Are MacBooks Just Trendy?
My brother had his MacBook stolen a couple of months ago so he’s in the market for a new laptop.
With a modest budget, the big question is whether he should cough up the $1,100 to $1,500 for a new MacBook, or spend $500 for something like a Dell Inspiron. As a MacBook user, the default reaction is: “Definitely, buy a Mac”. But the inner pragmatist counters that perhaps spending an additional $600 to $1,000 isn’t worth the expense.
Before the MacNation starts clamoring about how Macs are more stable, elegant, better designed, etc., the question that should be asked is whether the “regular” computer user needs a Mac to do what they need to do (browsing, e-mail, writing documents). In other words, can you avoid buying a Mac, and still have a satisfying computer experience?
The answer, I think, “Yes”.
If you really think about it, one of the biggest things that Apple has going for it right now is the MacBook is ultra-trendy. They’re cool, hip and everyone seems to have one these days. For many consumers, the MacBook has become the “It” computer - much like the iPod has become the default choice for MP3 players even though there are just as good or better products in the market.
Don’t get me wrong, being cool is a very good place to be. The longer you can hold on to that status, the better. The question is how long can the MacBook stay cool. How long can Apple demand - and get - a premium?
Perhaps the MacBook will continue to thrive until Vista works through its challenges. Maybe more difficult economic conditions will force more consumers to economize when they make major purchases. Or maybe the MacBook will become so popular it won’t be trendy any more.
Then, what happens? So, what do you think? Can the MacBook continue to thrive, and can Apple maintain its premium pricing for it?
Update: Apple accounted for 14% of PC sales last month by units and 25% by dollars, according to AppleInsider. Wow.
March 17th, 2008 at 8:21 am
Seems to me that Mac has always had a premium price…only recently, the functionality associated with the premium price has extended beyond graphic designers et al, thereby Mac is entering more the mainstream.
I think Mac will continue to get a premium price…the question is whether Mac can continue to deliver functionality that appeals to the maintstream for that premium. The “artsy” sector will always pay the premium.
My guess is the timing of the Vista fiasco and Mac’s surge into the mainstream is a coincidence rather than a driver.
March 17th, 2008 at 10:22 am
[...] friend Mark Evans wrote a blog post today entitled “Are MacBooks Just Trendy?” and I thought I’d write a completely unwarranted perspective myself. In his article, [...]
March 17th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
I recently saw a description that aligned the Mac with BMW and I think it’s apt. In the late 70’s and early 80’s german cars like Mercedes and BMW were rare, expensive and premium. They always been seen as cutting edge technologically and their form factor was superior. And they cost more. Over time they have become more mainstream and their prices on lower-end models have become more competitive though you will not find a BMW for the same as a hyundai.
My point, yes, you pay a bit of a premium at the bottom end and it’s a question of whether you want the form and the technological innovation. On the latter point, if you buy a new $500 laptop it likely may struggle with Vista (so you’ll be running XP for the foreseeable future).
March 17th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
There is no “Apple premium” for similarly specified machines.
What you’re complaining about is not “premium pricing” per se, but rather that Apple doesn’t make an cut-rate entry level system. If you actually compare the Inspiron’s specs to those of the cheapest Macbook, they’re not even vaguely similar:
Core 2 Duo running at 2.1GHz versus Celeron at 1.86GHz
3MB L2 cache versus 1MB
800MHz front side bus versus 533MHz
160GB disk versus 80GB
802.11n networking versus 802.11g
55W-hour battery versus 24W-hour
and so on.
Apple’s thesis is that the low end Macbook is the minimal machine that will give an acceptable experience to the typical user. They expect people to run the iLife apps, and make a machine that will do a good job of it.
Sure, you can have a “satisfying” computer experience without buying a Mac, for some value of “satisfying”. But what Apple is avoiding by carefully targeting their machines are surprises for the user who actually tries to use the machine in the way that they advertise it.
March 17th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
I disagree… for me, using a Mac has nothing to do with trendiness, but all to do with being more efficient at what I do and happier doing it.
These days, I spend 10+ hours a day in front of my Mac. The fact that the system is fun and pleasant to use is well worth the extra money, even with nothing else facotred in. The fact that it’s so easily customisable means I get a productivity boost that’s also worth the extra money, with nothing else factored in.
