Apple Shifting to Intel Graphics for Future MacBooks and 13-Inch MacBook Pros?

[Yebubbleman]

Clearly you don't know how to read definitions and interpret them. By your interpretation, every manufacturer is a monopoly since only they can make their own product and sell them through their channels of retailers. Which is just ridiculous. Tommy hillfiger has a monopoly for Tommy jeans, McDonald's over the BigMac, Sony on Sony TVs, Nintendo over the Wii, HTC on HTC Phones, Radio Shack on house branded HDMI cables, etc.. etc.. All of which are not monopolies in the real world, but are in your head so you can justify calling Apple a monopoly.

However, when the dictionary says comodity or article, they refer to categories of products, not actual products themselves. Mac OS X is not the commodity, computer operating systems are. As such, Apple does not hold a monopoly over computer operating systems.

So quote dictionaries all you want, if you do not understand the word and the definition, it still doesn't make you right. Apple is not a monopoly.

By that logic, using the word "gay" to mean "happy" is incorrect as it now more commonly means "homosexual" and (for better or worse) "stupid" or "lame". I'm pretty sure that I'm using the word correctly. Note: I wasn't citing the legal definition of a monopoly, but instead the dictionary one. If we're citing the dictionary definition, then I'm absolutely right and your claim of my lack of understanding of the word and its definition are invalid. If we're citing the legal definition, then you are absolutely correct. That's why Psystar's case against Apple for said "monopoly" flopped.

Prove it. I'm tired of going to Dell's site, configuring a Studio Hybrid and showing everyone that claims I am wrong that I am not.

I think I mistook the Studio Hybrid with their Nettops and budget PCs. Looking into it, you're right on that. My apologies. Though why would anyone buying a PC want the Studio Hybrid over a similarly feature packed PC that's, granted, larger in size? What's the allure? Or is there not one?

Let's talk post refresh. And you forgot the MBA 13". In ultra-portables, Apple is really competitive right now (since they just refreshed the stuff).

Last I checked, even at refresh prices, you could find ultraportables that are more inexpensive PC side than the 13" MacBook Air. Do they have the Blade SSDs? No, probably the traditional SSD-in-a-2.5-or-1.8-inch-enclosure type of SSD, and no, probably not with a 7 hour battery life either, and no probably not with a GPU with even a fraction of the muscle of the 320M, though if I were in the market for just an ultraportable, would it be worth it to me to spend extra to have those features?

Feel free to correct me if you spot different prices in the PC ultraportables market.

What if you want to buy that stuff ? Apple doesn't sell it. If you want that stuff : Tough cookies, buy a Dell/Sony/HP or any other manufacturer's products. Apple isn't overpriced because they don't sell what you want. I don't call McDonald's overpriced because I wanted a 8 oz Angus prime rib steak with mashed potatoes.

A 13" MacBook Pro at $1200 with a 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo processor and not even a dedicated GPU is overpriced. I'm sorry. Same with the 15" and 17" MacBook Pros, in which the PC competitors are half that cost for the same specs. No, I don't want a McDonalds, I want a hamburger that, in theory, shouldn't cost anywhere near that kind of premium. Even the white MacBook, with 2GB of RAM and the same integrated GPU (let alone MLB [with a couple small exceptions]) as the 13" Pro is a rip-off, though definitely much less of one than said 13" Pro.

 

[Erasmus]

Last I checked, even at refresh prices, you could find ultraportables that are more inexpensive PC side than the 13" MacBook Air. Do they have the Blade SSDs? No, probably the traditional SSD-in-a-2.5-or-1.8-inch-enclosure type of SSD, and no, probably not with a 7 hour battery life either, and no probably not with a GPU with even a fraction of the muscle of the 320M, though if I were in the market for just an ultraportable, would it be worth it to me to spend extra to have those features?

Feel free to correct me if you spot different prices in the PC ultraportables market.

^^ Pointless argument.

Dodgy summary: "Many Windows ultraportables are way cheaper than the MBA. They are also much slower than a MBA. Why would I spend more money on the faster MBA?"

Stupid analogy: Cars are almost always more expensive than pushbikes. But very few people who want to buy a car would be convinced to buy a tricked out bike instead.

 

[Yebubbleman]

^^ Pointless argument.

Dodgy summary: "Many Windows ultraportables are way cheaper than the MBA. They are also much slower than a MBA. Why would I spend more money on the faster MBA?"

