Apple’s MacBook Pro: Rotting Core?
1. What Apple Doesn't Want You To Realize
We like Apple products, but today we’re feeling outraged about the stale and expensive MacBook Pro. Paul Escallier speaks his mind, and shares evidence.
If you've been thinking about getting a new MacBook Pro in the next few weeks or months, you may want to think again. We all know that Apple charges a hefty premium for its products, but the unwavering high prices of its aging product line are becoming more and more outrageous. It has been more than a year since the line's last refresh, and two years since its last major upgrade. Sure, that sexy super model you wish you were dating might fret about her age, but she wouldn't make a big deal about two years. But for a computer, two years is half a lifetime. If dog years are at a one to seven ratio to human years, computer years are more like one to 20, so when you think about it a certain way, running a computer on two year old components is like a 40 year old running a marathon. Sure, it's possible, but that spry 20-something is going to do it much faster. If you had $2,000 to bet, would you wager it all on the 40 year old?
The reason for such quick and extreme outdated-ness is the speed at which the computer and component industries move. The fastest processor for any given price hardly lasts six months before a faster version comes out. RAM jumps from DDR to DDR2 to DDR3 in a span of just a few years. There's even a scientific law, Moore's Law, which basically states that processors will double in speed (it actually refers to transistor count, but speed is a direct correlation) every 18 months to two years. Yet, Apple continues to sell a computer with a two year old processor core! What's worse is that this collection of middle-aged hardware that comprises a MacBook Pro is still the same price as when it was released (not counting the first two months' "early adoption tax" – that premium you pay for something that is brand new)—that’s something virtually unheard of in the rest of the, computer business.
Because something better always manages to come out just a few months after a product’s launch, the previous model typically drops down to a lower price point, and likewise all of the models before it see a price reduction, too. That's why the $1000 desktop computer you bought from Costco five months ago is on sale for $600 now. However, Apple is able to freeze its prices because it has managed to maintain a proprietary platform. In other words, Apple is the only company with legal access to the Apple hardware and software, which is in contrast to the regular PC market where anyone can buy up a few parts and build a legitimate PC.
Back when Apple used specialized components for systems (like the PowerPC processor) its price-freezing tactics were more understandable, but since it has started using mainstream PC components, it has been trying to hide that fact with purposely vague parts lists to give the illusion of a more unique product. It is a method that is a bit questionable, to say the least.
We're going to take a look at the components used in the $2000 15-inch MacBook Pro, which, in this author's opinion, is the most practical choice of the MacBook line because of its size and additional power compared the cheaper models; however, the entire MacBook line uses similar components, so this article's analysis could speak to those models, too. As we examine the components, we’ll ask whether Apple is at all justified in keeping prices stable from the time of that component’s most recent update until now.
- Latest Computers News
- 08/24 – Apple Patent Filing is About Tracking, ID'ing Users
- 08/19 – School Cleared of Spying on Children's Laptops
- All Computers news
- Latest Computers Reviews
- 08/04 – Which Would You Choose, 17 or 15?
- 08/04 – 'GX' Takes Gaming to the Extreme
- 08/04 – Multimedia and Heavy Computing
- 08/04 – Performance on the Go
- 08/04 – A Closer Look at the GX740, the 17-Incher
- All Computers reviews
Moore's law is not a scientific law.
i agree 1000%
15" screen with 1920x1080 resolution? I don't know, I suppose this is only for watching movies, because otherwise this is a completely useless feature. I am now in front of a 24" 1920x1080 and it is by far much more friendly and "healthier" (for me at least) than a 15" 1440x900 laptop screen. At 1440x900 an 15" screen successfully proves it's lack of dimensions - this resolution should be used on bigger screens; higher resolutions on a 15" screen? Please, NO-NO-NO!
In a way I agree with the main idea of this article, but on the other hand we're talking about a "premium" product. The components quality included in a MacBook Pro, also the software included which on Windows side has to be acquired separately and thus increases the price tag of a legally owned Windows system. Except MacBook Pro, I don't know other laptops (regular, not miniature netbooks) that offer you comparable on-battery time.
Monopolistic? Probably, but I don't think it's Apple's fault that it's competitors can't offer the same quality and useful performances. Let's not forget some of the competition flaws, "this notebook/laptop is too noisy" makes me shiver every time when I'm stumbling on notebooks reviews/commentaries. If I wanted a vacuum cleaner surrounding sound, I would start a vacuum cleaner, I don't want to obtain that from a laptop, I want a quiet laptop, I want to see a lit led to be sure that the laptop is actually running, I don't want to hear it running. I never heard of a MacBook being noisy. We can continue longer.
