3 ms·

The price is roughly the same (inflation adjusted) as the original 2006 Macbook Pro. Things have certainly improved since the original Powerbook, which was arou

The price is roughly the same (inflation adjusted) as the original 2006 Macbook Pro. Things have certainly improved since the original Powerbook, which was around $12k in today's dollars. My background is in music, where folks routinely pay 10x for an instrument that is 20% better (arbitrary numbers, but I think the point holds). If you're a developer, your laptop is your "axe" that you make money with day in and day out. Does it really matter if it costs $1k or $3k? If it makes an employee half a percent more productive, what is that worth to a business?

overcast 10y ago
I really don't think Apple is targeting corporate customers with emoji touch bars. Of course, if you NEED it, you need it. I'm not arguing that. For everyone else, the cost for what you get is not reasonable. Also, after spending the last fifteen years on the IT side of a large enterprise. No manager on this earth would approve upgrading $3000+ laptops, for a half a percent in theoretical productivity. Business is, and has always been, making the most money, by spending the absolute least money. Regarding your inflation comment. Yes the price is similar. But the value for what you got in earlier years was MUCH greater, than what you get now. Sure, a 2016 laptop is better than a 2006 laptop. But at the time, the 2006 laptop was amazing, and the 2016 model is nothing special with its dated components.
- aczerepinski 10y ago
  I have an employer provided top of the line Macbook, as do most (all?) of my developer friends. Random devs at tech meetups mostly have 15" Macbooks. It's typical for recruiter spam emails to mention any computer + monitor you want as part of the standard hiring package. On a similar note, plenty of tech companies provide Herman Miller chairs, and other perks that don't cost the "absolute least money." Are you disputing that managers on earth have approved these expenses?
  - overcast 10y ago
    Read what I was responding to. Managers aren't going to spend $3000 on AN UPGRADE machine, to gain .5% productivity. What you're describing is essentially is a sign on bonus, where the company allows you to choose your work environment. Your employer isn't going to refresh your laptop every six months on incremental upgrades. That's just asinine. We have a five year depreciation on all laptops/desktops, and we sure as shit don't upgrade someone because we think it's going to increase their productivity by a half a percent. Regarding Herman Miller chairs, those last 10-15 years easy. I'm sitting on one just as old right now. I can easily argue the cost/value for proper seating, on employee productivity and well being.
    - aczerepinski 10y ago
      You were responding to me, and I never said anything about six month upgrade cycles. My point in this thread has only been that the price point is nothing new, and lots of companies and individuals can afford it/justify it with no problems. There's nothing ridiculous going on here.
      - overcast 10y ago
        "My background is in music, where folks routinely pay 10x for an instrument that is 20% better (arbitrary numbers, but I think the point holds). If you're a developer, your laptop is your "axe" that you make money with day in and day out. Does it really matter if it costs $1k or $3k? If it makes an employee half a percent more productive, what is that worth to a business?" You didn't say six month upgrades, but you're definitely referring to upgrading for minimal gains. This is not how things work in the enterprise, at all. There are typically long life cycles, especially in end user machines, as hardware is depreciated. I said nothing about what people can afford. I responded to you justifying a .5% productivity increase, for spending $3000 on a new laptop. That DOES NOT happen. Just the cost of getting some one setup on a new machine, washes out any .5% productivity, as it's wasted getting things configured.
        aczerepinski 10y ago
        Thank you for explaining to me what I was referring to. Glad to know.
- mhurron 10y ago
  > after spending the last fifteen years on the IT side of a large enterprise. No manager on this earth would approve upgrading $3000+ laptops, These new MacBooks will probably be available for refreshes in a few months time in a large enterprise. Anywhere offering MacBooks already will be offering these.
mschaef 10y ago
Your point on the inflatino-adjusted price is a good one. I'm less convinced about the other. The difference between a musical instrument and a laptop is that the musical instrument may last 50 years or more. The laptop will be lucky to make five (for professional use). So yeah... it's worth it to pay for quality tooling to do your job, but depreciation has to be factored in, which is much higher for IT technology than almost anything else.
Void_ 10y ago
Sounds like SV-based white boy. Engineers don't make $100k+ everywhere in the world...
- NotSammyHagar 10y ago
  You should move to seattle then. Good bachelors in CS in their first job make $100k+. Interns make 75k.

