okay calm ... i just think it's a bit silly they don't. probably cause they're making this mysterious tablet everyone's whispering about ...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac OS X 10.6.2 Confirmed to Drop Support for Intel Atom Processors
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
okay calm ... i just think it's a bit silly they don't. probably cause they're making this mysterious tablet everyone's whispering about ...
Actually it makes perfect sense. Net books are by default small and cheap and use really low end components. Apple may try to do small, but the are not going to go cheap. They never really have been about that. All of their products are about making as much money as possible. Since it would not be cheap, the market isn't going to buy into it. If price wasn't an issue, Apple is going to target its much more powerful laptops instead.
Thats crazy, because I really like my unibody 17" MacBook Pro to any of the 17" plastic crap HP, Dell, and Toshiba have floating around. But I guess if you call a kick ass laptop a plastic system with a garbage 17" display that does 1440x900 and is thicker than 2 MacBooks stacked on each other, so be it.
And Netbooks are hardly kick ass by any stretch. The user experience with a netbook is terrible.
if you read what i said, i said nothing about them making a cheap netbook. i find it silly they havent designed a smaller type of macbook. im sure the tech is there to shink it slightly more. the price is probably the big issue in this day and age for most companies...
And there we have it. Mac users prefer something that looks good on the outside to something that actually offers superior performance. Are you also by extension calling the non-pro Macbook crap because its plastic? Up until recently it had the same screen as any other laptop, I don't recall if it has changed in the recent update.
A PC user doesn't want to pay more for something that looks good but offers reduced performance. Or pay more for something that exceeds their needs by a large margin. Netbook user experience is only terrible if you are expecting it to replace more expensive laptops. Other than that they perform their functions admirably.
Why bother making one smaller though? Apple would rather keep it's product line as simple as possible and if people are willing to pay for it, Apple is just going to push for their normal notebooks that are more profitable and more popular. Apple doesn't want to make compromises when they don't have to.
If you want small, Apple provides the touch. Otherwise they are goign to pitch their laptops. They don't want to produce a smaller sized computer if their research tells them people aren't happy with them. That's just my take and it makes sense to me.
It isn't all about the GHz buddy. First off, I don't really care for the plastic MacBook, but it is a very popular laptop on my university campus.
Back to performance. I have a 2.8GHz Core2Duo 4GB RAM 17" uMBP with 1920x1200 LED display. The screen itself is superior to any other 17" screen I have ever seen in my entire life. Being as I spend countless hours a day looking at the thing, a high quality screen is incredibly important to me.
For speed, 2.8GHz is just fine. I don't do processor intensive tasks so having a 3.2GHz processor would make no darn difference to me. I rarely do gaming either, so the 512MB video card works perfectly for my needs. And the 8 hour battery is perfect, and my friends with PC's and 2 hour batteries are very envious of the fact that I never have my charger with me, because I don't need it. And they are jealous of my backlit keyboard as well.
So reduced performance? I don't think so. I challenge the typical customer to tell me the difference their 400MHz faster processor makes. Some customers see that they can get a faster processor by not getting a Mac and say "ZOMG I NEED THAT SPEED", when in reality they don't. I weighed the specs of the internal hardware with the incredible design, screen, keyboard, trackpad, and RESALE VALUE of a Mac, and I am glad I picked Mac.
So when a PC user tries to sell their uber-laptop 2 years after getting it and only can get a small fraction of what they paid, I will be laughing to the bank having only lost a few hundred dollars selling mine after two years.
Only if you can get someone to play for the perceived value.
Otherwise I really hope you have taken a look at other 17" notebooks lately. The Macbook Pro 17" isn't that competitive anymore with the options available elsewhere.
Well they must be doing something right because it turns my friends heads, and they are all getting MacBook Pro's when they replace their Gateway/Dell laptops.
And I just fixed the laptop of a staff member at my university/job. 17" HP that was $1800, 1440x900 screen, Windows Vista, 250GB HD. The only semi-appealing things were HDMI out and a number pad. I paid $200 more for my laptop with a HD much better screen, and half the thickness.
And I have always been able to sell my Apple systems for great value, no problem.
I really suggest you look at this year's 16.4 - 17.3" notebooks.
Sadly you're at Apple's whims for that.
"Competitive"?
If you want the best, you have to pay for it. If you prefer to save money, buy ghetto hardware. Each to his own.
Agreed. My 17" draws gasps of envious wonder every time I take it out of my bag when visiting clients. (Helps create the illusion that I might be a pro who knows what he's doing!
)That's my experience too. Every single Mac I've ever sold has fetched an astonishingly good price. People are willing to pay because they're well designed and well built.
My Perspective
I run a Hackintosh on an MSI Wind. I'm a little disappointed that Apple did this, but it's their product. No big deal for me.
It's not as though I use this little kicking-poodle of a computer as my main machine, anyways, and I see people still using Panther on eMacs very effectively, so the lack of an up-to-the-minute feature-set is no biggie. I just wanted something to fill the gap until the tablet's released.
