4GB RAM in a new Mac is a non-starter. MacOS can’t function properly with so little RAM.
I really don’t see them increasing the base to 16GB in the next 2 years either, though it would be nice.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Do you think Apple will make a Macbook SE? And at what price point?
- Thread starter senttoschool
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I really don’t see them increasing the base to 16GB in the next 2 years either, though it would be nice.
The iPhone 8 launched at $700. The iPhone SE, with the exact same internals as the iPhone 8 except an even faster SoC, launched at $400.
Why can't Apple shave $250 off the Macbook Air in two years and release it as the Macbook SE? What are the fundamental reasons you think Apple can't do this?
Last edited:
I agree with your prediction on the SE. I can see it being the current Air design whilst everything else gets updated, that would match the iPhone lineup nicely. The cost savings would come from Apple no-longer needing to recoup any design, retooling, etc. costs, just like with the iPhone SE (OG) and the current model.
Not sure about the others, I could see the Air maintaining the screen dimensions, but just smaller bezels -- whilst pro moves up to 14/16 to more strongly differentiate the products.
We agree on an Air that has smaller bezels, which would make it 14". There's no reason to make the bezels smaller if they don't plan to increase the screen size to compensate. Otherwise, they'd have to design and manufacture a whole new smaller body which would be costly.
If they just make the Air 14" with smaller bezels, it's a nice differentiation from a 13" Macbook SE without completely redesigning the Air. It's similar to how the 16" was not redesigned. It just had smaller bezels.
Last edited:
That's a lot to get through so forgive me if I don't address everything in there directly.
The new Air debuted at $1,199 in 2018. The 2019 model made an $100 cut, paid for by a cheaper (slower) SSD. The 2020 model added a new keyboard, doubled storage options and still fit in a $100 base price cut, then the M1 model also reversed the SSD speed cut of the 2019 model. It looks like a lot of these savings you want them to use for further price reduction have already been baked in on the existing model. Perhaps there is a bit of extra room from the chip, but more like for a $100 price cut of the machine as it stands next year, not a $250 price cut while also putting in a new chip in two years time.
As well as the actual cost to Apple, they assign a (higher) value to everything as paid for by the customer. So going with a 128GB SSD saves you $200 regardless what the SSD actually costs Apple (see: schools market MBA for $799). If Apple thought a $799 MacBook Air 128GB would entice enough extra sales/ service revenue to offset the loss, I've no doubt it would be on offer to the general public already. Unless they (rightly) feel that a 128GB machine at this point would be a customer experience that falls short of what they want to offer, even at a reduced price.
So I have my doubts that there is as much leeway in the price of the MBA as is being assumed here, but even more I'm fairly confident that the sums don't add up once the costs go through Apple's beancounters and come out the other side as consumer prices. Average selling price is something Apple fiercely tries to maintain in its product lineups, and that means enticing people to stretch to that little bit extra. A $750 MBSE to $1,200 MBA is too big a gap to upsell, people considering the former won't be looking twice at the latter. That's how we've ended up with the price compression and multiple overlapping options at the bottom of the MacBook range.
I think we'll certainly see a Macbook SE introduced at the tail end of the AS transition period, once all the other models are refreshed with their new designs, FaceID, better web cams, etc.
It will be based on the legacy Air chassis (aka current Air chassis), no FaceID, 8GB RAM (no 16GB option), 2019 spec Air 13.3" screen, and the M1 / 7GPU core chip. Slight chance it will use a newer M2 low-bin chip with less cores, slower clock, whichever makes the most sense from a cost-per-unit perspective for Apple.
It will retail for $699 USD.
It just has to wait until the new, sexier macbook designs are out with their compelling new features and form factors, and the Mx chip costs are really low due to the massive volumes being produced.
It will be based on the legacy Air chassis (aka current Air chassis), no FaceID, 8GB RAM (no 16GB option), 2019 spec Air 13.3" screen, and the M1 / 7GPU core chip. Slight chance it will use a newer M2 low-bin chip with less cores, slower clock, whichever makes the most sense from a cost-per-unit perspective for Apple.
