7 ms·

Off the top of my head (and so, perhaps wrong), I seem to recall the amount Apple is charging for going from 8 GB to 16 GB to be on the order of US$200. [1] Fo

Off the top of my head (and so, perhaps wrong), I seem to recall the amount Apple is charging for going from 8 GB to 16 GB to be on the order of US$200. [1] For RAM that they are purchasing and installing in volume. That's a lot of net profit into their pocket, for each unit. And that's where I have one particular concern: Apple closing down and engorging itself on yet another market segment (upgrades). You can argue that it's their product, to do with as they please. But when they start to own entire supply chains (just how "easy" is it going to be for competitors to get retina-class displays, in a timely fashion?), well... you have to start considering the word "monopoly", even if you stick a "quasi" in front of it. They've done an excellent job with their products, and with their marketing. But there's a reason that "competition" continues to be a mantra throughout the world, one that is held by many factions of differing ideology. Over the long term, total control tends to go bad. [1] I don't know from where my memory has retained the $200 figure, but looking at Apple's web site, I see that switching from the 8 GB / 256 GB configuration to the 16 GB / 512 GB configuration takes the system price from $2199 to $2799, for a $600 difference. http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/macbook_pro/select http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/macboo... Amazon has a retail Samsung 830 256 GB at $253 and a Samsung 830 512 GB at $677, for a $424 difference.