overcast 10y ago

I really don't think Apple is targeting corporate customers with emoji touch bars. Of course, if you NEED it, you need it. I'm not arguing that. For everyone else, the cost for what you get is not reasonable. Also, after spending the last fifteen years on the IT side of a large enterprise. No manager on this earth would approve upgrading $3000+ laptops, for a half a percent in theoretical productivity. Business is, and has always been, making the most money, by spending the absolute least money. Regarding your inflation comment. Yes the price is similar. But the value for what you got in earlier years was MUCH greater, than what you get now. Sure, a 2016 laptop is better than a 2006 laptop. But at the time, the 2006 laptop was amazing, and the 2016 model is nothing special with its dated components.

aczerepinski 10y ago
I have an employer provided top of the line Macbook, as do most (all?) of my developer friends. Random devs at tech meetups mostly have 15" Macbooks. It's typical for recruiter spam emails to mention any computer + monitor you want as part of the standard hiring package. On a similar note, plenty of tech companies provide Herman Miller chairs, and other perks that don't cost the "absolute least money." Are you disputing that managers on earth have approved these expenses?
- overcast 10y ago
  Read what I was responding to. Managers aren't going to spend $3000 on AN UPGRADE machine, to gain .5% productivity. What you're describing is essentially is a sign on bonus, where the company allows you to choose your work environment. Your employer isn't going to refresh your laptop every six months on incremental upgrades. That's just asinine. We have a five year depreciation on all laptops/desktops, and we sure as shit don't upgrade someone because we think it's going to increase their productivity by a half a percent. Regarding Herman Miller chairs, those last 10-15 years easy. I'm sitting on one just as old right now. I can easily argue the cost/value for proper seating, on employee productivity and well being.
  - aczerepinski 10y ago
    You were responding to me, and I never said anything about six month upgrade cycles. My point in this thread has only been that the price point is nothing new, and lots of companies and individuals can afford it/justify it with no problems. There's nothing ridiculous going on here.
    - overcast 10y ago
      "My background is in music, where folks routinely pay 10x for an instrument that is 20% better (arbitrary numbers, but I think the point holds). If you're a developer, your laptop is your "axe" that you make money with day in and day out. Does it really matter if it costs $1k or $3k? If it makes an employee half a percent more productive, what is that worth to a business?" You didn't say six month upgrades, but you're definitely referring to upgrading for minimal gains. This is not how things work in the enterprise, at all. There are typically long life cycles, especially in end user machines, as hardware is depreciated. I said nothing about what people can afford. I responded to you justifying a .5% productivity increase, for spending $3000 on a new laptop. That DOES NOT happen. Just the cost of getting some one setup on a new machine, washes out any .5% productivity, as it's wasted getting things configured.
      - aczerepinski 10y ago
        Thank you for explaining to me what I was referring to. Glad to know.
mhurron 10y ago
> after spending the last fifteen years on the IT side of a large enterprise. No manager on this earth would approve upgrading $3000+ laptops, These new MacBooks will probably be available for refreshes in a few months time in a large enterprise. Anywhere offering MacBooks already will be offering these.

mschaef 10y ago

Your point on the inflatino-adjusted price is a good one. I'm less convinced about the other. The difference between a musical instrument and a laptop is that the musical instrument may last 50 years or more. The laptop will be lucky to make five (for professional use). So yeah... it's worth it to pay for quality tooling to do your job, but depreciation has to be factored in, which is much higher for IT technology than almost anything else.

Void_ 10y ago

Sounds like SV-based white boy. Engineers don't make $100k+ everywhere in the world...

NotSammyHagar 10y ago
You should move to seattle then. Good bachelors in CS in their first job make $100k+. Interns make 75k.