Why A PC Diehard Bought A (Used) MacBook Pro (Op Ed)

[USAFRet]

Ah, and therein lies my frustration with my work. My talents are wasted - perhaps not for the simple part, but they can realistically walk in and pick any computer they like and get something that does "the basics" (literally the terminology 99% of the people I talk to use to sum up their use.... it's not very helpful). No real point in having me there.

I feel your pain. But that $1000+ Apple is a very hard sell against a $300 Toshiba, with an OS they already know, and will run applications they are already used to.
And future applications they want will ALL run on Windows. Only some will run in the Apple world.

 

[canadianvice]

Ah, and therein lies my frustration with my work. My talents are wasted - perhaps not for the simple part, but they can realistically walk in and pick any computer they like and get something that does "the basics" (literally the terminology 99% of the people I talk to use to sum up their use.... it's not very helpful). No real point in having me there.

I feel your pain. But that $1000+ Apple is a very hard sell against a $300 Toshiba, with an OS they already know, and will run applications they are already used to.
And future applications they want will ALL run on Windows. Only some will run in the Apple world.

A case of seeing what's better for people versus what they pick. Oh well, my responsibility is to give them sound advice on what they should be getting; if they reject that, try to get them the next best, and if they reject that, I abdicate all responsibility for their experience.

Should've bought the warranty!

(I had a guy buy a netbook once with the stated intention of doing music editing and running Diablo III. He bought it in spite of our advice, tried to return it a day past the return, and was turned away. Serves him right)

 

[gggplaya]

Clearly you don't understand the market for computers - 99% of people want 5 main things:
- Facebook (check)
- Email (check)
- Cat videos (check)
- Photos (check)
- Office Apps (check)

You left out the biggest one, PORN. Just saying.

There will also be a resurgence of PC games as well. This is because XBONE and PS4 both use AMD's CPU/GPU which is essentially a PC architecture. This means porting games between XBONE,PS4, and PC will be much easier than it used to be. And even today, midrange videocards in midrange computers have more power than XB or PS4. That means scaled up textures and graphics, possible higher resolution 4k in the future. In 2-3 years laptop CPU's with on chip GPU's will be able to handle some 1080p gaming with decent settings, so laptops will come back with a vengance when they do.

 

[iam2thecrowe]

Clearly you don't understand the market for computers - 99% of people want 5 main things:
- Facebook (check)
- Email (check)
- Cat videos (check)
- Photos (check)
- Office Apps (check)

99% eh? I'm gonna assume you believe the only people that use computers are not using them in a business environment and are under the age of 30. Assuming your "99%" is correct, of your "99%" that do use their pc for those basic things, i would say at least 50% of them would also require some additional things like games or business specific apps that aren't designed for mac OS. So they would have to use Windows. I know in my line of work it would be impossible for the business to change over to mac as all the business specific applications would have to be re-written for it, or buy expensive apple hardware + windows licenses... insane amounts of money would be needed to change over to apple devices from the perfectly good Dell and Microsoft products we use. My dell laptop has fallen from over one meter and hit the ground multiple times (its used as a service tool to connect to various machinery so it often rests on all sorts of unstable objects) and has survived, so anything to say with build quality of apple vs X brand windows pc is pretty much invalid. As from experience, at least mainly with dell products, they are built very solid. Across the whole business of thousands of users no one has complained about build quality or hardware robustness. Most businesses would also be in this boat of needing at least one or 2 apps that require windows. The only businesses i visit that use macs, are graphic arts type places, and there are only 2 or 3 macs within the business and they still require windows pc's for many things. For them macs are matter of personal preference and what they have learned on, not a requirement, and that's fine. At the end of it I don't believe there is any advantage of owning Apple hardware or their OS over a windows based pc. Macs still have their faults, they're not indestructible, they're can still get viruses (although many sales people use the pitch that macs dont get viruses) and they are not easier to use. I would say the one thing macs have going for them is that its harder to screw up the OS purely because its uses are limited, and core OS settings are harder to tamper with, which might suit some people that have had a bad experience with the Windows platform.

 

[canadianvice]

Clearly you don't understand the market for computers - 99% of people want 5 main things:
- Facebook (check)
- Email (check)
- Cat videos (check)
- Photos (check)
- Office Apps (check)

99% eh? I'm gonna assume you believe the only people that use computers are not using them in a business environment and are under the age of 30. Assuming your "99%" is correct, of your "99%" that do use their pc for those basic things, i would say at least 50% of them would also require some additional things like games or business specific apps that aren't designed for mac OS. So they would have to use Windows. I know in my line of work it would be impossible for the business to change over to mac as all the business specific applications would have to be re-written for it, or buy expensive apple hardware + windows licenses... insane amounts of money would be needed to change over to apple devices from the perfectly good Dell and Microsoft products we use. My dell laptop has fallen from over one meter and hit the ground multiple times (its used as a service tool to connect to various machinery so it often rests on all sorts of unstable objects) and has survived, so anything to say with build quality of apple vs X brand windows pc is pretty much invalid. As from experience, at least mainly with dell products, they are built very solid. Across the whole business of thousands of users no one has complained about build quality or hardware robustness. Most businesses would also be in this boat of needing at least one or 2 apps that require windows. The only businesses i visit that use macs, are graphic arts type places, and there are only 2 or 3 macs within the business and they still require windows pc's for many things. For them macs are matter of personal preference and what they have learned on, not a requirement, and that's fine. At the end of it I don't believe there is any advantage of owning Apple hardware or their OS over a windows based pc. Macs still have their faults, they're not indestructible, they're can still get viruses (although many sales people use the pitch that macs dont get viruses) and they are not easier to use. I would say the one thing macs have going for them is that its harder to screw up the OS purely because its uses are limited, and core OS settings are harder to tamper with, which might suit some people that have had a bad experience with the Windows platform.

