Why are the MAC's and apple stuff so expensive?
- Thread starter bliz
- Start date
CMetaphor
Quadfather
I disagree with iPad value comment. You want a well-priced tablet with good value? Nexus 7. Hands down. Don't pay 500$ or more when this better tablet exists for half the price.
Since SKY answered your first question I'll leave that out. But the cellphone industry has been grossly overpriced since the beginning of time. Mobile hardware is just isn't that difficult to produce. The SGS3 cost of production may cost more, but not considerably more. In the end both have extremely high markups, just because one may make 30-50 more per phone doesn't make the other less guilty when the markup is excess of 150-200 percent.
Here's something for you to think about. The Samsung GS3 you have in Canada that runs for 650 right now is a crippled dual core version vs the quad core of the international version. The quad core international version runs from 799-899 MSRP. Samsung could easily release the quad core here for 700 and still make a healthy profit, but they chose otherwise. Food for thought.
But I digress, the Apple is not the only guilty of high prices, but the rest of the industry as well.
BeaverBender
Well-known member
So, for all you obvious Apple-haters, answer me this... What Windows laptop with a 5mp screen costs only $2200? Oh wait, there isn't one... The closest has fewer than half the number of pixels and cost almost as much with similar specs. My MacBook Pro Retina is amazing, and actually runs Windows 8 better than any other laptop I've seen. Btw, I'm not an Apple fanboy, I've been working with PCs since their inception and, as you can see from my System specs, I have a kick-ass gaming machine PLUS seven other Windows PCs/laptops.
Your mac book pro with retina screen doesn't really have anything that it can run at that resolution... There really isn't very much content at that resolution at all, most things you look at on your screen will actually look the same on a windows PC with lower resolution. Have you ever spent $2200 on a windows laptop? Because $2200 laptops run windows really well, actually $800 laptops run windows really well. The way the MBP scales things actually decreases it's performance to similarly spec'd machines and unless you use the scaling feature (which lowers image quality so it doesn't look as nice anyways) your effective resolution is pretty much 1440x900.
Also with a 1920x1080 screen you can get better specs for $1000 sure you don't have a huge resolution but you have a higher performance machine, something that can actually drive that resolution when gaming and $1200 in your pocket. I understand that not everyone feels this way I am just explaining why I (and many others) don't see the value.
Don't get me wrong the mac book pro is an impressive machine that resolution + that hardware in that form factor is no easy feat. It just really does not offer much value for the extra $1200 over other machines with similar specs IMHO.
Samsung is now coming out with 13 inch 2560x1440 laptops, pretty sweet but unfortunately I will probably feel the price hike is not worth the money (as I do with the MBP). Samsung is also making laptops with dual 2560x1440 displays which is even more ridiculous.
Last edited:
Anyway,i'd never buy a 2560x1440 laptop haha ,it's too expensive and why even buying a laptop for gaming 
pay extra 1000$,cool -_-.
And Macbooks are way too overpriced, I think that 50% of time spend on the manufacturing is the aluminium finish ;P.
pay extra 1000$,cool -_-.And Macbooks are way too overpriced, I think that 50% of time spend on the manufacturing is the aluminium finish ;P.
BeaverBender
Well-known member
I don't think you know what you're talking about. Nothing that runs at that resolution? Hmm, let me see, I run all the Office apps at 5mp, as well as all the built-in Apple apps, plus Aperture for my photos, some games like Civ5 AND as I said, I run Windows 8 on it so ALL my Windows apps run at 5mp. Btw, it only scales the fonts so your comment there is wrong as well. Nice try but you should do some better research first.
Perineum
Well-known member
From what I've read JJThomp is right.
And my opinion... that much resolution on such a small screen is pointless. I have a "standard" monitor and I don't have a problem getting things done because of massive pixels.
I can't even see them.
And my opinion... that much resolution on such a small screen is pointless. I have a "standard" monitor and I don't have a problem getting things done because of massive pixels.
I can't even see them.
BeaverBender
Well-known member
So, he is right over someone that actually has one? Nice. Have you tried running Windows 8 on a MBPR?
Once you've tried it, you will NEVER be able to go back, much like an SSD, and you will be kicking yourself for making such a foolish statement. I can barely even look at my 2560x1600 305T screen now because it looks like absolute garbage by comparison.
Once you've tried it, you will NEVER be able to go back, much like an SSD, and you will be kicking yourself for making such a foolish statement. I can barely even look at my 2560x1600 305T screen now because it looks like absolute garbage by comparison.
Perineum
Well-known member
Placebo effect. Psychosomatic. Whatever you want to call it.
There are people out there with 80 INCH TVs at 1080 resolution and they don't complain about pixel pitch
... well, that is until someone comes out with something that's better on paper, then they'll suddenly "see" it and complain.
I'm all for higher resolutions, but at a decent size monitor.
And panel quality trumps higher resolution too, unless you're talking ridiculously small resolutions.
There are people out there with 80 INCH TVs at 1080 resolution and they don't complain about pixel pitch
... well, that is until someone comes out with something that's better on paper, then they'll suddenly "see" it and complain.
I'm all for higher resolutions, but at a decent size monitor.
And panel quality trumps higher resolution too, unless you're talking ridiculously small resolutions.
Last edited:
