4gb ram??

[MartinAppleGuy]

It's $100 to go from 4GB to 8GB. Everyone ought to at least go that far, in my opinion.

Not everyone can (or is willing to) use Apples site for buying. If you want to buy in a shop (maybe not even an Apple store, like a lot of people do), you get 4 Gb of RAM. I have seen one or two offers where they upgraded the RAM to 8Gb, but for the most part the user will get 4Gb of RAM unless doing a BTO.

 

[chabig]

Good point. I would like to think that most of us savvy enough to participate on the forum would buy BTO. But you're right, the majority of people probably get what's in the store.

 

[Meister]

Good point. I would like to think that most of us savvy enough to participate on the forum would buy BTO. But you're right, the majority of people probably get what's in the store.

bto is more expensive than getting offers on the base models.

 

[ioannis2005gr]

bto is more expensive than getting offers on the base models.

Good point!

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

Good point. I would like to think that most of us savvy enough to participate on the forum would buy BTO. But you're right, the majority of people probably get what's in the store.

I personally never done a BTO (although I was going to) as I was getting an offer when I got a 3 year warranty thrown in for free. I'm glad I never went for the build to order too, as 8Gb of RAM is great for my needs

 

[chabig]

Another reason I BTO is that I feel the machine has better resale value when I upgrade. It'll out spec the others on the market.

 

[dave343]

It is a 1000$ computer, but there has always been an Apple tax.

Matt

About 10 years ago that statement would have held some value to it, but it's getting dated now. Maybe... on the Mac Pro towers, but people need to look at the specs and what you get with the macbooks and compare apple's to apple's (no pun intended) and not apple's to oranges.
$1000 for a macbook air isn't a tax. You're getting an i5, 4gb 1600mhz ram, pci-e based flash, *all aluminium chasis*, 720p camera, backlit keyboard... and I could go on.
For $1000 in the PC world, you can't find me an Ultrabook with these specifications and design elements. Samsung and Sony, who do make Ultrabooks similar to the air with the i5 charge 1200-1800 for theirs. And, battery life is nowhere near as good as the air's, and it's inclosed in cheap plastic. Ok.. maaaybe carbon in some but still.

Before you talk about some distant Apple tax, you need to look at every feature you're paying for when you buy the Air, and then go seek out a PC with the same spec's. You'll be paying a lot more on the PC side.

And btw, I've been a hardcore PC guy for 20years, I'm in no way a mac fanboy, but this tax crap need's to be dropped. It's no longer relevant, it's annoying. People need to do more research.

 

[mad3inch1na]

About 10 years ago that statement would have held some value to it, but it's getting dated now. Maybe... on the Mac Pro towers, but people need to look at the specs and what you get with the macbooks and compare apple's to apple's (no pun intended) and not apple's to oranges.
$1000 for a macbook air isn't a tax. You're getting an i5, 4gb 1600mhz ram, pci-e based flash, *all aluminium chasis*, 720p camera, backlit keyboard... and I could go on.
For $1000 in the PC world, you can't find me an Ultrabook with these specifications and design elements. Samsung and Sony, who do make Ultrabooks similar to the air with the i5 charge 1200-1800 for theirs. And, battery life is nowhere near as good as the air's, and it's inclosed in cheap plastic. Ok.. maaaybe carbon in some but still.

Before you talk about some distant Apple tax, you need to look at every feature you're paying for when you buy the Air, and then go seek out a PC with the same spec's. You'll be paying a lot more on the PC side.

And btw, I've been a hardcore PC guy for 20years, I'm in no way a mac fanboy, but this tax crap need's to be dropped. It's no longer relevant, it's annoying. People need to do more research.

I think we might have different definitions of what the "apple tax" is. I didn't give a definition, so that is on me. The idea behind the "apple tax" is that for a given Mac, a cheaper PC can be found/built for less. For example, I can find a 1500$ windows laptop with a haswell quadcore i7 processor, 8GB RAM, a gtx 765m, and a 256GB SSD. A comparable apple computer in terms of performance is over 2000$.

The whole dogma behind the "apple tax" is that Apple fanboys will pay a hell of a lot more for a skinny, aluminum bodied, beautifully crafted machine, which some people see as a waste of money. I agree with you that some of the PC market has shifted, and the focus has spread out between power users and high-end consumers. Does this mean that the apple tax has dissappeared? No. The apple tax doesn't account for craftsmanship, it is only about benchmarks. You mentioned that the apple tax is no longer relevant, and I agree with you, but would go one step further to say it was never relevant. There will always be PC manufacturers out there who just throw high-end components together at wholesale price. That is what sets the margin for the apple tax, and it will always be an argument that Apple haters will use.

