Intel Ultrabooks Unable to Undercut MacBook Air Prices

[-hh]

Its amusing to see the smirks on apple fanboys' faces after reading this article stating naively that "PCs can't compete with the the air's price" or the more laughable "Apple is superior to a pc in technology."

Historically, the reason for that smirk is effectively Schadenfreude, after decades of being on the receiving end of an abusive "Macs Overpriced" mantra that was invalide for the very same "What they don't understand..." reason, which was that development costs distributed across Apple's smaller manufacturing economies of scale didn't result in the same cost formula.

What they don't understand is that this ultrabook is a first gen product so the cost is going to higher initially. Like all tech, once its its been out a while, the price will go down.

But of course. However, the first question to ask is where & when does this Learning Curve for price reductions apply...here?

This is clearly (and explictly) a derivative work from the Macbook Air, so does it start back in 2008 when the first MBA was released? Or does it actually go back further, such as to 2003 when the first Sony VAIO 505 was released? Or does it go even further back? Say to the 1992 release of the Powerbook Duo? Or even earlier, to the first portable Compaq DOS PC in the 1980s?

Afterall, it is indisputable that there have been R&D efforts (and products) that have sought to make laptops smaller/lighter/better for decades. And as such, does not all innovation essentially stand upon the shoulders of its predecessors (or, if one prefers, "nanos gigantium humeris insidentes")?

Indeed. From the technological perspective, these are all extensively derivative ...evolutionary... works. Sure, there's been revolutionary stuff too, but at very low levels as enablers, and not on the macro design scale: that's why we generalize to "<3lb portable", and not to: "device with enhanced appeal due to incorporation of Li-Po membrane enhancements to its power supply".

If you think back to the first gen macbook air, it was essentially an overpriced netbook, poor performance, high price, very little value except that it was thin and compact (but you can get the same with a ultraportable.) Now several gens later, look at the air. It actually performs great, and its a great value for what it offers.

Sure...classical refinement & learning curve - - but also attributable to investments in those specialty items to drive down costs...which generally do not stay exclusive to the original developer forever.

This first gen ultrabook currently campares on par with the macbook air price wise, performance wise, and design wise...

That would be true only if there's literally been absolutely nothing contained within its design that is newer than 2008, which is what we have to use as our baseline to definitively state that there's been zero technology leveraging. Since the Digitimes article specifically states that they're functionally copying MBA design elements and material solution approaches, this caveat cannot be true, and as such, a "First Gen" claim isn't true. Sure, it may be a "First Design" effort by a new manufacturer, but it is a derivative work which is leveraging common parts that are now in the supply chain only because of the true "First Gen" that came out from someone before them (be that Apple in 2008, or Sony in 2003, etc).

One more thing, please, please stop thinking that apple is superior to pcs technologically. Its ridiculous and not remotely true. They all use mostly the same hardware, supplied mostly by the same manufacturers. Cpus from Intel mostly, graphics from Nvidia or ATI, hdd from one of the many oem companies, most of which are the same performance wise.

Well, that can be mostly true if one limits the definition of "technology" to only hardware. However, that does then beg the question of what term other than "technology" one is going to use to differentiate software (which includes an OS)...so shall we go coin a new word to describe that area instead? If so, I nominate the word of Moof!ology


-hh

 

[GermanyChris]

his point is that the absolute price is too high since the cheapest notebook from apple you can buy now is $999 and it has only a 11" screen.

for most people a 11" screen is too small so they need to buy a 13" screen.

a well equipped 13" MBA with a 256GB SSD would be around $1500. This compares to a macbook for ~$1000 or a halfway decent windows notebook for $800.

yes they are not as good (in terms of built quality, weight) as a MBA but if you want to spend less than $999 for a notebook then there is nothing in apples product line.

many people would like to have a mac notebook for $800 and would happily accept higher weight, less design, no SSD.

Apparently being that the MacBook has been dropped..but please email Apple and tell them they're wrong, I'm sure your input will be valued..

Companies do not drop profitable just because...

 

[Judas1]

Its a first gen because its the first with this form factor and configuration. Sure Asus has pursued ultralights before this one, but it was before Intel's newer smaller and faster set of processors and with a different look.

