Retina MacBook Pros are actually cheaper to manufacture

[gorskiegangsta]

The rMBP has a lot of custom components, including RAM and SSD modules, which are almost certainly more expensive to manufacture. While the display assembly may be cheaper to manufacture in terms of amount of materials used, the not-so-good yield rate makes it more expensive. The more pixels a display has, the more chance of defects.

 

[Freyqq]

they are saving money on the amount of aluminum required to make the case and the lack of ODD. ODD are cheap and aluminum is even cheaper. On the other hand, there are 4 fans instead of 2, the retina display costs more to produce, and SSD standard all add to cost. More expensive to produce for sure lol.

 

[7even]

I nominate this as the worst rMBP-related thread yet

 

[NewbieCanada]

they are saving money on the amount of aluminum required to make the case and the lack of ODD. On the other hand, there are 4 fans instead of 2, the retina display costs more to produce, and SSD standard all add to cost.

It's ALUMINUM, FFS, not platinum. They line grills with it and throw it out so they don't have to clean up. It costs less than a dollar a pound. Now obviously the cast aluminum used in a MacBook case costs a bit more than a roll of Reynolds Wrap, but the difference in aluminum cost for a rMBP vs a MBP is a few cents at most.

 

[latestmonkey]

I wish there was a way to keep dumb people from getting on the internet.

 

[adnbek]

You just need to take one look at Puevlo's other posts to see if he knows nothing about what he talks about and is the very definition of a troll.

I miss the down vote button in times like this.

 

[Puevlo]

Thanks for the support guys. I knew if people just looked at it logically it would all make sense. Makes you feel a bit sorry for the people not on this forum who have fallen for the facade that retina MBPs are more expensive to manufacture.

 

[7even]

Thanks for the support guys. I knew if people just looked at it logically it would all make sense. Makes you feel a bit sorry for the people not on this forum who have fallen for the facade that retina MBPs are more expensive to manufacture.

 

[blow45]

I have to say that puevlo is a guy with some big cohones, and no one has proven him wrong btw.

He has exposed the biggest sham of all, that the overpriced retina model, is based on a display that is about $80 (as widely reported) more expensive than the previous one, yet it saves costs from all other components, such as custom flash, soldered ram, no optical.

The rMBP has a lot of custom components, including RAM and SSD modules, which are almost certainly more expensive to manufacture. While the display assembly may be cheaper to manufacture in terms of amount of materials used, the not-so-good yield rate makes it more expensive. The more pixels a display has, the more chance of defects.

No they are not, apple makes mega deals in flash and buys bulk, because they move the whole flash industry around, sticking the module to an adaptor costs peanuts. Their ram is not custom, it's just soldered on the board.

 

[Slivortal]

I have to say that puevlo is a guy with some big cohones, and no one has proven him wrong btw.

He has exposed the biggest sham of all, that the overpriced retina model, is based on a display that is about $80 (as widely reported) more expensive than the previous one, yet it saves costs from all other components, such as custom flash, soldered ram, no optical.



No they are not, apple makes mega deals in flash and buys bulk, because they move the whole flash industry around, sticking the module to an adaptor costs peanuts. Their ram is not custom, it's just soldered on the board.

Wait - you say custom flash costs more than bulk flash, yet you say that they save from custom flash?

SSD is a big cost contributor (at least for Apple) - you can tell by upgrading their other computers' SSDs. Plus, there is the R&D cost, as well as the cost of using an entirely new chassy (the old ones are pretty much made bulk by now).

RAM may be soldered, but there is more standard - I'd say the costs would be equal, if not heavier on MBPR's side.

Lack of optical drive is kind of made-up for in that Apple basically needed to design the "internal chassy" from the ground-up - rather than just sticking random parts in random places.

And my issue with the OP's argument was that he brought up a point without providing proof - then argues that we need to provide proof against it. This is classic probatio diabolica, and an often-used technique of Internet trolls.

 

[blow45]

Wait - you say custom flash costs more than bulk flash, yet you say that they save from custom flash?

