So when i was buying my macbook, i figured out for sure what i already assumed; Apple charges $150 for the black color. Heres how i figure. I got what they called the "ultimate" white which included 1gb ram, 80gb hdd, dvdrw, 2ghz core duo. It was 1449. The black one with the same specs costs 1599. hence the 150. What is weird is that a) the one i got is 50 less than the black one with only 512mb memory and b) you get 115 off (student discount) of the one i got and only $100 off of the black with 512mb ram. Discuss

10/2/2006 11:22:59 AM

This is old.

10/2/2006 11:34:21 AM

you should probably contact Apple and let them know. This has to be a mistake in the pricing scheme. They will be happy you brought this to their attention.

10/2/2006 11:37:08 AM

[old]

but good purchase!

[Edited on October 2, 2006 at 2:09 PM. Reason : a]

10/2/2006 2:08:55 PM

ITS CAUSE THE WHITE ONE IS GAY

10/2/2006 2:10:52 PM

all you paid for in the first place is looks. I am suprised it is not a more expensive option

10/2/2006 5:54:25 PM

cause i paid for a pretty white empty box.....uh ok

10/2/2006 6:35:21 PM

Anybody else think it's funny that the black macbook is considered the cool one, yet pretty much all PC notebooks are black anyway? Hmm...

10/2/2006 6:53:51 PM

Aluminum

10/2/2006 7:24:33 PM

yeah, i knew i wanted the white one, but my dads company just bought 5 black ones and he was kinda giving the guy a hard time bc he had no idea....

10/2/2006 7:30:01 PM

MacBooks have gone Core 2 Duo now:
http://www.engadget.com/2006/11/08/apples-macbook-goes-core-2-duo-too/

same price, more ummpfh

11/8/2006 9:13:09 AM

I want one.

[Edited on November 8, 2006 at 11:47 AM. Reason : c]

11/8/2006 11:47:25 AM

Quote :

"ITS CAUSE THE WHITE ONE IS GAY"

Quote :

"all you paid for in the first place is looks. I am suprised it is not a more expensive option"

i wonder if apple fanboys have yet to realize that apple is slowly becoming a PC in order to compete...every day that goes by shows mac becoming more and more just a "pretty" PC...and having a white laptop is just dumb...they get so dirty, and i'm betting the black color is cheaper to produce anyway

11/8/2006 12:05:59 PM

Quote :

"i wonder if apple fanboys have yet to realize that apple is slowly becoming a PC in order to compete...every day that goes by shows mac becoming more and more just a "pretty" PC...and having a white laptop is just dumb...they get so dirty, and i'm betting the black color is cheaper to produce anyway "

what's your point.
anyway, Macs run OS X. that's their competitive advantage, nothing to do with hardware.

11/8/2006 1:12:57 PM

^ While true, your logic is about 2 years old.

Now, all Apple gear is not only a computer, but a fashion statement. I'd bet the money Apple makes just because the thing's pretty is astounding.

Their grip on the trendy society is becoming Apple's competitive advantage.

11/8/2006 1:31:04 PM

^ exactly...look at their current advertising scheme...95% of their commercials are primarily geared towards sex appeal



[Edited on November 8, 2006 at 2:00 PM. Reason : comic]

11/8/2006 1:57:06 PM

OMG I HATE APPLE SO MUCH IT HURTS

11/8/2006 2:23:57 PM

sometimes i think about apple during angry sex

11/8/2006 4:12:16 PM

I'd like to say that I've actually found myself a lot more productive since switching my primary computer to a MacBook Pro. The tools available for Mac OS X are surprisingly quite good, especially some available from third-parties. The ability to dual boot has benefited me, since I often do operating system testing for my job. Parallels has also helped. As a professional IT support person, this flexible environment is invaluable to me.

In a small way, I'd consider my choice to purchase a Mac to be a fashion statement. I like the design and attention to detail. From my perspective, it's not "different because I'm better than you." I think it's much more along the lines of "it's different, but it suits me better."

As far as the ads that Apple is running lately, I've kinda cringed at some of them. I like the idea behind them, but I do worry about the "what goes around, comes around" effect they may create.

11/8/2006 5:57:59 PM

Maybe they'll make a red one to match the nano.

11/8/2006 5:59:59 PM

i can't help it...but i figure it holds to the thread's main goal of pointing out apple's ridiculous pricing:

11/8/2006 8:25:40 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc4oP_ITqMc

11/8/2006 10:02:04 PM

Quote :

"and i'm betting the black color is cheaper to produce anyway"

Yeah, probably, since most refined polymers are not white. Oh wait. . .

11/8/2006 10:43:53 PM

Quote :

"OMG I HATE APPLE SO MUCH IT HURTS"

11/9/2006 12:37:23 AM

gotta disagree w/ Apple's pricing

their MacBooks are very reasonable considering what you get. No Dell can dual-boot OS X, that alone is worth a pretty penny.