Stupid analogy: Cars are almost always more expensive than pushbikes. But very few people who want to buy a car would be convinced to buy a tricked out bike instead.

If you're just taking the damn thing across town, why do you need to spend more money on the car, especially when money is tight?

 

[KnightWRX]

By that logic, using the word "gay" to mean "happy" is incorrect as it now more commonly means "homosexual" and (for better or worse) "stupid" or "lame". I'm pretty sure that I'm using the word correctly. Note: I wasn't citing the legal definition of a monopoly, but instead the dictionary one. If we're citing the dictionary definition, then I'm absolutely right and your claim of my lack of understanding of the word and its definition are invalid. If we're citing the legal definition, then you are absolutely correct. That's why Psystar's case against Apple for said "monopoly" flopped.

You are wrong for both the dictionary and the legal definition. The dictionary again doesn't state that McDonald's has a monopoly over BigMacs. The "commodity" or "product" in the dictionary definition refers to segments. McDonald's doesn't have a monopoly over Hamburgers. Apple doesn't have a monopoly for computer operating systems.

You aren't right at all in this. You just want to be to justify calling Apple a monopoly.

I think I mistook the Studio Hybrid with their Nettops and budget PCs. Looking into it, you're right on that. My apologies. Though why would anyone buying a PC want the Studio Hybrid over a similarly feature packed PC that's, granted, larger in size? What's the allure? Or is there not one?

Just because a product doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean that other people don't want or desire the aspect you find worthless. Size is a spec, the Mini uses it, the Studio Hybrid also. People who want SFF PCs consider it and "something larger" doesn't appeal to them.

Different strokes for different folks. It doesn't make Apple overpriced, it just means they don't make a product in the segment you're shopping in.

Last I checked, even at refresh prices, you could find ultraportables that are more inexpensive PC side than the 13" MacBook Air. Do they have the Blade SSDs? No, probably the traditional SSD-in-a-2.5-or-1.8-inch-enclosure type of SSD, and no, probably not with a 7 hour battery life either, and no probably not with a GPU with even a fraction of the muscle of the 320M, though if I were in the market for just an ultraportable, would it be worth it to me to spend extra to have those features?

You just self-defeated yourself. The fact that there are less expensive PCs doesn't make the MBA overpriced if it offers higher specs to match that price tag. It just means Apple throws more into their models and prices them accordingly. Price oranges against oranges and you'll see Apple is very competitive. If you don't have a need for all the features Apple throws in, that doesn't make them overpriced, it makes them "not what you're looking for". Just shop elsewhere.

You played 2 cards against Apple here that are very common :

- Monopoly
- Overpriced

You've failed to back them up with facts, instead you've twisted definitions to make them fit your argument. You should know by now that people on this forum have seen these complaints tons of times and know very well how to rebute them with cold hard facts.

The plain fact is obvious : You want Mac OS X (not need) and you don't want to pay the price Apple wants you to pay. That doesn't make Apple a monopolistic company that sells overpriced product, it just means you have an inflated sense of entitlement and a low income. Fix either and you won't have a twisted view of Apple. There's enough out there to fault them on in the real world, you don't need to make up stuff about them.

 

[Erasmus]

If you're just taking the damn thing across town, why do you need to spend more money on the car, especially when money is tight?

Then Apple doesn't make a computer for you. Deal with it, and move on.

 

[Yebubbleman]

You are wrong for both the dictionary and the legal definition. The dictionary again doesn't state that McDonald's has a monopoly over BigMacs. The "commodity" or "product" in the dictionary definition refers to segments. McDonald's doesn't have a monopoly over Hamburgers. Apple doesn't have a monopoly for computer operating systems.

You aren't right at all in this. You just want to be to justify calling Apple a monopoly.



Just because a product doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean that other people don't want or desire the aspect you find worthless. Size is a spec, the Mini uses it, the Studio Hybrid also. People who want SFF PCs consider it and "something larger" doesn't appeal to them.

Different strokes for different folks. It doesn't make Apple overpriced, it just means they don't make a product in the segment you're shopping in.




You just self-defeated yourself. The fact that there are less expensive PCs doesn't make the MBA overpriced if it offers higher specs to match that price tag. It just means Apple throws more into their models and prices them accordingly. Price oranges against oranges and you'll see Apple is very competitive. If you don't have a need for all the features Apple throws in, that doesn't make them overpriced, it makes them "not what you're looking for". Just shop elsewhere.