Anyway, long story short, I want to see the MacBook useful qualities on other laptops as well and after that we can start comparing. Until then we can compare MacBook Pro with many other systems, and the only competitor is MacBook Pro. The price comparison is valid only when we will be talking about similar features on the laptops compared, otherwise, up to a point, the discussion about how cheap is the competition and how their prices are dropping leaves me completely indifferent as long as there are "this laptop is too noisy" and other flaws that oppose the main idea of what a laptop should be.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Who really cares about apple on this site? Most people who use them would never vist a site like this.
Most of the points presented in the article are true, but you're missing something kind of big here. Apple has never put pride into it's low pricing scheme first of all - that argument is a bit old, their products are expensive, but come with the engineering that commands it.
Apple hasn't pioneered a damn thing since the 1980s, but they sure as heck improved a bunch of things. Build quality has been and still is a problem with laptop manufacturers. Apple has been known on occasion to produce terrible batches as well (1st Gen macbook pro, believe me I owned one), but overall you would have to give it to apple in that their products are very well built. In terms of other improvements (ipod, iphone etc), those aren't aimed at the laptop so I'll leave them out.
If anyone's been following Apple's pricing scheme, this is what I've seen they tend to do: They release a product at a reasonable price, and wait until it's beginning to be out-dated to update it. Meaning they release a $2000 laptop thats worth 2 grand, and wait 1-2 years to update it without changing the price. If you don't like that scheme, well I don't think they care lol
Theres a lot of apple hate going on recently, and while some of it's valid, I think people need to start calling apple on what they're actually doing wrong, not things like "I cant afford it, waaaa."
In a way I agree with the main idea of this article, but on the other hand we're talking about a "premium" product. The components quality included in a MacBook Pro, also the software included which on Windows side has to be acquired separately and thus increases the price tag of a legally owned Windows system.
This is a prime example of what the article is about. Apple wants you to think it's using special, quality parts, when in fact it's only using plain old PC parts which you can find at Frys or Newegg.com.
The parts Apple uses aren't special magical parts that don't degrade in value, but Apple is trying to make everyone think they are.
I understand the premium price sucks, and it's part of the reason I've yet to buy a mac (besides me being a picky bastard when it comes to laptops). But there's an added bonus to purchasing and owning a macbook: premium service. While the price you pay, that "mac tax", is more money out of pocket, the peace of mind that you can just bring your laptop, or any Apple product into the store and have it repaired by experts who actually know what they're talking about. You simply can't get that anywhere else.
Buy a computer at Best Buy, and you're dealing with the Geek Squad, which sucks. I know, because I know people who do it and besides hating their jobs, often they don't fix the problem. Calling support sucks, for obvious reasons (10 minutes to talk to a human being, explaining what's wrong at least 3 times, etc). Having the ability to walk into a store, talk to a live person who actually understands what you're talking about, and getting it fixed pretty quickly by someone who cares? Is that not worth the premium price?
Also, how is Joe Consumer supposed to know the difference between Core 2, Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Quad, and i5/i7 chips? The only way is because I just listed them from oldest to newest. Numbers are easier: 2GHz, 1.5GHz, 3.2GHz...but once again, how the hell does some non-tech savvy consumer know the difference? You go into a Best Buy and yes, the numbers are all there, but there's 20 models from 30 companies with 50 different numbers. By the time you look at 3, your head's spinning.
Apple, alternatively, does away with the confusion. They sell only the latest models, and those looking to spend less can go to their online outlet store, or buy it used from someone else. They have limited customization for laptops, and its expensive and generally intended for the more expensive models. Sure, they don't offer i5 or i7 chipsets yet, but so what? Most companies don't sell those CPUs in laptops widespread yet, and the way Apple does it, everyone knows that there's a new, faster, better Macbook available. Every single convention or showing they do shows off one of their products, all the media swoops in (ourselves included), and everyone immediately knows.
So yes, it is sad that you can't get the absolute best on a Macbook Pro today. But if you wait until their bi-annual upgrade, you can! For us tech-savvy consumers, Apple is slow, but for everyone else, they are the simplest to deal with, and the extra money is worth spending. Not only because of the quality product, but the quality service.
Thanks for the comments, everyone! For those people commenting on whether not people who read this site are interested in Apple, I say: Look around you. You're at Tom's Guide! Welcome. We are interested in Apple, here. We are also interested in learning about the difference between different processors when it is time for us to make a purchasing decision. Hopefully this article can help people who are thinking about whether or not to buy a MacBook Pro right now. The MacBook Pro line has a great future ahead of it, and Apple will always market itself to a certain kind of consumer. Whether or not you are that consumer, at the very least you are interested in consumer tech--that's why you're here at Tom's Guide. Apple's marketing choices and spec choices say a lot about the CE industry.
