$200 does not get a rMBP with a 500GB drive.
----------
The rMBP's body is basically the same as the first unibody... well they did make it thinner.
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.
Why does the MD101 still exist?
- Thread starter deepen03
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
$200 does not get a rMBP with a 500GB drive.
----------
The rMBP's body is basically the same as the first unibody... well they did make it thinner.
If the car with roll down windows is still selling well and there is no other reason to change then it should continue to be sold. Adding unecessary cost into a product that is selling well is another reason shareholders should kick you out. Perhaps you need to take a business class, if you dont want to buy that spec, no problem, buy the one that meets YOUR needs and allow other to buy the spec that meets their needs.
I absolutely does. When you see SS on a Chevy, it's there high performance models, same when you see SRT for Chrysler, SVT for Ford, AMG for Mercedes etc...Yes it's a marketing term for their high performance product....same for Apple "Pro" is there high performance products. The 13" non retina Macbook Pro no longer is high performance. It would be like selling the v-6 mustang with a SVT or Cobra badge on it from the factory.
----------
Sometimes dropping the price increases sales....more people buying = more profits. You know damn well the margin on that laptop is insane at the current price.
----------
To be honest the reason I used to care was that I worked at Best Buy selling these and I couldn't stand seeing people buying that laptops. If that's what they wanted great, and I understand for some people they want the dvd drive and the upgrade-ability, however most people are just ill informed and don't know they are buying a laptop that is 4 years old. IMO and that is all it is, I think it looks bad on Apple part.
The majority of Mac users don't come to Apple discussion sites, and are aware that they should conform to the elite attitudes the reside there.
For many computer buyers for whom the latest tech is not a priority much less a need, a $75-100 price difference is a valid selling point. Its a good way for Apple to cover more bases--bringing more users into the Apple environment.
For many computer buyers for whom the latest tech is not a priority much less a need, a $75-100 price difference is a valid selling point. Its a good way for Apple to cover more bases--bringing more users into the Apple environment.
Why do you assume Apple, who know all that and have a track record of being very good at it, are making a wrong decision in that regard on the cMBP? They can see exactly the price/margin/cost sensitivity of their products?
The buyers have absolute power here, they can decline to buy at Apple's price. They don't, they buy them in substantial numbers. Look East for economies that follow your model more closely.
I don't see them giving the MacBook Pro any upgrades really, ever. It's more likely to get dropped from the product line before they upgrade it again. It would be nice, but I don't see it happening. Sucks, because I know a lot of people who still want one because of its expandability but the Ivy Bridge CPU puts them off of the idea.
PS: They would never use a 1080p screen. I find it amazing the iPhone got a standard resolution screen, but if you look back at Apple's history their displays have always been weird resolutions. The desktop monitors are 16:10 and the computer monitors are 16:8 or something crazy like that I forget.
All of their monitors are 16:10. The 16:10 is the older standard for computer screens, which has the benefit of being closer to golden ratio as well as having more vertical space for content. For the last few years, the computer industry has been moving to 16:9 aspect ratio because of reduced manufacturing costs. Apple remains stubborn though. I think its good that they do. As far as aspect ratios go, 16:10 is superior to 16:9 in my book.
Ok I thought the MacBooks might be a little different but comparing the display to the 20" Cinema Display on my desk I can see they are they same aspect ratio. Yeah I do agree it is better. A friend has an 11" MBA and that does have a 16:9 display. Looks weird because it is so small.
It's a fairly high-margin product by this point, and if I had to guess, they probably have tons of them in a warehouse somewhere. If someone just has to have a built-in optical drive, then they have that one choice for them. Possibly popular for the education and business sector too that need specific ports, optical, repairability, etc.
That said, I am still surprised it's continued as long as it has, but I suppose it's easy to understand why -- it apparently makes enough money to justify its existance. I'd never buy one (specs are far too outdated for the cost), but to each their own.
That said, I am still surprised it's continued as long as it has, but I suppose it's easy to understand why -- it apparently makes enough money to justify its existance. I'd never buy one (specs are far too outdated for the cost), but to each their own.
Believe it or not this model still sells well. Most college students that have Macs, choose the cMBP because of its price point.
Plus as others have said, schools that buy Macs go with this model as well.
Plus as others have said, schools that buy Macs go with this model as well.
Long story short, there's still a lot of people who think that the cMBP is a better value because it's cheaper and has more storage plus a SuperDrive, but what they fail to take into account is the lack of retina display and SSD, plus a mediocre iGPU and the weight.
There's still too many people who get suckered into the upgradeability factor as well, because by the time you add in 8GB of RAM (by buying 2x4GB sticks) and a decent SSD, it'll be almost as pricey as the rMBP already, and is still stuck with a non-retina display, mediocre GPU and also a heavy weight.
Also, there's still a sizeable proportion of potential customers that can't afford a rMBP, so they're stuck with using a Mac like the cMBP, which is a ripoff because it uses 3 year old technology. It's overpriced given its technology.