As I've said in previous posts, this is the consumer market we're speaking of. Obviously I'd be off my rocker if I thought this was applicable to corporate use. As far as the consumer market goes, the only hold-over software I've known to concern people has been some accounting apps and they now all offer cloud versions to deal with that.

It's like that XKCD comic: "I'm a mac, and I'm a PC, and since you do everything through the browser now we're basically indistinguishable".

 

[Vlad Rose]

Clearly you don't understand the market for computers - 99% of people want 5 main things:
- Facebook (check)
- Email (check)
- Cat videos (check)
- Photos (check)
- Office Apps (check)

99% eh? I'm gonna assume you believe the only people that use computers are not using them in a business environment and are under the age of 30. Assuming your "99%" is correct, of your "99%" that do use their pc for those basic things, i would say at least 50% of them would also require some additional things like games or business specific apps that aren't designed for mac OS. So they would have to use Windows. I know in my line of work it would be impossible for the business to change over to mac as all the business specific applications would have to be re-written for it, or buy expensive apple hardware + windows licenses... insane amounts of money would be needed to change over to apple devices from the perfectly good Dell and Microsoft products we use. My dell laptop has fallen from over one meter and hit the ground multiple times (its used as a service tool to connect to various machinery so it often rests on all sorts of unstable objects) and has survived, so anything to say with build quality of apple vs X brand windows pc is pretty much invalid. As from experience, at least mainly with dell products, they are built very solid. Across the whole business of thousands of users no one has complained about build quality or hardware robustness. Most businesses would also be in this boat of needing at least one or 2 apps that require windows. The only businesses i visit that use macs, are graphic arts type places, and there are only 2 or 3 macs within the business and they still require windows pc's for many things. For them macs are matter of personal preference and what they have learned on, not a requirement, and that's fine. At the end of it I don't believe there is any advantage of owning Apple hardware or their OS over a windows based pc. Macs still have their faults, they're not indestructible, they're can still get viruses (although many sales people use the pitch that macs dont get viruses) and they are not easier to use. I would say the one thing macs have going for them is that its harder to screw up the OS purely because its uses are limited, and core OS settings are harder to tamper with, which might suit some people that have had a bad experience with the Windows platform.

As I've said in previous posts, this is the consumer market we're speaking of. Obviously I'd be off my rocker if I thought this was applicable to corporate use. As far as the consumer market goes, the only hold-over software I've known to concern people has been some accounting apps and they now all offer cloud versions to deal with that.

It's like that XKCD comic: "I'm a mac, and I'm a PC, and since you do everything through the browser now we're basically indistinguishable".

If a user just want's a device for facebook, email, cat videos, photos, and office apps, they'd be better off just getting a tablet: Ipad, Note, etc. I don't see the need why they'd waste the extra 3-4x money on a macbook instead. Even Apple is aware of this considering at one point they were looking at switching their Macintosh lines to ARM CPUs so they can unify their software and interface. Too bad they realized ARM isn't fast enough yet for the few that use Macs for business use.

Also, I think your 99% is quite off considering games are one of the main driving the sales of faster processors. Nvidia/AMD are making large profits off their video cards as a result. Same with Valve with their Steam client and other software game companies. You had mentioned that you work at a computer shop. And while yes 99% of your clientele may be the 'cat video' type, most users with any more knowledge of PC's than that fix them themselves (or have their kid do it). I should know; I used to work at a computer shop myself and the only time we didn't have a 'cat video' type of person is when someone came in to borrow the high speed connection to update their MMO game.

 

[canadianvice]

Clearly you don't understand the market for computers - 99% of people want 5 main things:
- Facebook (check)
- Email (check)
- Cat videos (check)
- Photos (check)
- Office Apps (check)