You played 2 cards against Apple here that are very common :

- Monopoly
- Overpriced

You've failed to back them up with facts, instead you've twisted definitions to make them fit your argument. You should know by now that people on this forum have seen these complaints tons of times and know very well how to rebute them with cold hard facts.

You keep dodging the MacBook Pro argument. Those machines are overpriced. A PC ultraportable configured EXACTLY like a MacBook Air is probably comparable then. However, my use of the word monopoly fits that of the dictionary and you've yet to properly refute that. Even if it wasn't correct, the point would still remain (does everyone on this forum waste so much time arguing semantics?), Apple is the only one shipping computers with their OS. Therefore, they are in the unique position of having the freedom to charge whatever they want for the hardware that runs their OS as it is the only hardware that can. That is as monopolistic in practice as monopolies get.

As for the Dell Mac mini clone, if memory serves, they put that thing out solely to combat the Mac mini. As it is the cheapest Mac on the market, it makes sense. However it is not the cheapest PC out there, so while specs are similar, you're still comparing apples and oranges as the cheapest PC dekstop is still cheaper than the cheapest Mac desktop (and yes with similar if not faster innards).

I'm not saying that the cost of Macs are a deterent for me, but for at least half of their market segments they are overpriced compared to PCs with similar enough specs.

Then Apple doesn't make a computer for you. Deal with it, and move on.

Mercedes makes more expensive cars than Honda does. Both are cars. Doesn't mean that one is necessarily better than the other; just means that one is more expensive than the other for the purposes of getting from point A to point B. It is in that logic that I cite them being overpriced. Take what you will from that.

 

[KnightWRX]

However, my use of the word monopoly fits that of the dictionary and you've yet to properly refute that.

Except I have, many times. And it doesn't fit, as I've explained numerous times to you. You simply misinterpret the definition.

I've not dodged the MBP either, I've told you it's due for a refresh and thus I would not discuss it.

That you keep ignoring the parts of my posts you want to doesn't mean I haven't posted it, it just means you don't want to face reality.

Mercedes makes more expensive cars than Honda does. Both are cars. Doesn't mean that one is necessarily better than the other; just means that one is more expensive than the other for the purposes of getting from point A to point B. It is in that logic that I cite them being overpriced. Take what you will from that.

Hum, Mercedes isn't just "more expensive". You get what you pay for. If you want to stand there and claim a Honda Accord and a SLK Mercedes are just "cars", it just means you aren't Mercedes' customer, not that they are overpriced. There's a serious problem in your shopping habits if you compare both those models together and buy the Accord thinking "Wow, that Mercedes sure was overpriced for getting from point A to point B".

Are you even being serious anymore ? It's as if you're just posting to hear yourself type.

 

[Yebubbleman]

You aren't right at all in this. You just want to be to justify calling Apple a monopoly.

Yeah, that's it, I want to be able to use a cool word! Come on!

You should know by now that people on this forum have seen these complaints tons of times and know very well how to rebute them with cold hard facts.

I should know by now that diehard fans will defend what they are diehards about even against other fans who are actually presenting the practical realities. Case in point you, here, now.

The plain fact is obvious : You want Mac OS X (not need) and you don't want to pay the price Apple wants you to pay. That doesn't make Apple a monopolistic company that sells overpriced product, it just means you have an inflated sense of entitlement and a low income. Fix either and you won't have a twisted view of Apple. There's enough out there to fault them on in the real world, you don't need to make up stuff about them.

What if I need a computer that runs a program that only exists for Mac OS X (like Final Cut Pro)? Last I checked, only one computer manufacturer made a computer to do that. There is only one company that makes the computer I need to run the software I need. How the hell is that not monopolistic? Also, I have enough money to have multiple Macs. I'm a huge Mac fanboy, but I'm not overly defensive on the topic; they cost more than they should, but I buy 'em anyway.

The way you defend this **** almost makes it sound like you have a personal stake in 'em. Relax, man, I'm not here to tell you that Macs suck and you're not here to defend that statement.

 

[KnightWRX]

What if I need a computer that runs a program that only exists for Mac OS X (like Final Cut Pro)? Last I checked, only one computer manufacturer made a computer to do that. There is only one company that makes the computer I need to run the software I need. How the hell is that not monopolistic?

You're looking at it wrong from both the legal and dictionary perspective. What you need is a video editing solution. Many exist, one of which is Final Cut Pro on Mac OS X, as sold by Apple which sells all of these products, from the computer, to Mac OS X, to Final Cut Pro. This isn't monopolistic, it's vertical integration, a lost art in the consumer space of computers.

