Why Mac? ... average user....

[Tomahawk]

PC vs Mac

It's not worth debating. Never has been, at least not in a serious context.

People get anal over the subject.

We all have our opinion of which is best, but no one can sum it all up as to why.

So, I offer this small explanation, "Different strokes for different folks." I want to use Macs because I like using them. Reason being, I've used them long enough to know them inside and out.

I'm really into telescopes and astronomy, and the subject of which brand is better comes up all the time on discussion boards. I always make it a point to stay out of those debates because you know what? People who really use their telescopes don't talk about shit like that. Instead, they talk about what they observed with their telescopes because they're out there using it as a tool, which it was meant to be.

If my computer can't do want I need it to do, then I'm shit canning the mother fucker and getting one that can. Period.

 

[Modred189]

well, this WAS a good thread.

I was afraid this would happen. Unfortunately, just as a few posters were actually reading and addressing the OP, it sank into the pro/anti-mac argument I wanted to avoid. Ah well...

 

[Gillette]

your Elph should work just fine without any extra software or drivers, unless it's one of the first Elphs then it may have problems. I know all three of the Elphs I've had, have hooked up, been detected and was able to transfer pics without loading anything extra.

Original model, to be quite honest I can barely get the think recognized on any OS.

That is one of the stupidest things I have read in this entire thread. It's funny that most IT professionals are either on a Mac or would be on a Mac if their company allowed it. It has nothing to do with Windows competency. Most Window users only know how to use Windows, put a command line in front of them and they don't even have a clue of what to do. I am Windows certified (MCSE) and if it were up to me Windows PCs would not be allowed on my network.

No, because of:

I guess you don't understand the benefits of having an exchange server or outlook's role in business. There's a good reason companies embrace windows because windows supports legacy standards and the fact that if something goes wrong it's usually a simple hardware swap, not taking the machine to an apple authorized repair center and waiting a week for the part to come in. While Dell's home customer support side sucks, their business support for clients is awesome. Parts are shipped next day and arrive within 24 hrs or we'll have someone onsite within the nex business day.

Businesses don't want to upgrade their older equipment when a new operating system comes out that doesn't support x feature.

OSX has a bad history of constantly switching and ditching standards and throwing ports off their machines. Good for home users, bad for business

Dell's business support is absolutely phenomenal. Last time I had to deal with them we had three PCs randomly crap out at the office I was working at, couldn't get them running with the normal troubleshooting/hardware swapping stuff. Called up Dell, had a tech there at 9AM the next morning, fixed all of the problems we had (all three needed new mobo/psu, I'm assuming it was a power spike or something).

 

[vraa]

So I sell computers at a major retailer. We sell Macs and PC's. There's one question I get from customers that I also wrestle with. I've used macs. I want to get a mac laptop.
One thing gets in my way: Why would I buy a $1999 laptop (macbook pro), when, for basic, everyday use (office work, internet, photos etc...) I can get a PC for ~$1000 that is as powerful and as capable (including any software, say ~1500).? (The same analogy holds for the basic macbooks as well, just different price points).
I love the way macs look and work. Security's not a huge issue, as for most people, as long as you spring for good anti-malware software, you're fine. I like the OS (used it a lot in college). But the cost is very prohibitive.

I don't want to start a riot or something, as I am seriously asking:
Why should an average joe shell out that much more?

edit: for snyone who asks, yes I read the 30 days with Mac article. While very good, I don't think it addressed this question...

Specifically

Why would I buy a $1999 laptop (macbook pro), when, for basic, everyday use (office work, internet, photos etc...)

If you were an average user, you're get the 999$ macbook as you'll see a lot of college students have done. They just want something that is fashionable and just works.

 

[Lack]

If you were an average user, you're get the 999$ macbook as you'll see a lot of college students have done. They just want something that is fashionable and just works.

Not every one feels comfortable on a 13" screen.
Another group doesn't want GMA950.

