You buy a computer when you need it. Not before, not after. Thinking that there will be a point where you will be completely satisfied with its specs, and where it couldn't possibly get better, is fooling yourself, plain and simple.
There certainly isn't the "right" time to buy a computer, but there are plenty of "wrong" times. For example, do not every but an Apple for Christmas because the January Expo more often than not makes it old news. Same way buying a new G5 from Apple before the WWDC is a mistake.
As for the MacBook Pro, I was waiting for the 17" model to be released. Apple was slow on the release of the larger model so a lot of the components in this model are already getting old (graphics chip and CPU). I know almost as soon as I buy my next computer it will be phased out by something newer and sexier. For what it is worth I'd rather have three to six months of enjoying my "top of the line" computer instead of just one.
But the average Joe can pop Woodcrest CPU's into a socket on a PC motherboard.
I don't know about that. There is always some skill involved in lining up the pins, applying the right amount of thermal greece etc. Woodcrest uses Land Grid Array, so if you don't place the CPU correctly, you won't damage the CPU but you may damage the socket on the motherboard.
Check out Sun's 8 Socket X4600 x86 Server that was announced today to see how easy they make it replacing/upgrading a CPU. The CPU is on a separate card/module that just slides in into the HyperTransport backplane.
The consumer line provided increased the prices by greatly increasing the value -- the mini now includes the $100 wireless and bluetooth upgrade, plus many other included items, all for the $100 price bump.
People don't simply upgrade when they need to. They upgrade when there is a compelling reason to do so. Moving from dual G5's to quad woodcrest at the 2K price would be such a reason, whether I need it or not.
The consumer line provided increased the prices by greatly increasing the value -- the mini now includes the $100 wireless and bluetooth upgrade, plus many other included items, all for the $100 price bump.
There certainly isn't the "right" time to buy a computer, but there are plenty of "wrong" times. For example, do not every but an Apple for Christmas because the January Expo more often than not makes it old news. Same way buying a new G5 from Apple before the WWDC is a mistake.
Very, very true.
And with WWDC just a few weeks off, now may not be a great time to buy.
Quote:
As for the MacBook Pro, I was waiting for the 17" model to be released. Apple was slow on the release of the larger model so a lot of the components in this model are already getting old (graphics chip and CPU).
The graphics chip was and is mid-end; there is no better graphics chip that could be reasonably put into the MacBook Pro. The Mobility Radeon X1800's heat output is impossible to handle in such a small case. The X1600 is a huge upgrade over the 9700 in the last-generation PowerBook, too.
And the CPU was and is high-end.
So, I don't think it's fair to say the components were getting old. The 17-inch one got 2.16 GHz standard, whereas the 15-inch one, at the time, had 1.83 GHz standard.
Quote:
I know almost as soon as I buy my next computer it will be phased out by something newer and sexier.
Inevitably.
And you can keep being angry over it?
?or you can be happy with what you'll have anyway: a damn fine computer.
Quote:
For what it is worth I'd rather have three to six months of enjoying my "top of the line" computer instead of just one.
They said all consumer Macs would get cheaper with the Intel switch. They didn't. Now you're saying the pro desktop will get cheaper with the Intel switch. It won't.
That's right. People keep forgetting this. what happened to the $799 iBook (or MacBook)?
PPC's were CHEAPER that Intel's chips are. People keep forgetting this as well.
A.) My plans to buy a MacBook Pro seem to keep getting pushed back further and further...
B.) Apple's 20" LCDs are definately going to need to be reduced in price. Viewsonic and Dell both have competative 20" wide screen monitors selling for between $300-400. I'm hoping Apple a % off all of their LCD monitors. They aren't the only ones with 30" LCDs now. Time for them to get more competative.
The funny thing about that is that when Apple has come out with a new display, it was always cheaper than what was being offered. when it was a new catagory, it was at a price that was much lower than was expected.
But then Apple maintained their pricing at levels, even with price drops, that were ending up, over time, to be higher than the competition. This is hard to understand.