The dictionary in this case refers to video editing software as the commodity or product. Apple doesn't hold a monopoly over video editing software.

I'm kinda tired of repeating the same thing you keep ignoring.

BTW, I'm not a diehard Apple fan, search my post history, you'll see that I'm quite vocal in my critics of them. I just happen to understand English and can read dictionary definitions without misinterpreting them.

 

[Yebubbleman]

You're looking at it wrong from both the legal and dictionary perspective. What you need is a video editing solution. Many exist, one of which is Final Cut Pro on Mac OS X, as sold by Apple which sells all of these products, from the computer, to Mac OS X, to Final Cut Pro. This isn't monopolistic, it's vertical integration, a lost art in the consumer space of computers.

The dictionary in this case refers to video editing software as the commodity or product. Apple doesn't hold a monopoly over video editing software.

I'm kinda tired of repeating the same thing you keep ignoring.

BTW, I'm not a diehard Apple fan, search my post history, you'll see that I'm quite vocal in my critics of them. I just happen to understand English and can read dictionary definitions without misinterpreting them.

My guess is that this is a debate that'd probably go more fluidly in person. In any event, I'm kind of tired of arguing as well, so I'm not going to. From one Mac person to another, what are your thoughts on the potential switch back to Intel graphics? And how do you like the new Air? I noticed it in your sig.

 

[KnightWRX]

My guess is that this is a debate that'd probably go more fluidly in person. In any event, I'm kind of tired of arguing as well, so I'm not going to. From one Mac person to another, what are your thoughts on the potential switch back to Intel graphics? And how do you like the new Air? I noticed it in your sig.

My opinion on these Intel graphics are splattered all over the thread : It's the one reason I refused to buy Macs before, it's the one thing that will send me back to a PC with Linux.

As for the Air, I just love it. All the power of my old MacBook, none of the weight, much higher DPI screen. All the things I love in one package.

 

[Yebubbleman]

My opinion on these Intel graphics are splattered all over the thread : It's the one reason I refused to buy Macs before, it's the one thing that will send me back to a PC with Linux.

As for the Air, I just love it. All the power of my old MacBook, none of the weight, much higher DPI screen. All the things I love in one package.

Regardless of whether it's even likely or not, what would you say about a switch to AMD?

 

[pr5owner]

Hum, Mercedes isn't just "more expensive". You get what you pay for. If you want to stand there and claim a Honda Accord and a SLK Mercedes are just "cars", it just means you aren't Mercedes' customer, not that they are overpriced. There's a serious problem in your shopping habits if you compare both those models together and buy the Accord thinking "Wow, that Mercedes sure was overpriced for getting from point A to point B".
.

heres a better example

Hyundai Genesis Sedan V8 Vs E class mercedes

the Hyundai Corners better, accelerates faster, has more power, gets better gas millage, has a better crash rating, has more electronics and standard options (heated and air conditioned seats, nav, etc, etc, for under $50K CDN), cheaper and has a longer warranty.

 

[AidenShaw]

Regardless of whether it's even likely or not, what would you say about a switch to AMD?

Ick.

Even if the CPUs were OK - "ick" because of the gawd-awful ATI drivers for the graphics.

 

[tigress666]

heres a better example

Hyundai Genesis Sedan V8 Vs E class mercedes

the Hyundai Corners better, accelerates faster, has more power, gets better gas millage, has a better crash rating, has more electronics and standard options (heated and air conditioned seats, nav, etc, etc, for under $50K CDN), cheaper and has a longer warranty.

And with care the Mercedes will probably last longer and still look to be in good shape for longer (That Hyundai will be showing its age a lot sooner).

I mean, my BMW I had with care looked really good at 20 years old (it looked half its age). I know the Toyota I have now (a 2003 Celica) you can tell that even if you tried it's going to look a lot rougher at 20 years old. It is aimed at the young market who cares more about performance than quality. They use much cheaper materials on stuff (the doors are easily scratched, the seats have really thin material that wears holes real quick). There's just no way it is going to weather aging as well as my BMW did (or a 1973 Porsche I had). Hey, don't get me wrong, I love my Toyota (I like it better than the BMW honestly). But, it really isn't going to age as well and even though it looks new now (it's only 6 years old, youngest car I've had yet), I know it's not going to stay looking new as long as the BMW did. It's a great car for the price imho, but for the price, sacrifice had to be made somewhere (hey, they managed to improve performance in my car's generation while making the price tag cheaper, that's pretty impressive).

