[Eug Wanker]

AppleInsider | Foxconn lands Core 2 Duo MacBook orders from Apple

It sounds more like the Pro models, but they mention it could be the MacBook as well.

[drnkn_stylz]

Now we all wait until November for MB and MBP. Stupid move on Apple's part. If anyone wants C2D, they can go get it from Sony or Dell now. Seriously Apple needs to pick up the pace and be more competitive.

[clockworkwar]

First bad move apple has made in ages!

[drnkn_stylz]

Complete bullsh*t IMO... I'm going to be ordering a refurb Macbook now. Forget this stupid waiting game, I need a notebook already!

[clockworkwar]

Originally Posted by drnkn_stylz

Complete bullsh*t IMO... I'm going to be ordering a refurb Macbook now. Forget this stupid waiting game, I need a notebook already!

Always get a Powerpook G4, and then max it for the same price. Well thats ok if you dont want to run windows on it.

[drnkn_stylz]

I do want to run Windows though. I plan to be a Comp.Sci. major, so I want to have experience on the dark side as well.

[Tomchu]

Originally Posted by clockworkwar

Always get a Powerpook G4, and then max it for the same price. Well thats ok if you dont want to run windows on it.

And then at the end of the day, you have a max'ed out Powerbook for the same price ... but it still has a single-core G4. Sorry, that just doesn't cut it compared to a Core/Core 2 Duo. LOL

[drnkn_stylz]

Agreed. A maxed out MacBook with 2gb RAM, 7200rpm HDD would run circles around a maxed out PBG4.

[Eug Wanker]

Yep. A PowerBook G4 is slooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwww compared to even the lowly MacBook Core Duo.

[drnkn_stylz]

The fact that it's a dual core vs. a single core should be obvious enough.

[Elektrix]

Originally Posted by drnkn_stylz

Now we all wait until November for MB and MBP. Stupid move on Apple's part. If anyone wants C2D, they can go get it from Sony or Dell now. Seriously Apple needs to pick up the pace and be more competitive.

It's kind of irrelevant though. For anyone who is so desperate to have a Core 2 Duo processor, they could have purchased a Sony or Dell last month and been done with it.

Why does Apple really need to "pick up the pace"? people who buy laptops just based on specs aren't going to buy any sort of Apple machine anyway, and Apple would always lose in that business. If you just have to have the fastest processor, the biggest hard drive, the most RAM, etc., the MacBook or MacBook Pro has never been the best deal out there.

-Elektrix

[drnkn_stylz]

That is a good point. I'm just surprised Apple hasn't been trying to keep up a little more.

[cameronx]

Originally Posted by Elektrix

Why does Apple really need to "pick up the pace"? people who buy laptops just based on specs aren't going to buy any sort of Apple machine anyway, and Apple would always lose in that business. If you just have to have the fastest processor, the biggest hard drive, the most RAM, etc., the MacBook or MacBook Pro has never been the best deal out there.

That's true--but it seems to me that a large percentage of Apple's core customers (the people who post on this board and over at AppleInsider) prefer to be on the "bleeding edge" when they can. The Core 2 upgrade is laughably minor--which makes me wonder what Apple's really playing at. While you're right in that Apple will never attract true spec-whores, it's losing sales (or at least pushing them into the future) to not have the latest technology when it's available everywhere else, and the upgrade is, from the perspective of how much work will have to be done to implement the technology, minor.

[eeboarder]

so what do you think will be updated besides the processor? magnetic latch? user-replaceable hdd?

[pat++]

Why update a product which is selling like hot cakes. Until a few days ago, the Apple store had 7 and then 3-5 days delivery time for the MacBook which means they were not able to meet demand. It changed to 24h (on the US website) two days ago, which means they just reach production/demand balance. The french Apple store is still quoting 3 days delays for MacBooks... People are buying the current MacBooks, not need to update. Period. They will update the MacBook when they need to do so.

[FireWire]

Originally Posted by Elektrix

It's kind of irrelevant though. For anyone who is so desperate to have a Core 2 Duo processor, they could have purchased a Sony or Dell last month and been done with it.

Why does Apple really need to "pick up the pace"?

Well, to have people's business? Now that Mac and PC are more or less the same, it's unacceptable that one has to pay a huge premium for the former.. We expect a small premium, but that's just ridiculous.

