Cost of Apple switching to Intel
So now that Apple is in the midst of switching over to Intel processors and folks have pointed out that the CPUs are more expensive I wonder what the real cost is? There are various factors such as Apple needing to design and support the manufacturing of the various support chips, if and when those could not be found on shelf, as well as board design. My guess is that designing the support chips and having them made as well as board design costs could more than offset the extra costs of the CPU. What do the rest of you think?
Comments
Originally posted by Brendon
So now that Apple is in the midst of switching over to Intel processors and folks have pointed out that the CPUs are more expensive I wonder what the real cost is? There are various factors such as Apple needing to design and support the manufacturing of the various support chips, if and when those could not be found on shelf, as well as board design. My guess is that designing the support chips and having them made as well as board design costs could more than offset the extra costs of the CPU. What do the rest of you think?
This is so general.
Originally posted by Brendon
So now that Apple is in the midst of switching over to Intel processors and folks have pointed out that the CPUs are more expensive I wonder what the real cost is? There are various factors such as Apple needing to design and support the manufacturing of the various support chips, if and when those could not be found on shelf, as well as board design. My guess is that designing the support chips and having them made as well as board design costs could more than offset the extra costs of the CPU. What do the rest of you think?
The chips that the mac faithful want, ie Yonah and Merom, are more expensive. But it has been pointed out to me that there are many other chips that intel offers that are cheaper and which may find their way into the lower end mac models.
I think since Apple buys so many chips they are probably much less expensive, perhaps as much as 35% off from what intel lists per 1000.
Plus, Intel is making a huge profit, obviously. They are pretty generous with price drops and clockspeed increases. The core duo will be dirt cheap once Merom comes out.
Apple is making a killing, no worries.
Overall Apple has to do less and that makes moving to Intel a better overall solution IMO.
Originally posted by tensdanny38
and they get the boards for really, really cheap.
Really? Wow. How much do they get them for?
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Really? Wow. How much do they get them for?
I believe that it has been written that the cost of one CPU would run Apple about double the cost of a PPC, or about $150 more. I believe that the savings on the MB and the savings on the support chips would make up some of this cost. Basically other makers have laptops that compare with the MacBook Pro but are cheaper. I think that what we are seeing in the pricing is the cost of changing the product lines over to Intel, and not the final pricing that we could see after Apple makes the transition complete. I guess this would include the big apps as well.
Originally posted by Brendon
I believe that it has been written that the cost of one CPU would run Apple about double the cost of a PPC, or about $150 more. I believe that the savings on the MB and the savings on the support chips would make up some of this cost. Basically other makers have laptops that compare with the MacBook Pro but are cheaper. I think that what we are seeing in the pricing is the cost of changing the product lines over to Intel, and not the final pricing that we could see after Apple makes the transition complete. I guess this would include the big apps as well.
Hmmm...I don't follow this logic...and it doesn't support the "fact" that "they get the boards for really, really cheap". The point is that no one here knows (with any degree of real accuracy) what Apple's product cost structure is or the exact nature of its deal with Intel.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Hmmm...I don't follow this logic...and it doesn't support the "fact" that "they get the boards for really, really cheap". The point is that no one here knows (with any degree of real accuracy) what Apple's product cost structure is or the exact nature of its deal with Intel.
Correct and this is another attempt at understanding that structure better. Future hardware does depend on this, so we could make better guesses as to what is in the offing if we know more about the cost of going Intel. Now the fact that the vast majority of the market is using the same basic kit that Apple is using should make this job much easier. Apple also has .Mac and iLife as revenue streams while the other Intel hardware makers don't have this. To tie this with future hardware, look at the offerings in the MacBook Pro, it lacks some of the features that others are offering in their 'Books. So will this always be the case? Or is it simply that Apple is so used to designing their own offerings that they are having difficulty letting Intel do that. Or more likely they are having trouble coordinating those activities.