Will people please stop bitching about Apple's pricing strategy?!
Read this:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/09/07/technology/07apple.php
And am continually astounded at people's naivety. Apple have maintained a rationalised suite of products since Mr Jobs came back and sorted things out. So, as they add a new top-end product to their range (in whatever category: PCs, Notebooks, OSs, iPods, etc.), they drop one off the low-end. This allows them to just keep 3 or 4 products in each range, making it a lot easier for people to choose and a lot easier for them to keep inventory for and support. In the same fashion, they shift the pricing so that the top-end product is a bit beyond what a sensible person can afford and the low-end is pretty darn accessible.
This shouldn't be news to anyone!
Of course, when they release a new product category, they can (and do) charge what they like, because like moths to the flame, Apple loyalists will buy it. So, if you want to pay a super premium to be the first one to have something, then go for it. Just don't go complaining about it.
The other thing that confuses me is why on earth would you pay a premium to become a beta-tester for Apple. Show me the generation-1 product from them that has been free from major issues. Battery-life, overheating, screen robustness, OS-flaws, etc...
But Apple aren't the only ones. Microsoft has been effectively treating their first release software as beta for years now. Why? Well because the market pressure dictates as such. If any of these technology-centric companies waited till something was properly tested and stable, they'd lose any momentum available through the initial wave. It's sad, but true.
We face similar issues in the world of digital advertising. How can we be expected to continually innovate , whilst working backwards from a fixed point in time that demands integration with other media activity? The answer is of course, that we wait for users of our media creations to identify the issues and fix them in the live environment. Something has to give: Users? Clients? Developers? Project Quality? Time? Cost? Normally it's some combination of these. And normally the agency involved has to shift into some mode of damage control.
Surely there's a better way?
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/09/07/technology/07apple.php
And am continually astounded at people's naivety. Apple have maintained a rationalised suite of products since Mr Jobs came back and sorted things out. So, as they add a new top-end product to their range (in whatever category: PCs, Notebooks, OSs, iPods, etc.), they drop one off the low-end. This allows them to just keep 3 or 4 products in each range, making it a lot easier for people to choose and a lot easier for them to keep inventory for and support. In the same fashion, they shift the pricing so that the top-end product is a bit beyond what a sensible person can afford and the low-end is pretty darn accessible.
This shouldn't be news to anyone!
Of course, when they release a new product category, they can (and do) charge what they like, because like moths to the flame, Apple loyalists will buy it. So, if you want to pay a super premium to be the first one to have something, then go for it. Just don't go complaining about it.
The other thing that confuses me is why on earth would you pay a premium to become a beta-tester for Apple. Show me the generation-1 product from them that has been free from major issues. Battery-life, overheating, screen robustness, OS-flaws, etc...
But Apple aren't the only ones. Microsoft has been effectively treating their first release software as beta for years now. Why? Well because the market pressure dictates as such. If any of these technology-centric companies waited till something was properly tested and stable, they'd lose any momentum available through the initial wave. It's sad, but true.
We face similar issues in the world of digital advertising. How can we be expected to continually innovate , whilst working backwards from a fixed point in time that demands integration with other media activity? The answer is of course, that we wait for users of our media creations to identify the issues and fix them in the live environment. Something has to give: Users? Clients? Developers? Project Quality? Time? Cost? Normally it's some combination of these. And normally the agency involved has to shift into some mode of damage control.
Surely there's a better way?
posted by sam court at 9:43 am
5 Comments:
Yeah, that cracked me up too.
They're all getting a $100 credit. Dangerous precedent.
Tough titty, I say.
i like shiny things
mrs. moth x
Have you thought about Natwest?
I personally think that it's hilarious that these tossers paid top dollar for an über phone and are then actually surprised when the price goes down... What did they want? That Apple do a Nokia trick and artificially inflate the price of there wanker-model phone so as to maintain its exclusivity and protect its customers ego?
ZOMG I can't believe I missed an apostrophe in that last post.
Post a Comment
<< Home