wavephorm 14y ago
So $424 extra for the bigger drive, and $176 for the extra ram... that sounds almost reasonable.
- pasbesoin 14y ago
  Could someone speak to the RAM installation and the materials cost involved in the RAM upgrade? Would it be akin to going from two 4 GB "sticks" to two 8 GB sticks? I'm seeing 4 GB DDR3 DIMM's at around $23, while 8 GB DIMM prices -- a bit scant in quantity -- appear to average in the low $50's. So, say $46 versus $110, for a $64 difference? Very approximately. And I didn't look closely at bus speeds -- just very off-the-cuff.
  - ajross 14y ago
    That's exactly right. The memory interconnect on the board is the same as it is anywhere (the DRAM controller in modern Intel CPUs is inside the chip, so the memory is just directly connected). The only difference is that the chips are soldered to the board instead of being on removable DIMMs.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
mikeash 14y ago
Many of Apple's suppliers are also competitors. Samsung, for example, supplies a lot of iPhone parts while also selling iPhone competitors. I doubt it would be that difficult for others to source an equivalent display, if they're willing to pay an equivalent price,
- calciphus 14y ago
  Well, Apple certainly isn't manufacturing the displays themselves, so that's partially true. However, like on the iPad3 - Apple probably paid the manufacturer (in that case, Samsung) for a large chunk of the NRE to develop that screen, and has in return been granted some period of exclusivity to it. Knowing Samsung, it's probably 12-18 months. On the laptop display, I don't know if we know yet who supplies them, but expect a similar deal.
- latch 14y ago
  This isn't how it works. Apple has exclusive deals in place with many of its suppliers. Many of the parts Apple buy are either not available for anyone else, or not available at the same price. One way Apple has done this is to provide some of the initial capital needed for new plants/technologies. For example, if retooling a plant for new LCD production costs $1 billion, Apple might front 1/2 the money in exchange for 6-18month exclusivity on those panels. Also, Apple has scale in its favor. They can negotiate better terms and ensure that their quota gets filled first.
  - Someone 14y ago
    On the other hand, there is nothing that prevents the likes of HP, Acer, Dell and Samsung to do the same. All of them could have the economics of scale Apple enjoys, but they choose to have a more diverse product line instead. Your argument would carry more weight if Apple had a much larger chunk of the market than all others.
    - 2muchcoffeeman 14y ago
      I don't buy it. The traditional cycle, if Apple had a new technology first, is Apple releases it, wait a year and everybody else can do it just as well and probably cheaper. You can get Android handsets whose specs are better than the iPhone 4 in every way except the screen. If a manufacturer could out do the iPhone 4, iPad or MBP screen, they would have. Especially since they are traditionally spec driven.
WiseWeasel 14y ago
The upgraded configuration has a faster core i7 processor and 512GB SSD, but still 8GB RAM. Bumping RAM to 16GB is another $200.
- pasbesoin 14y ago
  My bad -- it appears that I saw the 16 in the 1600 MHz bus speed, for the upgraded model, and in glancing too quickly, mistook that for the size (looking again at the web page, still open in another tab). To follow up on the RAM specifications, would the chip count/size for the 16 GB model be equivalent to two 8 GB DIMM's or to one 16 GB DIMM (as they are currently constructed)? (Asking anyone who knows.) I assume the latter, representing higher per-chip density, would reflect significantly higher cost. P.S. I'm not a fan of small, light gray text on a white background (the specs listing on the Apple product page).
  - WiseWeasel 14y ago
    It's the blue-green square here: http://guide-images.ifixit.net/igi/IAbJlQbhPUYnQMOS.huge http://guide-images.ifixit.net/igi/IAbJlQbhPUYnQMOS.huge I'd say it looks roughly equivalent to two 8GB DIMMs.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
MartinCron 14y ago
That's a lot of net profit into their pocket, for each unit. You should never price things based solely on how much the inputs cost. If people are willing to pay huge premiums for incremental RAM upgrades, Apple will gladly let them.
- jaems33 14y ago
  In this case though, there are few alternatives. Even if the RAM upgrade was $400, I'd still buy it because the RAM is soldered and so I wouldn't be able to upgrade it myself.
- ctdonath 14y ago
  Paying 10% more for "better done right without further hassle on my part" is worth a lot to many customers.
  - wlesieutre 14y ago
    Which is fine and dandy, but "Pay 100% more for 'there's no other way to get a RAM upgrade'" is a pretty crappy deal.
    - MartinCron 14y ago
      It absolutely IS a crappy deal, but it's the only deal you're going to get unless you're willing to consider an alternative product. You can always stick the cheap ram in your clunky Dell laptop.
      - pyre 14y ago
        > your *clunky* Dell laptop Careful, there. Your bias is showing.
        astrodust 14y ago
        If Dell comes up with something as refined as the MacBook Air in the next few years, I'll be truly surprised. HP has been working towards making better products through better design. Sony keeps working on creating these crazy, over-styled products, but they are different. Dell seems to be cranking out the same basic thing.
reaganing 14y ago
$200 to go from 8GB to 16GB was among the most reasonable of notebook vendors I saw in my research last night. Lenovo, for example, wanted $1,060 to go from 4GB to 16GB in the ThinkPad X230. Regardless, I don't think anyone looking at such an expensive notebook to begin with would have a problem paying $200 for more RAM if they think they might need it some day if it means a thinner notebook.
- georgespencer 14y ago
  > Lenovo, for example, wanted $1,060 to go from 4GB to 16GB in the ThinkPad X230. At a guess I'd say that's because they're using matched 8GB sticks, whereas Apple is using 4x 4GB. (Just a guess.)
  - reaganing 14y ago
    Yeah, Lenovo's using 8GBx2, but even so, it's a very heavy markup. Newegg wants about $125 for such sticks[1]. It'd be about $85 for 4GBx4[2] if that is in fact what Apple's using I also just navigated the labyrinth that is HP.com and looked at pricing on the 15" Envy (15t-3000 series specifically). The base model comes with 6GB and it costs $315 to go to 16GB (8GBx2)[3]. So, Apple's pricing really doesn't seem bad at all. [1]: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226323 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226... [2]: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226279 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226... [3]: No direct link possible apparently.
- phaus 14y ago
  Even if I made a million dollars a year, I wouldn't want to be needlessly gouged by anyone. I'm fine with vendors charging way more than the ram is worth, as long as I have the option to purchase my ram somewhere else. There's no denying that the new MacBook is a very nice machine, it just sucks that they either had to make huge concessions to get the form factor the way it is or they wanted to. Does anyone know if the Samsung Series 9 allows for user upgradable memory? If so, there is no excuse for Apple.
  - 14y ago
MrFoof 14y ago
Memory and storage are always margin padders for a simple reason: the average user cares about the benefit provided, not the raw cost. There isn't a single OEM I can think of that doesn't do this. Heck -- go buy a server from Dell or HP. You want to see margin? There's some crazy fantastic margin. The user looks at a storage upgrade as "I get twice as much for X". They don't break it out to $ per GB, and they don't start to compare to low volume wholesale (i.e. NewEgg) component prices. Automobiles are very similar, especially the higher end you go. Though even for family sedans, the "cost" of a V6 over a four-cylinder in a family sedan isn't several thousand dollars. Even if you include upgrades to the transmission and the rest of the driveline, the raw cost doesn't come close. It's tasty front-end margin, plain and simple, and I can't think of many people who complain about the cost per additional horsepower. The cost to produce 19" wheels over 18" wheels on a Porsche Boxster isn't anywhere near the extra $1560 they charge you, but if you want stiffer sidewalls, it's what it's going to cost straight from Porsche. Trim levels? Trust me, a V12 sedan doesn't cost 50% more than a V8 sedan, regardless of interior upgrades. There's a lot of pure profit built into top-trim levels of models.