One size doesn't fit all in here.

 

[logik]

One size doesn't fit all in here.

Perhaps a Mac isn't for them, then?

 

[Lack]

Perhaps a Mac isn't for them, then?

So what's the point in calling them "avarage" users?

 

[Modred189]

Perhaps a Mac isn't for them, then?

AGH!
This is my point! Being that I am a basic/average user, can someone say a Mac isn't for me? Should I tell my average/basic customers that? Is a Mac only for people who are into music/movies etc? Are they too expensive for less demanding people?

 

[RyanGrob]

AGH!
This is my point! Being that I am a basic/average user, can someone say a Mac isn't for me? Should I tell my average/basic customers that? Is a Mac only for people who are into music/movies etc? Are they too expensive for less demanding people?

You need to change your original post first of all. It should be if you can get a Macbook for 1099, not a Macbook Pro. You're logic has huge flaws. I don't understand how you can sell PC's and Mac's when you assume the Macbook Pro is ultimately the average user is looking for.

 

[Mistrblank]

I'm a partial switcher too having bought a Macbook last september and I love it. For me it's the fact that it's as simple or as complicated as I want to make it that sells it to me. On the GUI, everything is laid out nicely and where I might expect it to be, and if not a simple use of finder will get me where I want to be. At the same time though I have the power of a command line back end with all the wonderful BSD style commands to manipulate and work on my system.

Above all the system looks nice and in the OS the interface looks nice and is robust (and getting even moreso with Leopard), nothing compared to the aging toybox in Windows XP (won't touch Vista until we see the first service pack) and nothing compared to the default Linux desktop options (though I do understand if I'm willing to go out of my way to get there I can make them look almost like OS X too). It is a toy, but at least it looks like a professional toy.

I do however work in a position where I can't afford to tie myself to any particular operating system and forsake so I will use whatever is available to me and it's hard for me to say that any particular OS is better than any other, they all have different capabilities.

 

[Modred189]

You need to change your original post first of all. It should be if you can get a Macbook for 1099, not a Macbook Pro. You're logic has huge flaws. I don't understand how you can sell PC's and Mac's when you assume the Macbook Pro is ultimately the average user is looking for.

Not necessarily. Look at the Sony here:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage...ategoryId=pcmcat103700050030&id=1177717722882
and compare it to a macbook pro.
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APP...6894000/wo/gI1mF0NBlVvH2cfM7Es1uElEHSj/4.?p=0
And if you mtach the HD and the ram in a Macbook, you are still talking ~150-200 difference (excepting the black one of course).

... not so different at all, except the graphics cards. And being that no mac is meant for gaming (BS EA/ID announcements aside, as I have my doubts), they will both do the 2d stuff the same.

 

[LesterOfPuppets]

Link Sony SZ series?
Yeah, almost. They sell 79 USD iPod Shuffles along with along with 149-249 Nanos all they way to 349 USD Video iPods but they can't offer a decent selection of computer hardware as well? Just give people the choice -

I bought my half-gig mp3 player for $42, slapped a 2gig SD card in there for $15, whadda deal.

My mp3-player can be compared to the Dells that people like to say are a way better deal than Macs - or the killer rig they can build from parts at newegg. It works great, has an lcd screen, eq, can play all cuts from one album or all cuts from one artist, takes AAA batteries and cost just a little over half what a shuffle would. It's not the size of a postage stamp, not made of metal and I can't clip it on my shirt, though.

I don't cry over Mac not offering something like my mp3 player, dunno why everyone cries over them not offering a midrange desktop or uses that as an argument that Apple sucks or something equally ridiculous.

 

[LesterOfPuppets]

Link Sony SZ series?
Yeah, almost. They sell 79 USD iPod Shuffles along with along with 149-249 Nanos all they way to 349 USD Video iPods but they can't offer a decent selection of computer hardware as well? Just give people the choice -

I bought my half-gig mp3 player for $42, slapped a 2gig SD card in there for $15, whadda deal. I got more than twice the storage and WAY more features than a shuffle for a little less dough.

