Apple Confirms Retina MacBook Build-to-Order Pricing for 1.3 GHz Processor

[Mr. Gates]

Having a second USB port would make these a lot better.

Would it really have taken up that much more space? One on the left side, one on the right.

Right now you can charge, or use a device, or connect your smartphone, or use an Ethernet connection. But not all at once. Existing hubs probably won't let you charge.

With two ports you could use one for charging and one with a regular hub for all your existing peripherals.

I've had 3-4 things plugged into my MacBook Pro on several occasions.

Power, Ethernet, Second monitor, and iPhone.

Exactly.
But still, too many compromises for the price. This CPU had a better battery claim than this when it was being talked up by INTEL. Kind of sad.

 

[CrAkD]

Rip off I'll take a refurb quad core any day for close to those prices

 

[Traverse]

Would it really be that noticeable?

 

[Gfxman]

This machine is sexy, but has too many compromises.

The biggest are

- just one usb-c port it's a good idea, whatever is the reason behind it...
- the screen, should have been edge to edge, it's possibile now, why that ugly bevel?
- the sd camera screems for justice

but the biggest problem: the price in europe is insane...

Why there are not reviews out yet?
Apple is blocking reviews?

I'll wait for the next iteration, or a true mac book air retina.

 

[nutmac]

How do you figure? The i7 bump for $300 is a 600mhz jump .. I'd say that outpaces this quite a bit. Personally I'd never buy the upgrade but to someone who wants it/needs it ..

Agreed. This built-to-order option just seems rather ridiculous. I might be wrong and perhaps the upgrade boosts the performance significantly for those who wants it. But at least on paper, it's a pitiful boost that shouldn't even be offered. If Apple can squeeze it in, 16GB RAM upgrade will probably get much warmer reception.

 

[Macboy Pro]

Way way way way over priced!!!

 

[Traverse]

Rip off I'll take a refurb quad core any day for close to those prices

The segment who want a quad-core machine won't be considering the rMB and vice versa. It isn't a rip off for people who want the rmb.

 

[KPOM]

Ill wait for the next version with an HD camera...

Actually, the next version with the Skymont processor should be a significant improvement. I've heard the leap from Broadwell to Skymont is like the leap from the Core Duo to the Core 2 Duo.

 

[CrAkD]

The segment who want a quad-core machine won't be considering the rMB and vice versa. It isn't a rip off for people who want the rmb.

Even the 13" is a better deal more ports more power more screen big deal it's a little thicker

 

[bobob]

My rMBP (granted it was refurb) was ~$1200 and it is much more of a machine than this.

You're right - - it's almost twice the machine!

(3.48 lbs vs 2 lbs)

 

[Brian Y]

yet tray price on 5y71,5y51 and 5y31 is the same. So Apple is either taking people for a ride or compensating for whatever discount they get from Intel (or both as usual).

That's probably a mistake on Intel's site. Why would Intel charge the same for a faster CPU as a slower one?

 

[KPOM]

Way way way way over priced!!!

No one is forcing you to buy one. The HP Elitebook 1020 has the same processor and a comparable price, though.

 

[nutmac]

Having a second USB port would make these a lot better.

Would it really have taken up that much more space? One on the left side, one on the right.

While I want second USB-C port as well, it's entirely possible that south bridge in Intel's chipset allows only 4 USB connections: (1) USB-C port, (2) iSight camera, (3) trackpad, (4) keyboard. And Apple didn't want to add another controller.

iFixIt and Anandtech will no doubt offer better clues as to why there's only 1 USB-C port, of course.

 

[tigres]

good lord, what a outrageous price for a gimped computer. Good looking, but useless.

 

[BCWorld]

Wow. So you pay almost 2k for the 1.3 M CORE? Not even an i5 or i7 for that price? Ouch. ###

 

[SpiderDude]

well. not really being fair there

It's a steal compared to the original MacBook Air.

$1799 to start and if you wanted an SSD then you had to shell out $3098, and that was for only 64GB.