For example, you could have a Dell Inspiron 6400 for 1199$ CAD, which would include a 2.0 Ghz Core 2 Duo (T7200) CPU, 1 Gb of RAM, 120 Gb HD, 8x DVD burner, ATI X1400 graphic card and a 14,4" screen, etc. (1399$ with the RAM maxed to 2 Gb)

Even with a student discount, a stock MacBook will cost 1349$, and that only includes a 2.0 Ghz Core Duo, 512 Mb of RAM, 80 Gb HD, Combo drive, and a small 13,3" screen. To match the spec found on the Dell, you have to fork out 1794$ CAD (2242$ for 2 Gb of RAM), and still, you're stuck with a Combo drive and a smaller screen. What's the deal?

For as much as I love Apple, I honestly don't think that a MacBook is that better than a Dell... As we can now run both Windows and OS X (albeit illegally) on any PC, Apple can't afford to rip off customers like this. At this price, there's no way I'm gonna buy a MacBook any time soon, and I don't think I'm the only one. Apple is shooting itself in the food by allowing such a big gap between their offering and the competition's.

[eeboarder]

what do ya think?

processor(of course)
higher-res screens?
DL drive?

what else?

[cwosigns]

Originally Posted by drnkn_stylz

That is a good point. I'm just surprised Apple hasn't been trying to keep up a little more.

Keep up? Apple is AHEAD of the game! The performance increase of C2D is decidedly minor. And if you MUST have a C2D machine, go get a Sony or a Dell. But you're not going to run OS X on it easily.

Because Windoze boxes all do the same thing, it largely is about the hardware. And while an Intel Mac sports similar hardware to Windoze boxes, it's always been about the OS and great design.

So go get a Dell or Sony and be stuck with an inferior OS being run on an inferior design. I'm happy with my 2.0 GHz Core Duo MacBook with 2 GB RAM.

[drnkn_stylz]

Software wise, yes Apple is way ahead. Hardware wise, they're just catching up now.

[Thunderbird]

Originally Posted by FireWire

As we can now run both Windows and OS X (albeit illegally) on any PC, Apple can't afford to rip off customers like this.

We can? How?

[HouseSold]

Originally Posted by FireWire

Well, to have people's business? Now that Mac and PC are more or less the same, it's unacceptable that one has to pay a huge premium for the former.. We expect a small premium, but that's just ridiculous.

For example, you could have a Dell Inspiron 6400 for 1199$ CAD, which would include a 2.0 Ghz Core 2 Duo (T7200) CPU, 1 Gb of RAM, 120 Gb HD, 8x DVD burner, ATI X1400 graphic card and a 14,4" screen, etc. (1399$ with the RAM maxed to 2 Gb)

Even with a student discount, a stock MacBook will cost 1349$, and that only includes a 2.0 Ghz Core Duo, 512 Mb of RAM, 80 Gb HD, Combo drive, and a small 13,3" screen. To match the spec found on the Dell, you have to fork out 1794$ CAD (2242$ for 2 Gb of RAM), and still, you're stuck with a Combo drive and a smaller screen. What's the deal?

For as much as I love Apple, I honestly don't think that a MacBook is that better than a Dell... As we can now run both Windows and OS X (albeit illegally) on any PC, Apple can't afford to rip off customers like this. At this price, there's no way I'm gonna buy a MacBook any time soon, and I don't think I'm the only one. Apple is shooting itself in the food by allowing such a big gap between their offering and the competition's.

Points well taken.........We bought a Toshiba Core Duo 15.4" at BestBuy recently for just over $500 with firewire and DL DVD burner and TruBrite screen (4gb addressable). Audio is 3X as loud as our MacBook and has good sound (Harman Kardon?) Granted, no OSX, but it screams and runs cool and 3 hours on battery (ugh).

Check out how the notebook scene is shaping (including Apple) at Notebook and Laptop Reviews

How do you run OSX on a PC?

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by cameronx

...The Core 2 upgrade is laughably minor--which makes me wonder what Apple's really playing at...

After 9 months an upgrade is clearly due. And plugging in a C2D to the existing MBPs would indeed be an easy basic minor speedbump.

However there are lots of badly needed improvements to laptops to really take advantage of the power of Merom chipsets. Properly done this Merom upgrade could be much more useful to graphics pros than the current MBPs. Things like mass storage, bus speeds, RAM, Superdrives, etc., all of which add heat that requires engineering.

-Allen Wicks

[HouseSold]

Originally Posted by SierraDragon

After 9 months an upgrade is clearly due. And plugging in a C2D to the existing MBPs would indeed be an easy basic minor speedbump.

However there are lots of badly needed improvements to laptops to really take advantage of the power of Merom chipsets. Properly done this Merom upgrade could be much more useful to graphics pros than the current MBPs. Things like mass storage, bus speeds, RAM, Superdrives, etc., all of which add heat that requires engineering.

-Allen Wicks

Graphics are the one area that would really change some of the market for the MacBook/MacBook Pros.

