U.S. schools can purchase new 128GB M1 MacBook Air in bulk for $779

AppleInsider

Apple is now selling a new 128-gigabyte Apple Silicon MacBook Air through its U.S. Education Institution program.

The base MacBook Air model made available in the Apple Store and through resellers features a 256-gigabyte SSD. The new smaller model serves to cut costs even further for schools looking to get a MacBook into a student's hands.

The deal was spotted by Reddit user dduci9y, who found the deal on the November 10 Apple U.S. Education Institution - Hardware and Software Price List.

To take advantage of the $779 price tag, a United States educational institution must purchase the model in multiples of five units. Space gray, gold, and silver units are available for purchase.

The 128-gigabyte M1 MacBook Air isn't the only model available to purchase in bulk, either. Schools can also buy them in configurations of 256- and 512-gigabytes, for $879 and $1,129 each, respectively.

razorpit

Common sense says winner, however with us already having incredibly high school taxes and schools still ask us to supply pencils, crayons, glue sticks, etc., I don't see this moving many of these over the horrible Chromebook's my kids now have.

lkrupp

razorpit said:

Common sense says winner, however with us already having incredibly high school taxes and schools still ask us to supply pencils, crayons, glue sticks, etc., I don't see this moving many of these over the horrible Chromebook's my kids now have.

I vividly remember way back when my local school district voted to purchase PCs. They didn’t even allow Apple to submit a bid. Parents at the time (early-90s) said they wanted their children to learn how to use “real” computers that they would be using when they got jobs. When my oldest son arrived at the University of Illinois in Champaign/Urbana he was amused to see that the engineering lab was Mac only and running Mathematica. I’m sure the parents of those children were shocked to see Macs in use too. Now what would their kids do? Seems they started clamoring for Mac laptops.

rob53

razorpit said:

Common sense says winner, however with us already having incredibly high school taxes and schools still ask us to supply pencils, crayons, glue sticks, etc., I don't see this moving many of these over the horrible Chromebook's my kids now have.

It's not just the throwaway Chromebooks but the use of Google software that makes it difficult for Apple to get back into the majority of K-12 schools. Apple products will still sell well in colleges, universities and private schools.

This configuration would be really nice for enterprise and corporate users who maintain all their data on servers. 128GB of local storage is plenty for macOS and applications. It's been two decades since I ran a diskless Mac configuration, netbooting off an Apple server, but it would be interesting to try this again especially since Big Sur now uses a signed system volume, https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=3xpv8r2m, making it that much more difficult to change anything in the System. This could benefit schools, enterprises and government installations who would boot even the user folders off a server without having to worry about any System software attacks. This "feature" should be investigated by all large installations as a way to provide a more secure and manageable installation. This feature alone could offset all the labor expenses caused by configuring Chromebooks.

CloudTalkin

razorpit said:

Common sense says winner, however with us already having incredibly high school taxes and schools still ask us to supply pencils, crayons, glue sticks, etc., I don't see this moving many of these over the horrible Chromebook's my kids now have.

Yeah, it is hard to argue when looking at school budgets.  A school can purchase 5 MBA's or 15 Chromebooks ($250 avg).  I don't share your opinion about Chromebooks.  Sure, there are some crappy models.  That happens when multiple vendors put out competing products.  There's always going to be someone willing to race to the bottom.  But a good .edu Chromebook can be had for $250-300.  Besides, the type of laptop isn't really that important in the grand scheme imo.  It's the curriculum and teacher that matter most.

cloudguy

CloudTalkin said:

razorpit said:

Common sense says winner, however with us already having incredibly high school taxes and schools still ask us to supply pencils, crayons, glue sticks, etc., I don't see this moving many of these over the horrible Chromebook's my kids now have.

Yeah, it is hard to argue when looking at school budgets.  A school can purchase 5 MBA's or 15 Chromebooks ($250 avg).  I don't share your opinion about Chromebooks.  Sure, there are some crappy models.  That happens when multiple vendors put out competing products.  There's always going to be someone willing to race to the bottom.  But a good .edu Chromebook can be had for $250-300.  Besides, the type of laptop isn't really that important in the grand scheme imo.  It's the curriculum and teacher that matter most.

