Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Notebooks > MacBook Pro

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jan 3, 2013, 08:35 PM   #1
Windows&Apple
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Question Why is the 15 inch MacBook Pro so expensive?

I need justification for spending close to $2,000.00 on a 15 inch MacBook Pro. I'm still trying to figure out how a machine (although beautiful) can be so overpriced! I'm not looking at the retina, instead it's the base 15 inch (2.3GHz).

The specs I have laid out right now is:
  • HD Anti-glare screen
  • 8GB RAM
  • 500GB 5200RPM HDD
  • AppleCare

But for the price I'm paying, the HDD is small, 500GB is a bit too small for what is essentially a Rolls Royce of laptops... the speed isn't an issue, I understand why it's a slower speed, so I'm fine with that. The "HD" anti-glare screen isn't really HD... it's not 1080p, it's just a step under that and that's disappointing. The 8GB RAM upgrade is a $100, but I could do the upgrade for 1/2 the price.

From what I see, I could get these same specs in an ASUS for a cheaper price and I'd get a 1080p screen. I'm just trying to understand why I'm asked to pay so much for so little?
Windows&Apple is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 08:40 PM   #2
chrisperro
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: canada
trackpad ,OS, build quality ,costumer service, just a few ....
Is your money do whatever you want to do with it.
chrisperro is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 08:40 PM   #3
Xgm541
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2011
Short answer: apple likes big profit margin.

Long answer: you could get an ASUS with a 1080p screen, but then you:

1) wouldn't have OSX would you?
2) the build quality of the ASUS is likely less than that of the MBP.
3) ASUS warranty doesn't have the luxury of having many retail locations with "genius bars" for quick support.
4) ASUS resell value drops much faster than your MBP.

etc, etc.
__________________
MacBook Air 2010, 1.4ghz, 4gb, 128GB <3 my baby
MacBook Pro Retina 2.3ghz, 8gb, 256gb.
iPhone 5 16GB AT&T
iPad 3 16GB.
Xgm541 is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 08:42 PM   #4
Windows&Apple
Thread Starter
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xgm541 View Post
Short answer: apple likes big profit margin.

Long answer: you could get an ASUS with a 1080p screen, but then you:

1) wouldn't have OSX would you?
2) the build quality of the ASUS is likely less than that of the MBP.
3) ASUS warranty doesn't have the luxury of having many retail locations with "genius bars" for quick support.
4) ASUS resell value drops much faster than your MBP.

etc, etc.
I suppose the resell value is true, and the "image" of a MacBook Pro aswell. I think I might just buy a high-end 13 inch and toss an SSD and 16GB of RAM in that baby. It'd be cheaper
Windows&Apple is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 08:47 PM   #5
SAIRUS
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Can't add 16 gig ram on the 13".

I got it for my uses, which involve a need for mo powa
__________________
You're ugly...
...only if you think you are.
15" Retina Macbook Pro, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S, iPa-okay okay I have a ton of Apple stuff and 200 characters is not enough.
SAIRUS is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 08:51 PM   #6
A Hebrew
macrumors 6502a
 
A Hebrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Minnesota
First of all, take the 8gb RAM out of your calculations, all companies rip you off on ram upgrades (or at least most). The cost is probably much higher than it has to be but I assume that Apple is keeping it at the same price of the last few generations because it will be discontinued anyway, and they want to push newer technology.
__________________
2012 13" MacBook Air | 2012 27" iMac | iPad 3 | iPhone 5
A Hebrew is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 08:53 PM   #7
Windows&Apple
Thread Starter
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Hebrew View Post
First of all, take the 8gb RAM out of your calculations, all companies rip you off on ram upgrades (or at least most). The cost is probably much higher than it has to be but I assume that Apple is keeping it at the same price of the last few generations because it will be discontinued anyway, and they want to push newer technology.
New technology that replaces RAM? Probably, but for now, I need it and the upgrade is pretty expensive. I'm hoping the 2013 MBP's will have 8GB's of RAM standard across all models, upgradeable to 16GB
Windows&Apple is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 09:02 PM   #8
JeffiJers
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: U.S.
idk but i agree with you OP.