Apple has been making macbooks before 2008. They have also seen ultrathins from other manufacturers for many years. But when they invested in the form factor we know of today with Intel's ULV processors, I define that as the first gen macbook air, which was in 2008.

edit
In addition, whats the cost to Apple to produce a macbook air? All the components are made out of house by other manufacturer, which gets better with time, and cheaper the more apple orders these components because manufacturing cost goes down. Apple recycles the form factor because it works. So you see, the first gen is expensive to produce even if you have learned from previous endeavers, and they get cheaper over time with success of the product.

 

[Renzatic]

People like you crack me up. Take any of the markets the Apple is leading in right now.

Smart phones, they were the ones that created the form factor you defend as public domain. No phones had a huge touch screen and looked like a deck of cards until that time. They did not invent the phone just the form factor we all love.

IPod still no real competition.

IPad, totally created by Apple now everyone is coping it.

Mac Air. I cannot think of a single laptop that was so thin, had SSD etc. They again created that form factor. Did they create the Laptop no, no one is claiming that. But to say there was small laptops around and not give credit where credit is do is just plain stupid.

If Apple where not so successful with any item listed above, none of those items would exist as they do today, but rather as they existed yesterday.

Creativity breeds creativity. Apple is in their stride right now. You can love it or not, but the way computing/phones will look in the future, are coming from their factories and engineers first.

I guess if you think of a laptop that's a few millimeters thinner than the competition as an entire paradigm shift, then your argument might make sense. But it doesn't. Computers have steadily been getting smaller long before Apple decided to get into the ultraportable market. Asus and Sony have been making them long before. They might've been the first to make a laptop that thin, but it's only by a matter of degrees.

Apple wasn't even the first to introduce an SSD into a laptop. You gotta give Asus props on that with some of their EEE PCs. Of course they sorta sucked a bit at the time, but they've been in computers beforehand.

The Air isn't a revolutionary product, rather an incredibly slick and polished evolutionary one. Unlike the iPhone and iPad, which I'll admit did pretty much change the game for their respective markets, the Air isn't something entirely new and different here.

 

[-hh]

Its a first gen because its the first with this form factor and configuration. Sure Asus has pursued ultralights before this one, but it was before Intel's newer smaller and faster set of processors and with a different look.

Apple has been making macbooks before 2008. They have also seen ultrathins from other manufacturers for many years.

Um, so your logic is that this is the "First" except for all of those that came before it - - for which you specifically mention three (3) examples.

I'm sorry, but by your own accounting, it is arguably no earlier than fourth (4th) tier derivative work.

But when they invested in the form factor we know of today with Intel's ULV processors, I define that as the first gen macbook air, which was in 2008.

Sure, the ULV CPU was a technology enabler - - but is it still only exclusively available for just Apple to buy? Well, no.

Therefore, this piece part represents one of those technology enablers that the real "First" (Apple) paid for, but whose general availability as a commodity is what allows others to follow without incurring the "First Ever" learning curve penalties (cost, etc) that (in this particular case) Apple paid for.

edit
In addition, whats the cost to Apple to produce a macbook air? All the components are made out of house by other manufacturer, which gets better with time, and cheaper the more apple orders these components because manufacturing cost goes down. Apple recycles the form factor because it works. So you see, the first gen is expensive to produce even if you have learned from previous endeavers, and they get cheaper over time with success of the product.

That's a pretty high level generalization that carries some important assumptions. Of course, what's absent is how this pertains to the real question here, which is when another contender comes along with an alternative product. On the one hand, sure, they have a risk that their product may not be able to steal sales from the established product (Apple). On the other hand, the established product has actually reduced some of the risks for the new contender because their success has reduced the uncertainty of sales by proving that a marketplace segment does indeed exist.

It is impossible to make a generalized claim that the one factor always outweighs the other, although it is generally safe to assume that if someone finds traction, that "me too" copies may very well have some sucess: the real determining factor here is to what degree the me too's are able to mimic the salient product differentiators.


-hh

 

[accessoriesguy]

Apple has masterfully peered at the progress of technology as well as consumer demands and executed them brilliantly. They take a lot of risks releasing things early, but this is how they come out on top! They have perfected their craft!

 

[Judas1]

Apple and everyone calls the 2008 macbook air the first macbook air, ie a first gen of the macbook air line. Everybody knows a first gen is the first incarnation of the product line of a company. All of a sudden you want to redefine what a first gen product is? Dude, whatever. Keep thinking the first air was revolutionary when it was just thin, thats it it, nothing revolutionary about that. Apple had been doing unibody for a while with macbooks. Large glass touchpad, not new. Grey brushmetal, also not new. The first air had nothing that was new, except the form factor. We still all called it first gen. Haha, but for some reason its wrong for me to say this is a first gen ultrabook. Talk about fanboyness.