Apple has a nice chance here to not screw users over, and here's how:
make it so every Mac Pro ships with two CPU sockets, and so that the end user can add a CPU or change out the CPU chips, as their needs, wallet and schedule dictate.
It wasn't possible with G5 due to the exotic and delicate cooling mechanism.
But the average Joe can pop Woodcrest CPU's into a socket on a PC motherboard.
If Apple deliberately leaves the second socket off of the low-end or midrange model's logic board - preventing a later upgrade of adding a matching processor or putting in two brand new processors - that's going to look bad.
Unrelated comment:
if I'm not mistaken, Woodcrest processors require FB-DIMM memory, which could push up system pricing a bit, but could also really raise the roof on RAM capacity in the box:
the new intels are cheaper than older ppc macs, if u take in consideration that almost all models are dual processor, lots more power, faster ddr ram and about the same prices....
And if u load a dell with all the bang and wisthles a ? have, it will cost u the same or a bit more.
Not to mention the OX X and iLive by far the best u can get out there.
Macs arent expensive. that a fact.
Dells are inexpensive but they got damaged soon and the parts are not cheap.
unless u buy complete care that is extra $$$$$$$$$$.
Most people don't look at it that way. They see a rise in price. They see that they are competitive in performance with PC's, finally, and they say; About time they aren't so slow, but Apple raised the price.
I agree with you that not all the people look the "raise" as a good thing.
But often the same people add a lot of stuff with the BTO option and end paying more than the base price they where supposed to pay.
Also, I worked for Hell (jeje) selling parts for consumer and business division, and let me say that they recieve a huge amount of people that has to call back or order via web more upgrades or usually replacements for component of their computers.
I work now for a Store that its specialized on Macs and HP + some extra PC brands.
We receive more than 10 times more PC's with failures than Macs, and in the case with Macs its rare to see a new model.
Personally I never had a hardware problem with any of mine.
So its hard for me to think that if I pay a few bucks more for a product that has more quality and its very reliable I will lost in the short, medium or long term.
Apart of the cost thing, if my memory dont fool me, the mini and the iMac doesnt have soldered socket, actually I found sometime ago (weeks) that somebody changed processor on a Mac Mini to 2.16 ghz and its was working nice.
That's right. People keep forgetting this. what happened to the $799 iBook (or MacBook)?
PPC's were CHEAPER that Intel's chips are. People keep forgetting this as well.
Apple could easily release a Macbook with a Celeron-M 430 and a 40gb hard drive for that price if they wanted to. Hell, I'd buy it to replace my iBook G3.
I agree with you that not all the people look the "raise" as a good thing.
But often the same people add a lot of stuff with the BTO option and end paying more than the base price they where supposed to pay.
Also, I worked for Hell (jeje) selling parts for consumer and business division, and let me say that they recieve a huge amount of people that has to call back or order via web more upgrades or usually replacements for component of their computers.
I work now for a Store that its specialized on Macs and HP + some extra PC brands.
We receive more than 10 times more PC's with failures than Macs, and in the case with Macs its rare to see a new model.
Personally I never had a hardware problem with any of mine.
So its hard for me to think that if I pay a few bucks more for a product that has more quality and its very reliable I will lost in the short, medium or long term.
Apart of the cost thing, if my memory dont fool me, the mini and the iMac doesnt have soldered socket, actually I found sometime ago (weeks) that somebody changed processor on a Mac Mini to 2.16 ghz and its was working nice.
Hopefully, the processors wont be soldered and we will be able to upgrade easy and trouble free the new MacPro's.
8)
I know the commercial end of Hell very well. Good products.
But, back to Apple. People don't mind if THEY make the choice to raise the price by adding features. They don't like to see the base price high. The choice being made for them. Apple sometimes makes the mistake of including features in their base model that raises the price substantially.
I know that Apple feels that those features are the "Apple experience". But many people don't use those features. Yes, Apple makes it simple to buy, by including them. I know all the arguments.