SSD is a big cost contributor (at least for Apple) - you can tell by upgrading their other computers' SSDs. Plus, there is the R&D cost, as well as the cost of using an entirely new chassy (the old ones are pretty much made bulk by now).

RAM may be soldered, but there is more standard - I'd say the costs would be equal, if not heavier on MBPR's side.

Lack of optical drive is kind of made-up for in that Apple basically needed to design the "internal chassy" from the ground-up - rather than just sticking random parts in random places.

And my issue with the OP's argument was that he brought up a point without providing proof - then argues that we need to provide proof against it. This is classic probatio diabolica, and an often-used technique of Internet trolls.

his intention might have been to troll but everyone predictably attacked him but no one really proved him wrong.

No I said it they buy it in bulk with mega deals, the flash roms, and it's easier to just a custom adapter and stick it on the motherboard, and much cheaper. That's why there's no industry standard ssd, they make boatloads of money off the flash, "their" flash, and it comes very very cheap to them.

There's not much to design man for the chassy, they just slimmed and shrunk the existing one, the manufacturing process is already there. Not much r&d, every dime a dozen manufacturer designs 10 laptops and more a year and they work just fine, and it takes about a few hours to design the blueprint on a 3d cad software.

Again with ram, bought at bulk prices, soldered by machine on the motherboard, no assembly, cost cutting.

I ll give it to you at it might not be cheaper than the base model to make, but it certainly very well could be about the same price.

But there's a catch here, a big one.

As with the ipad apple have the highest margins (and the ipod, iphone btw) by far on the high storage models. Because like I said flash is were the money is. By restricting storage options to 256gb apple are forcing most users (well accustomed to at least 500gb hard drives) to go to the next model, apple are making on the higher model, way more money. A non custom ssd port would not have allowed that of course.

 

[Slivortal]

his intention might have been to troll but everyone predictably attacked him but no one really proved him wrong.

No I said it they buy it in bulk with mega deals, the flash roms, and it's easier to just a custom adapter and stick it on the motherboard, and much cheaper. That's why there's no industry standard ssd, they make boatloads of money off the flash, "their" flash, and it comes very very cheap to them.

There's not much to design man for the chassy, they just slimmed and shrunk the existing one, the manufacturing process is already there. Not much r&d, every dime a dozen manufacturer designs 10 laptops and more a year and they work just fine, and it takes about a few hours to design the blueprint on a 3d cad software.

Again with ram, bought at bulk prices, soldered by machine on the motherboard, no assembly, cost cutting.

I ll give it to you at it might not be cheaper than the base model to make, but it certainly very well could be about the same price.

My point was more that it didn't matter if no one could prove him wrong. Without proof of his own, there was nothing to prove wrong. I could ask you to prove that there isn't a teapot revolving around the sun somewhere between Earth and Mars, but I first have to make a case for why one would be there - otherwise I would be unfairly forcing the burden of proof upon your shoulders.

But what you said is very much true. And to an extent, Apple may be slightly overcharging, and if they are, it could be for trying to assert that their new product is better or simply because there's nothing like it on the market, and they charge what they can. I think there also could be a software development cost that could come from trying to increase the GPU efficiency for high-res calculations, but again this isn't a set-in-stone cost like the other ones we're talking about.

But there's a catch here, a big one.

As with the ipad apple have the highest margins (and the ipod, iphone btw) by far on the high storage models. Because like I said flash is were the money is. By restricting storage options to 256gb apple are forcing most users (well accustomed to at least 500gb hard drives) to go to the next model, apple are making on the higher model, way more money. A non custom ssd port would not have allowed that of course.

This is a common practice in the computer industry concerning memory upgrades. While there is a valid question to whether or not Apple NEEDED to change their ports, their seems to be some justification behind it (increasing SSD efficiency). I think the truth may lie somewhere between the two.

 

[sofianito]

Well, I believe most of us agree that Apple neither loses money nor plays low margin, and knowing that the retail cost of cMBP and rMBP are almost the same, one should ask himself how and where Apple is reducing manufacturing costs...

 

[gorskiegangsta]

I have to say that puevlo is a guy with some big cohones, and no one has proven him wrong btw.

