What's inside future low-cost Apple MacBooks?

With new lower-cost Apple MacBooks reportedly on the way soon, it's time to engage in a favorite diversion: what, pray tell, is inside?

(Credit: Apple)

The low-cost MacBooks may appear sooner than expected and would be "the most affordable notebook offerings in the Mac maker's history," according to an AppleInsider report.

The idea that the new models would be unprecedentedly low-cost is intriguing in itself considering the recent appearance of low-cost "ultrathin" laptops from Hewlett-Packard and Asus, among others, that typically range between $600 and $900.

And what powers these laptops? Low-cost Intel ultra-low-voltage "ULV" processors like the SU4100 or SU7300. And what's so important about these processors? They are at the heart of a new wave of laptops that boast extra-long battery life, some claiming up to 10 hours. Will Apple opt for battery life over performance? The current 13-inch white polycarbonate MacBook uses relatively high-performance Intel processors and claims about five hours of battery life.

Another thought: will this be Apple's un-Netbook? With no immediate plans for a Netbook (though a media pad is expected next year), this may be an opportunity for Apple to go at least half way toward addressing the low-end laptop segment.

Along these lines, will Advanced Micro Devices processors be forever ostracized from the MacBook lineup? In a hotel near the Intel Developer Forum that ended on Thursday, AMD was showing off an MSI dual-core ultrathin laptop with ATI graphics that starts at about $500. Not bad for a Netbook-like price. (Yeah, I know, highly unlikely.)

The truth is MacBooks are trending toward low-cost already. Even the once stratospherically priced MacBook Air can be had for less than $1,500 and the 13-inch MacBook Pro starts at $1,199. So, a MacBook that comes in lower than $999 (the starting price of the current MacBook) wouldn't be a big surprise. It would be a surprise if Apple went as low as $800. Now that's a cheap MacBook.

[sartor1]

I hope Apple can sell the new White Polycarbonate MacBook for $799 or so. They'd sell like hot cakes!

[dowell100]

Sure, but the main problem is that it will still be a Mac. Think of the costly software costs if you are already a Windows user. Not worth it.

[SlimGem]

@ dowell100,<br /><br />Macs come with just about everything the average user needs included in the iLife suite, which is much more than any PC contains. Just about anything available for Windows has some type of alternative Mac version, even anti-malware that isn't needed. Free software is available for almost anything needed also, the same as for a PC.<br /><br />Plus, if you have software that you simply must use that isn't made for OS X then you can install Windows virtually or in a dual boot configuration and use anything you want.<br />That argument doesn't hold water anymore, and buying a Mac is well worth it.

[SlimGem]

@ dowell100,<br /><br />Macs come with just about everything the average user needs included in the iLife suite, which is much more than any PC contains. Just about anything available for Windows has some type of alternative Mac version, even anti-malware that isn't needed. Free software is available for almost anything needed also, the same as for a PC.<br /><br />Plus, if you have software that you simply must use that isn't made for OS X then you can install Windows virtually or in a dual boot configuration and use anything you want.<br />That argument doesn't hold water anymore, and buying a Mac is well worth it.

[SlimGem]

@ dowell100,<br /><br />Macs come with just about everything the average user needs included in the iLife suite, which is much more than any PC contains. Just about anything available for Windows has some type of alternative Mac version, even anti-malware that isn't needed. Free software is available for almost anything needed also, the same as for a PC.<br /><br />Plus, if you have software that you simply must use that isn't made for OS X then you can install Windows virtually or in a dual boot configuration and use anything you want.<br />That argument doesn't hold water anymore, and buying a Mac is well worth it.

[Sausagebiscuit]

Cool, it seems that OSX also lets you post comments in sets of three now.

[baggyguy1218]

@ SlimGem <br /> <br />Its still $799 for a ultra small screen and who knows where the other cuts will be. and do you think iLife will be availible on a Mac priced that low? Something is going to be cut, slimmed, and shaved. Windows XP or Vista...is that software free? Last I looked Windows Vista/7 was still not free, unless you were in Thailand. <br /> <br /> HALLELUYA!! Now anyone can buy a Mac....and check Facebook. My $449 Dell I bought from Best Buy does that.