But, nevertheless, many people get turned off by the prices. When they question friends and colleagues, they are told Macs cost more. Then they look at the price and agree. They don't even get to WHY they cost more. The fact that they do is enough.
Apple also uses very expensive custom cases that raise the price.
As far as reliability goes, sure, they are more reliable, despite well publicized flaws.
But as we know from Japanese cars, quality DOESN'T have to cost more. It could even cost LESS. It's the attention to quality that matters. Though Apple has slipped up on a few things as of late.
Apple could easily release a Macbook with a Celeron-M 430 and a 40gb hard drive for that price if they wanted to. Hell, I'd buy it to replace my iBook G3.
Remember that Apple now competes with other PC manufacturers.
I don't understand this comment.
Apple competes with Windows PC manufacturers no more, or less, than it did before. We can, IMO, neglect the small number of people that would buy an Apple computer but use Windows as the primary OS.
The competition is between Windows and OS X, and changing the hardware hasn't affected that.
Apple could easily release a Macbook with a Celeron-M 430 and a 40gb hard drive for that price if they wanted to. Hell, I'd buy it to replace my iBook G3.
Uh, no?
Apple never planned on using anything from Intel older than Yonah?
(not counting the P4s in the developer machines, duh?)
Comments
Originally posted by Chucker
You buy a computer when you need it. Not before, not after. Thinking that there will be a point where you will be completely satisfied with its specs, and where it couldn't possibly get better, is fooling yourself, plain and simple.
There certainly isn't the "right" time to buy a computer, but there are plenty of "wrong" times. For example, do not every but an Apple for Christmas because the January Expo more often than not makes it old news. Same way buying a new G5 from Apple before the WWDC is a mistake.
As for the MacBook Pro, I was waiting for the 17" model to be released. Apple was slow on the release of the larger model so a lot of the components in this model are already getting old (graphics chip and CPU). I know almost as soon as I buy my next computer it will be phased out by something newer and sexier. For what it is worth I'd rather have three to six months of enjoying my "top of the line" computer instead of just one.
-Kerrum
Originally posted by boots
But the average Joe can pop Woodcrest CPU's into a socket on a PC motherboard.
I don't know about that. There is always some skill involved in lining up the pins, applying the right amount of thermal greece etc. Woodcrest uses Land Grid Array, so if you don't place the CPU correctly, you won't damage the CPU but you may damage the socket on the motherboard.
Check out Sun's 8 Socket X4600 x86 Server that was announced today to see how easy they make it replacing/upgrading a CPU. The CPU is on a separate card/module that just slides in into the HyperTransport backplane.
The consumer line provided increased the prices by greatly increasing the value -- the mini now includes the $100 wireless and bluetooth upgrade, plus many other included items, all for the $100 price bump.
People don't simply upgrade when they need to. They upgrade when there is a compelling reason to do so. Moving from dual G5's to quad woodcrest at the 2K price would be such a reason, whether I need it or not.
Originally posted by mugwump
The consumer line provided increased the prices by greatly increasing the value -- the mini now includes the $100 wireless and bluetooth upgrade, plus many other included items, all for the $100 price bump.
Wireless and Bluetooth are worth $100?
What "many other included items"?
What other items? I'm not going to look it up, sorry.
Originally posted by Kerrum
There certainly isn't the "right" time to buy a computer, but there are plenty of "wrong" times. For example, do not every but an Apple for Christmas because the January Expo more often than not makes it old news. Same way buying a new G5 from Apple before the WWDC is a mistake.
Very, very true.
And with WWDC just a few weeks off, now may not be a great time to buy.
As for the MacBook Pro, I was waiting for the 17" model to be released. Apple was slow on the release of the larger model so a lot of the components in this model are already getting old (graphics chip and CPU).
The graphics chip was and is mid-end; there is no better graphics chip that could be reasonably put into the MacBook Pro. The Mobility Radeon X1800's heat output is impossible to handle in such a small case. The X1600 is a huge upgrade over the 9700 in the last-generation PowerBook, too.