Well maybe base model.


as soon as you go hi res, or any upgrades you are not that far off from the retina which comes stock with flash storage, thinner, and better display.

I am picking up the retina because of this otherwise i would have bought a 15pro if it was say 1600 for the base w high res.

infact, idk why they all dont come 1050...


apples prices are weird, the 13 air and cpro are priced perfectly and the 15 retina is a good price for what you get .
JeffiJers is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 09:07 PM   #9
simsaladimbamba
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: located
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAIRUS View Post
Can't add 16 gig ram on the 13".

I got it for my uses, which involve a need for mo powa
This thread does not talk about the MacBook Pro with Retina Display, it is talking about the classic MBP, which in fact can take 16 GB RAM since 2011 regardless of display size.
simsaladimbamba is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 09:31 PM   #10
el-John-o
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Missouri
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAIRUS View Post
Can't add 16 gig ram on the 13".

I got it for my uses, which involve a need for mo powa
Yes you can, if you install it yourself (doesn't apply to the retina).

-Sent from my 13" MacBook Pro, running 16 gigs of RAM.

By the way, if yo are running a cMBP, I STRONGLY suggest upgrading yourself. Apple upgrades are kind of like accessories installed on a car by a dealership, it's pure profit gouging. The cMBP IS user upgradeable. Get the right tools (00 screwdriver, etc.) so you aren't stripping screws, and get the stuff you need. I got 16GB of RAM for less than $80. Also popped in a couple SSD's.

Over a Windows machine, for one, you're ditching Li-Ion batteries for more expensive Li-Po batteries that ver, very few Windows machines run. Also, the built in battery is much, much bigger than on a windows laptop, because it doesn't need an enclosure or all the hardware that's required to make a removable battery (it's the reason apple went that route). So not only do you get industry leading battery life, that battery life will still be there a year down the road, and will outlast most Windows laptops. You MIGHT find a Windows laptop that gets 6-7 hours (in day to day tasks, obviously more intense stuff eats it), but 6 months from now it's battery life will have degraded much faster than the MBP.

You get OSX, obvious advantages there.

Despite what others say about a big profit margin, a lot of it is in the materials. The MBP is made of aluminum, not plastic. It uses a premium quality display (even the non retina will knock most laptop displays out of the park in terms of brightness, color, contrast, and overall look). These things might not matter to you, if not, then you might be spending too much. Some, like myself, are willing to pay for that type of a laptop, one with exceptional build quality, and the top notch materials. When you compare RAM, CPU and Hard Drive, it looks like the RAM is a bad deal, but there IS more to it than that!
__________________
Windows7 PC - Phenom II 965@4GHz x4 Cores, 16GB DDR3-2133, Radeon HD7970 | iPhone 5 32GB | iPad Air WiFi+LTE 128GB | Mid 2012 MacBook Pro 13", Dual 256GB SSD's in RAID 0, 16GB DDR3-1600
el-John-o is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 09:32 PM   #11
vpro
macrumors 6502a
 
vpro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Then..

Go for an awesome refurb 17"MBP, with the mass savings - upgrade the heck out of her, then and call it a day - Apple offers alternatives which are often times way more justly and makes more sense. Don't let them dictate by limiting the current options. Or wait till late 2013.
__________________
15" 2.8Ghz 16GB, 1TB|17" 2.5Ghz 16GB, 520GB SSD+980GB RAID|Mac Pro 3.0GHz 32GB, 1TB
vpro is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 09:36 PM   #12
A Hebrew
macrumors 6502a
 
A Hebrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Minnesota
Quote:
Originally Posted by Windows&Apple View Post
New technology that replaces RAM? Probably, but for now, I need it and the upgrade is pretty expensive. I'm hoping the 2013 MBP's will have 8GB's of RAM standard across all models, upgradeable to 16GB
That part was the computer in general.....not ram.
__________________
2012 13" MacBook Air | 2012 27" iMac | iPad 3 | iPhone 5
A Hebrew is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 09:37 PM   #13
locoboi187
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Well Applecare raises the price right there. And for $2k id just get the rMBP
__________________
Macbook Pro Retina 15"
iPhone 5 32GB - Black
iPad 4 16GB - Black
TV 3
locoboi187 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 09:49 PM   #14
Windows&Apple
Thread Starter
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by locoboi187 View Post
Well Applecare raises the price right there. And for $2k id just get the rMBP
It's tempting, but the ability to upgrade the laptop myself is worth the loss I take when it comes to screen resolution
Windows&Apple is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 09:50 PM   #15
hallux
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by locoboi187 View Post
Well Applecare raises the price right there. And for $2k id just get the rMBP
So for the same price you'd go for 1/2 the storage, 1/2 the RAM and the Retina display. For the price of a BASE Retina MBP you can get a base 15" with the hi-res display, 16 GB of memory (the retina will have 8 and you CAN'T add to that) and enough left over for an SSD (that can be installed in parallel with the existing spinner if you remove the SuperDrive).

I still don't get that argument that "for $2K just get the RMBP" when other than the display it's actually LESS of a machine and there's ZERO opportunity to make it more of a machine except for upgrading the SSD - which, by the way, is not the same SSD as you'd get for a CMBP.

By the way, my RAM and SSD upgrades are based on non-Apple upgrades and self-installing (which is quite simple).
__________________
2012 15" MBP, 2.3 GHz, 16 GB RAM, 750 GB Samsung EVO SSD, Hi-Res glossy
2012 Mac Mini 2.5, 8 GB RAM, 120 GB OCZ Vertex 3 SSD (soon, need the install kit)
hallux is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 10:27 PM   #16
Windows&Apple
Thread Starter
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
So what would be the difference between a fully pimped out 13 inch (2.9 i7) verses a base 15 (2.3 i7)?
Windows&Apple is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 10:42 PM   #17
KPOM
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Windows&Apple View Post
So what would be the difference between a fully pimped out 13 inch (2.9 i7) verses a base 15 (2.3 i7)?
Dual Core (13") vs. Quad Core (15").
KPOM is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 10:54 PM   #18
TRAV9614
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by KPOM View Post
Dual Core (13") vs. Quad Core (15").
There is also a dedicated GPU.
__________________
2012 15" cMBP, 2.3 GHz, 16 GB RAM, 500 GB HDD; iPad2 16 Gb; iPhone 5 16gb; 3rd gen iPod touch 32 GB
TRAV9614 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 11:06 PM   #19
Windows&Apple
Thread Starter
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by KPOM View Post
Dual Core (13") vs. Quad Core (15").
But I assume the SSD would make applications run a lot quicker, and the added RAM would only boost performance, is the dual core vs. quad core really going to make that much of a difference?
Windows&Apple is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 11:16 PM   #20
KPOM
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Windows&Apple View Post
But I assume the SSD would make applications run a lot quicker, and the added RAM would only boost performance, is the dual core vs. quad core really going to make that much of a difference?
It depends on the application. For web browsing, e-mail, and basic Office tasks, likely not. If you are running photo editing software, video or audio encoding, and similar CPU-intensive tasks that can take advantage of the extra 2 cores, then it will.
KPOM is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 11:30 PM   #21
el-John-o
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Missouri
Quote:
Originally Posted by Windows&Apple View Post
But I assume the SSD would make applications run a lot quicker, and the added RAM would only boost performance, is the dual core vs. quad core really going to make that much of a difference?
There are three types of applications (putting it simply) that you are going to use. Many applications will be a combination.

Disk intensive, CPU Intensive, and GPU intensive.

Disk intensive applications will benefit from an SSD. Anything that uses or manipulates large files will benefit from an SSD. Your operating system is very disk intensive, so it 'feels' faster. Don't be fooled though, it's not going to make your computer run intense applications faster, it's simply allowing data to move around faster.

CPU Intensive apps benefit from multiple cores, lots of cache, and a good clock speed. The Quad Core i7 will do this better than the dual core i5 or i7

GPU intensive apps can include games, 3D rendering software, etc. These apps will struggle with the HD4000 graphics, even though the HD4000 is leaps and bounds better than previous Intel graphics. The dedicated GPU is very important here.

