Why the Black MB isn't a ripoff, and why Integrated Graphics isn't so bad.

[JasonElise1983]

people...people... Get off your high horse with this video card BS and look at the facts. The GMA950 is decent enough for a CONSUMER laptop. Compare the macbook to other PC laptops in it's pricerange and tell me what you find. Yes, you will find somewith dedicated video cards, but are they made like an Apple product? I know for a fact that Lenovo makes a similar laptop (not 13-inch but close) and it uses a GMA950 as well. Most CONSUMER laptops and desktops today use integrated graphics. If you need more than that BUY SOMETHING ELSE!

on the color: Black costs more because every person who has seen the black one wants it. Just like a luxury car, a cadillac escalade and a chevy tahoe are the same basic car, but the escalade costs about $20000 more because it says cadillac. yes their are some differen't features, but not that many. if you can't afford the black one or can't justify buying it than buy the white ones, that's why they are there.

 

[TBi]

I mean good god, a dual core 2 Ghz processor *barely* beats a single 1.42 Ghz G4 with a radeon 9550!!! And LOSES to a 1.67 Ghz G4 with Radeon 9700!!

Of course it's going to lose to a 9700, that was last years top end Mac notebook graphics card.

Anyway not all Integrated graphics are bad. Just intels (and VIA's). Some of nVidia and ATi's integrated graphics are actually quite powerful. Not as fast as the discrete versions but they'll definately smoke Intel's offering.

It seems with Mac's you can't have your cake and eat it too. There is always a draw back with everything, with windows laptops it's windows itself P) and with Mac's it's the fact that you have to pay through the nose for decent graphics. Also because i'm such a graphics snob i have to say that the X1600 in the MBP is still a load of crap considering what they could have put in. Some of nVidia's newest mobile offerings use less power and give you about double the framerates.

 

[QCassidy352]

Of course it's going to lose to a 9700, that was last years top end Mac notebook graphics card.

the point isn't that the GMA950 loses to the 9700, it's that it loses by so much that it allows a single processor 1.67 G4 to beat a 2.0 core duo. Given the unbelivable disparity in the two processors, the 9700 must thrash the GMA950 6 ways from sunday for the performance to be even similar, let alone for the powerbook to win.

and how about the Radeon 9550? Was that last years top end mac notebook graphics card? No, it was budget, even last year, but it smokes the GMA950 so badly that the ibook with a single processor at 1.42 Ghz can almost keep up with the macbook using a core duo at 2.0 Ghz.

people...people... Get off your high horse with this video card BS and look at the facts. The GMA950 is decent enough for a CONSUMER laptop.

well gosh, that's funny, nobody on this board thought so until apple started using integrated graphics. When it was only in PCs and all macs had dedicated graphics, this board has nothing but contempt for intel integrated. Yet now, it's good enough!

 

[netdog]

The MacBook graphics are not a bottleneck for most of us. For those who want to game heavily, clearly the MacBook is not the best choice. So what?

 

[aristobrat]

well gosh, that's funny, nobody on this board thought so until apple started using integrated graphics. When it was only in PCs and all macs had dedicated graphics, this board has nothing but contempt for intel integrated. Yet now, it's good enough!

I wouldnt' say "nobody".

I remember the thread you were in the day that the Intel Mac mini was announced, and there were a few folks there that had no problems with the integrated graphics.

 

[yadmonkey]

I don't think it's a rip off, but I do think it's a tad rude.

 

[IJ Reilly]

I want to beat this horse some more because I think it's actually an important discussion about apple's direction. As a stockholder I should be "pleased as punch" about the extra $150 profit/blackbook. As a consumer, and apple kool aid drinker, I'm not. I'm still not sure which one I would buy if priced the same (since matte black is more sedate/professional looking, but looks cheap compared to my pismo IMHO). But let's say I preferred black. Some have said nothing wrong with paying an extra $150 for exclusivity/fashion and likened it to buying a Hummer. There's the problem. While I can afford one, I would never buy a Hummer (conspicuous consumption, environmental callousness) or a Mercedes SUV (worthless, trouble prone piece of crap SUV) or an Escalade (let's not even go there). For many consumers, cars, computers, clothes and purchases in general are a reflection of values. Even if I wanted black (and even if $150 is chump change relatively speaking), I don't want to be in the fashion/exclusivity camp. I'm not accusing posters here who are willing to pay the extra $150 of that, but many buyers out there are, and that's not an impression I want to convey. You don't agree? How many here would be comfortable wearing the latest $200 basketball shoes, carrying a $500 purse, wearing a rolex, polo logos on everything, or wearing mink? Nuf sed. Historically apple has connoted intrinisic quality, and style/fashion has been a byproduct of the obsessive (in a good way) attention to detail. Nakedly charging the extra $150 for black color alone is a huge direction change for apple, and I wish it had been handled differently (such as including worthless "goodies" to at least try to hide the gouge).

