We can keep going in circles and hijack every other thread about how Apple should do a mid-range extensible tower and magically make high revenues off of it even though other PC manufacturers don't and haven't in well over a decade now, and about how they should do this or should do that.
I'd rather talk about something realistic, myself.
Well I don't mean to hijack the thread but you've referenced an article which claims that market share will increase and I just don't see without the models I've mentioned. I'll be moving on now.
But I personally don't know how it would fit in Apples product matrix without eating a bit of 15" MacBook Pro sales.
Home many in the Pro segment do you see buying a GMA machine and how many consumer are going to drop $2000 plus on a laptop? Not many. On the flip side, when they can get a 15" GMA windows laptop how many do you think are going to buy the 13" iBook instead. This is sales 101 people. You sell what the consumer wants to buy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac
While I agree that Apple is quite profitable I also beleive that Apple could make a 15" Macbook and maintain their nice margins. Also do you actually believe Apple can substancially increase market share without a 15" Macbook and a mid-range tower? I don't.
Nope. Anyone who thinks the computer world is going to shift to the Apple way of thinking is fooling themselves.
Apple is certainly late to the Core2 party so I think it's safe to say they're making a design change. All the 1st gen Intel machines look outwardly similar if not identical to their PPC predecessors. Apple may be ready to head into the Leopard era with a new look and their current bestsellers (notebooks) should be leading the way.
Until the operating system and applications are truly resolution independent I don't think higher res screens make sense. I'm still under 40 and yet I'm finding myself increasing browser font sizes and working on documents at more than 100%. Increasing screen res for me wouldn't actually give me any additional space to work because I'd have to increase the size of everything even more to read it.
As for the hi-jacking of the thread, Apple is doing well because they remain focused. There are very few standard models and a limited number of build-to-order options.
At the same time I'm one of those who thinks their current lineup (and the ones before that) contain glaring mistakes or omissions. Putting all the good components and options into the 17" MacBook Pro while not even offering a 13" Pro is assinine, as is not having a non-Pro 15". The mid-range tower is a good idea despite the opposition in this thread. Such a box should cost less to manufacture than the iMac does (no display, no expensive notebook components, no elaborate cooling design) and yet could be sold in the same retail price range by promoting the power of a real desktop CPU and the flexibility of a tower design (2 HDs, two PCI-express slots, 4 RAM slots). The MacPro proves that Apple can compete on price with a desktop design.
The problem is that a 13" MacBook Pro and a 15" MacBook will have more or less overlapping prices.
The 13" MacBook Pro will be more expensive than the 15" MacBook and this can confuse customers as much as this does in the PC world (where most people chose an inexpensive 15" notebook because size and price matters).
If there will be a 15" MacBook, people will whine and bitch as loud as they can because Apple will protects its high Pro margins by keeping screen resolution and other features as low as the 13" MacBook and increasing it's price as much as $200-$300.
The problem is that a 13" MacBook Pro and a 15" MacBook will have more or less overlapping prices.
The 13" MacBook Pro will be more expensive than the 15" MacBook and this can confuse customers as much as this does in the PC world (where most people chose an inexpensive 15" notebook because size and price matters).
If there will be a 15" MacBook, people will whine and bitch as loud as they can because Apple will protects its high Pro margins by keeping screen resolution and other features as low as the 13" MacBook and increasing it's price as much as $200-$300.
On the other hand, why no just introduce a 12" or 13" MBP? You could even sell it cheaper than the black MB, pointing to the smaller screen size, people looking for 15" could still go that way. However, I think you could sell it for more than the black MB, and it would still sell quite well. I loved my 12" Dell Inspiron 300m for school use, it didn't hurt my back to lug it around.
I find it hard to believe this price. I just went over to Dell in US, and this configuration you mentioned sells for more than $5k, mainly due to processor and 4Gb of RAM ($5306 to be exact). Maybe I missed the joke...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass
Hey, I hate to tease you all, but this 12" Dell is thinner and lighter than the macbook (granted it's an inch smaller than mb) cost my dad in canada about $3400 canadian incl. shipping (not sure about tax) when he bought it a few days ago. I know that's a bit pricier than the Macbook, but check out what he got...
