3 ms·
The original point of this thread is that they'd like to be able to get an M2 PC like that. So that's the problem.
by chc 3y ago
The original point of this thread is that they'd like to be able to get an M2 PC like that. So that's the problem.
- krger 3y agoI, too, would like to pay Ford prices for a Rivian.
- Taywee 3y agoI'll gladly play Apple processor prices for an Apple processor, but I'm not going to pay Apple PC prices for an Apple PC when all I really want is the CPU.
- derefr 3y agoIt's an SoC; what do you think you're paying for besides the CPU? The whole rest of the computer (for a Mac Mini, at least) is worth maybe $50.
- tracker1 3y agoExcept if you want 32gb ram and 2tb disk space, they charge well in excess of what anyone else (for the most part) is able to charge for similar upgrades.
- quickthrower2 3y agoI guess Apple doesn’t want to be Intel. It is like the old Kelloggs adverts “we don’t make cereal for anyone else”. Alluding to those brands that use the same cereal at a marked up price and resell it to a supermarket brand to sell at a lower price in a plain box.
- roqi 3y ago> The original point of this thread is that they'd like to be able to get an M2 PC like that. Not really. The point is that Apple's products are overpriced, and in particular the Apple Mini underperforms and simply isn't competitive when compared to today's alternatives. I repeat, a mini PC with 8GB of RAM and a 256GB HD on the market for over 700€ simply doesn't compete with miniPCs with Ryzen or Intel i7 or even i5 that ship with 500GB HDs and at least 16GB of RAM which can cost 200 or 300€ less.
- astrange 3y agoNeither of them really have HDs, rather SSDs, but more importantly the memory numbers are not directly comparable because macOS has a memory compressor. Which matters a very large amount for many workloads.