On another note, I was in no way promoting the idea of the Apple tax, and went on to argue why pure benchmarks don't mean anything when your laptop runs perfectly. In persuasive writing, it is sometimes useful to acknowledge the opposing viewpoint, and then explain why your viewpoint is better, reinforcing your argument.

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear in my original post, maybe now you can see where I am coming from. Hopefully I wasn't condescending, it really is distasteful.

Best,
Matt

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

I think we might have different definitions of what the "apple tax" is. I didn't give a definition, so that is on me. The idea behind the "apple tax" is that for a given Mac, a cheaper PC can be found/built for less. For example, I can find a 1500$ windows laptop with a haswell quadcore i7 processor, 8GB RAM, a gtx 765m, and a 256GB SSD. A comparable apple computer in terms of performance is over 2000$.

The whole dogma behind the "apple tax" is that Apple fanboys will pay a hell of a lot more for a skinny, aluminum bodied, beautifully crafted machine, which some people see as a waste of money. I agree with you that some of the PC market has shifted, and the focus has spread out between power users and high-end consumers. Does this mean that the apple tax has dissappeared? No. The apple tax doesn't account for craftsmanship, it is only about benchmarks. You mentioned that the apple tax is no longer relevant, and I agree with you, but would go one step further to say it was never relevant. There will always be PC manufacturers out there who just throw high-end components together at wholesale price. That is what sets the margin for the apple tax, and it will always be an argument that Apple haters will use.

On another note, I was in no way promoting the idea of the Apple tax, and went on to argue why pure benchmarks don't mean anything when your laptop runs perfectly. In persuasive writing, it is sometimes useful to acknowledge the opposing viewpoint, and then explain why your viewpoint is better, reinforcing your argument.

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear in my original post, maybe now you can see where I am coming from. Hopefully I wasn't condescending, it really is distasteful.

Best,
Matt

But with the Windows machine you would have to charge it more (due to less battery life, resulting in a higher electricity cost), buy Antivirus every year, buy Office every year, pay for upgrading the OS every 5 years, pay for better video editing software (as Movie Maker is no match for iMovie)...

 

[Meister]

(due to less battery life, resulting in a higher electricity cost)

my electricity cost is so high that a few kilowatts make no difference to me.
I actually calculated the % off my use compared to all the electricity my provider provides to all housholds and I couldn't believe my eyes. I think that they would have to fire people if I stop using power.

 

[Serban]

in the last 3-4 years, RAM wasn't the priority for a perfect consumer laptop, because RAM is enough by standards and fast enough. In the other hands for a perfect laptop you must get a perfect battery life and that you have from 2013, and a perfect CPU/iGPU combo thats meet between the perfect power and power consumption. My point is from 2010 i think the Macbook Air was perfect in size/light and RAM...and for the last 2-3 years they try and succeed to perfect the battery life with a CPU/iGPU at their best and the storage (PCIe).

So for a consumer laptop now is the best MBA (maybe some people the PPI is a draw back but i guess this will be updated too this year)

 

[mad3inch1na]

But with the Windows machine you would have to charge it more (due to less battery life, resulting in a higher electricity cost), buy Antivirus every year, buy Office every year, pay for upgrading the OS every 5 years, pay for better video editing software (as Movie Maker is no match for iMovie)...

First of all, I don't know why you bring those points up, considering the whole point of my post was to say that the apple tax was a useless measurement of value.

Second, I have a Windows machine, and other than the electricity part (which has a minimal effect), all the rest of your points are really random. I have never purchased an antivirus program because there are plenty of good, free ones out there. Office isn't even released every year, and I would still pay for Office on my mac if it were. In terms of upgrading the OS, I typically upgrade my computer every 5 years, so the cost of the OS is bundled with the computer (much like Apple). And the video editing software is a niche argument. I have used iMovie maybe twice over the last 5 years, and many people don't use it.

Many PCs with high end components either weigh 10 pounds, have horrible heat sinks, or both. This makes them essentially overpriced desktops with a significantly reduced lifespan. They often come with generic cases that poorly dissipate heat, TN panels for gaming that have terrible color reproduction and viewing angles, and a terrible trackpad. They aren't consumer friendly, and at the end of the day, they are really just semi-portable desktops that you can bring to your friend's LAN party.

Like I said before, the apple tax is not a good argument because cheaper PCs have many drawbacks. I know it is more exciting to have an argument than to agree with someone, but at least read my post first.

Best,
Matt