He was teasing me for holding out for the new MB pro, but I'm hoping that when it finally arrives the Pro will beat his. (and he'll still be stuck with XP... )
Dell XPS M1210
Components
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor T7600 (2.33GHz/667MHz/4MB)
Genuine Windows® XP Professional
Integrated Webcam and Mobile Broadband Antenna
4GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz (2 Dimms)
100GB 7200RPM SATA Hard Drive
8x CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) with double-layer DVD+R write capability
256MB NVIDIA® GeForce™ Go 7400 TurboCache™
Integrated Sound Blaster® Audigy™ HD Software Edition
...Why are they delaying the shipments so much....Other vendors are already shipping Core 2 Duo laptops so I would have thought that Apple would be the first ones...
apple has morew work to do before they can upgarde chips in their laptops, due to form factor. sony is as slow as apple if you check their store, because they make stylish laptops as well. that would not be tha case with no brand name or regular laptop makers like toshiba, hp, and dell who concentrate less on looks.
On the other hand, why no just introduce a 12" or 13" MBP? You could even sell it cheaper than the black MB, pointing to the smaller screen size, people looking for 15" could still go that way. However, I think you could sell it for more than the black MB, and it would still sell quite well. I loved my 12" Dell Inspiron 300m for school use, it didn't hurt my back to lug it around.
You can't sell a 13" or smaller MBP with dedicated graphics at a lower price than the Black MB, ever.
A 13"MBP would have no real benefit over a 15"MBP though.
Because it has a lot smaller screensize but like the MB it wouldn't be that much smaller in weight and size.
If you can lug a 13"MB around you can lug a 15"MBP around.
I think if there will be a small form factor MBP it has to be really small and people have to pay for it.
Personally I don't know if it would (or should) have dedicated graphics though. (depends on price)
I find it hard to believe this price. I just went over to Dell in US, and this configuration you mentioned sells for more than $5k, mainly due to processor and 4Gb of RAM ($5306 to be exact). Maybe I missed the joke...
I asked him, he got it during a RAM upgrade sale (i think 4 Gig for 2 Gig price), plus an educator's discount, and only 1-year warranty.
You can't sell a 13" or smaller MBP with dedicated graphics at a lower price than the Black MB, ever.
A 13"MBP would have no real benefit over a 15"MBP though.
Because it has a lot smaller screensize but like the MB it wouldn't be that much smaller in weight and size.
If you can lug a 13"MB around you can lug a 15"MBP around.
I think if there will be a small form factor MBP it has to be really small and people have to pay for it.
Personally I don't know if it would (or should) have dedicated graphics though. (depends on price)
and if it has to use the MacBook Pro moniker.
[edited to clarify]
I think that just introducing a 15" Macbook is really all that is necessary to fill in the gap between the Macbooks and MBPs. While some feel a 17" Macbook should be offered I'm less convinced about this.
What I'd like to see:
13" MB
1.8 ghz ICD
$1099
13" MB
2.0 ghz ICD
$1299
No price premium for black which is offered on both models
15" MB
2.0 ghz ICD
$1599
Offered in white and black with no black price premium
I think that just introducing a 15" Macbook is really all that is necessary to fill in the gap between the Macbooks and MBPs. While some feel a 17" Macbook should be offered I'm less convinced about this.
What I'd like to see:
13" MB
1.8 ghz ICD
$1099
13" MB
2.0 ghz ICD
$1299
No price premium for black which is offered on both models
15" MB
2.0 ghz ICD
$1599
Offered in white and black with no black price premium
15" MBP
2.0 ghz Core 2
Starting at $1999
Other speeds and configurations
17" MBP
2.0 ghz Core 2
Starting at $2599
Other speeds and configurations
Works for me except I'd bump the MBP configurations up to 2.16ghz and drop the Macbook configurations by $100.
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor T7600 (2.33GHz/667MHz/4MB)
Genuine Windows® XP Professional
Integrated Webcam and Mobile Broadband Antenna
4GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz (2 Dimms)
100GB 7200RPM SATA Hard Drive
8x CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) with double-layer DVD+R write capability
256MB NVIDIA® GeForce™ Go 7400 TurboCache™
Integrated Sound Blaster® Audigy™ HD Software Edition
That has got to be one of the butt-ugliest laptops I've ever seen.
A genuine question: How long does the battery last? (Did he get the 6-cell battery or the 9-Cell? If the 9-Cell, is it any bigger than the 6-Cell (does it stick out the back of the computer or something like that?) or just heavier? How much does the computer weigh with the 9-cell battery?
You can't sell a 13" or smaller MBP with dedicated graphics at a lower price than the Black MB, ever.
A 13"MBP would have no real benefit over a 15"MBP though. Because it has a lot smaller screensize but like the MB it wouldn't be that much smaller in weight and size. If you can lug a 13"MB around you can lug a 15"MBP around.
