Refurbished 13-Inch Retina MacBook Pro Models Appear in Apple's Online Store

[Yebubbleman]

Originally Posted by Candlelight

To get rid of the standard model and replace it with a suddenly more expensive model would've be a bad move. They needed to give it a year to give a big indicator to the crowd that optical drives, firewire and ethernet ports (and overall user upgradability) would be phased out of Apple laptop design.

Then again Apple have made no secret optical drives have been on the chopping block for a while.

They ARE giving it a year. That's what the (Mid 2012) generation of non-retina unibody MacBook Pros is. A one year stay of execution on a dead-design walking. Frankly, for those of us that want upgradability, optical drives, FireWire and Ethernet ports (and yes, I'm one of them) before they're gone, it's awesome and better than Apple has ever done when it comes to them killing off "legacy" things in favor of solutions THEY feel are superior and what the consumers SHOULD want.

[HarryKNN21]

How could Apple need to refurbish a 3-month-old product?

Would some "refurbished" Apple products be just customer returned products?

[MH01]

Originally Posted by KPOM

I'm an Apple consumer, but I'm also an Apple owner. As the former, I want to pay as little as possible. As the latter, I want others to pay as much as possible. The only "logic" that should go into pricing for any business is what is best for long-term profitability. Sure, I'd have rather personally pay $200 less, but I understand why Apple priced it the way they did (because they can). I'm not saying I'm happy about it as a consumer. If you don't think it's worth $1699, then don't buy it.

Your greedy defending ur stock choice. Cool. Fact still remains the 13 is overpriced however you spin it.

The lack of dedicated GPU makes it even more of a ripoff . In comparison the 15 is a much better offering spec/price wise

----------

Originally Posted by HarryKNN21

How could Apple need to refurbish a 3-month-old product?

Would some "refurbished" Apple products be just customer returned products?

Yup customer returns

[Krauser]

Has anyone entertained the notion that Apple may have priced the 13" so high so that people look at the 15" as a more cost effective option?

I'm just saying... most of the people here, myself included, said $1699 was ridiculous for a retina 13" model with integrated graphics and a 128gb SSD. But because of this, I said "wow, the 15" model ends up being pretty much the same price when spec'd similarly, but I get a quad core and a dedicated GPU... might as well go for that! What a value!"

In hindsight, Apple would be doing themselves a favor marking up the 13" just to push people to the 15". They've ludicrously, and only as Apple can do, made us consumers feel as if 2200 dollars for a laptop is a bargain.

[MH01]

Originally Posted by Yebubbleman

They ARE giving it a year. That's what the (Mid 2012) generation of non-retina unibody MacBook Pros is. A one year stay of execution on a dead-design walking. Frankly, for those of us that want upgradability, optical drives, FireWire and Ethernet ports (and yes, I'm one of them) before they're gone, it's awesome and better than Apple has ever done when it comes to them killing off "legacy" things in favor of solutions THEY feel are superior and what the consumers SHOULD want.

Be nice to think they did it to be nice, though most probably due to supply constraints

----------

Originally Posted by Krauser

Has anyone entertained the notion that Apple may have priced the 13" so high so that people look at the 15" as a more cost effective option?

I'm just saying... most of the people here, myself included, said $1699 was ridiculous for a retina 13" model with integrated graphics and a 128gb SSD. But because of this, I said "wow, the 15" model ends up being pretty much the same price when spec'd similarly, but I get a quad core and a dedicated GPU... might as well go for that! What a value!"

In hindsight, Apple would be doing themselves a favor marking up the 13" just to push people to the 15". They've ludicrously, and only as Apple can do, made us consumers feel as if 2200 dollars for a laptop is a bargain.

Build a whole product line to push sales to another line...... ?!?!?! Nope it's just greed

[Krauser]

Originally Posted by MH01

Be nice to think they did it to be nice, though most probably due to supply constraints

----------



Build a whole product line to push sales to another line...... ?!?!?! Nope it's just greed

It's not like they've built an entire product line based around that. It's obvious that the 13" retina is a little bit of an odd ball. And considering the 13" non retina, even when it existed without the retina line, was the most popular consumer laptop in Apple's lineup, it isn't a stretch to see that Apple notices that, until they discontinue the 13" cMBP, the retina 13" can be priced higher than it should be, as most consumers looking to buy the 13" models weren't going to consider it at such a price bump that the 15" took, whereas the 15" is in no way a favored consumer product (as it is much more a professional machine with regards to those purchasing it compared to the 13").

All I'm trying to say is, with the retina's and non-retina's currently being sold side by side, it makes sense for Apple to price the 13" too high as a push for people to spring to the 15" because anyone considering one who thinks it's too high will probably just end up buying the 13" cMBP that they've been selling like hotcakes since 2008 or jump up to the 15" which is a 2200 dollar machine at a minimum. Of course it's greed, but I guarantee that when the cMBP's go away, whether it be next cycle or the one after, the drop in price for the 13" retina model will be greater than that of the 15".