99% eh? I'm gonna assume you believe the only people that use computers are not using them in a business environment and are under the age of 30. Assuming your "99%" is correct, of your "99%" that do use their pc for those basic things, i would say at least 50% of them would also require some additional things like games or business specific apps that aren't designed for mac OS. So they would have to use Windows. I know in my line of work it would be impossible for the business to change over to mac as all the business specific applications would have to be re-written for it, or buy expensive apple hardware + windows licenses... insane amounts of money would be needed to change over to apple devices from the perfectly good Dell and Microsoft products we use. My dell laptop has fallen from over one meter and hit the ground multiple times (its used as a service tool to connect to various machinery so it often rests on all sorts of unstable objects) and has survived, so anything to say with build quality of apple vs X brand windows pc is pretty much invalid. As from experience, at least mainly with dell products, they are built very solid. Across the whole business of thousands of users no one has complained about build quality or hardware robustness. Most businesses would also be in this boat of needing at least one or 2 apps that require windows. The only businesses i visit that use macs, are graphic arts type places, and there are only 2 or 3 macs within the business and they still require windows pc's for many things. For them macs are matter of personal preference and what they have learned on, not a requirement, and that's fine. At the end of it I don't believe there is any advantage of owning Apple hardware or their OS over a windows based pc. Macs still have their faults, they're not indestructible, they're can still get viruses (although many sales people use the pitch that macs dont get viruses) and they are not easier to use. I would say the one thing macs have going for them is that its harder to screw up the OS purely because its uses are limited, and core OS settings are harder to tamper with, which might suit some people that have had a bad experience with the Windows platform.

As I've said in previous posts, this is the consumer market we're speaking of. Obviously I'd be off my rocker if I thought this was applicable to corporate use. As far as the consumer market goes, the only hold-over software I've known to concern people has been some accounting apps and they now all offer cloud versions to deal with that.

It's like that XKCD comic: "I'm a mac, and I'm a PC, and since you do everything through the browser now we're basically indistinguishable".

If a user just want's a device for facebook, email, cat videos, photos, and office apps, they'd be better off just getting a tablet: Ipad, Note, etc. I don't see the need why they'd waste the extra 3-4x money on a macbook instead. Even Apple is aware of this considering at one point they were looking at switching their Macintosh lines to ARM CPUs so they can unify their software and interface. Too bad they realized ARM isn't fast enough yet for the few that use Macs for business use.

Also, I think your 99% is quite off considering games are one of the main driving the sales of faster processors. Nvidia/AMD are making large profits off their video cards as a result. Same with Valve with their Steam client and other software game companies. You had mentioned that you work at a computer shop. And while yes 99% of your clientele may be the 'cat video' type, most users with any more knowledge of PC's than that fix them themselves (or have their kid do it). I should know; I used to work at a computer shop myself and the only time we didn't have a 'cat video' type of person is when someone came in to borrow the high speed connection to update their MMO game.

Gaming on PC is increasing, but I would suspect the majority of people who take it seriously are probably a large intersect with system builders. In my three years working where I do, I've had precisely 4 people inquire about a system that would be used for gaming.

Most computer users are the cat video type, and the reason they'd want a macbook is because it has better software than the tablets do - but it's the critical software they want and need. Office, accounting apps, etc. Plus, a hardware keyboard never hurts either.

That, and a lot of them are afraid of tablets. It's newfangled, strange technology they don't want to confront.

Don't read into it too much, but I have to say all-in-all, the primary motivator of people is price. They consistently buy low grade, inexpensive laptops against my advice simply because the laptops are cheap. Inevitably, they skimp out on the warranty and we see them coming back in 5 months.

It's one of the reasons I always make sure they're acutely aware of the fact we sell the product, we don't warranty it (except as additional service) - the same model everyone uses here. These people get turned back to the manufacturer, and I shudder to think of how well that works out for them.

Not my problem though. I told them.

 

[Vlad Rose]

Clearly you don't understand the market for computers - 99% of people want 5 main things:
- Facebook (check)
- Email (check)
- Cat videos (check)
- Photos (check)
- Office Apps (check)

99% eh? I'm gonna assume you believe the only people that use computers are not using them in a business environment and are under the age of 30. Assuming your "99%" is correct, of your "99%" that do use their pc for those basic things, i would say at least 50% of them would also require some additional things like games or business specific apps that aren't designed for mac OS. So they would have to use Windows. I know in my line of work it would be impossible for the business to change over to mac as all the business specific applications would have to be re-written for it, or buy expensive apple hardware + windows licenses... insane amounts of money would be needed to change over to apple devices from the perfectly good Dell and Microsoft products we use. My dell laptop has fallen from over one meter and hit the ground multiple times (its used as a service tool to connect to various machinery so it often rests on all sorts of unstable objects) and has survived, so anything to say with build quality of apple vs X brand windows pc is pretty much invalid. As from experience, at least mainly with dell products, they are built very solid. Across the whole business of thousands of users no one has complained about build quality or hardware robustness. Most businesses would also be in this boat of needing at least one or 2 apps that require windows. The only businesses i visit that use macs, are graphic arts type places, and there are only 2 or 3 macs within the business and they still require windows pc's for many things. For them macs are matter of personal preference and what they have learned on, not a requirement, and that's fine. At the end of it I don't believe there is any advantage of owning Apple hardware or their OS over a windows based pc. Macs still have their faults, they're not indestructible, they're can still get viruses (although many sales people use the pitch that macs dont get viruses) and they are not easier to use. I would say the one thing macs have going for them is that its harder to screw up the OS purely because its uses are limited, and core OS settings are harder to tamper with, which might suit some people that have had a bad experience with the Windows platform.

As I've said in previous posts, this is the consumer market we're speaking of. Obviously I'd be off my rocker if I thought this was applicable to corporate use. As far as the consumer market goes, the only hold-over software I've known to concern people has been some accounting apps and they now all offer cloud versions to deal with that.

