It's all about the $300 touch bar premium... [Analysis on new MBPs]

[Barnfather]

I think realistically, the prices are roughly in line for a high-end laptop. These have always been expensive, for many years.

What has happened, I think, is that people have become hypnotised by all the super-cheap Chromebook/Windows laptops which have flooded the market in recent years, where you can get a servicable plastic slab for £300-£400, so the jump to a £1k-£2k base model Apple model seems expensive in comparison, especially with a couple of hundred bump for whatever reason.

 

[ThE.MeSsEnGeR]

I'll be honest, the only thing that REALLY REALLY bugs me, to the point it has stopped me purchasing the laptops, is a huge 25% reduction of battery capacity on both the 15" and 13" models (99>75 kwh, 75>54kwh).

This is something that Apple should really look into. They're choosing to sacrifice battery life over thinness. They should find a better sweet spot for the balance.

Yeah I keep telling people its always been just as expensive.
But people love to complain.

It's become a hot trend now. Most (not all) do it without any real basis.

This analysis is nothing more than the rationalizations of a person that tries to justify their impulse-buy of the new shiny Apple product.
Like some other user said, improvements in technology do not justify a price jump, otherwise you would be paying 1000 € for an 8 GB USB-C because, well, now it's 10x faster!
Your arguments make no sense what-so-ever.

Thank you for your opinion, but I respectfully disagree. I'm not trying to justify any impulse, because I'm not even considering buying a new MacBook any time soon. My 2012 13" MacBook Air still functions pretty well. And before that, I had a white MacBook for a good 5 years until it broke from an unfortunate accident, so I had to buy this MBA. Some of the people I see arguing and nagging about the new MBP's are people who have 2015 and 2014 MacBooks. If people choose to update their laptops on a yearly basis, they will indeed find the upgrade a bit expensive this time. I don't judge them. That is simply not my case. So don't judge either.

Nice analysis. I think another way we can look at this is comparing it to when the MacBook Air first came out. For what it was, it was ridiculously expensive, yet it transitioned into a much cheaper unit a year or two later.

This x1000.

I think realistically, the prices are roughly in line for a high-end laptop. These have always been expensive, for many years.
What has happened, I think, is that people have become hypnotised by all the super-cheap Chromebook/Windows laptops which have flooded the market in recent years, where you can get a servicable plastic slab for £300-£400, so the jump to a £1k-£2k base model Apple model seems expensive in comparison, especially with a couple of hundred bump for whatever reason.

This x10000 + huge sense of entitlement = unhappy spoiled customers

 

[srsub3]

Let's say in a different way... do you think that intel charges 1 hundred more every year for a new gen processor? Or do you think that intel produces every year upgraded cpu spending less? This is a nice explanation of your wrong rationale... sorry but you are wrong in my opinion. The same for ssd.... do ou remember how much they cost few years ago? and now? Sorry but production and its associated costs work in a different way....

 

[MisterAndrew]

There's a huge flaw in your original analysis. -> The older lower spec components cost as much or more a year ago as the newer better spec components cost now. There's also the fact that a lot of the design changes Apple took on the new MBPs were cost cutting measures. Smaller/thinner design = less physical material. Consolidating components (e.g. SSD on logic board rather than daughter card). The removal of all the connectivity ports and replacing them with only USB-C/Thunderbolt 3. Thunderbolt 1 & 2 had very expensive licensing. Due to all that it's plausible to assume the new MBPs cost Apple a lot less money to manufacture than the old ones and at the same time they raised the prices. That means they have no intention at passing any savings to consumers. It's about as greedy a move as one can make.

 

[Bobby Corwen]

Let's say in a different way... do you think that intel charges 1 hundred more every year for a new gen processor? Or do you think that intel produces every year upgraded cpu spending less? This is a nice explanation of your wrong rationale... sorry but you are wrong in my opinion. The same for ssd.... do ou remember how much they cost few years ago? and now? Sorry but production and its associated costs work in a different way....

I think this hits close to the nature of why I think its a fallacy that people think this way.