Look at what other makers are supplying on their latest releases at the link above or Notebook and Laptop Reviews
About 3X quicker than a MacBook Pro currently in gaming benchmarks.

The nVidia 7900gtx made that one laptop off the charts in processing with a C2D processor (2.33ghz)

[Elektrix]

The 7900GTX is also only found generally in 10+ pound behemoth laptops in the $3000-5000 range, is a massive heat generator, and is really only suitable for machines that are meant to basically be used on a desk most of the time.

These are boutique markets for high-end gaming laptops; not to say that Apple couldn't benefit from having some high-end gaming machine, but I doubt that is what the MacBook Pro should be.

You could argue that the MacBook Pro could benefit from having one of the NVidia Quadro graphics cards, which are designed more for professional graphics work. But that's something else.

-Elektrix

[mini.boss]

Originally Posted by cwosigns

Keep up? Apple is AHEAD of the game! The performance increase of C2D is decidedly minor. And if you MUST have a C2D machine, go get a Sony or a Dell. But you're not going to run OS X on it easily.

No, apple is behind the game.

You can be a mac snob all you want but when Apple entered the Intel world, offered options to run Windows on it and heavily marketed the OS with these commercials then they're officially after increasing their market. So that means they need to adapt to the customers expectations because PC switchers will NOT justify every action the way the mac fanatics will. They need to keep up and give us hardware that matches the PC world, OR lower prices to keep in line with their rapidly aging technology.

Ive been in the market for a macbook for 3 months now. And while it used to be "macs are competitively priced" thats far from being true now. >$1000 can buy me a coreduo/512mb/60GB/CDburner Macbook or <$1000 can buy me a Core2Duo/2gb/120GB/DVDburner PC. Thats because the pc world adjusted specs and price while the mac world now offers the most expensive coreduo out there.

I dont mind if theyre late on Core2 but drop those MB/MBP prices to match the market already. Its old technology and $2500 is a rediculous price for an MBP equipped with last years best technology.

[HouseSold]

Originally Posted by mini.boss

No, apple is behind the game.

You can be a mac snob all you want but when Apple entered the Intel world, offered options to run Windows on it and heavily marketed the OS with these commercials then they're officially after increasing their market. So that means they need to adapt to the customers expectations because PC switchers will NOT justify every action the way the mac fanatics will. They need to keep up and give us hardware that matches the PC world, OR lower prices to keep in line with their rapidly aging technology.

Ive been in the market for a macbook for 3 months now. And while it used to be "macs are competitively priced" thats far from being true now. >$1000 can buy me a coreduo/512mb/60GB/CDburner Macbook or <$1000 can buy me a Core2Duo/2gb/120GB/DVDburner PC. Thats because the pc world adjusted specs and price while the mac world now offers the most expensive coreduo out there.

I dont mind if theyre late on Core2 but drop those MB/MBP prices to match the market already. Its old technology and $2500 is a rediculous price for an MBP equipped with last years best technology.

Agree with your post points and Elektrix's too.

Apple will lose market unless it offers some more performance to price features.
With Intel processors in alot of hardware now, Apple has to sway buyers with features, performance AND value.

I love OSX, but it's not enough to keep everyone in the Apple camp; I've run across too many people lately who have switched back to the dark side, because of hardware. (and all the heat and RSD issues plaguing Apple before and still now)

Like being a Corvette lover when Ford comes out with a new Mustang GT; some people will break rank and brand loyalty.

[Guoseph]

For someone like me who's still on the fence at this point (because buying another notebook is a matter of want rather than need), I definitely feel very sensitive to what I am getting for the price I pay. Since now there's comparable hardware platforms, every time a 14.1" Core Duo laptop(which is only marginally larger than MB) goes on sale for <600 I start to think myself: 1049 - 600 = $449 (or occasionally more extreme: 1049 - 500 = 549) is the premium that I am paying for OSX and a nicer looking laptop. These premiums might seem like less of a factor if I was in the MBP camp, but for a thousand dollar laptop, it seems high.

I suppose I am just hoping for something that makes me justify an impulse buy

[Simon]

Originally Posted by cameronx

That's true--but it seems to me that a large percentage of Apple's core customers (the people who post on this board and over at AppleInsider) prefer to be on the "bleeding edge" when they can.

That's a contradiction in itself. The people who post on a board like this one are a small minority of Apple's overall customer base. We are certainly not the people Apple has in mind when they create their products.