It's like that XKCD comic: "I'm a mac, and I'm a PC, and since you do everything through the browser now we're basically indistinguishable".

If a user just want's a device for facebook, email, cat videos, photos, and office apps, they'd be better off just getting a tablet: Ipad, Note, etc. I don't see the need why they'd waste the extra 3-4x money on a macbook instead. Even Apple is aware of this considering at one point they were looking at switching their Macintosh lines to ARM CPUs so they can unify their software and interface. Too bad they realized ARM isn't fast enough yet for the few that use Macs for business use.

Also, I think your 99% is quite off considering games are one of the main driving the sales of faster processors. Nvidia/AMD are making large profits off their video cards as a result. Same with Valve with their Steam client and other software game companies. You had mentioned that you work at a computer shop. And while yes 99% of your clientele may be the 'cat video' type, most users with any more knowledge of PC's than that fix them themselves (or have their kid do it). I should know; I used to work at a computer shop myself and the only time we didn't have a 'cat video' type of person is when someone came in to borrow the high speed connection to update their MMO game.

Gaming on PC is increasing, but I would suspect the majority of people who take it seriously are probably a large intersect with system builders. In my three years working where I do, I've had precisely 4 people inquire about a system that would be used for gaming.

Most computer users are the cat video type, and the reason they'd want a macbook is because it has better software than the tablets do - but it's the critical software they want and need. Office, accounting apps, etc. Plus, a hardware keyboard never hurts either.

That, and a lot of them are afraid of tablets. It's newfangled, strange technology they don't want to confront.

Don't read into it too much, but I have to say all-in-all, the primary motivator of people is price. They consistently buy low grade, inexpensive laptops against my advice simply because the laptops are cheap. Inevitably, they skimp out on the warranty and we see them coming back in 5 months.

It's one of the reasons I always make sure they're acutely aware of the fact we sell the product, we don't warranty it (except as additional service) - the same model everyone uses here. These people get turned back to the manufacturer, and I shudder to think of how well that works out for them.

Not my problem though. I told them.

I know what you mean about people wanting cheap without looking at quality. I had a boss at one company that bought an Emachine with a Celeron, 1gb RAM, Windows Vista and wondered why it ran so slow. But hey, it was cheap!

BTW, I gotta ask, you ever have a customer get mad at you after fixing their machine (wasn't even runnable when it came in) because their desktop icons are all there, but not in the right place? Or worse yet, have a customer stick a floppy disk in their CD-ROM drive because it'd fit and they thought it'd read it? It boggles my mind sometimes how dumb the general public can be... lol.

*Btw, the 'coffee cup holder' joke is more true than it is a myth. Water cooled PC anyone?*

 

[canadianvice]

Clearly you don't understand the market for computers - 99% of people want 5 main things:
- Facebook (check)
- Email (check)
- Cat videos (check)
- Photos (check)
- Office Apps (check)

99% eh? I'm gonna assume you believe the only people that use computers are not using them in a business environment and are under the age of 30. Assuming your "99%" is correct, of your "99%" that do use their pc for those basic things, i would say at least 50% of them would also require some additional things like games or business specific apps that aren't designed for mac OS. So they would have to use Windows. I know in my line of work it would be impossible for the business to change over to mac as all the business specific applications would have to be re-written for it, or buy expensive apple hardware + windows licenses... insane amounts of money would be needed to change over to apple devices from the perfectly good Dell and Microsoft products we use. My dell laptop has fallen from over one meter and hit the ground multiple times (its used as a service tool to connect to various machinery so it often rests on all sorts of unstable objects) and has survived, so anything to say with build quality of apple vs X brand windows pc is pretty much invalid. As from experience, at least mainly with dell products, they are built very solid. Across the whole business of thousands of users no one has complained about build quality or hardware robustness. Most businesses would also be in this boat of needing at least one or 2 apps that require windows. The only businesses i visit that use macs, are graphic arts type places, and there are only 2 or 3 macs within the business and they still require windows pc's for many things. For them macs are matter of personal preference and what they have learned on, not a requirement, and that's fine. At the end of it I don't believe there is any advantage of owning Apple hardware or their OS over a windows based pc. Macs still have their faults, they're not indestructible, they're can still get viruses (although many sales people use the pitch that macs dont get viruses) and they are not easier to use. I would say the one thing macs have going for them is that its harder to screw up the OS purely because its uses are limited, and core OS settings are harder to tamper with, which might suit some people that have had a bad experience with the Windows platform.

As I've said in previous posts, this is the consumer market we're speaking of. Obviously I'd be off my rocker if I thought this was applicable to corporate use. As far as the consumer market goes, the only hold-over software I've known to concern people has been some accounting apps and they now all offer cloud versions to deal with that.

It's like that XKCD comic: "I'm a mac, and I'm a PC, and since you do everything through the browser now we're basically indistinguishable".

If a user just want's a device for facebook, email, cat videos, photos, and office apps, they'd be better off just getting a tablet: Ipad, Note, etc. I don't see the need why they'd waste the extra 3-4x money on a macbook instead. Even Apple is aware of this considering at one point they were looking at switching their Macintosh lines to ARM CPUs so they can unify their software and interface. Too bad they realized ARM isn't fast enough yet for the few that use Macs for business use.