Hyundai probably also uses cheaper sheet metal, cheaps out in places like latches on the door and stuff you won't notice now but will break sooner. My parents rented a Kia and it already had a broken trunk latch because the metal they used on the latch was so thin it bent. Sorry, but you *do* get what you pay for. Maybe you get a faster car, but they will find other places to give you crappy quality.

You do realize that the cheap car will find places they will cheap out on to keep that price? Probably stuff some young kid won't notice cause all he cares about is top speed. But it won't keep its value as long for the fact it won't age as well, even if you try to take care of it.

 

[tblrsa]

I´m very happy with my new Macbook Pro 13". I plan to convert my whole private IT into the Apple Ecosystem. Why? Well, for one I do love working with OSX. It´s not perfect but it does "just work" as it should. Not having to bother much about Spyware and Viri is an added bonus and gives some peace of mind while working with the machine too. Of course I´m aware about the possibility of rootkits and keyloggers, but if you don´t click on everything and the kitchen sink, you should be fine.

You might get faster hardware with Windows PCs, but to be honest, i´ve been quite disappointed with Windows Vista. Windows XP was not a bad OS, but everything that came after just felt out of place. Another thing is that you usually don´t get Windows Discs shipped with a Windows PC anymore , you´d have to burn a backup yourself. With my Mac I got the OS shipped on a Disc, as it should be.

 

[iEdd]

Doesn't MR use something simple as a CAPTCHA box to stop spambots? Or are these guys actual humans?

 

[Mal67]

Also, clearly if "there is no competition" to Apple, then you must like its products enough to justify the cost?

Eh... I've used Macs for 20 years so I think they're dirt cheap now. $7000-9000 is still what I remember the 17" PowerBook as. $6k for a 30" ACD. Everything today is just cheap. Then again my baseline has and always will be Macs.

I think it's amazing what you can get for less than $2k Australian these days especially when from memory the Mac Classic was the first one available for less than that amount nearly twenty years ago. However it's time to join the rest of the computing world and get some i3 notebooks (+ the mini) out there preferably with a graphic solution that is better than the 320 not comparable to it.

 

[pr5owner]

And with care the Mercedes will probably last longer and still look to be in good shape for longer (That Hyundai will be showing its age a lot sooner).

I mean, my BMW I had with care looked really good at 20 years old (it looked half its age). I know the Toyota I have now (a 2003 Celica) you can tell that even if you tried it's going to look a lot rougher at 20 years old. It is aimed at the young market who cares more about performance than quality. They use much cheaper materials on stuff (the doors are easily scratched, the seats have really thin material that wears holes real quick). There's just no way it is going to weather aging as well as my BMW did (or a 1973 Porsche I had). Hey, don't get me wrong, I love my Toyota (I like it better than the BMW honestly). But, it really isn't going to age as well and even though it looks new now (it's only 6 years old, youngest car I've had yet), I know it's not going to stay looking new as long as the BMW did. It's a great car for the price imho, but for the price, sacrifice had to be made somewhere (hey, they managed to improve performance in my car's generation while making the price tag cheaper, that's pretty impressive).

Hyundai probably also uses cheaper sheet metal, cheaps out in places like latches on the door and stuff you won't notice now but will break sooner. My parents rented a Kia and it already had a broken trunk latch because the metal they used on the latch was so thin it bent. Sorry, but you *do* get what you pay for. Maybe you get a faster car, but they will find other places to give you crappy quality.

You do realize that the cheap car will find places they will cheap out on to keep that price? Probably stuff some young kid won't notice cause all he cares about is top speed. But it won't keep its value as long for the fact it won't age as well, even if you try to take care of it.

i dont think they cheaped out on anything in the genesis sedan, its stereo is a lexicon system, you know who else uses lexicon? Rolls Royce

also the sedan is the first car ive ever seen using a fiber optic network for communication between all the communication modules in the car, not even bmw or merc uses that.

hyundai also is the highest non premium brand ranked for highest initial quality(JD Power review), i think they were number 2 in 2004 and number 3 in a later year like 2008. cant remember exactly

hyundai and kia are not the same, hyundai only owns kia and they may share some engine blocks with each other, but they are not made in the same factory, most kias are made in the US, ALL genesis models are made in korean factories.

the phrase, "you get what you pay for" is not true at all it can never be used to generalize a brand and every product under that brand

 

[aquaquest]

i have one, it's perfect in Maya rendering

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

From one Mac person to another, what are your thoughts on the potential switch back to Intel graphics? And how do you like the new Air? I noticed it in your sig.

