Sidebar Sidebar
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

hmm

Whats with the hypocrites. IF this site or digitimes states sources said the next iphone will be a clamshell everybody would yell its a rumour and sources does not mean anything but when its a pc rumour with sources and not fact everybody says its a fact?

There is nothing stopping companies like hp or dell from getting machines as small and at the same price as a macbook air.

Remember dell and hp use the same manufacturers as apple does.

Right now this story is only a rumor.
 
"Overpriced" is subjective, but the price/performance suffers tremendously for those few millimeters spared. If weight and thickness are that critical to you- congratulations, the Air isn't overpriced. If they aren't a big deal- guess what, you probably consider it overpriced :rolleyes:

As the digitimes article says, the pricing that Intel is giving on the processors, along with the suggested design guidelines (for which the PC makers could choose to follow some and not others) is causing the problem. If Intel is not satisfied with the number of units they're putting out, they'll drop the price, and/or revise the guidelines. If they feel like they're making enough money, then obviously things won't change.

My personal opinion is that the entire form factor is ludicrously expensive with little to show for it, but thickness really isn't the biggest priority to me. Most modern laptops are "thin enough".

EDIT: Also, Digitimes alleges that the design guidelines from Intel are "similar" to the air, not that the Air meets all of them. It's tough to say if those differences would cost a lot of money since we don't have the design guidelines publicly visible, at least from what I can find.
 
Intel make the Sandybridge chips for the Air. So the Air is Intel powered too.

Its Intel vs Intel.

I think Intel will win :)
 
butterfly0fdoom said:
1) What kind of tasks? I can run Lightroom on a previous-generation MacBook Air while running other programs in the background without any problems. Have you tried it? It's surprisingly powerful. The market of people that need anything beyond the amount of power an MBA has rather small.
Click to expand...

As I can see, you own a MBP 13"... Have you ever worked with a MBP 15"? That's my working machine and during a long repair, Apple lend me a 13" to do my daily work. And it felt like a huge step back, everything was so much slower and laggy.

In your eyes, the air feels quite fast but other users who uses photoshop, cad programs, indesign etc and are used to the 15", the air isn't sufficient enough
 
stadlin said:
As I can see, you own a MBP 13"... Have you ever worked with a MBP 15"? That's my working machine and during a long repair, Apple lend me a 13" to do my daily work. And it felt like a huge step back, everything was so much slower and laggy.

In your eyes, the air feels quite fast but other users who uses photoshop, cad programs, indesign etc and are used to the 15", the air isn't sufficient enough
Click to expand...

The problem is that sites dedicated to technology/a technology company tend to attract the power users.

I would wager that the userbase here is not a representative sample of the entire pool of Mac owners.
 
Value is in the eye of the beholder.

Whether or not the MBA is a good value or not depends on what you "value". You are paying extra to have thin. You are paying extra to have smooth. You are paying extra to have unibody, MagSafe, and Mac OS X. You are paying extra for membership in a community.

Most Apple users value those things, and so they don't have a problem with the price. I am much more utilitarian. I look at the product line now and I see that the entry level portable is a thousand dollar, eleven inch netbook that doesn't even have an SD card reader.

Why would I do that when I bought a Samsung netbook that does the same thing and more for $400 three years ago? They aren't the same? Of course they aren't, but the differences - beauty, unibody design, "Being a mac-user" aren't ones I care about.

My one criticism of the Apple community is that valuing different things in your technology isn't allowed. No criticism is valid criticism. That, of course, is how Apple likes it, but it doesn't endear anyone to your cause. I don't want to "just get an adapter" for a disc drive, and ethernet, and a card reader, and a hub - I'm going to want to use more than one of these things at once - and on and on. Pretty soon my MBA is 1500 bucks! So the answer to that is "Maybe the Air isn't for you then." Maybe not, but this answer is always delivered with dismissiveness and condescension.

I had been looking forward to upgrading my years-old Macbook, and 30 days ago I could have gotten everything I wanted for the same price as the limited offering I see before me.