Also, I think your 99% is quite off considering games are one of the main driving the sales of faster processors. Nvidia/AMD are making large profits off their video cards as a result. Same with Valve with their Steam client and other software game companies. You had mentioned that you work at a computer shop. And while yes 99% of your clientele may be the 'cat video' type, most users with any more knowledge of PC's than that fix them themselves (or have their kid do it). I should know; I used to work at a computer shop myself and the only time we didn't have a 'cat video' type of person is when someone came in to borrow the high speed connection to update their MMO game.

Gaming on PC is increasing, but I would suspect the majority of people who take it seriously are probably a large intersect with system builders. In my three years working where I do, I've had precisely 4 people inquire about a system that would be used for gaming.

Most computer users are the cat video type, and the reason they'd want a macbook is because it has better software than the tablets do - but it's the critical software they want and need. Office, accounting apps, etc. Plus, a hardware keyboard never hurts either.

That, and a lot of them are afraid of tablets. It's newfangled, strange technology they don't want to confront.

Don't read into it too much, but I have to say all-in-all, the primary motivator of people is price. They consistently buy low grade, inexpensive laptops against my advice simply because the laptops are cheap. Inevitably, they skimp out on the warranty and we see them coming back in 5 months.

It's one of the reasons I always make sure they're acutely aware of the fact we sell the product, we don't warranty it (except as additional service) - the same model everyone uses here. These people get turned back to the manufacturer, and I shudder to think of how well that works out for them.

Not my problem though. I told them.

I know what you mean about people wanting cheap without looking at quality. I had a boss at one company that bought an Emachine with a Celeron, 1gb RAM, Windows Vista and wondered why it ran so slow. But hey, it was cheap!

BTW, I gotta ask, you ever have a customer get mad at you after fixing their machine (wasn't even runnable when it came in) because their desktop icons are all there, but not in the right place? Or worse yet, have a customer stick a floppy disk in their CD-ROM drive because it'd fit and they thought it'd read it? It boggles my mind sometimes how dumb the general public can be... lol.

*Btw, the 'coffee cup holder' joke is more true than it is a myth. Water cooled PC anyone?*

I've never done technical work within my store, unfortunately. They thought going without a technician for 12 months was somehow superior to giving me the minimum of training I'd need, simply because I'm part time :\

We've had some amazingly stupid people though. One person with a Coke-cooled PC, another one who had his GFX blow out, we opened up the system and there's tar from his cigs literally everywhere forming a cozy layer of insulation. Of course we've also had plenty of the irrational angry people too.

The two crowning instances for me were:
1. Black guy (obviously foreign) comes in for something we had but sold, and as I go to say "unfor-" he interrupts with "Oh, un f* fortunately, huh? Stupid asshole!". Actually overheard him saying to his friend being an ass is a way to get customer service.

2. Guy comes in (I'd been on the job less than a week) and says "I'm buying a computer, cause my old one had viruses, but first - if I wanted to make sure the old one was absolutely clean, what parts would I have to remove? (I'll take HDD and Mobo for Double, thanks). "The Hard drive and *maaaaayyybbbeee* the motherboard. (due to BIOS infections, despite being incredibly rare)"

"Oh, I can see you don't have a clue what you're talking about. You can just sell! Get me someone who does!"
*Who has a sufficient badge of rank to say exactly what I just said?* *Get my buddy who wears a technician's uniform different from our own*

"Oh, yea, you'd just need to remove the mobo and HDD."
"That's what I tried to tell this idiot over there!" *customer points to me*

You know, typical minimum-wage retail experience. The customer is rarely right, it's simply your job to try and trick them into thinking they are.

 

[USAFRet]

And I see this whole thread is going nowhere.

 

[canadianvice]

And I see this whole thread is going nowhere.

Focus on the journey, not the destination 😛

 

[jdlobb]

I'm sorry, this sounds pretty stupid. Apple is nothing more than a pc with a different os. that os is mostly useless compared to most software is designed for windows, NOT an apple os.
And what i've found over and over and over, an apple with the EXACT same parts will cost hundreds more than a pc brand. Only an idiot would get an apple.

Please, tell me more about apple costing more than a PC.

Apple MacBook Pro - $1,299
Dell XPS with the same specs - $1,299
Asus Zenbook with worse specs (1080p screen) - $1,229
HP Elitebook with worst specs (4GB ram, 900p screen) - $1,304

I'm sorry that Apple doesn't make any plastic laptops with Celeron processors and 2GB of RAM to sell to technical illiterates like you for $299

May I ask where you're getting the price on the Asus? The highest price I've seen for the same specs has still been under $1,000.

What's really ironic too is that you compared Apple's laptop to Asus's Ultrabook. It should be Apple's Air vs Asus Zenbook. Or if you want to use the Macbook, pick one of Asus's normal laptops.

Ah, and therein lies my frustration with my work. My talents are wasted - perhaps not for the simple part, but they can realistically walk in and pick any computer they like and get something that does "the basics" (literally the terminology 99% of the people I talk to use to sum up their use.... it's not very helpful). No real point in having me there.