11/9/2006 7:55:09 AM

Quote :

"gotta disagree w/ Apple's pricing"

vs.

Quote :

"their MacBooks are very reasonable considering what you get. "

?

11/9/2006 7:56:33 AM

I think he is saying that he has to disagree with what people have to say about Apple's pricing.

11/9/2006 11:13:09 AM

^ thanks for decrypting that

yeah, I meant to say I disagreed w/ the grumblings on Apple's pricing

such, it's slightly higher in some regards (namely iPod vs. other players), but overall it's a luxury brand that demands luxury prices for luxurious features (dual booting OS X & WinXP, for instance)

[Edited on November 9, 2006 at 11:26 AM. Reason : .]

11/9/2006 11:25:51 AM

The only reason I would ever want to buy an Apple is due to Final Cut Pro. And I don't know if that's worth it. a $3500 PC would absolutely molest a $3500 Powermac in performance.

11/9/2006 3:02:52 PM

errrrrrr

11/9/2006 3:25:01 PM

molest?
i dont' think so
http://www.systemshootouts.org/shootouts/desktop/2006/0809_dt3200.html
http://www.macworld.com/2006/08/features/macproprice/index.php
http://www.macworld.com/2006/08/opinion/dellmacprofollowup/index.php
http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=10

11/9/2006 3:42:51 PM

^ i didn't sort through 20 pages to find it (if it's there)...but do any of those links actually compare performance of a high-end mac to a high-end pc? and i don't think the macworld links count...if someone's really going to do benchmark tests, i think it should be a fairly independent third party

11/9/2006 5:12:29 PM

Quote :

"compare performance of a high-end mac to a high-end pc"

No, but they compare high-end mac's and high-end pc's with essentially the same components. If you're trying to argue that the windows operating system outperforms Mac OSX, well fine throw windows on the mac pro. The price differences listed in those articles mean it'd still be cheaper to get a macpro with an oem copy of windows xp pro than it would be to get a comparable dell workstation.

11/9/2006 5:17:13 PM

i don't think "comparable" components operate exactly the same unless they ARE the same...that's why i'm looking for some actual performance data

11/9/2006 5:26:36 PM

When I said comparable, I meant nearly identical. Stop being a fag.

And stop saying you're looking for some actual performance data. If you were you would have found it on Anandtech in 5 seconds.

http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=16

[Edited on November 9, 2006 at 6:31 PM. Reason : ]

11/9/2006 6:29:09 PM

^ i don't understand how my point makes me a fag...

the link you gave doesn't have any actual comparisons, just opinions:

Quote :

"For most tasks under Windows XP, the Mac Pro performs much like a similarly clocked Core 2 processor despite having a faster FSB and more cores."

Quote :

"When I said comparable, I meant nearly identical."

"faster FSB" and "more cores" is not "comparable"...you would expect more performance, but instead you get something that performs similarly...very informative

oh, wait, your new computer is prettier, which has immeasurable value

[Edited on November 9, 2006 at 6:38 PM. Reason : .]

11/9/2006 6:36:42 PM

Quote :

"the link you gave doesn't have any actual comparisons"

Scroll down to the freaking table of contents and go to the benchmarks. Are you that freaking lazy? Do I have to link to each page in the article. God you're thick.

Here, since you're too fucking illiterate to read and use an index:

http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=11

And, although I assume you'll be too lazy to actually look through anything but the 3 line summaries, this page has a couple articles that compares the mac pro to effectively identical pc's (like the dell professional workstations.) And yes, those dell workstations can have the same performance related parts. Yeah they'll have a different sticker on the front, but unless you're a ricer you know stickers don't make things faster.

http://www.anandtech.com/mac/

I'm done reading for you.

[Edited on November 9, 2006 at 7:08 PM. Reason : ]

11/9/2006 7:02:23 PM

ummm...okay...so the two major competitors are a 3ghz quad-core mac and a 2.93ghz dual core pc:

sysmark 2k4: pc wins 6/9 (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=9)
winstone 2k4: mac wins 2/2 (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=10)
3dsmax7/cinebench9.5: mac wins 2/3 (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=11)
encoding: pc wins 2/4 (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=12)
quake 4: pc wins 2/2 (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=13)
f.e.a.r.: pc wins 2/2 (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=14)
oblivion: pc wins 2/2 (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=15)

so...pc comes out on top in 14 of 24 benchmarks...with 2 fewer (and slower) cores AND a slower FSB...i don't know, i guess i just don't understand why apple needs to double the cores and have a faster bus to perform worse

i'll stick with a pc that will cost the same, be cheaper to upgrade, performs better, AND has more usable software (for me)

OH, I KEEP FORGETTING THAT IT WON'T LOOK AS PRETTY!