It will retail for $699 USD.
It just has to wait until the new, sexier macbook designs are out with their compelling new features and form factors, and the Mx chip costs are really low due to the massive volumes being produced.
I wonder if they'd use a diving board trackpad, or just a smaller force touch in order to reduce cost?
They will use the same one in the current Air. Cost is already reduced due to scale.
Fair enough, though they conceivably still have the toolings from the 12MB trackpad.
On another hand Apple may not see the value of lowering the entry point of their Mac's line where updates happen with lower frequency than iPhones (I guess), losing 250$ on cash for the same margin.
I read a few weeks ago the tecnology is still very expensive on 2021 and they will support it from getting away from Intel and AMD. At the same time the first models to get the new screen are the more expensive, with higher cost i5/i7/i9 and dedicated graphics. The change to Apple Silicon is a larger saving on those models and they're more expensive.
An Air 13'' on 2022 with newer design costs and Mini-LED would be very unlikely to cost 999$. Maybe it costs 1199$ with a new name, they kill the 13'' Pro and keep the same Retina Air 13'' on 999$ with chip upgrade for years even if it now costs them 25% less and they could sell with the same margin from today for 750$. They could sell with a 10% discount for their partners (where there's huge volumes) allowing them to sell on bigger discounts (which people loveeeee) as long as it doesn't hurt the brand and people still buy directly from them/pre-order.
Depending on Apple's planing for the iPad OS a cheap MacOS system may also hurt them.
Still I wouldn't close the possibility they're studying a possible SE, if they want it and what kind numbers they need to jusify it (costs, volume, service's sale).
I read a few weeks ago the tecnology is still very expensive on 2021 and they will support it from getting away from Intel and AMD. At the same time the first models to get the new screen are the more expensive, with higher cost i5/i7/i9 and dedicated graphics. The change to Apple Silicon is a larger saving on those models and they're more expensive.
An Air 13'' on 2022 with newer design costs and Mini-LED would be very unlikely to cost 999$. Maybe it costs 1199$ with a new name, they kill the 13'' Pro and keep the same Retina Air 13'' on 999$ with chip upgrade for years even if it now costs them 25% less and they could sell with the same margin from today for 750$. They could sell with a 10% discount for their partners (where there's huge volumes) allowing them to sell on bigger discounts (which people loveeeee) as long as it doesn't hurt the brand and people still buy directly from them/pre-order.
Depending on Apple's planing for the iPad OS a cheap MacOS system may also hurt them.
Still I wouldn't close the possibility they're studying a possible SE, if they want it and what kind numbers they need to jusify it (costs, volume, service's sale).
macOS works (well would work if I would bother with) perfectly fine on my iBook with 1.5GB of RAM
Slightly more serious:
While that might be true for macOS11 today, such a MacBookSE would (should) be supported till 2028 (give or take) and on more then just running the bare OS.
Also, the difference between 4 and 8GB would be at about 5$ on Apple's side......
..... before you consider that they would have to make SoC specific to that 1 lowend computer.
So, yeah 8GB at least. If one suggests that storage might max out at 256GB, now that would make some sense for an EDU-only device.
I think that they'd trim the storage to a lower level first, but yes, conceivably they could build a routine into MacOS to offload background apps to storage just like iOS. Then a computer with less ram could feel fast, like an iPad Air.
A 4/64 MBSE, that feels shockingly quick due to relentless optimization. Sold on the premise of cloud storage for large files. It could likely be built for less than an iPad Air+ Keyboard. Fewer cheaper cameras, older tech display, binned down silicon, old chassis. $699 would be doable.
They've always sold the iPhones at higher margins than iPads and Macs. Also, they got rid of 3D Touch on the iPhone SE 2020. Before the release of the iPhone SE, I believe the iPhone 8 was still sold at $549.
And really, Macs and MacBooks have always been expensive. The Mac mini and MacBook Air were already their "cheap" models.
