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.
Is Apple becoming very greedy with their pricing on new Macs ?
- Thread starter DBZmusicboy01
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My 12" PowerBook G4 1.33Ghz was $1799 in 2004. How about that?
That said, I think the new 12" Macbook isn't worth it compared to the other models. A MacBook air with more power and slightly more weight can be purchased for less money. For me, saving the extra few mm of width and fraction of a pound weight isn't worth spending more money, especially with fewer ports, less battery life, and a slower processor.
I'm not sure who exactly will be buying the 12", it's a dumb purchase if you ask me, but I'm sure it'll sell. For someone it may suit their needs perfectly.
I'll stick with my Retina MacBook Pro.
That said, I think the new 12" Macbook isn't worth it compared to the other models. A MacBook air with more power and slightly more weight can be purchased for less money. For me, saving the extra few mm of width and fraction of a pound weight isn't worth spending more money, especially with fewer ports, less battery life, and a slower processor.
I'm not sure who exactly will be buying the 12", it's a dumb purchase if you ask me, but I'm sure it'll sell. For someone it may suit their needs perfectly.
I'll stick with my Retina MacBook Pro.
But its really not that different then the MBAs You're paying 1,200 for a 1.6GHz MBA - that's without a retina screen and not on the latest chipset.
You do realize that modern computing is about a whole lot more than ghz? This is a processor that is more powerful than the mid-line processors from just a couple of years ago.
The reality is that very few users are limited by their cpu anymore. Of far more value to them is lightweight, silent operation with great battery life.
You are paying for that tradeoff here, as opposed to cpu power you don't need.
Well, let's wait for the user and professional reviews how this fanless Core M processor performs.
good point
----------
you're paying to have a retina display. and that's not the only way you're paying...
you have to suffer with an under powered processor
not so great battery life
Like I said in a previous post. Apple would have been better off putting a 1080p display in this laptop and giving people a better processor, better battery life and taking $200 bucks off the starting price.
Because as nice as a retina display is, I don't think the average consumer is clamoring for it.
Actually, you don't know how you really want one until you've physically seen, held and used one yourself.
Apple has always charged high prices to insure they enjoy fat profits.
Buying is optional. There's a lot of suckers like me out there
Buying is optional. There's a lot of suckers like me out there
Steve was the one to introduce the first MacBook Air "muddying" the waters. it cost more than this MacBook, had 1 USB port, and was even less powerful in comparison to its bigger pro brother.
Much like the first air this MacBook is not meant for the vast majority of people.
I'd guess this is a step towards "unifying" the line and we'll eventually see the MacBook replace the air and we'll be back at MacBook and MacBook Pro.
The iBook G3 was $1599 in 1999 in today's dollars $2271. I think people forget or don't know how expensive Apple stuff used to be. The Ti book was $2599 which would be $3527. Apple has been lowering prices pretty consistently after the Intel transition.
The great thing about Apple products is that for the average consumer, who is not obsessed with buying their latest stuff year after year, they last a lot longer and provide a solid user experience throughout their lifespan. so at the end of the day you feel you spent your money well.
I really don't get the uproar about the rMB's price.
For £1,300, you get 8GB RAM, a retina screen and 512GB of flash storage. Sure, the processor isn't as fast as a MBA or MBP, but I think it represents pretty good value.
Configuring a 13" MBA to 8GB/512GB actually makes it more expensive than the MacBook, as is the cheapest MBP with half a terabyte of internal storage.
I know the MacBook isn't for everyone (myself included), but for a decent amount of RAM and a very generous slice of flash storage, it represents fairly good value. Not to mention it looks like one of the best engineered laptops they've ever done, has a retina screen, and I can only imagine how nice it would be to carry around all day.
I was expecting it to be in the £1,500-700 range, much like how the first MBA was priced.
For £1,300, you get 8GB RAM, a retina screen and 512GB of flash storage. Sure, the processor isn't as fast as a MBA or MBP, but I think it represents pretty good value.
Configuring a 13" MBA to 8GB/512GB actually makes it more expensive than the MacBook, as is the cheapest MBP with half a terabyte of internal storage.
I know the MacBook isn't for everyone (myself included), but for a decent amount of RAM and a very generous slice of flash storage, it represents fairly good value. Not to mention it looks like one of the best engineered laptops they've ever done, has a retina screen, and I can only imagine how nice it would be to carry around all day.
I was expecting it to be in the £1,500-700 range, much like how the first MBA was priced.
Unlike designer handbags or fancy cosmetics, the price premium Apple charges is for real value. They don't have a budget line with crap parts.
First, I was only talking about the retina screen and I have a retina mbp already so i know about retina from using it.
But looking at the macbook as a whole, what new info can you get from it from physically handling it? How pretty it is in person? Aesthetics does have it's place but if you're buying a computer just cause it's pretty then you deserve what ever happens.