Apple will introduce C2D soon. At the latest by MWSF. Although geeks like us might care, a majority of Apple's notebook customers could care less about CD vs. C2D. They'll get a MB or a MBP because they value its advantages over every PC notebook out there. If you think those advantages are not worth waiting for C2D or if you think the increased price of a MBP or MB over some Dell is not justified, you should probably really not get a Mac. Some people are better of with a PC, there's nothing bad about that.

[Eug]

As someone who already owns a Core 2 Duo iMac, I will state that the upgrade from Core Duo to Core 2 Duo is not that significant in itself. Yes, it's faster, but Core Duo is already blistering fast.

I also think the current (white) MacBook is an excellent value.

[xtal]

Originally Posted by Simon

The people who post on a board like this one are a small minority of Apple's overall customer base. We are certainly not the people Apple has in mind when they create their products.

I'm in full agreement.

[zaghahzag]

Originally Posted by Eug

As someone who already owns a Core 2 Duo iMac, I will state that the upgrade from Core Duo to Core 2 Duo is not that significant in itself. Yes, it's faster, but Core Duo is already blistering fast.

I also think the current (white) MacBook is an excellent value.

like 2 years ago when ibooks had crappy g4s or g3s in them, they were still a good value. the macbooks are incredibly fast and around the same price. They are incredible values and incredible machines.

[mini.boss]

Originally Posted by zaghahzag

the macbooks are incredibly fast and around the same price. They are incredible values and incredible machines.

Incredible machines i have to agree with, but incredible value???? Not a chance. Back in the PPC days then there was a mystery as to how much we were overpaying to go Mac, but these Macs now are almost entirely PC components so we know exactly the value. And a 2ghz/512mb/80gb/Intel950 Macbook is not a "value" at $1500 and a 2.16ghz coreduo/512mb/80gb/ATIx1600 MBP is definitely a rip off. In todays market these are outdated and worth about $800 and $1300 respectively.

[cwosigns]

Originally Posted by mini.boss

Incredible machines i have to agree with, but incredible value???? Not a chance. Back in the PPC days then there was a mystery as to how much we were overpaying to go Mac, but these Macs now are almost entirely PC components so we know exactly the value. And a 2ghz/512mb/80gb/Intel950 Macbook is not a "value" at $1500 and a 2.16ghz coreduo/512mb/80gb/ATIx1600 MBP is definitely a rip off. In todays market these are outdated and worth about $800 and $1300 respectively.

Regardless of what you say, there is an intangible value in "Mac-ness." You wouldn't be bitching in a forum about price and features if you didn't desire a Mac over a PC. Apple knows there is a value there that they can charge for, and they do. When you reduce any product to its components, the value is MUCH less. The value lies in how it's put together and what it will do for you after it is put together.

[mini.boss]

Originally Posted by cwosigns

Regardless of what you say, there is an intangible value in "Mac-ness." You wouldn't be bitching in a forum about price and features if you didn't desire a Mac over a PC. Apple knows there is a value there that they can charge for, and they do. When you reduce any product to its components, the value is MUCH less. The value lies in how it's put together and what it will do for you after it is put together.

Wow. I questioned Apple's current pricing in 2 forums and got the same responses in both. "Apple SHOULD charge extra because they can" and some angry negative feedback because I dared to question Apple's decisions. As a recent convert then I have to admit its a very strange and unwelcoming society out here where people are more concerned with the profitablity of a big corporate teddy bear rather than the hard working consumers who just want to experience the Mac. Its not enough to love apple, you have to protect them.

I'm buying a MacBook and paying the extra money. All I was pointing out was that Apple is now in the PC world and there are expectations from non mac-fanatics as to how much we should get overcharged for computers. Sure, they got me hooked but theres no chance that they'll get my mom or dad even though they'd benefit from OS X much more than I would.

Oh, and I hate to upset people more but don't pretend "value lies in how it's put together". $1500-2500 for perfection is justifiable but these are far from perfect. These are beautiful machines but their aesthetics also have brought on the MacBooks biggest flaw. It runs too damn hot and the fan runs all the time. I've used tons of PC's that run 50+% cooler, speedstep properly and can accurately be called "laptops".

[clockworkwar]

Originally Posted by mini.boss

Wow. I questioned Apple's current pricing in 2 forums and got the same responses in both. "Apple SHOULD charge extra because they can" and some angry negative feedback because I dared to question Apple's decisions. As a recent convert then I have to admit its a very strange and unwelcoming society out here where people are more concerned with the profitablity of a big corporate teddy bear rather than the hard working consumers who just want to experience the Mac. Its not enough to love apple, you have to protect them.

I'm buying a MacBook and paying the extra money. All I was pointing out was that Apple is now in the PC world and there are expectations from non mac-fanatics as to how much we should get overcharged for computers. Sure, they got me hooked but theres no chance that they'll get my mom or dad even though they'd benefit from OS X much more than I would.

