Why is Apple hardware so expensive?!

Apple to me have the capability to take the Computer world in a major coup, if only they enabled their software to run on open hardware, Microsoft Windows is where it is today because you can install it in any configuration and you dont have to buy the hardware from Microsoft.

I was seriously looking at an Apple Macbook for my next purchase or even an iMac but the price is plain greedy, and Leopard alone is not worth that much extra than what a similar spec PC would cost.

The Macbook at the moment has an Intel GMA Graphics chip in it with 144mb DDR2 Shared memory ... wtf is that going to run apart from maybe Photoshop but its going to die if you ever put the simplest of games on there! - it comes with an Intel Core2Duo but all be it pretty low specifications at an affordable price, theyre asking for £600.00 for it, imagine the laptop you could buy with Vista/XP on it - the specs would be way better than the MacBook.

Then there is the problem of the iMac why on earth someone would buy it with a HD2600 graphics card in it, for £700.00/£1000 for the top end version is absolutely beyond me - again the PC you could build for £1000 for would be amazing, QuadCore, 8800GTX, Raptor HD's 10,000rpm, 4gb RAM

Its like with Apple your paying for the brand, the basic Macbook costs sub £200.00 i would imagine to produce, Leopard cant cost more than £100.00 so that leaves Apple with £300.00 profit, your stuck with a machine you cant upgrade, your stuck with pathetic on board graphics!

If only Apple would allow OSX to be as pervasive as Windows is, IBM tried closed hardware and it failed miserably except for their server business, but getting their software onto their own Hardware is a massive mistake when it doesnt reach the basics of what money could buy in the PC World!

If Apple really think they have the superior O/S and many believe it to be true, then challenge Microsoft really in the Software space, afterall leopard is native to Intel now, and there should be no need to run it on closed hardware!

#490060

oh hai, welcome to computers and teh intartubz!

Its like with Apple your paying for the brand,

Yep. That pretty much is the answer to your questions. You are paying for quality and .

If only Apple would allow OSX to be as pervasive as Windows is, IBM tried closed hardware and it failed miserably except for their server business, but getting their software onto their own Hardware is a massive mistake when it doesnt reach the basics of what money could buy in the PC World!

Except, it is working for Apple. Have you seen Mac sales numbers and marketshare recently? During the Christmas shopping season, Apple sold 3.2 Million Macs.

afterall leopard is native to Intel now, and there should be no need to run it on closed hardware!

Therein lies the foundation to Mac vs PC arguments. Customizability versus Stability. When Apple controls the hardware, they have control over the compatibility of the hardware. Once that is breached, then the Mac community is in the same quagmire that the PC world is, a run around for hardware compatibility. What happens when something doesn't work with your PC? You call Microsoft, they direct you to call your computer manufacture. You call your manufacture, they direct you to Microsoft. It is a pain. The way that Apple conducts business is that if you have a problem, you call Apple. End of the line.

Apple also tried a clone project, that failed.

So, if you want a computer that runs without wanting to worry about the inner workings, get a Mac. If you love to customize it to your needs, get a PC.

You can make a similar argument for the iPod, iTunes Music Store, and the iPhone, but the fact is they know how to market, and appeal to customers.

There is a simple solution. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

#490065

If you don't like it, don't buy it.

Well put.

#490066

"If you dont like it, dont buy it"

I agree with that statement, i dont agree with the price of the hardware i think it is over the top and anyone who purchases Apple hardware is basically being ripped off.

I do like Apple's software, i think Leopard is brilliant and yes it is good that they can control the compatibility of their Software as long as its on closed Hardware.

It comes down to who is really responsible for Software not working properly, is it a hardware issue (most probably not) therefore its more likely to be the software itself, Microsoft/Apple can only ever do so much - the hardware manufacturers have to take more of a responsibility instead of blaming Windows Vista for their hardware not working properly because they havent bothered to make it compatible with a new iteration of an OS that will supply that hardware companies customers for the future 3-4 years.

Its hardware companies that are costing Microsoft their reputation in some respects.

However as for Apple controlling the hardware being a good thing, your right, it is and im sure if Microsoft did that then it would be exactly the same case, however what Apple do is, control the hardware, but also artificially inflate the price of the entire package!

Leopard was promoted for its cost effectiveness against Vista at WWDC07 however when you factor in the cost of the Hardware required - its actually not so cheap - and if Apple are serious about becoming the number one they will sooner or later have to abandon their closed hardware initiative.