My mp3-player can be compared to the Dells that people like to say are a way better deal than Macs - or the killer rig they can build from parts at newegg. It works great, has an lcd screen, eq, can play all cuts from one album or all cuts from one artist, takes AAA batteries and cost just a little over half what a shuffle would. It's not the size of a postage stamp, not made of metal and I can't clip it on my shirt, though.

I don't cry over Mac not offering something like my mp3 player, dunno why everyone cries over them not offering a midrange desktop or uses that as an argument that Apple sucks or something equally ridiculous.

Mac has tried offering $1000 desktops in the past, but it wasn't working for them apparently, so they stopped.

 

[The Hunter]

A Mac is a good choice for a basic/average user if they want a good system that will work without any hassle for good value. It's not a good choice if they want a cheap price first and foremost (NB: difference between good value and good price).

Macs will never compete with the $500 or less whiteboxen and Dell specials, nor should Apple try to compete in that segment, and they know that. Macs are fantastic for the most basic of use (and in fact are a good way to get basic users exploring more of their computer's capabilities) - but they're for people who want a good and easy experience above saving a little bit of money.

 

[taylorwilsdon]

A Mac is a good choice for a basic/average user if they want a good system that will work without any hassle for good value. It's not a good choice if they want a cheap price first and foremost (NB: difference between good value and good price).

Macs will never compete with the $500 or less whiteboxen and Dell specials, nor should Apple try to compete in that segment, and they know that. Macs are fantastic for the most basic of use (and in fact are a good way to get basic users exploring more of their computer's capabilities) - but they're for people who want a good and easy experience above saving a little bit of money.

Except, uh, for the mac mini...

 

[Modred189]

Please do not respond to trolls, thanks.
-KaosDG

 

[theDreamer]

Modred189:
~No, the Macbooks are 1280, but they are on 13" screens, so overall it becomes a cleaner screen, since the area v. pixels is reduced and more complement.

From the links you are providing you are showing off others with intergrated GPUs, can you live with that? If so then the Apple Macbook would be a good deal, also can you get a student discount? If so that will help knock off some more of the price.


~A suggestion to you, if you have an Apple store in your area, I would spend some time and go there and play around on their laptops and see how you feel typing, work, etc. on them. You may not like the "feel" of how it all flows and become dissatisfied.

 

[skeeder]

PC user popping in.

I do a ton of graphic design work and work in IT devision at my local college, we support not only pc's but mac's.

Here is what I have to say.

The Mac design appeals to many different people. its: pretty, nice, simple to use, and just plain cool looking. Admit it...the new macbook pro's...look FREAKING COOL.

While people may say "different strokes for different folks" despite its simple logic...its quite logical, here we are on a gaming forum, a massive PC crazed forum. WE HAVE A 32GB RAM CLUB! how is that for the average person? its not. Its what floats your boat. OSX is just that, here is another option, this is windows, this is mac. Some people will like the mac some people will not.

As far as the owner of the thread wondering about what seperates the pc world from the mac world. well. Thanks to bootcamp and Windows XP being supported on the mac's...nothing. A little different hardware but no different from the various designs from Dell to Gateway. Sure they run a little bit more, but Sony and IBM are expensive machines as well! Sure OSX doesn't run (without hacks) on other machines, but that was Apple's choice. It comes down to, do like the size, wieght, keyboard of the machine...the physical properties are more important than anything else. (I assumed laptops since thats what people are arguing about)

 

[Modred189]

Modred189:
~No, the Macbooks are 1280, but they are on 13" screens, so overall it becomes a cleaner screen, since the area v. pixels is reduced and more complement.

Good point, but ultimately it's the same resolution, same amount of screen real estate. I don't do a lot of high end photo editing (mostly on the desktop) so the slightly better res, isn't a huge issue. I can't tell a big difference between the sony and the macbooks screens. Then again, I see them in two different places with different lighting on different days, etc... lol, so who knows.