Oh, and I hate to upset people more but don't pretend "value lies in how it's put together". $1500-2500 for perfection is justifiable but these are far from perfect. These are beautiful machines but their aesthetics also have brought on the MacBooks biggest flaw. It runs too damn hot and the fan runs all the time. I've used tons of PC's that run 50+% cooler, speedstep properly and can accurately be called "laptops".

I know there is alot of people who say that Apple should charge more just for the OS. Ermmm i dont think so, as much as i dont mind funding the corporate powerhouse a little bit extra money, the Macbook (in the UK) anyway is far to expensive! Im still going to get one, because they are thinner that PC models usually, but it is expensive!

[cwosigns]

Originally Posted by mini.boss

Wow. I questioned Apple's current pricing in 2 forums and got the same responses in both. "Apple SHOULD charge extra because they can" and some angry negative feedback because I dared to question Apple's decisions. As a recent convert then I have to admit its a very strange and unwelcoming society out here where people are more concerned with the profitablity of a big corporate teddy bear rather than the hard working consumers who just want to experience the Mac. Its not enough to love apple, you have to protect them.

I for one am not more concerned with the profitability of a big corporate teddy bear. But I am willing to pay a premium for a Mac product. If you consider the virus protection a PC REQUIRES to remain virus-free and stable to be able to function on the internet, over time the costs of anti-spyware software, anti-virus software, subscription fees to keep it up-to-date, disk utilities to repair virus-ridden machines--all of that adds up FAST. Macs, right out of the box, are virtually immune and require no extra cost to remain safe on the internet. Hard working consumers who want to experience a Mac and go to an Apple Store or Comp USA and experience one. If they like it and want one, they can pony up the dough and buy one. I once went to a BMW dealer and liked what I sat in, but I couldn't afford one so now I have a Honda.

Originally Posted by mini.boss

I'm buying a MacBook and paying the extra money. All I was pointing out was that Apple is now in the PC world and there are expectations from non mac-fanatics as to how much we should get overcharged for computers. Sure, they got me hooked but theres no chance that they'll get my mom or dad even though they'd benefit from OS X much more than I would.

I'm glad you're getting a MacBook. I have one. I'm sure you'll enjoy it immensely. However, Apple is not in the PC world. Apple has always done their own thing, and typically PC makers will copy it. Vista copies Mac OS X. Apple was at the fore in dropping 3.5 floppy drives, proliferating USB for peripherials, and a long time ago Apple shipped the very first mouse. Apple switched to Intel processors, and the hardware differences between Macs and PCs are minor now. Macs can run Windoze now. Big deal. That isn't the reason Apple switched to Intel. Motorola wasn't able to produce a powerful processor that could be used in a portable. Intel could.

Apple isn't overcharging you. Apple offers well-designed, highly capable, beautiful computers that run a very fast, stable, powerful operating system. That computer also comes with a powerful, yet easy-to-use suite of programs that allow you to be productive AND have a hulluva lot of fun. You can use it to get on the internet without ever having to worry about viruses or spyware. And it can do that RIGHT OUT OF THE BOX without anything extra. And oh yeah...it can run Windoze, too. Show me ANY major PC manufacturer that can do all of that right out of the box.[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by mini.boss

Oh, and I hate to upset people more but don't pretend "value lies in how it's put together". $1500-2500 for perfection is justifiable but these are far from perfect. These are beautiful machines but their aesthetics also have brought on the MacBooks biggest flaw. It runs too damn hot and the fan runs all the time. I've used tons of PC's that run 50+% cooler, speedstep properly and can accurately be called "laptops".

I have a MacBook. My fan isn't on all the time and it runs very cool. There was an issue with early production MacBooks where they would overheat and shut down. Apple has addressed this and is reparing or replacing those machines. Prior to my MacBook, I've had four iMacs and three PowerBooks and none of them had a fan that ran excessively or became unduly hot while in use. There are isolated cases, and unfortunately those are the machines that get the press.

I'm glad you've given the Mac a chance. But the Mac isn't for everyone. If you don't care how your hardware is put together or what OS you use, then you could be satisfied with a cheaper PC and I invite you to swtich back any time.

[mini.boss]

Originally Posted by cwosigns

If you consider the virus protection a PC REQUIRES to remain virus-free and stable to be able to function on the internet, over time the costs of anti-spyware software, anti-virus software, subscription fees to keep it up-to-date, disk utilities to repair virus-ridden machines--all of that adds up FAST.

Its far from my intentions to hijack this thread, but I do have to point out that what you stated there is a gross misconception about PC's.