#490068

jesus dude, what are you, 8? save up or shut up. 'whaaaa!!!! why are bmw's so expensive? they should charge less so i could afford one!'

yeah, some of the macs are a bit pricey (i'm talking to you, macbook air. you, too, mac pro). you pay a premium for the design and the mostly-fulfilled expectation of stability. but, if you look at what you get, dollar-for-dollar, products like the imac, the mini and the macbook are actually quite reasonable.

#490072

Yes, and actually you can install Windows on them also!

My personal point of view on this, if Apple makes Mac OS X run on open hardware they loose lots of money, as it's because of the hardware they sell that they see so much money.

Let's see: as told before, a MacBook at 600, with profits of 300, against a Mac OS X Leopard DVD sold at 100, with profits of... 50? so... 300 versus 50... get it?

Edit: PS: so they would need to sell Leopards six times the hardware they currently sell.

#490076

Let's run this down in a really simple way.

The thing Apple realizes that most companies (and people) don't is that execution matters. Yes, Macs may lack a few features (same with the iPhone and iPod), but what you get is solid performance, stability and one of the best computing platforms out there. I don't know if you've looked recently, but with a new Mac, you also get the iLife suite. Now, to buy something similar for a PC will cost way, way more than the $79 Apple charges for buying the iLife suite new. A GarageBand equivalent alone will probably cost more. You also get superior product design and (usually) quality. There have been a few issues amongst users (witness the first iPod nanos with their scratches, and more recently, MacBook yellowing), but for the most part, quality has been excellent.

You say that Apple is sooner or later going to have to abandon the closed platform. I don't think that's true. I don't know if you've looked at Apple's 4th Quarter 2007 results, but there are records being set everywhere. Over 2.1 million Macs were shipped just in the 4th quarter.

Oh yeah, and welcome to a discussion that has been brought up many, many times. Also, I think you should check out the following links:

In the long run, Windows is more expensive | A reasoned discussion of why Macs tend to be a bit more expensive | Mac Pro can be $1000 less expensive than a comparable PC | A thread on MacRumors | A blog article comparison

And there you go.

#490077

I agree, some apple hardware is way too pricey, take the macbook air for example. It's too thin, has one usb port and no cd drive, it could just be a mistake to have made. However, everything else, MacBook, iMac I think are priced reasonably because you get good design and stability, something you might not get with other PC's. Also, when you sell your mac again, you get more profit for it versus an old pc

#490083

Apple hardware is expensive only if you approach their products with the mindset that they should have low-end, mid-range, and high-end price targets.

Well, that mindset is incorrect. Apple does not compete in the low-end computer market. They compete in the mid- and high-end arenas. In those arenas, their products are less expensive than their competitors. Take an iMac or Mac Pro's specifications, then go to Dell.com and try to build a computer with the same specs. The Dell will cost more.

If you're referencing the cost of the iPhone, it's a friggin' smartphone. They're all expensive.

If you're referencing the cost of the iPod Touch, it's a luxury product. Pony up, or get a 4GB Nano.

#490088

If you're referencing the cost of the iPod Touch, it's a luxury product

Consider Multi Touch, accelero meter, OS X goodness (firmware is included in the price, whatever you say) and something that flat while keeping a good screen quality, the iPod is not that expensive ! And if you jailbreak it ... Yummy.

(and flash memory is expensive ...)

macbook air isn't too pricy, why ? because people won't buy it because of the "one usb port" thing. But the ones that will not care about that has the money for the Air. I think Apple did a nice move with the Air, that clearly shows that Apple if still in the race for smaller computers and it shows what they can do, like a tech demo.

#490090

If you're referencing the cost of the iPod Touch, it's a luxury product

Consider Multi Touch, accelero meter, OS X goodness (firmware is included in the price, whatever you say) and something that flat while keeping a good screen quality, the iPod is not that expensive ! And if you jailbreak it ... Yummy.

(and flash memory is expensive ...)

macbook air isn't too pricy, why ? because people won't buy it because of the "one usb port" thing. But the ones that will not care about that has the money for the Air. I think Apple did a nice move with the Air, that clearly shows that Apple if still in the race for smaller computers and it shows what they can do, like a tech demo.

I don't know why someone that needs a printer and cd/dvd drive for example and more USB stuff would buy the Air, its redicolously overpriced IMO. However, if you just wanted a laptop thats light, small and can do basic stuff like watch downloaded movies, listen to music, etc it would be perfect for you. It just depends on what you need a product for.

#490091

I don't know why someone that needs a printer and cd/dvd drive for example and more USB stuff would buy the Air, its redicolously overpriced IMO.

They wouldn't.