I'm not buying jewelry, and I don't want to pay for lifestyle, but with Apple it is build in to the cost.
 
well, it boils to this. Windows/PC are a dinosaur product, yes they dominated for a while but a new change is in the air-Apple are the mammals, slowly increasing in numbers, nipping at Windows toes...and we all know what finally became of the dinosaurs;
Though I wouldn't be surprised if the final death knell for Widows is a version of OS X that can operate on a PC....mass extinction event

Apple now has but 11% of the computer market-and about 75% of all other markets-or more: iPads iPhones iPods-and anyone ever even HEAR about sombodies uncles grandfathers plumbers son in college using a Zoon? (sic) no...anyone even SEEN one in the wild? no...

"Windows is an antiquated technology"-Walt Mossberg, WSJ Sept 2009
 
seashellz said:
"Windows is an antiquated technology"-Walt Mossberg, WSJ Sept 2009
Click to expand...

So is the internal combustion engine and the electro-magnetic dynamic speaker driver but they still far outsell any more forward thinking technology in their fields.

Just saying'... ;)
 
seashellz said:
"Windows is an antiquated technology"-Walt Mossberg, WSJ Sept 2009
Click to expand...

That quote is actually from Brian Croll, vice president of OS X marketing at Apple, which makes the quote worthless- pumping up OS X and putting down competitors is his job.

It's like the sea monkey salesman telling you that pet rocks are terrible toys, and Legos are dull lifeless pieces of plastic. Sea monkeys are alive, after all!

Also, as further proof, your quote isn't mentioned once on WSJ.com.
 
farmermac said:
funny how Apple can innovate and create new categories of products over and over, and still be cheaper than the competition. Same deal with tablets. They are stomping on everyone in overall design and quality of ecosystem, and they're not being undercut price-wise.
Click to expand...

Disregarding the entire pricing issue, Apple is NOT innovative at all. Microsoft is innovative, but they absolutely fail at executing their ideas. On the other hand, Apple rarely comes out with anything truly new; they are, however, incredibly skilled at taking unrefined ideas and culling them into remarkably successful products.

Tablets is one such instance. Microsoft tried to launch tablet PCs back in the XP era, but they failed because the OS wasn't meant for touch input, the battery life was abysmal, and the devices' sizes were unwieldy. Apple then comes around with their iPad, which, instead of using a downscaled mouse-and-keyboard OS, used an up-scaled version of an more power-efficient OS that was designed for touch input. Microsoft had a good idea; Apple made it workable.

Or let's consider MP3 players. Pre-iPod, devices used clunky interfaces and (physically) larder hard drives, resulting in larger, clunkier devices. And then comes Apple with their iPod, which used smaller drives and featured Apple's knack for more refined user interfaces. Other people had good ideas; Apple made it workable.

Even smartphones fall under this category. Palm OS, Symbian, and Windows Mobile were good enough for their day and purposes (as OSes for business-oriented devices). Apple comes swinging with their idea of a smartphone OS that's more geared for a mass-market device. Other companies had good ideas; Apple made it workable.

And now we have the "ultrabooks". Ultraportables aren't anything new, but Apple made it clear what they were aiming for when they announced the original Air, which, in typical Apple fashion, is a solid refinement of an existing category. And, again, others had good ideas; Apple made it workable.

But what makes people attribute the innovation to Apple is that after Apple makes an idea more workable, everyone scrambles to copy whatever paradigm shift Apple created with their implementation of said ideas.
 
butterfly0fdoom said:
Disregarding the entire pricing issue, Apple is NOT innovative at all. Microsoft is innovative, but they absolutely fail at executing their ideas. On the other hand, Apple rarely comes out with anything truly new; they are, however, incredibly skilled at taking unrefined ideas and culling them into remarkably successful products.

Tablets is one such instance. Microsoft tried to launch tablet PCs back in the XP era, but they failed because the OS wasn't meant for touch input, the battery life was abysmal, and the devices' sizes were unwieldy. Apple then comes around with their iPad, which, instead of using a downscaled mouse-and-keyboard OS, used an up-scaled version of an more power-efficient OS that was designed for touch input. Microsoft had a good idea; Apple made it workable.

Or let's consider MP3 players. Pre-iPod, devices used clunky interfaces and (physically) larder hard drives, resulting in larger, clunkier devices. And then comes Apple with their iPod, which used smaller drives and featured Apple's knack for more refined user interfaces. Other people had good ideas; Apple made it workable.

Even smartphones fall under this category. Palm OS, Symbian, and Windows Mobile were good enough for their day and purposes (as OSes for business-oriented devices). Apple comes swinging with their idea of a smartphone OS that's more geared for a mass-market device. Other companies had good ideas; Apple made it workable.

And now we have the "ultrabooks". Ultraportables aren't anything new, but Apple made it clear what they were aiming for when they announced the original Air, which, in typical Apple fashion, is a solid refinement of an existing category. And, again, others had good ideas; Apple made it workable.

But what makes people attribute the innovation to Apple is that after Apple makes an idea more workable, everyone scrambles to copy whatever paradigm shift Apple created with their implementation of said ideas.
Click to expand...

Or, you could simply state that Apple took large risks with cutting edge technologies that consumers felt were akin to a bowl of Mashed Potatoes and Gravy.

Same outcome. Risk is the key to all success. Apple excels at Risk Management. Others ran from it.

End Game? "He who has the Gold Makes the Rules".

Get used to it. :apple:
 
Glideslope said:
Or, you could simply state that Apple took large risks with cutting edge technologies that consumers felt were akin to a bowl of Mashed Potatoes and Gravy.

Same outcome. Risk is the key to all success. Apple excels at Risk Management. Others ran from it.

End Game? "He who has the Gold Makes the Rules".

Get used to it. :apple:
Click to expand...

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.
 
butterfly0fdoom said:
Disregarding the entire pricing issue, Apple is NOT innovative at all. Microsoft is innovative, but they absolutely fail at executing their ideas. On the other hand, Apple rarely comes out with anything truly new; they are, however, incredibly skilled at taking unrefined ideas and culling them into remarkably successful products.

snip
Click to expand...

Everything is a remix. There are no new ideas anymore. Everything is a derivation of something that came before it.

Well, not everything, but my point is that very few large corporations can innovate in the way that you define innovation. The only real way that a large corporation can innovate is from a skunkworks type set-up within the larger operation. Innovations come from small groups with big ideas ... not typically found inside Fortune 500 firms.

Also, to say that Apple is not innovative and that Microsoft is is kind of ludicrous to me. After all, the TabletPC is just basically a Windows laptop with a swivel screen and a stylus. Microsoft didn't invent the laptop, swivel screen or stylus, they just put it together in a package that no one had thought of doing. By your definition, that's not innovation.
 
nwcs said:
Add to this that Apple has had the first mover advantage for a couple years now. Hard for others to excel unless they can undercut Apple or outperform them.
Click to expand...

Absolutely true.

Daveoc64 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Except for the fact that the new MBA is not a slow computer at all. The Core2 Duo versions were slow, but not the new ones.

topmounter said:
So by the logic of the h:apple:ters, this means that the PC manufacturers are even more greedy than :apple:

:D
Click to expand...

Probably not as much to do with greed as the fact that Apple has many of the key suppliers all sewed up. They have cornered the market on overseas slave labor.
 
butterfly0fdoom said:
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.
Click to expand...

Do you know why the long term "fanboys" feel this way? Go back to the 90's when Microsoft was touting all these OS innovations that we had on our Macs for years. How the MS fans would dismiss the Mac and call it a toy for no reason other than they didn't have one or couldn't afford one. To watch Apple die on the vine as one CEO after another dragged the company into almost extinction.

Now fast forward and look at what Apple has done. Mostly, they "raised the bar" in product design, quality, and innovation.