I think if there will be a small form factor MBP it has to be really small and people have to pay for it.
Personally I don't know if it would (or should) have dedicated graphics though. (depends on price) and if it has to use the MacBook Pro moniker.
I agree in that I think introducing an 10" to 12" MacBook Nano sans optical drive would be the way to go. Of course the price would be around the 15" MacBook Pro since you'd be going for portability, not power. Which is the reason I think they'd skip the "Pro" tag because the MBN would be using ULV chips, at best a slow (but probably dedicated) fanless GPU, etc... It should however have the non CPU/GPU MacBook Pro features.
And try not to so condescending, of course the difference in size/wieght between the 13" and the 15" MBP wouldn't be that much (neither was the difference between 12" PB and 12" iBook but even so it was enough). It would be still be nice though and the weight/size savings could be used on something else. That said, I still believe they should stick with the smaller subnotebook size instead of simply a 13" MacBook with a dedicated graphics card and aluminium body to make it "Pro".
I agree in that I think introducing an 10" to 12" MacBook Nano sans optical drive would be the way to go.
I like the idea of this but I don't care for the reality of them. Sony sells this type of laptop for $2050. Way too much for way too little. For $2000 it better have an optical drive.
Every Macbook should come with dedicated graphics. There is no excuse. At least something equal to an Nvidia 6200.
Why? I mean, really: for most people, it doesn't make a difference. Heck, I've rough edited whole TV shows with dedicated graphics. Most people aren't gamers, and the dedicated graphics keep getting better and better. Intel's next round will play video better, etc. Heck, most businesses use most of their computers for word processing, some spread sheet stuff, email and web surfin'. What do you need more than a dedicated graphics chip for that for? I bet Apple gets some good deals from the all-inclusive Intel solution. Why jack up prices even a little? Get a MBP if you want something better. I kinda like the utilitarian, but coolness of the MacBooks. I use the MBP's for work, but my kid and nieces and nephews get the MacBooks.
There is no way around the fact that the GMA950 is just low end cheap garbage, I love how Apple had the nerve to bust on those cheapass Integrated graphics and then turn around and use those things, Integrated graphics are a joke. I wonder how many millions of GMA950s Foxcon has at the ready to handicap the new Macbooks, or should I say cripple? Whats the point of a nice fast new Cpu if you are throwing in cheapo Integrated graphics that cant match the performance of real GPU's from 2- 3 years ago? A cpu that 3-4 times faster and a gpu thats 3-4 times crappier. APPLE is GPU crippling almost every machine it makes.
Comments
We can keep going in circles and hijack every other thread about how Apple should do a mid-range extensible tower and magically make high revenues off of it even though other PC manufacturers don't and haven't in well over a decade now, and about how they should do this or should do that.
I'd rather talk about something realistic, myself.
Well I don't mean to hijack the thread but you've referenced an article which claims that market share will increase and I just don't see without the models I've mentioned. I'll be moving on now.
Matsu would've loved it.
But I personally don't know how it would fit in Apples product matrix without eating a bit of 15" MacBook Pro sales.
Home many in the Pro segment do you see buying a GMA machine and how many consumer are going to drop $2000 plus on a laptop? Not many. On the flip side, when they can get a 15" GMA windows laptop how many do you think are going to buy the 13" iBook instead. This is sales 101 people. You sell what the consumer wants to buy.
While I agree that Apple is quite profitable I also beleive that Apple could make a 15" Macbook and maintain their nice margins. Also do you actually believe Apple can substancially increase market share without a 15" Macbook and a mid-range tower? I don't.
Nope. Anyone who thinks the computer world is going to shift to the Apple way of thinking is fooling themselves.
Until the operating system and applications are truly resolution independent I don't think higher res screens make sense. I'm still under 40 and yet I'm finding myself increasing browser font sizes and working on documents at more than 100%. Increasing screen res for me wouldn't actually give me any additional space to work because I'd have to increase the size of everything even more to read it.
As for the hi-jacking of the thread, Apple is doing well because they remain focused. There are very few standard models and a limited number of build-to-order options.
At the same time I'm one of those who thinks their current lineup (and the ones before that) contain glaring mistakes or omissions. Putting all the good components and options into the 17" MacBook Pro while not even offering a 13" Pro is assinine, as is not having a non-Pro 15". The mid-range tower is a good idea despite the opposition in this thread. Such a box should cost less to manufacture than the iMac does (no display, no expensive notebook components, no elaborate cooling design) and yet could be sold in the same retail price range by promoting the power of a real desktop CPU and the flexibility of a tower design (2 HDs, two PCI-express slots, 4 RAM slots). The MacPro proves that Apple can compete on price with a desktop design.