From the links you are providing you are showing off others with intergrated GPUs, can you live with that? If so then the Apple Macbook would be a good deal, also can you get a student discount? If so that will help knock off some more of the price.

Yea, I'm good with integrated graphics. Nothing I do with this laptop will need any kind of dedicated system. No games, no movie editing, no 3d rendering or CAD, and no high def movies.
The macbooks have the GMA950, only 64megs, while the Pro's go all the way up to the 8600's. I kinda wish there was something in between (similar to the Intel 945). But either will be fine for watching movies, listening to music web surfing and doing office work.

See the laptop in my sig to see what I am upgrading from. I want to get into a C2D system...

~A suggestion to you, if you have an Apple store in your area, I would spend some time and go there and play around on their laptops and see how you feel typing, work, etc. on them. You may not like the "feel" of how it all flows and become dissatisfied.

Been there, done that, and while informative, I hate the lighting there. It, like many retail shops, is very artificial, and the employees are DICKS. Won't leave me the F alone, asking WAY too often if I need help. I work at BestBuy, and I always hate nagging customers, so when a sales associate does it somewhere else I HATE it.

If you mean more specifically the OS, not the hardware, I have some experience with the OS. I took several Photoshop classes in college and we used MacOSX based G5's. It's not so different I wouldn't get used to it. My biggest hurdle will be one of the issues mentioned in the recent [H] article: less freeware/open source, but it's something I can get over if I plop down for a mac.
I just have to wrestle with the price difference. No one has yet convinced me why the difference is so big...

 

[hungryduck]

You post is rude, vague and a terrible waste of time and effort.
Especially considering that's a better monitor than that on teh macbooks. The 15" Macbooks have the same resolution (Wxga at 1280X800) but lack the brightness and eco technology (all debatable, understood). Good job.

Also, your little explosion about gaming, is a waste, as I already stated, had you read my OP, that this is in no way for gaming. Thus, I don't need the 8600.

So... if you could, go back, re-read my posts, and try again. I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that you are not a complete douchebag forum troll macboy, and are just having a bad day.

theres no such thing as a 15in macbook. the 15in macbook pro has a 1400x900 screen.

anyway, I'm really tired of this silly thread. Stop arguing with people who are trying to help you and stop bothering the shit out of us to convince you to get a mac.
if you want it, then buy the fucking thing.

 

[Modred189]

You're an idiot. You have no intention of getting a Mac, you're just a troll. The 15'' Macbook DOES NOT have WXGA. Its 1440x900, the 13'' version has the same resolution as your piece of shit there.

You are reiterating what has already been stated. And yes I do intend to buy a new notebook within the next month. I'm trying to decide which way to go, as I have hear proponents offer reason s why to choose one over the other.
Oftentimes better put than your own responses, but still...

My main question centers on why there is such a price discrepancy, and whether or not the pros/cons of switching to a mac outweigh the extra dollars.

So if want to address that, then cool, go right ahead. But swearing up a storm and inventing reasons to be angry won't be welcome.

theres no such thing as a 15in macbook. the 15in macbook pro has a 1400x900 screen.

anyway, I'm really tired of this silly thread. Stop arguing with people who are trying to help you and stop bothering the shit out of us to convince you to get a mac.
if you want it, then buy the fucking thing.

Fixed, sorry. typo.
See above anti-flame statement, and check my other posts before you go calling someone a troll...

 

[Fendrix]

Not to be rude or anything, I just don't see what else you need to hear.

I think everyone has given their thoughts and feelings on the subject of why they did or why they didn't buy a MacBook/Pro, even if it is turning into a flame war. You've gotten lots of answers so now it's time to buy one or not. I guess what I'm saying is after all the posts in this thread it's time to make an educated decision, and at the very least go with your gut. If you still think the price difference isn't worth it, then don't buy one, but I'm very happy with my purchase and I think you would be too.