In reality, NOBODY has a price list for how much and what costs what and when or why it goes down in price, if ever.

You don't know what is what. Only Apple engineers do.

1) Just because in the past tech prices went down (like in the 2000s) and tech evolved super fast doesn't mean the slope is unlimited. It doesn't just keep evolving and lowering in price forever. Its more complex than that.

2) You're thinking in "build your own PC" terms (which is a common fallacy) by just assuming a 1:1 value for parts and going from there but look at the incredible complexity of the engineering to make it so small? How much does that cost.

Point blank, the only things left to consider are SSD size and what graphics setting you get your games. The rest is a case of too much power already. Dont need more RAM or better CPUs.

So the price of those things didnt go down this year. From 2014-2016, SSDs like what Apple puts in are still the same price. The memory in graphics cards didnt get any cheaper either. This isnt the mid 2000s anymore where last years tech goes down 80%.

Today everything they make is a ultra engineered supercomputer. No compromises. There are no discounts.

Think of them in terms of how much storage and graphics potential you have as a 1:1 ratio to the cost and its not really different than last year. If you want a 1TB storage machine with graphics that can run 90% of games its gonna be 3K just like it was last year.

Last year you had the option of getting less graphics and tiny storage to make the entry point more accessible but they got rid of that. It wasn't ideal computing anyway.

There is actually way more value in these than ever before and you get the most bang for your buck ever in the history of MBP once you pay the entry fee.
[doublepost=1477680119][/doublepost]

There's a huge flaw in your original analysis. -> The older lower spec components cost as much or more a year ago as the newer better spec components cost now. There's also the fact that a lot of the design changes Apple took on the new MBPs were cost cutting measures. Smaller/thinner design = less physical material. Consolidating components (e.g. SSD on logic board rather than daughter card). The removal of all the connectivity ports and replacing them with only USB-C/Thunderbolt 3. Thunderbolt 1 & 2 had very expensive licensing. Due to all that it's plausible to assume the new MBPs cost Apple a lot less money to manufacture than the old ones and at the same time they raised the prices. That means they have no intention at passing any savings to consumers. It's about as greedy a move as one can make.

Apple is not really a savings company, that was never their thesis. Ever.

Its a luxury brand, and they actually get business because the price wall is so alluring and exclusive.

If you were expecting Apple to lower prices to get your business I dont know what to tell you.

They get customers by making extremely better products than anyone on earth, not by giving good deals or bargains. Or "passing on savings" to customers.

 

[MisterAndrew]

I think this hits close to the nature of why I think its a fallacy that people think this way.

In reality, NOBODY has a price list for how much and what costs what and when or why it goes down in price, if ever.

You don't know what is what. Only Apple engineers do.

1) Just because in the past tech prices went down (like in the 2000s) and tech evolved super fast doesn't mean the slope is unlimited. It doesn't just keep evolving and lowering in price forever. Its more complex than that.

2) You're thinking in "build your own PC" terms (which is a common fallacy) by just assuming a 1:1 value for parts and going from there but look at the incredible complexity of the engineering to make it so small? How much does that cost.

Point blank, the only things left to consider are SSD size and what graphics setting you get your games. The rest is a case of too much power already. Dont need more RAM or better CPUs.

So the price of those things didnt go down this year. From 2014-2016, SSDs like what Apple puts in are still the same price. The memory in graphics cards didnt get any cheaper either. This isnt the mid 2000s anymore where last years tech goes down 80%.

Today everything they make is a ultra engineered supercomputer. No compromises. There are no discounts.

Think of them in terms of how much storage and graphics potential you have as a 1:1 ratio to the cost and its not really different than last year. If you want a 1TB storage machine with graphics that can run 90% of games its gonna be 3K just like it was last year.

Last year you had the option of getting less graphics and tiny storage to make the entry point more accessible but they got rid of that. It wasn't ideal computing anyway.

There is actually way more value in these than ever before and you get the most bang for your buck ever in the history of MBP once you pay the entry fee.
[doublepost=1477680119][/doublepost]

Apple is not really a savings company, that was never their thesis. Ever.