Why do you think Macs have always been expensive? (Hint: answer is in original post and it starts with an “I”)
Why do you think Apple is willing to lower its margins for iPhone, iPad, Watch in pursuit of higher market share but not the Mac?
Why don’t you think that Apple can shave $250 off the price in 2 years?
EDU discounts for the M1 Air can easily be had for $799 already. And the M1 Air just released.
They've been expensive even before Intel. Indeed, I was surprised to see them offer the then Intel-based Mac mini and MacBook Air for relatively affordable prices.
Iirc, the M1 MBA is $899 with EDU discount on Apple Store, not $799. The $750 laptops generally don't have 2560x1600 displays and all metal chassis.
Sure, $750 MacBooks would be nice. I'm not counting on it, though.
- They were using IBM before Intel. They never used Apple Silicon until the M1.
- I'm referring to multiple sales of the EDU M1 MacBook Air dropping to $799 within the last month alone. Even at $799, Apple probably still makes a good profit.
- $400 phones don't usually have a faster SoC than all Android phones. But the iPhone SE does. SE products are supposed to be great value products. There's no reason why the Macbook SE can't exist at $750 or even $700. History and Apple's new strategy heavily favors a Macbook SE product launching in the future.
What corners do you think they'll cut for the SE. I think extremely low storage might be a possibility, given the recently refreshed base iPad; evidently, plenty of people buy 64 gig tablets.
Maybe 64, 256 options? A clean doubling of the iPad, de facto SE options.
I'm sure that many will laugh at the idea of a 64 GB storage laptop, but it's worth mentioning that this is a forum of mostly enthusiasts, and many others have different use cases than us.
I did 16 GB of storage on Chromebook for a year, no issues. Even now I use a fraction of 256, I have fiber internet and several cloud locations.
I just don’t see Apple doing an SE laptop tho.
They're not going to cut any corners from the current Macbook Air, which is already $1000, $900 on sale or EDU, and $800 EDU on sale.
They don't need to.
SSDs are cheap as dirt nowadays. You can easily get a 256GB Nvme SSD for $30 on sales on Amazon. And that's with low volume and plenty of middle-men involved. Also, keep in mind that Apple's SSD controller is integrated into the SoC already so all Apple has to do is buy the SSD NAND. Basically, it wouldn't surprise me if Apple's 256GB NAND actually costs them $10 or less only.
Two years from now, which is when Ming-Chi Kuo expects an "affordable Macbook", Apple would have no problems shaving $250 from the base price.
Last edited:
Agreed on the first point. I've got a HP Stream running Linux that has only 64. No problems managing it.
The SE would fit with the rest of their product line, which SEs are distributed throughout.
They are using fairly fast storage, admittedly. It would also fit with the rest of their product line. Why else would the base iPad start out at only 32 gigs.
This 256GB ADATA Nvme PCIE 4.0 drive is rated for 3500MB/s which is 35% faster than the SSD inside the MacBook Air went on sale for $30 on Amazon.
ADATA is a reliable, well known, and super popular SSD brand.
And this SSD is low volume and has Amazon as the middle man. In addition, this SSD has to integrate a storage controller, which is a large part of an SSD's cost.
Apple's storage controller is already built into the SoC, saving a huge part of the cost. All Apple has to do is buy SSD NAND, which is dirt cheap.
Again, it wouldn't surprise me if 256GB of NAND costs Apple less than $10. $5 is my guess.
As for why the iPad starts with only 32GB of SSD? It's because Apple wants to bait you into upgrading to 128GB for $100 more. There's no differentiation for iPads except storage which means there's no other way Apple can get you to spend more. With Macs, Apple can differentiate on storage, RAM, GPU cores, and probably CPU cores in the future.
Last edited:
I back up my computer to an ADATA drive. I'm well aware of their good value. It seems you're correct about the cost, but my point about product line continuity still stands.
Offering a low storage base model on the SE device, like the base iPad, which is essentially an SE.