Apple Should be Embarrassed About Mac Pricing

[WannaGoMac]

First, let me preface this by saying I am a big Mac fan!! I don't own one yet, but I am thinking of getting a Mac Mini AND I have purchased a Macbook for someone with Applecare. I haven't made the jump because the hardware is OLD in the Mini. This is not a troll post, but more a frustration post as I really like Macs and want to keep recommending them to friends & family...

If apple is trying to stay price competitive at the high end, why do they not refresh their hardware more frequently? Why is it SOOOO long between product updates? I read here https://buyersguide.macrumors.com//#Desktop_Macs that both the Mac Mini and Imac are 8 months since they were updated!! That's CRAZY.

Maybe in the PowerPC days Apple could get away with this, but in the Intel world they can't do this anymore as Dell/HP/etc update their equipment on a weekly basis. I just am shocked that the Mac Mini and Imac AVERAGE 5 months between refreshes! It's just a joke... Frankly, they are making it harder to convince people to switch when they look at Dell selling Core 2 Duos for less than the Core Duo Mac Mini!

Apple should be embarrassed at selling the Mac Mini at their current prices given that it uses 6 months old technology (and it was already old in September). I realize Apple doesn't want to compete on the low end computers, fine. However, they shouldn't sell computers as top of the line when they clearly are no longer that way....

*************
I just want to discuss why:

1) Apple does not keep the Mac hardware specs to maintain the same level of premium?

2) Apple doesn't pass on the savings to the buyer as Intel lowers it's prices for CPUs. Is apple saying the $599 Mac Mini is not cheaper to build now as compared to September 2006??

 

[mkrishnan]

If apple is trying to stay price competitive at the high end, why do they not refresh their hardware more frequently? Why is it SOOOO long between product updates? I read here https://buyersguide.macrumors.com//#Desktop_Macs that both of their computers are 8 months since they were updated!! That's CRAZY.

Erm... the 8-core Mac Pro was just released this month, wasn't it? I'm confused.

 

[JHacker]

Apple should be embarrassed at selling the Mac Mini at their current prices given that it uses 6 months old technology.

I would much rather have Apple do things the way they do now, than switch to Dell's method where there are constantly upgrades and new models coming out. Apple has established a solid line of computers this way. Also, why do you care so much about 6 month old technology!? The performance differences between the two technologies are seriously not a big deal. Buy a computer and use it and stop complaining that there aren't monthly upgrades because at least this way, when you finally do buy your computer, you'll have 6 months to use it before something new comes out, rather than 1 month.

 

[WannaGoMac]

Erm... the 8-core Mac Pro was just released this month, wasn't it? I'm confused.

I will edit to make it clearer...

mac Mini

Imac

I would much rather have Apple do things the way they do now, than switch to Dell's method where there are constantly upgrades and new models coming out. Apple has established a solid line of computers this way. Also, why do you care so much about 6 month old technology!? The performance differences between the two technologies are seriously not a big deal. Buy a computer and use it and stop complaining that there aren't monthly upgrades because at least this way, when you finally do buy your computer, you'll have 6 months to use it before something new comes out, rather than 1 month.

I see your point. They hold value longer like mercedes and BMW..

I guess it is that I went to configure a comparable Dell to an IMac recently. I was shocked how much more the Imac cost. About 900 more....
I was very dis-heartened as I didn't think the difference was so much anymore...

 

[johnee]

I guess I'm a little confused on this matter too. It does seem like they take a long time updating some of their hardware. Didn't it take a long time for them to upgrade to either core duo or c2d?

anyway, the 8core's were using (still are using?) xenon processors exclusively. maybe they will continue with that tradition.

Let's see if they incorporate SR sooner rather than later.

I should have mentioned that the longer they incorporate the same design, the more stable that design gets as they can incorporate changes based on initial feedback. I'm thinking the mbp displays here?

 

[gnasher729]

Do you feel better now after your rant?