[ckh1272]

"by baggyguy1218 September 27, 2009 12:35 PM PDT<br />@ SlimGem <br /><br />Its still $799 for a ultra small screen and who knows where the other cuts will be. and do you think iLife will be availible on a Mac priced that low? Something is going to be cut, slimmed, and shaved. Windows XP or Vista...is that software free? Last I looked Windows Vista/7 was still not free, unless you were in Thailand. <br /><br />HALLELUYA!! Now anyone can buy a Mac....and check Facebook. My $449 Dell I bought from Best Buy does that."<br /><br />@baggyguy1218--iLife comes with the Mini, which is the cheapest Mac available. You assumption is wrong, just like the rest of your comment.

[solitare_pax]

What extra costs? Low-end macs come with iLife for free, and there's a variety of free productivity software such as Open Office and Inkscape to use for many project, not to mention Windows emulation if you really need to use a Windows program. Most PC printers and USB based gadgets work with Mac OS. <br /><br />I imagine the only things that would not run well on it are the high-end video games and anti-virus programs from the Windows side of the street...

[msjonker]

@SlimGem <br /> <br />So you're saying it makes sense to buy a MacBook and theb find Mac alternative software to Windows software. Then, anything you can't find, install inside a virtual machine, for which you will have to buy a Windows license. <br /> <br />I could see doing this as reasonable if it would be less than a PC, but it costs more. Not to mention that you can't even run all your applications natively in your OS. <br /> <br />Where is the sense in doing this?

[EricJM001]

Macs are better, end of story, I don't care what any (I have never used a mac) fanboy says. I used to be a Windows fanboy myself, but Vista was so bad that I decided it was time to try something else and bought a MacBook Pro.<br /><br />It was almost a religious experience. Everything was better than the PC...everything! Aluminum construction, backlit keyboard, large trackpads. Leopard is what Vista should have been, rock solid dependable with cool new features like virtual desktops and Time Machine - full system back up software with undelete.<br /><br />Windows 7 still doesn't have these features, hell it still looks like Vista to me. I'm gonna stay on the Mac for a while. Microsoft and the plastic, sticker covered PC laptop manufacturers can call me when they get a clue.

[ADGTHFan]

How about a design that WILL match the Macbook Pro? PLEASE? &lt;:(

[john55440]

Eww!, ugly white plastic. (grin)

[Seaspray0]

It does look rather antiseptic when you see it up close. The prettiest laptop I've seen so far had a mint green metalic finish. I used to think color didn't matter but seeing it made me change my mind.

[jacob1varghese]

$799 is the right price. <br /><br />Take out the optical drive and firewire. <br />Replace mini-DVI with mini-displayport<br />Add GPS<br />Reduce the screen size to 11 or 12 inches<br />That's a winner.<br /><br />Ultraportable

[dverlaque]

Add GPS? That would raise the price substantially... and for that matter, why would you need GPS?

[indyraider4]

If you take out that much I would expect it down to 699 or maybe 749.

[jacob1varghese]

@dverlaque<br /><br />GPS chips are now only $5

[sting7k]

$799 is hardly low cost for something with these specs.

[Lennron]

@sting7k <br /> <br />Keep in mind that you're talking to Mac users. They're used to spending $1500-2000 for a machine with decent specs. So $800 is going to sound like a phenomenally low price to them.

[sharmajunior]

There's no room for Macbooks with ULV's in the market. ULV's can bearly run a netbook. <br /> <br />I tried it on the Dell Latitude XT and it sucked!

[Sausagebiscuit]

Bears are barely scary.

[espeed623]

@Sausagebiscuit<br /><br />You're berry punny, ya know.

[freemarket--2008]

You forget that this is OSX, not Windows. It's much less of a resource hog.

