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

[netdog]

It's a much, much larger part than you apparently realize. This story goes all the way back to the original Macintosh.

In terms of Apple's brand, I had the priviledge of working with Steve Hayden, the man who created the Macintosh Super Bowl ad for Chiat Day, when he led our small group on the IBM Brand Team at Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide during the 90s. That ad began the process of defining Apple's brand as we still know it today. Yes, it has evolved and been refined over the years, but that campaign put the first stake in the ground regarding what is Apple's modern brand (the Macintosh and what has followed).

Part of Apple's brand mission was certainly to build excellent products. It was also to put that technology in the hands of the people (unlike IBM, the supplier of grey corporate America as represented in the spot by Big Brother). A huge part of Apple's brand has been to be a company that is cool and stylish. This is a prerequisite for their products, though it seemed to have been forgotten temporarily during the Performa period. Among other elements, part of their brand is to put forward products that embody their brand goals (great engineering, ease of use, beauty, etc.).

What you are saying here is that you value form to the exclusion of other factors. What you value, however, is not a reflection of the Apple brand as a whole. The MacBook is fully consistent with Apple's brand strategy. The beauty of their machine is not simply a matter of form following function. It is the result of design teams with an eye for beauty working hand in hand with engineers to develop products that both function beautifully and look stunning. They have always charged a premium for this. You choose to see the iPod as form following function, but actually it is both, at the highest order, dancing together. That is achieved with that very goal consciously in mind. Any suggestion otherwise would be incorrect.

Now, as for the MacBook, I would be willing to bet the ranch that the premium-priced black MacBook is not going to harm Apple's brand. The black iPod didn't do it any harm. Quite the opposite in fact. According to the manager at the London Apple Store, he has been flooded with requests for the black MacBook by Mac users and switchers alike. Not enough to reach a conclusion on, but I haven't really heard anything beyond whinging to suggest that his experience isn't being repeated in Apple Stores around the world.

This thing is a huge hit. Please people, stop whining about how terribly wrong Apple has got it here and be glad that this machine may actually help the Apple base to grow, a benefit to anyone who uses OS X as it will attract more development.

 

[Gurutech]

In terms of Apple's brand, I had the priviledge of working with Steve Hayden, the man who created the Macintosh Super Bowl ad for Chiat Day, when he led our small group on the IBM Brand Team at Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide during the 90s. That ad began the process of defining Apple's brand as we still know it today. Yes, it has evolved and been refined over the years, but that campaign put the first stake in the ground regarding what is Apple's modern brand (the Macintosh and what has followed).

Part of Apple's brand mission was certainly to build excellent products. It was also to put that technology in the hands of the people (unlike IBM, the supplier of grey corporate America as represented in the spot by Big Brother). A huge part of Apple's brand has been to be a company that is cool and stylish. This is a prerequisite for their products, though it seemed to have been forgotten temporarily during the Performa period. Among other elements, part of their brand is to put forward products that embody their brand goals (great engineering, ease of use, beauty, etc.).

What you are saying here is that you value form to the exclusion of other factors. What you value, however, is not a reflection of the Apple brand as a whole. The MacBook is fully consistent with Apple's brand strategy. The beauty of their machine is not simply a matter of form following function. It is the result of design teams with an eye for beauty working hand in hand with engineers to develop products that both function beautifully and look stunning. They have always charged a premium for this. You choose to see the iPod as form following function, but actually it is both, at the highest order, dancing together. That is achieved with that very goal consciously in mind. Any suggestion otherwise would be incorrect.

Now, as for the MacBook, I would be willing to bet the ranch that the premium-priced black MacBook is not going to harm Apple's brand. The black iPod didn't do it any harm. Quite the opposite in fact. According to the manager at the London Apple Store, he has been flooded with requests for the black MacBook by Mac users and switchers alike. Not enough to reach a conclusion on, but I haven't really heard anything beyond whinging to suggest that his experience isn't being repeated in Apple Stores around the world.

This thing is a huge hit. Please people, stop whining about how terribly wrong Apple has got it here and be glad that this machine may actually help the Apple base to grow, a benefit to anyone who uses OS X as it will attract more development.

totally agree on that...
-_-)b

 

[dogbone]

To ask an extra $200 for a black model is clearly an outrageous rip off. There's no question about it and the OP's arguments concerning car colours are irrelevent in this case. We are not talking about 12 available colours, some of which would have to be manufactured in uneconomically small quantities. In fact we are not talking any way out colours at all. Just black or white. If both were available at the same price it is a certainty that quantities of either would be ordered to make no difference in manufacturing costs.

Yes it is clearly a rip off. But then I can also say..."so what". No one is forced to buy it. Having said that I would be annoyed at having to pay more for this little "exclusivity" game of apple's purely because given the choice a black surround is more conducive to editing colour photography due to decreased ambient reflections.

 

[TBi]

<snip>
purely because given the choice a black surround is more conducive to editing colour photography due to decreased ambient reflections.

