Why Wi-Fi only tablets are rare: Brilliant iPad pricing

[brbubba]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

No, your statement is completely false.

Find a PC with the same exact hardware and features. The Apple equivalent will be of equal price or less. You're looking only at the fact that Apple doesn't sell lower cost laptops or desktops.

Apple is wayyyy behind in the laptop game, so you can't even compare them anymore most laptops are i3/i5/i7 now. Price wise, Apple has never really been able to compete even on feature parity except in cherry picked scenarios. But then again, why is anyone expecting them to when they do crazy things like machine a laptop body out of a solid chunk of aluminum! That alone is costing them at least $100, if not more. When I think of how many units they move a quarter it simply boggles my mind to imagine how many CNC machines are just machining aluminum unibodies 24/7.

[RockdaMan]

Originally Posted by M0zza

... And then you are supposed to explain why he is wrong.

Just did a quick check and the similar spec'd laptop from apple is obscenely higher priced than my Acer. But then that is laptops.

Post it.

[Penforhire]

Depending on how you look at it, Apple is not "way behind" in laptops.

Give me a direct competitor to the Air series. It 'aint the Sony Vaio Z's (too thick). A direct competitor doesn't exist.

You mentioned the unibodies yourself. There are other components that are 'top shelf' in the MBP's as well. That can taken into account when pricing competing laptops... or you can buy the consumer-grade 'equivalent' Dell that has the build quality of wet cardboard.

None of that has taken me to the dark side myself. I own three laptops (personal netbook, personal full-size, and a business workstation laptop) and none of them are Apples. But I'd like to replace the netbook with an Air some day...

[M0zza]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

Post it.

Look it up yourself. All you have done so far is state you vehemently disagree and have not provided any info yourself.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by M0zza

Look it up yourself. All you have done so far is state you vehemently disagree and have not provided any info yourself.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

iPhones are no more expensive that other smartphones...

That is not true from what I have seen. You have to compare the price buying them unlocked and iPhones are then more expensive than other comparable smartphones.

[RockdaMan]

Originally Posted by M0zza

Look it up yourself.

I don't know the specs of your machine.

Anyway, the truth is the truth is the truth. Get the same hardware, pay about the same price. It's been the truth for a while now.

[RockdaMan]

Originally Posted by tompe

That is not true from what I have seen. You have to compare the price buying them unlocked

I'm an American, and we almost never buy phones unsubsidized.

You can buy an iPhone starting at $49.

[brbubba]

Originally Posted by Penforhire

Depending on how you look at it, Apple is not "way behind" in laptops.

Give me a direct competitor to the Air series. It 'aint the Sony Vaio Z's (too thick). A direct competitor doesn't exist.

You mentioned the unibodies yourself. There are other components that are 'top shelf' in the MBP's as well. That can taken into account when pricing competing laptops... or you can buy the consumer-grade 'equivalent' Dell that has the build quality of wet cardboard.

None of that has taken me to the dark side myself. I own three laptops (personal netbook, personal full-size, and a business workstation laptop) and none of them are Apples. But I'd like to replace the netbook with an Air some day...

In regards to the features I stated, Apple is in dire need of a refresh. Based on the rumor mill though that should be happening this week.

There are plenty of direct 13" Air competitors size wise. Just do a google search for "Macbook Air Competitor." The 11" doesn't have any competitors because no one has the cojones to bring out a $1000 netbook except for Apple and the thing looks awesome.

I was simply arguing price parity can be achieved in any cherry picked scenario, but on the whole if you want performance parity you're going to save a lot of money going with a PC. But yes, you're not going to beat an aluminum unibody in terms of fit and finish. About the only thing that would be more bad ass would be to have a magnesium unibody. However, even the laptops with magnesium cases are rinky dink, no more than a millimeter in thickness. And they are definitely NOT machined, likely cold rolled and then punch formed or something. Machining magnesium is inherently very dangerous due to the possibility of ignition of chips and dust if precautions aren't taken.

[MikeFromHC]

Originally Posted by M0zza

Look it up yourself. All you have done so far is state you vehemently disagree and have not provided any info yourself.

Unlikely that he will.
Apple $2499.00
Dell $1029.99
Six cores beat two cores in many cases and the Dell chip is newer. "Nehalem" is an architect and there is no telling exactly which chip it is.

Apple:

One 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processor
3GB (three 1GB) memory
1TB hard drive
18x double-layer SuperDrive
ATI Radeon HD 5770 with 1GB GDDR5
Free Shipping
$2,499.00

Dell
Processor AMD Phenom™ II X6 1045T (2.7GHz/9MB cache)
Operating System Genuine Windows® 7 Home Premium 64-Bit
Memory2 8GB2 Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM at 1333MHz
Hard Drive 1000GB 3 SATA hard drive (RPM) (7200RPM)
Video Card AMD Phenom™ II X6 1045T + ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB
Blu-ray Disc (BD) Combo (Reads BD and Writes to DVD/CD)
$1029.99
Free shipping

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

iPhones are no more expensive that other smartphones...no one can touch the price of the iPod touch...

Taking a look at Verizon:
iPhone 4 16GB $199/2yr or $649
iPhone 4 32GB $299/2yr or $749

Samsung Fascinate Galaxy S $199/2yr or $579

The $199 contract price on the 16GB iPhone is on a par with Verizon's other top-end smartphones, and the $649 retail price is higher than every non-iPhone smartphone they offer.

Since the entry level iPhone's contract price is no higher than those of other top-end smartphones, it's fair to say that it's competitively priced.

However, since Verizon does not offer any other smartphones that cost more than the 16GB iPhone, it's not competing on price.

Competing on price means using the fact your product costs less than your competitor's product as a selling point. It's saying, theirs may be better, but ours is cheaper.

Apple doesn't do that: No Apple ad will admit that anything is better than their products. Apple's selling points are the "cool factor," and "it just works." It's not "Get Apple because we're cheaper."

That's competing on price, and Apple doesn't do it. That's how they avoid the low-margin end of the market, by selling quality, user experience and intangibles.

Competing on price is not the same as being competitively priced - and while I'm more than willing to ascribe one to Apple, you won't get me to agree to the other.

[RockdaMan]

Boy, some people really are anti-Apple zealots.

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

Boy, some people really are anti-Apple zealots.

That's a strong statement.

I hope you're not including me in that number, as that would stun everyone who knows me off the boards. (And it would break my Mac's feelings - if it had feelings to break.)

[CleverClothe]

Originally Posted by Penforhire

Give me a direct competitor to the Air series. It 'aint the Sony Vaio Z's (too thick). A direct competitor doesn't exist.

Dell Adamo, world's thinnest laptop.

[brbubba]

Originally Posted by CleverClothe

Dell Adamo, world's thinnest laptop.

I found that one, although Dell sent it to the graveyard....