He has exposed the biggest sham of all, that the overpriced retina model, is based on a display that is about $80 (as widely reported) more expensive than the previous one, yet it saves costs from all other components, such as custom flash, soldered ram, no optical.



No they are not, apple makes mega deals in flash and buys bulk, because they move the whole flash industry around, sticking the module to an adaptor costs peanuts. Their ram is not custom, it's just soldered on the board.

The RAM is not custom, huh?

So that module in blue can be found on any good 'ol laptop?

 

[wankey]

People who think the Retina MacBook Pros are a good deal need to realise they are being taken for a ride. They are actually cheaper to build than a regular MacBook Pro.

It is smaller therefore there is less raw material that needs to be spent on it. This also means more can be transported within the same amount of packaging saving money on transport. Also, just like transistors, smaller pixels are actually cheaper and easier to manufacture.

There is also no expensive optical drive that needs to be included.

There is not one aspect of a Retina MacBook Pro that costs more than the base MacBook Pro.

I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. You cannot.

Hi Troll. Smaller usually means more expensive. Raw materials themselves are not the expensive portions of a tech device.

Also your assertion that smaller pixels are actually cheaper and easier to manufacture shows how little engineering you understand. Prove you wrong? How can I prove a dumb person wrong with intelligence.

 

[latestmonkey]

I get the feeling this guy trolls and then just reports everyone for their responses.

There used to be a guy who did that for all new apple releases. Would just complain about the cost left and right and then report anyone who was mean to him. I find it funny that he's now banned from this site.

 

[blow45]

The RAM is not custom, huh?

So that module in blue can be found on any good 'ol laptop?

Ram is just ram man, they buy from some factory or other, they can order any form factor or other, rest assured that if non soldered standard meant more costly to apple they wouldn't have gone that way, it's cheaper, get over it.

 

[NewbieCanada]

I wish there was a way to keep dumb people from getting on the internet.

It was called Windows 3.0. Unfortunately they upgraded it.

----------

Obvious troll was trolling obviously.

 

[Serelus]

This is trolling at it's finest... trying to understand is useless.

- Make a thread title that makes people think it's something relevant to talk about.
- Make a few arguments that can be justified, and add one that's ABSOLUTELY absurd. (This is to disguise the fact the he is infact trolling.)
- Finish it all of with some bait by being a cocky ass, stating that no one can prove you wrong.

This is how trolls feed their children, and currently you're feeding them.

 

[gorskiegangsta]

Ram is just ram man, they buy from some factory or other, they can order any form factor or other, rest assured that if non soldered standard meant more costly to apple they wouldn't have gone that way, it's cheaper, get over it.

Get over what, your flawed, circular logic in that "because Apple is using it, it must be cheaper"? I don't think so.

That's clearly a custom made RAM module. Custom components always cost more than standard ones because component manufacturers need to create new processes, build new facilities and/or repurpose old ones to get it done. Anyone who's even remotely familiar with component industry recognizes that.

So here's an idea. If you can't bring actual proof (an iSuppli link, perhaps) that the custom rMBP components are indeed cheaper than standard ones in other MBPs, please take your own advice and get over it.

 

[blow45]

Get over what, your flawed, circular logic in that "because Apple is using it, it must be cheaper"? I don't think so.

That's clearly a custom made RAM module. Custom components always cost more than standard ones because component manufacturers need to create new processes, build new facilities and/or repurpose old ones to get it done. Anyone who's even remotely familiar with component industry recognizes that.

So here's an idea. If you can't bring actual proof (an iSuppli link, perhaps) that the custom rMBP components are indeed cheaper than standard ones in other MBPs, please take your own advice and get over it.

My logic is that "custom" components do not cost more than you claim, and since you mentioned this, the burden of proof is with you. So I am waiting for the isupply link. Build new facilities and repurpose old ones is pretty vague, doesn't really mean anything. I could claim that a "unibody" motherboard has less assemblage cost and it's cheaper to manufacture as a whole thing rather than make ports for industry standard components.