When it is, I'll buy it, but until then, I'm perfectly willing to hack it. I'm not willing to buy a full-blown MacBook for the purpose, because it doesn't fit the purpose. It's too big, and it's too powerful.
Now, as for my main machines, I DO run legitimate Macs (a Book-Pro, a new Mini, and a recently fried Core Duo Mini) all with legitimate licenses. My HacBook also has a legitimate license to Leopard (insofar as one can be considered legit...)
So, on the whole, I don't feel as though I've done wrong, and I don't feel wronged. It's worth noting that it happened, and maybe discussing the implications on a realistic scale, but in this space it just seems to have become another excuse to drag out the opposing-side zealots and their hyperbolic weapons of attack that are never going convince the other side of anything.
At least... that how I see it. You mileage is likely to vary.
-regularg0nz0
I run a Hackintosh on an MSI Wind. I'm a little disappointed that Apple did this, but it's their product. No big deal for me.
It's not as though I use this little kicking-poodle of a computer as my main machine, anyways, and I see people still using Panther on eMacs very effectively, so the lack of an up-to-the-minute feature-set is no biggie. I just wanted something to fill the gap until the tablet's released.
When it is, I'll buy it, but until then, I'm perfectly willing to hack it. I'm not willing to buy a full-blown MacBook for the purpose, because it doesn't fit the purpose. It's too big, and it's too powerful.
Now, as for my main machines, I DO run legitimate Macs (a Book-Pro, a new Mini, and a recently fried Core Duo Mini) all with legitimate licenses. My HacBook also has a legitimate license to Leopard (insofar as one can be considered legit...)
So, on the whole, I don't feel as though I've done wrong, and I don't feel wronged. It's worth noting that it happened, and maybe discussing the implications on a realistic scale, but in this space it just seems to have become another excuse to drag out the opposing-side zealots and their hyperbolic weapons of attack that are never going convince the other side of anything.
At least... that how I see it. You mileage is likely to vary.
-regularg0nz0
Your mother would be proud. At some point in life you will develop a conscience. I know, because I use to think like you.
Regards,
Dan
Of course, if you compare any 17" notebook and don't actually compare all the specs, the MBP might seem overpriced. However, the MBP 17" only comes in one top of the line configuration.
I hope you enjoy that 699$ 1440 pixels wide 17" AMD notebook with 2 hours of battery life.
Given your example of other 17" notebooks, I don't believe you've taken a look at the models available. Within that there are also more premium options over a bottom of the barrel AMD option.Of course, if you compare any 17" notebook and don't actually compare all the specs, the MBP might seem overpriced. However, the MBP 17" only comes in one top of the line configuration.
I hope you enjoy that 699$ 1440 pixels wide 17" AMD notebook with 2 hours of battery life.
The 13" Mac notebooks are the most competitive and it drops greatly when you start increasing the screen size.
So far I haven't heard you name any other make & model.
but I've seen several articles from online magazines comparing macbook pro's with compatitors and always the conclusion is that when identical makes are compared, the prices for a windows machine are a bit better, but the reviewers prefer the apple for it's flawless working, longer life, better battery performance and no virusses.
This is an old review with the 5hr battery... imagine it could do 8hrs!!!
http://www.pcworld.com/article/162726/mac_vs_windows_2000_laptops_compared.html
I don't know how you guys get so much access to 17" screens. The only ones you can find readily in New Zealand are Gateway and Sony so they're naturally nearly as expensive as the 17" MacBook pro.
Gateway's AMD DualCore netbook looks nice. This might be an alternative to Atom netbooks.
Not netbook - bigger and cheaper
Wow, now 15.4" laptops are now cheaper than netbooks....
Does this mean that the laptop only costs $50, since Windows 7 Home Premium lists at $200 ($199.99)?
Wow, now 15.4" laptops are now cheaper than netbooks....
Does this mean that the laptop only costs $50, since Windows 7 Home Premium lists at $200 ($199.99)?
Wow, now 15.4" laptops are now cheaper than netbooks....
Does this mean that the laptop only costs $50, since Windows 7 Home Premium lists at $200 ($199.99)?
Oh wow celeron, that POS hasn't passed my mind for a few years.
Win 7 Premium + Celeron/Sempron = Fail.
I'd spend a few dollars more an get the dual core Celeron or Sempron. If you go with a Sempron you'd get the Radeon 3200 as well over the GMA 4500MHD.
Otherwise in this $249 netbook space they're going to kill Atom in terms of performance.
The desktop Sempron 140 has some potential as well when bundled with a 785G board.
You talk out of your rear end.
For some people, me included, a netbook is the only option. I'm not avoiding paying for anything at all, I paid full whack for Logic way before Apple bought it, I paid for my Final Cut Studio license, and I have spent around £10000 on Apple hardware over the past few years. In fact I even have shares, great way to fund purchasing their hardware!
Apple's EULA is illegal in Europe, and so is their iPhone price fixing scam. I love everything they make, but it still annoys me they are behaving somewhat like MS more and more each day.
You fanboys need to remove your heads from where the sun don't shine.