Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Too bad they don't use something that is nearly free, like sand, to make computer chips. Oh wait, they do use silicon from sand. Why are chips so expensive then? Someone is making a lot of money off the increased price of chips.
I wish I could buy steak for the price of its constituent organic and inorganic components.

Or lower quality parts like the M2 MBP SSD.

Either way, if Apple’s parts gets more expensive, we will pay for it somehow. Apple definitely doesn’t want to reduce their margins.
The M2 MBP 256 GB SSD is the same quality part as the M1 (or better). However, it's slower because it's 1 chip instead of 2. The M1 uses 2 x 128 GB chips. The M2 uses 1 x 256 GB chip. These are the same chips that are used in the 512 GB model, except that the 512 GB model uses 2 of them.
 
It’s almost like inflation impacts all the prices of everything…and we are going to see articles about inflation and apple products for awhile.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eltoslightfoot
Too bad they don't use something that is nearly free, like sand, to make computer chips. Oh wait, they do use silicon from sand. Why are chips so expensive then? Someone is making a lot of money off the increased price of chips.
Just the very machines that etch chips cost nearly a billion dollars to purchase and set up in factories. There is far and away more to the process than just scooping sand and tricking it into doing math.

Not to mention that not just any sand will do…
 
Or lower quality parts like the M2 MBP SSD.

No. Not lower quality.

It was a practical way to deal with parts shortages for base MBPs without reducing storage capacity.

People who purchase budget/base-level MBPs (apparently the majority here due to the outrage) will likely not notice the reduced SSD speed)
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Premium1
It won't happen, but everyone who needs a new phone should just buy a gently used iPhone 13 and they'll honestly be set for a good 3-4 years at least.

I've been saying this for years: the smartphone market is plateauing. New models don't really offer that much more over the previous generation, and that statement becomes more true with every new phone.

Plus, buying new contributes directly to bad environmental practices, exploitative labor markets, and corporate greed. Buy used phones from local and individual sellers in your country. Save hundreds of dollars. Take a step toward a better world.
Just wondering but are you assuming the owners of all the used phones getting purchased in your plan are just giving up phones for good?

Someone’s buying new if you’re buying used, and buying used still doesn’t eliminate the moral issues you bring up because if you’re carrying the brand you’re supporting it and the ethical choices they make as a walking advertisement.
 
Wouldn't Apple have already agreed to a price before this? I feel like the contracts would have been signed a long time ago for this year's chips so why now would the price change?

Has Apple committed to the pricing of Apple stuff for the next 3 or 4 years? Do we consumers know what Apple products will cost in 2024, 2025? Why not? Why doesn't Apple pin it down so that we can know how much Apple stuff will cost us in the future? That's rhetorical of course. Apple doesn't commit because it needs the flexibility to price based upon fluctuating costs of components and manufacturing.

So must other companies lock down pricing well in advance and then potentially just EAT the cost- or losses- if commodity prices shift? Of course not. While it's possible Apple got TSMC to commit to a fixed cost for this generation of chips, TSMC would then require a fixed cost from those who contribute the commodities that make those chips If TSMC could not get such commitments- as is implied by these types of stories- they could not pass along such fixed cost commitments to Apple.

Wild example: suppose some part of Silicon chips had the price run to infinity. Does TSMC just pay infinity for as much as they can, build that many chips and then just go out of business when they run out of cash? Of course not.

Basically, what this story and similar means is:
  • TSMC costs of chipmaking are rising, which means
  • if Apple wants TSMC chips they will need to pay more for them, which means
  • the products in which those TSMC chips are used will likely be priced higher.
More simply, unless something dramatic happens to flip this kind of story into many stories about big chip commodity price CUTS very soon, expect HIGHER prices for new iDevices. Higher manufacturing costs will be passed through to consumers. I have zero expectations of Apple eroding profit margin to eat higher costs. Thus, the ONLY apparent option is to pass through higher costs of manufacturing to consumers.
 