Apple shouldn't be embarrassed, you should be for posting this. Apple is there to make money, and for all I know they are doing quite well in that department, so I don't think anyone at Apple is the slightest bit embarrassed about prices.

And Apple _is_ at the top. Dell has nothing, I repeat nothing whatsoever that matches an eight core Mac Pro. And nothing, again I repeat nothing whatsoever that matches MacOS X Tiger.

 

[zap2]

Good thing you weren't here for the PPC Mac(so long ago )...we'd wait and wait for those danm PowerBook G5, only to get a small speed bump

 

[gnasher729]

First, let me preface this by saying I am a big Mac fan!!

If that is not a troll indicator, then I haven't seen one yet

 

[mkrishnan]

I will edit to make it clearer...

Erm... okay, thank you... are you referring to the iMac as the "high end" product then?

I guess I'm all for faster product updates, but Apple does have somewhat more stringent requirements for hardware than most OEMs. I mean, I'm not trying to be a fanboy, but you know this is the alternate consideration. The iMac doesn't use Conroe processors, does it, because of size / heat /power considerations? I'm under the impression that it uses Merom processors. And that the ones it uses are still pretty much up to date. Granted that there are tower case desktops running non-Merom processors that consume a lot more power, etc, and are faster, when you look at Merom-based hardware, I don't think the iMac is that out of date. The graphics card, perhaps, yes. But not otherwise.

 

[roland.g]

Sorry, but these threads make me laugh. I too am waiting for the next iMac revision to buy and bought a refurb Mini in Oct to tide me over. I will sell it when I get the iMac. However, realize that the iMac and notebooks won't see another refresh till Santa Rosa is available next month. And that the Mini, while many believe is overdue for Core 2 Duo, is an ENTRY LEVEL machine. So get over it. If you really want more power out of a Mini, with its 2.5" hard drive and integrated graphics, buy one and drop a Core 2 Duo in it.

 

[66217]

What's the big deal?

Most of the people don't need the all new technology. And as far as I am concerned, the Core 2 Duo is the standard right now.

 

[gnasher729]

I guess it is that I went to configure a comparable Dell to an IMac recently. I was shocked how much more the Imac cost. (

A comparable Dell? Dell doesn't build anything that is comparable to an iMac. Hint: When you look at an iMac, where does Apple hide the big, nasty, ugly black plastic piece of **** box that Dell has to put under or on your desk?

 

[Wild-Bill]

Erm... the 8-core Mac Pro was just released this month, wasn't it? I'm confused.

I, and practically everyone else on this board would not consider slapping two 8-core processors into an existing configuration a "release". None of the hardware in the Mac Pro has been updated: no new video cards, no new motherboard or chipset design, no new burners, nothing. Both ATI and nVidia have cards out much newer than the current Mac Pro offerings.

Not picking on you mkrishnan, just validating the OP's point. Apple seriously lags behind the competition with respect to refreshing their lineup. And yeah, since they are not working with the PPC architecture anymore there really is no excuse not to update their products on a more regular basis.

Perhaps the person in charge of that is also working on the iPhone......

 

[WannaGoMac]

Do you feel better now after your rant?

Apple shouldn't be embarrassed, you should be for posting this. Apple is there to make money, and for all I know they are doing quite well in that department, so I don't think anyone at Apple is the slightest bit embarrassed about prices.

And Apple _is_ at the top. Dell has nothing, I repeat nothing whatsoever that matches an eight core Mac Pro. And nothing, again I repeat nothing whatsoever that matches MacOS X Tiger.

I feel much better thanks!

I was not talking about the Mac Pro, rather the consumer line of Mac Mini and Imacs.

I am not arguing against the extra cost for buying a mac, but rather the extra cost applied on old technology being sold as latest technology. It is hard to convince people to switch when it costs so much more once you compare Oranges to Oranges to go Mac right now.

