Apple released the new MacBooks, as expected. I knew they were coming and bought my MacBook Pro anyway because I knew I still wanted something in this performance range, and didn’t want to make the compromises to have the cheaper MacBook.
So its not cool that the top-of-the-line MacBook, at $1000 less than my Pro, is almost exactly the same in capabilities with the exception of the smaller screen and wimpier graphics card. I mean, seriously? I’m glad Apple didn’t make silly compromises just to make artifical distinctions between product lines, but come on! If you can sell the same thing for $1000 less, then why is mine $1000 more? Argh!
Reader poll: is an extra 2.1″ (diagonal) of screen real estate and the ability to run a 30″ Cinema Display worth $1k?
Apparently the new MB has a glossy screen. Having a non-glossy screen is worth a good chunk of money, IMHO. $1000? Maybe not, but it should at least make you feel a little better 🙂
I hear you’re reading my blog, so I thought I’d retaliate!
Bwahahah
Sigh. I just got the 2 Ghz Macbook Pro for astronomy work this summer, and they do this. I love the digital age.
If you read the arstechnica post on the new boxes, ‘yes’- lots of people are screaming angry about the wimpy graphics card, because it is tied into the ‘Pro’ software- final cut, etc. Not something I really care about (still five pounds, so no dice for me) but interesting.
Here’s hoping for a MacBook mini? I don’t think Apple has released a notebook computer under 5 lbs. in the last 10 years… (The 2400 came out in 96 and was in the 4 lb. range).
Aaron: Yeah, glossy screen? Ick. I would *not* settle for that.
Kevin: I guess the consolation is that its still a kick-ass ninja computer, just like it was yesterday. Its just that there are a bunch of little minjas there now that weren’t there before.
I’m sooooo glad I waited. (sorry, don’t mean to rub it in.)