That's the entire point.

What is it with people who cannot understand the concept of owning a secondary--not a second, a secondary--computer?

#490092

I don't know why someone that needs a printer and cd/dvd drive for example and more USB stuff would buy the Air, its redicolously overpriced IMO. However, if you just wanted a laptop thats light, small and can do basic stuff like watch downloaded movies, listen to music, etc it would be perfect for you. It just depends on what you need a product for.

An iPod touch is also light, small, and can do basic stuff like watch downloaded movies, listen to music, etc.

#490094

I don't know why someone that needs a printer and cd/dvd drive for example and more USB stuff would buy the Air, its redicolously overpriced IMO. However, if you just wanted a laptop thats light, small and can do basic stuff like watch downloaded movies, listen to music, etc it would be perfect for you. It just depends on what you need a product for.

Exactly as Desides said, its supposed to be a secondary computer. If you need some more USB ports, buy a hub, they aren't that expensive. And honestly, when you're on the go, how many USB ports do you need? Its not like you're dragging a printer with you..

And its not ridiculously overpriced. Take a look at the Sony TZ. It's bigger and its not as good in my opinion.

#490098

iMacs actually arent that badly priced... look at a similarly speced HP and your looking around the same cost.

but this has been argued both ways to death.

Home brew PCs will always be cheaper... and more fun to create etc.

some things to keep in mind;

* Apple include the install disks, most pc manufacturers dont include windows disks.

* Apple software is cheaper. eg- iwork costs $99 AUD, office costs $250 aud for home and student and a whopping $650 for office standard.

* Apple's are damn cool. You pay for the industrial design and lack of desk clutter on the iMac.

* Apple's iLife suite and other included programs are quite extensive and well implemented. They are not an afterthought put on top of the OS- they form the main part of the OS.

* You dont need to buy antivirus... unless your quite paranoid... ok so there's AVG free for the PC, but... still its nice not having to feel constantly cautious.

* CS3, Photoshop is optimised to run on the intel processors, and benchmarks have proven the mac versions run faster than on windows equivalents (see CNET for proof)

* Macs are special for a reason... the strict licensing of apple software on apple hardware is beneficial... it really does make things run more smoothly. Not only that but Apple can implement advanced features without worries of compatibility- eg- EFI and bootcamp software...

#490108

Levi, IIRC, they tie on 64bit Vista.

It's simple. If you like Apple Hardware. Buy a Apple PC. If you like other PC makes, buy theirs. I'm going to stick with HP/Windows for the time being.

I wouldn't mind playing with Leopard, but I can't budget the cost of a Apple right now. I need a prosumer MiniDV camera more...

On Office: I bought Office Ultimate 2007 for $59 USD from Microsoft (The Ultimate Steal) last year. However, iWork (which is more of competitor to Works, which is similarly priced) is nice, too.

Its really all about preferences. Buy what you want. We won't judge.

#490125

However, iWork (which is more of competitor to Works, which is similarly priced) is nice, too.

What-what?!? Pages is a hybrid of Word and Publisher. Numbers is similar to Excel. Keynote is a cleaner version of Power Point. How is that not a competitor of Office. Is Open Office not a competitor to Office either? Yeah, there is not a database program or mail client, but there is mySQL (open source and pretty simple to install for those that need it) and Mail.app (already installed on your Mac).

#490126

OpenOffice, yes. iWork is really designed for those people who don't need or want all of the bells and whistles of Office/Office for Mac. It's more in line with Works. Apple is filling the niche between OpenOffice and Office for Mac, not replacing it. If it was a competing product to office, Apple would market it so. They don't.

iWork simplifies parts of Office for those who don't need everything Office has, like Works does for Windows Users. OpenOffice is an full-fledged office alternative, designed to match Office feature for feature in an open source, free way.

#490134

. . . anyone who purchases Apple hardware is basically being ripped off.

I don't feel ripped off what so ever. I was a bit worried while I was purchasing one because I didn't really know what to expect. Now I feel that I actually got a really good deal.

TBH, what you are saying about paying for a brand is true. Lets put this into context - You buy a BENCH jacket for £100, yet you can find the same style jacket in Primark for under a tenner. Why do you think that is? Are you just paying for a name or the jacket? Not only is the BENCH jacket of far better quality but your getting an excellent brand name too, The Primark jacket is just cheap rubbish that falls apart within days/weeks.

I personally feel I actually got real good value for money when buying my iMac, but hey thats my opinion!