1) Macs and OSX is no doubt a more secure OS, but in the hands of "intelligent" PC users then viruses, spyware, stability or whatever else stereotypifies PC's are easily avoidable. Not once have I gotten a virus or spyware in my PC because me and my wife know what to avoid, which apps are safe and what mail not to open. Trust me, anyone can avoid viruses and spyware. Its not that tough.

2) I haven't spent a dime in anti-anything because free solutions have always been around. Currently i use MS Defender for spyware and AVG for antivirus.

Note that I'm not trying to promote windows over mac. I know firsthand the problems that can happen to teens, moms, newbies and everyone else who doesn't listen when you tell them to stop opening those emails. THE WINDOWS WORLD IS DANGEROUS and thats why I'm glad to switch. But then that goes back to the original point. How the heck can you recommend the uninformed to spend that much for a mac laptop when they see more advanced technology and better specs for $500 less in a PC.

They can advertise all they want, but if apple would adjust their prices fairly then it would help the people that SHOULD be on macs make the switch. But instead the price just keeps them in the windows world.

[cwosigns]

Originally Posted by mini.boss

Its far from my intentions to hijack this thread, but I do have to point out that what you stated there is a gross misconception about PC's.

1) Macs and OSX is no doubt a more secure OS, but in the hands of "intelligent" PC users then viruses, spyware, stability or whatever else stereotypifies PC's are easily avoidable. Not once have I gotten a virus or spyware in my PC because me and my wife know what to avoid, which apps are safe and what mail not to open. Trust me, anyone can avoid viruses and spyware. Its not that tough.

2) I haven't spent a dime in anti-anything because free solutions have always been around. Currently i use MS Defender for spyware and AVG for antivirus.

Note that I'm not trying to promote windows over mac. I know firsthand the problems that can happen to teens, moms, newbies and everyone else who doesn't listen when you tell them to stop opening those emails. THE WINDOWS WORLD IS DANGEROUS and thats why I'm glad to switch. But then that goes back to the original point. How the heck can you recommend the uninformed to spend that much for a mac laptop when they see more advanced technology and better specs for $500 less in a PC.

They can advertise all they want, but if apple would adjust their prices fairly then it would help the people that SHOULD be on macs make the switch. But instead the price just keeps them in the windows world.

You're still missing the point, and I'm guessing you always will. You are not the average consumer. The very people you listed (teens, moms, newbies and everyone else who doesn't listen) will not know that there are "free" (you get what you pay for) anti-virus/spyware programs. And like I said, those solutions require EXTRA time, effort, and knowledge.

And the internet and computing world is a business. Apple isn't obligated to make the internet safer for anyone other than their customers. Why should Apple lower their price, take a hit in profits, and piss off their shareholders to save ignorant people from themselves?

I get that you want Macs to be cheaper. They're not. But despite what you say, they aren't exorbitantly priced when you consider ALL the factors.

[mini.boss]

Originally Posted by cwosigns

And the internet and computing world is a business. Apple isn't obligated to make the internet safer for anyone other than their customers. Why should Apple lower their price, take a hit in profits, and piss off their shareholders to save ignorant people from themselves?

And why should consumers care whether or not Apple makes profits? Honestly, take a look at what you're saying. Thats the words of a board member or someone in marketing, not some dude who works hard and wants to buy a nice mac.

I really think that is Apple's biggest accomplishment. Theyve convinced a group of everyday consumers into believing they should put the companies profits at a higher priority than consumer needs.


You definitely are correct in that I will never understand this because I just don't have that in me where I can put a corporations profit margins above the contents of my wallet. Apple would be smart to open a PayPal donation button on their site because they'd make a killing.

[Guoseph]

Originally Posted by mini.boss

And why should consumers care whether or not Apple makes profits? Honestly, take a look at what you're saying. Thats the words of a board member or someone in marketing, not some dude who works hard and wants to buy a nice mac.

I really think that is Apple's biggest accomplishment. Theyve convinced a group of everyday consumers into believing they should put the companies profits at a higher priority than consumer needs.


You definitely are correct in that I will never understand this because I just don't have that in me where I can put a corporations profit margins above the contents of my wallet. Apple would be smart to open a PayPal donation button on their site because they'd make a killing.

If the corporation didn't make money, it wouldn't exist. Who get's into business to lose money?

If I like Apple's products enough as a consumer, I would be concerned with their profitability, because I would want them to stay in business, so that I can continue to buy their products in the future.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by mini.boss

And why should consumers care whether or not Apple makes profits? Honestly, take a look at what you're saying. Thats the words of a board member or someone in marketing, not some dude who works hard and wants to buy a nice mac.

