Is there a reason why Apple does this?

[Shubbeh]

I know, it's not new.
It still annoys me.
I'm interested in buying a 13" rMBP. I'd like 8 GB of RAM and 512 GB of storage, but for some reason, I can't upgrade the $1499 model to 512 GB of storage, I have to buy the next tier up with the 2.6 GHz Core i5, which I don't give a damn about, in order to be able to get 512 GB at all.
Don't tell me the 2.4 GHz Core i5 can't handle the awesomeness of the 512 GB SSD 😛
I'm sure it's just so they can get an extra $100 out of me... but is there something I'm missing?
Even more annoying is that Intel's price for both the i5-4258U (2.4 GHz) and i5-4288U (2.6 GHz) is supposedly $342, so one wonder why 1) Intel sells both, who would buy the 2.4 GHz unit for the same price as the 2.6 GHz, and 2) why Apple charges $100 extra.
"Because they can" I know, I know... forgive my ranting. But like I said, if there's something I'm missing, I'm genuinely interested to learn.

 

[Nismo73]

Nope, you're not missing anything, it's the Apple way. It drives me insane trying to pick a model of computer for my needs, whether it be the iMac or Macbook Pro, or maybe a mini. They're all updated at different times which keeps you guessing, some upgrades get added after some time after a refresh is done, now there's a choice of dedicated/integrated in the 15" and they make it so you might as well get the more expensive model once you want to add the 512gb ssd, etc.

 

[Radiating]

I know, it's not new.
It still annoys me.
I'm interested in buying a 13" rMBP. I'd like 8 GB of RAM and 512 GB of storage, but for some reason, I can't upgrade the $1499 model to 512 GB of storage, I have to buy the next tier up with the 2.6 GHz Core i5, which I don't give a damn about, in order to be able to get 512 GB at all.
Don't tell me the 2.4 GHz Core i5 can't handle the awesomeness of the 512 GB SSD 😛
I'm sure it's just so they can get an extra $100 out of me... but is there something I'm missing?
Even more annoying is that Intel's price for both the i5-4258U (2.4 GHz) and i5-4288U (2.6 GHz) is supposedly $342, so one wonder why 1) Intel sells both, who would buy the 2.4 GHz unit for the same price as the 2.6 GHz, and 2) why Apple charges $100 extra.
"Because they can" I know, I know... forgive my ranting. But like I said, if there's something I'm missing, I'm genuinely interested to learn.

I don't think you understand how big companies work, it is much less expensive to stock a low mid and high end model than hundreds of different combinations. So what Apple does is they give you a discount for sticking to the "preconfigured tiers". If you want anything that deviates then you will have to pay more because it is more expensive to produce.

Apple isn't price gouging you they are giving you a discount when getting a package.

 

[laurihoefs]

I don't think you understand how big companies work, it is much less expensive to stock a low mid and high end model than hundreds of different combinations. So what Apple does is they give you a discount for sticking to the "preconfigured tiers". If you want anything that deviates then you will have to pay more because it is more expensive to produce.

Apple isn't price gouging you they are giving you a discount when getting a package.

This exactly.

And it is also likely Apple keeps the number of available configurations to minimal until the initial rush of orders right after a product launch is over. When the number of orders comes down and the stock that was accumulated for the launch is cleared, the restrictions are lifted.

More configuration options became available a while after the launch last year. And the year before that, etc.

 

[yangchewren]

Even more annoying is that Intel's price for both the i5-4258U (2.4 GHz) and i5-4288U (2.6 GHz) is supposedly $342, so one wonder why 1) Intel sells both, who would buy the 2.4 GHz unit for the same price as the 2.6 GHz, and 2) why Apple charges $100 extra.

If you want anything that deviates then you will have to pay more because it is more expensive to produce.

Apple isn't price gouging you they are giving you a discount when getting a package.

There are actually two sides to this argument. It is likely that intel sells the slower chip to Apple at a discount, moreover, since it is likely that demand for the cheaper macbook pro would be higher, Apple can request for further discounts on the slower chip.

However, if this wasn't the case, where the faster and slower chip are of the same cost as OP highlighted, then Apple is merely seeing inefficient expenditure on raw materials. Where an inferior component is obtained at a similar price. This is unlikely and unusual, but could still be a sustainable practice as Apple is able to sell different configurations to meet different needs despite having no difference in costs.

 

[jz-]

In the 15" Pro and the Macbook Airs, the 512GB SSD is a +US$300 upgrade.
In the 13", you're paying +US$300 for 512GB SSD and 2.6GHz.

Unless I'm mistaken, the faster processor is basically free in this case?

 

[hachiman]

I hate this too. But I think Apple knows this. They know that people will want larger SSD, so they make tiers based on SSD size. They can get away with it (now) because no one else makes compatible SSD. I'm sure one day when these PCIe SSD are more common and available, then upgrade options will take place, and tiers will be based on something else, maybe graphics (13" regular Iris, Iris Pro, Dedicated?).

Not too big of an annoyance though. I think Apple is one of the only few who actually pushes for faster CPU, WiFi, SSD, longer battery, while lowering the price. For other laptop makers, they will milk the cow and upgrade their products slowly.

 

[Count Blah]

Pay, pay, pay - it's the apple way.