Just wondering but are you assuming the owners of all the used phones getting purchased in your plan are just giving up phones for good?

Someone’s buying new if you’re buying used, and buying used still doesn’t eliminate the moral issues you bring up because if you’re carrying the brand you’re supporting it and the ethical choices they make as a walking advertisement.
No. They may be buying new, but I'm not. My choice is buy new or buy used. The other person selling their device is already making a choice of their own, all I can control is my own choice. When I need to upgrade my device, I'm going to do so. Buying used means I won't be buying new. The opportunity cost is I'm not contributing to the new goods market.

And disagree somewhat on the advertisement thing. Sure, I'd be supporting worse labor practices using an iPhone than using a Fairphone. But my money still isn't going to Apple directly if I buy a used iPhone, and while my advertising is somewhat valuable to Apple, it's less valuable than advertising + my money.

It's impossible to live as a part of modern society without being in some ways complicit in unethical practices. (And if you're rich enough to be able to afford buying absolutely everything at top dollar in order to only engage in 100% ethical practices, your wealth is probably itself built from unethical practices, directly or indirectly.) That doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't try to minimize your complicity.
 
Everything has been going up with the current high inflation so I would expect it.

Inflation is not a catalyst. It's a result... the result of people choosing to "just pay" vs. deciding their money is worth more than the stuff being offered for sale. If buyers as a group flex their innate power to say "NO" to higher prices, inflation ends. If consumers hold that stance, deflation follows as sellers begin hunting for a lower price that will move consumers to once again part with their dollars.

But I agree. Expect higher prices... not because of inflation (as some kind of force) but because sellers have confidence buyers will "just pay."
 
Last edited:
People want to be paid more so prices are going to follow.
It's not a want, it's a need.

People need to be paid more because cost of living is going up and employers by and large don't make efforts to match inflation and keep up with costs of living, because their top priority is making money, which is driven by wealthy people wanting to become even more wealthy by owning shares of publicly traded companies and demanding as much from those companies, who in turn cut costs at every corner.
 
Expect higher prices... not because of inflation (as some kind of force) but because sellers have confidence buyers will "just pay
Yep. That's why there needs to be a stronger used market push. If we collectively say "no" to new goods and buy used en masse, it'll make a difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
Too bad they don't use something that is nearly free, like sand, to make computer chips. Oh wait, they do use silicon from sand. Why are chips so expensive then? Someone is making a lot of money off the increased price of chips.

Yes, when you hear stockholder reports of "another quarter of record profit" you see this in action. And that's not exclusively a chip thing. Look at gas/oil. Prices are relatively sky high but big oil will report record profit too.

In "normal" capitalism, inflation should pinch both ends. Sellers should feel pressure to eat some margin to try to minimize price increases out of fear that buyers won't pay. Buyers should anticipate higher prices and then carefully consider if they want to pay more for that "thing" they want... or- and this is key- choose to NOT buy. However, in modern capitalism, inflation creates an easy excuse to raise prices- not just to cover costs- but to expand margin.

The clever part is that inflation has been recast as something that is to be managed/controlled by the FED instead of something to be managed/controlled by buyers flexing their power to NOT buy. The FED can only make debt more expensive, which does play a part in managing the pace at which inflation runs. The real power to dramatically manage inflation... to even drive prices down... is for consumers as a group to decide their dollars are worth more than the stuff being pitched to them. Until "we" do that, prices only rise. Even the FED targets "managing" inflation to about 2% (increases) each year.

There's no such entity working to drive prices down... even modern consumers as a group. Yes, we will whine. Yes, we will gripe. But then we fall all over ourselves to be first to pay up whatever the ask price. While we do that, sell-side capitalism is working fantastically well: revenue records, profit records, bonuses being earned, stock option grants, etc.
 
Last edited:
No. Not lower quality.

It was a practical way to deal with parts shortages for base MBPs without reducing storage capacity.