Yes, I think you get it. The issue isn't that anyone is being "ripped off." It's an entirely voluntary purchase, as has been pointed out ad infinitum. The problem with Apple charging a substantial premium for a thing that has no intrinsic value, is how this marketing plays to people outside of the Mac bubble. Poorly, I think. Very poorly. If Apple is trying to appeal to people who aren't Mac users already, then this is clearly not the way it's done. It only feeds the perception (which I have been hearing for all of the 22 years I've been a Mac user), that the Mac is the computer for people with more money than sense.

I imagine Apple will sell plenty of black MacBooks to current members of the choir, but I find it hard to believe that this pricing scheme will appeal at all to anyone who might be considering switching. This is where the rubber really hits the road for Apple, and why I consider it to be such an unfortunate marketing decision. One step forward, two steps back.

 

[netdog]

YIf Apple is trying to appeal to people who aren't Mac users already, then this is clearly not the way it's done. It only feeds the perception (which I have been hearing for all of the 22 years I've been a Mac user), that the Mac is the computer for people with more money than sense.

I guess you must be upset about iPods too then. I own an iPod because I like it. Value for money? Come on now. There are laptops that are less expensive.

 

[yadmonkey]

Yes, I think you get it. The issue isn't that anyone is being "ripped off." It's an entirely voluntary purchase, as has been pointed out ad infinitum. The problem with Apple charging a substantial premium for a thing that has no intrinsic value, is how this marketing plays to people outside of the Mac bubble. Poorly, I think. Very poorly. If Apple is trying to appeal to people who aren't Mac users already, then this is clearly not the way it's done. It only feeds the perception (which I have been hearing for all of the 22 years I've been a Mac user), that the Mac is the computer for people with more money than sense.

I imagine Apple will sell plenty of black MacBooks to current members of the choir, but I find it hard to believe that this pricing scheme will appeal at all to anyone who might be considering switching. This is where the rubber really hits the road for Apple, and why I consider it to be such an unfortunate marketing decision. One step forward, two steps back.

Wow - you both get it. I am concerned for the same reasons. Apple is certainly seeing a surge in popularity and I think it's important for people to perceive that as being a result of quality first and style second. Apple users have always walked the line between being perceived as style-elitists and those willing to pay more for better computers. I'm afraid this decision reinforces the former and is going to turn off potential switchers.

Actually, I think the black option is really desirable to potential switchers who are interested in Macs but don't necessarily like the white Apple iPod style. These are precisely the customers who will be turned off by a 10% premium for color.

 

[ModestPenguin]

A vaguely unrelated question comment concern about the macbook. If I were to buy one would I be thouroughly angushed come fall and merom is introduced into the line? Should I wait because I don't desperately need one and buying one would make me poor? But I wannnnntttt a blackbook sooooo bad. They are quite astounding.

So what should I do?

 

[netdog]

Actually, I think the black option is really desirable to potential switchers who are interested in Macs but don't necessarily like the white Apple iPod style. These are precisely the customers who will be turned off by a 10% premium for color.

The black laptop is selling like wildfire here in London. These arguements just don't hold water in the real world. Consumers are not upset. Macheads on bulleting boards seem to be.

The black MacBook is in demand, just as the iPod 4G and 5G were when they were introduced. Both are very expensive for what you get. Both are also great, and a huge hit with consumers who can afford them.

Apple is doing just fine with both the MacBooks. Maybe its time to stop telling them that they've got it wrong and take stock that after the rushed-to-market MBP that did get a lot of bad press, Apple has got it right here with the MacBook. All of this criticism amounts to a lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing. It's a hit. Get it? It's a hit.