I really think that is Apple's biggest accomplishment. Theyve convinced a group of everyday consumers into believing they should put the companies profits at a higher priority than consumer needs.


You definitely are correct in that I will never understand this because I just don't have that in me where I can put a corporations profit margins above the contents of my wallet. Apple would be smart to open a PayPal donation button on their site because they'd make a killing.

I think you're completely misunderstanding this.

It is not about Mac loving geeks that think they have to pay more for the sake of beloved Apple. Obviously we would love $299 Macs. But that's not the point.

The point is that if you want to understand why Apple choses to sell which products, to who, and at which price you must stop thinking like 'what do I want? how much would I pay?' and start thinking like
- what do over 90% of the potential buyers need? (and yes, geeks like us do not belong in that group)
- what kind of computer experience do people want?
- what are people willing to pay for that experience?

You have to understand that people like us here are a very vocal minority. Apple does not define its products, specs, or prices by looking at our needs. They are focused on a much broader market because that's where the money lies. If you want to understand Apple, you have to look at the real market, not 'our market'.

OTOH, for you personally, as a buyer, the decision is entirely different. If you come to the conclusion that you can get cheaper hardware elsewhere (if you build your own PC and put Linux on it, you'll definitely be a lot cheaper) and the added cost of a Mac isn't justified by OS X's advantages, then by all means, get a PC - you'll be much happier.

[siflippant]

Originally Posted by Simon

I think you're completely misunderstanding this.

It is not about Mac loving geeks that think they have to pay more for the sake of beloved Apple. Obviously we would love $299 Macs. But that's not the point.

OTOH, for you personally, as a buyer, the decision is entirely different. If you come to the conclusion that you can get cheaper hardware elsewhere (if you build your own PC and put Linux on it, you'll definitely be a lot cheaper) and the added cost of a Mac isn't justified by OS X's advantages, then by all means, get a PC - you'll be much happier.

[andynotts]

Surely the point of moving to Intel in the first place was so that mac users wouldn't have to wait so long between processor upgrades. Since Apple has gone all Intel this is the 1st processor revision and they have missed the opportunity to keep up with Windows laptops. There is a premium on Apple laptops and for that I think users should expect the latest hardware.

[Elektrix]

Originally Posted by andynotts

Surely the point of moving to Intel in the first place was so that mac users wouldn't have to wait so long between processor upgrades. Since Apple has gone all Intel this is the 1st processor revision and they have missed the opportunity to keep up with Windows laptops. There is a premium on Apple laptops and for that I think users should expect the latest hardware.

That really wasn't the primary point of moving to Intel. The primary point of moving to Intel was mainly that there was almost no possibility of getting the PowerPC G5 into the laptop line, and even with the Pentium M it was clear that Intel was really leapfrogging what Apple could offer with PowerPC-based notebooks. Since notebooks are a very big part of Apple's computer sales, it really became almost a necessity to make the switch to the Intel platform so that Apple could release faster and more powerful desktops.

The point however was not just to be able to constantly update the notebook line with new processors all the time, although that was a benefit as well.

I think the point in this case that should still be kept in mind is that Core 2 Duo, on the existing notebook platforms (Napa), is not some huge leap over Core Duo (the platform is basically the same anyway except for the processor). From a perception issue certainly I understand why you feel that Apple isn't "keeping up" with Windows laptops, but this isn't really as serious as it seems. I mean, it's not like Apple is pushing Pentium M-based Sonoma platform laptops while everyone else has Core Duo Napa-based laptops........ or like when Apple was pushing G4 laptops and the Windows PC makers had Pentium M stuff that was clearly better performing and more efficient.

Now, I do expect Apple to release their Core 2 Duo updates (as we've seen with the iMac, it's not like Apple refuses to use them or something). But I don't think it is such a huge deal to not have them out at the same time as some other laptop manufacturers have them out.

Now, when Santa Rosa comes around, that actually will be an entirely new platform (as opposed to just sticking the Core 2 Duo processor in the existing Napa platform), that will take full advantage of the Core 2 Duo processors. When those come around, we can hope that Apple will have something ready right away.

-Elektrix

[micah002]

Originally Posted by pat++

Why update a product which is selling like hot cakes. Until a few days ago, the Apple store had 7 and then 3-5 days delivery time for the MacBook which means they were not able to meet demand. It changed to 24h (on the US website) two days ago, which means they just reach production/demand balance. The french Apple store is still quoting 3 days delays for MacBooks... People are buying the current MacBooks, not need to update. Period. They will update the MacBook when they need to do so.