It isn't $250. Unless a school system has a bad procurement officer or find themselves in a bind - due to having a bad procurement officer - Chromebooks can be obtained in bulk from special suppliers like CTL and Sector 5 via B2B channels frequently for $150 and at times under $100. Also, while there are many advantages to a Mac or iPad there is one factor you aren't considering. If you want a refresher of that factor, view the infamous "playtime" sequence of Toy Story 3: kids break stuff. So schools will either pay $250 for a "ruggedized" Chromebook that is nearly impossible to break short of driving a minivan over it or $99 for a Chromebook that is easily, cheaply replaceable when broken. Also, if it is broken or lost by the little 10 year old what happens to the data? If it is an iPad or Mac, it is gone. If it is a Chromebook, it is all in the cloud. (You can even configure it to automatically sync the "Downloads" folder, the only local storage, to Google Drive.) So issue a new Chromebook, have the kid sign in again with the same account and it all pops up again in a few minutes. 

Sorry, one can hate Google forever for putting a touchscreen UI with Android as opposed to "doing the right thing", continuing with their Blackberry clone until they went out of business - which would have allowed Microsoft who also had a touchscreen UI to dominate the market in their place which would have gained Apple and its fans what exactly except an even bigger, more powerful and influential Microsoft thanks to its billions in market share and tens of billions in revenue from mobile added to their already crushing market share in PC, cloud and enterprise with the very hostile Ballmer still running it to this day very likely - but Chromebooks are a very good, workable technical and product solution to a real problem that addressed an actual market need. The last data from Canalys stated that it isn't just schools buying Chromebooks anymore either. Small and medium-sized businesses are buying them as well as using the GSuite for their data processing and communications needs i.e. corporate email, videoconferencing, teleconferencing, collaboration, etc. even business telephone numbers and service from Google Voice if you want it. The hardware and the software cost a fraction of what Microsoft charges to provide the same and you don't need to hire - or more accurately contract - an IT staff to manage it. (For example, a $500 Chromebox can serve as videoconferencing hardware. Feel free to imagine what videoconferencing hardware normally costs.)

Basically, claiming that the low end of the market doesn't have legitimate needs and doesn't deserve good products to meet them isn't just classism, but it is bad economics. Just because Apple exercises their perfectly valid right to choose not to meet that need doesn't mean that it is bad when other companies do. Quite the contrary in fact. Feel free to wish that it was someone - anyone - but Google, but in the process go ahead and propose a business model that actually works. Everyone else that has tried to go up against Microsoft in this market - supplying products and services to schools and small enterprises - has failed, Google hasn't and there is a reason for that: they came up with products and a business/revenue model that is actually scalable and viable where others failed to do so.

Fidonet127

cloudguy said:

Basically, claiming that the low end of the market doesn't have legitimate needs and doesn't deserve good products to meet them isn't just classism, but it is bad economics. 

Nobody is claiming this at all. In the mean time, my child with their 2018 or 2019 HP Chromebook gets knocked offline several times a week and sometimes several times a day. My Apple products have no such problems, even though my Macs are 2014 models. This is despite having good internet, upgraded the wifi to wifi 6 mesh system, adding a stand and a fan to keep his school laptop from having problems. 

CloudTalkin

cloudguy said:

CloudTalkin said:

razorpit said:

Common sense says winner, however with us already having incredibly high school taxes and schools still ask us to supply pencils, crayons, glue sticks, etc., I don't see this moving many of these over the horrible Chromebook's my kids now have.

Yeah, it is hard to argue when looking at school budgets.  A school can purchase 5 MBA's or 15 Chromebooks ($250 avg).  I don't share your opinion about Chromebooks.  Sure, there are some crappy models.  That happens when multiple vendors put out competing products.  There's always going to be someone willing to race to the bottom.  But a good .edu Chromebook can be had for $250-300.  Besides, the type of laptop isn't really that important in the grand scheme imo.  It's the curriculum and teacher that matter most.

It isn't $250. Unless a school system has a bad procurement officer or find themselves in a bind - due to having a bad procurement officer - Chromebooks can be obtained in bulk from special suppliers like CTL and Sector 5 via B2B channels frequently for $150 and at times under $100. Also, while there are many advantages to a Mac or iPad there is one factor you aren't considering. If you want a refresher of that factor, view the infamous "playtime" sequence of Toy Story 3: kids break stuff. So schools will either pay $250 for a "ruggedized" Chromebook that is nearly impossible to break short of driving a minivan over it or $99 for a Chromebook that is easily, cheaply replaceable when broken. Also, if it is broken or lost by the little 10 year old what happens to the data? If it is an iPad or Mac, it is gone. If it is a Chromebook, it is all in the cloud. (You can even configure it to automatically sync the "Downloads" folder, the only local storage, to Google Drive.) So issue a new Chromebook, have the kid sign in again with the same account and it all pops up again in a few minutes. 

