hahahahahaha
$1,489.00!!!!
For a 2009 Cor DUO laptop.
Apple has gone mad... a whole $200 bucks cheaper than a brand new 2011 one.
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.
Standart resolution + Antiglare
- Thread starter ryuk
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
hahahahahaha
$1,489.00!!!!
For a 2009 Cor DUO laptop.
Apple has gone mad... a whole $200 bucks cheaper than a brand new 2011 one.
Totally agree. I also ... I can imagine that I buy too, no? They gave some number of stock the product?
Oh that must be where I wsaw that option and not in the 2011's. I knew I had seen it somewhere.
Gee, I don't really need a 15" laptop, but that is tempting. Anti-glare would be sooo nice.
So... can anyone tell me how that resolution in 15" compares to the resolution in the 13"? Given that there is more screen in the 15" do they about even out? Or is one still "smaller" or "larger"?
I wonder how the weight compares..... going to look now....
Miss Terri
I think you should go to the Apple store.
Anti-Glare costs more because it ruins the way Steve likes it and the promo pictures.
I honestly think you should get one.
I can tell you the difference.
The hi-res 15" is a bigger screen with more resolution
The 13" normal screen is a smaller screen with less resolution.
Hope that helped.
It's actually $460 dollars cheaper if you add the antiglare screen.
yes, I bought mine last week, and it still shows them in stock.
Last edited by a moderator:
Apple doesn't have any problems selling those for $1500. Guarantee that you click on that link tomorrow, they will be sold out.
Last edited by a moderator:
That tells you how overpriced that crap is
Core Duo 3 year old laptop for $1,500 dollars US.
Jaysus.
Carry on.
Yes. Just go and slap something on the computer you just spent $2,000 bucks for so that it is the way you want.
It would be impossible for Apple to just give you the laptop you want. They just give you what they want.
and if you DARE change the beauty of the laptop by making it NOT glossy (that's not the way Steve wants it), then you have to give them another $150 bucks AND get it Hi-Res.
I Heart
It's all about their supply chain. They are really efficient at it.
Think about it. 80% of people or more will likely buy the default resolution because they don't know what they're buying anyway. More advanced users are going to want the hi-res display for doing real work where toolbars take over screen real estate. A greater percentage of advanced users will likely want a matte screen over the average consumer, so they only put that on the high-end display. Probably less than 1% of users would want a lower-res display with a more professional anti-glare display. They are on somewhat opposite ends of the spectrum. Some supply chain guru at Apple probably figured up that it wouldn't be very cost effective for them to develop and maintain stock of this additional option since such a minority of people would want it.
I have another theory on why Apple keeps a lot of the options on their product lines simplified. I've learned in various psychology and marketing courses that the more options you give someone the more likely they are to be dissatisfied with their decision. The fewer options you give, the more likely they are to be happy with their choice, as you partially made it for them. I know it sounds weird at first (I didn't believe it at first), but when you think about it, it makes absolute perfect sense. Marketers use these strategies all the time. You always want your customer to be happy with their purchase. Mac users are even harder to please. Imagine if they were second-guessing themselves even more than they already do?
I think that theory may carry some weight. Choosing the high-end was an easy decision for me because it was either a 6750M or 6490M. If Apple would have kept the $2000 model and given it a 6750M, but with only 512MB of GDDR5, then the decision on whether to upgrade the $2200 model would have been more difficult than it was.
Actually, it didn't. I understand that 13" is smaller than 15". I also understand that the 15" --- even with standard resolution --- has "more" resolution than the 13".
BUT, since the 13" screen is smaller, I want to know how they compare in terms of how large the same print would look on either screen.
Hopefully someone understands what I'm asking and can clarify it for me
I will also have to see how the "power" of that machine compares to my late 2010 13". Less might be okay, but I would like to know.
I see it is only a pound heavier, the same thickness, and about an inch bigger in width and depth.
Miss Terri
PS: ryuk, your English is fine - I understood what you meant. The computer that you are looking at is a refurbished model. There is a more limited supply than of new computers, but there are likely to be quite a few. I mean, it's not like there is just ONE. Still, if you want one, it's good to order sooner rather than later because with refurbished they can just appear and disappear as they run out of stock. Sometimes certain models sell out but then reappear again later, too.
The refurbished ones come in a plain box, but other than that have the same warranty and eligibility for Apple Care as new ones, and most people report they look like new. They can also be returned, just like new ones.
Basically you look for what fits your needs.
In this case, I'm not looking for power, comfort and only a "professional look" screen.
Although I agree with you that a 2-year old laptop for that price is very pricey, me thinks from reading your history that you be a troll.
That works quite well, but I've found in some programming IDEs that this also increases the font size when the code is printed (which may less than desirable).
However, as someone else mentioned, you can also reduce the screen resolution to a lower supported one in System Preferences (I tend to do this in the late afternoon if my eyes are getting tired). However, text in particular is slightly fuzzier if you do this.
Personally, as a programmer, I would always go for matte/anti-glare, even if it meant getting a higher resolution - especially as most modern IDEs are screen-hogs with all the toolbars, windows etc.