Its a luxury brand, and they actually get business because the price wall is so alluring and exclusive.

If you were expecting Apple to lower prices to get your business I dont know what to tell you.

They get customers by making extremely better products than anyone on earth, not by giving good deals or bargains. Or "passing on savings" to customers.

No Bobby. You're wrong on all points except your point about Apple not being a "savings company." You're absolutely correct there. We're talking about a company that is really good at raking in loads of cash. And how do they do that? By aggressively negotiating deals to get the lowest prices possible, manufacturing products at the lowest possible cost in China, working out deals like they did with Ireland to evade taxes, and convincing consumers like you that you're getting a great deal by paying for overpriced products because they made you believe you're cool and better than others if you sport them.

 

[Clint_Barton]

Today has been a pretty rough day for many Apple users out there. So I'll try to be as objective as possible. After hours of reading thread posts and comments here and on other sites, it's obvious that the community is a bit shaken by the decisions made by Apple regarding the new MacBook Pros. Some people are calling it quits for Apple, others are considering it, and there are those that are simply satisfied with the new products.

The new MacBook Pros do have a higher price point than earlier generations. But this was coming eventually to the MacBooks. Think about it, and look at the iPad line-up lately. Apple used to come up with newer generations/hardware updates at the same price points of earlier ones and replace them, thus making older ones cheaper. But in the last few years, Apple has been adding newer generations (i.e. 9.7" iPad Pro) with a premium over a device that's been in the market for over a year (i.e. iPad Air 2), instead of simply replacing it.

Now, this new way of doing things has hit the MacBook line, and it hit hard. But to try and simplify this mess, let's have a general look at the specs and pricing options. We can see that it all comes down to the $300 premium that accompanies the famous/infamous touch bar.

Please note:
I've modified some specs to get the closest resemblance between models to compare prices.
I'm no computer genie, so excuse the basic knowledge of some spec comparisons.

13" MacBook Pro (2015) vs. 13" MacBook Pro (2016):







As we can see here, the new model (w/o touch bar) replaces the old one at the same price point. It features the new butterfly keyboard, bigger trackpad, new color option, slightly better graphics, less CPU power, and exchanges existing ports in favor of TB3 ports (among many improvements under the hoods). In brief, apart from the lowered CPU power, everything about the new version is future driven and updated. At the same price point. Whereas the 13" MacBook with touch bar is $300 extra.

But let's analyze this as if we're upgrading the 2015 model on the check out page.
CPU: 2.7GHz dual-core i5 -> to 2.9GHz quad-core i5. Wouldn't that be a $100 upgrade?
Graphics: Intel Iris 6100 -> to Intel Iris 550. Wouldn't that be a $100 upgrade?
RAM: 8GB 1866GHz -> 8GB 2133MHz. It's an upgrade, but let's say it's not worth $100.
Touch Bar and Touch ID addition: Wouldn't that be a $100 upgrade?
Plus factor the new design and architecture of the whole device.

Looking at it this way, I guess $300 doesn't seem that much any more.

15" MacBook Pro (2015) vs. 15" MacBook Pro (2016):

As for the 15" model, it's a different story because Apple didn't give the users the option to opt-out of the touch bar premium. So I've added only two configurations.





Let's do the same analysis, as if we're upgrading the 2015 model on the check out page.
CPU: 2.5GHz quad-core i7 -> 2.6GHz quad-core i7. Wouldn't that be a $100 upgrade?
Graphics: Intel Iris Pro -> Radeon Pro 450 w/ 2GB. Wouldn't that be at least a $100 upgrade?
RAM: 16GB 1600MHz -> 16GB 2133MHz. It's an upgrade, but let's say it's not worth $100.
Touch Bar and Touch ID addition: Wouldn't that be a $100 upgrade?
Plus factor the new design and architecture of the whole device.

Looking at it this way, I guess $300 doesn't seem that much any more.