The 13" MacBook Pro will be more expensive than the 15" MacBook and this can confuse customers as much as this does in the PC world (where most people chose an inexpensive 15" notebook because size and price matters).
If there will be a 15" MacBook, people will whine and bitch as loud as they can because Apple will protects its high Pro margins by keeping screen resolution and other features as low as the 13" MacBook and increasing it's price as much as $200-$300.
The problem is that a 13" MacBook Pro and a 15" MacBook will have more or less overlapping prices.
The 13" MacBook Pro will be more expensive than the 15" MacBook and this can confuse customers as much as this does in the PC world (where most people chose an inexpensive 15" notebook because size and price matters).
If there will be a 15" MacBook, people will whine and bitch as loud as they can because Apple will protects its high Pro margins by keeping screen resolution and other features as low as the 13" MacBook and increasing it's price as much as $200-$300.
On the other hand, why no just introduce a 12" or 13" MBP? You could even sell it cheaper than the black MB, pointing to the smaller screen size, people looking for 15" could still go that way. However, I think you could sell it for more than the black MB, and it would still sell quite well. I loved my 12" Dell Inspiron 300m for school use, it didn't hurt my back to lug it around.
Hey, I hate to tease you all, but this 12" Dell is thinner and lighter than the macbook (granted it's an inch smaller than mb) cost my dad in canada about $3400 canadian incl. shipping (not sure about tax) when he bought it a few days ago. I know that's a bit pricier than the Macbook, but check out what he got...
He was teasing me for holding out for the new MB pro, but I'm hoping that when it finally arrives the Pro will beat his. (and he'll still be stuck with XP...
Dell XPS M1210
Components
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor T7600 (2.33GHz/667MHz/4MB)
Genuine Windows® XP Professional
Integrated Webcam and Mobile Broadband Antenna
4GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz (2 Dimms)
100GB 7200RPM SATA Hard Drive
8x CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) with double-layer DVD+R write capability
256MB NVIDIA® GeForce™ Go 7400 TurboCache™
Integrated Sound Blaster® Audigy™ HD Software Edition
...Why are they delaying the shipments so much....Other vendors are already shipping Core 2 Duo laptops so I would have thought that Apple would be the first ones...
apple has morew work to do before they can upgarde chips in their laptops, due to form factor. sony is as slow as apple if you check their store, because they make stylish laptops as well. that would not be tha case with no brand name or regular laptop makers like toshiba, hp, and dell who concentrate less on looks.
On the other hand, why no just introduce a 12" or 13" MBP? You could even sell it cheaper than the black MB, pointing to the smaller screen size, people looking for 15" could still go that way. However, I think you could sell it for more than the black MB, and it would still sell quite well. I loved my 12" Dell Inspiron 300m for school use, it didn't hurt my back to lug it around.
You can't sell a 13" or smaller MBP with dedicated graphics at a lower price than the Black MB, ever.
A 13"MBP would have no real benefit over a 15"MBP though.
Because it has a lot smaller screensize but like the MB it wouldn't be that much smaller in weight and size.
If you can lug a 13"MB around you can lug a 15"MBP around.
I think if there will be a small form factor MBP it has to be really small and people have to pay for it.
Personally I don't know if it would (or should) have dedicated graphics though. (depends on price)
and if it has to use the MacBook Pro moniker.
[edited to clarify]
I find it hard to believe this price. I just went over to Dell in US, and this configuration you mentioned sells for more than $5k, mainly due to processor and 4Gb of RAM ($5306 to be exact). Maybe I missed the joke...
I asked him, he got it during a RAM upgrade sale (i think 4 Gig for 2 Gig price), plus an educator's discount, and only 1-year warranty.
You can't sell a 13" or smaller MBP with dedicated graphics at a lower price than the Black MB, ever.
A 13"MBP would have no real benefit over a 15"MBP though.
Because it has a lot smaller screensize but like the MB it wouldn't be that much smaller in weight and size.
If you can lug a 13"MB around you can lug a 15"MBP around.
I think if there will be a small form factor MBP it has to be really small and people have to pay for it.
Personally I don't know if it would (or should) have dedicated graphics though. (depends on price)
and if it has to use the MacBook Pro moniker.
