It makes no sense that the Magicless 13" MacBook Pro released today - when upgraded to the 2.4 GHz CPU - costs the same as the Magicful 13" MacBook Pro, which comes with the 2.9 GHz CPU, Touch Bar, and Touch ID sensor. It looks as though Apple had made a mistake and priced the Magicless 13" MacBook Pro a few hundred dollars too high.
Because the Magicless 13" MacBook Pro comes with a much slower CPU than the Magicful 13" MacBook Pro, and the Magicless MacBook Pro lacks the Touch bar as well as the Touch ID sensor, it should have been priced at $1099 (or $1199 at the most). This could have been the machine that - when upgraded to a higher CPU speed, to 512 GB of SSD and to 16 GB of RAM - could still be had for under $1899. This would still be very expensive for a dual-core laptop but somewhat manageable. As it stands now, not a single MacBook Pro released today is priced within reason for the majority of Apple customers. Perhaps, the Apple executives make way too much money that they have lost all remaining sense of reality at this point.
Yet they are all now back ordered.
Y'all are getting trolled.
For the lower end there is the 13" MBA at $999 with 1.6Ghz Core i5 (5th gen) 8GB RAM and 128GB SSD.
The Dell XPS 13 costs $1049 for a faster @ 2.5Ghz but also 8GB RAM and 128GB SSD.
The XPS specs better for the money but the disparity is not large and for me MacOS is enough better not to care.
For the 13 MBP without the touch bar the rough equivalent is the $1,149 XPS 13 build with the 2.5Ghz i5-7200U, 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD and a 1920x1080 display.
For $1499 (aka $350 more) you get the 2.0Ghz Core i5, 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD but with Iris Graphics 540 instead of the HD 520 and a slight brighter (500 nits vs 400 nits) 2560x1600 display. Whether that's worth $350 more is up to you but for me MacOS is worth the delta.
What Apple doesn't have anymore with the removal of the 11" MBA is an equivalent to the $799 Core i3 XPS 13.
The whole concern trolling/unrighteous anger thing with the "I'm an Apple stockholder" and "I'm so rich money doesn't matter to me but I'm outraged for the less fortunate" is just humorously predictable.
Especially since many of these new MBP are destined for business and IBM has stated that the TCO for Macs are up $273-$535 less than PCs. For for $350 more the 13" MBP is cheaper and more powerful than the lower priced XPS 13.
MacBook Air is low resolution and on its way out. I was specifically speaking of new MacBook Pros. Will students be able to afford these new Macbook Pros?
Obviously, FaceBooks will continue buying them, but that wasn't my point. To sustain an ecosystem, Apple cannot make Macs into luxury items. Just consider the fate of the golden Apple Watch models. Apple discontinued them because there's not enough interest. As a shareholder, I disagree with the direction to transition Macs to the luxury segment.
I'm not rich, but I can afford pretty much anything. I can afford a Ferrari, but I drive an upper-trim Kia. I'm not going to pay unjustifiedly high prices just because I can afford them. I may consider a Volvo if it beats the Kia in features (which it does not), but I will not be considering a Ferrari. If Apple wants to start selling only Ferrari, I will not be buying Apple anymore.
Will I switch to Windows now? I will not.
Will I be buying any of the late 2016 MacBook Pros? I will not unless the price returns to fair levels.
Do I think these prices will come down? Yes I do. I believe Apple will come to their senses within a few months.
Will Apple's bottom line suffer in the 1st quarter of the 2017 physical year because of the lower demand for MacBook Pros during the holiday quarter? I don't think it will because Macs don't have a significant effect on the Apple's bottom line anymore.
Apple didn't raise the MacBook Pro prices to boost their profits; they did so to show higher profit margins to Wall Street.
In the poll conducted by 9to5mac with nearly 15,000 people polled, over 35% said they would not buy the 2016 MacBook Pros after they learned about the specs-to-price ratio. Those are not the folks who still have new MacBook Pros. Those are the ones who were ready to pull the trigger, but who decided not to upgrade to this generation of MacBook Pros.
I do not recall such a high ratio of eager Apple customers in the past who were put off by high prices. I recall people saying "take my money" the minute new Macs came out. Over a third are not offering their money to Apple anymore. Take it for what it's worth to you.
I'm not saying that Apple should not be allowed to sell overly expensive MacBook Pros; all I'm saying is that Apple should continue to offer affordable options with decent specs. They don't have such an option in the 2016 MacBook Pro line. The $1499 entry level MacBook Pro is too expensive for its specs.
Please, could you sort out the data into table. It is damm simple. Reading it on small screen gives you one or two paragraphs and you have to remember the rest to do comparison. Please copy paste is not journalism. Put there some added value. Thanks a lot.
Perhaps, the Apple executives make way too much money that they have lost all remaining sense of reality at this point.
Exactly what I thought and think. I'm a Mac person since 1989, an Apple licensee since 2003 (who has paid hundreds of thousand of dollar in royalties) and an Apple Stock holder since quite a few years, but the greed those guys in Cupertino are showing since a couple of years is clearly out of this world. It feel like getting taken from behind, because the believe they can do so. No longer with me. I'm sticking with my Late 2013 MBPr until it falls apart. While Touch ID is desirable, I'm not willing to suddenly spend 60+% more for virtually the same machine minus USB ports, minus MagSafe. Perhaps one day as a second hand machine. Whoever decided to drop MagSafe should be slapped with a dead fish in his face.
Comments
Obviously, FaceBooks will continue buying them, but that wasn't my point. To sustain an ecosystem, Apple cannot make Macs into luxury items. Just consider the fate of the golden Apple Watch models. Apple discontinued them because there's not enough interest. As a shareholder, I disagree with the direction to transition Macs to the luxury segment.
I'm not rich, but I can afford pretty much anything. I can afford a Ferrari, but I drive an upper-trim Kia. I'm not going to pay unjustifiedly high prices just because I can afford them. I may consider a Volvo if it beats the Kia in features (which it does not), but I will not be considering a Ferrari. If Apple wants to start selling only Ferrari, I will not be buying Apple anymore.
Will I switch to Windows now? I will not.
Will I be buying any of the late 2016 MacBook Pros? I will not unless the price returns to fair levels.
Do I think these prices will come down? Yes I do. I believe Apple will come to their senses within a few months.
Will Apple's bottom line suffer in the 1st quarter of the 2017 physical year because of the lower demand for MacBook Pros during the holiday quarter? I don't think it will because Macs don't have a significant effect on the Apple's bottom line anymore.
Apple didn't raise the MacBook Pro prices to boost their profits; they did so to show higher profit margins to Wall Street.
In the poll conducted by 9to5mac with nearly 15,000 people polled, over 35% said they would not buy the 2016 MacBook Pros after they learned about the specs-to-price ratio. Those are not the folks who still have new MacBook Pros. Those are the ones who were ready to pull the trigger, but who decided not to upgrade to this generation of MacBook Pros.
I do not recall such a high ratio of eager Apple customers in the past who were put off by high prices. I recall people saying "take my money" the minute new Macs came out. Over a third are not offering their money to Apple anymore. Take it for what it's worth to you.
I'm not saying that Apple should not be allowed to sell overly expensive MacBook Pros; all I'm saying is that Apple should continue to offer affordable options with decent specs. They don't have such an option in the 2016 MacBook Pro line. The $1499 entry level MacBook Pro is too expensive for its specs.
Reading it on small screen gives you one or two paragraphs and you have to remember the rest to do comparison.
Please copy paste is not journalism. Put there some added value. Thanks a lot.