Bottom Line/Personal Opinion:

Yes, Apple used to introduce newer models at old models' prices, and now it's adding a premium to newer models while keeping old ones intact. But like I said, look at the iPad line and you'll see what I mean. And I haven't seen that many threads over the iPad Pro with the same hatred and trash talk the MacBook Pro has received in the last 12 hours. (Honestly, regarding most subjects, the negative talk and nagging on these forums lately has become blatant and repetitive).

One more thing I believe Apple should have done was introduce a 15" MacBook Pro model without the touch bar, making it lose the $300 premium like the base model 13" MacBook Pro (2016). I guess they know it would've cannibalized the 15" w/ touch bar sales. So they're simply pushing people towards newer tech. I might add that the 2015 MacBook Pro models are not bad computers at all for those looking to save some money.

Finally, I believe it's an exaggeration that people are looking at the the new MacBooks as the end of Apple. Negative comments were made about the first iPod, the first iPhone, the first iPad, the lightning ports replacing 30-pin ports, or any other drastic change in technology. I guess we as humans, are afraid of change.

Apple isn't meeting the needs of the ultra-high-end-pro market? Apple doesn't update all its countless products twice a year? Apple doesn't add this or that feature? Then go look for another company that does. Stop agonizing over every single update or refresh. That specific high-end market represents less than 10% of the general market. Apple is evolving, its customers are evolving, and the world is evolving around us.

at least for the 15in, you should compare it to the 2015 15in with the dGPU, as all models of the new 15in have a dGPU

 

[srsub3]

I think this hits close to the nature of why I think its a fallacy that people think this way.

In reality, NOBODY has a price list for how much and what costs what and when or why it goes down in price, if ever.

You don't know what is what. Only Apple engineers do.

1) Just because in the past tech prices went down (like in the 2000s) and tech evolved super fast doesn't mean the slope is unlimited. It doesn't just keep evolving and lowering in price forever. Its more complex than that.

2) You're thinking in "build your own PC" terms (which is a common fallacy) by just assuming a 1:1 value for parts and going from there but look at the incredible complexity of the engineering to make it so small? How much does that cost.

Point blank, the only things left to consider are SSD size and what graphics setting you get your games. The rest is a case of too much power already. Dont need more RAM or better CPUs.

So the price of those things didnt go down this year. From 2014-2016, SSDs like what Apple puts in are still the same price. The memory in graphics cards didnt get any cheaper either. This isnt the mid 2000s anymore where last years tech goes down 80%.

Today everything they make is a ultra engineered supercomputer. No compromises. There are no discounts.

Think of them in terms of how much storage and graphics potential you have as a 1:1 ratio to the cost and its not really different than last year. If you want a 1TB storage machine with graphics that can run 90% of games its gonna be 3K just like it was last year.

Last year you had the option of getting less graphics and tiny storage to make the entry point more accessible but they got rid of that. It wasn't ideal computing anyway.

There is actually way more value in these than ever before and you get the most bang for your buck ever in the history of MBP once you pay the entry fee.
[doublepost=1477680119][/doublepost]

Apple is not really a savings company, that was never their thesis. Ever.

Its a luxury brand, and they actually get business because the price wall is so alluring and exclusive.

If you were expecting Apple to lower prices to get your business I dont know what to tell you.

They get customers by making extremely better products than anyone on earth, not by giving good deals or bargains. Or "passing on savings" to customers.

It's economy, and I'm sorry you don't know how the business goes nowadays... you are not talking about a new super innovative feature that costs billions to produce, but a well established piece of technology, compressed in an aluminum body and sold with a big margin to increase profits....

 

[Bobby Corwen]

No Bobby. You're wrong on all points except your point about Apple not being a "savings company." You're absolutely correct there. We're talking about a company that is really good at raking in loads of cash. And how do they do that? By aggressively negotiating deals to get the lowest prices possible, manufacturing products at the lowest possible cost in China, working out deals like they did with Ireland to evade taxes, and convincing consumers like you that you're getting a great deal by paying for overpriced products because they made you believe you're cool and better than others if you sport them.

with great products. FULL STOP.

