20 08 11 - 10:34A giant durrrr rises from the American consumer, who knows nothing and does not want to:
"The PC business only returns a few points of margin. HP is really good, and they only return 5%," said Martin Reynolds, analyst at Gartner. "Staying in the PC business is relatively risky. Who knows where these things will go over the next few years?"
Fully integrated hardware and software systems like Apple's iPhone, iPad and Macintosh are becoming more sought-after in the technology industry. Apple does not break out its segment profits, but it is the eighth most-profitable company on the Fortune 500.
That gave Apple (AAPL, Fortune 500) -- the third-largest and fastest-growing PC maker in the country -- grounds to declare the beginning of the "post-PC" era in March.
"I think what we're seeing -- what HP's move is really about -- is the aftermath of the Wintel strategy, in which you give all the profits to Intel and Microsoft," said Carl Howe, analyst at Yankee Group. - Crowdist News Network
The Apple model is that one manufacturer controls hardware, operating system and thus software.
We had this model before -- in the 1980s.
It is great because you have very few options and thus everything works. Where PCs might have used over 300 different video cards, Apple had only one.
However, there were also problems: Apple was unable to extend its product line quickly. Why make faster, better and stronger when profits are already high?
In addition, problems existed with Apple's hardware (and still do). In fact, the only reason we have Apple hardware today is thanks to Wintel innovation.
This brings us to the paradox of society:
We need leadership, but we also need competition to unlock new demands. Otherwise, we end up in stagnation.
A king, back in 1990, might have observed the 500 MHz chips in some supercomputers and said, "You know, if we make 2 million of those, they'll be cheap -- let's put those in our desktop computers."
That would have kept computers competitive up until 2001.
The same king at that point might have looked at computers, and seen that a linear expansion of Intel chips was likely, and said, "You know, if we make 20 million of your fastest chips, and apply some technologies from your server line, we could get another ten years out of this at the same cost."
Apple, on the other hand, is prole rule. If it looks shiny and has a neat interface, who cares what powers it? Apple continues to make obscene profits on the sheer ignorance of its customers.
Too much anarchy gets us a mess, but luckily, the market tends to correct. The days of crap motherboards are over, thanks to the price differential of $100 between something excellent and the cheapest option. No one with a functional mind messes around with a key component for that.
Thanks to the proliferation of technology -- thanks to Wintel -- we now have cheap chips, motherboards, RAM and video cards.
Apple, like liberalism, can only make a profit once someone else stabilizes the technology. It seems to please those who don't push their machines to do anything all that interesting.
But the consumer, as always, chortles along in his Idiocracy/Homer Simpson waddle.