Apple opened the door for this direct comparison when they made the switch to Intel chips... it's a fact of life now as much as apple fans like to talk about "design" and "os" value.

If that is not a troll indicator, then I haven't seen one yet

I am not. I would like to understand why Apple takes 5-8 months to put in a faster CPU onto motherboard that clearly support faster CPU speeds...

I have bought Macs (the Macbook C2d) for relatives already. Just not for myself... so I have put my money where my mouth is

 

[johnee]

Look at it this way, you're paying for a lot of thoughtful people to make a very functional, sleek machine that uses a better OS. It takes forethought, insight, and creativity to make these machines. Dell basically makes a box, sticks in the guts, loads a default OS, and ships it out to you as a "here you go buddy, good luck".

I'm getting sick of that model, and I'm willing to pay for more.

 

[WannaGoMac]

Look at it this way, you're paying for a lot of thoughtful people to make a very functional, sleek machine that uses a better OS. It takes forethought, insight, and creativity to make these machines. Dell basically makes a box, sticks in the guts, loads a default OS, and ships it out to you as a "here you go buddy, good luck".

I'm getting sick of that model, and I'm willing to pay for more.

Agreed 110%. I recommend Macs now just because of Applecare to be honest. I can't believe the level of questions they will answer with patience and courtesy. Best $250 I ever spent...

And that the Mini, while many believe is overdue for Core 2 Duo, is an ENTRY LEVEL machine.

Then lower the price as it gets old... I know, they don't have to so they don't. Just hard to convince people to spend the $ on it when you can get more bang from an ugly dell/hp unit.

 

[johnee]

I, and practically everyone else on this board would not consider slapping two 8-core processors into an existing configuration a "release". None of the hardware in the Mac Pro has been updated: no new video cards, no new motherboard or chipset design, no new burners, nothing. Both ATI and nVidia have cards out much newer than the current Mac Pro offerings.

Not picking on you mkrishnan, just validating the OP's point. Apple seriously lags behind the competition with respect to refreshing their lineup. And yeah, since they are not working with the PPC architecture anymore there really is no excuse not to update their products on a more regular basis.

Perhaps the person in charge of that is also working on the iPhone......

You bring up an excellent point though. I do wish apple could find a balance between what they do now and updating some of the infrastructure a bit more. But they seem to be (on the basis of growth) doing pretty well with their current methodology. Maybe when they don't grow as much as they like, they might change it.

 

[suneohair]

More crap threads. The only thing that needs an update right now is a the Mini.

Everything IMO is fine. The lack of Mini updates might hint toward something though, like a slightly larger faster mini with faster merom/penryn with the new iMac getting Conroe/Quad chip. Mac Pro moving to 8-core only at some point.

Pure speculation of course.

I do think it is silly to expect a rather small volume (albeit increasing) company to update everyday. Apple seems to build a lot of systems and it makes sense for them to phase the old ones out (read: clearing out old machines) before introducing new ones.

If you don't want the current computers don't buy them. Apple doesn't make you. If you want that Dell, get it. The value is in the other things when the hardware isn't tomorrows new stuff, OS, etc. I will not argue this stuff since it is all about what you want and that is different for everyone.

Would I buy an iMac right now? No. Mini? No? Macbook? Yes. MBP? No. Mac Pro? Maybe

Nobody needs to be embarassed, because you know what? Macs are selling regardless of what you think. Right now there are hundreds if not thr=ousands of people buying Macs completely oblivious to another coming out tomorrow or even next year. Same thing with Dells, you think people really know what they are getting? They don't.

People up on tech are the minority when it comes to computer buying and their voices are masked by the constant chime of the cash register (or servers for online sales )

 

[Muncher]

A comparable Dell? Dell doesn't build anything that is comparable to an iMac. Hint: When you look at an iMac, where does Apple hide the big, nasty, ugly black plastic piece of **** box that Dell has to put under or on your desk?

So true .