 

[curmudgeonette]

Graphics: Intel Iris Pro -> Radeon Pro 450 w/ 2GB. Wouldn't that be at least a $100 upgrade?

Actually... that's a cost savings! My calculations:

AMD has priced a reference 2GB RX 460 card for desktop systems at $109 retail. Now, Apple isn't using an actual card. Instead, they are adding a portion of the components to an existing circuit board. Lets say this knocks $20 off the price. Apple also doesn't have to package a card for retail sale. Save another $10. Thus, a 2GB Polaris 11 component group is $79. Note, this is for a 7/8 (I think) enabled chip.

Intel's price delta between the HD530 and Iris Pro 580 is $56. So - downgrading to the HD530 and adding a dGPU is only $23. Note though that the Pro 450 is a 5/8 enabled chip! A full 3/8 of it can be defective. The Pro 455 is a 3/4 chip. Only the Pro 460 is a fully working die. By being able to accept all these defective chips, Apple likely can save more than $23 per machine.

We can see that it all comes down to the $300 premium that accompanies the famous/infamous touch bar.

$300 is an interesting number! Many people write that the MB12 should be a $1000 computer. Instead, it starts at $1300. The MBP13 without a touch bar might be nicely priced at $1200 but instead is $1500. The $1800 touch bar MBP13 would be nice at $1500. And finally the MBP15 jumped from $2100 to $2400.

Wow! It looks like Apple is adding a $300 "premium" onto all their laptops.

 

[Bobby Corwen]

It's economy, and I'm sorry you don't know how the business goes nowadays... you are not talking about a new super innovative feature that costs billions to produce, but a well established piece of technology, compressed in an aluminum body and sold with a big margin to increase profits....

What about when people return them and then they have to refurbish them. What about the costs of everything for the whole Apple empire? The stores, the customer service, the tech support, the ads, the costs, the millions of employees the make the whole eco-system possible.

How much does that cost?

How many people buy MBPs vs MacBooks or airs anymore? What profits would it take to make it worth even existing?

The idea is every product needs to be self sufficient. This is a rule from the days when they almost went under.

 

[Ries]

at least for the 15in, you should compare it to the 2015 15in with the dGPU, as all models of the new 15in have a dGPU

Well, the older models had Iris Pro, so you have to subtract that. Makes it even pricing.

6770HQ $434.00
6700HQ $378.00

So 56$ saving for Apple.

You can get a desktop RX460 for $95, that includes a box, fans, pcb, profit margin for the producer and retailer.

So the chip itself+ram is properly $50.

No price hike needed for that dGPU.

 

[Clint_Barton]

all this math hurts my head

 

[TheDoubler55]

V

Today has been a pretty rough day for many Apple users out there. So I'll try to be as objective as possible. After hours of reading thread posts and comments here and on other sites, it's obvious that the community is a bit shaken by the decisions made by Apple regarding the new MacBook Pros. Some people are calling it quits for Apple, others are considering it, and there are those that are simply satisfied with the new products.

The new MacBook Pros do have a higher price point than earlier generations. But this was coming eventually to the MacBooks. Think about it, and look at the iPad line-up lately. Apple used to come up with newer generations/hardware updates at the same price points of earlier ones and replace them, thus making older ones cheaper. But in the last few years, Apple has been adding newer generations (i.e. 9.7" iPad Pro) with a premium over a device that's been in the market for over a year (i.e. iPad Air 2), instead of simply replacing it.

Now, this new way of doing things has hit the MacBook line, and it hit hard. But to try and simplify this mess, let's have a general look at the specs and pricing options. We can see that it all comes down to the $300 premium that accompanies the famous/infamous touch bar.

Please note:
I've modified some specs to get the closest resemblance between models to compare prices.
I'm no computer genie, so excuse the basic knowledge of some spec comparisons.

13" MacBook Pro (2015) vs. 13" MacBook Pro (2016):







As we can see here, the new model (w/o touch bar) replaces the old one at the same price point. It features the new butterfly keyboard, bigger trackpad, new color option, slightly better graphics, less CPU power, and exchanges existing ports in favor of TB3 ports (among many improvements under the hoods). In brief, apart from the lowered CPU power, everything about the new version is future driven and updated. At the same price point. Whereas the 13" MacBook with touch bar is $300 extra.

