sflocal said:

[...] it's too bad Apple didn't have an option for a discreet GPU for the Mini.

They do. It looks like this:

https://www.apple.com/shop/product/HM8Y2VC/A/blackmagic-egpu

MacPro said:

lorin schultz said:

sirozha said:

I do agree that the true Pro-level machines can cost whatever price Apple wants to charge, as they are means of production for highly paid occupations. 

I accept that pro level machines cost more than consumer-oriented versions. What I don't understand is why the difference is increasing so much, so quickly.

I use my MacBook Pro in my work. When I bought it, two years ago, it cost just over CAD$5,000 after AppleCare and taxes. The equivalent today (same amount of RAM, staying with an i7 instead of upgrading to the i9, Radeon graphics instead of upgrading to the Vega, same amount of storage) costs CAD$6225. That's an increase of 25% in two years!

The new machine doesn't offer anything that will increase my earning power and thus offset the extra cost. That difference comes directly out of my pocket.

A pro user has to accept the price of suitable tools being higher than consumer goods, but costs still have to be justifiable and make economic sense within the context of running the business. Current prices are making that a lot harder for those who prefer Apple's tools.

Just a thought ...  Did your house go up in value over the last few years?  Does a car cost more than the same car a few years ago?  

The article uses adjusted dollar values to make the comparisons, so inflation isn't a consideration.

And no, my house did not go up 25% in value over the last two years, nor does a two-year newer car cost 1/4-again more than the one I have.

More importantly, my billing rates have not increased 25% in two years, nor does a new Mac compared to a two-year-old model provide the means to increase my productivity by 25%.

Finally, the cost of producing a computer should not have increased 25% in two years. It hasn't for anyone else. What's going on at Apple that its pricing is so out of step with the rest of the industry?

For several years now computer prices have been pretty stable, even with inflation. The questions are why has that now changed, why only Apple, and why so much?

Mike Wuerthele said:

lorin schultz said:

The headline says:

Apple's flagship Macs are now less expensive than ever before

That's not true. They may be less expensive than they have been at various points in history, but they are not the lowest they've ever been. Even the article itself states "[...] if you compare the current Mac and iOS lineup with last year's, you can see a huge increase in prices." That contradicts the statement made in the headline.

I mention this not to be pedantic, but to dispute the article's implication that current prices are not cause for concern to me as a buyer. While current prices may not be inconsistent with and unprecedented in Apple's history, they are not what one might reasonably expect. Prices are higher than they were just a year ago, and last year's machines were no more exotic or specially equipped than current models. In the absence of any obvious reason for this, I find myself wondering what's gone sideways at Apple to cause it?

This short-term aberration strikes me as more significant than ultra-long-term trends. I think comparing prices in 2018 to recent years is more relevant than a historical perspective, because Apple in 2018 bears little resemblance to the company it was twenty or even just ten years ago.

The Apple of 2018 enjoys massive economies of scale it could not leverage in years past. The fact that Apple could not hit lower price points back in the day does not necessarily mean it can't now. Yet prices are not declining or even holding steady. They're rising. Sharply. Compared to just one year ago. I'm bothered by that, and am not comforted by comparisons to times of different circumstances.

It was a fun article, an enjoyable romp down memory lane, and informative overall. I just don't think it makes the point it seemed to intend. Or maybe I misunderstood. It's been known to happen from time to all the time.

All of the bolded statements above can be true. At no point did we say to not worry about it, but there is a lot of gnashing of teeth about how Apple has never, ever done this -- which is completely, utterly bogus.

Okay, I accept the premise was not "don't worry about it" because you would know better than I.

Assuming the formula used to calculate era-dollar equivalents was reasonably accurate, you're right, prices are not the highest they've ever been (though the headline is still a factual mis-statement). Nor should they be. The production challenges facing a computer manufacturer in 2018 are much less daunting than they were at the peak price periods mentioned in the article. I think it's reasonable to expect prices to be lower overall now than in the past.

Compound that expectation with the fact that prices are not only not falling, but rising precipitously, and I think users have a valid gripe. We may not be in the midst of the worst price climate ever, but it's certainly stormy in a time when the forecast would suggest it should be sunnier.

The article concludes that "you get what you pay for." I would argue that's less true today than it was two years ago, as price increases have not been proportional to performance and feature gains.

sirozha said:

I do agree that the true Pro-level machines can cost whatever price Apple wants to charge, as they are means of production for highly paid occupations. 

I accept that pro level machines cost more than consumer-oriented versions. What I don't understand is why the difference is increasing so much, so quickly.

I use my MacBook Pro in my work. When I bought it, two years ago, it cost just over CAD$5,000 after AppleCare and taxes. The equivalent today (same amount of RAM, staying with an i7 instead of upgrading to the i9, Radeon graphics instead of upgrading to the Vega, same amount of storage) costs CAD$6225. That's an increase of 25% in two years!

The new machine doesn't offer anything that will increase my earning power and thus offset the extra cost. That difference comes directly out of my pocket.

A pro user has to accept the price of suitable tools being higher than consumer goods, but costs still have to be justifiable and make economic sense within the context of running the business. Current prices are making that a lot harder for those who prefer Apple's tools.

The headline says:

Apple's flagship Macs are now less expensive than ever before

That's not true. They may be less expensive than they have been at various points in history, but they are not the lowest they've ever been. Even the article itself states "[...] if you compare the current Mac and iOS lineup with last year's, you can see a huge increase in prices." That contradicts the statement made in the headline.

I mention this not to be pedantic, but to dispute the article's implication that current prices are not cause for concern to me as a buyer. While current prices may not be inconsistent with and unprecedented in Apple's history, they are not what one might reasonably expect. Prices are higher than they were just a year ago, and last year's machines were no more exotic or specially equipped than current models. In the absence of any obvious reason for this, I find myself wondering what's gone sideways at Apple to cause it?

This short-term aberration strikes me as more significant than ultra-long-term trends. I think comparing prices in 2018 to recent years is more relevant than a historical perspective, because Apple in 2018 bears little resemblance to the company it was twenty or even just ten years ago.

The Apple of 2018 enjoys massive economies of scale it could not leverage in years past. The fact that Apple could not hit lower price points back in the day does not necessarily mean it can't now. Yet prices are not declining or even holding steady. They're rising. Sharply. Compared to just one year ago. I'm bothered by that, and am not comforted by comparisons to times of different circumstances.

It was a fun article, an enjoyable romp down memory lane, and informative overall. I just don't think it makes the point it seemed to intend. Or maybe I misunderstood. It's been known to happen from time to all the time.