Sorry, you can hate Google forever for putting a touchscreen UI with Android as opposed to "doing the right thing", continuing with their Blackberry clone until they went out of business - which would have allowed Microsoft who also had a touchscreen UI to dominate the market in their place which would have gained Apple and its fans what exactly except an even bigger, more powerful and influential Microsoft thanks to its billions in market share and tens of billions in revenue from mobile added to their already crushing market share in PC, cloud and enterprise with the very hostile Ballmer still running it to this day very likely - but Chromebooks are a very good, workable technical and product solution to a real problem that addressed an actual market need. The last data from Canalys stated that it isn't just schools buying Chromebooks anymore either. Small and medium-sized businesses are buying them as well as using the GSuite for their data processing and communications needs i.e. corporate email, videoconferencing, collaboration, etc. The hardware and the software cost a fraction of what Microsoft charges to provide the same and you don't need to hire - or more accurately contract - an IT staff to manage it. Basically, claiming that the low end of the market doesn't have legitimate needs and doesn't deserve good products to meet them isn't just classism, but it is bad economics. Just because Apple chooses not to meet that need - except for iPods - doesn't mean that it is bad when other companies do. Quite the contrary in fact. Feel free to wish that it was someone - anyone - but Google, but in the process go ahead and propose a business model that actually works. Everyone else that has tried to go up against Microsoft in this market - supplying products and services to schools and small enterprises - has failed, Google hasn't and there is a reason for that: they came up with products and a business/revenue model that is actually scalable and viable where others failed to do so.

Read better... and for context, instead of reading for points (imagined) to argue against.  $250 is just a price placeholder highlighting the cost difference that still exists between the discounted MBA and a Chromebook... also to make my 15-to-5 ratio work.  Really wasn't intended as a platform for your soapbox.  Also, really not sure how you formed the opinion that I hate Google.  Nothing in my comment would indicate that.  I think you've been betrayed by your inner monologue while composing your missive.  

Focused commentary serves your purpose better.  You're all over the place with stream of consciousness tangentially related ramblings.

alanh

 I'm seeing it at $799 not $779....

cloudguy

Fidonet127 said:

cloudguy said:

Basically, claiming that the low end of the market doesn't have legitimate needs and doesn't deserve good products to meet them isn't just classism, but it is bad economics. 

Nobody is claiming this at all. In the mean time, my child with their 2018 or 2019 HP Chromebook gets knocked offline several times a week and sometimes several times a day. My Apple products have no such problems, even though my Macs are 2014 models. This is despite having good internet, upgraded the wifi to wifi 6 mesh system, adding a stand and a fan to keep his school laptop from having problems. 

First off, your 2014 MacBook would be:
1. Way more expensive than $100-$300
2. Against procurement policy to purchase since rules generally prohibit buying used/refurbished devices due to warranty/service issues
3. Even more prone to breaking and needing to replace than brand new Macs

Also:
1. They would still need an IT staff to manage. That is a lot of money.
2. And what would these schools run on these Macs anyway? You guessed it ... Google Classroom. Which is what the vast majority of schools that chose iPads over Chromebooks are running anyway, as are the schools that are still using Windows laptops. Apple tried to address this area by working something out with Pearson to deliver ebooks to iPads, but it was just that - replacing textbooks with iPads - plus whatever learning apps that third parties put in the App Store. Google Classroom is a comprehensive solution for education that Apple can't match. A lot of people hate it - there was this software engineer for Slack who wrote an oped ripping it - but right now the choice is between "flawed" (Google Classroom) and "nothing" and flawed beats nothing every time. 

Also, allow me to point out that if your kid's Chromebook has a USB 3.0 port - and even cheap Chromebooks made as far back as 2015 do - then a gigabit ethernet to USB adapter works fine. Even some Wi-Fi to USB dongles do! A problem that is easy to fix if the real issue isn't being upset at being forced to use something other than an iPad or MacBook in the first place.

wood1208

Apple's new strategy is to offer better value comparing to past. It shows up in iPhone 11, SE,HP Mini and M1 Macbooks. Among them Macbook's future looks brighter where Apple will be able to capture more market share in laptop and desktop computing.

I am not going to debate 128GB SSD as it can easily filled up like 16GB iPhone. IMO Macbook 256GB and iPhone 64GB should be base.

mknelson

wood1208 said:

Apple's new strategy is to offer better value comparing to past. It shows up in iPhone 11, SE,HP Mini and M1 Macbooks. Among them Macbook's future looks brighter where Apple will be able to capture more market share in laptop and desktop computing.

I am not going to debate 128GB SSD as it can easily filled up like 16GB iPhone. IMO Macbook 256GB and iPhone 64GB should be base.