I feel your pain. But that $1000+ Apple is a very hard sell against a $300 Toshiba, with an OS they already know, and will run applications they are already used to.
And future applications they want will ALL run on Windows. Only some will run in the Apple world.

and some people would rather not buy a garbage chromebook or throw away laptop that maybe last 6 months before it has to be replaced. MacBooks are proven to last for years and remain issue free for their entire life. I know a lot more people using Macs from 2010 and 2011 than PC laptops from 2010 and 2011.

Also, $1000 isn't as much money to some people as it is to others.

I go back to my earlier point. When you price like-to-like specs of MacBooks against PC laptops the price premium for a Mac isn't nearly as much as the "perception" that PC blowhards seem to have.

Any price premium that does exist is also likely to be valued as worth the fact that you can walk into a store, buy a MacBook, take it out of the box, and be running and stable in as much time as it takes for you to type in your email address and select your preferred language.

OS X also has a functional app store, unlike the garbage nonsense that Windows created, as well as infinitely simpler installation and installation of programs.

Finally, contrary to popular belief, there are actually very very few "PC exclusive" applications anymore.

 

[USAFRet]

and some people would rather not buy a garbage chromebook or throw away laptop that maybe last 6 months before it has to be replaced. MacBooks are proven to last for years and remain issue free for their entire life. I know a lot more people using Macs from 2010 and 2011 than PC laptops from 2010 and 2011.

And I have a fully functional Toshiba laptop, 2009 era, currently dualbooting Win 7 and Win 10 Tech Preview.
Whatever.

Of all the Windows based laptops I've seen, I've seen exactly 1 die in 6 months. And that was simply a hard drive fail. Easily replaced.
Any other fails were directly due to user error. Like stepping on it and breaking the screen.

 

[Vlad Rose]

and some people would rather not buy a garbage chromebook or throw away laptop that maybe last 6 months before it has to be replaced. MacBooks are proven to last for years and remain issue free for their entire life. I know a lot more people using Macs from 2010 and 2011 than PC laptops from 2010 and 2011.

And I have a fully functional Toshiba laptop, 2009 era, currently dualbooting Win 7 and Win 10 Tech Preview.
Whatever.

Of all the Windows based laptops I've seen, I've seen exactly 1 die in 6 months. And that was simply a hard drive fail. Easily replaced.
Any other fails were directly due to user error. Like stepping on it and breaking the screen.

Yeah, it's kinda ironic. I've owned 2 laptops. One is a Toshiba netbook with an Atom that's still running strong and cost about $300. The other was a $2500 Toshiba Satellite with dual 8600m's that died exactly 2 years after purchase due to a faulty video card Nvidia ended up having a lawsuit over. Apple was one of those victims with the Nvidia lawsuit as well. So much for high end being issue free or lasting their life span.

 

[Solandri]

MacBooks are proven to last for years and remain issue free for their entire life. I know a lot more people using Macs from 2010 and 2011 than PC laptops from 2010 and 2011.

I'm curious if you have actual data that backs this up, or if you're just saying it because you want to believe it's true. The data I've seen (from companies that repair computers or provide extended warranties), puts Apple in the top tier (along with Samsung, Asus, and usually Lenovo). But Apple usually comes in at #4, not a standout #1 like you'd expect from their prices.

Here's an alternate theory to explain your observation. A 4-5 year old computer is pretty much obsolete (becoming less true now that CPU speeds have peaked, but was pretty much the case as little as 3 years ago). PC laptops cost less so once they reach obsolescence, people dispose of them and replace them with a new one. Apple laptops cost more, so people hang on to them long past obsolescence to try to "get their money's worth" out of them.

I helped prep my sister's then-5-year old Macbook for donation to a low-income friend. There was no ethical way I would've intentionally inflicted it (a Core Duo) onto someone in light of the newer used systems available. I insisted on buying a low-end SSD and installing it (my contribution to the donation) to bring its level of performance up to a somewhat acceptable level by modern standards.

I go back to my earlier point. When you price like-to-like specs of MacBooks against PC laptops the price premium for a Mac isn't nearly as much as the "perception" that PC blowhards seem to have.

The price premium for a Mac is not "perception". It's clearly visible in Apple's profit margin, which is around 20%+ vs about 5% for companies like Dell. Both companies are buying commodity parts from the same suppliers, paying the same OEMs and ODMs to assemble them, and providing aftermarket service which like all insurance is based on the cost of the premium exceeding the cost of service. The fact that Apple's profit margin is so much higher tells you that Apple products cost a lot more per dollar that actually went into building and servicing the product.

 

[Vlad Rose]

The price premium for a Mac is not "perception". It's clearly visible in Apple's profit margin, which is around 20%+ vs about 5% for companies like Dell. Both companies are buying commodity parts from the same suppliers, paying the same OEMs and ODMs to assemble them, and providing aftermarket service which like all insurance is based on the cost of the premium exceeding the cost of service. The fact that Apple's profit margin is so much higher tells you that Apple products cost a lot more per dollar that actually went into building and servicing the product.

