What an amazing move by Apple. They usually keep charging the same price until they refresh the product, a practice that really annoys me because some products only refresh once a year.
Apple does a lot of things that annoy me, but at the core are the specs and pricing of their equipment over time. Usually a machine debuts at a fair price, but with a smaller HD and less RAM than bargain PCs. BTO options are ridiculously overpriced, often 3 times the retail price of the upgraded component and the prices remain constant for the entire lifetime of the machine. With many refresh cycles of 9 months or longer, by the end of the production run all Macs look underspec'd and overpriced.
I still can't believe the 2008 Mac Pro shipped with a 320GB HD when 750GB drives are quickly approaching $100 retail.
So, because it's a niche computer, it automatically devalues it?
Apparently, all computers have to be made specifically for YOUR needs, correct?
YES!! you read me clearly.
HA. i was merely stating what i believed to be true.
don't get me wrong, i love apple computers. i just like to point out ridiculous products that i'd love to have if i were rich, but are useless to the common poor man.
HA. i was merely stating what i believed to be true.
don't get me wrong, i love apple computers. i just like to point out ridiculous products that i'd love to have if i were rich, but are useless to the common poor man.
The Air is one of the lowest selling macs ever.
IMHO, it is worth $799.
And, for what its worth, (and you really need to think about this), Apple needs to get away from the NO GPU in MINI, MACBOOK, and AIR (regardless of battery life).
Now, besides the Air being over priced, under powered, and okay, light, Apple has this mind set that they insist on screwing the PRO user.
Entertain me.
When the 1st Macbook came out, the OpenGL came out scoring 71%, not bad, then it jumped to 120%, still, no gaming right, so who cares? Well, as it turns out, Barefeats reports MOTION could run on the Macbook. Then, the next gen with Leopard made Open GL jump to 171%, wow, still, no gaming, but motion was great. So, what did apple do, the crippled it and now it scores at a measly 24%. Why? It was never good for games, so why screw with the PRO users, who cares if they can use a cheap machine for motion, chances are you can rest assured they have a PRO machine and you can't play games on it, so why screw with us?
Now, could you play games on a mini or a Macbook, you could be sure that MOTION and 3D would run great. SO WHAT?!
Why does Apple keep insisting on screwing with the PRO, which by the way is the smallest user base. Its baffling. Reallly. You can then look at the iMac, which used to ship with MATTE, but now its all GLOSSY, again, NO PRO USE for COLOR or GRAPHICS (which was not the case a few years back), again, screwing the consumers.
To make matters worse, the Macbook and iMac also use CHEAP NON STANDARD Firewire chipsets (Macbook Pro and Mac Pro use TEXAS INSTRUMENTS), if you read some audio forums, many high end studios complain that their audio device won't work with a macbook or iMac, in fact, from Sept 07 to FEB 08, the Macbook Pro had the same cheap chip-set.
So, all in all, Apple continues to reduce prices, and focuses on the CONSUMER and not the PRO, but at the SAME time, screws over the PRO user.
It makes no sense. With gaming being one of the biggest markets, bigger than music, think about what it would be like if EVERY APPLE had a GREAT GPU, everyone and their mother would by a MAC mini or a Macbook, as a second computer that you could use for games, PRO use and not worry about as much as your $2500MBP or Mac Pro, not that you would lose that latter.
Still. Apple needs to grow up and get away from this whole ON BOARD GPU crap and let users play games then use it for motion if they want.
Do you have any proof of this "lowest selling macs ever"? I doubt you do, as far as I can tell, you completely made that up or are presenting your belief or assumptions as a fact. That's probably a ridiculously low bar as there's at least one Mac that was available for a few weeks before it was replaced with a new model.
All the stories I've seen have Apple reps saying Apple is quite happy with their results for Macbook Air, so even if they don't sell as many as they do Macbooks, it's not really competition to a MacBook, and looks like it probably sells enough to keep making. If something doesn't sell as well as they would like, they usually don't say anything at all.
As for the rest of your complaints, you're complaining that you can't do pro stuff on consumer hardware? Alrighty then. Some of them are valid complaints, but if Apple says a machine is not supported by a piece of software, then it's best to not depend on that machine to use it.
Do you have any proof of this "lowest selling macs ever"? I doubt you do, as far as I can tell, you completely made that up or are presenting your belief or assumptions as a fact.
According to Apple's last quarterly meeting notes, the MBA was not selling very well, and had disappointed analysts as well as the company. The forecast was off by almost 90,000 units. One executive compared it to the Cube.
I've been phoned by sales from over at the local Apple Store on 3 occasions in June alone, pushing the MBA (they know I'm in the market for a laptop). But it's just not going to work for me. I wanted it to... but I just can't "settle" for a functionality-depleted machine & go for looks.
It's a very cool computer but it wasn't designed for the road warrior. As I closely evaluated the unit, I looked over my product spec and PPT folders and those alone were 92 GB. I would have to do some serious paring down everywhere. When you're 10,000 miles from the office & no net connection, you better have every PPT and spec available
There would be many sacrifices needed, such as no more 1394 & saying goodbye to my whole back-up plan, which is very elegant. I use SuperDuper to a 1394>SATA external drive that is the exact same size as the drive in my Mac laptop, so a quick switch gets me up & running in less than 10 minutes. No longer effective with the MBA ... I'd have to wait 2 weeks or so & take it to the Apple Store.
The major problem was the poor choice to use a Parallel bus for the SSD drive. This means when Samsung releases their 250 GB Solid State 1.8" SATA drive in Q4, MBA owners will not be able to put one inside their MBA's, even though the form factor is right on.
The battery is the real killer, though. Flying from LAX to MEL takes 16-1/2 hours. It takes 9 hours to fly from ORD to CDG. It takes 9-1/2 hours to fly from SYD to HKG. I'm supposed to travel with a laptop whose battery can't be replaced? Gimme a break, dude.
Unlike Steve, I wasn't given my own private jet, so I need to tote extra batteries to keep working and watch movies ripped to the hard drive - whoops, sorry - with such a tiny drive, I guess ripping DVDs would be out of the question.
Also, I kind of think $1800 for one USB port is a little goofy. Again, the laptop is very cool but I think Apple went overboard on the whole thin thing. I mean, unless we're still in 1995 and laptops are 4-1/2" thick again, I don't think this is a problem anymore.
I'd love to tote a MBA around to local coffee shops and hear the oohs and aahhs. But to head out on the road to do business? Naw, it's just too limited. It's been stripped down way too much. Plus, it still has a 13" screen, and anybody who travels knows that 12" is the perfect size for that seat back tray!
When the 1st Macbook came out, the OpenGL came out scoring 71%, not bad, then it jumped to 120%, still, no gaming right, so who cares? Well, as it turns out, Barefeats reports MOTION could run on the Macbook. Then, the next gen with Leopard made Open GL jump to 171%, wow, still, no gaming, but motion was great. So, what did apple do, the crippled it and now it scores at a measly 24%. Why? It was never good for games, so why screw with the PRO users, who cares if they can use a cheap machine for motion, chances are you can rest assured they have a PRO machine and you can't play games on it, so why screw with us?
Uhhh, wth are you talking about? When did Apple cripple the MB's GPU, they went from the GMA 950 to the X3100, when did it get slower? IDK what you are talking about.
According to Apple's last quarterly meeting notes, the MBA was not selling very well, and had disappointed analysts as well as the company. The forecast was off by almost 90,000 units. One executive compared it to the Cube.
The MacBook Air launched successfully, and customers have responded "very well" to the ultraportable design.
The MacBook Air was "constrained" most of the quarter, but by the end of March was in a near-ideal supply balance.
Apple repeated its first quarter observations on the demographics of MacBook Air purchasers, saying that it appealed to college professors, students, and frequent travelers.
Cannibalization of other MacBook lines by the Air is said to be low.
Those are the only Air references I've been able to find from the most recent quartly conference call or meeting notes.
i like how defensive people are over a product they most likely dont sell.
BEEP. STARTING UP.
MUST SELL FOR APPLE.
MUST DEFEND MBA.
hahaha. i kid.
but seriously. i stick to my opinion that the MBA is for rich people.
it is now, in a way.
but in a few years it won't be.
Its not for rich people any more than the MBP is now that there is only a 600 dollar difference between the upgraded Air and the base MBP - its just a different type of system. low-weight and sleek vs. big and powerful. People obsess with dollar value per GB/GHz and not certain other things (my iBook G4 still runs snappy and its 40GB hard drive has tons of space on it).
But anyway this pushes (at least for me) the Air into a reasonable price range for my lifestyle. A new revision should do the trick methinks.
it's good for rich businessmen. looking for a small, light computer that that doesn't run very fast or hold much information just to do presentations, take notes, or do other light business work.
as for it being a good deal for your only every day use computer. no.
Actually it's ideal for my wife too - she upgrades every 3 years or so, and has been through:
Monster Big Sony F series laptop (£3000)
PowerBook 15" (£1300)
iMac 24" (£1200) - didn't like it, wanted a laptop again, had the iMac for a year.
MacBook Air (£1200) - best so far
She does mainly email, web browsing and MS Office student/teachery (she's both) stuff, and finds it perfect, loves the size and portability.
We're on Mozy for remote backups, TM over wireless for local one so no worries there. Just works...
I'm guessing they've not got around to slashing the prices for the UK store. It's £190 for the 1.8Ghz upgrade and £639 for the SSD. A total of £829 (Yes, over $1600 inc tax). Or was it more expensive before?
To answer myself, they'd not updated the UK.
The upgrade is now £130 for the CPU and £389.99 for the SSD, total = £519.99 (just over $1000 inc tax).
The top end MBA is now £1719 inc tax (£1462.98 ex tax) which is just shy of $3000 before tax. So, we're about as expensive as the USA now BEFORE the cut.
..... a small, light computer that that doesn't run very fast or hold much information just to do presentations, take notes, or do other light business work.
Do you have any proof of this "lowest selling macs ever"? I doubt you do, as far as I can tell, you completely made that up or are presenting your belief or assumptions as a fact. That's probably a ridiculously low bar as there's at least one Mac that was available for a few weeks before it was replaced with a new model.
All the stories I've seen have Apple reps saying Apple is quite happy with their results for Macbook Air, so even if they don't sell as many as they do Macbooks, it's not really competition to a MacBook, and looks like it probably sells enough to keep making. If something doesn't sell as well as they would like, they usually don't say anything at all.
As for the rest of your complaints, you're complaining that you can't do pro stuff on consumer hardware? Alrighty then. Some of them are valid complaints, but if Apple says a machine is not supported by a piece of software, then it's best to not depend on that machine to use it.
He means- It one of the SLOOOOWEST running MACS ever.
Comments
Apple does a lot of things that annoy me, but at the core are the specs and pricing of their equipment over time. Usually a machine debuts at a fair price, but with a smaller HD and less RAM than bargain PCs. BTO options are ridiculously overpriced, often 3 times the retail price of the upgraded component and the prices remain constant for the entire lifetime of the machine. With many refresh cycles of 9 months or longer, by the end of the production run all Macs look underspec'd and overpriced.
I still can't believe the 2008 Mac Pro shipped with a 320GB HD when 750GB drives are quickly approaching $100 retail.
So, because it's a niche computer, it automatically devalues it?
Apparently, all computers have to be made specifically for YOUR needs, correct?
YES!! you read me clearly.
HA. i was merely stating what i believed to be true.
don't get me wrong, i love apple computers. i just like to point out ridiculous products that i'd love to have if i were rich, but are useless to the common poor man.
YES!! you read me clearly.
HA. i was merely stating what i believed to be true.
don't get me wrong, i love apple computers. i just like to point out ridiculous products that i'd love to have if i were rich, but are useless to the common poor man.
The Air is one of the lowest selling macs ever.
IMHO, it is worth $799.
And, for what its worth, (and you really need to think about this), Apple needs to get away from the NO GPU in MINI, MACBOOK, and AIR (regardless of battery life).
Now, besides the Air being over priced, under powered, and okay, light, Apple has this mind set that they insist on screwing the PRO user.
Entertain me.
When the 1st Macbook came out, the OpenGL came out scoring 71%, not bad, then it jumped to 120%, still, no gaming right, so who cares? Well, as it turns out, Barefeats reports MOTION could run on the Macbook. Then, the next gen with Leopard made Open GL jump to 171%, wow, still, no gaming, but motion was great. So, what did apple do, the crippled it and now it scores at a measly 24%.
Now, could you play games on a mini or a Macbook, you could be sure that MOTION and 3D would run great. SO WHAT?!
Why does Apple keep insisting on screwing with the PRO, which by the way is the smallest user base. Its baffling. Reallly. You can then look at the iMac, which used to ship with MATTE, but now its all GLOSSY, again, NO PRO USE for COLOR or GRAPHICS (which was not the case a few years back), again, screwing the consumers.
To make matters worse, the Macbook and iMac also use CHEAP NON STANDARD Firewire chipsets (Macbook Pro and Mac Pro use TEXAS INSTRUMENTS), if you read some audio forums, many high end studios complain that their audio device won't work with a macbook or iMac, in fact, from Sept 07 to FEB 08, the Macbook Pro had the same cheap chip-set.