I'm guessing the new Intel Sandy Bridge IGP will be just fine for the MB and 13" MBP. Unsuitable for what people will expect in the 15"/17" MBP.

Ick.

Even if the CPUs were OK - "ick" because of the gawd-awful ATI drivers for the graphics.

Yet ATI/AMD GPUs look pretty good performance/power-wise. Is it a foregone conclusion that the driver will be bad?

 

[Erasmus]

The funniest thing about the above spam is that it's posted on a Mac site. You know, the OS that has an inbuilt, universal Print to PDF function that works perfectly...

 

[Yebubbleman]

Ick.

Even if the CPUs were OK - "ick" because of the gawd-awful ATI drivers for the graphics.

Historically, I'll grant you. Presently, I'll have to disagree and point to the advent and launch of StarCraft II and Steam (and thereby every Half-Life 2/Source game) for Mac. NVIDIA's drivers were **** and Apple had to do a ton of work with NVIDIA to get the games to even launch correctly. ATI also had problems with their drivers, but they fixed and updated them in a timely manner and as a result ATI users of recent were playing the aforementioned sans hiccups a lot sooner than NVIDIA users.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

Historically, I'll grant you. Presently, I'll have to disagree and point to the advent and launch of StarCraft II and Steam (and thereby every Half-Life 2/Source game) for Mac. NVIDIA's drivers were **** and Apple had to do a ton of work with NVIDIA to get the games to even launch correctly. ATI also had problems with their drivers, but they fixed and updated them in a timely manner and as a result ATI users of recent were playing the aforementioned sans hiccups a lot sooner than NVIDIA users.

It's hard to point who's at fault in all this, however.

 

[kingtj]

A bit off-topic now, but ....

I've owned a Hyundai Genesis Coupe since very early in 2009. (The Coupe and the sedan are so different, they hardly deserve to share the same name ... but I think that's because Hyundai was originally going to label all their highest-end vehicles with the "Genesis" moniker instead of Hyundai, and then they changed their strategy a bit.)

Anyway, with the Coupe, they definitely "cheaped out" in a number of places, because the goal was pretty clearly to market an alternative to an Infiniti G35 sedan at a much lower price-point. It happens to work out really well for them because it gives people a car priced right in line with other sports car choices like the V6 Chevy Camaro or V6 Ford Mustang, or just slightly cheaper than a comparably configured Nissan Z car. It gives potential buyers a viable choice if they want a "little more luxury than the American sports cars at the same price point", OR if they want to save a little money off competitors like the Z and still get something that looks as good and performs similarly.

But you only have to get in an Infiniti and drive it once or twice to realize real quickly that the Genesis Coupe did NOT achieve complete parity with their offering while costing $10K less. The leather seats in the Hyundai are really cheap leather. Looks good when brand new, but the side bolsters show wear after like 6,000 miles of using them! The car has several issues with creaks and rattles, including a weird creak people hear from the rear corner of the car that a few owners said was fixed when "a bad weld in the frame was finally found and fixed". Yet most of them seem to do it and Hyundai has no official fix involving re-welding mentioned, to date. The "premium stereo" (at least in models like mine, before they swapped to a newer stereo with a built-in nav system) was buggy too. A lot of people had to have the head-units replaced in less than a year due to pops/clicks or things like the bluetooth just quitting on them.

So yeah, I think "you get what you pay for" still has a lot of validity. Doesn't ALWAYS apply, but it generally does when the manufacturer of the product isn't just pocketing money because people are foolish enough to pay for their name/branding.

i dont think they cheaped out on anything in the genesis sedan, its stereo is a lexicon system, you know who else uses lexicon? Rolls Royce

also the sedan is the first car ive ever seen using a fiber optic network for communication between all the communication modules in the car, not even bmw or merc uses that.

hyundai also is the highest non premium brand ranked for highest initial quality(JD Power review), i think they were number 2 in 2004 and number 3 in a later year like 2008. cant remember exactly

hyundai and kia are not the same, hyundai only owns kia and they may share some engine blocks with each other, but they are not made in the same factory, most kias are made in the US, ALL genesis models are made in korean factories.

the phrase, "you get what you pay for" is not true at all it can never be used to generalize a brand and every product under that brand