Apple Monitors: The Price Problem

by James R. Stoup Jul 15, 2005

Can we all agree that Apple makes nice monitors? I think we can. They come in three magnificent sizes: 20 inch, 23 inch and the big daddy of them all, the 30 inch. Surrounded by aluminum goodness they are the ying that completes the PowerMac’s yang. Sadly they also boast price tags of $800, $1,500 and $3,000 respectively, therein lies the problem.

If you just dropped $600 for a Mac Mini how can you justify spending $800 on a monitor? I could understand if you planned on placing it beside a $3,000 PowerMac, what is a few more bucks at that point right? But for consumers on a budget Apple has severely priced itself out of the display game.

If you are Joe Schmuck then a simple bit of arithmetic will show you that at CompUSA’s website you can get FIVE 15” LCD monitors for $750, THREE 17"LCD monitors for $775 or ONE 20” LCD monitor for $800! Hum, which one should you choose? If you go with option A then you could set up two computers with a dual monitor display and still have one left over for a laptop. If you go with plan B then you could have a very nice dual monitor setup for one station and still have a nice display for another computer. Option C leaves you with one monitor for one computer. You know Apple, your displays are nice, but they aren’t that nice.

And here is the crux of the matter, I don’t understand why Apple won’t make smaller displays. Yes the profit margin would be less than on a $3,000 30” display but so what? I bet CompUSA sells 1,000 15” monitors for every one 30” Cinema HD display. Everyone can use a 15” or 17” display but realistically you are only targeting professionals and gamers with displays larger than 25 inches.

Lets say that Apple decided to go ahead and bring back the smaller displays and they come in your standard 15” and 17” sizes. Even if they really gouged us on the price, charging $300 and $400 respectively, I still think they would see them flying off the shelves. If you sell the Mac Mini for $500 and then have a nice little $300 monitor to go with it your average consumer could then buy a keyboard and mouse and get a whole system for under $900. That seems like a good way to gain market share. Sadly, as it stands now, to get the cheapest system with the cheapest monitor will set you back $1,300 with no keyboard or mouse.

Now, I realize that Apple makes very high quality monitors and that as a result they will never be the cheapest on the block. I can live with that. But come on Apple, please explain to me why I can get a 19” monitor for $350 or your 20” monitor for $800? Does that seem a little odd?

Anyway, in wrapping this up, the demand is there for smaller, cheaper flat screen displays. Other companies realize this and adjust their product lines accordingly. So, if everyone else can do it why not Apple? It’s a shame really because with the Mac Mini Apple has finally released a computer for the masses, bringing OS X to the budget user. Well, now that they have the OS why not give them something cheap to watch it on?

Before anyone goes nuts disputing the prices shown in this article I would suggest actually going to compusa.com and looking at the products for yourself.

Comments

  • Beeb,


    I just don’t feel right.  I mean, here you are sort of agreeing with me and we haven’t even insulted each other yet.  This is kind of creepy.  I am getting this tingling sensation all over.


    But back to the subject at hand.  If Apple really wants to target the middle to low end market with the Mac Mini then they need to an equivilent display to go with it.  And if that means selling another competitor’s product then so be it.  Anything is better than turning people away from your product because they can’t buy what they want.

    James R. Stoup had this to say on Jul 15, 2005 Posts: 122
  • My brother bought a Mac mini a few months ago. He, like most, decided to use his existing 17” CRT which was 3 or 4 years old.

    Ironically, it packed it in a couple of weeks later.  My brother rang me for advice on buying a new monitor. If Apple did have low end 17” LCD, then it would have been simple for him to go buy one. 

    Now I know this doesn’t happen every day, but considering a lot of Mac mini users would be using old monitors that are going to pack it in soon enough, then maybe it does make sense for Apple to provide a consumer level LCD.