[odonnelly99]

Originally Posted by Krauser

Has anyone entertained the notion that Apple may have priced the 13" so high so that people look at the 15" as a more cost effective option?

I'm just saying... most of the people here, myself included, said $1699 was ridiculous for a retina 13" model with integrated graphics and a 128gb SSD. But because of this, I said "wow, the 15" model ends up being pretty much the same price when spec'd similarly, but I get a quad core and a dedicated GPU... might as well go for that! What a value!"

In hindsight, Apple would be doing themselves a favor marking up the 13" just to push people to the 15". They've ludicrously, and only as Apple can do, made us consumers feel as if 2200 dollars for a laptop is a bargain.

1699 was definitely pushing it, but to be honest, i don't think i've ever seen the 13" sold for 1699 (outside of the apple store). I've usually seen it for either 1499 or 1549, and at a variety of locations. Just last week I called Fry's and they were selling it for 1549, as was best buy when i stopped in (i went with the 15" instead )

[gnasher729]

Originally Posted by Mr. Retrofire

2 TB SSD is impossible in the current price range of the rMBPs.

1 TB SSD is possible in the price range of the rMBPs. I mean the SSD, you then have to pay the same again for the computer

----------

Originally Posted by Naaaaak

These "refurbished" models are probably all units with LG displays. The ones with notable image retention issues. The ones which some of us paid full price for and never could get fixed because according to Apple, "they are working within spec".

Do you actually have any evidence for that, or are you blindly praising everything Samsung and putting down anything that isn't Samsung? There seems to be quite a tendency of that. Of course in a short time from now all people with display problems will have non-Samsung displays, just as all the people who are happy with their displays will have non-Samsung displays, because Apple is doing their hardest to get rid of Samsung.

[Akarin]

Originally Posted by TouchMint.com

Still cant justify these over a mba. $400 more for a bigger/heavier laptop with better processor and screen.

I agree with you but what finally made up my mind to go with a MBP is the disk size.

[Mackan]

Originally Posted by gnasher729

Do you actually have any evidence for that, or are you blindly praising everything Samsung and putting down anything that isn't Samsung? There seems to be quite a tendency of that. Of course in a short time from now all people with display problems will have non-Samsung displays, just as all the people who are happy with their displays will have non-Samsung displays, because Apple is doing their hardest to get rid of Samsung.

It just makes sense to suspect refurbished ones have a higher probability of having an LG screen with image retention.

[johnnyturbouk]

Originally Posted by stanli

Mac Horizon in Hollywood CA has a good selection of used or pre-owned macs.
Currently they have a used macbook pro 13" 2.9ghz i7 and also macbook pro 15" 2.2ghz i7 Quad.

blatant publicity

I really do not likr the rMBP-13" as mu auxiliary machine

``i for one am holding out for the r13MBA

[nexusrule]

IMO buying a rMBP 13'' with haswell so close makes little sense, the rMBP 13'' having only integrated graphics and haswell reportedly bringing gt650 (15'' rMBP discreet gpu) level performance to the graphic compart.

[KPOM]

Originally Posted by Krauser

Has anyone entertained the notion that Apple may have priced the 13" so high so that people look at the 15" as a more cost effective option?

I'm just saying... most of the people here, myself included, said $1699 was ridiculous for a retina 13" model with integrated graphics and a 128gb SSD. But because of this, I said "wow, the 15" model ends up being pretty much the same price when spec'd similarly, but I get a quad core and a dedicated GPU... might as well go for that! What a value!"

In hindsight, Apple would be doing themselves a favor marking up the 13" just to push people to the 15". They've ludicrously, and only as Apple can do, made us consumers feel as if 2200 dollars for a laptop is a bargain.

Perhaps, although it's also possible that Apple is trying to push the 15" cMBP out sooner than the 13" model. Judging from the reaction on this thread, $1499 seems to be the price level that a lot of people will find "reasonable" for the 13" rMBP. However, that's also a bit too expensive for what Tim Cook said last October was still Apple's best selling model (which I was a little surprised with given that the Air has been promoted as Apple's entry level product for over 2 years). It is entirely possible that in July Apple will announce spec bumps and price drops for the rMBP line, drop the 15" cMBP, but keep the 13" around in some form so that they keep a product at the $1199 price point. I don't see them dropping the 13" rMBP $500 in less than a year. I could easily see $200. I eventually see the 13" rMBP starting at $1299, though I think 2014 is more likely for that than 2013. Once it does hit that level, then the cMBP can be dropped.

[K42]

Originally Posted by Bubba Satori

August.

----------



Apple doesn't sell to the average consumer.

Yes they do.

Nowadays I see Macs everywhere. That was not the case 10 years ago.

[KPOM]

Originally Posted by Spink10

You think they do a complete check for IR?

They do some form of physical inspection. If it's obvious they may address it. And if someone returned it because of IR, it may have been logged as such in their system.

----------

Originally Posted by K42

Yes they do.

Nowadays I see Macs everywhere. That was not the case 10 years ago.