That's definitely true since their last quarter profit margin was 8.5 billion (higher than everyone else), but yet only own less than15% in the smartphone market (android has 85%), 26.5% in the tablet market, and 13.4% of the home computer/laptop market. They are also only the 5th largest PC maker in the world.

 

[Solandri]

That's definitely true since their last quarter profit margin was 8.5 billion (higher than everyone else), but yet only own less than15% in the smartphone market (android has 85%),

I'm fairly certain what's going on in the smartphone market (in the U.S.) is that iPhones are effectively being subsidized by Android phones. If you look at the cost of the phones unlocked (i.e. no contract), an iPhone 6 is about $650. A 6+ is about $750. An unlocked Galaxy S5 is about $500, a Note 4 about $700.

Yet if you look at the subsidized pricing on carriers, the iPhone 6 and S5 are both $199, the 6+ and Note 4 are both $299. Essentially the S5 is marked up an extra $150 (or the iPhone 6 marked down an extra $150), the Note 4 marked up $50. And the extra money the carrier makes from gouging its Android customers is sent to Apple as payment for iPhones. I think this also explains the higher market share of iPhones in the U.S. vs other countries where there is no carrier subsidy. The iPhones are simply more expensive there (noone shifting money from Android sales to iPhones to lower the iPhone prices), making them less attractive.

The U.S. very badly need to decouple phone sales from carrier service sales. So that each phone can stand on its own merits and pricing.

 

[palladin9479]

The price premium for a Mac is not "perception". It's clearly visible in Apple's profit margin, which is around 20%+ vs about 5% for companies like Dell. Both companies are buying commodity parts from the same suppliers, paying the same OEMs and ODMs to assemble them, and providing aftermarket service which like all insurance is based on the cost of the premium exceeding the cost of service. The fact that Apple's profit margin is so much higher tells you that Apple products cost a lot more per dollar that actually went into building and servicing the product.

Apple is utilizing the designer clothing model of marketing. The makers of designer clothing & accessories (Gucci / Prada / Louis Vuitton / ect..) are not using some super high quality materials or process, they are using the exact same every other quality manufacturer (not bargain bin) is using. They instead focus on marketing their logo and attaching the perception of "elite" to it, then marking the price high enough that folks want to use their product as a display of success / wealth. Apple does this by heavily involving itself with Hollywood and Movie / TV productions. Stop and go through practically every Hollywood movie / TV show and every PC or notebook with have a giant Apple logo in plain view of the camera. Even though everything they are doing is made up and 99% of it doesn't make any sense once so ever, people associate and remember the Apple logo. It's all about image management, they employ more graphics artists then they do engineers for the purpose of making everything they produce have a stylish theme to it. This is what Steve Jobs did for them that turned the company around, he transformed Apple products from OEM computers into stylish fashion accessories that displayed ones status.

 

[jdlobb]

Apple's profitability is very poor evidence that their products are meaningfully more expensive or that they're charging some sort of "fashionability" premium. A comparable laptop from Dell still costs the same, or very close to the same, as a MacBook. But Dell is much less profitable and doesn't carry the same "prestige."

If you're going to compare computers you have to compare like to like. You can't compare a MacBook pro to an Inspiron laptop and say "look, Dell is cheaper."

A Dell XPS laptop with a QHD screen, an i5 processor, 8GB of RAM, and a 128GB SSD is $1,299, the exact same price as a MacBook Pro with a QHD screen, an i5 processor, 8GB of RAM, and a 128GB SSD.

A Dell XPS ultrabook costs the exact same as a MacBook Air

A Lenovo workstation with the same specs as a Mac Pro actually costs about $500 more than the Apple

Like to like

The only difference between Apple and PC companies is that Apple doesn't offer low-end computers. With Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. you can always start cutting features and quality to get to lower prices. But those are entirely different markets. Dell et al sell plenty of their high end laptops, and I doubt that any of you PC fanbois would begrudge anybody for buying a $1,299 Dell or Asus, so why do you have such ire for people who chose to spend the same money on an Apple product.

 

[Shneiky]

No Dell or HP workstation I ever saw with the same specs as a Mac Pro was the same price. We got 8 Z420s with varying specs because what you could get for the same price from Apple was laughable. A comparable 8 core, 32 GBs RAM with 256 SSD MacPro is 6000 EUR, but it lacks the 2 TBs HDDs that we have. And of course our Z420s have K4000s. And they did not cost even close to 5000 what is left for 6000 EUR and still have more. Those dual GPUs in there are a waste. The number of software that uses Dual GPU is limited to the fingers on my hand. And I am not even counting all the proprietary cables, devices, storage, monitors and everything you have to pay for the MacPro. It even goes to double the price when you put all in the basket.

 

[USAFRet]

The only difference between Apple and PC companies is that Apple doesn't offer low-end computers. With Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. you can always start cutting features and quality to get to lower prices. But those are entirely different markets. Dell et al sell plenty of their high end laptops, and I doubt that any of you PC fanbois would begrudge anybody for buying a $1,299 Dell or Asus, so why do you have such ire for people who chose to spend the same money on an Apple product.

I'd laugh at any purchaser that bought a $1300 laptop to simply email/facebook/watch cat videos.
Be it Dell, Lenovo, Asus, or Apple.