[Lennron]

@fremarket--2008 <br /> <br />You forget that netbooks also run Linux which still struggles with ULV's. OSX will be no different. <br />OSX is as much of a resource hog as XP, which is what's ran on netbooks, not Vista.

[EvanSei]

I have used OSX and windows extensively and have no preference for either OS but apple products seem to be more reliable and hold value better than MS's alternating between awesome OS's and bad ones. But the huge price tag on a Mac compared to a PC has me stuck to windows right now mainly because 7 is comparable to OSX and I can't find a reason to get a mac right now, but if 7 was bad I would have got a Mac, I get a new laptop about every year and a half and if apple drops the price of the macbook to around $799 for the 15" and $600-$650 for the smaller version and is able to keep from screwing up the Mac book like they have the other products lately I will get one.

[freemarket--2008]

If you paid a little more, your computer would probably last twice as long.

[Seaspray0]

@freemarket. There is no current basis on how long your computer will last based on anything. Until you find those statistics, don't claim something that is not supported.

[Lennron]

@ Seaspray <br /> <br />But we're talking about Macs here. Those things can run for 5000 years without even a minor glitch. Or did I just make that up? It's hard to tell because it's as ridiculous a claim as "OSX can't get trojans" and "OSX never crashes" like you normally see on these posts.

[zyxxy]

OSX never crashes. It just restarts after you do something obviously wrong. You see? It is all your fault.

[ddesy]

Lennron,<br /><br />Who has ever claimed that OS X doesn't get trojans? Since a user actively does something to install one, of course it gets them. There still haven't been any true viruses for it, however.

[cbscowards]

The period key works on OS X.

[EvanSei]

@freemarket<br />My computers die in fact they are still perfectly healthy, I just need another computer or just have the intense urge to upgrade. And believe it or not I have never had a virus, not on vista, not on 7, and not on OSX.

[Viv Collins]

Why does it have to be cheap? what benefit is it to be seen as cheap or competing against low end products to the Apple brand?

[beat_elite]

maybe because I don't have 1000 bucks at hand to spend, but I like the Mac software that comes pre-installed.<br /><br />IMO i'd like the price point to be around 750-800 and have around the same specs as the $1,000 macbook and if it's good then I'll take back everything bad I've said about Apple in the past.

[Rolker]

I'm know I'm going to get in a lot of "trouble" about what I'll write next, but I find this a very interesting move.<br />Apple users use to say that you pay more for Macs but you get better quality. The equation was: cheap PCs = constant failures, bad quality, etc. Mac users always claim that PCs are Hondas, while Macs are Ferraries, and you get what you pay.<br />So, using this logic it means that the new, cheap Macs are going to be a waste of money. They will crash, burn, etc. You'll be buying a Honda and not a Ferrari. <br />It seems that Apple realized that not a lot of people are willing to pay to own the Apple brand. The fact is that most just don't (this is in contrast to the iPod and iPhone, which usually don't cost more than the competition). <br />I think this is a good move and more people will be able to buy Macs. Will people move to OS X? I don't know and time will tell...

[Perry_Clease]

"by tektaktyks September 27, 2009 5:42 PM PDT<br />yea looks like the macs are great at posting comments...is it that great ilife you all speak of? safari?..."<br /><br />Now there is the pot calling the kettle black.

[lordmorgul]

@Rolker,<br />This is about diversifying the brand to accomodate a broader market... not about destroying the image of the Ferarri of computers. The users who are already loyal Apple fans and believe the better hardware is worth paying for, will... surprisingly enough... continue paying for the high-end Macs. The point of offering some cheaper product lines will be to broaden the market and bring in new customers previously not willing to shell out for the Ferarri.

[freemarket--2008]

In a normal economy, Apple would crank out new high-end products with high-end prices. That won't fly for now, so they're using their streamlined new OSX to grab some of the low-end users who can't quite justify $1000. Once the economy picks up, they'll hit the upscale market again with some new tech.