To those of us using our MacBooks, black or white, it's also insanely great.

 

[IJ Reilly]

I guess you must be upset about iPods too then. I own an iPod because I like it. Value for money? Come on now. There are laptops that are less expensive.

Your response suggests that you don't understand what I (and a few others) are saying. It is all about how Apple is perceived.

The iPod's value is in how it works, not its color.

 

[netdog]

Your response suggests that you don't understand what I (and a few others) are saying. It is all about how Apple is perceived.

The iPod's value is in how it works, not its color.

Oh come on. Do you really believe that?

It's value is in how it works AND HOW IT LOOKS!

 

[yadmonkey]

The black laptop is selling like wildfire here in London. These arguements just don't hold water in the real world. Consumers are not upset. Macheads on bulleting boards seem to be.

The black MacBook is in demand, just as the iPod 4G and 5G were when they were introduced. Both are very expensive for what you get. Both are also great, and a huge hit with consumers who can afford them.

Apple is doing just fine with both the MacBooks. Maybe its time to stop telling them that they've got it wrong and take stock that after the rushed-to-market MBP that did get a lot of bad press, Apple has got it right here with the MacBook. All of this criticism amounts to a lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing. It's a hit. Get it? It's a hit.

To those of us using our MacBooks, black or white, it's also insanely great.

First of all, thank you very little for attributing this mess of arguments to me. I didn't even make the argument - I already said I don't think it's a ripoff. I just expressed a concern that it could hurt Apple's overall strategy.

And of course the black Macbook is selling like hotcakes. Mac users will gobble it up - that was never a question. But there's another picture here and it's Apple's desire to get more market share. My only concern is that when Apple puts a premium on style for the first time, they are turning off potential switchers.

 

[weg]

I agree completely.

Integrated graphics are the way to go for the consumer machines. If you want to play games get a console. I know I don't want to pay extra for a fancy graphics card.

Well, with integrated graphics, you pay extra for the RAM that the graphics card needs... the MacBook comes with 512 MB RAM, the Intel GMA 950 uses up to 64MB of your 512 MB (makes 448 MB RAM - not exactly much for running Mac OS X). Apple ships 2x256 MB, so both slots are filled, meaning, if you want to update, you have to buy Apple RAM unless you wanna the RAM that comes with the MacBook.

 

[netdog]

First of all, thank you very little for attributing this mess of arguments to me. I didn't even make the argument - I already said I don't think it's a ripoff. I just expressed a concern that it could hurt Apple's overall strategy.

And of course the black Macbook is selling like hotcakes. Mac users will gobble it up - that was never a question. But there's another picture here and it's Apple's desire to get more market share. My only concern is that when Apple puts a premium on style for the first time, they are turning off potential switchers.

I just switched in January.

I know that it is only incedental, but I did see a number of switchers snapping up MacBooks in London on the three days I was at the store.

Didn't mean to attribute anything to you. LOL. All apologies.

I do think, however, that your concerns about switchers are unwarranted. Of course, it is quite possible that I am wrong. Time will tell.

My biggest concern for the Mac is not that the $150 premium for black will turn off switchers, but that Windows users are going to fall prey to deluge of hype surrounding Vista. We'll see.

 

[netdog]

Well, with integrated graphics, you pay extra for the RAM that the graphics card needs... the MacBook comes with 512 MB RAM, the Intel GMA 950 uses up to 64MB of your 512 MB (makes 448 MB RAM - not exactly much for running Mac OS X). Apple ships 2x256 MB, so both slots are filled, meaning, if you want to update, you have to buy Apple RAM unless you wanna the RAM that comes with the MacBook.

I would recommend selling the RAM that comes with the MacBook on eBay. I plan to. It still comes out to a lot less than upgrading, and 512MB isn't sufficient, shared graphics or no shared graphics. On the MacBook, it comes with two sticks to support dual channel for the shared memory. I am surprised that Apple keeps pushing the 512MB base, though it allows them to make their machines look less expensive than they actually are...and then of course to sell RAM upgrades at Apple prices...something that they have always enjoyed doing. Most consumers won't go to Crucial or Egg. They will just ask Apple for what they need.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Wow - you both get it. I am concerned for the same reasons. Apple is certainly seeing a surge in popularity and I think it's important for people to perceive that as being a result of quality first and style second. Apple users have always walked the line between being perceived as style-elitists and those willing to pay more for better computers. I'm afraid this decision reinforces the former and is going to turn off potential switchers.