[Edited on November 9, 2006 at 7:44 PM. Reason : pretty!]

11/9/2006 7:43:39 PM

Quote :

"so...pc comes out on top in 14 of 24 benchmarks...with 2 fewer (and slower) cores AND a slower FSB...i don't know, i guess i just don't understand why apple needs to double the cores and have a faster bus to perform worse"

Of course, you didn't read the article so you would find no information as to why that might be, like the two page technical article on why despite 2 extra cores and a faster bus, game performance might suffer.

Quote :

"i'll stick with a pc that will cost the same, be cheaper to upgrade, performs better, AND has more usable software (for me) "

I fail to see how any except the last point could be reasonably true given that all macs are pretty much standard PC components with the exception of the main board, unless you think there's magic mac voodoo ram or hard drives? The only thing you could make a reasonable argument on as far as hardware would be the graphics card, and that's a firmware issue.

11/9/2006 8:06:21 PM

Quote :

"so...pc comes out on top in 14 of 24 benchmarks...with 2 fewer (and slower) cores AND a slower FSB...i don't know, i guess i just don't understand why apple needs to double the cores and have a faster bus to perform worse"

The extra cores weren't being used in most of those tests. If they were the quad core would have definitely been faster (this is true of any quad computer, not just the Powermac). Also, the FB-DIMM's latency was affecting it's performance marginally (as it lost most of those tests by marginal amounts), and the Core 2s actually had more cache/core which is good for a few percentage point boosts in performance.

Not to mention that PC probably costs more than that Mac, especially with the Core 2 Extreme processor.

11/9/2006 8:33:19 PM

^^^umm are you going to buy anything like that? cause you're probably just being an apple flaming douche that has enough time and enough envy of macs to argue all of this

ok so ill check back on this in another month and see whats happenedv

[Edited on November 10, 2006 at 1:09 AM. Reason : as]

11/10/2006 1:08:21 AM

Quote :

"Anybody else think it's funny that the black macbook is considered the cool one, yet pretty much all PC notebooks are black anyway? Hmm..."

It's because part of Apple's market share comes from people who want to go against the flow. People who not just understand that "widely accepted" practices are not necessarily the best... they believe that going against the flow should be encouraged even when it doesn't make sense. So Apple can get extra $150 profit off a large portion of their user base.

By the way, there is a nice website http://www.xvsxp.comthat compares OS X and Windows XP side by side. The ratings don't represent exactly how Wolf Web users are likely to encounter these Operating Systems... for example, the ratings neglect the relative ability to pirate software (yay XP!!! except you can get terrible viruses in the process...) or the mere PRESENCE of iLife on OS X, since iLife is not a free part of the OS despite coming with every new Mac. XP gets extra points for the free downloads available from Microsoft too...

Anyways, I prefer Mac for its more intuitive collection of tools built in, the ease of switching between languages, the treatment of input devices, the unix-commands and X11 interface (I access remote UNIX programs), the highly encouraged practice of amateur programming with free included developer tools with rarely any risk to harming the system, the overall "character" of the user and developer base (Mac people would rather live life than spend 24/7 on wolf web insulting people). I also like to be familiar with the OS I recommend to family and other amateurs who don't understand "good computing practice" (how NOT to install 100 viruses within 24 hours of turning your computer on), and I wanted to be able to easily video chat without them worrying about complex installations and settings... oh and I can dual boot with XP.

I would prefer a second button on the laptops for using XP... on the desktop, a nice 3-button mouse works beautifully with Apple's Expose for drag-and-drop from the desktop to active windows.

11/20/2006 12:44:42 AM

the optical drives on macs are craptacular.
my gf is on her second and it's screwing up now.
she's had the computer maybe two months.

11/20/2006 12:55:06 AM

i've owned/serviced tens and tens of macs over the years, and I've only replaced optical drives once in all those years.

just because you ran into a couple bad ones doesn't ruin the rest of em. They've been great for me, even under lots of stress (my wife absolutely kills our 12" PBG4, and everything's still going strong).

11/20/2006 8:55:00 AM

Quote :

"It's because part of Apple's market share comes from people who want to go against the flow"

hahahaha. this is a nice way of calling them idiots.

11/20/2006 9:56:00 AM

^yeah because all the revolutionary thinkers go with the flow and think just like everyone else

11/20/2006 10:08:24 AM

there's a difference between being a revolutionary thinker who goes against the flow and idiots who just want to go against the flow

11/20/2006 10:15:03 AM

Macs are cool

11/20/2006 10:54:02 AM

totally cool

11/20/2006 11:38:31 AM

Quote :

"Maybe they'll make a red one to match the nano. "

http://www.speckproducts.com/15mac-seethru.html

11/20/2006 11:41:52 AM