 

[Dusky600]

Didnt Asus design the mackbook air the same way that sony designed some of apples macbooks before ?

i heard this somewhere

Edit

Disregard this, i was bored and too lazy to check the internet. now i have.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Apple has masterfully peered at the progress of technology as well as consumer demands and executed them brilliantly. They take a lot of risks releasing things early, but this is how they come out on top! They have perfected their craft!

Do you think that Apple has done much looking at consumer demands or do you think they came up with the innovative idea and sold consumers on it? Examples, iPad, iPhone, MBA. There was no large group of consumers clamoring for these devices, Apple designed them and people flocked to them.

 

[vvswarup]

Everybody should pipe down!

Back in the day, the claim by many was (and still is) that people should buy a Windows PC instead of a Mac because they are paying double for what is essentially the same piece of hardware. Those who chose to buy a Mac were (and still are) derided for paying double just for a logo. Those who chose to go Mac defend their choice by saying that there are things about the Mac that justify its premium.

When it comes to Ultrabooks vs. MBA, however, the shoe is on the other foot. The MacBook Air is comparatively less expensive than alternatives. MacBook Air users get to say that Ultrabook buyers are paying a premium for the same piece of hardware.

Those participating in this pissing contest (Mac and Windows users alike) don't get it at all. Mac buyers choose Mac instead of a Windows PC because there is something about the Mac that justifies its cost. Why can't the same argument apply to Ultrabooks? Just Apple has evidently given people a reason to pay what they pay for Macs, let Ultrabook manufacturers give people a reason to pay for an Ultrabook. Just as Mac buyers made a conscious choice as a consumer that the Mac is worth its premium, Ultrabook buyers are making a conscious choice as a consumer that an Ultrabook is worth its premium over a MacBook Air.

I can understand the sentiment of people. All these years, Apple users have been (and still are) derided as sheep, and that they waste money on a logo. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it is easy to get caught up in the "bleep you" moment. But it's important to apply fair and consistent standards.

 

[Hastings101]

Guys the contest is over apple has won. Its over for the PCs. You guys don't need to debate this anymore. The PCs in reality never had a chance with the consumer market once the consumers were willing to pay more for better designed pcs and when apple began pricing their products extremely competitively. You guys didn't even mention a mac can run windows, linux and OSX. At this point its so sad, i actually feel sorry for the PC makers. It will be a sad day when dell,acer, asus and the rest of them just sell to the corporate market or die out because they just couldn't innovate and keep up.

Hail to the future, hail to Steve Jobs, a true innovator and businessman.

Except no one cares about any of that, all they care about is their computer being able to check e-mail and go to Youtube, and usually the less they have to pay the better.

 

[varera]

Far too expensive.

I went with a Sony Laptop instead. They offered me what I needed at a pretty reasonable price.

I still have my old MacBook and my iPhone though.

And I have made exactly the opposite. After my wife's Vaio GPU got fried because of poor internal heating pump design, I have bought her MBP13. Same price, so much better quality. And no viruses, ha?

 

[jlc1978]

The MAC and PC markets are separate markets - while there is some overlap in buyers and Apple clearly would like to convert PC users to Macs, the markets and their dynamics are different.
The PC market is basically a commodity market - whether it's the home or business segment - where price is the main differentiator and while companies try to differentiate on features the still need to come in at a price point or risk losing sales to cheaper alternatives.
The Mac market buyer is driven primarily by wanting OSX - and Apple can effectively differentiate it's products and not worry so much about price; other than charging too much will push people to PCs since tehre is a limit people will pay for OSX.
In the end, ASUS new pc is not designed to be a MBA competitor - in the sense it will steal MBA buyers - rather ASUS has let Apple prove their is a market for such devices and is now staking a spot in the PC market where there is little competition and they may be able to charge a premium for the device. Of course, the inevitable drive to commoditization will occur as the parts suppliers and OEMs standardize on designs and components, leaving manufactures to add some bells and whistles (which MBs probably will be designed to allow) to try to stand out as prices drop. ASUS probably doesn't care what it costs to make a MBA - they because that is not their competition - it's the company that can cut a few corners to make a slim pc that sells for $100 less while keeping the same relative performance. A pc buyer doesn't car if a Mac has a 12 hour battery - they want a pc that has the same run time as all the similar pcs.
If PC buyers really wanted MBAs and were not price sensitive you'd see a lot of Airs running Win7 natively. That you don't tells me while the form factor is intriguing it won't take off in the pc market until the price drops.
Will that effect Apple - not really. It will keep some price pressure on them but Apple has wisely stayed out of the broader PC market - and probably will continue along the "unified field" theory of device interoperability so that your Apple iPad/Mac/TV etc will be able to share information seamlessly and be more than just a PC.
As I've said before - Apple's biggest strength is having a visionary dictator that can drive decisions in the direction he wants; without worrying about being second guessed or forced out. It's their biggest long term weakness as well.