Actually, I think the black option is really desirable to potential switchers who are interested in Macs but don't necessarily like the white Apple iPod style. These are precisely the customers who will be turned off by a 10% premium for color.

Right. It's almost as if Apple has thrown in the towel on trying to convince prospective new Mac owners that OSX and top-notch industrial hardware design are worth something. They seem to be saying, "let's just sell fashion, and see how that works."

 

[netdog]

Right. It's almost as if Apple has thrown in the towel on trying to convince prospective new Mac owners that OSX and top-notch industrial hardware design are worth something. They seem to be saying, "let's just sell fashion, and see how that works."

Top notch industrial hardware? Is that what you think Apple's brand is built upon?

 

[firsttube]

perhaps this post is off topic, but i'm dealing with a rather time sensitive issue here, i'm swapping out the 2x256 ram modules in my macbook, and putting in a single 1 GB stick. After putting the 1 gig stick in, and putting it all back together, i turn the macbook on and the power light blinks at me, as if there is no ram in there. Does anyone have a link or something as to how to reinsert the ram? I don't think I'm pushing it in far enough, but if i push any harder i think i'm going to break something. Is there supposed to be a clicking sound once it's actually "in"?
Thanks for any replies.

FT

 

[netdog]

perhaps this post is off topic, but i'm dealing with a rather time sensitive issue here, i'm swapping out the 2x256 ram modules in my macbook, and putting in a single 1 GB stick. After putting the 1 gig stick in, and putting it all back together, i turn the macbook on and the power light blinks at me, as if there is no ram in there. Does anyone have a link or something as to how to reinsert the ram? I don't think I'm pushing it in far enough, but if i push any harder i think i'm going to break something. Is there supposed to be a clicking sound once it's actually "in"?
Thanks for any replies.

FT

It's unlikely that you will break anything. Gently apply pressure on alternating ends of the so-dimm and you will feel it find its seat. Don't push too hard, but the base is pretty solidy set. I had a similar issue. Obviously, it is important that the RAM be fit in snugly, especially in a portable.

 

[firsttube]

It's unlikely that you will break anything. Gently apply pressure on alternating ends of the so-dimm and you will feel it find its seat. Don't push too hard, but the base is pretty solidy set. I had a similar issue. Obviously, it is important that the RAM be fit in snugly, especially in a portable.

Understood. It seems like it just wont go any farther, and it's not getting snug. I've never had trouble installing ram in the past, in a core duo imac, a g3 imac, a g3 ibook, no problems at all. now a macbook is getting in my way...

Edit: ahh, i think i got it now - here goes nothin'.

 

[yadmonkey]

Actually, I think I'm probably representative of the people Apple wants to attract and will potentially turn off with this decision. I'm a long time Mac user, but I don't particularly like the white iPod/iBook Apple style. Never did. I'm in it for the OS. I'm in it despite the style.

That's why I think Apple is walking a dangerous line. They seem to be more focused on attracting people who want a computer as an accessory. But styles change and so will their loyalties.

There are so many people out there who could care less about style and could easily become loyal to Apple based on their awesome OS, yet are turned off somewhat by Apple's focus on style.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Oh come on. Do you really believe that?

It's value is in how it works AND HOW IT LOOKS!

No, not really. Function is King. Apple took over this market by storm because they sweated the human interface issues, like nobody else before. The industrial design of the iPod reflects its function. Most people aren't going to parse these issues consciously, but they understand innately when something works (or doesn't), and when a product's appearance and function are successfully integrated. Form following function: this is the holy grail of industrial design.

 

[netdog]

No, not really. Function is King. Apple took over this market by storm because they sweated the human interface issues, like nobody else before. The industrial design of the iPod reflects its function. Most people aren't going to parse these issues consciously, but they understand innately when something works (or doesn't), and when a product's appearance and function are successfully integrated. Form following function: this is the holy grail of industrial design.

Function is only part of the story with the iPod. It's only part of the story with the Apple brand.