Is it time to bring the MacBook back?
So, as everyone knows, the MacBook has been discontinued since 2010, or 2011 (can't remember). To me, this wasn't necessary. This was their economy Mac. This was for the consumer that wanted a Macbook, but didn't want to pay the extra couple hundred dollars for a Macbook Pro.
Yes, it's true that the MacBook Air 11 inch now serves as the economy MacBook, but what about the consumers that don't want an 11 inch screen? That want a full sized notebook? There's no option for $999 other than the 11 inch MacBook.
Also, the naming scheme doesn't make sense to me. How is there going to be a MacBook Air and a MacBook Pro, but no MacBook? That's like having a PS3 Slim and a PS3 Pro without having a PS3.
I believe that Apple will probably change the MacBook Air into just "MacBook." But I think there still should be a MacBook in the middle, something that has better specs as the MacBook Air, but not as great as the MacBook Pro.
Comments
By the time it would be ‘needed’ again, they’ll have stopped selling laptops entirely.
The Mac Book is gone forever.It was good in it's time.
Better specs than the MBAir? ... wouldn't that also make it MORE expensive than the MBAir? ...
so the MBAir would STILL be the only $999 option.
No, they could easily bring the bring the price of the MacBook Air down even further, as it should be, or they can keep the 11-inch $999 and the regular MacBook at $999, also. Pretty Simple.
Better yet, they should make the MacBook $899-$799, or that price for the 11-inch Air. Great solution.
The Macbook Air uses low voltage processors, which Intel charge more for. The processor in the entry $999 11" Air costs $342:
http://ark.intel.com/products/75028/
Once you add the margin on, the processor alone makes up about half the retail price of the laptop. The Macbooks used to use similar processors to the entry 13" Pro and they cost less:
http://ark.intel.com/products/67355/
They wouldn't fit into an Air shell easily though with the same size battery as the TDP is more than double. But you can see with the price difference there, this would mean roughly $170 retail price difference (slightly offset by the bigger battery). A Macbook with this sort of spec should be able to be priced around $849. They used to sell an educational Macbook Air with a cheaper $250 CPU:
http://ark.intel.com/products/56858
I'm not sure how much cheaper it was. They seem to just knock $50 off now for the same spec.
Going back to a plastic shell isn't a good idea as it would end up being heavy. The unibody metal Macbooks were ok though.
The main thing I can see them doing is removing the Air from the name. It's a redundant descriptor now that it's the only design in that range. If it pans out that they are making a 12" model to replace both the 11" and 13" models:
http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/10/12/apple-planning-to-launch-all-new-12-macbook-higher-res-sixth-gen-ipad-in-2014
that would probably work out ok. It could still be an Air-like design but called Macbook and starting at $999. There's only $100 retail difference between the 11" and 13" so I'd have liked them to drive the 13" in at the $999 price point eventually but if they pay by the inch for displays then 12" is a good enough compromise. 12" laptops are great for portability. While they are a bit small for productive use, getting a large external is not a big deal. Students can take the laptop to class and have a 23"-27" display in the dorm room for 'work'.
I've always felt they could do with a more affordable 15" and I'd rather that the Air line was one size at 14" with smaller bezels but if they can't get the displays cheap enough then it can't happen. A higher-end option might work though e.g $1299 14"/15" Air.
They have to make design choices around what is best for their business and what they can source from suppliers. It generally works best for them to be able to upsell to higher priced models. I suspect they will continue to lower TDP at the entry level so that it extends battery life and eventually, they may even become passively cooled as some laptops are now. They can use some sort of convection current setup to help. This will always keep people who buy for processor intensive tasks buying the higher TDP models and keep consumers that don't like charging batteries getting longer usage times.
Which makes no sense at all. First the a AIRs are already close to the performance of the Pros in many respects. Second to offer better performance Apple would essentially have to build a variant of the 13" MBP. In effect the 13" MBP is already in between the AIRs and the 15" MBP, so effectively you are trying to fill a slot that is already filled.
This is why I see Apple as having only one slot to fill and that is for a dramatically cheaper laptop. Ideally something with a $650 price tag to start. To do that though they need a motherboard that maxes out at $100 which can't be done well with Intels current lineup of hardware. Thus the interest in an ARM based solution. Apple could certainly do this with an enhanced A7X. With quad cores it would be more than competitive with the low cost Intel offerings.
