Interesting Article by Notebookreview on Apple high prices

[fallen1981]

Hi, just read this which I thought added food for thought on the new Macbooks Pros.

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4668

Although it is kind of one sided I thought it was an interesting read. Whilst I have already ordered my MBP 2.8 320 gb (7200) and it has not changed my mind it raises an interesting issue.

Although I believe you should buy when you need and not worry about the future I still cant help but think it was kind of a let down that for the prices you pay in 2008 we should have had high def screens at at minimum and 9700 Graphics card if not highers Or at least more online config options. The OS is the only reason I continue to support such prices but it is wearing thin.

Any thoughts?

 

[Eidorian]

It's the hard truth in that guest review.

 

[MVApple]

That article is absolute garbage.

Is the HDX16t a great bang for buck notebook? Absolutely. Notice how sly he tries to be though. An acceptable hardware configuration for the HP will run you $1350, not the $1175 he so claims. He doesn't mention that at $1175 you only get a 1366x768 resolution notebook, which is an unacceptable resolution for a desktop replacement with a 16" screen. It's funny how he tries to act like HP notebooks have zero problems as well.

Now $1350 is a lot less than what you could get a macbook pro for and just looking at raw power specs the macbook pro might seem like a bad deal. But you buy a laptop so it can be portable though right? Well according to laptopmag with continuous web browsing the HP will get just under two hours of battery life with the six cell, that's pathetic and you are already pushing 6.8 pounds, with the eight cell battery and the 1080p screen you are going to be pushing 7.4lbs, almost 2lbs more than the macbook pro. What happened to portability and battery life huh? Although a 1080p screen is very nice and better than the macbook pro, the LED backlighting is definately better and adds to the cost. Again something HP misses because they are selling to those who are budget minded.

He failed to mention that in his crappy review didn't he? Cold hard truth? Hardly. It's more on par with a presidential political campaign. If he wanted to lay out the cold hard truth he would have layed out all the facts, not just the ones that favored his biased viewpoint.

The HP notebook is a great value, but the macbook has things that HP notebook doesn't because those things add to the cost and HP is marketing towards those seeking value. He also failed to mention that the HP comes with bloatware, something HP does so they can sell he laptops cheaper. Show me a 15.4" notebook with an aluminum body, that is less than one inch thick, and that will give you almost 5 hours of battery life on continuous web browsing and then we'll talk. Actually, show me ANY 15" notebook that has just ONE of those.

This is like comparing a budget car to a luxury car. Yes the budget car is a better value and will give you the same basic function as a luxury car, but some people want the luxuries that go with a premium car and they can afford it.

Unforutantely for OSX lovers, Apple is a company that mainly caters to those seeking a luxury product.

 

[sukanas]

This is like comparing a budget car to a luxury car. Yes the budget car is a better value and will give you the same basic function as a luxury car, but some people want the luxuries that go with a premium car and they can afford it.

thats why apple people are so snobby (includes me)
im jk about the snobby but you guys kNOW there are people out there like that

 

[840quadra]

I don't mind (and actually like) some Dell or HP laptops, however his choices in the article could have been better.

Either way, it was a nice reality check that I went over myself before I purchased my new MBP. I am happy to report that this is my 14th day of owning it, and I have no regrets, or 2nd thoughts.

A counterpoint

Like it or not, Apple hardware seems to retain it's value better than the competition too. For me, Keeping in Apple hardware (for well over 10 years now) has been a worthwhile investment. Things may change going forward, however I have never taken it in the shorts selling my used Apple hardware, like I do when I sell used Dell / HP hardware after owning it.

I just recently sold my (almost) 2 year old 1.83 C2D MacBook for $900, not too uncommon in my area (Twin Cities Minnesota) at the time it went. I paid $1099 for it on Black Friday (2006), did $100 in memory upgrades (2GB), and bought and installed a superdrive ( $50 ). In all, I spent $350 for two years worth of use, and rolled the remaining $749 into my new MacBook Pro.

And before you dig into my upgrades and how I lost money, note that original base Macbook 1.83 systems (no upgrades and 1GB ram) still sold for $800 in my area, two weeks before the new systems came out. That means, those systems retained roughly $72% of their original value after two years! I am sorry but HP and Dell system's currently don't do that, and likely won't in the near future.

Perhaps Apple's resale value is inflated, but I can learn to live with it.

 

[MowingDevil]

Hard to take any journalist seriously that makes simple errors like this. Proofreading it once would have easily caught it.

If it seem like I am being harsh just remember that notebooks with very capable GPU’s like the 9600m and 9800m can be has for less than the MacBook.

Not that he doesn't have a point w/ but is clearly biased and just trying to make a case instead of bringing a realistic approach. I agree, the underlying theme of this rant is absurd much like the car example previously mentioned.

 

[futuremac]

They are expensive, but look on the bright side; the resale value of Apple products make up for the initial price. If your always keen on upgrading to the latest laptop it'll probably cost you less all up on your second Apple notebook than on your second similarly spec'd Dell, HP etc..