Thanks for reading,
Rachel Rosmarin
Managing Editor, Tom's Guide
Wow, bash Apple much? Your writing was hardly objective.
Wow, bash Apple much? Your writing was hardly objective.
As an opinion piece, I wouldn't expect it to be objective. There's nothing wrong with the MacBooks themselves; it's the way Apple is marketting them that takes advantage of the consumer. The article points out Apple's flaws in this respect not only as matter of opinion, but with supporting facts as well.
You make some good points. But doesn't the Mac come with better software included? Please correct me if I'm wrong. I had heard the PCs don't ship with the equivalent of ilife, for example.
This was a refreshing and candid article amidst all the iMarcus iYam windows bashing posts.
Apple still relies on the old IT professional tricks: use language your client does not understand to convince them you know what you are talking about and are worth the money.
As the personal PC industry catches up to the corporate PC industry the same lessons will be learned: the snake oil salesmen that talk but can't walk will be weeded out. Apple needs to adapt, or die. Because the personal PC industry is already saying "Helllllllo ASUS!"
Fantastic article. As an apple fan, I couldn't agree with you more. And I'm glad you brought up blu ray. Blu Ray players and burners are starting to get widespread. I don't want to have to rebuy all my blu ray movies as dvds just so i can watch them while on a flight in far inferior quality on my laptop.
My only nitpick is that you opted to talk up the Nivdea GT335M instead of the far superior ATI 5830 GPU.
Nividea has pretty much exited the laptop GPU scene 6 months ago. All their mobile gpu offering are very outdated and there is nothing new on the horizon.
Thus I think Apple needs to switch to the ATI 58XX series which offers fantastic performance gains over every other laptop gpu on the market all while using extremely low amounts of power, just 24 watts!!
My only nitpick is that you opted to talk up the Nivdea GT335M instead of the far superior ATI 5830 GPU.Nividea has pretty much exited the laptop GPU scene 6 months ago. All their mobile gpu offering are very outdated and there is nothing new on the horizon.Thus I think Apple needs to switch to the ATI 58XX series which offers fantastic performance gains over every other laptop gpu on the market all while using extremely low amounts of power, just 24 watts!!
I actually agree with you. I've generally prefered ATI over Nvidia, and especially so with their current offerings. My only thought is that since Apple has been using an Nvidia chipset AND video card, it'll probably prefer to stick with Nvidia just so that they dont need to rewrite drivers and other back-end software.
You neglected something truly innovative that would make the laptop BLAZING fast with INSTANTANOUS BOOTTIMES...
Originally Posted by Jack B:
I posted earlier about apple putting a small ssd into the next mbp's in addition to a normal hdd. I don't mean a literal 1.8" or 2.5" ssd. I just looked up how much an 8 GB NAND memory IC costs. Bought in a reel of 1000, it costs a grand total of $10. Integrated into the spot where the old north bridge used to be, apple could not only have switchable graphics but also hybrid drives on each of its systems. By shutting down the harddrive and using the flash module for most activities could result in vastly faster performance and longer battery life. Put the OS on there and you could be enjoying what, 10 hours of battery life and (instantanous) boot times. I could wait another month for that.
Here's the link for the NAND IC I mentioned:
http://search.digikey.com/scripts/ [...] -1372-2-ND
I would even be happy with a Built in HD Radio/HD TV tuner with QASM cable-in, and a HDMI out.
"Apple wants you to think that a Mac uses specialized Mac hardware that is independent from the rest of the computer market. This is simply untrue. This type of behavior is never good for the consumer. Not only does it keep prices high, but it also prevents progress from being made in important areas like performance."
This is why I've always been skeptical of apple. Never a hater, just a little skeptical...
Apple migrated their notebooks from Intel to Nvidia chipsets back in October 2008, citing better graphics performance. Nvidia is now banned from making chipsets compatible with Intel Nehalem processors, forcing Apple to either release a Core i5 notebook with slow Intel graphics (and have the user manually switch to a power-hungry GPU), or wait for Nvidia Optimus (Intel chipset, Nvidia auto-switching GPU).
The age of peak marathon performance is generally accepted to be in the mid-30s, so your cute metaphor is well of the mark. Pro tip: get outside more.
The article hits the nail on the head quite often, but you have to hand it to Apple as a money making enterprise. They have found (and own) a sweet spot in the market that most other PC makers would love to occupy (loyal / die hard customers willing to overpay for standard components in a pretty package). Of course there is value beyond the hardware (OSX for those who like it, design "sex appeal", and Apple service). But of course there are far more many people out there who will scoff at paying the Apple tax. But for Apple, *enough* people will pay it to allow them to prosper. Jobs truly is a marketing genius in this regard.
Fantastic article, I really hope Apple read this, well written!