Mac Sales Contracted in November

If a report from WSJ is correct, that may indeed be the case.  According to November computer data from NDP Group Inc. 

Mac sales lost 1% compared to November of 2007 while the PC market grew 2% from the same period last year.  WSJ is reporting this as evidence that Apple has begun to suffer from the recession US consumer are going through and there is worries that this will carry into 2009.

So, should be we worried for out favorite fruity consumer electronics company?  Well, my initial reaction was to think that WSJ was likely wrong in its reporting.  Something about the data they nickpicked to make Mac sales look bad compared to the rest of the industry.  Well, this is WSJ so I'm doubting that to be the case.  This isn't Marketwatch's Dvorak after all.

Anyway, the official numbers from Apple is what count in January.  But given that Apple refreshed the Macbooks for Christmas (and the Holidays) but not the iMacs, that could have had an impact on anyone who was looking to hold off their purchase until the consumer desktop line was refreshed.

Recall that in the midst of a lot of wild rumors and speculations from Mac centric sites and supposedly responsible financial analysts (who I'm very close to putting into the same group as lawyers - not a compliment by the way), Apple specifically announced that there would be no more updates on any Apple products for the rest of 2008. 

So far, the anti-Apple forces have yet to pick up on this nor have the Apple fanboys mounted any sort of defense.  I'm sure this is only a matter of time.  Let's see if this WSJ article stands up to the coming Mac-centric onslaught.

Source:  WSJ

Note:  A virtual standstill as far as the NDP data shows, we are likely to show Mac share of the dollar increase in percentage as Mac prices have largely remain the same while PC prices have decreased a noticeable 35% to 45%, according to WSJ.

Another note:  This is retail sales.  Doesn't seem to include online sales.  How much of these retail sales are actual PCs and regular laptops and how much of these are netbooks will be interest for bloggers and FAs. 

Impact:  I've noticed a bigger discount from a larger number of Mac online retail outlets like Amazon, Maconnection, and others.  Could these discounts have moved buyers online instead of through brick-and-border stores?  Plus, with some Macs discounted by as much as $400, I'm interested in see if these discounts are extended beyond 2008.

Why Apple's Answer To the Netbook Won't Be Just Another Netbook

I have a MacWind, converted from the 10" MSI Wind Dave the Mobile Warrior helped me with.  He has one too although he's not too wild about it anymore.  I like it but there's nothing like working with a real Macbook.  

More than that, after using the MacWind for a month, I realized Apple is not likely going to follow what everyone else is doing.  NOT just another netbook to run OS X.  Why?  Before I get into it, I really would like to hear from everyone about about.  Particularly other folks with a MacWind or MacEEE PC.

• Keyboard.  Imagine how little those keys are going to have to be now that Apple has gone completely with the new layout first seen in the Macbooks.  
• Small real estate.  One of the great experiences about using a Mac is the great resolution and the desktop.  On a 6-8" (I'll go on record now to say Apple will not come out with a 10" netbook) LCD screen, it's just too small.
• Battery life.  I get 4.5 hours running OS X on the Wind.  That's with a 6-cell battery.  Heavy stuff.  Not Apple's style.  Form is a very import equation in Apple products and designs.  Jobs will not allow any part to protrude.  Heck, it even isn't going out on a limb to say Apple's answer to the netbook will not have a user-replaceable battery.  
• Slow processing speed on the Wind.  I mean I can use it for everyday work just fine.  The Wind is a huge upgrade from my Powerbook but it's not Macbook or even Mac Mini fast.  Jobs will not tolerate folks from the blogworld or media to say how slow it is.  

Battery life.  Performance issues that may arrive from running a full-sized OS X.  Display and interface issues.  It's looking less and less like a Macbook Nano and more like something else.

Next post:  How Apple Can Make a $500 Mac That Isn't Crappy (I have a feeling there will be an "i" in front of it)

It's Time

I finally pulled the trigger.  I stopped thinking and acted on it.

I got a new Macbook.  Which one?  Just the Macbook or the Macbook Pro?  Or the Air?  I will say this right now.  I like the Air or MBA to some.