The above two points could be achieved using Linux too, to be fair. But then, I’d also have to consider the fact that whenever I’ve used Linux, there’s been inevitable bouts of computer fixing that took out many hours at a time, just to get “that one thing” working. Mac has all the benefits of a Linux box, without the hassle. That is worth paying for, too.
Daniel
March 17th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
The price premium isn’t that much, particularly not compared to what it used to be and compared to the utility you get out of it. It’s worth it to have a computer that just works.
March 17th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Did he not have a homeowners insurance rider added for his MacBook?
March 17th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Actually, the MacBook is cost competitive with PC laptops with similar specifications.
In fact, it’s about the same price as the Dell Inspiron mentioned above: $1,100 for the MacBook vs $1,055 for the Inspiron.
I agree with the authors premise: a basic PC laptop can serve many peoples needs for say $600. However, trying to compare that machine to a MacBook is foolhardy.
At the $1,100 price point, the MacBook delivers more value than a PC. Why? With similar hardware, it’s the usability of Apple’s software that makes a MacBook a much better choice than a laptop with Vista.
Are MacBooks just trendy? Can we test this hypothesis? Sure. Take a random sample of MacBook users and swap their laptops with less-trendy PC counterparts. Let them use the machines for a while and write about the experience. Would they be satisfied?
Are MacBooks just trendy? Sure, just like Windows Vista is a success!
March 17th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Mark, I can’t think of anyone I know that would go back to Vista/XP after using OSX for any length of time. Design aside, ‘Apples’ to Apples - the price points aren’t out of line with similarly equipped PC’s.
March 17th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Pay now or pay later. But pay you will. If you value your time, you’ll suggest a Mac.
March 17th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
It all gets down to the value of your time. Using windows is a big time waster in every respect. The extra $1000 over three years is about .91 per day. Adjust for the resale value of the Mac and the difference is even less.
http://www.RcHelicopters.com
http://www.DomainRegistry.com
March 17th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
^Uh, yes they are. I can get a IBM/Lenovo 14″ 2.4ghz computer with 2 gigs of ram running XP Pro for around $900.
March 17th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Hmmm… Who cares about trendy? I need something that works for me and my clients. They all use MS, and it simply makes sense to use MS for developing their software. I know you can run Windows on a Mac, but laptops are already underpowered as it is, no need to add a layer of slowness.
So… What do we get for the extra $1000? A cool glowing Apple icon?
Not worth it.
March 17th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
After using my friend’s nice new ~2ghz dual core notebook running vista, and having it freeze up when trying to open a web page, and plenty of strange warning errors asking me “if I really want to do this” I have to say that I cannot recommend vista to anyone at all…. the difference really is night and day from OS X which I almost never curse at
Just so you know where I’m coming from: as a long time PC user who has recently started using os X for the first time.
March 17th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
What a silly premise. You’re comparing apples and oranges. When that POS Dell starts running OS X, then you can start comparing them. You seem to be of conviction that people buy MB’s because of looks… hah! Nothing could be farther from the truth.
March 17th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Actually the price is not really that higher. If you go to Dell’s website and configure a similar hardware you get almost the same price.
March 17th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
@Andrew “the price points aren’t out of line with similarly equipped PC’s.”
The problem is– there ARE NO SIMILARLY EQUIPPED MACs to the $500 Dell.
March 17th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
@Andrew “Mark, I can’t think of anyone I know that would go back to Vista/XP after using OSX for any length of time.”
The gap between the two isn’t quite that clear cut, I change between a PC laptop and a Macbook Pro at work all day and apart from a few issues (such as trying to use the all windows hot corner on my dell, I always do that) I can switch between them depending on the work I’m doing.
To the main topic, they are cool, there’s no hiding that, but your right, you can get standard PC hardware cheaper then the Macbook’s (a large part of their price is the design it almost feels like)
If you want the best of both worlds you could make your next PC laptop into a frankenstien, running OSX on it.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
I’m not sure if this answer touches on your question exactly, but I’m encouraging my parents to get an Apple computer as their next home computer because they really aren’t technically savvy and have a whole host of problems with their current PC. It’s worth the extra cash to avoid random shutdowns, viruses, and the like.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
But if that’s all the “regular user” needs to do, why not just spend even less and buy them a OLPC unit, with the added benefit of your purchase price including one for some kid who wouldn’t otherwise be able to have one?