#490153

TBH, what you are saying about paying for a brand is true. Lets put this into context - You buy a BENCH jacket for £100, yet you can find the same style jacket in Primark for under a tenner. Why do you think that is? Are you just paying for a name or the jacket? Not only is the BENCH jacket of far better quality but your getting an excellent brand name too, The Primark jacket is just cheap rubbish that falls apart within days/weeks.

Absolutely Not True!

Your assuming that a brand name is automatically better, and sadly this is not always the case.

Bench manufacture their clothes in the cheapest possible way, anyone who says they dont are liars, its business economics.

Bench clothing will be mass produced in china for 50p a time or something insanely small, and then be sold to mugs like you who think its better for £100 - £99.95 clear profit.

I cannot stand ignorance in any form - your assuming BENCH is better, when in actual fact it probably really isnt as good as some of the clothes in Primark.

#490159

http://www.aqua-soft.org/board/showpost.ph...535&postcount=7

I had compared prices of two similar category product here some time back... do you really think it's expensive when you look at that?

Over the time, the premium that you pay for Apple computers has gone very low... so some extent it's even at par with other competing products. if you had said that Apple products are way too expensive prior to 2002-2003, it would made sense. Today, Sorry my friend... it's not so.

As a matter of fact, Right now I'm going to browse a bit and compare prices between MBP and similarly config'd offering from Dell & HP. Let me see for real how much your claim stand above water.

(you should know : I'm going to stay awake for another 30-40 mins just for you, I better make some coffee. Mother of god, things I do for kids.)

//Posts Merged. I've made sure you had the latest timestamp, and clearly indicated your edit...hopefully this is still acceptable. -NC.

{{EDIT}}

[newsimg]http://www.aqua-soft.org/media/news/ce93a30f2e824032ff6caa9269362477.jpg[/newsimg]

MacBook Pro (Base Model) - $1,999

* 2.2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4M L2 Cache, 800MHz

* 1440 x 900 resolution, 15" LED backlit LCD Screen

* 2GB memory 667MHz

* 120GB hard drive 5400RPM

* 8x double-layer SuperDrive

* NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT graphics with 128MB SDRAM

* WiFi-N

* Bluetooth

* iSight cam

* Backlit Keyboard

[newsimg]http://www.aqua-soft.org/media/news/19a77355633621c6f912069892b91ae2.jpg[/newsimg]

Dell Precision M4300 - $1,761

($1,761 which came after saving offered by Dell.com from actual cost of $2,041. Not that it matters, just wanted to mention)

Intel® Core™ 2 Duo T7500 (2.20GHz) 4M L2 Cache, 800MHz Dual Core

Genuine Windows® XP Professional, SP2 with Media

NVIDIA Quadro FX 360M, 512MB Turbo Cache memory (256 dedicated)

15.4 inch Wide Screen WSXGA+ TrueLife LCD Panel

2.0GB, DDR2-667MHz SDRAM, 2 DIMMS

120GB Hard Drive, 9.5MM, 7200RPM (Free Fall Sensor)

8X DVD+/-RW w/Roxio Creator™/Cyberlink PDVD™

Dell Wireless® 360 Bluetooth Module for Windows XP

Dell Wireless 1505 Draft 802.11n Mini Card

Standard Touchpad

Resource CD - Contains Diagnostics and Drivers for Windows XP

[newsimg]http://www.aqua-soft.org/media/news/3e0e5ec1ada4d4693c332269e51e5995.jpg[/newsimg]

HP Compaq 8510p Notebook PC - $1,796

Genuine Windows® XP Professional

Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor T7500 (2.2-GHz, 800-MHz, 4-MB L2 cache)

15.4-inch diagonal WSXGA+ WVA, anti-glare (1680 x 1050 resolution and 16M colors)

ATI Mobility RadeonTM HD 2600 with 256MB of GDDR III video memory and 512 MB HyperMemory

2048MB 667MHZ DDR2 2D

120GB 5400 rpm SATA hard drive

DVD+/-RW SuperMulti DL Drive

Dual Point Keyboard (touchpad and pointstick)

Intel 802.11 a/b/g/draft-n Wi-Fi Adapter

HP Integrated Module with Bluetooth® Wireless Technology

MDC V92 modem

Fingerprint Reader

90W ac adapter

8-cell (73 WHr) Lithium-Ion battery

3/3/0 Warranty

Genuine Windows XP Professional Recovery Media: Driver DVD

System Recovery DVD for Genuine Windows XP Professional

So now we have three costs for (almost) similar configs.