Just decide what you need it for. An SSD is NOT a replacement for a faster CPU, though an SSD is the best way to make your computer 'feel' faster.

The biggest performance boosts the 15" are going to have, is 2 extra cores and a dedicated GPU. SSD or not, heavy, and intense applications are going to benefit from that. However, if the majority of your use is writing papers, browsing the web, occasional photo viewing and editing, etc. etc., then you would benefit MORE form an SSD/Dual Core combo, than an HDD/Quad Core combo. (Though obviously the best performance comes from an SSD/Quad combo)

That said, the latest MacBook Pro has some really good stuff from Intel. The Ivy Bridge i5 chips and the HD4000 are really, really good for what they are. Unless you are doing serious video editing or wanting to game at high settings and resolutions, chances are the 13" will provide the performance that you need. It's much faster than previous generation MBP's.

Like I said before, decide what level of performance you need, and whether it's worth the cost. Also, go play with them at the Apple store. Some hate the 13" form factor. I happen to prefer it GREATLY, but I've encountered people who look at it and say "How can you get anything done on that small screen?". Well, to be fair, I DO have a 27" ACD at home, but, the lower resolution doesn't bother me for the stuff that I do when I'm on the go. Again, YMMV, so you need to determine what YOU are going to use it for.

I do photoshop and lightroom work, some fairly intense photo editing, and even a little web design on mine, but that's all when connected to the larger display. On the go, it's web browsing, word processing, blogging, emailing, etc. Light duty stuff, so I'm able to get away with the 13". (Though the 13" doesn't have any hiccups driving photoshop, lightroom, etc., all at 2560x1440). However, 'converting/encoding' type tasks such as exporting RAW files into JPEG, etc., take longer on the 13" MBP than they do on my quad core desktop. Again, your mileage may vary!
__________________
Windows7 PC - Phenom II 965@4GHz x4 Cores, 16GB DDR3-2133, Radeon HD7970 | iPhone 5 32GB | iPad Air WiFi+LTE 128GB | Mid 2012 MacBook Pro 13", Dual 256GB SSD's in RAID 0, 16GB DDR3-1600
el-John-o is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 11:35 PM   #22
PatriotInvasion
macrumors 65816
 
PatriotInvasion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Boston, MA
I love the PC vs Mac price debate as if they both run the same OS.

Aside from the high end design of a Mac, you are paying for the access to Mac OS X - complete with iLife, Mac App Store, and an overall much more polished and stable OS experience.

By saving a few bucks on the Asus, you get a Windows based computer complete with "Intel Inside" stickers, a ton of bloatware (90-day risk free AOL trial!) and probably some 15-month subscription to McAfee Antivirus...Yuck with a capital Y Go with the Mac and be happy. As others have said, you'll make the extra money back in resale value.
__________________
27-inch iMac [Late 2013, 3.2GHz quad-core Intel Core i5, 8GB of memory, 256GB of flash storage], iPad Air [16GB, silver], iPhone 5s [16GB, silver], Time Capsule [1TB, A1355, 3rd Generation]
PatriotInvasion is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 12:07 AM   #23
thekev
macrumors 603
 
thekev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xgm541 View Post
Short answer: apple likes big profit margin.

Long answer: you could get an ASUS with a 1080p screen, but then you:

1) wouldn't have OSX would you?
2) the build quality of the ASUS is likely less than that of the MBP.
3) ASUS warranty doesn't have the luxury of having many retail locations with "genius bars" for quick support.
4) ASUS resell value drops much faster than your MBP.

etc, etc.
Resale value is fickle no matter what. People rely on it too much at times. It's not as consistent as it's sometimes portrayed on here. Asus is capable of exceptional build quality. They spun off Pegatron. Pegatron has since done some work for Apple. A frequent complaint you'll find on Asus is that in the event you do need warranty support, it is difficult to obtain. Their ultrabooks turn up a lot of complaints, but they're not necessarily the dead notebook or unusable type. If you look at Amazon, the reviews are pretty detailed.
__________________
world's largest manufacturer of tin foil hats, none of that aluminum foil crap.
thekev is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 11:10 AM   #24
Queen6
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Behind the Great FireWall and happier for it
Quote:
Originally Posted by Windows&Apple View Post
So what would be the difference between a fully pimped out 13 inch (2.9 i7) verses a base 15 (2.3 i7)?
For me there is absolutely nothing compelling about the 13" other than the size, the 15" absolutely dominates the 13" in every aspect, anyone looking to buy the 13" should think about it carefully.

Apple set the standard for performance with the 15" Retina and now they are looking to cash in on those who are not able to live with the 15" footprint. A 13" Retina with a basic CPU upgrade (dual core i7) costs as much as a base 15" Retina in many countries which is a bad joke to say the least.

It makes little sense to go with a 13" Retina unless you are absolutely tied to the form factor; the CPU`s performance level of the 15' over the 13" in isolation is significant to say the least, anything CPU intensive is simply going to be completed far faster, any app that can take advantage of multicore architecture more so.

GeekBench Results:
  • MacBook Pro (13-inch Mid 2012) Intel Core i7-3520M 2900 MHz (2 cores) 7797 (High end)
  • MacBook Pro (15-inch Mid 2012) Intel Core i7-3615QM 2300 MHz (4 cores) 10799 (Base)

My own base 15" Retina benchmarks at over 11K systematically (Link: just hit 11040 and 11043 and 11096) and on top of the far higher CPU rating you will have both the HD 4000 and GT 650M GPU`s, superior audio, higher resolution, twice the storage capacity. If i was forced to buy the 13" Retina i would be very unhappy to say the least giving up so much, saving just a couple of hundred dollars, for the sake of the smaller footprint

The bottom line is the 13" Retina is priced far too high, i applaud Apple`s ingenuity and engineering prowess, equally their greed is staggering just when will enough be enough $$$$. The 13" Retina should have a base price range of $1200 - $1300, the standard 13" should certainly be sub four figures, in general the 13" line is grossly over priced, as fundamentally it`s a basic computer with little to nothing changing since it`s introduction in 2008 as the Aluminium MacBook; duel core CPU, integrated graphics only, and very poor resolution on the standard model. Apple are simply cashing in on the desirability of the form factor...

The straight up answer is buy a bigger bag, and you will have all the performance you need, at all times

Last edited by Queen6; Jan 4, 2013 at 11:33 AM.
Queen6 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 11:35 AM   #25
Liquinn
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Build quality.
OSX.
Customer support.
Re-sale value.
Ability to have Windows native and you can dual boot OSX AND Windows on the same machine; you can't do the same with a PC; legally.
Access to the app store.
Comparability with other Apple products.
Better battery life than on most cheap PCs.

That's a good list of reasons; but it's your money. :P

You get what you pay for.
__________________
2011 Mini | 13" (cMBP) + 15" (rMBP 2013) | Powermac G5 | 27" TBD | iPhone 3GS (16GB) | iPad 1 and iPad 4 | iPod touch 4G (64GB) | Apple Wireless Keyboard + Magic Mouse x2 | Magic Trackpad |
Liquinn is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Notebooks > MacBook Pro

Tags
price 15_inch hd

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Need help on deciding 13 inch Macbook Air(Haswell) or 13 inch Retina Macbook Pro HeWasOnly3 MacBook Air 12 Feb 5, 2014 08:53 PM
Which is better? Mid 2009 Macbook Pro 13 inch or Early 2008 Macbook Pro 15 inch Macdude2010 MacBook Pro 10 Jan 31, 2014 12:49 PM
Haswell: 13 inch Retina MacBook Pro or 13 inch MacBook Air?? boombox15 MacBook Pro 28 Nov 28, 2013 12:44 AM
One expensive MacBook Pro. KennyJustinCaze MacBook Pro 40 Feb 24, 2013 12:14 AM
Regular 13 inch Macbook Pro or 13 inch Machbook pro with retina display? hammerton MacBook Pro 21 Oct 25, 2012 07:35 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:17 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC