Is the Macbook Air 13" overpriced?

[iRabbit]

Did you read my entire post? I was talking a combination of service and build quality. I also talked about computers from 2005 and even earlier... and I'm talking about that being the norm, not the rarity.

In other words, yes, Macs can seem more expensive to the average Joe looking for a $300 netbook. However, that $300-$500 netbook will be well in the garbage or retired LONG before the "way more expensive" MacBook Air (or other MacBook). They don't seem smart enough to realize they are comparing Apples to Oranges (or to cheap PCs... LOL).

Just to cover price-points, even though it's too early to tell, I'm going to venture a guess that a lot of iPads are going to outlive their netbook counterparts but a long-time.

And in the end, no matter how you cut it, you cannot beat Apple's service.

 

[Gregintosh]

The best example is that Sony Vaio example I posted a few posts ago. That's what proves that the MBA's are a good value as it is the closest of competitor.

For this discussion to progress someone would have to keep posting true competitors (in specs, form factor, build quality, etc.) and show that they are significant cheaper than the MBA (i.e. making the MBA overpriced).

This is not possible, since such laptops don't exist. Sony's answer to the MBA for example starts at $1,999, making the MBA look like a discount laptop.

I am really getting tired of going in circles with people arguing that because you can get a netbook for $299 it makes the $1299 MBA overpriced. They aren't the same product.

The people who are arguing that MBA's are a rip off are making an argument akin to this:

I think Gulfstream Jets at $5,000,000 are overpriced because I can buy a Ford car for $10,000 easily. What a rip off!

Well no, while they are both modes of transportation, much like an MBA and a Netbook are tools used for internet and productivity, but they are not even in the same category of products. While they both target the same need (transportation or computing) they target very different audiences and very different needs.

 

[Poindexter333]

As a customer of Apple since 1977, and an owner of just about one or more of every iteration of every Macintosh product since day one, I admittedly love most things Macintosh.

I spent $1,800 for my first MacBook Air Rev A, and despite some teething problems, it was so worth it to me. I felt the same way about the TiBook- thin, solid and performed needed tasks like a champ. The same can be said of the latest Rev E MBA which I now love even more than the first one. What a rocket! And once you go unibody, everything made from plastic feels cheap and wobbly, so I doubt there are any serious alternative on the PC front- but I can't be sure.

I use it to run my entire company from, so I carry it everywhere I go just about, and the size and lightness are incomparable- especially once you factor in the solidity and performance in every category I require it to. As it is a business expense, I can easily justify the price as I believe it pays for itself many times over versus other less ideal alternatives, IMHO.

However- as I do not need tech support anymore- I need insurance NOT AppleCare, as it never covers spills, breakage or loss. Safeware or SquareTrade offer MUCH better coverages for the majority of people that will not need hand-holding, but might crack the occasional screen, have it stolen, or have a kid pour buffalo wing sauce (true!) into the keyboard.

 

[KnightWRX]

Yep, that doesn't disqualify it from being overpriced.

Sure it does. It can only be overpriced if comparables are priced cheaper. Thus far, no one that has claimed the MBA is overpriced has brought forth convincing evidence that it is.

(Because it's not).

If we assign weight and size a value, there are Ultraportables that are faster than the MBA with a .5LB to 2LB difference. The prices of those range from a difference of up to $800 compared to the MBA. Is .5LB - 2LB heavier worth potentially $800?

2 lbs is out of the range of the Ulra portables. A 13" MBA is 2.9 lbs, a MBP 13" is 4.5 lbs. You'd have me believe that a MBP is now an ultra portable that competes with the Air ? Because that's what you just said...

So, again, post a link to these supposed MBA competitors that are 800$ with better specs, including weight and size into these specs please.

You can decide whether or not something is overpriced with those factors in mind. Sure, the MBA isn't overpriced compared to itself or machines with near identical specs - but it is overpriced when you consider how much it is you're paying to shave off .5LB.

Again, if shaving off that weight and getting a smaller footprint (either in thickness or just all around size) is not important to you, you are not the crowd this is aimed at. Hence why are you even looking at it ?

You know what ? To me an iMac is quite overpriced. Why ? Because why would I pay so much for a computer I can't carry anywhere ? That's the thing, it's not overpriced because it sacrifices portability for mhz and storage, it's just not aimed at me. I can easily recognize that.

Why can't some of you "the MBA is overpriced!" crowd do the same ?

 

[Poindexter333]

I really disagree with this statement. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find lots of 3 or 4+ year old PC laptops still being used regularly. Go to your local Apple store and watch the Genius Bar for a while... you'll be amazed at how many 4+ year old laptops come in... and those are only the ones with problems (mostly battery issues). I was there yesterday and even watched a PowerBook come in.

Ultimately, I think you NEED to replace your Mac (desktop or laptop) less than half as often. When I was running PC regularly, I was replacing them every 2-3 years. That is not at ALL the case with my Macs. My big MacPro is about 3 years old and I just doubled the ram and will be good to go for likely another 3 years. My husband has two G5s over 5 years old running in his recording studio, and running very well. We have a family-shared white 2005 MacBook that is still going strong... it needed a new hard drive about a year ago and my Apple Store replaced it for me for free. We JUST replaced my daughter's 4 year-old Mac Mini with an iMac, and not because she needed it, just wanted it for her 18th birthday... we're going to hook her old mini up to a TV in our playroom and keep using it, I'm sure, for a few years. And don't even get me started on the amazing service I got from the store yesterday when I had an original 2008, 3 1/2 year old MacBook Air go south. Let's just say I left with a top-of-the-line new MacBook Air with very little pain to my pocket. That amazing service is worth something as well.

Now, I know some of us hardcore Mac fans LIKE to get the newest models when we can, but we don't NEED to... and that's the point. Unless you're a heavy gamer, you likely won't NEED to replace your laptop for 3, 4, or 5 years. My 2005 white MacBook still runs excellent for internet browsing, email, word processing and the occasional photo edit. My husband even reviews video footage on it through iMovie sometimes.

Plus, look at the resale values on Macs... even older ones. If you sell your older one used, you'll get a lot more than you would for a comparable used PC.

I definitely think you not only get a better experience with a Mac, but much more value for the money via good service and longevity.

I felt a need to respond to this too. I am in total agreement. I too still very happily use several older Macs. I used my TiBook 667 from 11/01- 2/2008- when the MBA first came out. I still am running my Mac G4 Cube in the bedroom as a media server- mainly due to the cool looks, I run my IIsi just because it freaks people out, and my home automation runs from my old G5 tower. I could afford to upgrade every time they come out with something new but I don't feel compelled to do so from any sense of dissatisfaction with the previous products. If my TiBook didn't die the very week that the MBA came out, I wouldn't have upgraded then either.

I would challenge PC laptop owners to compare their usage histories, and show how their 6 or 7 year old laptop stacks up.

 

[Young Spade]

You know what ? To me an iMac is quite overpriced. Why ? Because why would I pay so much for a computer I can't carry anywhere ? That's the thing, it's not overpriced because it sacrifices portability for mhz and storage, it's just not aimed at me. I can easily recognize that.

Why can't some of you "the MBA is overpriced!" crowd do the same ?

See, you do good and then you start jumping the shark. You can't just say this is overpriced because it doesn't do this, when it's in an entirely different category.

Make your point, then move on. You're just talking for no reason and, here, you start weakening your argument.

----------

While they both target the same need (transportation or computing) they target very different audiences and very different needs.

What?

 

[deeddawg]

See, you do good and then you start jumping the shark. You can't just say this is overpriced because it doesn't do this, when it's in an entirely different category.

Actually, it was a good (if subtle) point -- "overpriced" is a subjective thing based on individual needs/values. KnightWRX cites an example of a system that is overpriced for him because he's not the iMac's target market. His point is that claiming something is overpriced because what you value doesn't match up with that system's strengths is silly: anyone happily considering 5lb 13" laptops is not really the Macbook Air's target market.

 

[Young Spade]

Actually, it was a good (if subtle) point -- "overpriced" is a subjective thing based on individual needs/values. KnightWRX cites an example of a system that is overpriced for him because he's not the iMac's target market. His point is that claiming something is overpriced because what you value doesn't match up with that system's strengths is silly: anyone happily considering 5lb 13" laptops is not really the Macbook Air's target market.

? He said that the iMac is overpriced because HE CAN"T MOVE IT. Saying something isn't applicable to your needs is not the same as saying it's overpriced.

The price of a G5 plane ticket DOES NOT MATTER if I'm walking down the street to my neighbor's house. Therefore, I cannot say it's simply "overpriced". I can, but my argument holds no weight. I have no valid points.

Stating the "imac is overpriced because I have no use for it" holds no weight. There are no valid points that are consistent within that argument.

Caps for emphasis.

 

[KPOM]

? He said that the iMac is overpriced because HE CAN"T MOVE IT. Saying something isn't applicable to your needs is not the same as saying it's overpriced.

The price of a G5 plane ticket DOES NOT MATTER if I'm walking down the street to my neighbor's house. Therefore, I cannot say it's simply "overpriced". I can, but my argument holds no weight. I have no valid points.

Stating the "imac is overpriced because I have no use for it" holds no weight. There are no valid points that are consistent within that argument.

Caps for emphasis.

That's not his point. What he's saying is that the economics of building a PC in the sub-3lb range are far different from the economics of building one in the sub-5lb range. With 60% more weight and potentially 100+% more volume to work with, you can add features or accommodate faster processors and additional storage more cheaply. Building a sub-3lb ultraportable notebook PC less than .8" thick in September 2011 involves compromises, whether it's Apple, Acer, ASUS, Lenovo, Samsung, Sharp, or Toshiba (who all compete in that space). Not surprisingly, products in this category have similar prices, with the MacBook Air neither significantly cheaper nor significantly more expensive than the other announced devices.

For those in the market for a sub-3lb notebook, the MacBook Air is not overpriced. For those who are willing to accept a larger, heavier (and less portable) notebook, there are other choices, both on the Mac and Windows sides, that are more economical.

 

[driftless]

This thread has become annoying. It appears that those that do not want or/and cannot afford to purchase a MBA are baiting those who choose to or/and can. Maybe some are not capable of discerning the both the dramatic and subtle design, architecture, OS operating system differnces that make a MBA a complete and superior product. A MBA is more than the sum of its components. macs just work better. Period - IMHO. So let's not get caught up in the components. Components are just components. Viva la Choice! Viva la Difference! Viva la Apple!

 

[ZBoater]

Is it overpriced? No. If it were, it wouldn't be flying off the shelves like it is. This notion that Apple should only make a certain percentage of profit is ridiculous. If they can make 300% profit, more power to them. It's called supply and demand, and free market. There is a lot of competition for your computing dollar, but if Apple doesn't have a problem selling MBAs, there is no logical reason to sell them cheaper.

And they are worth every penny IMHO.

 

[deeddawg]

[

? He said that the iMac is overpriced because HE CAN"T MOVE IT. Saying something isn't applicable to your needs is not the same as saying it's overpriced.

Bingo. That was his point. Like I said, it was subtle.

This thread has become annoying. It appears that those that do not want or/and cannot afford to purchase a MBA are baiting those who choose to or/and can.

Always happens. Kinda fun sometimes playing with the little'uns who just don't get it.

 

[Young Spade]

[




Always happens. Kinda fun sometimes playing with the little'uns who just don't get it.

Maybe that's it. Instead of having fun I get irritated?

Hmm...; I'll try that sometime.

 

[KohPhiPhi]

The best example is that Sony Vaio example I posted a few posts ago. That's what proves that the MBA's are a good value as it is the closest of competitor.

No, that's not a good example. Why? Firstly because Sony is another premium company that's always applied a premium to their products (pretty much like Apple), so it's not your standard PC laptop. And second, because the Vaio Z is a far more powerful and decked out machine that a MBA (better screen, better graphic card, better upgradability, etc), thus it's more expensive.

 

[ThomasBoss]

Considering the first mba was a underpowered baby toy that was sold for almost $2000 (i think) I would say the current price is OK

 

[gnasher729]

Apple's products aren't aimed at people who only care about raw specs with no concern about size / weight / design / OS / etc.

Actually, Apple's products are aimed at people who look very clearly at specs, and include difficult to measure specs like size / weight / design / OS / usability / life expectancy / service quality in their buying decisions. The people you are talking about are number whores, and Apple doesn't target them.

 

[Bernard SG]

It's not overpriced: if it were, it wouldn't sell like hot cakes the way it does currently.
However, it's totally expensive: It's a super-premium product (MBP being already a premium product). At this point in time, and as far as I am concerned, I have no justification to pick an MBA instead of an MBP, the main reason being that I need a lot of GB's on my hard-drive and the cost per GB of SSD's is still out of my reach, while "instant-on" and the super-portability of the MBA are not decisive factors for me.
If I could live with 64 or even 128 GB, though, I might consider an MBA.

 

[KnightWRX]

You can't just say this is overpriced because it doesn't do this, when it's in an entirely different category.

That was exactly my point. An iMac isn't overpriced because it doesn't do what I want, no matter that I would never pay so much for it. I was countering the guy who said that the category doesn't matter, it's the value we put into an object that determines if it's overpriced or not.

I was basically the same thing you were. Might not want to jump down my throat about it next time.

----------

? He said that the iMac is overpriced because HE CAN"T MOVE IT.

You completely misread me. I said that if I was to follow the argument that was made (ie, if I don't value a certain spec, it makes something overpriced) then to me an iMac would be overpriced. My point is that if you're not shopping for something in a certain category, that doesn't make it overpriced.

A F150 isn't overpriced because you can buy a Mazda 2 for much cheaper. A suburban luxury home isn't overpriced because you can buy a floor level condo 3 suburbs farther away. etc.. etc... A MacBook Air thus is not overpriced because you can buy a cheap 6 lbs laptop with the same screen size.

----------

It's not overpriced: if it were, it wouldn't sell like hot cakes the way it does currently.

Is it overpriced? No. If it were, it wouldn't be flying off the shelves like it is.

Flying off the shelves and overpriced mix about as well as oil and water.

Flying off the shelves is a matter of marketing and brand perception. Overpriced is a comparative shopping term associated with similar and competing products.

Something can definately be overpriced in a category yet "fly off the shelves" still, just based on marketing/brand perception. Some brands, even though they are the same chinese made gadgets just have that public perception of being better. Motorcycle clothes/accessories is a great example of this, Designer clothing (made in Pakistan wha... ?), Jewelry, etc... etc..

I'm not saying this is the case with the MacBook Air, but pointing out the weakness of that argument.


----------

No, that's not a good example. Why? Firstly because Sony is another premium company that's always applied a premium to their products (pretty much like Apple), so it's not your standard PC laptop. And second, because the Vaio Z is a far more powerful and decked out machine that a MBA (better screen, better graphic card, better upgradability, etc), thus it's more expensive.

Then please, pretty please, with a cherry on top. Post us a good example proving the MBA is overpriced.

 

[ZBoater]

Flying off the shelves and overpriced mix about as well as oil and water.

Flying off the shelves is a matter of marketing and brand perception. Overpriced is a comparative shopping term associated with similar and competing products.

Something can definately be overpriced in a category yet "fly off the shelves" still, just based on marketing/brand perception. Some brands, even though they are the same chinese made gadgets just have that public perception of being better. Motorcycle clothes/accessories is a great example of this, Designer clothing (made in Pakistan wha... ?), Jewelry, etc... etc..

Ummmm, I beg to differ.

In the market driven economy we live in, "over priced" means priced beyond a level that can sustain sales. If Apple could charge $10,000 for each MBA, and sell every single one they manufacture, do you think it is overpriced? I don't.

There is no set level of profit. Fairness doesn't figure into this equation. Apple makes a product, and wants to sell it for a profit. Like almost everything else in a market driven economy, the higher you price it, the lower the demand. Overpricing happens when you price it at a point where the demand falls to a point that you are not making enough money.

I understand many people are on a budget, and heck, we would ALL prefer that Apple stuff was cheaper. I "feel" that many Apple things are "overpriced", but that's because I see similar things cheaper and wonder why Apple has to be so greedy. Answer - they are a for-profit organization, and they are exceptionally good at it. Me, as a consumer, have a choice. Pay their price or buy something else. That is the one drawback of Apple's policy, where if you want Apple there is only one source. Your choice as a a consumer is to go Windows or Linux or something else.

The Apple board of directors is not going to sit around saying "gee, we made too much profit last quarter, let's lower the price a bit to give our loyal customers a break". It doesn't work that way. The way Apple works is they refresh their stuff, give you more "bang" for your buck, but they still want as many bucks as they can get from you. The day MBAs stop flying off the shelves (or iPads or iPhones), Apple will be "overpriced" and they will adjust. I just don't see that day coming any time soon.

 

[KnightWRX]

Ummmm, I beg to differ.

In the market driven economy we live in, "over priced" means priced beyond a level that can sustain sales.

You're redefining overpriced here. No overpriced is a simple comparative terms. Is there something in the market that is competitively comparable (not a MacBook Air vs a Hulking Dell Inspiron) and priced more aggressively ?

You're putting value on marketing and brand perception. Sure there is a market value for those, street creds if you want. Does the Lacoste shirt really feel more comfortable ? More warm ? Is it better made ? Probably not. But it's still 30$ above the price of a no-name shirt made in the same shop in Pakistan. It sells because it's a Lacoste. Brand percetion, marketing. It's still overpriced, it's just that some people have a certain need to be "represented" by a brand or they feel lessened in their purchase.