And the CPU was and is high-end.
So, I don't think it's fair to say the components were getting old. The 17-inch one got 2.16 GHz standard, whereas the 15-inch one, at the time, had 1.83 GHz standard.
I know almost as soon as I buy my next computer it will be phased out by something newer and sexier.
Inevitably.
And you can keep being angry over it?
?or you can be happy with what you'll have anyway: a damn fine computer.
For what it is worth I'd rather have three to six months of enjoying my "top of the line" computer instead of just one.
Sure, but trust me, six months is pushing it.
Originally posted by Chucker
Wireless and Bluetooth are worth $100?
What "many other included items"?
I can think of at least one more thing
Originally posted by Chucker
Often claimed and always proved wrong.
They said all consumer Macs would get cheaper with the Intel switch. They didn't. Now you're saying the pro desktop will get cheaper with the Intel switch. It won't.
That's right. People keep forgetting this. what happened to the $799 iBook (or MacBook)?
PPC's were CHEAPER that Intel's chips are. People keep forgetting this as well.
Originally posted by Kerrum
A.) My plans to buy a MacBook Pro seem to keep getting pushed back further and further...
B.) Apple's 20" LCDs are definately going to need to be reduced in price. Viewsonic and Dell both have competative 20" wide screen monitors selling for between $300-400. I'm hoping Apple a % off all of their LCD monitors. They aren't the only ones with 30" LCDs now. Time for them to get more competative.
The funny thing about that is that when Apple has come out with a new display, it was always cheaper than what was being offered. when it was a new catagory, it was at a price that was much lower than was expected.
But then Apple maintained their pricing at levels, even with price drops, that were ending up, over time, to be higher than the competition. This is hard to understand.
Originally posted by boots
Apple has a nice chance here to not screw users over, and here's how:
make it so every Mac Pro ships with two CPU sockets, and so that the end user can add a CPU or change out the CPU chips, as their needs, wallet and schedule dictate.
It wasn't possible with G5 due to the exotic and delicate cooling mechanism.
But the average Joe can pop Woodcrest CPU's into a socket on a PC motherboard.
If Apple deliberately leaves the second socket off of the low-end or midrange model's logic board - preventing a later upgrade of adding a matching processor or putting in two brand new processors - that's going to look bad.
Unrelated comment:
if I'm not mistaken, Woodcrest processors require FB-DIMM memory, which could push up system pricing a bit, but could also really raise the roof on RAM capacity in the box:
http://www.crucial.com/promo/index.a...p_intel_fbdimm
Conroe doesn't require FB-DIMM but Conroe doesn't do dual socket either.
How often have we discussed this one?
It's not likely that Apple will do that.
Originally posted by plokoonpma
Pls chucker.
the new intels are cheaper than older ppc macs, if u take in consideration that almost all models are dual processor, lots more power, faster ddr ram and about the same prices....
And if u load a dell with all the bang and wisthles a ? have, it will cost u the same or a bit more.
Not to mention the OX X and iLive by far the best u can get out there.
Macs arent expensive. that a fact.
Dells are inexpensive but they got damaged soon and the parts are not cheap.
unless u buy complete care that is extra $$$$$$$$$$.
Most people don't look at it that way. They see a rise in price. They see that they are competitive in performance with PC's, finally, and they say; About time they aren't so slow, but Apple raised the price.
Not with dual processors
Not with 802.11 / bluetooth standart
Not with Front Row + Apple Remote
Not with 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM
Not with 667MHz frontside bus
Not with 1000BASE-T Gigabit Ethernet
Not with Mini-DVI port
Not with Extended desktop
Not with Built-in iSight camera
I think it worths the price bump
I agree with you that not all the people look the "raise" as a good thing.
But often the same people add a lot of stuff with the BTO option and end paying more than the base price they where supposed to pay.
Also, I worked for Hell (jeje) selling parts for consumer and business division, and let me say that they recieve a huge amount of people that has to call back or order via web more upgrades or usually replacements for component of their computers.