 

[LesterOfPuppets]

Considering the usage requirements of the OP, and some of the statements by said OP, I'm not sure why a new lappy is in order. Maybe Vista is taxing the current lappy a bit?

Otherwise, to me, usage habits don't seem to warrant a multi-core cpu.

If there is a good reason for an upgrade, and it were me, I'd choose from Toshiba, Apple and Lenovo (pretty much in that order, personally). Maybe Acer, but I don't have enough experience with them to definitely include them.

 

[Lack]

I don't cry over Mac not offering something like my mp3 player, dunno why everyone cries over them not offering a midrange desktop or uses that as an argument that Apple sucks or something equally ridiculous.

Maybe becouse they could really use features Mac ecosystem has to offer, but can't jump in becouse of the limited hardware offer? Why not combine best of both worlds?

Mac has tried offering $1000 desktops in the past, but it wasn't working for them apparently, so they stopped.

Name one.

 

[LesterOfPuppets]

Maybe becouse they could really use features Mac ecosystem has to offer, but can't jump in becouse of the limited hardware offer? Why not combine best of both worlds?

You could suggest that, and maybe suggest that BMW should offer a $12,000 car. You could argue that a $10,000 Hyundai will do everything an average car user needs, why bother spending more on a low-end BMW, say a Mini, for instance? Like I said, I like the mp3 player I got. Apple doesn't offer anything as cheap. I have to deal with what it lacks as opposed to the Shuffle, can't clip it to my shirt, it takes up more space, and I can't automatically sync it with iTunes. I'll revel in the features it has that Apple, and many other mp3 player manufactures don't offer and deal with its shortcomings and will try not to blame any company for not giving me exactly what I want. Dang, I wish all DSLRs took SD cards (since I have a few), but they don't. I don't consider the companies that produce such cameras as terrible companies.

Name one.

Got me, I guess the cheapest non-Mini headless Apple desktop was $1300 in 2001. the Cube, with mouse and KBD. Around the same time G3 imacs were available for about $1000, but that's an all-in-one computer, a different beast all together.

 

[Lack]

You could suggest that, and maybe suggest that BMW should offer a $12,000 car. You could argue that a $10,000 Hyundai will do everything an average car user needs, why bother spending more on a low-end BMW, say a Mini, for instance?

I could. But thats a different thing. I'm suggesting that Apple can offer simply more variants - like if you by a BMW series you can choose coupe, droptop, sedan or wagon trims.

Like I said, I like the mp3 player I got. Apple doesn't offer anything as cheap. I have to deal with what it lacks as opposed to the Shuffle, can't clip it to my shirt, it takes up more space, and I can't automatically sync it with iTunes. I'll revel in the features it has that Apple, and many other mp3 player manufactures don't offer and deal with its shortcomings and will try not to blame any company for not giving me exactly what I want.

Whos to blame then? Should I blame myself for having more sophisticated needs then the avarage Joe Mac?

Dang, I wish all DSLRs took SD cards (since I have a few), but they don't. I don't consider the companies that produce such cameras as terrible companies.

You can get an SD to CF adapter.

 

[Black Morty Rackham]

Name one.

While I don't think any of them were priced as low as $1000, if you take into account that computers in general cost a LOT more back then, I'd say many of the Performas and lower-end Power Macs fit the bill for a "mid-end" headless system. The 4400 was sold for as little as $1500 back in 1996 or '97!

Whos to blame then? Should I blame myself for having more sophisticated needs then the avarage Joe Mac?

The word is different, not more sophisticated.

 

[Lack]

While I don't think any of them were priced as low as $1000, if you take into account that computers in general cost a LOT more back then, I'd say many of the Performas and lower-end Power Macs fit the bill for a "mid-end" headless system. The 4400 was sold for as little as $1500 back in 1996 or '97!

