Intel Ultrabooks Unable to Undercut MacBook Air Prices

[*LTD*]

Apple spends some of the LOWEST numbers on R&D,

Exactly. And look at what they're accomplishing. The very model of efficiency. Talk about getting the most from every cent.

The industry at large could learn from Apple. In many ways it's quite apparent they are (as we're seeing); the next step is to learn from Apple's management of finances.

 

[nebulos]

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.

the 2011 MBAs and 13 MBPs are much closer than their 2010 counterparts. read up on them.

the new MBAs offer plenty of performance for an entry level computer. they're not the flighty, anorexic supermodels their grandparents were. they're nimble now, body and brains.

 

[stockscalper]

I run Windows 7 on my 2010 MacBook Air without a hitch. Why would I want to pay more for a poorly made, higher priced knock off when I have a high quality product that runs two operating systems?

 

[TigerWoodsIV]

Not really surprising. Apple has been better about pricing their products recently. The high end products are still pretty expensive, but the MBA is a good value. Sure there are notebooks for a few hundred dollars, but they suck.

That's why my next laptop is going to be the next generation MBA most likely. My 2008 MBP is still going strong for now.

 

[FrizzleFryBen]

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.

I believe you are in the wrong thread. I think you want to start a thread elsewhere about why ultra-thin products are not for you. Your premise is flawed and irrelevant in this thread.

 

[bpaluzzi]

It's entirely possible to say that the MBA is overpriced.

It's Apple's entry level product.

I'm not prepared to pay a premium for a (slow) computer just because it's thinner.

For what you're getting it might be good value, but it's now your only choice other than a "pro" machine.

That doesn't mean it's overpriced. It means Apple doesn't fit your needs. That's like saying that Bentley is overpriced because they don't offer a sub-compact.

And just because it's the lowest-priced model in the laptop lineup doesn't mean it's an entry level product. Apple is a premium company.

 

[Lord Appleseed]

I'm not prepared to pay a premium for a (slow) computer just because it's thinner.

Funny, because the MacBook Air 2011 is lightning fast and even outperforms or matches other stronger Apple computers in some tasks.

 

[radek42]

I respectfully disagree. I think the price is fair for what you get.

1. Most people (including me) do not need more horsepower than 1.7GHz. It took me long time to figure that out. After using Atom 330 processor on my file server (which doubles as a desktop) for nearly two years now I realized i5 1.7GHz is plenty!

2. Carrying 3lbs rather than 5lbs every day all day makes a big difference.

YMMV.

Cheers,
R>

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.

 

[xFenixKnightx]

Wow. First time seeing this. *cough* ripoff *cough*

 

[altecXP]

Nah, if you look at Apple's revenue, gross margins, net profit, EPS, and other financials, along with their customer satisfaction ratings, product line and overall innovation, I'd say that Apple is the one who knows what they're doing.

Their R&D dollars are more focused and are resulting in strong selling products.

If anything, other companies are wasting resources on R&D of iffy products with poor ROI. Heck, Cisco just shuttered their FlipVideo division. HP averages $2B in R&D a year and their main innovative unveiling is a mediocre tablet? Windows 7 was a strong release for Microsoft, but what else of note has come from them of late? How much R&D did they pour into the abruptly-cancelled Kin? How is Windows Phone 7 doing? Windows Live? Bing is a nice search engine and they are losing money right with it right now.

Cisco bought FlipVideo for IP, and their staff, not the product.
HP also unveils new servers, and NetApp competitors, and they just refreshed their whole lineup in the last 2 years.

Microsoft released:
Phone 7
xbox updates
Kinect
Windows live tools for Windows (which are actually doing well, thanks for asking)
Bing is two years old, it's not uncommon for sites to last 5 years before making a profit, I think the Huffington Post only made money the year that AOL bought them.
Office 365
Azure
currently working on Windows 8/server 2012/office 2012
System Center
SP1 for office
SP1 for Win 7
Multipoint server 2011
IE 9
new version of Security Essentials
HomeOS

Microsoft leases a LOT more things than Apple does each year, even if you never hear about it.

 

[SimonTheSoundMa]

When do we get lawsuits for companies using unibody design? Wasn't that a patented manufacturing process?

I do not think you can patent a manufacturing process that has prior art.

Stills cameras being one consumer product that starts like as a block and are milled/eroded out. I know my old Olympus OM4-Ti from the 1980's is made in the same way as Apple products.

Milling out a product from a solid lump of metal is nothing new.

 

[bpaluzzi]

Cisco bought FlipVideo for IP, and their staff, not the product.
HP also unveils new servers, and NetApp competitors, and they just refreshed their whole lineup in the last 2 years.

Microsoft released:
Phone 7
xbox updates
Kinect
Windows live tools for Windows (which are actually doing well, thanks for asking)
Bing is two years old, it's not uncommon for sites to last 5 years before making a profit, I think the Huffington Post only made money the year that AOL bought them.
Office 365
Azure
currently working on Windows 8/server 2012/office 2012
System Center
SP1 for office
SP1 for Win 7
Multipoint server 2011
IE 9
new version of Security Essentials
HomeOS

Microsoft leases a LOT more things than Apple does each year, even if you never hear about it.

Are you really listing service packs? Wow. Even with those padding your list, Apple released more "stuff" in the previous year than Microsoft.