People who purchase budget/base-level MBPs (apparently the majority here due to the outrage) will likely not notice the reduced SSD speed)
Except it doesn't impact just the base models. The 512gb was also slower than the M1 in same configuration for SSD. We get it, apple can do no wrong in your eyes but you are mistaken, it is lower quality.
 
Yep. That's why there needs to be a stronger used market push. If we collectively say "no" to new goods and buy used en masse, it'll make a difference.

Or do as our ancestors did when prices reached levels too great for the money in hand: make do with what they had.

Ultimately, the super profitable ride for sellers ends that way anyway. Eventually, they reach a point where they hit the proverbial "last straw" for consumers and consumers as a group refuse to pay. When this occurs, a magical thing happens: the desperation (to buy) flips into a growing desperation to sell by sellers. And the seemingly dormant-but-key part of capitalism that is supposed to drive prices DOWN over time gets revived as sellers hunt for a price level that will again move buyers to buy as a group.

Instead of imagining only higher prices, imagine a time where we can realistically forecast lower prices. There is no hard rule that says prices must only rise.
 
Last edited:
Everything has been going up with the current high inflation so I would expect it.
This is part of the issue. Many companies are raising prices far above what they need to in order to make up for increased costs. Since people expect to pay higher prices, they are taking this opportunity to increase their profit margins and see how far they can go.
 
Yes, when you hear stockholder reports of "another quarter of record profit" you see this in action. And that's not exclusively a chip thing. Look at gas/oil. Prices are relatively sky high but big oil will report record profit too.

In "normal" capitalism, inflation should pinch both ends. Sellers should feel pressure to eat some margin to try to minimize price increases out of fear that buyers won't pay. Buyers should anticipate higher prices and then carefully consider if they want to pay more for that "thing" they want... or- and this is key- choose to NOT buy. However, in modern capitalism, inflation creates an easy excuse to raise prices- not just to cover costs- but to expand margin.

The clever part is that inflation has been recast as something that is to be managed/controlled by the FED instead of something to be managed/controlled by buyers flexing their power to NOT buy. The FED can only make debt more expensive, which does play a part in managing the pace at which inflation runs. The real power to dramatically manage inflation... to even drive prices down... is for consumers as a group to decide their dollars are worth more than the stuff being pitched to them. Until "we" do that, prices only rise. Even the FED targets "managing" inflation to about 2% (increases) each year.

There's no such entity working to drive prices down... even modern consumers as a group. Yes, we will whine. Yes, we will gripe. But then we fall all over ourselves to be first to pay up whatever the ask price. While we do that, sell-side capitalism is working fantastically well: revenue records, profit records, bonuses being earned, stock option grants, etc.
So far that has been the case, but I bet Apple will feel the crunch as soon as this fall. I chose to buy an M1 MBA 2020 16/512 that was $500 less than what an M2 MBA 16/512 would have been. That required Swappa, but I did it and saved the money.

And used prices have been steadily increasing as demand hits that. We just haven't seen inflation in so long, I don't think we know truly how the customer will respond.
 
Except it doesn't impact just the base models. The 512gb was also slower than the M1 in same configuration for SSD. We get it, apple can do no wrong in your eyes but you are mistaken, it is lower quality.

Astonishing outrage. You'll be voting with your wallet to send Apple a strong message, right?
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: freedomlinux
Yep. I am sure you will be on right as preorders open to pay higher prices for lower quality though.

"I am sure you will be on right as preorders open to pay higher prices for lower quality though."

Please stop with the juvenile insults.

Curious, whose laptop are you going to purchase instead?
 
Too bad they don't use something that is nearly free, like sand, to make computer chips. Oh wait, they do use silicon from sand. Why are chips so expensive then? Someone is making a lot of money off the increased price of chips.

Alright then, we all (most people) got access to sand we should just make our own chips at home if we were to follow your logic.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: eltoslightfoot
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.