We are light years away from '96-'97, the market evolved.
Taking into acount the last 5 or 6 years, I don't think Apple charged a lot more for thair computers then it does now. It's just more bang for you buck right now.
This isn't tru for their Power line - back in '05 you could get a single processor G5 for 1499$. Now if you want get a Mac Pro then you have to pay at least 2200$.

The word is different, not more sophisticated.

Discreet graphic card is more sophisticated then integrated. Expanstion slot is more sophisticated then no expansion slot. Even an integrated flash card reader is more sophisticated then having none.

 

[RyanGrob]

Good point, but ultimately it's the same resolution, same amount of screen real estate. I don't do a lot of high end photo editing (mostly on the desktop) so the slightly better res, isn't a huge issue. I can't tell a big difference between the sony and the macbooks screens. Then again, I see them in two different places with different lighting on different days, etc... lol, so who knows.

Yea, I'm good with integrated graphics. Nothing I do with this laptop will need any kind of dedicated system. No games, no movie editing, no 3d rendering or CAD, and no high def movies.
The macbooks have the GMA950, only 64megs, while the Pro's go all the way up to the 8600's. I kinda wish there was something in between (similar to the Intel 945). But either will be fine for watching movies, listening to music web surfing and doing office work.

See the laptop in my sig to see what I am upgrading from. I want to get into a C2D system...

Been there, done that, and while informative, I hate the lighting there. It, like many retail shops, is very artificial, and the employees are DICKS. Won't leave me the F alone, asking WAY too often if I need help. I work at BestBuy, and I always hate nagging customers, so when a sales associate does it somewhere else I HATE it.

If you mean more specifically the OS, not the hardware, I have some experience with the OS. I took several Photoshop classes in college and we used MacOSX based G5's. It's not so different I wouldn't get used to it. My biggest hurdle will be one of the issues mentioned in the recent [H] article: less freeware/open source, but it's something I can get over if I plop down for a mac.
I just have to wrestle with the price difference. No one has yet convinced me why the difference is so big...

Yikes, not to be rude but I kind of figured this from your responses. In contrast to what you're saying, I find the sales team at my Apple store to courtesy and extremely helpful. Unlike those at BestBuy, they aren't trying to sell me something (granted this was a few years back when I bought my first IBook). They are highlighting the benefits of buying a Mac, and all the features they come with but in the end, they left the decision up to me which is what it should be. I don't want to be forced into buying something, where when I say "No", I mean No. Circuit City did the same to me when I bought my new TV the other week. They just don't know when to shut up. When I walk into BestBuy, within 5 minutes about 5 people have asked to help me and trying to sell me stuff.

One of the MOST key points I love Apple is their customer service. It is #1 and nothing even comes close. When I call, I want to speak to someone American. I live in America, I purchased my computer in America (made somewhere else, i know...), I want to speak to someone that lives in America. I just had some issues with my Macbook Pro and they were able to fix it and get it back to me in 3 days (1 to get the box out, 1 to get to them, overnight shipping back to me). I had the unfortunate experience with having to deal with Dell with my family and my girlfriend. I'll give them props to try and solve an issue, but god damnit I can't understand a word they say. Although I will say for business purposes, Dell can come through. It's weird how it's like day and night when it comes to this and doesn't seem fair.

You have been given many reasons as to why some people prefer Mac's and why some don't. In the end, the decision is in the consumer's hand and not yours. You can touch on the feature's and advantages of owning a Mac, but be sure to mention some of their disadvantages also. You should not force your opinion on someone and praise one product over the other. Heh, guess I would do bad in sales

 

[Syndication]

The word is different, not more sophisticated.

I think he meant that Apple should offer more makes and models of their computers, rather than just what they have now. The biggest complaint from pc users and mac users alike is the limited expandability mac systems have traditionally had. Now I can understand why because they want to perserve system stability and not introduce random drivers into OSX, but you know, it gets to the point where a co-worker of mine had bought a Mac Pro (Apple's most advanced machine evarr! according to Steve Jobs) and laments that he can't even run an 8800 GTX in OSX or run the 7300GT (as default) + the 8800 in another slot.