 

[MacNewsFix]

The first Ultrabook demoed was an ASUS model that bore a close resemblance to the MacBook Air, and Intel feels that these ultra-thin and light laptops could make up 40% of the consumer laptop market by the end of 2012.

Wait, that means no optical drive. OH, THE HUMANITY!!!

Those requirements have, however, pushed up the cost of those components beyond that of the modular ones typically used in PCs, resulting in Ultrabook pricing coming in at the same levels as Apple's MacBook Air.

Wait, no way to argue about the existence of an Apple Tax®? OH, THE HUMANITY!!!

EDIT: Hey! Someone is stealing my material!

So Much For The Apple Tax! Laptop Makers Can’t Compete With The MacBook Air For The Price

Intel's effort to match the MacBook Air's thin profile has seen the company push forward its new platform with more components integrated directly onto the machines' circuit boards and using non user-replaceable batteries, mirroring Apple's own steps.

"Integrated components" and "non user-replaceable batteries?" OH, THE HUMANITY!!! Somebody get Doctorow on the phone.

 

[KnightWRX]

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.

Sure, but that's not a product they want to sell. It doesn't make what they are selling overpriced, it just means they don't cater to your particular needs. Surprise : They don't have to.

 

[ChrisA]

All this means is that when Apple asks Foxcon to build a computer Foxcom comes up with a price. Then if Asus or HP asks Foxcon to build the same PC Foxcon comes up with the same price. No one builds their own computers, not Apple, not HP or Asus. They all use the same Chinese factories. It's not a surprise that the same computer costs the same price .

 

[JohnPhamlore]

The non-Apple ultrabooks from what I have seen are risking a debacle selling to students a device that makes it very difficult to make presentations on older projectors that only have VGA or other previous generation type inputs not HDMI.

Intel and AMD have agreed to phase out VGA over the next couple of years. The logical plan would have been for the PC makers to replace their current VGA ports with some sort of DisplayPort or even eventually Thunderbolt just like Apple has been pushing. Instead the PC makers are sometimes only providing a micro-HDMI port.

At least with an Apple machine a student can buy one connector that has a good chance to be stocked locally. It seems kind of strange to me that in this case the Apple product seems to have the safest flexibility for connectivity.

 

[emaja]

the Air is slow and always will be because the one that came out 5 years ago was. period.

That is a ridiculous statement. It's like saying cars will always get bad gas mileage since they always have.

Change happens and most often for the better. Computers do not get slower.

 

[ssk2]

I respectfully disagree. I think the price is fair for what you get.

1. Most people (including me) do not need more horsepower than 1.7GHz. It took me long time to figure that out. After using Atom 330 processor on my file server (which doubles as a desktop) for nearly two years now I realized i5 1.7GHz is plenty!

2. Carrying 3lbs rather than 5lbs every day all day makes a big difference.

YMMV.

Cheers,
R>

1) I do agree, usually I won't require that much power. HOWEVER, and this is my major sticking point with any ultra-thin, most of us cannot afford a premium ultra-thin AND a more expensive laptop/desktop option for more intensive tasks. THIS is where the old Macbook fitted perfectly in to many of our computing needs. I could run everything I need to from there, from Office to Lightroom and Photoshop. It was a fantastic machine.

2) This is where I disagree. That's a difference of less than 1kg, hardly worth the premium you're paying. Certainly, millions of people carry around much heavier laptops everyday without complaint.

 

[altecXP]

Are you really listing service packs? Wow. Even with those padding your list, Apple released more "stuff" in the previous year than Microsoft.

Yes, because they take more funding. Should I list ALL of Microsoft Research while I'm at it? They have about over 300 projects being funded my Microsofts R&D money.

 

[jhende7]

Except it's no longer an option.

My first (and only) MacBook cost me £650. To buy something remotely similar would now cost £1000+.

I don't get this comment at all. The MBA starts at 849 pounds and is far more powerful then your white macbook.

In fact I don't know of a mac ever being cheaper then $899, so it seems like your blaming Apple because of the exchange rate as well.

 

[bpaluzzi]

Yes, because they take more funding. .

Uh.. whuh?

 

[Gasu E.]

resemblance?

They are all made in Steve Jobs' image. Very thin and light!

 

[pyramid6]

I respectfully disagree. I think the price is fair for what you get.

1. Most people (including me) do not need more horsepower than 1.7GHz. It took me long time to figure that out. After using Atom 330 processor on my file server (which doubles as a desktop) for nearly two years now I realized i5 1.7GHz is plenty!

2. Carrying 3lbs rather than 5lbs every day all day makes a big difference.

YMMV.

Cheers,
R>

Exactly.

I program Objective-C, Java, and Python and my 2010 MBA is plenty fast. The SSD harddrive helps when programming because most bottlenecks are in the hard drive. Outside of a few people in my office who mostly need more RAM (multiple large spreadsheets), a MBA is more than enough computer. When people complain about the speed of their computers, it's mostly because of graphics.

Besides, if I need more computing power, I can spin up a cluster of computers at Amazon or Rackspace. I can run them for a few hours and then turn them off.

 

[altecXP]

Uh.. whuh?

You think coders work for free and instantly know how to fix the code with out any research into what the bug is?


This place really makes me think no one has ever worked in a large company that does any type development.

 

[Starflyer]

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.

Read this:

https://www.macrumors.com/2011/07/0...ash-to-keep-latest-technology-for-themselves/