I work now for a Store that its specialized on Macs and HP + some extra PC brands.
We receive more than 10 times more PC's with failures than Macs, and in the case with Macs its rare to see a new model.
Personally I never had a hardware problem with any of mine.
So its hard for me to think that if I pay a few bucks more for a product that has more quality and its very reliable I will lost in the short, medium or long term.
Apart of the cost thing, if my memory dont fool me, the mini and the iMac doesnt have soldered socket, actually I found sometime ago (weeks) that somebody changed processor on a Mac Mini to 2.16 ghz and its was working nice.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ad.php?t=91459
Hopefully, the processors wont be soldered and we will be able to upgrade easy and trouble free the new MacPro's.
8)
Originally posted by melgross
That's right. People keep forgetting this. what happened to the $799 iBook (or MacBook)?
PPC's were CHEAPER that Intel's chips are. People keep forgetting this as well.
Apple could easily release a Macbook with a Celeron-M 430 and a 40gb hard drive for that price if they wanted to. Hell, I'd buy it to replace my iBook G3.
Originally posted by plokoonpma
Hey Melgross,
I agree with you that not all the people look the "raise" as a good thing.
But often the same people add a lot of stuff with the BTO option and end paying more than the base price they where supposed to pay.
Also, I worked for Hell (jeje) selling parts for consumer and business division, and let me say that they recieve a huge amount of people that has to call back or order via web more upgrades or usually replacements for component of their computers.
I work now for a Store that its specialized on Macs and HP + some extra PC brands.
We receive more than 10 times more PC's with failures than Macs, and in the case with Macs its rare to see a new model.
Personally I never had a hardware problem with any of mine.
So its hard for me to think that if I pay a few bucks more for a product that has more quality and its very reliable I will lost in the short, medium or long term.
Apart of the cost thing, if my memory dont fool me, the mini and the iMac doesnt have soldered socket, actually I found sometime ago (weeks) that somebody changed processor on a Mac Mini to 2.16 ghz and its was working nice.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ad.php?t=91459
Hopefully, the processors wont be soldered and we will be able to upgrade easy and trouble free the new MacPro's.
8)
I know the commercial end of Hell very well. Good products.
But, back to Apple. People don't mind if THEY make the choice to raise the price by adding features. They don't like to see the base price high. The choice being made for them. Apple sometimes makes the mistake of including features in their base model that raises the price substantially.
I know that Apple feels that those features are the "Apple experience". But many people don't use those features. Yes, Apple makes it simple to buy, by including them. I know all the arguments.
But, nevertheless, many people get turned off by the prices. When they question friends and colleagues, they are told Macs cost more. Then they look at the price and agree. They don't even get to WHY they cost more. The fact that they do is enough.
Apple also uses very expensive custom cases that raise the price.
As far as reliability goes, sure, they are more reliable, despite well publicized flaws.
But as we know from Japanese cars, quality DOESN'T have to cost more. It could even cost LESS. It's the attention to quality that matters. Though Apple has slipped up on a few things as of late.
Originally posted by BenRoethig
Apple could easily release a Macbook with a Celeron-M 430 and a 40gb hard drive for that price if they wanted to. Hell, I'd buy it to replace my iBook G3.
You said the magic words: could, and wanted to.
It's not that they can't. It's that they won't.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
...snip...
Remember that Apple now competes with other PC manufacturers.
I don't understand this comment.
Apple competes with Windows PC manufacturers no more, or less, than it did before. We can, IMO, neglect the small number of people that would buy an Apple computer but use Windows as the primary OS.
The competition is between Windows and OS X, and changing the hardware hasn't affected that.
Originally posted by BenRoethig
Apple could easily release a Macbook with a Celeron-M 430 and a 40gb hard drive for that price if they wanted to. Hell, I'd buy it to replace my iBook G3.
Uh, no?
Apple never planned on using anything from Intel older than Yonah?
(not counting the P4s in the developer machines, duh?)
So get over it already folks, not gonna happen?