 

[-hh]

Apple and everyone calls the 2008 macbook air the first macbook air, ie a first gen of the macbook air line.

Sure, but there's qualifiers within the above: the "first" distinction being applied is that it was the first MBA, and not the first-ever lightweight laptop.

Everybody knows a first gen is the first incarnation of the product line of a company. All of a sudden you want to redefine what a first gen product is?

Incorrect, and if that's all that you've interpreted from what I wrote, I respectfully request that you go back and re-read it again.

Dude, whatever. Keep thinking the first air was revolutionary when it was just thin, thats it it, nothing revolutionary about that.

Yes, except that now you've contradicted your own first point and are now agreeing with my point that not even the 1st Generation MBA was the "first-ever lightweight laptop".

Apple had been doing unibody for a while with macbooks. Large glass touchpad, not new. Grey brushmetal, also not new. The first air had nothing that was new, except the form factor. We still all called it first gen. Haha, but for some reason its wrong for me to say this is a first gen ultrabook. Talk about fanboyness.

FYI, 'fanboyness' is namecalling, which is a TOS violation. Please don't repeat the mistake.

Each of these examples were in their time "firsts", which did incur higher fixed costs to facilitize the manufacturing base, and which over - - not time, but success - - did result in higher-than-baselined unit production quantities which mathmatically justified a larger denominator for purposes of calculating the amortization of fixed (vs variable) production costs.

A larger denominator for fixed costs does result in a lower net anufacturing cost for an item, but please do note that this does not correlate to reduced variable costs: to assume that is incorrect. Reducing variable costs requires an additional manufacturing technology (MANTECH) investment to optimize the process, and that MANTECH expense is another Fixed cost which has to also be amortized (and thus reach its payback).

Moving on,

Back in the day, the claim by many was (and still is) that people should buy a Windows PC instead of a Mac because they are paying double for what is essentially the same piece of hardware. Those who chose to buy a Mac were (and still are) derided for paying double just for a logo. Those who chose to go Mac defend their choice by saying that there are things about the Mac that justify its premium.

Agreed, this was the history...and part of this thread is an illustration of how it still happens when particular design attributes (here, form factor) are disregarded in the value perception process of at least some potential consumers.

When it comes to Ultrabooks vs. MBA, however, the shoe is on the other foot. The MacBook Air is comparatively less expensive than alternatives. MacBook Air users get to say that Ultrabook buyers are paying a premium for the same piece of hardware.

(re-arranging vvswarup's quoted text for contextual continuity)

I can understand the sentiment of people. All these years, Apple users have been (and still are) derided as sheep, and that they waste money on a logo. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it is easy to get caught up in the "bleep you" moment. But it's important to apply fair and consistent standards.

I think we can recognize that 'bleep' as basically being a Schadenfreude event after decades of being on the receiving end of the abusive "Macs Overpriced" mantra. In terms of applying a fair and consistent standard, to apply the Ethics of the Golden Rule, it is permissible to point this out at this time. So while these facts are what they are, one can hope that Mac affectionados will have the self-restraint (and "Class") to rise above the petty behavior that was imposed upon them for so long and not be obsessed with getting "revenge".

Those participating in this pissing contest (Mac and Windows users alike) don't get it at all. Mac buyers choose Mac instead of a Windows PC because there is something about the Mac that justifies its cost. Why can't the same argument apply to Ultrabooks? Just Apple has evidently given people a reason to pay what they pay for Macs, let Ultrabook manufacturers give people a reason to pay for an Ultrabook. Just as Mac buyers made a conscious choice as a consumer that the Mac is worth its premium, Ultrabook buyers are making a conscious choice as a consumer that an Ultrabook is worth its premium over a MacBook Air.