The pricing for the new MacBook isn't unprecedented. Apple also priced the original Air highly (in the price range of the Pros if I remember correctly) before the current design was introduced.
It is a live concept, and is priced accordingly. Give it a generation or two, when they figure out it's place in the product lineup, and the prices will fall into place.
It is a live concept, and is priced accordingly. Give it a generation or two, when they figure out it's place in the product lineup, and the prices will fall into place.
Apple has a history of charging near the upper limit. It works well for them. Nothing has changed.
Late reply.
I disagree about your statement of Steve muddying waters with the Air; in the end it blew open the whole Ultrabook segment. It's an entirely different class of computer nowadays. The new MacBook? It's not an Air, it's not a Pro. It's product clutter. It looks nice, but it's still product clutter.
My hope is that they either (a) add enough ports to make it an actual "pro" machine, which is unlikely, or (b) they merge it with the Air line and keep the specs and resolution high. Which is also unlikely. I love my Macintoshes, but I'd never buy one of these new ones. It's functionally useless for my needs and if was going to spend that much on a show-off item I could get something that brought me a bigger smile.
I see most people on here in complete defense of Apple when it comes to their product pricing. An Apple Macbook Pro retailing for $1500 has similar specs to a Windows laptop retailing for $700-800.The price differential is enormous. Now i understand that Apple uses only the best quality parts in their products unlike other manufacturers who have to cut manufacturing costs by using cheaper quality components and that Apple has hands down the best customer service among its competitors but i feel its too much of a premium to pay. Apple is the only company that gets away with absurdly high prices.Buying an iMac for $2k when one can build a custom PC for half that price seems a little more than a rip off.I like Apple products, they are usually great in quality and offer good customer service buy i cannot in good faith defend their product pricing.
I dont believe anyone has asked you to defend their pricing. The Apple tax is higher in some and lower in some but Apple is cheaper now than its ever been. My 15 Latitude E6500 cost more than a 17 MacBook Pro when it was new, my E6420 cost as much as a 15 MacBook Pro when it was new. My HP Z600 cost more than a DP MP when new all three are worth less now than a competing Apple product of the same era.
But we are not talking about the past. We are talking about the present. And right now Apple products are way more expensive than other similar products from competing brands.
But they’re cheaper than ever. The MB is worth what Apple is charging to me, The pixel is also worth what they are charging to me. Do you think it’s different now? Business class computers and workstations cost more money than non it’s the way it is no matter the platform.
People have a tendency to value what they want/need, and discount the value of what they don't want/need.
Do those $700-$800 Windows laptops with "comparable" specs have Flash storage? Retina displays? Even at those prices (high relative to the $200-$300 models), I'm seeing "webcam not included." Software? Warranty terms of "1 year parts, labor not included." Weight? Thickness?
Now, as with ANY piece of equipment, we buy what we want/need, and try to find a model that has as little of what we don't want/need as possible. In my case, that's why I don't have a nMP (or a cMP, for that matter). And it's also why I see value in getting OS X updates at no extra charge. I like to keep my OS up to date, so for me, the "Apple Tax" seems more like pre-payment, or an investment that pays dividends. For those perfectly happy to use Win XP or 10.6.8 until the next Ice Age arrives, it has no value.
In the end, it's the manufacturer, not the consumer, that has to worry about features and price. Either the product is appealing to potential buyers, or it's not. So, if the vast majority of Apple's customers end up preferring the MBA or MBP, then the 12" MacBook may turn out to be a failure. If its feature set attracts or retains customers who might have purchased a Surface Pro 3, maybe not so much of a failure. If I don't want/need one, that doesn't make it a failure, unless everyone else is exactly like me.
Do those $700-$800 Windows laptops with "comparable" specs have Flash storage? Retina displays? Even at those prices (high relative to the $200-$300 models), I'm seeing "webcam not included." Software? Warranty terms of "1 year parts, labor not included." Weight? Thickness?
Now, as with ANY piece of equipment, we buy what we want/need, and try to find a model that has as little of what we don't want/need as possible. In my case, that's why I don't have a nMP (or a cMP, for that matter). And it's also why I see value in getting OS X updates at no extra charge. I like to keep my OS up to date, so for me, the "Apple Tax" seems more like pre-payment, or an investment that pays dividends. For those perfectly happy to use Win XP or 10.6.8 until the next Ice Age arrives, it has no value.
In the end, it's the manufacturer, not the consumer, that has to worry about features and price. Either the product is appealing to potential buyers, or it's not. So, if the vast majority of Apple's customers end up preferring the MBA or MBP, then the 12" MacBook may turn out to be a failure. If its feature set attracts or retains customers who might have purchased a Surface Pro 3, maybe not so much of a failure. If I don't want/need one, that doesn't make it a failure, unless everyone else is exactly like me.
On second thoughts, i agree with you. Because that extra price pays for itself over a few years not to mention resale value of Apple products are higher than other brands.