They are much more common, but still not in the top 5 globally. They are #3 in the US, though. They are popular on college campuses here (so popular, that to stand out, you almost need to carry a Dell or HP), but the average selling price of a Windows notebook in the US is around $400 ($700 for "Ultrabooks"), so the vast majority sold are still less expensive Windows notebooks.

Apple appeals to the premium market. "Average" people aren't debating whether $1499 would be a "reasonable" price for a notebook. They are in the market for much cheaper PCs.

[Aluminum213]

The 13" retina must of really flopped bad with refurbished models already being available

[KPOM]

Originally Posted by Aluminum213

The 13" retina must of really flopped bad with refurbished models already being available

Not necessarily. The October 2010 MacBook Air was available as a refurbished unit in January 2011. The July 2011 MacBook Air was available refurbished in October 2011, and the June 2012 MacBook Air was available refurbished in September 2012.

Usually it takes 3-4 months for refurbished units to show up, and this was no exception. Pretty much every Apple notebook returned opened to a store for any reason winds up refurbished. Lots of notebooks are sold during the holiday season, and lots are returned for many reasons.

[K42]

Originally Posted by Mackan

An artificial limit set by Apple?

It may not be true. I have 16GB RAM in my early 2011 MPB 17" without any problems. Apple's specs say 8 GB max.

[Wicked1]

Originally Posted by MMOTotal

I'm holding out until the updates, if Apple do discontinue the classic MacBook Pro line I would assume the price on the retina models would decrease.

Rumor has it once they go retina all around the ret unit price will drop, personally I think they are way too expensive, even the refurb units.

I decided on a Base 13" 2012 MBP and could not have made a better decision, I had a 13 MBA Base but 128 is not enough, so in the MBP I bought a 240 SSD for $120 and it works perfectly now. I guess if you have the extra $ and feel the need for retina, I guess it is worth it then.

[K42]

Originally Posted by KPOM

They do some form of physical inspection. If it's obvious they may address it. And if someone returned it because of IR, it may have been logged as such in their system.

----------



They are much more common, but still not in the top 5 globally. They are #3 in the US, though. They are popular on college campuses here (so popular, that to stand out, you almost need to carry a Dell or HP), but the average selling price of a Windows notebook in the US is around $400 ($700 for "Ultrabooks"), so the vast majority sold are still less expensive Windows notebooks.

Apple appeals to the premium market. "Average" people aren't debating whether $1499 would be a "reasonable" price for a notebook. They are in the market for much cheaper PCs.

Maybe it is different in the states, but here in Holland I know plenty of "average" people who do buy Macs.

Average in the sense that they are not creative professionals, not programmers, and not particularly rich. They use their macs "just" for surfing, reading mail etc.

Yawn... that kind of average (I am not implying that I am not).

Apart from that I find the notion that mac buyers are kind of special rather appalling.

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by K42

Apart from that I find the notion that mac buyers are kind of special rather appalling.

They're not. Some Apple device owners which it were the case though and you'll always have to butt head a bit with them to make them realise it's just not true.

[KdParker]

Originally Posted by MMOTotal

I'm holding out until the updates, if Apple do discontinue the classic MacBook Pro line I would assume the price on the retina models would decrease.

I wouldn't assume that there will be a price decrease.

[KPOM]

Originally Posted by K42

Maybe it is different in the states, but here in Holland I know plenty of "average" people who do buy Macs.

Average in the sense that they are not creative professionals, not programmers, and not particularly rich. They use their macs "just" for surfing, reading mail etc.

Yawn... that kind of average (I am not implying that I am not).

Apart from that I find the notion that mac buyers are kind of special rather appalling.

By "average" I'm speaking more in terms of demographics. Most Mac users (myself included) don't do anything special on the Mac that they couldn't do on a $500 Windows PC. However, not everyone can afford a $1699 rMBP, or even a $999 MacBook Air. Macs typically appeals to people in upper income groups with higher levels of education, much the same way that BMW appeals to a different audience from Chevrolet, so do Apple products as compared to HP and Dell. A Chevy Malibu and a BMW 335 will do equally well at getting someone to work or the grocery store. But I doubt people would say that BMW is aiming for the "average" audience. (There I go again with car analogies).

[kahkityoong]

Originally Posted by MH01

Your greedy defending ur stock choice. Cool. Fact still remains the 13 is overpriced however you spin it.

The lack of dedicated GPU makes it even more of a ripoff . In comparison the 15 is a much better offering spec/price wise

----------



Yup customer returns

Don't see any 'spin' here. KOM merely stated that Apple charges whatever the market will bear. Consumers can have an opinion on whether it's fair or not but that is not what pricing is usually based on. I do the same thing, base price on what people are willing to pay. Don't like it? F.O. and buy something else.

[Bubba Satori]

Originally Posted by Bubba Satori

Apple doesn't sell to the average consumer.

Originally Posted by K42

Yes they do.

Nowadays I see Macs everywhere. That was not the case 10 years ago.

Starbucks Yuppies, trustafarian boomers, and classrooms filled with students $200K in debt.
Yeah, they're all over the place and I sold a bunch of them.