This is a very good point, which is that regardless of the OS, certain hardware form factors inherently cost more than others. Desktops vs Laptops is the first obvious tier of this, and Laptops vs Ultrabooks are another tier.

Naturally, the consumer is only going to be willing to pay the additional expense for that difference if they believe that it brings with it some inherent additional value...and this isn't just about the hardware, but also the software and OS too, possibly even the manufacturer's warranty, quality of service, training, etc, etc ... any litany of variables, down to free oil changes, free loaner cars, free coffee in the waiting lounge, carwash, etc.

When we totally generalize this out, the factors merely encompasses every possible way in which a supplier may be able to successfully differentiate their product from the competition in order to attract and retain customers who are willing to pay for that differentiation.


-hh

 

[AppleScruff1]

The MAC and PC markets are separate markets - while there is some overlap in buyers and Apple clearly would like to convert PC users to Macs, the markets and their dynamics are different.
The PC market is basically a commodity market - whether it's the home or business segment - where price is the main differentiator and while companies try to differentiate on features the still need to come in at a price point or risk losing sales to cheaper alternatives.
The Mac market buyer is driven primarily by wanting OSX - and Apple can effectively differentiate it's products and not worry so much about price; other than charging too much will push people to PCs since tehre is a limit people will pay for OSX.
In the end, ASUS new pc is not designed to be a MBA competitor - in the sense it will steal MBA buyers - rather ASUS has let Apple prove their is a market for such devices and is now staking a spot in the PC market where there is little competition and they may be able to charge a premium for the device. Of course, the inevitable drive to commoditization will occur as the parts suppliers and OEMs standardize on designs and components, leaving manufactures to add some bells and whistles (which MBs probably will be designed to allow) to try to stand out as prices drop. ASUS probably doesn't care what it costs to make a MBA - they because that is not their competition - it's the company that can cut a few corners to make a slim pc that sells for $100 less while keeping the same relative performance. A pc buyer doesn't car if a Mac has a 12 hour battery - they want a pc that has the same run time as all the similar pcs.
If PC buyers really wanted MBAs and were not price sensitive you'd see a lot of Airs running Win7 natively. That you don't tells me while the form factor is intriguing it won't take off in the pc market until the price drops.
Will that effect Apple - not really. It will keep some price pressure on them but Apple has wisely stayed out of the broader PC market - and probably will continue along the "unified field" theory of device interoperability so that your Apple iPad/Mac/TV etc will be able to share information seamlessly and be more than just a PC.
As I've said before - Apple's biggest strength is having a visionary dictator that can drive decisions in the direction he wants; without worrying about being second guessed or forced out. It's their biggest long term weakness as well.

I think you bring up some good points, and quite valid too.

 

[whitedragon101]

I don't have any qualms against Apple. I just find it irritating when people act like Apple ***** out rainbows and unicorns while everyone else is drowning in the gutters of non-innovation when it isn't the case.

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

 

[MacNewsFix]

Great article over at PCWorld (by way of MacWorld) on why it is so hard for manufacturers to compete with the MacBook Air. Explains a lot of why Apple sells 9 out of 10 computers purchased for over $1000.

 

[Steve121178]

Great article over at PCWorld (by way of MacWorld) on why it is so hard for manufacturers to compete with the MacBook Air. Explains a lot of why Apple sells 9 out of 10 computers purchased for over $1000.

But most Windows based PC's are priced lower than $1000 so it's a pointless benchmark. A more important stat is that 90% of computers run Windows regardless of price.

 

[emaja]

But most Windows based PC's are priced lower than $1000 so it's a pointless benchmark. A more important stat is that 90% of computers run Windows regardless of price.

Of course it's relevant. Where do you think the profits are?

 

[Young Spade]

Except no one cares about any of that, all they care about is their computer being able to check e-mail and go to Youtube, and usually the less they have to pay the better.

I don't know why he got a negative but I agree.

As long as Apple keeps their premium image (and they will), their market share will eventually hit a wall.

one of the main things holding people back is price. AND the fact that it is entirely different OS, which causes problems for some people in the IT department.

To us, or whoever is a "fanboy", it's easy to justify the machines and claim glory to a never-ending rise in sales.