However, I don't like the fact that the battery isn't user-replaceable.  At least, not without a screwdriver.  Also, 1.86Ghz is okay with the new Nvidia GPU but I think I want to go with something faster.

So, that leave the MB or the MBP.  I currently have a 15" Powerbook (1st gen Mac Mini, a power horse by the way, and MacWind), but I didn't think it was as portable as I like.  Coming in at 5.5 lbs, it a bit hefty when I've got keys, G1, a notebook, and miscellaneous items in my backpack, it can come out a bit heavy.

On the other hand, the new MBP has a dedicated GPU.  And it can come in handy for games.  More importantly, it is future-proof when Snow Leopard comes out and OpenCL is implemented and prevalent (that is my hope) in many day-to-day applications and tasks.  Plus, the MBP chips have 6MB of cache.  In my book, it's a very good upgrade from what I've been using the last few years.

And so is the Macbook.  I like to think of the new unibody Macbook as Macbook Pro Lite rather than a regular Macbook.  The white Macbook, now that's a regular Macbook that we've known for the last few years.  But it has some compromises that I not willing to work with.   The unibody Macbook with the new Nvidia 9400M, it has four to five times more graphics muscle, making it a convincing alternative to folks who want more portability without too much compromises.

The new unibody Macbook with its more robust features is no accident.  And it's meant for someone like me.  I don't know if it's future-proof with its integrated graphics processor.  However, it's lighter at 4.5 lbs, LED screen, and its memory is expandable to 4GB.

Now, the CPU is no upgradable.  No Apple laptop has had an upgradable CPU since the Powerbook 1400 series.  So, what did I go with?

A mini review will be forthcoming as well as come game specs.  It's what the 9400M is for, isn't it?

Macbook and Gaming

Given the strides that the new unibody Macbooks has made in the graphics department with the Nvidia integrated graphics process, it is suffice to say that we should also see a change in the specs of some games to reflect the update.

However, that has not been the case.  Checks on gaming sites like Inside Mac Games, publishers, and online stores that offer Mac games offered nothing.  In fact, no mention of Nvidia's 9400M at all. 

I do a little gaming.  I used to play a lot of LAN games.  As someone who is on the sideline waiting to get into the market for one and can't decide on which model best suits my needs as far as some gaming, video editing, and a mix of writing, e-mail, and everyday Web work, I would like to know how today's gaming requirements compared to the Macbooks. 

Resorting to Googling and combing through Mac-centric forums have helped but all are quite subjective due to the settings and tolerance of Macbook owners.  Some want settings really really high.  Others won't consider gaming good if they can't get 100+ FPS.  And still others don't mind play at the rate of a slide-show. 

I'll be making a call and buy in a few days.  I'll let you know what I decide on what the reasons behind my choice.  And if I do go ahead and update this time around, I'll try and set up a page for games that I've tried so everyone can have a better idea how the Macbook stack up to today's games.

Note:  I won't be talking just about Mac games.  I'll also be talking about running games via Bootcamp.

Apple's Answer to $500 Junk and Netbooks

There is a flurry of new Apple speculations with the Internet going wild as one blogger or analyst talked about the CPU that will like going into the coming netbook from Apple.

I don't know what it'll look like, what it can do, or what CPU will be powering it.  Suffice to say, Atom chips, from Intel and powers the millions of netbooks in the market, will not make it into Apple's answer to the netbook.

So, let's go this new exciting (potentially revolutionary) mobile device called Access.  I wanted to call it iLife but then you'll asking isn't a suit of Apple applications called iLife?  So, Access it is.  Access because of the following reasons:

• Fully integrated with iLife version running on the OS X.
• Fully integrated with MobileMe.
• With Wi-Fi access and may be offered with 3G access from ATT.  Now, it is also entirely possible this may be subsidized later on.  It's is also entirely possible we may see LTE, WiMax, white spaces versions.  Steve Jobs has indicated in recent memories that Apple should learn from Microsoft in forming alliances and partnerships.  
• This will help Apple sell more mobile devices, introduce more people to OS X, sell more Macs.
• This would go for $500. 