So, all in all, Apple continues to reduce prices, and focuses on the CONSUMER and not the PRO, but at the SAME time, screws over the PRO user.
It makes no sense. With gaming being one of the biggest markets, bigger than music, think about what it would be like if EVERY APPLE had a GREAT GPU, everyone and their mother would by a MAC mini or a Macbook, as a second computer that you could use for games, PRO use and not worry about as much as your $2500MBP or Mac Pro, not that you would lose that latter.
Still. Apple needs to grow up and get away from this whole ON BOARD GPU crap and let users play games then use it for motion if they want.
It's terrible marketing. It really is.
The Air is one of the lowest selling macs ever.
Do you have any proof of this "lowest selling macs ever"? I doubt you do, as far as I can tell, you completely made that up or are presenting your belief or assumptions as a fact. That's probably a ridiculously low bar as there's at least one Mac that was available for a few weeks before it was replaced with a new model.
All the stories I've seen have Apple reps saying Apple is quite happy with their results for Macbook Air, so even if they don't sell as many as they do Macbooks, it's not really competition to a MacBook, and looks like it probably sells enough to keep making. If something doesn't sell as well as they would like, they usually don't say anything at all.
As for the rest of your complaints, you're complaining that you can't do pro stuff on consumer hardware? Alrighty then. Some of them are valid complaints, but if Apple says a machine is not supported by a piece of software, then it's best to not depend on that machine to use it.
Do you have any proof of this "lowest selling macs ever"? I doubt you do, as far as I can tell, you completely made that up or are presenting your belief or assumptions as a fact.
According to Apple's last quarterly meeting notes, the MBA was not selling very well, and had disappointed analysts as well as the company. The forecast was off by almost 90,000 units. One executive compared it to the Cube.
I've been phoned by sales from over at the local Apple Store on 3 occasions in June alone, pushing the MBA (they know I'm in the market for a laptop). But it's just not going to work for me. I wanted it to... but I just can't "settle" for a functionality-depleted machine & go for looks.
It's a very cool computer but it wasn't designed for the road warrior. As I closely evaluated the unit, I looked over my product spec and PPT folders and those alone were 92 GB. I would have to do some serious paring down everywhere. When you're 10,000 miles from the office & no net connection, you better have every PPT and spec available
There would be many sacrifices needed, such as no more 1394 & saying goodbye to my whole back-up plan, which is very elegant. I use SuperDuper to a 1394>SATA external drive that is the exact same size as the drive in my Mac laptop, so a quick switch gets me up & running in less than 10 minutes. No longer effective with the MBA ... I'd have to wait 2 weeks or so & take it to the Apple Store.
The major problem was the poor choice to use a Parallel bus for the SSD drive. This means when Samsung releases their 250 GB Solid State 1.8" SATA drive in Q4, MBA owners will not be able to put one inside their MBA's, even though the form factor is right on.
The battery is the real killer, though. Flying from LAX to MEL takes 16-1/2 hours. It takes 9 hours to fly from ORD to CDG. It takes 9-1/2 hours to fly from SYD to HKG. I'm supposed to travel with a laptop whose battery can't be replaced? Gimme a break, dude.
Unlike Steve, I wasn't given my own private jet, so I need to tote extra batteries to keep working and watch movies ripped to the hard drive - whoops, sorry - with such a tiny drive, I guess ripping DVDs would be out of the question.
Also, I kind of think $1800 for one USB port is a little goofy. Again, the laptop is very cool but I think Apple went overboard on the whole thin thing. I mean, unless we're still in 1995 and laptops are 4-1/2" thick again, I don't think this is a problem anymore.
I'd love to tote a MBA around to local coffee shops and hear the oohs and aahhs. But to head out on the road to do business? Naw, it's just too limited. It's been stripped down way too much. Plus, it still has a 13" screen, and anybody who travels knows that 12" is the perfect size for that seat back tray!
When the 1st Macbook came out, the OpenGL came out scoring 71%, not bad, then it jumped to 120%, still, no gaming right, so who cares? Well, as it turns out, Barefeats reports MOTION could run on the Macbook. Then, the next gen with Leopard made Open GL jump to 171%, wow, still, no gaming, but motion was great. So, what did apple do, the crippled it and now it scores at a measly 24%.
Uhhh, wth are you talking about? When did Apple cripple the MB's GPU, they went from the GMA 950 to the X3100, when did it get slower? IDK what you are talking about.
BEEP. STARTING UP.
MUST SELL FOR APPLE.