There's still too many people who get suckered into the upgradeability factor as well, because by the time you add in 8GB of RAM (by buying 2x4GB sticks) and a decent SSD, it'll be almost as pricey as the rMBP already, and is still stuck with a non-retina display, mediocre GPU and also a heavy weight.
Also, there's still a sizeable proportion of potential customers that can't afford a rMBP, so they're stuck with using a Mac like the cMBP, which is a ripoff because it uses 3 year old technology. It's overpriced given its technology.
This is true but it will get you a blazing fast 128GB one and an external hard drive, I for one would far rather have a PCIe SSD at 128GB than any HDD in any mac running Yosemite.... (or even mavericks for that matter)
But you're missing the point about the upgradeability.
Yes, when you add everything up, you could've bought a pricier computer, BUT that's assuming you have the total to spend, in your pocket, right now. Obviously, if the buyer can afford a better specced machine, but chooses the cMBP instead - that wouldn't be a very wise choice.
The cMBP was my 1st Mac. As a student, I could only dream of affording the model I wanted - (16gb RAM; i7; 512SSD). But I could afford the cMBP there and then. And over the past (almost) 3 years, I've been able to upgrade it to where I have a machine (with those same specs) that handles whatever I throw at it, flawlessly.
My next Mac (disregarding the last-of-the-quad-core-Mini's I picked up 6 months ago) will probably be a 13" rMBP, and probably the 8gb 512 version. And whereas now, even if I were starting out in the Mac world - I don't think I would get the cMBP (given its age) - but were its price to drop significantly, I might very well have given it a close look. It's a gateway drug to the Apple Mac world. If it's cheap enough - it still has something going for it, imo.
Instead of being tethered to an external drive all the time, I'd rather stick a 128 SSD AND a 1 TB platter drive in the cMBP.
But that's not the point, you don't get to say the rMBP is only a little more when that little bit more gets you a tiny drive.
You missed my point about by the time you upgraded the cMBP with 16GB RAM and a 512GB SSD, it would have cost around that of a rMBP with 16GB RAM and a 512GB SSD as well, and you still don't get a retina display, and you're still stuck with a mediocre GPU and a heavy weight even if it costs almost the same as the rMBP after upgrading.
I agreed with that it is a small drive, but a small brilliant drive not a large terrible one that makes using a modern OS a chore.
There are a lot of other reasons for getting the rMBP, the screen is worth the small drive hassle on it's own all day long.
The AC wireless is great if you have the routers, Thunderbolt 2 is very fast and supports 4K screens.
The battery life is much better.
It far thinner and lighter to carry about ( the cMBP weighs as much as the 15 inch rMBP).
All in all that $200 buys you a far more than just a fast small drive it buys you a much better computing experience for the trade off of not being able to do your own upgrades (and to my mind with 8GB of RAM standard and the option of SSD's up to 1TB there is no shortage of ability to buy what you need).
We'll have to agree to disagree I think you are willing to take old tech much more weight, poorer battery life and a slow computing experience to store some files locally. I think you've got your priorities wrong but hey buy what you like it's still available and you are welcome to waste your money however you wish.
They don't come close in terms of price. Down my parts of the world - the price difference between a top of the line rMBP and cMBP is huge - far more than the price of a 512SSD and 16gb of RAM. It's no doubt closer Stateside - but not by much.
And again - even if they were the same, price-wise - the cMBP can be upgraded incrementally, over time, which is not possible with the rMBP.
So making the argument that they end up costing the same (which they don't) - is *ignoring* the massive benefit of *incremental* upgrades for those who cannot afford to put down the bigger amount in advance.
Yup, especially since you can use the laptop for a while first and see if you even need those upgrades.
Nonsense and other words.
A brand new Early 2015 rMBP is slightly faster processor-wise than the Mid-2012 cMBP. While the cMBP is three years old, it is still within shouting distance of a brand new machine. You have to custom order a MacBook Air to get an Air that is faster than the three year old MD101. Are you saying the Air is obsolete also even though it uses current technology?
The error in your argument is that you are mistaking newer technology for improved productivity. The MD101 is still a highly capable machine - to claim otherwise is absurd. Don't blind yourself with the idea that newer technology necessarily equals better productivity - it does not. The new rMBPs offer a different set of advantages and disadvantages - nothing more, nothing less. That Apple has not reduced the price of the MD101 and continues to sell it should tell you that they are still selling in sufficient volume to be "worth" that price.
A slow computing experience? Both CPUs are faster than the i5-5250U in the 2015 MBA.
You can't compare apples with oranges, or Air with Pro.
And also did you conveniently neglect the far better display, integrated GPU and also the PCIe SSD, plus lighter weight and better thermal design? I think it's safe to say that the retina display can actually improve productivity, because you can work longer on the screen without straining your eyes as much.
The non-retina display is already beyond shouting distance alone. And so is the integrated GPU.
The 3 year old technology part largely refers to the non-retina display, SATA3 interface, SuperDrive and the weight. In raw CPU performance it may be similar, but in all other aspects, there's no contest.