However, it just won't happen; not the global takeover that people claim will occur anyway.

----------

Of course it's relevant. Where do you think the profits are?

Well the profits are in enterprise, where they make billions.

The consumer market makes money as well, obviously not as much as Apple, but it does make a ton of money.

The companies aren't in "trouble", but it's easy to assume that when you don't hear stories about them every two seconds like you do with Apple.

 

[Hyper-X]

I could be completely mistaken about this but although I agree that the MBA appears to provide a very good product representing the ultraslim line of computers, I don't think it's all that successful, at least in my region. For my current needs I use a Lenovo x120e which is more than sufficient for my needs. The MBA surpasses it with more raw horsepower and a much better trackpad however it's over double the cost which made the MBA a competitor to the MBP in that price range... hence I chose the MBP at that point. (to be fair my x120e has a 240g SSD, 8GB RAM, W7 Pro @ $599)

Every Apple Store or post exchange I visit, I always ask about how well the MBA's sell compared to the MBP's and I hear the same thing all the time. People don't seem to like the MBA because they think it feels flimsy and the MBP always outsells the MBA to the point it's no comparison.

 

[Young Spade]

Every Apple Store or post exchange I visit, I always ask about how well the MBA's sell compared to the MBP's and I hear the same thing all the time. People don't seem to like the MBA because they think it feels flimsy and the MBP always outsells the MBA to the point it's no comparison.

Well I mean, if you think about it logically, you're getting an underpowerd machine (for the price) that is limited in its lifespan, depending on what you do.

For the 13 inch, it's more than the MBP, has lower specs, and is unupgradable.

When you can get the baseline MBP with better specs and install a SSD in there and come out even or 100 more, there really is no reason to get the Air.

Screen resolution bump is great but it isn't "that" many more pixels.

Plus, the baseline 11 inch is a grand and only comes with 4 gigs of RAM. That is un-upgradeable.

Which is pretty appalling in today's age.

So yea, it's easy to get hyped up here with everybody loving the thing (it is the first/second month of its release), but yea, I don't think it sells "that" well when you compare it with Apple's other machines.

 

[Hyper-X]

Well I mean, if you think about it logically, you're getting an underpowerd machine (for the price) that is limited in its lifespan, depending on what you do.

For the 13 inch, it's more than the MBP, has lower specs, and is unupgradable.

When you can get the baseline MBP with better specs and install a SSD in there and come out even or 100 more, there really is no reason to get the Air.

Screen resolution bump is great but it isn't "that" many more pixels.

Plus, the baseline 11 inch is a grand and only comes with 4 gigs of RAM. That is un-upgradeable.

Which is pretty appalling in today's age.

So yea, it's easy to get hyped up here with everybody loving the thing (it is the first/second month of its release), but yea, I don't think it sells "that" well when you compare it with Apple's other machines.

Agreed. The MBA is an in-between product of a full laptop but much more powerful than a Netbook or value-PC.

I don't have an issue with the MBA all that much because I understand the idea behind its purpose since I already use a CULV product. However the general public will only tend to see the basics like...

- The MBA "only" has 128GB where as most laptops will have easily triple that or more.

- It feels flimsy, afraid that it might get damaged.

- It doesn't have an optical drive, can't burn CD's or play DVD's.

- Can't upgrade easily.

- For a thousand bucks, I have better options with many other products.

- I can buy a MBP for that price.

- I don't see the big deal about it other than it's super thin and light.

For people like me I appreciate the lightweight part about it having to carry a notebook everywhere I go. The times I need to use any optical drive is about 1% of the time and if someone is still "in the dark ages" where they want files burned on a CD/DVD without having a flash drive handy. Having near "instant on" and "instant off" is vital for an on-the-go type of lifestyle. Not having to worry about where the next AC outlet's going to be is definitely a plus. However despite all this, the general public, at least in my opinion don't value any of that nearly as much as I do.

 

[Young Spade]

However despite all this, the general public, at least in my opinion don't value any of that nearly as much as I do.

The general public doesn't really know what all of that is or means lol; for them, they leave it plugged in, hope it "just works", and only take it off to take to class, a friend's house, around their house, or a coffee shop.

I guess Apple's thinking is: If they don't know about the specs, why should they matter?

And you can plainly see that with these MBAs.

They should have went with 4 gigs stock of RAM and upgradeable to at least 6, IMO.