Have we considered that they have stacks of inventory and they're just waiting for that to dwindle a little before selling the Core 2 Duos? Why sell overstock at a discount when you can sell it at full price? This also gives them time to ramp up inventory on the Core 2 Duos so they're prepared when they hit market.

[Elektrix]

Originally Posted by micah002

Have we considered that they have stacks of inventory and they're just waiting for that to dwindle a little before selling the Core 2 Duos? Why sell overstock at a discount when you can sell it at full price? This also gives them time to ramp up inventory on the Core 2 Duos so they're prepared when they hit market.

Yup, that's definitely a possibility. As far as anyone can tell, there isn't necessarily a technical reason that Apple couldn't have updated the MBP line with Core 2 Duo back in September.... although there is speculation that the additional delay does have to do with some internal case redesigns, etc. to deal with heat issues as well as perhaps make some other changes.

I'm not sure at this point it's just an issue of selling unsold inventory though....... it's not like Apple didn't know that Core 2 Duo was coming......... and by the same token, it wouldn't explain why they were so quick to update the iMac with Core 2 Duo (if Apple had inventory issues, they probably would have tried to keep selling remaining iMacs as well).

-Elektrix

[mini.boss]

Well, i guess its just a confusing situation then.

On one hand they seem like they want to drastically increase their marketshare with their aggressive ad campaigns, constant finger pointing at the competitions flaws, release of software to enable running other OS's and the use of hardware that is almost identical to the "lesser" computers. But while that is very appealing to non-mac users, on the other hand they are retaining the same "you will pay what we tell you to pay" attitude that pushed people away back when Apple had a chance to control the market.

Obviously most people here can justify that apple makes no mistakes and that its our duty as mac owners to defend their profit margins and pay beyond value. But for those potential switchers not sucked into apple's way of thinking then it definitely is an insane concept to understand.

[Elektrix]

mini.boss, Apple sets prices for what the market will bare, pretty much. They're hardly the only company that sells premium models at higher prices than normal.

Really, comparing the MacBook Pro to similar high quality offerings (that is, other PC laptops that are well constructed, etc. and not cheaply made plastic pieces of junk), the price differentials aren't all that different. On the low-end side, the MacBook isn't so far off overall from what you get on the PC side of things in the same $1100-1400 price range...... the biggest area they are lagging behind on is probably the lower amount of standard RAM and smaller hard drives, which will hopefully be addressed. But again, I don't think these things are that crazy.

We already know that the MacBook especially has been enormously popular and is selling incredibly well; so there doesn't seem to be a case that the average consumer is being pushed away, and they see the value and quality that the MacBook especially represents. Same thing with people who do buy the MacBook Pro.

So no, Apple isn't selling any $1000 laptops with Core 2 Duo, 2GB of RAM and 200GB hard drives, but they also aren't putting together the cheaply built machines necessary to have those kinds of specs at those prices.

[mini.boss]

Originally Posted by Elektrix

mini.boss, Apple sets prices for what the market will bare, pretty much. They're hardly the only company that sells premium models at higher prices than normal.

But they are the only company selling premium models at higher prices without updating specs to match the current market.

And thats the point. They came out high end with a reasonable price, but that was a long time ago and since then even the most budget systems have caught up and surpassed apple in most features. I'm not saying we shouldnt pay a premium to go Mac, but if they're not going to update specs then why is it so offensive to expect them to at least lower prices?

[cwosigns]

Originally Posted by mini.boss

But they are the only company selling premium models at higher prices without updating specs to match the current market.

And thats the point. They came out high end with a reasonable price, but that was a long time ago and since then even the most budget systems have caught up and surpassed apple in most features. I'm not saying we shouldnt pay a premium to go Mac, but if they're not going to update specs then why is it so offensive to expect them to at least lower prices?

Take an economics class and get back to us. And who says they're not going to update their specs? And why would we expect them to lower their prices when they don't NEED to. MacBooks are selling like hotcakes. And budget systems have NOT surpassed Apple in most features. Do budget PC systems come with a built-in, high-quality videoconferencing camera? Do budget PC systems run Mac OS X? Are they virtually immune to common computer threats right-out-of-the-box? Don't throw obscure freeware in my face, because it's not preinstalled on the system and already configured to keep your computer safe w/o any end-user input.

You say you don't understand why and how Apple can charge a bit more for their products. We explain it to you, but you don't hear it. You would paint us as brainwashed Apple-heads who blindly worship His Steveness. If YOU don't see the value in a Mac, don't buy it. Go buy a cheap Dell and be on your way. Bitching in these forums that Macs are too expensive, simply because you can't get a laptop for $600 is pointless.