Apple can order X number of ram modules from a factory at a discount (plenty of factories would want their business, it's not as if the industry is booming) and have it made cheaper since they come on the motherboard.

You said they are pricier, I am waiting for the link.

As a general point I 'd like to say, that troll or not troll the op has not been refuted here so far, they have just been personally attacked.

In the cmbp you can get cheaper ssds, non apple ram and avoid the apple tax. So far we have and extra $80 for the screen, but in terms of custom flash storage, non upgradable ram and flash that means wider margins to apple with no alternative solutions for the buyer, lack of optical, slimmer body, this does come up as at least on par with the cmbp, it certainly doesn't seem at all more expensive to manufacture.

 

[TheMacBookPro]

My logic is that "custom" components do not cost more than you claim, and since you mentioned this, the burden of proof is with you. So I am waiting for the isupply link. Build new facilities and repurpose old ones is pretty vague, doesn't really mean anything. I could claim that a "unibody" motherboard has less assemblage cost and it's cheaper to manufacture as a whole thing rather than make ports for industry standard components.

Apple can order X number of ram modules from a factory at a discount (plenty of factories would want their business, it's not as if the industry is booming) and have it made cheaper since they come on the motherboard.

You said they are pricier, I am waiting for the link.

As a general point I 'd like to say, that troll or not troll the op has not been refuted here so far, they have just been personally attacked.

In the cmbp you can get cheaper ssds, non apple ram and avoid the apple tax. So far we have and extra $80 for the screen, but in terms of custom flash storage, non upgradable ram and flash that means wider margins to apple with no alternative solutions for the buyer, lack of optical, slimmer body, this does come up as at least on par with the cmbp, it certainly doesn't seem at all more expensive to manufacture.

You're claiming one thing and he's claiming another thing- and you're both asking each other for a link.

Why don't you start by proving yourself correct with some form of proof first?

 

[latestmonkey]

re: trolls

great, now there are two of them. Stop feeding them and they will wither away.

 

[blow45]

You totally disregarded the insane about of R&D that went into making the machine a reality.

What exactly is the insane amount of r&d that went into this? Slimming the body, adding a couple of different fans (also used by other manufacturers) and slapping on a retina display? You know not only apple make notebooks, there are tons of notebook manufacturers worldwide that make all sorts of different models per year. None of them put on "insane" amounts of r&d into them, and they are not much different than apple's. Well they sell them with razor thin margins, that's one of the few differences.

If there's anyone who put insane amount of r&d it's the component makers, lg, toshiba, intel and nvidia amongst others, these guys are the ones who 've had some very tough technical issues to solve.

Apple didn't put anything "insane" in the mix, they just made a notebook out of components as so many others are doing.

----------

re: trolls

great, now there are two of them.

don't just baselessly accuse other people of trolling for no reason, make your case with arguments. It's not some kind of religious taboo that in an apple forum one claims a product is predictably overpriced, and it's not more expensive to make than its cheaper counterpart. No one here has convincingly argued against what the op has said so far. Trolling or not, he wasn't too far off from the truth. He was actually closer to the truth than almost all people who posted subsequently.

Simply put the $80 retina extra cost can be very well argued is saved by other manufacturing and component choices in these machines, thus not warranting the price difference.

You guys are buying apple and you don't think they are going to be grabbing your behind in terms of prices for a gen one product, and a mac for that matter with an advantage (retina) they first bring to market? Seriously?

I am in the market for one too, and I 'll buy it whilst also being very well aware I will be paying for an even higher apple tax. It's my choice, that doesn't mean I am blind to some basic facts here.

 

[Slivortal]

You're claiming one thing and he's claiming another thing- and you're both asking each other for a link.

Why don't you start by proving yourself correct with some form of proof first?

This is my main issue. You can't expect to make outlandish statements and expect other people to prove/disprove them for you. You're supposed to come to us with proof and ask us whether we have anything to refute it with.

For the third time on this thread, I'm going to bring up probatio diabolica - whether it's Russel's teapot or invisible pink unicorns, the burden of proof lies on the presenter, not the audience.