[edited to clarify]
I think that just introducing a 15" Macbook is really all that is necessary to fill in the gap between the Macbooks and MBPs. While some feel a 17" Macbook should be offered I'm less convinced about this.
What I'd like to see:
13" MB
1.8 ghz ICD
$1099
13" MB
2.0 ghz ICD
$1299
No price premium for black which is offered on both models
15" MB
2.0 ghz ICD
$1599
Offered in white and black with no black price premium
15" MBP
2.0 ghz Core 2
Starting at $1999
Other speeds and configurations
17" MBP
2.0 ghz Core 2
Starting at $2599
Other speeds and configurations
I think that just introducing a 15" Macbook is really all that is necessary to fill in the gap between the Macbooks and MBPs. While some feel a 17" Macbook should be offered I'm less convinced about this.
What I'd like to see:
13" MB
1.8 ghz ICD
$1099
13" MB
2.0 ghz ICD
$1299
No price premium for black which is offered on both models
15" MB
2.0 ghz ICD
$1599
Offered in white and black with no black price premium
15" MBP
2.0 ghz Core 2
Starting at $1999
Other speeds and configurations
17" MBP
2.0 ghz Core 2
Starting at $2599
Other speeds and configurations
Works for me except I'd bump the MBP configurations up to 2.16ghz and drop the Macbook configurations by $100.
Dell XPS M1210
Components
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor T7600 (2.33GHz/667MHz/4MB)
Genuine Windows® XP Professional
Integrated Webcam and Mobile Broadband Antenna
4GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz (2 Dimms)
100GB 7200RPM SATA Hard Drive
8x CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) with double-layer DVD+R write capability
256MB NVIDIA® GeForce™ Go 7400 TurboCache™
Integrated Sound Blaster® Audigy™ HD Software Edition
That has got to be one of the butt-ugliest laptops I've ever seen.
A genuine question: How long does the battery last? (Did he get the 6-cell battery or the 9-Cell? If the 9-Cell, is it any bigger than the 6-Cell (does it stick out the back of the computer or something like that?) or just heavier? How much does the computer weigh with the 9-cell battery?
...and maybe 15"
Just give me a MacBook with ? GPU
Not going to happen.
You can't sell a 13" or smaller MBP with dedicated graphics at a lower price than the Black MB, ever.
A 13"MBP would have no real benefit over a 15"MBP though. Because it has a lot smaller screensize but like the MB it wouldn't be that much smaller in weight and size. If you can lug a 13"MB around you can lug a 15"MBP around.
I think if there will be a small form factor MBP it has to be really small and people have to pay for it.
Personally I don't know if it would (or should) have dedicated graphics though. (depends on price) and if it has to use the MacBook Pro moniker.
I agree in that I think introducing an 10" to 12" MacBook Nano sans optical drive would be the way to go. Of course the price would be around the 15" MacBook Pro since you'd be going for portability, not power. Which is the reason I think they'd skip the "Pro" tag because the MBN would be using ULV chips, at best a slow (but probably dedicated) fanless GPU, etc... It should however have the non CPU/GPU MacBook Pro features.
And try not to so condescending, of course the difference in size/wieght between the 13" and the 15" MBP wouldn't be that much (neither was the difference between 12" PB and 12" iBook but even so it was enough). It would be still be nice though and the weight/size savings could be used on something else. That said, I still believe they should stick with the smaller subnotebook size instead of simply a 13" MacBook with a dedicated graphics card and aluminium body to make it "Pro".
I agree in that I think introducing an 10" to 12" MacBook Nano sans optical drive would be the way to go.
I like the idea of this but I don't care for the reality of them. Sony sells this type of laptop for $2050. Way too much for way too little. For $2000 it better have an optical drive.
Every Macbook should come with dedicated graphics. There is no excuse. At least something equal to an Nvidia 6200.
Why? I mean, really: for most people, it doesn't make a difference. Heck, I've rough edited whole TV shows with dedicated graphics. Most people aren't gamers, and the dedicated graphics keep getting better and better. Intel's next round will play video better, etc. Heck, most businesses use most of their computers for word processing, some spread sheet stuff, email and web surfin'. What do you need more than a dedicated graphics chip for that for? I bet Apple gets some good deals from the all-inclusive Intel solution. Why jack up prices even a little? Get a MBP if you want something better. I kinda like the utilitarian, but coolness of the MacBooks. I use the MBP's for work, but my kid and nieces and nephews get the MacBooks.