March 17th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
If he hasn’t used OS X before you might want to let him try it before he commits lots of money.
- Up side, Macs hold their value.
- Down side, some people can’t stand the interface.
I fall into the category of people who can’t stand the interface so I bought a Dell laptop factory installed with Ubuntu Linux. Because it came preloaded there was no difficult configuration work.
Not for everyone but I found the interface to be great, the price was great, and the M1330 is small enough to haul around in a backpack. (13″ screen, with a higher resolution than the MacBook.)
March 17th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
I’ve switched to OS X about half a year ago but still have to use WinXP on my job. The thing with Mac OS X is that they just make me happier - because they simply work. They enable me to do the things I want and focus on them (not having to worry about drivers gone wild, updates, incompatible software…). I’m glad to have a much better product, even for a higher price.
March 17th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Pure FUD. I own a Macbook (2Ghz), a Thinkpad x31, use XP at home, Vista and Ubuntu Gutsy at work, and have a Hardy install on an extra Vaio to play with. The right tool for the right job– and I would definitely go back to XP from MacOS.. the finder is a frickin joke. Tell me, how can ONE GUY write a finder replacement that kicks Apple’s butt all over the map (PathFinder) Additionally, I spec’d a Thinkpad x61 this weekend for a client, and a 2.2Ghz machine with 2GB ram and 100GB 7200 RPM hdd came out to $950.. how the heck is that not priced at a significant discount to the MacBook? My MacBook is a fine computer with a nice screen, but it’s not the best laptop ever, and I’m pretty sure it’s not worth a 40-60% premium over a $1000 notebook.
March 17th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
I think it’s a mistake to focus exclusively on the price of the hardware. Consider the operating system as well. Buy a MacBook and get the full version of OSX. Buy a $500 Dell and you get what? Some dumbed down version of Windows Vista. Oh, and a computer that’s not capable of running the full version of Windows Vista.
I think the decision was probably a bit harder back in the WinXP days. In a Windows Vista world, Mac/OSX is the clear choice.
March 17th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
You don’t need a similarly equipped PC to get the same performance out of XP, which as far as I’m concerned is still a viable and productive operating system. I would love to have a MacBook Pro, but considering the premium that I would be paying over, say, a Dell Inspiron 1525, which has it’s own design merits, I don’t see one in my future unless Apple decides to pass falling hardware costs on to the consumer. I’m not hard up for cash, but a MBP, albeit a luxurious upgrade no doubt, would be difficult to justify.
March 17th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
Mark, you don’t get the equivalent of a MacBook for $600-$1,000 less. If you try to find a Windows laptop with the exact same specs as a MacBook, point for point, you’ll find, right now, maybe one (new unsealed) for $100 less.
The cheaper ones vary in specs negatively. Such as having larger screen sizes, resulting in larger overall size (which, to me, seems to be an important point for a portable computer).
And, of course, none have Mac OS X. Which is the primary reason I chose a Mac. I finally got back a satisfactory computing experience for all the basic stuff, like email, surf and write. I had Win XP before that, and I got a fed up with the plethora of little quirks that annoy (it wasn’t even stability or speed — my XP machine was as stable or fast as it could be).
March 17th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
P.S.: Most other Win laptops equivalent to MacBook are as expensive or more. Check it out on Newegg. No cheating — the EXACT same screen size and processor speed.
March 17th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Andrew - You must not know me.
I routinely switch back & forth between CDE, Gnome, XP, Vista, and OS X, Maemo, Hildon, etc. They’ve all got quirks. I’ve pretty much boiled it down to being equivalent to switching back and forth between cars. If you do it often enough, you do it without thinking.
Does a regular user need a Mac? Nope. a Zonbu, maybe, or a cheap PC. The bottom line is that people buy cheap XP/Vista PC’s and they work.
As far as value perceived verses price paid, the premium that you pay to play with an Apple and the obvious difference in market share makes it clear that most people don’t see enough value to pay the premium. That could be either because the value doesn’t exist, or because the value exists but is not perceived by ordinary consumers, or because they value other things greater than the additional functionality of a Mac (food, for example).