 

[Vlad Rose]

The only difference between Apple and PC companies is that Apple doesn't offer low-end computers. With Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. you can always start cutting features and quality to get to lower prices. But those are entirely different markets. Dell et al sell plenty of their high end laptops, and I doubt that any of you PC fanbois would begrudge anybody for buying a $1,299 Dell or Asus, so why do you have such ire for people who chose to spend the same money on an Apple product.

I'd laugh at any purchaser that bought a $1300 laptop to simply email/facebook/watch cat videos.
Be it Dell, Lenovo, Asus, or Apple.

True dat.

 

[Solandri]

Apple's profitability is very poor evidence that their products are meaningfully more expensive or that they're charging some sort of "fashionability" premium. A comparable laptop from Dell still costs the same, or very close to the same, as a MacBook. But Dell is much less profitable and doesn't carry the same "prestige."

I just don't know what to say...

Profit margin = (revenue - costs) / revenue

The smaller the costs are as a percentage of revenue, the bigger the profit margin. Ergo, if a company has a bigger profit margin, it represents a worse value.

In a normal liquid market, if one company finds an untapped market and produces a product to fulfill that demand, it can generate high profits in the short-term. But competitors soon see that company making oodles of money, enter the market for that product, and the competition lowers the price so profit settles down to about the 5%-10% that's the industry-wide norm.

When this doesn't happen and profit margin remains high, it's because a company either has a near-monopoly (e.g. DeBeers and diamonds), or because they've successfully marketed themselves as the fashionable choice and people keep paying higher prices for it when lower priced competitors are readily available (e.g. Gucci, Apple).

If you're going to compare computers you have to compare like to like. You can't compare a MacBook pro to an Inspiron laptop and say "look, Dell is cheaper."

That's why I'm using profit margin. It cancels out the effect of individual product price. You see "revenue" in both the numerator and denominator in the above formula? It cancels out. All that matters is the ratio of cost to revenue.

A Dell XPS laptop with a QHD screen, an i5 processor, 8GB of RAM, and a 128GB SSD is $1,299, the exact same price as a MacBook Pro with a QHD screen, an i5 processor, 8GB of RAM, and a 128GB SSD.

The Dell XPS frequently goes on sale or has coupons which cut that price by 25%-40%. Apple's sales almost never go higher than 10%.

The only difference between Apple and PC companies is that Apple doesn't offer low-end computers.

That's actually the first sensible thing you've said. Yes low-end computers have lower profit margin, and high-end computers have bigger profit margin. That doesn't change the fact that high-end computers are worse values. That's basic price/performance curves.

Companies can get away with higher profit margins on these high-end items because there's less competition. So you should buy the high-end item only if your needs require it. But I'm seeing all sorts of people buying Macbook Pros who aren't artists or photographers or videographers, when the only tangible advantage of the MBP over the MBA or a plethora of PC laptops is the better screen gamut and resolution. They're buying the MBP because it's fashionable, not because their needs require a screen which covers 100% of sRGB color space and has super-high PPI. (I'm a semi-pro photographer, so the better screen is actually one of my requirements, and I'm not particularly happy about having to pay a premium for it.)

 

[palladin9479]

That's actually the first sensible thing you've said. Yes low-end computers have lower profit margin, and high-end computers have bigger profit margin. That doesn't change the fact that high-end computers are worse values. That's basic price/performance curves.

Apple offering a low cost product would severely undercut their market image. It would be like Gucci offering a "budget" handbag, it's instant brand death. It's why those big name designers open entirely new lines with different symbols and distinguishing markings so that anyone can easily differentiate by sight between the "premium" product and the "budget" product. Both products are made from the same material and same quality of facilities and thus have similar costs per unit but they still need to maintain the distinguished brand of the premium product. Apple is no different, their "Pro" series is made from the same Chinese / Taiwanese components as everyone else, they get OEMs to customize a particular board for a particular model, but that's for stylish reasons as it's still made from the same materials and at the same facilities. They put inside it standard components, stick a fruit logo on the outside and preinstall their OS onto it. They then overcharge by ridiculous amounts.

To give an idea of what they are doing, a CPU from Intel that would cost ~$300 USD in bulk will raise the cost of the Apple system by ~$400 USD. They pocket the difference and the brand loyalists will flock to defend the practice. Nothing wrong with that, as long as customers seek to inform themselves and know they are purchasing a badge.

 

[g-unit1111]

and some people would rather not buy a garbage chromebook or throw away laptop that maybe last 6 months before it has to be replaced. MacBooks are proven to last for years and remain issue free for their entire life. I know a lot more people using Macs from 2010 and 2011 than PC laptops from 2010 and 2011.

And I have a fully functional Toshiba laptop, 2009 era, currently dualbooting Win 7 and Win 10 Tech Preview.
Whatever.

Of all the Windows based laptops I've seen, I've seen exactly 1 die in 6 months. And that was simply a hard drive fail. Easily replaced.
Any other fails were directly due to user error. Like stepping on it and breaking the screen.

Yeah exactly - the only parts I've ever had to replace on any given laptop are usually the battery or the hard drive, and that's about it.