Most schools use Google Docs and Apps. It's basically all stored online and run in a browser. There won't actually be much stored on the school laptops except for special projects - maybe a class video or photo album.

Fidonet127

cloudguy said:

Fidonet127 said:

cloudguy said:

Basically, claiming that the low end of the market doesn't have legitimate needs and doesn't deserve good products to meet them isn't just classism, but it is bad economics. 

Nobody is claiming this at all. In the mean time, my child with their 2018 or 2019 HP Chromebook gets knocked offline several times a week and sometimes several times a day. My Apple products have no such problems, even though my Macs are 2014 models. This is despite having good internet, upgraded the wifi to wifi 6 mesh system, adding a stand and a fan to keep his school laptop from having problems. 

First off, your 2014 MacBook would be:
1. Way more expensive than $100-$300
2. Against procurement policy to purchase since rules generally prohibit buying used/refurbished devices due to warranty/service issues
3. Even more prone to breaking and needing to replace than brand new Macs

Also:
1. They would still need an IT staff to manage. That is a lot of money.
2. And what would these schools run on these Macs anyway? You guessed it ... Google Classroom. Which is what the vast majority of schools that chose iPads over Chromebooks are running anyway, as are the schools that are still using Windows laptops. Apple tried to address this area by working something out with Pearson to deliver ebooks to iPads, but it was just that - replacing textbooks with iPads - plus whatever learning apps that third parties put in the App Store. Google Classroom is a comprehensive solution for education that Apple can't match. A lot of people hate it - there was this software engineer for Slack who wrote an oped ripping it - but right now the choice is between "flawed" (Google Classroom) and "nothing" and flawed beats nothing every time. 

Also, allow me to point out that if your kid's Chromebook has a USB 3.0 port - and even cheap Chromebooks made as far back as 2015 do - then a gigabit ethernet to USB adapter works fine. Even some Wi-Fi to USB dongles do! A problem that is easy to fix if the real issue isn't being upset at being forced to use something other than an iPad or MacBook in the first place.

If you didn't get the hint, our child is working from home. The point is still, that six year old Macs are still operating better than the Chromebook they supplied. Our wifi is very good, It is a mesh system. We could of used our own stuff, at our house, however the school wants to use their stuff. I also didn't care, if our child uses Chromebook as long as it works. You have this weird idea that any person that uses Macs, somehow hates Google, Chromebook, etc. I never said for the schools to buy old Macs as any sort of solution. Maybe you should stop jumping to conclusions.

OctoMonkey

alanh said:

 I'm seeing it at $799 not $779....

Perhaps if a district contacts an Apple education sales rep wanting to purchase 1000 units the price goes down to $779.  Might not be much savings per unit, but it add up and it's taxpayer's money being spent.

Sadly, this is likely still far too high.  Perhaps if they could break $500...  but even then I would doubt it.  The Chromebooks (Crapbooks as the students in my son's schools call them) are simply too cheap.  Price is trumping quality and longevity.  We have purchased iMacs for our kids to use...  I was tired of seeing my boys with their faces 6 inches from the Chromebook's screen because the display is so pathetic.  My 2011, 11" Macbook Air has a far superior display.

normm

alanh said:

 I'm seeing it at $799 not $779....

The article says you have to buy multiples of five units to get that price.  Does that work?

mike1

alanh said:

 I'm seeing it at $799 not $779....

What happens to the price if you change the quantity to 5?

CloudTalkin

mike1 said:

alanh said:

 I'm seeing it at $799 not $779....

What happens to the price if you change the quantity to 5?

You're correct.  It says right in the article: To take advantage of the $779 price tag, a United States educational institution must purchase the model in multiples of five units. 
$100 off 4000 worth of laptops seems a bit underwhelming.  It equates to a 2.5% .edu discount.  

gmgravytrain

It's a darn shame Apple will never be able to compete with other companies in the educational institutions, except maybe in Dubai.  It just seems as though Apple is leaving an awful lot of market share on the table, but I'm not going to question Apple's financial model.  Quality doesn't sell to the impoverished, only cheap does.  I can't imagine how Apple ever was able to conquer the educational market in those early years of the company.  Apple will just have to make do with what it can sell to the masses.

rezwits

cloudguy said:

CloudTalkin said:

razorpit said:

Common sense says winner, however with us already having incredibly high school taxes and schools still ask us to supply pencils, crayons, glue sticks, etc., I don't see this moving many of these over the horrible Chromebook's my kids now have.