Apple ($1,999), Dell ($1761) and HP ($1796)

Let me justify those extra $200 Apple is charging you (Which you may think is for Brand Name)

Apple is providing you following extras with $200

* iSight cam

* Backlit Keyboard

* From above three configs, only Apple's is LED backlit (longer lifespan, better brightness & lesser power consumption)

* Apple Ships Leopard and Restore disks with MBP, while both Dell/HP are charing extra for Restore Disk of XP pro.

Not to Mention, other software goodies that you get with MBP base model

Bundled Applications

* iLife ’08 suite

* Front Row

* Photo Booth

I haven't listed trial apps (like iWork, MS Office 2008 and Aperture), but iLife suit alone saves you like $79.

Front Row and Photobooth are nothing special, but what you can term as bells and whistles.

HP and Dell both have their properietary media suits.. which I've personally experienced and trust me, both are buggy and rubbish at best.

Media center is best you can find on windows for media experience from Microsoft, and it costs you extra if you're on XP.

And then, there is build quality and look factor of MBP. Not that Dell or HP has bad built quality, but all the notebooks that I've owned (which includes HP-Compaq, Dell XPS and Apple iBook) Apple has much better build quality in my personal experience. Your mileage may vary depending on the models you've used.

It also goes without saying that my iBook still turns heads compared to XPS of my girlfriend.

Anyway... I'll say that by above comparision, $200 difference is CAN NOT be compared as premium cost/brand name charge.

In the end... I say read the first line from shmengie's post. I don't wanna repeat what he said.

I rest my case.

#490176

Good point iGo. I just wanted to mention that I bought a machine comparable to a MacBook Pro (HP Pavilion dv9500t; now 9700t) for less than $1999. Admittedly too things were in place; Academic pricing, and obviously not tendering sales tax. The Prices on all of these get quite interesting when you tack sales tax on (or VAT in UK).

Given a choice, I'd still stick to HP or Toshiba. I've got history with those too companies; I've got 5 year old Satellite that give your iBook a run for it. I suppose it's really academic, as these machines are being made side by side in a Chinese factory in Shanghai that's under contract by Dell, Apple, HP/Compaq and Toshiba. So your build quality mileage may vary.

When I bought my Satellite, an Apple iBook lost because of price; When I bought my Qosmio, a PowerBook G4 lost again on two fronts, OS & Price. When I bought my Pavilion, I didn't consider an Apple. I found an iPod a better choice to give Apple my money.

I do agree with this: "Anyway... I'll say that by above comparision, $200 difference is CAN NOT be compared as premium cost/brand name charge."

It boils down to personal preference. If you don't think Apple is worth spending your money on, merrily spend it elsewhere.

I will mention one thing that has slowed me down from buying a Apple Laptop. I know that all laptops are theft magnets, but it seems like Apple hardware is particularly prone to pilfering. I don't think I want to spend $2000+ on something just to have it disappear. I'm not taking into account the irresponsibility of computer owners in general, but just a footnote.

#490178

The point that most of you seem to be making here is that macs have similar value for price for similar (though not very exactly) specs...I'd agree with that, and iGo's quotes are proof. But my point is, the other manufactures of PCs offer lower end stuff too, at much lower prices and Apple doesn't do that at all. So basically that puts even the lowest-priced mac out of the reach of a poor idiot like me (right now I'm just a student, but even when I begin to earn I suspect getting around to be an Apple consumer would take a long time for me), hence leading to "The grapes are sour anyway!" syndrome.

I don't think I'd be wasting money on an Apple product, it's just that I don't have that money to waste on it...

#490180

TBut my point is, the other manufactures of PCs offer lower end stuff too, at much lower prices and Apple doesn't do that at all. So basically that puts even the lowest-priced mac out of the reach of a poor idiot like me (right now I'm just a student, but even when I begin to earn I suspect getting around to be an Apple consumer would take a long time for me), hence leading to "The grapes are sour anyway!" syndrome.

Apple will never seriously compete in the low-end market. It's not what they do. This is like complaining about not being able to find a $15,000 BMW.

Just buy a Mac Mini. It's the closest you'll get.

#490183

To all of you complaining about the high prices, I just remembered something.

My mom and dad did not pay for my MacBook Pro. As a matter of fact, they haven't paid for any of my toys. I'm 17, work only a part time job that doesn't have great pay, and don't make a lot of money otherwise. What's more, my parents have a rule that says I have to save double of what I'm going to spend. So, to afford my MBP, I had to save $4000. For someone with the small amount of money as I do, it took a while. But I did it.

If I can do it, anybody can. Even the most basic job still pays.

Oh, yeah... and I'm a full time student.

#490188