Well a highly reflective glossy screen isn't going to be much help to you either there

You'd be better off with the MBP with it's non reflective screen.

 

[dogbone]

Well a highly reflective glossy screen isn't going to be much help to you either there

Nothing a quick rub with some superfine sandpaper won't fix.

 

[reflex]

But that's what they do with BTO options--they're never sold at reasonable prices.

Good point. For an example of a real ripoff, compare the price of the 2GB BTO option ($500) to what you would pay if you bought it separately (about $150). Then try to complain about the $150 difference between black and white again

 

[reflex]

Nakedly charging the extra $150 for black color alone is a huge direction change for apple, and I wish it had been handled differently.

I agree ... they should have charged the extra $150 for both the black and the white MacBooks.

I'm kidding btw.

 

[TBi]

The black one is more expensive than the white one because of the bigger hard drive. It's very hard for the workers to put the bigger hard drive in the laptop because it is so hard to see in their poorly lit sweat shops.
Takes extra time and effort and maybe more electricity to run lights. The white one is much easier to see and thus cheaper!

...

...

...

 

[TBi]

I agree ... they should have charged the extra $150 for both the black and the white MacBooks.

I'm kidding btw.

I've a better way of thinking of it! The black one is what they should have cost but apple are giving you a silent instant rebate of $150 when you buy the white version! So you aren't being ripped off by the black one, you are just getting a better deal with the white one :O. Until they stop the rebate and charge top dollar for the white one.

 

[dogbone]

Another way of looking at it is that...surprise surprise even though apple make excellent products they are still just a company and as such they'll rip anyone off if they can. Nothing new there. I guess that what is irksome is that they laugh in your face while they are robbing you. Apple should show their class and rob you more subtley split the difference and perhaps charge $100 more for the white and $100 less for the black and the same hd.

 

[Pistol Pete]

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.

amen

 

[matticus008]

I've a better way of thinking of it! The black one is what they should have cost but apple are giving you a silent instant rebate of $150 when you buy the white version! So you aren't being ripped off by the black one, you are just getting a better deal with the white one :O. Until they stop the rebate and charge top dollar for the white one.

That's what I'm saying. It's not a full $150 discount on the white ones, but the price of the black ones could easily knock $50 off the white price if Apple has shifted their costs.

If Black MacBooks account for 1/3 of sales and the overall Apple markup formula is 20%, then the white ones could be sold at a narrower 17% margin while the black ones might be selling for a 26% margin so that the whole line ends up being where Apple needs it to be.

Apple should show their class and rob you more subtley split the difference and perhaps charge $100 more for the white and $100 less for the black and the same hd.

Then they'd be the same price (or the black would be $50 cheaper, depending on how one parses your statement). If Apple raised the white price another $100, it'd be $200 more than the iBook and people would be crying bloody murder over that. It's much easier to roll it into the most expensive model to keep the bottom end as cheap as possible. That's not screwing the customer, it's helping the budget-minded ones.

 

[conditionals]

If anything is bland, the PB's aluminium colour is just like everyone elses product, and has to go.

By god, black aluminum would be crazy awesome. Can they even do that? With the science of anodization? If so, sign me up!

 

[Rod Rod]

I disagree with his opinion that the video card won't have any effect on how well Final Cut Pro, Motion, etc, will operate, but believe what you will.

http://www.creativemac.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=43717

Yup, believe what you will!

By god, black aluminum would be crazy awesome. Can they even do that? With the science of anodization? If so, sign me up!

Black anodizing has been around for a very long time!

 

[Cedd]

I am a switcher and the Black Macbook will be my first Mac. I had been avidly waiting for their launch since January and ordered one within 5 minutes. I am still waiting for delivery, but that is another story.

Anyway, I know that I am paying more for my machine but I was prepared to do so as black was the look I preferred. At the risk of getting flamed I always found the white ibooks to look a bit like toys (sorry I know they are not toys, not my subjective opinion) whereas the aluminium and black look (IMHO) more "professional". I paid more for that look, I knew what I was doing at the time I bought it and I am happy with my decision - I have not been "ripped off" but I am a consumer who exercised a choice on the basis of all the information available...

 

[dogbone]

I have not been "ripped off" but I am a consumer who exercised a choice on the basis of all the information available...

You have been ripped off, you've paid a coupla hundred more for a different colour that costs nothing extra to produce. Just because you don't mind doesn't mean you weren't ripped off.

 

[mccldwll]

"The beauty of their machine is not simply a matter of form following function. It is the result of design teams with an eye for beauty working hand in hand with engineers to develop products that both function beautifully and look stunning. They have always charged a premium for this."


This has never been a Mies argument. It wasn't form following function but, as you here agree, form integrated with function (and as I have suggested, the attention to small details in form reflecting the attention to detail in the overall product, including the OS). They're not separable. That's always been apple's statement. This principle is violated (and demonstrates a major shift in philosophy) when apple charges a large, naked $150 premium for style alone. (And I don't think the ipod color comparisons are relevant since those primarily are style driven).