wavephorm 14y ago

So $424 extra for the bigger drive, and $176 for the extra ram... that sounds almost reasonable.

pasbesoin 14y ago
Could someone speak to the RAM installation and the materials cost involved in the RAM upgrade? Would it be akin to going from two 4 GB "sticks" to two 8 GB sticks? I'm seeing 4 GB DDR3 DIMM's at around $23, while 8 GB DIMM prices -- a bit scant in quantity -- appear to average in the low $50's. So, say $46 versus $110, for a $64 difference? Very approximately. And I didn't look closely at bus speeds -- just very off-the-cuff.
- ajross 14y ago
  That's exactly right. The memory interconnect on the board is the same as it is anywhere (the DRAM controller in modern Intel CPUs is inside the chip, so the memory is just directly connected). The only difference is that the chips are soldered to the board instead of being on removable DIMMs.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

mikeash 14y ago

Many of Apple's suppliers are also competitors. Samsung, for example, supplies a lot of iPhone parts while also selling iPhone competitors. I doubt it would be that difficult for others to source an equivalent display, if they're willing to pay an equivalent price,

calciphus 14y ago
Well, Apple certainly isn't manufacturing the displays themselves, so that's partially true. However, like on the iPad3 - Apple probably paid the manufacturer (in that case, Samsung) for a large chunk of the NRE to develop that screen, and has in return been granted some period of exclusivity to it. Knowing Samsung, it's probably 12-18 months. On the laptop display, I don't know if we know yet who supplies them, but expect a similar deal.
latch 14y ago
This isn't how it works. Apple has exclusive deals in place with many of its suppliers. Many of the parts Apple buy are either not available for anyone else, or not available at the same price. One way Apple has done this is to provide some of the initial capital needed for new plants/technologies. For example, if retooling a plant for new LCD production costs $1 billion, Apple might front 1/2 the money in exchange for 6-18month exclusivity on those panels. Also, Apple has scale in its favor. They can negotiate better terms and ensure that their quota gets filled first.
- Someone 14y ago
  On the other hand, there is nothing that prevents the likes of HP, Acer, Dell and Samsung to do the same. All of them could have the economics of scale Apple enjoys, but they choose to have a more diverse product line instead. Your argument would carry more weight if Apple had a much larger chunk of the market than all others.
  - 2muchcoffeeman 14y ago
    I don't buy it. The traditional cycle, if Apple had a new technology first, is Apple releases it, wait a year and everybody else can do it just as well and probably cheaper. You can get Android handsets whose specs are better than the iPhone 4 in every way except the screen. If a manufacturer could out do the iPhone 4, iPad or MBP screen, they would have. Especially since they are traditionally spec driven.

WiseWeasel 14y ago

The upgraded configuration has a faster core i7 processor and 512GB SSD, but still 8GB RAM. Bumping RAM to 16GB is another $200.

pasbesoin 14y ago
My bad -- it appears that I saw the 16 in the 1600 MHz bus speed, for the upgraded model, and in glancing too quickly, mistook that for the size (looking again at the web page, still open in another tab). To follow up on the RAM specifications, would the chip count/size for the 16 GB model be equivalent to two 8 GB DIMM's or to one 16 GB DIMM (as they are currently constructed)? (Asking anyone who knows.) I assume the latter, representing higher per-chip density, would reflect significantly higher cost. P.S. I'm not a fan of small, light gray text on a white background (the specs listing on the Apple product page).
- WiseWeasel 14y ago
  It's the blue-green square here: http://guide-images.ifixit.net/igi/IAbJlQbhPUYnQMOS.huge http://guide-images.ifixit.net/igi/IAbJlQbhPUYnQMOS.huge I'd say it looks roughly equivalent to two 8GB DIMMs.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