Now I know the drivers aren't there for OSX for the 8800 GTX and there is no mac version of the card that has an embedded rom for the mac, but expandability in this area should be a primary concern. Most people can't grasp the concept of why buying a machine this powerful would be limited to 2 graphics cards. Maybe the new mac pro will have an 8800, but I bet you it'll be old by the time they release it. However, it still doesn't solve the problem of all those people who bought older macpro's being screwed over with the inability to upgrade graphics at the same market price of their pc counterparts. Everyone knows that mac video cards run 1.5x that of pc cards even though now it's the same hardware!

That being said, a few people in this thread have said there is something to be desired in the current limitations of hardware choices in the mac line up. Unless you're buying a laptop, I think most pc users will never understand why things are so restricted on the mac side, while those mac users will never understand why pc users want to upgrade their video cards or mess with their systems, as well as have the ability to replace any part at fair market value. (Similar replacement parts on the mac's are expensive as hell, I wish they would cut the crap and just sell them at normal rates instead of something outrageous like $199 for a macbook pro replacement keyboard to authorized repair centers). Overall It's two different mentalities all together.

Most people would benefit from having a mac and a pc to have the best of both worlds.

 

[kenham40]

Original model, to be quite honest I can barely get the think recognized on any OS.



No, because of:


Dell's business support is absolutely phenomenal. Last time I had to deal with them we had three PCs randomly crap out at the office I was working at, couldn't get them running with the normal troubleshooting/hardware swapping stuff. Called up Dell, had a tech there at 9AM the next morning, fixed all of the problems we had (all three needed new mobo/psu, I'm assuming it was a power spike or something).

Why not just use a memory card reader for your ELPH?

 

[LesterOfPuppets]

I could. But thats a different thing. I'm suggesting that Apple can offer simply more variants - like if you by a BMW series you can choose coupe, droptop, sedan or wagon trims.

Yeah, they could. To serve the OP, they'd have to offer the laptop equivalent of a version of the Z4 with a 2 litre engine - their lowend 3 litre is just a little too much engine and costs too dang much for the average user, gotta get it down to that $10,000 price point.

Apple has, what, 8 different base laptop configs? That's a pretty good spread if you ask me.

I'm still curious as to why the OP needs a new car, errm laptop.

 

[Lack]

Yeah, they could. To serve the OP, they'd have to offer the laptop equivalent of a version of the Z4 with a 2 litre engine - their lowend 3 litre is just a little too much engine and costs too dang much for the average user, gotta get it down to that $10,000 price point.

BMW offers a 2 liter engine in the Z4.
But, you don't get it. A car is something more then the engine and a laptop is something more then the processor.

Apple has, what, 8 different base laptop configs? That's a pretty good spread if you ask me.

How did you add that up? There's MacBook, MBP 15,4" and MBP 17". Thats 3.
There ar 6 total versions (3 MB and 3 MBP) - but I wouldn't call adding a faster processor or black colour a good spread.

 

[taylorwilsdon]

BMW offers a 2 liter engine in the Z4.
But, you don't get it. A car is something more then the engine and a laptop is something more then the processor.



How did you add that up? There's MacBook, MBP 15,4" and MBP 17". Thats 3.
There ar 6 total versions (3 MB and 3 MBP) - but I wouldn't call adding a faster processor or black colour a good spread.

There are two speed configs for the 15, one for the 17. 2 more for the 13 incher. There are two colors of the 13. There are two video cards for the 15, and you can pick glossy or matte for the Macbook Pro line. You can choose regular or High Def for the 17 inch display. Plenty of choice if you ask me.

 

[LesterOfPuppets]

How did you add that up? There's MacBook, MBP 15,4" and MBP 17". Thats 3.

Yep, 3 different screen sizes. Dang, Dells are way better, they got 5!