 

[blitzkrieg79]

Thank you so much for speaking my mind!!! Shared graphics are just fine for anyone not doing intense video editing or gaming.

Personally, I don't understand why you would buy a computer to play games on when you can get a console to do it just as well...

I can see that you were never a gamer. Consoles are great for sports games, some RPGs, some arcade, but where PC shines are the RPGs, first person shooters, and RTS games. Overall PC games require more thinking and consoles usually are mindless quick-paced fun games. I think that those are two different gaming markets. Sports games can never be as fun on a PC than on a PS2 and Max Payne or Warcraft3 (which isn't even out on consoles) can never be as fun on a console than on a PC. It has to do with the control/environment scheme.

Whenever people say that if you want to game just buy a console could not be any more wrong but I guess you have to game in order to understand it.

 

[Play Ultimate]

bored reading this....

Number one, this is precisely what Apple did with the iMacs and the first version of the iBook, and the iPod nano. No premium was charged for any color. Number two, last I checked, we were entitled to our opinions.

I got through about 3 pages of this and just got feed up with the arguments.
So I'll make my comments and hope they weren't stated elesewhere.

1) People buy things for different reasons. Just because you have the same reason does not make the other person wrong. For example, my brother likes Rolex watches. However, it does not tell time much differently than my $40 Timex. So is the Rolex a rip-off? Well, it is to me but not to him. So who's right?

2) We have no clue what the costs are to produce the Black MacBook. With margins, overhead absorption, and costs, $150 difference may be a very reasonable price.

3) Re: the quote. When Apple had the flavored iMacs/iBooks, inventory was a nightmare. Some colors were popular, others weren't. Charging a nominal fee for an exclusive color helps alleviate those problems.

 

[dogbone]

1)... So is the Rolex a rip-off? Well, it is to me but not to him. So who's right?

You are saying comparing a Rolex and a Timex is analogous to comparing black plastic with white plastic?

2) We have no clue what the costs are to produce the Black MacBook.

I think we have a very good clue, namely the cost of the black ipod compared to the white.

3) Re: the quote. When Apple had the flavored iMacs/iBooks, inventory was a nightmare. Some colors were popular, others weren't. Charging a nominal fee for an exclusive color helps alleviate those problems.

But we aren't talking about 5 multicoloured versions are we? Just black and white.

 

[IJ Reilly]

I think we have a very good clue, namely the cost of the black ipod compared to the white.

Exactly. Or a strawberry vs. a blueberry iMac. A little common sense can go a long way in this discussion. An injection-molded plastic laptop case is going to cost Apple maybe $20-30 to manufacture, tops, whether it's white or black or any other color. I don't know why some are having such a hard time accepting that Apple is experimenting with charging a premium for a fashion accessory. Some of us are aware of it, and think it's a mistake. Others are aware of it, and have no problem with it. We can disagree over that point. But I don't understand being in denial over whether it is actually happening.

 

[IJ Reilly]

What you are saying here is that you value form to the exclusion of other factors.

No, I did not say that. I was talking about industrial engineering, a concept I have to assume you don't fully grasp, if only because you responded with a lengthy discussion of marketing and branding, which is a different issue.

 

[dogbone]

But I don't understand being in denial over whether it is actually happening.

Precisely. I'm about as big a mac fanboy as there is. However I have to call this cynical exercise by apple for what it is.

 

[TBi]

1) People buy things for different reasons. Just because you have the same reason does not make the other person wrong. For example, my brother likes Rolex watches. However, it does not tell time much differently than my $40 Timex. So is the Rolex a rip-off? Well, it is to me but not to him. So who's right?

Yes but a black rolex and a white rolex would cost the same wouldn't they? This is a comparison of an identical product in different colours, not two different brands or models.

2) We have no clue what the costs are to produce the Black MacBook. With margins, overhead absorption, and costs, $150 difference may be a very reasonable price.

I wouldn't say it would cost that much just to change the colour of the plastic. Especially considering black is more or less a universal colour when it comes to plastic.

3) Re: the quote. When Apple had the flavored iMacs/iBooks, inventory was a nightmare. Some colors were popular, others weren't. Charging a nominal fee for an exclusive color helps alleviate those problems.

How does charging a fee alleviate the problem of inventory? Stop people buying what the want so they'll take the one they consider ugly? Not a good way to treat your customers.

 

[netdog]

No, I did not say that. I was talking about industrial engineering, a concept I have to assume you don't fully grasp, if only because you responded with a lengthy discussion of marketing and branding, which is a different issue.

Insulting people won't get you anywhere IJ.

If you look over what you said, you will see that my reply made perfect sense, and was not off the mark in raising the influence of the brand upon the ensuing designs and marketing desicions. I do understand the aspects that you raise that influence Apple design. I just replied that your asolutist view only allows you to understand one aspect that informs their design. Cheers.