MartinCron 14y ago

That's a lot of net profit into their pocket, for each unit. You should never price things based solely on how much the inputs cost. If people are willing to pay huge premiums for incremental RAM upgrades, Apple will gladly let them.

jaems33 14y ago
In this case though, there are few alternatives. Even if the RAM upgrade was $400, I'd still buy it because the RAM is soldered and so I wouldn't be able to upgrade it myself.
ctdonath 14y ago
Paying 10% more for "better done right without further hassle on my part" is worth a lot to many customers.
- wlesieutre 14y ago
  Which is fine and dandy, but "Pay 100% more for 'there's no other way to get a RAM upgrade'" is a pretty crappy deal.
  - MartinCron 14y ago
    It absolutely IS a crappy deal, but it's the only deal you're going to get unless you're willing to consider an alternative product. You can always stick the cheap ram in your clunky Dell laptop.
    - pyre 14y ago
      > your *clunky* Dell laptop Careful, there. Your bias is showing.
      - astrodust 14y ago
        If Dell comes up with something as refined as the MacBook Air in the next few years, I'll be truly surprised. HP has been working towards making better products through better design. Sony keeps working on creating these crazy, over-styled products, but they are different. Dell seems to be cranking out the same basic thing.

reaganing 14y ago

$200 to go from 8GB to 16GB was among the most reasonable of notebook vendors I saw in my research last night. Lenovo, for example, wanted $1,060 to go from 4GB to 16GB in the ThinkPad X230. Regardless, I don't think anyone looking at such an expensive notebook to begin with would have a problem paying $200 for more RAM if they think they might need it some day if it means a thinner notebook.

georgespencer 14y ago
> Lenovo, for example, wanted $1,060 to go from 4GB to 16GB in the ThinkPad X230. At a guess I'd say that's because they're using matched 8GB sticks, whereas Apple is using 4x 4GB. (Just a guess.)
- reaganing 14y ago
  Yeah, Lenovo's using 8GBx2, but even so, it's a very heavy markup. Newegg wants about $125 for such sticks[1]. It'd be about $85 for 4GBx4[2] if that is in fact what Apple's using I also just navigated the labyrinth that is HP.com and looked at pricing on the 15" Envy (15t-3000 series specifically). The base model comes with 6GB and it costs $315 to go to 16GB (8GBx2)[3]. So, Apple's pricing really doesn't seem bad at all. [1]: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226323 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226... [2]: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226279 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226... [3]: No direct link possible apparently.
phaus 14y ago
Even if I made a million dollars a year, I wouldn't want to be needlessly gouged by anyone. I'm fine with vendors charging way more than the ram is worth, as long as I have the option to purchase my ram somewhere else. There's no denying that the new MacBook is a very nice machine, it just sucks that they either had to make huge concessions to get the form factor the way it is or they wanted to. Does anyone know if the Samsung Series 9 allows for user upgradable memory? If so, there is no excuse for Apple.
- 14y ago

MrFoof 14y ago

Memory and storage are always margin padders for a simple reason: the average user cares about the benefit provided, not the raw cost. There isn't a single OEM I can think of that doesn't do this. Heck -- go buy a server from Dell or HP. You want to see margin? There's some crazy fantastic margin. The user looks at a storage upgrade as "I get twice as much for X". They don't break it out to $ per GB, and they don't start to compare to low volume wholesale (i.e. NewEgg) component prices. Automobiles are very similar, especially the higher end you go. Though even for family sedans, the "cost" of a V6 over a four-cylinder in a family sedan isn't several thousand dollars. Even if you include upgrades to the transmission and the rest of the driveline, the raw cost doesn't come close. It's tasty front-end margin, plain and simple, and I can't think of many people who complain about the cost per additional horsepower. The cost to produce 19" wheels over 18" wheels on a Porsche Boxster isn't anywhere near the extra $1560 they charge you, but if you want stiffer sidewalls, it's what it's going to cost straight from Porsche. Trim levels? Trust me, a V12 sedan doesn't cost 50% more than a V8 sedan, regardless of interior upgrades. There's a lot of pure profit built into top-trim levels of models.