The MacBook is gone forever. The MacBook Air sort of took it's place as the "economy" Apple laptop, but it's very possible that it will be renamed to just "MacBook", as lightweight devices slowly become more of an expected standard in the industry.
Apple needs to hit the 600-700 dollar mark. The only way to do that is to shave off a huge slice from the processors cost. Interestingly Intel is under a lot of pressure to lower laptop parts cost so maybe something Intel based will ship. $999 is way too high. Doesn't matter.
Very good concept indeed.
I have a "cheap" laptop already, it's call a PC - I only use due to work platform is PC.
My Mac Book Pro is a workhorse I use it for my personal life.
The world doesn't need to "dumb down" or "go cheap" - to much of that going around in hardware & software & most important - HUMANS that can't keep up ( and I don't mean materially) but want everyone to think so.
Think about an iPad for a minute and imagine that SoC was built for performance not low thermal power. We would have a chip that could make for a very passable laptop.
So? The ARM based laptops we are talking about would be similar work horses. They would still run OS/X, still have large internal SSD storage, WiFi and what have you.
See this is where I have a big problem with your post. Lower cost doesn't mean dumbed down or cheap by any means. All we are talking about here is using modern technology eliminate Intels high margin chips to allow Apple to offer a better value in the marketplace. As for your comment about humans I have no idea what you are talking about.
As much as I would like to think the Macbook will make a return, I don't see it happening. I think Apple is content with there mac lineup, and if anything we should see a revamped Macbook air "hopefully with a retina display" sometime next year. Don't get me wrong though, if Apple were to ever release a 800 dollar 13inch Macbook people would be all over that, myself included.
Apple really is not that expensive in what you are getting in good quality control and excellent customer service compared to the other companies that stink in customer service and also durability of their computers which break down a lot.
This is true but it is often very difficult to explain to people that are more concerned about price. This is where I see ARM allowing Apple to drastically lower the price of a laptop like machine. Since so much of the current AIR's price is wrapped up in the processor they could immediately shave a couple of hindered off the machines price. Note also that I do not imagine a "laptop" modeled on what we currently think of as a laptop if Apple implemented an ARM based device. So if anything new does come from Apple it probably won't be called a Mac Book.
why add another model to the lineup? both the Pro and Air are impressive pieces of technology and quite capable machines, to bring back the standard MacBook would not create more market share for Apple and may actually hinder the new consumer's decision about which laptop to purchase. Or possibly they (consumer) may decide to stick with a PC. more choices doesn't always translate into more sales and it usually creates more confusion for the less savvy end-user.
Your agreement has some validity but on the other hand Apple gives up considerable potential due to limited breadth of its Mac line up. Some sales simply aren't possible because Apple doesn't have the hardware for suitable for many markets.
I understand what you're saying, however I think Apple's unspoken mantra is to not make their products attainable to every consumer. It's kind of in the vein of they see themselves as the Mercedes (Bugatti, Ferarri, etc.) of the computing world. And like Mercedes' tagline of "A Mercedes in every garage." they know it's just not possible, but it's something the marketers and consumers strive for because it's not only a beautiful, well functioning machine, but it's also a status symbol for some. Just like a Bugatti Veyron.
Cheers
Intel chipsets and processors are expensive across the computing spectrum, not only for Apple. As for an alternative to Linux, that's a choice we all have to make. I've set up a media server running Linux Mint, it's great and I don't think I'll be changing that out any time soon. My Mac is for video and audio editing, and my PC is my work horse for daily messing about, database creation and other work. We could argue until we're both blue in the face about the pros and cons of each operating system, but in the end neither of us will convince the other that our way of thinking is superior. However I stand by my assertion of Apple's customer base being driven by the unspoken desires of Apple's marketing. To the point that they see their product as the best in the world and then charging a price that reflects this mentality. Because in the end all the sheeple of the world see is that Apple logo on the back of your beat up MBP. Nothing else really matters to them (sheeple) beyond that.
Don't get me wrong, I love my MBP, my iPhone and iPad, the Apple culture, and so on. But I'm also not going to disregard one OS over another because it doesn't conform to the standards of independent tests conducted by others, or because I'm anti-Bill Gates/Steve Jobs/Linus Torvalds. I like to think I'm knowledgeable enough in technology as a whole to be completely at ease moving from one OS to another -seamlessly- and building a system from scratch to come to my own conclusions about how well it truly works. I'm far from some kind of genius, but I'm just as far from dumb. Different strokes for different folks, mate.