Really remember back to how most products in the late 1990's and early 2000's were poorly designed. Ugly even. User interfaces on things like TV's and VCR's we're hideous. Companies just didn't seem to care. Then there's Apple. Slowly but surely hitting one home run after another. Consumers "wow'd" by great design of the hardware and easy to use interfaces.

Now anyone who's anyone in consumer electronics looks at Apple for inspiration. They look at Apple to see how they do it for engineering, product design, packaging and marketing.

So does Apple **** unicorns and rainbows. No... they are not perfect. No company is. But, no one can argue how much influence Apple has had on consumer electronics over the past 10 years and it's all been for the better.
 
ssk2 said:
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.
Click to expand...

I use Office, Lightroom and Photoshop on my 2010 11" Air.. All run super fast... faster in fact than my i7 iMac 27" due to the SSD. I can only imagine how nice the 2011 model is...

Fact is the only thing I have found that the Macbook Air does not do better than any other computer is rendering/editing... Premier or After Effects need a big hefty rig for 1080p editing.
 
So exactly what does it take to convince people that they get what they pay for when they buy a personal computer? You can hone your repair skills and your trouble-shooting techniques on either / any platform.
 
The real issue is the ultra thin design components have not yet been commoditized. Given the prospective size of the market that wil happen soon enough and you'll see prices drop significantly. Apple of course won't drop prices to match because that is not their game.

I suspect you'll see some high end machines first and then q slew of cheap ones as the manufacturing gets ironed out.
 
wdmarty said:
Whether or not the MBA is a good value or not depends on what you "value". You are paying extra to have thin. You are paying extra to have smooth. You are paying extra to have unibody, MagSafe, and Mac OS X. You are paying extra for membership in a community.

Most Apple users value those things, and so they don't have a problem with the price. I am much more utilitarian. I look at the product line now and I see that the entry level portable is a thousand dollar, eleven inch netbook that doesn't even have an SD card reader.

Why would I do that when I bought a Samsung netbook that does the same thing and more for $400 three years ago? They aren't the same? Of course they aren't, but the differences - beauty, unibody design, "Being a mac-user" aren't ones I care about.

My one criticism of the Apple community is that valuing different things in your technology isn't allowed. No criticism is valid criticism. That, of course, is how Apple likes it, but it doesn't endear anyone to your cause. I don't want to "just get an adapter" for a disc drive, and ethernet, and a card reader, and a hub - I'm going to want to use more than one of these things at once - and on and on. Pretty soon my MBA is 1500 bucks! So the answer to that is "Maybe the Air isn't for you then." Maybe not, but this answer is always delivered with dismissiveness and condescension.

I had been looking forward to upgrading my years-old Macbook, and 30 days ago I could have gotten everything I wanted for the same price as the limited offering I see before me.

I'm not buying jewelry, and I don't want to pay for lifestyle, but with Apple it is build in to the cost.
Click to expand...

I don't buy the argument that when you are "utilitarian" you care for other things. On the contrary, when you consider all the aspect of usability of the computer, as a computing machine but also as an object in your life, portability (weight and size), overall construction and the physical quality of the display, the trackpad, backlight keyboard, it seems that the MacBook Air is a very "utilitarian" choice.

And in general, a more intuitive and easy to use OS is a very practical difference for a user.

I think the problem is that peoples (especially in the PC world) tend to consider that the only things that really matter are the ones that you can put a number on, like computing speed, amount of memory, etc.
 
Glideslope said:
Or, you could simply state that Apple took large risks with cutting edge technologies that consumers felt were akin to a bowl of Mashed Potatoes and Gravy.

Same outcome. Risk is the key to all success. Apple excels at Risk Management. Others ran from it.

End Game? "He who has the Gold Makes the Rules".

Get used to it. :apple:
Click to expand...
Actually two things contributed to Apple's success:
1) a single leader with a strong vision and direction who could force everyone to do what he wanted
2) the visionary leader has been right so many more times than he has been wrong.

The challenge is: what happens post Jobs?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back