But let's analyze this as if we're upgrading the 2015 model on the check out page.
CPU: 2.7GHz dual-core i5 -> to 2.9GHz quad-core i5. Wouldn't that be a $100 upgrade?
Graphics: Intel Iris 6100 -> to Intel Iris 550. Wouldn't that be a $100 upgrade?
RAM: 8GB 1866GHz -> 8GB 2133MHz. It's an upgrade, but let's say it's not worth $100.
Touch Bar and Touch ID addition: Wouldn't that be a $100 upgrade?
Plus factor the new design and architecture of the whole device.

Looking at it this way, I guess $300 doesn't seem that much any more.

15" MacBook Pro (2015) vs. 15" MacBook Pro (2016):

As for the 15" model, it's a different story because Apple didn't give the users the option to opt-out of the touch bar premium. So I've added only two configurations.





Let's do the same analysis, as if we're upgrading the 2015 model on the check out page.
CPU: 2.5GHz quad-core i7 -> 2.6GHz quad-core i7. Wouldn't that be a $100 upgrade?
Graphics: Intel Iris Pro -> Radeon Pro 450 w/ 2GB. Wouldn't that be at least a $100 upgrade?
RAM: 16GB 1600MHz -> 16GB 2133MHz. It's an upgrade, but let's say it's not worth $100.
Touch Bar and Touch ID addition: Wouldn't that be a $100 upgrade?
Plus factor the new design and architecture of the whole device.

Looking at it this way, I guess $300 doesn't seem that much any more.

Bottom Line/Personal Opinion:

Yes, Apple used to introduce newer models at old models' prices, and now it's adding a premium to newer models while keeping old ones intact. But like I said, look at the iPad line and you'll see what I mean. And I haven't seen that many threads over the iPad Pro with the same hatred and trash talk the MacBook Pro has received in the last 12 hours. (Honestly, regarding most subjects, the negative talk and nagging on these forums lately has become blatant and repetitive).

One more thing I believe Apple should have done was introduce a 15" MacBook Pro model without the touch bar, making it lose the $300 premium like the base model 13" MacBook Pro (2016). I guess they know it would've cannibalized the 15" w/ touch bar sales. So they're simply pushing people towards newer tech. I might add that the 2015 MacBook Pro models are not bad computers at all for those looking to save some money.

Finally, I believe it's an exaggeration that people are looking at the the new MacBooks as the end of Apple. Negative comments were made about the first iPod, the first iPhone, the first iPad, the lightning ports replacing 30-pin ports, or any other drastic change in technology. I guess we as humans, are afraid of change.

Apple isn't meeting the needs of the ultra-high-end-pro market? Apple doesn't update all its countless products twice a year? Apple doesn't add this or that feature? Then go look for another company that does. Stop agonizing over every single update or refresh. That specific high-end market represents less than 10% of the general market. Apple is evolving, its customers are evolving, and the world is evolving around us.

Very well said. Love the USB c, wish the new iPhone had it as well.
[doublepost=1477684927][/doublepost]

And does that low end laptop offer the same build quality and funcationalities the new MacBooks do?

No way! My Macbook pro is from 2010, still runs great. Let me know what PC still runs like new 6 years later? None.
[doublepost=1477685776][/doublepost]

Thank you for your opinion, but I respectfully disagree. I'm not trying to justify any impulse, because I'm not even considering buying a new MacBook any time soon. My 2012 13" MacBook Air still functions pretty well. And before that, I had a white MacBook for a good 5 years until it broke from an unfortunate accident, so I had to buy this MBA. Some of the people I see arguing and nagging about the new MBP's are people who have 2015 and 2014 MacBooks. If people choose to update their laptops on a yearly basis, they will indeed find the upgrade a bit expensive this time. I don't judge them. That is simply not my case. So don't judge either.

Got em