You've got to realize you aren't just paying for a computer, you're paying for a top-of-the-line OS (and iLife, to boot!), as well as the fact that all of the desktop Mac lines push the limits: Mac Minis are small, iMacs are thin, and Mac Pros, are, well, supercomputers.

 

[Shotgun OS]

Then lower the price as it gets old... I know, they don't have to so they don't. Just hard to convince people to spend the $ on it when you can get more bang from an ugly dell/hp unit.

There is absolutely you get more bang for your buck with a Dell or HP. What you do get is a piece of **** box filled with default **** pieces/parts that are somewhat designed to run a default **** OS.

You get what you pay for.

Now, my old iMac G3 from 7 years ago can run OSX fine. Find me a Dell from 7 years ago that can run Vista flawlessly.

 

[emptyCup]

I thought that when Apple went from a CoreSolo to a Duo, added BT, Airport, gigabit ethernet, optical out and two more USB ports it was a great upgrade. Instead, there was huge whining about the $100 price increase. Apple understands that people will always complain. You will get a Core2Duo when Apple can do it without raising the price (or when you do it yourself). In the meantime look at the iMac with the integrated graphics. It has everything you want in the mini plus a free screen with iSight.

 

[daveL]

I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but Intel doesn't update their product line like they used to. They are basically updating their processor lines once a year or so. Same with their chipsets. The Xeons in the MP, as well as the Conroes and Meroms, came out last summer. With the exception of the quad-core Xeon, none of these processor lines are set for a refresh until late this year - well over a year. Even minor speed bumps have nearly non-existent. The Napa mobile platform has been around since Core Duo came out and won't be updated to Santa Rosa until next month - that's getting close to a year and a half between updates. The server / workstation chipset won't be refreshed until the second half of the year, so it to will be more than a year between updates. The ATI x1900 has been out over a year already, with nothing but the x1950 in the interim, which is merely a small overclock.

Anyway, my point is that the tech landscape has changed in the last couple of years, with the product life cycles extending far beyond what they used to be. This isn't an Apple thing, it's industry-wide.

Just my take on it.

 

[iW00t]

I would much rather have Apple do things the way they do now, than switch to Dell's method where there are constantly upgrades and new models coming out. Apple has established a solid line of computers this way. Also, why do you care so much about 6 month old technology!? The performance differences between the two technologies are seriously not a big deal. Buy a computer and use it and stop complaining that there aren't monthly upgrades because at least this way, when you finally do buy your computer, you'll have 6 months to use it before something new comes out, rather than 1 month.

Blah blah blah, 6 months to use it, so what.

A PeeCee is faster, lasts longer, and works as well. If Apple is going to win people over on the merit of their software, fine. But make sure their hardware is up to scratch.

The Mini does look pretty disgraceful. And in this day and age our Macbook Pros still uses a X1600 GPU. Lol... so powerful.

A comparable Dell? Dell doesn't build anything that is comparable to an iMac. Hint: When you look at an iMac, where does Apple hide the big, nasty, ugly black plastic piece of **** box that Dell has to put under or on your desk?

Funny, for the previlege of having a big ugly box-like thing Apple charges you $2999 for it. I don't see the AIO design of the iMac as a boon, I see it as a curse.

 

[ortuno2k]

Not really about Mac pricing, but about having a product on the shelf that's using outdated technology and hasn't been touched in over 6 months! That's what they should be ashamed of.
I mean, look at their Macs lineup - not a single one using a CD processor - all on C2D - except the high end Mac Pro, which was updated recently but it's more of a Pro machine - not a consumer machine like a Mac Mini or iMac.
I feel your pain dude - I've been wanting for the new Mac Mini to drop so I can buy one for my mom - but nothing yet.
I guess that iPhone is taking up ALL their resources.

 

[Sun Baked]

More crap threads. The only thing that needs an update right now is a the Mini.

Happens every now and then when somebody squeezes a newbies head.