(Case in point, I'd never buy a Shoei or Arai helmet. My Scorpion is half the price, has the same DOT and Snell certifications, better ventilation, better fog free coating on the visor, changeable and washable liner of the same quality and less road noise... wait what justifies the price of the Shoei and Arai helmets again ? Oh right, it's Arai and Shoei, brands).

Forget brand though. The MacBook Air is not overpriced period. There is no comparable in the market that sells for much less. "Ultrabooks" as they are being defined are all priced about the same. Like the iPad, Apple is being quite aggressive in pricing here with the MacBook Air.

 

[ZBoater]

You're redefining overpriced here. No overpriced is a simple comparative terms. Is there something in the market that is competitively comparable (not a MacBook Air vs a Hulking Dell Inspiron) and priced more aggressively ?

You're putting value on marketing and brand perception. Sure there is a market value for those, street creds if you want. Does the Lacoste shirt really feel more comfortable ? More warm ? Is it better made ? Probably not. But it's still 30$ above the price of a no-name shirt made in the same shop in Pakistan. It sells because it's a Lacoste. Brand percetion, marketing. It's still overpriced, it's just that some people have a certain need to be "represented" by a brand or they feel lessened in their purchase.

(Case in point, I'd never buy a Shoei or Arai helmet. My Scorpion is half the price, has the same DOT and Snell certifications, better ventilation, better fog free coating on the visor, changeable and washable liner of the same quality and less road noise... wait what justifies the price of the Shoei and Arai helmets again ? Oh right, it's Arai and Shoei, brands).

Forget brand though. The MacBook Air is not overpriced period. There is no comparable in the market that sells for much less. "Ultrabooks" as they are being defined are all priced about the same. Like the iPad, Apple is being quite aggressive in pricing here with the MacBook Air.

I see what you are saying. You make a good point. I sometimes buy overpriced things because of brand perception. I'm a brand freak. Most people are more sensible in their purchases.

 

[orfeas0]

Did you read my entire post? I was talking a combination of service and build quality. I also talked about computers from 2005 and even earlier... and I'm talking about that being the norm, not the rarity.

In other words, yes, Macs can seem more expensive to the average Joe looking for a $300 netbook. However, that $300-$500 netbook will be well in the garbage or retired LONG before the "way more expensive" MacBook Air (or other MacBook). They don't seem smart enough to realize they are comparing Apples to Oranges (or to cheap PCs... LOL).

Just to cover price-points, even though it's too early to tell, I'm going to venture a guess that a lot of iPads are going to outlive their netbook counterparts but a long-time.

And in the end, no matter how you cut it, you cannot beat Apple's service.

Hey man my friend had a macbook pro and 1 year and 1 day after he bought it, it died.
We don't know from what, but I suspect it's the hdd.
Also, 2 years ago his 1,5year macbook died too.
That's not good advertising now, is it?
While my mom has a 5 year-old acer that still works (as a matter of fact, we just improved the ram from 1gb to 2 and it's flying!), and my dad has a 3-year old HP working fine.
Don't bash on PCs, they don't use different components (cpu-ram-etc) than the macbooks... It's just a different exterior (and that's where macbooks shine).

 

[Bernard SG]

Hey man my friend had a macbook pro and 1 year and 1 day after he bought it, it died.
We don't know from what, but I suspect it's the hdd.

That's bad luck for the 1 year and 1 day...
That being said, HDD failure is a pretty common occurrence for laptops, and providing you have backups, I wouldn't call that 'died'.
And of course, anecdotal evidence... I Mean, it seems that Apple stuff, statistically, tend to last substantially more than competitors' and therefore have a quite nice resale value.

 

[RobQuads]

I've going to leave the Macbooks Pro/iMac arguments alone as IMO they are a different argument and market to the Macbook Air

IMO the Macbook Air is not over priced for what it is. I would have loved the same spec (even a PC) laptop for the less money but there is no suitable option. Some are starting to appear now but most are still vapourware and not in the public domain yet.

You are paying a price for the portability etc but thats part of it, in the same way you pay for that faster car.

 

[gnasher729]

Hey man my friend had a macbook pro and 1 year and 1 day after he bought it, it died.
We don't know from what, but I suspect it's the hdd.

In the UK, I would fully expect Apple to fix the problem free of charge. Anywhere else, if it is the hard disk drive then anyone who can handle a screwdriver without injuring themselves can easily replace the hard disk drive in a MacBook Pro.