(Or because Mac’s make poor gaming machines…)
Most people don’t buy BMW’s either.
March 17th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
Good thing you weren’t too hard on Apple - the Mac nation would’ve got ya!
March 17th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
To Andrew’s point, there are those that use XP at work or for work purposes.
Apple will be able to poach Windows users due to virtualization functionality built into Leopard.
Windows users no longer need to worry about buying new applications for the Mac post migration nor do they need to buy a third-party virtualization app anymore hence increased migration.
March 17th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
i think it isn’t about trend. i think it is about two things. 1) it looks sexy, and 2) for ordinary people, Macs i think will be more productive for them and for geeks.
a friend, who isn’t a computer geek was asking me about the macbook and if she could run Microsoft Office on it. i gave her a whole song and dance, praised the mac and told her why I love my mac. In the end, she settled for “it looks beautiful, why I like it”.
For us guys, we look at the bottom line. Is the macbook priced correctly? i’d say yes.
for this reason: reducing the downtime for incidents like viruses, trojans and worms should be enough incentive i think for most people. i’m not saying windows sucks but the fact that it is far more difficult to secure for ordinary users makes Windows machines for me less productive.
in the past 2 years, i’ve had to reinstall my mac once— and it was because i trashed the system using kernel-panic-inducing-alpha software. counter that with some of my family members running windows on their PCs just browsing. and yes, i’ve installed anti viruses on their PCs, regularly updated. They all use firefox and safari with cookie wiping on close enabled by default. i’ve even setup a limited account for their daily use. (which, irritatingly enough, they don’t use). fact is, every three months or so they come to me with their machines so worm ridden the laptops become unusable, the easiest way is to just wipe the damn thing clean.
it’s not as if you couldn’t run windows software if you needed to. boot camp and virtualization software are around for that. thus you can do more with your mac.
Non-geeks should use Macs just to get real productivity out of their computing life. imagine if your machine just couldn’t work right when you’ve got a deadline.
I’m not saying the Mac is perfect, but between a US$500 laptop and a US$1.3K one, if you can spend the extra money, it will be money well spent just to reduce downtime, headaches from worms. Time is money.
imho, I think the biggest reason i’d suggest non-geeks to use macs is a non-altruistic, but practical one from my point of view. At the end of the day, they’ll come to you and say “my PC is broken. again”. Mac seems to me to reduce my headaches. Linux btw works too but not quite as naturally headache reducing as Macs.
March 18th, 2008 at 12:03 am
Bought an iMac about a year ago. Thought I paid too much, but I wanted a Mac - I’m a graphic artist and I use them for at least 40 hours a week at work and have for around 3 years.
Out of the box, my iMac was far more computer than I ever expected. More software - iLife, iMovie - more features - built in wifi, bluetooth, available DVI, HDMI connections for dual-monitor use, optical audio connection, firewire.
I still feel like I got a huge bargain. And the $500 Dell laptop my wife just bought (plus 150 for extra memory, and other misc. non-upgrade costs) ended up being around $900 somehow. And I just don’t enjoy using it.
My new attitude - don’t waste money on PCs.
March 18th, 2008 at 2:07 am
sorry - meant to say boot camp application can be used to run Windows applications. The so-called halo effect of the iphone and ipod is really what’s driving people to buy macs.
March 18th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Based on the promise of an easier interface and more exciting tools, plus the fact that it ‘is pretty’, I bought a MacBook for my wife a year and half or so ago.
To this date, I don’t think that her usage has gone beyond Firefox & the DVD player.
Save the money.
March 19th, 2008 at 12:38 am
I used to run two dual monitor systems on a big L-shaped desk, one mac one pc. Same apps (outside of OS-specific on each). I got around fine on either.
I found that when it was crunch time, I went to the mac. The little usability differences made big time differences.
That said, I recommended a PC to my mom.
If your computer is attached to you day in day out, get a mac. If not, the world is still PC - don’t fight it if you don’t want to put in the time.
March 19th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Personally I’d only buy a PC for my mom if I was some kind of sado-masochist. Glad to hear there is more market share for Apple. Since they were the ones that created the vision for Bill Gates to design Windows, they should at least have some benefit.
I’m personally tired of having to act as a QC provider for Microsoft’s bloatware. Hey, Apple isn’t without flaws, but if you love your mother…