Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Notebooks > Blast it, Apple. Play fair!

Blast it, Apple. Play fair!
Thread Tools
miawj
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2008, 07:30 PM
 
I've got one and half - two grand sitting around to give to you but I can't pull the trigger. £300 extra for an extra 256MB VRAM? What year is this, 1998? If you only want to provide two alternatives for your laptops then go ahead but don't sit around with some stupid in-between machine just to maintain a three-item symmetry across your range. I've already paid you for a 23" display to hook up to it so I don't particularly want to spend £1860 on a 17" (which is the only sensible option.) Why not just abandon the middle machine (or only charge a £100 premium.) There is just no way to justify spending the extra £300 even though I can afford it.

(I'm sorry. There's probably a billion other threads about this. I am just very frustrated.)
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2008, 08:01 PM
 
If you think the extras aren't worth $500, why not just go for the cheaper model? This thread will not change Apple's lineup or pricing in any way.
     
miawj  (op)
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2008, 08:32 PM
 
I know, I know. It just seems such a pointless object. A 100MHz difference don't mean squat. An extra 50GB don't mean squat. But the different video card does make a real world material difference. I know there has always been this problem with a middle machine but this particular line-up does seem to be wholly out of whack.

I've a sneaking suspicion I may end up buying a Mac Pro (go hang the electricity bills) and a consumer Macbook instead (but I'm scared I might scuff my nubuck!)
     
slpdLoad
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2008, 08:38 PM
 
You're making the issue about your specific needs. A lot of people think the graphics card doesn't mean squat as long as the display works, but that extra 50 gigabytes is exactly what they need to store their documents. Sorry you haven't figured out the right compromise for your needs yet. If you actually post about what you need out of machines, people here will be more than happy to give you advice.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 1, 2008, 04:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by miawj View Post
I know, I know. It just seems such a pointless object. A 100MHz difference don't mean squat. An extra 50GB don't mean squat. But the different video card does make a real world material difference.
Umm, no.

The graphics circuitry is identical. The only difference is the 256 MB VRAM. And as almost every single test on Mac OS X has shown that renders basically zero difference. There are only very few games that will show a slight performance increase due to the extra VRAM (you need tons of large textures). So in essence, the extra 100 MHz CPU clock will actually make more of a difference than the extra VRAM. And of course you are also entirely neglecting that the middle model comes with a T9300 while the low-end comes with a T8300. This is important because it means you also get twice the L2 cache on the middle model. And that is actually something you will notice in everyday processor intensive tasks.

So let me make it really short: If you need max graphics performance you'll have to go with the 17" which actually does offer better graphics performance than the others. If you don't feel like spending that kind of money go for the low-end 15". There's ample choice. I see no rational reason to complain here.
     
wataru
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 1, 2008, 05:46 AM
 
Yawn. Either buy it or don't.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 1, 2008, 02:41 PM
 
Aside from a very small set of users who have large texture needs, the 256->512MB VRAM upgrade is of very little consequence.

The profit margins on the upgraded 15" are incredible... the cost difference is about $75 for the CPU, $15 for the HDD, perhaps $10 for the VRAM plus the overhead cost of stocking multiple SKUs.
     
Mackan
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2008, 09:27 AM
 
If I want 512 MB of VRAM I have to buy the middle MacBook Pro, and thereby also paying more for faster cpu and bigger HDD. If I want a superdrive in my MacBook, I have to buy the middle model and thereby also paying more for faster cpu and bigger HD.

I don't like their buisness model at all. It is entirely based on milking you on money as much as possible. Apple should provide better configuration options for the notebooks they sell.

And it wouldn't surprise me if in the next MacBook Pro refresh, the base model is back at 128 MB VRAM again.
     
EndlessMac
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2008, 01:06 PM
 
I haven't looked at the MacBooks but the middle priced MacBook Pro is a big mark up in price for little gains in my opinion. I wouldn't buy it. The cheapest MBP is the better deal because you can add 4 gigs of RAM plus the 7200 RPM hard drive and still be cheaper than the middle MBP. IMO the gain in RAM and hard drive speed will make more of a noticeable performance difference than the middle MBP's modest gain in CPU speed and graphics memory.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2008, 04:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by Mackan View Post
And it wouldn't surprise me if in the next MacBook Pro refresh, the base model is back at 128 MB VRAM again.
Not going to happen.
     
0157988944
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2008, 05:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Mackan View Post
If I want 512 MB of VRAM I have to buy the middle MacBook Pro, and thereby also paying more for faster cpu and bigger HDD. If I want a superdrive in my MacBook, I have to buy the middle model and thereby also paying more for faster cpu and bigger HD.

I don't like their buisness model at all. It is entirely based on milking you on money as much as possible. Apple should provide better configuration options for the notebooks they sell.

And it wouldn't surprise me if in the next MacBook Pro refresh, the base model is back at 128 MB VRAM again.
That's the way Apple does it. It won't change. Complaining is futile. Macs aren't designed to be upgraded, unless you pay a lot. Just how it is.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:19 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,