I mean, the Air was an actual computer. This is just a tablet's logic board bundled with a buck load of batteries, with a keyboard slapped on it and a screen attached.
Aside from the 8 gigs of ram and the extra capacity this is a tablet...

 

[Mr. Gates]

Rip off I'll take a refurb quad core any day for close to those prices

This JokeBook and the thousand dollar watch straps....
It seems like Apple just thinks it's users will buy anything with an Apple logo on it regardless of the price.
I wonder how they got that idea ? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ‪

People dictate companies policy and pricing by buying their stuff....or not buying it.

So, ...go figure

 

[KPOM]

Apple appear to be targeting a very odd market. The pretentious, nouveau-rich crowd.

People must be insane to spend this amount of cash on an underpowered laptop! Pretty it may be, but just like the Apple Watch, they seem to be going for a different market.

Have to agree. My rMBP (granted it was refurb) was ~$1200 and it is much more of a machine than this.

This is targeting the same market as the original MacBook Air. Eventually, the Core M processors will improve (starting with Skymont next year) so that this can become the mainstream MacBook again in a few years, following the same pattern the MacBook Air took from January 2008 to July 2011.

I'm not sure I understand the criticism. It isn't as if Apple hasn't done this before. They know where they want to take the notebook, but the technology isn't quite there to make it mainstream. So they are releasing it as a niche machine alongside the existing MacBook Air and MacBook Pro lines (which will still be their top sellers) until it is powerful enough to replace one of them.

 

[thefredelement]

I think an iPad is a better value.

 

[leman]

How do you figure? The i7 bump for $300 is a 600mhz jump .. I'd say that outpaces this quite a bit. Personally I'd never buy the upgrade but to someone who wants it/needs it ..

First of all, its not 600mhz, but 300mhz (looking at the TurboBoost frequencies) + cache increase (which is actually more significant here for performance). So we are looking at around 10% increase in clock. Now, to the 12" MacBook — the difference is 500mhz max TurboBoost, or 20% increase in max theoretical performance. Certainly looks like a better deal to me than the i7 upgrade on the 13", at least on paper.

 

[MrXiro]

Is there something performance-wise about this chip that I'm not getting? The rMB seems extremely pricey for what it is. The pricing just doesn't make sense to me. Either the 13 inch rMBP is under priced or the rMB is over priced...

 

[diipii]

Well, they are at a position now.
A perhaps dangerous one.
Where they are under the impression, and so far it's correct.
That they can make whatever they want, as long as it's marketed right, and has 'Fashionably' Good looks that many many people will pay the price they ask.

Until people stop buying, they have no reason to change the route they are now on.

Of course, as with all things, there will come a point where this is going to backfire on them, but I suspect we have a little way to go yet.

Totally spot on. Apple have painted themselves into a "thin at any price" corner and have to use slow CPUs to cool the innards down. And your comment about marketing before everything highlights a danger signal for Apple. The Apple bubble is getting close to bursting and I am wondering who will get the chop first. I would bet on Cook and Ive, both hugely deserving of their just deserts.

 

[GhostRaider]

I don't understand the position of the MacBook. Back in the day "MacBook" was the entry level laptop for those who wanted a Mac. It was less expensive. As for the MacBook Air, I'm not really sure what will happen to it since "MacBook" is technically the lightest laptop. I would assume Apple to discontinue the MacBook Air in the near future.

The MacBook Pro is the pro version of the MacBook that has better performance but at a pricier range.

So why is the Macbook at the same price range as the MacBook Pro with a crappier performance? I find it kind of stupid. Why would anyone sacrifice performance when you can get the Pro version at the same price?

 

[Jynto]

Introducing the world's first $250 0.2 GHz.

Pretty sure it's not the first.

 

[Macboy Pro]

Wow. So you pay almost 2k for the 1.3 M CORE? Not even an i5 or i7 for that price? Ouch. ###

Or you can pay 2/3 of the price for a Macbook Pro Retina with twice the machine.

oh... but its 2mm thicker so it is not Apple innovation anymore.