3 ms·

> [Apple] customers are very willing to pay extra or sacrifice on specs to get a well-integrated product with an OS that does not track their every move, does n

> [Apple] customers are very willing to pay extra or sacrifice on specs to get a well-integrated product with an OS that does not track their every move, does not shove ads down their throat, and reliably boots after an update. I think this is a lame attempt at rationalizing something that has no justification whatsoever. Nowadays, adding adequate amounts of RAM is not a cost concern. We have cheap miniPCs with 16GB and even 32GB of RAM being sold for less than what Apple charges for adding 8GB of RAM. This is not what any customer wants. Apple customers do not want to be short-changed, even if they are loyal Apple customers. Just read through this discussion. A browser such as Chrome quickly dries out all free RAM with a few tabs opened, which can be around 5-6GB of RAM on a Mac. You are also awfully wrong in claiming Apple products do not compete on perf/$. Apple has been for years pushing the idea they sell premium, high-performance hardware. Their switch from Intel to their own silicon is sold as a premium to pay for performance improvements. Each and every single version bump of their silicon has been marketed fully centered on performance. Even Apple's lame excuse for shipping substandard RAM sizes is centered on performance, and how Apple's weak 8GB shared memory matches other OEM's 16GB +XGB VRAM systems. And now all of a sudden Apple does not compete on performance?

thejazzman 3y ago
> lame attempt at rationalizing It's not rationalizing to state a fact. We buy what we want. I don't need a faster phone or a faster Mac. I'll take it, yeah, but that's not why I like the product Apple Silicon has just made performance another perk * I'm not an Apple fanboy and really wish they hadn't lost their soul in exchange for being a multi trillion dollar company. But I do appreciate that their hardware is way more affordable than it used to be (eg $699 M1 MacBook at Walmart)
leetcrew 3y ago
> Nowadays, adding adequate amounts of RAM is not a cost concern. We have cheap miniPCs with 16GB and even 32GB of RAM being sold for less than what Apple charges for adding 8GB of RAM. I don't that's an apples-to-apples comparison (pun intended). the ram in those computers is soldered to the mainboard, while it is part of the SoC in the newer macbooks. I don't know exactly how much that contributes to the manufacturing cost, but my intuition is that it would be significantly higher. > You are also awfully wrong in claiming Apple products do not compete on perf/$. Apple has been for years pushing the idea they sell premium, high-performance hardware. I don't think I am, unless "perf/$" means something very different to you. to me, it means the amount of performance you get for your money. apple is certainly crowing about "apple silicon" now that they have the best mobile parts, but I don't think even apple marketing would claim to outperform laptops from acer, asus, etc. for the same money. but this is all an aside to my main point. adding up the cost of a bag of parts is one way of valuing a computer (and one that makes a lot of sense for a tower that hides under your desk), but it's not the only way. you can also look at it from more of a product perspective: what does it enable you to do? if you're a video editor or developer by trade, it's easy to justify the cost of a $2-3k macbook pro, even with the understanding that it's a huge markup over the bill of materials. it is a thing you use to make money. the base macbook air is perfectly fine for watching videos, sending emails, and possibly flexing on your friends at college. I don't think it's unlikely that apple intentionally hamstrings their $1000 offering to make it unsuitable for professionals, but that's not something I get upset about anymore. the alternative is not a $1000 mba with 16GB ram and a 512GB ssd; it's a macbook air that starts at $1500.

thejazzman 3y ago

> lame attempt at rationalizing It's not rationalizing to state a fact. We buy what we want. I don't need a faster phone or a faster Mac. I'll take it, yeah, but that's not why I like the product Apple Silicon has just made performance another perk * I'm not an Apple fanboy and really wish they hadn't lost their soul in exchange for being a multi trillion dollar company. But I do appreciate that their hardware is way more affordable than it used to be (eg $699 M1 MacBook at Walmart)

leetcrew 3y ago

> Nowadays, adding adequate amounts of RAM is not a cost concern. We have cheap miniPCs with 16GB and even 32GB of RAM being sold for less than what Apple charges for adding 8GB of RAM. I don't that's an apples-to-apples comparison (pun intended). the ram in those computers is soldered to the mainboard, while it is part of the SoC in the newer macbooks. I don't know exactly how much that contributes to the manufacturing cost, but my intuition is that it would be significantly higher. > You are also awfully wrong in claiming Apple products do not compete on perf/$. Apple has been for years pushing the idea they sell premium, high-performance hardware. I don't think I am, unless "perf/$" means something very different to you. to me, it means the amount of performance you get for your money. apple is certainly crowing about "apple silicon" now that they have the best mobile parts, but I don't think even apple marketing would claim to outperform laptops from acer, asus, etc. for the same money. but this is all an aside to my main point. adding up the cost of a bag of parts is one way of valuing a computer (and one that makes a lot of sense for a tower that hides under your desk), but it's not the only way. you can also look at it from more of a product perspective: what does it enable you to do? if you're a video editor or developer by trade, it's easy to justify the cost of a $2-3k macbook pro, even with the understanding that it's a huge markup over the bill of materials. it is a thing you use to make money. the base macbook air is perfectly fine for watching videos, sending emails, and possibly flexing on your friends at college. I don't think it's unlikely that apple intentionally hamstrings their $1000 offering to make it unsuitable for professionals, but that's not something I get upset about anymore. the alternative is not a $1000 mba with 16GB ram and a 512GB ssd; it's a macbook air that starts at $1500.