    Chris Howard had this to say on Jul 15, 2005 Posts: 1209
  • I ended up buying the dell 20’’ widescreen monitor for a little over $400 (with coupon codes i found online). That is MUCH cheaper than the Apple counterpart. I bought this display for use with my Mac mini. I agree that if apple made smaller displays people would snag the mini, the display, and the keyboard/mouse for $900. I would have. Oh well.

    d e l e t e p l s had this to say on Jul 16, 2005 Posts: 5
  • I just don’t feel right.  I mean, here you are sort of agreeing with me and we haven’t even insulted each other yet.  This is kind of creepy.  I am getting this tingling sensation all over.

    You know what they say, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.  smile  What’s funny is that this article got linked on MDN, and compared to those peole you’re practically a Microsoft shill.  But apparently you’re “misguided” and “need to get a grip on reality.”

    Beeblebrox had this to say on Jul 16, 2005 Posts: 2220
  • One major difference between the el cheapo monitors is that they’re analog-only.

    The Dell 24” and 20” monitors are not el-cheapo.  They have all the features of the Cinema Displays and are significantly cheaper.  The Dell 24” is almost half the price of the Apple 23”.

    The only reason to buy the Cinemadisplay is to support Apple.  You could accomplish the same thing by buying the Dell monitor and giving Apple the extra $700 difference.

    Beeblebrox had this to say on Jul 16, 2005 Posts: 2220
  • Beeb,


    I just finished reading some of the post I got over at MDN.  Now, I do like the site because they have some good links but the people who comment over there tend to get a little nuts.

    In fact, a lot of the comments I got didn’t really have anything to do with what the point of my article was.  The problem is that someone post something along the lines of “I think three button mice are gay”.  Then, you get 20 replies to that dumb statement.  But at reply number 17 or so people begin to insult me because they think I said that or that I support that notion.  So, I end up getting blamed/flamed for all types of stupid crap that I never even said in the first place.  Quite annoying it all is.

    James R. Stoup had this to say on Jul 16, 2005 Posts: 122
  • James, I’m jealous of you for getting picked up by MDN!  And I’m one of those over there who “tend to get a little nuts”!! :D That’s where I let my dark side out. It helps me keep my cool here when people dare to disagree with me - like - how could I be wrong?!! pfft!

    One thing I try to avoid doing here is answering any of those who disagree with my articles until others have had a chance to disagree with them.  I also find by then I’ve cooled down from my initial reaction.

    The only reason to buy the Cinemadisplay is to support Apple.

    There’s too much truth in that statement, Beeb…

    Chris Howard had this to say on Jul 17, 2005 Posts: 1209
  • but the people who comment over there tend to get a little nuts.

    That’s like saying Pavarotti enjoys the occassional slice of cheesecake.  The Pope is somewhat religious.  These people worship Apple and Steve Jobs.

    Beeblebrox had this to say on Jul 17, 2005 Posts: 2220
  • I’m surprised to be seeing this from Apple Matters; many of its arguments are quite sensible. This one, however, is hideous. Apple is not trying to be in the consumer display market. Meanwhile, the Mac mini is specifically designed to be used with users’ existing peripherals and displays, particularly Windows switchers’.

    Ben Rosenthal had this to say on Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 10
  • I was gouged by the 23in Cinema Display… it is fantastically overpriced. I am not a happy camper.

    But why is it so overpriced? One single reason: Dell.

    Before Dell really started selling quality LCD’s, the only competition Apple had was Sony, Viewsonic, and one or two others with credible LCDs - and they all played nice by selling at the same price point.

    No one else has been able to offer the same quality at the same price as Dell. Apple just so happens to offer the same quality, at higher prices.

    Now if I could go back and change my purchase I would most likely buy the Dell, and that’s coming from somone that is obsessive about having matching electronic brands. The extra money saved would buy me a Mac mini that I could use as my iTunes server.

    Nathan had this to say on Jul 22, 2005 Posts: 219
  • I recently was looking for a new monitor to replace my piece of crap 17” I got at costco. I found that with the educational discount I get brang the price down to 700, which is very reasonable for a 20” good quality display. I ended up getting a 19” samsung monitor/TV which is way cool.

    shirmpdesign had this to say on Jul 29, 2005 Posts: 6
  • Page 2 of 2 pages  <  1 2
You need log in, or register, in order to comment