price, $2k is ludicrous.

>Apple is both VERY kind to its installed base ... and praying that the
>prices of the rams drop before it looses it's shirt on both the upgrade
>and the NEW price for the 512k MAC.
 
Don't feel sorry for Axxxx they aren't praying for the prices to drop,
they're telling the 256k vendors what they want to pay and with the various
manufacturer's they can play pricing games with everyone of them.        
Remember, there are quite a few divisions that can use the 256k's and
together they can add up to some HUGE quantities. That's some big bucks
for the 256k manufacuturers.  Axxxx doesn't deal with rep's or distri-
bution houses on these types of products,  they go direct to the
semiconductor house!!

Marketing departments ( you know they've got a huge one! ) aren't about
to let their company offer products they don't intend to make money on.
How many companies do you know of where "GOODWILL" won out over MONEY??

    Alan Yamauchi

UUCP:	{ihnp4,ucbvax!amd,hpda,sri-unix,harpo}!fortune!yamauchi
DDD:	(415)594-2436 
USPS:	Fortune Systems Corp, 101 Twin Dolphin Drive, Redwood City, CA 94065

Message-ID: <2280@tekig.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 26-Sep-84 12:12:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: tekig.2280
Posted: Wed Sep 26 12:12:50 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 28-Sep-84 06:36:27 EDT
References: <1267@unm-cvax.UUCP> <142@dmsd.UUCP>
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 18



     Apple being kind? Come on who are you trying to fool.  Apple
     is out to make a buck on EVERYTHING they do! 

     The MAC doesn't use 18 memory chips, Apple is too cheap to put 
     parity checking in its computers.  MAC has only 16 memory chips.
     Also I really doult if Apple is paying $30 a chip!  But even if
     they do pay that much, 16*$30 = $480 dollars.  Looks like a lot
     of room for some profit.

     Lets keep all the facts straight.  Apple exsists only to make 
     money and you can be sure that everything that Apple does is
     to make more money.

     I hope people will forget all this nonsense about Apple being
     kind.  Otherwise the next thing we will hear about is how IBM's
     great social virtues took it to the top.

Message-ID: <452@watdcsu.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 28-Sep-84 09:42:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: watdcsu.452
Posted: Fri Sep 28 09:42:04 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 29-Sep-84 08:40:01 EDT
References: <4346@fortune.UUCP>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 18

In addition to the new 256K chips, remember that Apple also has to
provide:
- a 68000
- a 'Woz machine' disk controller chip
- about 30 other chips, many complex -> expensive
- a multi-layer PC board.

at $995 ($1495 in Hoserland) it doesn't sound like Apple could be
making much money on this.  Maybe a bit more on the 512K Fat Macs,
though.

Tom Haapanen

allegra \
clyde \  \
decvax ---- watmath --- watdcsu --- haapanen
ihnp4 /  /
linus  /

Message-ID: <518@loral.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 28-Sep-84 18:22:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: loral.518
Posted: Fri Sep 28 18:22:34 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 29-Sep-84 10:19:11 EDT
References: <2280@tekig.UUCP>
Lines: 5

It seems to me that those individuals that quote the price of
memory chips as the rationle for a lower price on the Mac
upgrade need to take a course in cost accounting.  It is
not as cut and dry as labor and materials.

Message-ID: <145@dmsd.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 28-Sep-84 07:53:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: dmsd.145
Posted: Fri Sep 28 07:53:13 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 30-Sep-84 03:26:35 EDT
References: <1267@unm-cvax.UUCP> <142@dmsd.UUCP> <2280@tekig.UUCP>
Lines: 53

OK ... OK ... so I forgot the Mac didn't have parity ... but it doesn't
change the numbers much ... since I omited the tally of costs associated
with taking in the return, issuing credits, testing, stocking, repair ...
which certainly over $60.

For those who think that Apple can just name a price they want to pay for rams
 ... think again ... the semi producers will sell them for the highest bid.
The fact is that the semi producers are coming online faster than the customers
RIGHT NOW (and just like 1981 and 64k parts) ... but who has been shipping
256k parts in real volume (not just ramp up volumes) ... NOBODY!

Who wants to be shipping product with 256k parts ... ALMOST EVERYONE.

Anyone who can predict short run prices for 256k parts is a very valuable
person ... their are both those betting on fast fall and those betting on
a rise followed by a 12-18 month slow fall. Given pricing on other hot
semi products released in the last 4-6 years I lean toward shortages 3-6 months
out on 256k parts ... and the resulting flatness or rise in prices as
most major system houses  come on line using the parts.

Sure the price will drop to around $3.50 a part within a few years ... but
that is not today.

Apple is in this market to make money ... for them to decide on shipping
product at zero markup (net loss) is VERY KIND ... for those who continue
to fume at this assertion please go back and look at Apples quarterly earnings
for the last year ... they have missed taking big losses by a hair or less.
Last Oct-Dec ... the big christmas sales ... they cleared a profit by
accident ... many of us expected them to follow the rest of the market and
declare sizable losses ... not yet but turning down profits on 100,000 mac
upgrades could do it.

As for the fella's from Fortune and Tektronics ... it's nice of you to collect
pay checks from companys that still price their 64k drams with the 1981 market,
and always ship product above a 2.5x multiplier ... it's truly nice to
throw rocks at apples profits when your own pay check comes from someone
taking what the market will bare ... 

STOP BAD MOUTHING APPLE ... atleast it is still giving people jobs in
AMERICA ... and not over seas like Atari and a growing number of other
small computer makers.

If you want to set an example for charity ... start with your own pay check ...
give 75% of it to a good cause ... sell your home, computer, car, stero,
and color tv and donate the procedes to charity. Then you might have a cause
for asserting that others (like APPLE and its employees) should also be
revenue source for charity.

John Bass

The fair price for the upgrade today is $1500-$2000 ... enjoy the kindness
of Apple in pricing that IBM, DEC, Tandy, TEKTRONICS, and everyone else
aren't likely to give.

Message-ID: <3225@apple.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Sep-84 12:21:39 EDT
Article-I.D.: apple.3225
Posted: Mon Sep 24 12:21:39 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 4-Oct-84 00:54:21 EDT
References: <1267@unm-cvax.UUCP> <142@dmsd.UUCP>
Organization: Apple Education Research Group, Cupertino CA
Lines: 15

John Bass has finally hit it right. If you think Apple is making any
money on the upgrade, you are sadly mistaken. I wish we were -- I own
stock.  If you want to complain to someone, try the dealer you bought
your Mac from. They are the only ones making money on the upgrade.

Actually, you might try Japan inc. as well, I believe they are making
money on this as well.

Sorry to disappoint you all, but you'll have to think of something else
to flame at Apple for. Think hard, something will come to you.

These are *my* views and they do not represent those of my employer.

toby

Message-ID: <440@wdl1.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 26-Sep-84 21:23:26 EDT
Article-I.D.: wdl1.440
Posted: Wed Sep 26 21:23:26 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 4-Oct-84 03:50:32 EDT
Lines: 0
Nf-ID: #R:sun:-169500:wdl1:1400007:000:1
Nf-From: wdl1!jbn    Sep 26 17:47:00 1984