Yeah, it is hard to argue when looking at school budgets.  A school can purchase 5 MBA's or 15 Chromebooks ($250 avg).  I don't share your opinion about Chromebooks.  Sure, there are some crappy models.  That happens when multiple vendors put out competing products.  There's always going to be someone willing to race to the bottom.  But a good .edu Chromebook can be had for $250-300.  Besides, the type of laptop isn't really that important in the grand scheme imo.  It's the curriculum and teacher that matter most.

It isn't $250. Unless a school system has a bad procurement officer or find themselves in a bind - due to having a bad procurement officer - Chromebooks can be obtained in bulk from special suppliers like CTL and Sector 5 via B2B channels frequently for $150 and at times under $100. Also, while there are many advantages to a Mac or iPad there is one factor you aren't considering. If you want a refresher of that factor, view the infamous "playtime" sequence of Toy Story 3: kids break stuff. So schools will either pay $250 for a "ruggedized" Chromebook that is nearly impossible to break short of driving a minivan over it or $99 for a Chromebook that is easily, cheaply replaceable when broken. Also, if it is broken or lost by the little 10 year old what happens to the data? If it is an iPad or Mac, it is gone. If it is a Chromebook, it is all in the cloud. (You can even configure it to automatically sync the "Downloads" folder, the only local storage, to Google Drive.) So issue a new Chromebook, have the kid sign in again with the same account and it all pops up again in a few minutes. 

Sorry, one can hate Google forever...

Basically, claiming that the low end of the market doesn't have legitimate needs and doesn't deserve good products to meet them isn't just classism, but it is bad economics. Just because Apple exercises their perfectly valid right to choose not to meet that need doesn't mean that it is bad when other companies do. Quite the contrary in fact. Feel free to wish that it was someone - anyone - but Google, but in the process go ahead and propose a business model that actually works. Everyone else that has tried to go up against Microsoft in this market - supplying products and services to schools and small enterprises - has failed, Google hasn't and there is a reason for that: they came up with products and a business/revenue model that is actually scalable and viable where others failed to do so.

There isn't any hating here, but it's honestly like:

iPad as a little kid, graduate Kindergarten (K-2nd), ChromeBook with a Browser, get to High School (3rd-7th), (8th/9th-12th) GET REAL! . (i.e. MacBook for $600), I mean it's like once they use WebKit, enough, they'll want to really get in there and code/Xcode or just use Office (at least)...

GeorgeBMac

My grandson's school handed out 2 in 1's to all of their students -- and without both tablet and laptop their students simply can't do the homework or take the tests.  On both his last math and Social Studies tests he had to answer questions as well as draw graphs -- one requires a keyboard, the other an electronic pencil -- so he was switching back and forth between laptop mode and tablet mode as he took the test*.

So, for my grandson, a MacBook by itself would be worthless no matter how little it might cost:   $1,399, $999, $799 or $9.99

Does Apple want schools to buy BOTH a MacBook AND an iPad for each student?   How stupid can they get?  Schools are not going to do that!

But then you get to the next problem:   His school is running Google software on Windows.   While MacOS can do most of it, by all reports, it can't do all that is required.

Apple needs to get in better touch with reality if they want to break back into the school market.   Their products, as they stand, simply can't do the job in today's environment.

Apple needs to either invest in the R&D and resources needed to be effective competitors in the public school market or drop out.  Right now they're just spinning their wheels.  

Both Steve and Bill knew that it was software that does the job and the hardware is only there to enable to the software.  Without the software the hardware is worthless.   And, right now, Apple does not have the necessary software.

* Full disclosure:   He used his iPad with an external keyboard and trackpad because its better than the crappy Dell his school gave him (when was the last time anybody used a Celeron processor?).   His iPad with keyboard and mouse has been a capable replacement for the school's 2-in-1.   But the school computer remains at the ready in case his Apple equipment can't complete a task (due mostly to software differences).

larryjw

Several issues take precedence:

Sure, Tech is pushing computers for kids -- money in the bank -- but also believing they can make a positive contribution.  But, does tech improve teaching and learning in k-12?

Pandemic: No choice now to use tech for remote learning. What can schools and parents afford?

Pandemic: Kids and families need connectivity. Unless you're in the upper income levels, connectivity is not available. If you live in non-urban centers, connectivity doesn't exist. We've been paying ATT and Verizon, etc billions in taxes for 30 years to bring the internet to non-urban centers and these companies have just pocketed the taxes for CEO and investors benefit. 

In urban centers, apartment owners have veto power over upgrading to allow for internet connections. And veto they do. And homelessness was astronomical before the pandemic, worse after the pandemic, and, what's higher than astronomical?, when CDC restrictions on evictions are eliminated.