MUST DEFEND MBA.
hahaha. i kid.
but seriously. i stick to my opinion that the MBA is for rich people.
According to Apple's last quarterly meeting notes, the MBA was not selling very well, and had disappointed analysts as well as the company. The forecast was off by almost 90,000 units. One executive compared it to the Cube.
Link, please?
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ence_call.html
The MacBook Air launched successfully, and customers have responded "very well" to the ultraportable design.
The MacBook Air was "constrained" most of the quarter, but by the end of March was in a near-ideal supply balance.
Apple repeated its first quarter observations on the demographics of MacBook Air purchasers, saying that it appealed to college professors, students, and frequent travelers.
Cannibalization of other MacBook lines by the Air is said to be low.
Those are the only Air references I've been able to find from the most recent quartly conference call or meeting notes.
i like how defensive people are over a product they most likely dont sell.
BEEP. STARTING UP.
MUST SELL FOR APPLE.
MUST DEFEND MBA.
hahaha. i kid.
but seriously. i stick to my opinion that the MBA is for rich people.
it is now, in a way.
but in a few years it won't be.
Its not for rich people any more than the MBP is now that there is only a 600 dollar difference between the upgraded Air and the base MBP - its just a different type of system. low-weight and sleek vs. big and powerful. People obsess with dollar value per GB/GHz and not certain other things (my iBook G4 still runs snappy and its 40GB hard drive has tons of space on it).
But anyway this pushes (at least for me) the Air into a reasonable price range for my lifestyle. A new revision should do the trick methinks.
it's good for rich businessmen. looking for a small, light computer that that doesn't run very fast or hold much information just to do presentations, take notes, or do other light business work.
as for it being a good deal for your only every day use computer. no.
Actually it's ideal for my wife too - she upgrades every 3 years or so, and has been through:
Monster Big Sony F series laptop (£3000)
PowerBook 15" (£1300)
iMac 24" (£1200) - didn't like it, wanted a laptop again, had the iMac for a year.
MacBook Air (£1200) - best so far
She does mainly email, web browsing and MS Office student/teachery (she's both) stuff, and finds it perfect, loves the size and portability.
We're on Mozy for remote backups, TM over wireless for local one so no worries there. Just works...
Cheers,
M.
I'm guessing they've not got around to slashing the prices for the UK store. It's £190 for the 1.8Ghz upgrade and £639 for the SSD. A total of £829 (Yes, over $1600 inc tax). Or was it more expensive before?
To answer myself, they'd not updated the UK.
The upgrade is now £130 for the CPU and £389.99 for the SSD, total = £519.99 (just over $1000 inc tax).
The top end MBA is now £1719 inc tax (£1462.98 ex tax) which is just shy of $3000 before tax. So, we're about as expensive as the USA now BEFORE the cut.
..... a small, light computer that that doesn't run very fast or hold much information just to do presentations, take notes, or do other light business work.
What kind of work do you do? Rocket science?
MBA = POS!
Why? How? Because it doesn't work for you, perhaps?
My wife has one, as does a colleague at work, and they both can't live without it.
Why do you feel the need to devalue things from which others get value.
but seriously. i stick to my opinion that the MBA is for rich people.
That's true: My wife is very rich. </end sarcasm>
Link, please?
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ence_call.html
Those are the only Air references I've been able to find from the most recent quartly conference call or meeting notes.
Thanks, JeffDM.
The (uninformed) arrogance that one sees sometimes in this forum is a tad depressing.
Do you have any proof of this "lowest selling macs ever"? I doubt you do, as far as I can tell, you completely made that up or are presenting your belief or assumptions as a fact. That's probably a ridiculously low bar as there's at least one Mac that was available for a few weeks before it was replaced with a new model.
All the stories I've seen have Apple reps saying Apple is quite happy with their results for Macbook Air, so even if they don't sell as many as they do Macbooks, it's not really competition to a MacBook, and looks like it probably sells enough to keep making. If something doesn't sell as well as they would like, they usually don't say anything at all.
As for the rest of your complaints, you're complaining that you can't do pro stuff on consumer hardware? Alrighty then. Some of them are valid complaints, but if Apple says a machine is not supported by a piece of software, then it's best to not depend on that machine to use it.
He means- It one of the SLOOOOWEST running MACS ever.
And that's not a complaint but a fact.
Let the whining and crying begin. Apple - the only company whose customers won't let it lower prices.
Haha - fool me once with the iPhone- $200 price drop in less than 3 months!
You don't fool me twice -$500 in in 5 months!!!