Don't forget Apple also dominates in Resale Value. Even if these "Ultrabooks" could undercut the MBA, they would never be able to hold their value like an Apple.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Intel Ultrabooks Unable to Undercut MacBook Air Prices
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Except it's no longer an option.
My first (and only) MacBook cost me £650. To buy something remotely similar would now cost £1000+.
The new 13.3" MacBook Air is an amazing product. It packs quite a punch in a very thin and light package. It is as fast as my last year's 17" Pro -- actually much faster at reading/writing to the disk. The Air's SSD is the way of the future. Please, please buy SSDs now so the price can come down for the rest of us. I want a SSD in every computer I own.
If Apple can bring a similar Air design to a 15" laptop at near the same price as the current Pro, watch out!
re future ssd pricing
i'm all about lower ssd prices and upping capacity - maybe intel should give up on ultrabooks and concentrate on ssd's
yes ssd is the future my friends
The process, not the design. If someone creates a Unibody structure by a different process, that would be legal.
The cost.
If they put the same hardware (or close enough) inside a computer with an enclosure like the White MacBook and they dropped the SSD then it wouldn't be anywhere near as expensive.
Buying Power
Apple's buying power and ability to secure exclusive components before anyone else can even touch them puts them out in front of everyone else. Apple products just work.
Apple's buying power and ability to secure exclusive components before anyone else can even touch them puts them out in front of everyone else. Apple products just work.
I dont get it. This article makes it sound like Apple took Intel's stuff and put it in the Air but Intel has problems putting things in something that looks like the Air.
Apple couldn't have made the new Air with out extensive help from Intel. When the new Air shipped Apple sent thank you cards to the people at Intel for making it possible.
The Air essentially IS an "Intel Ultrabook" just not marketed as one.
Apple couldn't have made the new Air with out extensive help from Intel. When the new Air shipped Apple sent thank you cards to the people at Intel for making it possible.
The Air essentially IS an "Intel Ultrabook" just not marketed as one.
Intel seems to be in a fix here - On one hand they shouldn't really care if their CPUs are selling inside a MacBook Air or a Ultrabook. On the other hand if Apple gets too big that gives them negotiating powers over Intel.
So if Intel reduces their prices - they will end up reducing for everyone and if they don't now, Apple will make them reduce only for them. Better option would be for Intel to reduce prices across the board - for their decent CPUs, not Atom.
Have you used one? I have a 13" i5 MBA on my desk right now and it's as fast as my 3 month old MBP (sitting right next to it) and it was cheaper.
Exactly, let's get the SSd prices down so we can look for 2TB SSD withing a few years, not decade.
If they can get a 15" MBA within a year I'll replace all my MBP's. It is fun to see how apple makes even the most daring SciFi gadgets look outdated.
If they can get a 15" MBA within a year I'll replace all my MBP's. It is fun to see how apple makes even the most daring SciFi gadgets look outdated.
The new 13.3" MacBook Air is an amazing product. It packs quite a punch in a very thin and light package. It is as fast as my last year's 17" Pro -- actually much faster at reading/writing to the disk. The Air's SSD is the way of the future. Please, please buy SSDs now so the price can come down for the rest of us. I want a SSD in every computer I own.
If Apple can bring a similar Air design to a 15" laptop at near the same price as the current Pro, watch out!
It is strange to see headlines saying people can't compete with Apple on price. Things have sure changed in the last 10 years.
The iPad and now the MacBook Air are an interesting test. The old argument of not buying Apple products because of cost doesn't hold up so well anymore.
The iPad and now the MacBook Air are an interesting test. The old argument of not buying Apple products because of cost doesn't hold up so well anymore.
Pc manufactures cannot even compete with MBP in terms of design, elegance and etc.
So, now they want to try MBA?
PC laptops were sold because they were cheaper than MBP. If it costs same or more than MBA, then I will not think twice. Window 7 is a nice OS, but I don't like where Window 8 is headed.
So, now they want to try MBA?
PC laptops were sold because they were cheaper than MBP. If it costs same or more than MBA, then I will not think twice. Window 7 is a nice OS, but I don't like where Window 8 is headed.
You are stating the MBA is overpriced on a Article that clearly states that other companies are having trouble making a similar product for the same price?
This is clearly not meant for you, you are willing to sacrifice portability for power. Not everyone is like that.
Dont say something is overpriced just because it does not suit your needs.
You're missing the point.
I don't want to pay MORE for a computer that:
-has a 1.7GHz processor
-features Intel Graphics
-has fixed RAM
-has 2 USB ports (which aren't even USB3)
-features a small (albeit fast) SSD
The size benefit of the MacBook Air does not justify the cost OR the tradeoffs above.
These same specs in a thicker, heavier machine would cost much less to buy. That was where the White MacBook came in. It offered much better value.
No, 'overpriced' would mean that an Apple products costs MORE than its 'equivalent'. The fact that Apple doesn't release bottom dwelling crap doesn't mean that the products they do produce are 'overpriced'.
BTW... 'SLOW'??? Have you ever touched an MB Air?
Get your head out of the spec sheets and see what the actual experience is like.
While the small form factor has its downside, that's very misleading. Look at this geekbench result
(http://www.stuff-review.com/2011-07/2011-macbook-air-sandy-bridge-benchmark/)
As you can see, the 1.6GHz, let alone 1.7GHz, computer can outperform the old 3.06 GHz processor-based computer.
I'm confused. Didn't the new air just beat the late 2010 macbook pro in speed tests quite handily? Just what are you doing on these things? Rendering After Effects?
Apple spends some of the LOWEST numbers on R&D, they essentially have Intel and Foxconn to most of the R&D work.
For a comparison, Apple use something like 4.6b in R&D over 4 years. In the same 4 years MS did 31b, Intel did 23b, and Cisco did 19b. HP averages almost 2b a year.
If anything Apple is the one forgoing R&D costs.
Why the hell would you make a comparison like that?
If Apple had maintained the White MacBook line then they could have easily refreshed it with a newer 2.0GHz+ i3 or i5 processor.
I'm not talking about new MacBook Air vs Old
I'm talking about current MacBook Air vs (what could have been released) MacBook
I'm saying that the old MacBook offered better performance at a lower price than the old MacBook Air did.
If Apple had released a new MacBook, I don't see why that trend would not have continued.
Last edited by a moderator:
It means that Apple's production line is more efficient that other companies. They definitely make and sell more than other laptop companies so they're probably making some up in volume.