And how will Apple make something insanely-great at this price point without turning Access into another piece of $500 junk?  Stay tuned.  I've got more idle speculations to offer on that point.   And it's only Apple who will be able to pull it off.

MacBook GPU Debate

Well, not so much a debate but more about what to get.  Macbook with its integrated GPU but still much more powerful than anything we've seen for the Macbook line or go with the Pro version and the 9600 dedicated GPU.

I spent some time over the weekend with both units as I haven't decided which works best for me. And the GPU played a big part as I also considered future-proofing my mobile investment.  Here is a post from Linden LAN from October (not long ago) that discussed the 9600M, 8600M, and the 9400M.  As you may already know, the 9600M is the flagship GPU in the MBP, the 8600M was the GPU in previous iterations of MBP, and the 9400M replaced the underpowered Intel IGP x3100 (Apple has passed on the current generation, x4500).

There's a lot of debate over the Macbook with the 9400M, in good ways, not bad.  People generally love it and, yet, people also like numbers.  This GPU versus that GPU versus something else.

Based on LL's way of looking at it, the aluminum Macbook's GPU is 82% of the 8600M.  Not bad.

However, no matter what you go with, I have to say you can't go wrong with any of the selection on the market, from the new MBP and MB to the previous generation MBP.  I don't think you can go wrong.

As for me, I am still in love with my MacWind and I've yet decided when I'll pull the trigger.  Suffice to say, I am leaning towards the Macbook with the newer mobile system, GPU, and looks.

Source:  Linden LAN

Apple Is Not Scared of Storm

I'm sure Apple is always looking ahead but may be concerned whenever someone tugs at you trying to pass you.  But for CNet to say that Apple is scared, it's going a bit far.

There is definitely a lot to like about the Storm.  Here's a few that CNet listed that I agree:

• cut-and-paste - but by all accounts, it's not implemented with much grace.  But Storm has it and the iPhone don't.
• removable battery - I have an issue with this one.
• tethering - ATT said it's coming.  
• memory - I like the expansion slot.  

Now, I have some issues with how CNet spun it.  First, the battery.  I totally agree.  110% that the iPhone needs an user-replaceable battery.  One of two things has to happen.  Either the battery becomes user-replaceable or that Apple or the chip makers find a way to extend battery power by a lot.  Personally, I don't see that happen.  

Now, memory.  Please.  Totally ignore the fact that Apple has onboard storage.  So far as I know, only Nokia's N-series has similar storage capacity.  Now, would I like to have an additional memory slot.  You bet.  But it's not coming and the Storm has 1GB.  You'll need to put out additional $$$ for more memory yourself.  

Now, the clickable screen is pretty nice.  If I'm apple, I might be concerned about that.  But having used the G1 for a bit now and the iPhone's touchscreen keyboard, I don't care one way or another.  In fact, I'm able to lightly touch the iPhone's screen, thereby alleviating any kind of pressure I need to put on my hands and fingers.  Buttons or no buttons.  Clicking or no clicking.  It's a personal preference that the two camps will argue that till the end of time.  It's like Apple's one-button mouse thing that never dies. People grip about it but still buy Macs because they like the Mac as a whole.  And if they wanted a two-button mouse, they go and get one.  

You know, CNet has some good posts and articles but sometimes, they just come out of nowhere with something like this.  It's no wonder they're losing their traditional readers.  Seriously, Apple releasing an update on the day Storm goes on sale?  The writer is SO ready for the weekend.  

Now, to be fair, the article did point out something about the iPhone.  It's short-comings.  Well, for cynics and conspiracy theorists, it's Apple of adding features a little at a time to get people to upgrade.  Possible.  Or it could be that coming out with a mobile device and supporting a whole new platform is harder than it looks and Apple is just taking it one step at a time.  I think it's a little of both.  Look at MobileMe.  

With that said, go read it and see if you agree with CNet that Apple is scared of a storm.  

Source:  CNet