[Seaspray0]

"It seems that Apple realized that not a lot of people are willing to pay to own the Apple brand." And that's my answer too. It's not being cheap, it comes down to value.

[mattlisk]

I have to imagine that the savvy people have realized that while you have the nuts who will buy all of your products that you might start to **** people off with umpteen generations of iPods and iPhones in addition to Macs all at very high price points. Luxury brands have taken a beatdown in this down economy and maybe Apple is positioning themselves to still sell units no matter where discretionary income of its consumers stands. <br /> <br />&lt;a href="http://mattlisk.com/about"&gt;Matt Lisk&lt;/a&gt;

[SlimGem]

@ dowell100,<br /><br />Macs come with just about everything the average user needs included in the iLife suite, which is much more than any PC contains. Just about anything available for Windows has some type of alternative Mac version, even anti-malware that isn't needed. Free software is available for almost anything needed also, the same as for a PC.<br /><br />Plus, if you have software that you simply must use that isn't made for OS X then you can install Windows virtually or in a dual boot configuration and use anything you want.<br />That argument doesn't hold water anymore, and buying a Mac is well worth it.

[sanenazok]

"the same as for a PC" - that about sums it up. There are tons of free software alternatives, especially for bare-bones office suites like iWork and media management of iLife. I can't wait for Apple to start selling underpowered netbook hardware for $800. That will rock!

[Sausagebiscuit]

heh three times posting this wasn't enough, you had to go for a fourth!

[tektaktyks]

yea looks like the macs are great at posting comments...is it that great ilife you all speak of? safari?...

[Dargonax]

@dowell100 <br />It's intreresting to see this kind of comments against Windows (Macs comes loaded with software and not Windows) since the very reason why Windows doesn't come loaded with software is everytime Microsoft includes something for free with Windows the "lesser OS" community goes up the baricade barking about how the big bad Microsoft is illegally using its monopoly to put them out of business....

[Wee_Mad_Arthur]

Yeah, that would be a great point, besides the fact that Mac's can run Windows either natively or in virtualization. NIce attention to detail though!

[sanenazok]

So pay for the Mac just to run Windows. Let's see, pay the Apple tax on the hardware, buy new OS X every 18 months, and then pay for the full license of Windows. Nice all around. Cheaper to keep two separate systems.

[ckh1272]

@ sanenazok--What full license?? You can buy the upgrade same as every other PC user. I have Vista on mine and can upgrade to Win 7 for the same price as every other Win PC user. Besides, it's more expensive to keep two separate systems. Think about the math for a second.

[Gold_Storm_Mac]

@wee<br />what r u talkin about?

[Yelonde]

@ sanenazok<br /><br />lol, you sound like a microsoft PR person. Did you just drink a gallon of Microsoft koolaid?<br /><br />First of all, the so called "apple-tax" price is for extra small things that one wouldn't normally notice, such as<br /><br />- Faster ram (ddr3 vs ddr2, which is quite expensive, but still fast)<br />- Faster Processors (the average macbook has 2.4 ghz vs the average 2 ghz)<br />- Better Shells (aluminum vs plastic)<br />- A Fully-featured OS (Full Snow-leopard vs a reduced Home Premium)<br />- More software (iLife vs nothing on the average PC's Part, and trust me, I have never seen 3rd party free alternatives that even matched to the usability, or professionality of iLife)<br /><br />If you want to use the overstated "apple tax" argument, then you are believing the lie that Microsoft has been telling you. It is quite obvious that the average mac comes with better hardware than the average PC, in addition to free software like iLife (no, free alternatives do not even compare to ilife, and iMovie is 10x better than movie-maker). If we were however, to get similar software (take a mac-pro vs an alienware desktop), you would find that with the same hardware, they are nearly the same price.<br /><br />Next up, full OSX updates cost an average of $100, where as windows OS updates can cost up to $250 for the so called "ultimate" version. <br /><br />And FYI, I didn't buy a mac to run windows, I bought a mac to run mac. Now how about that?

[sanenazok]

@Yelondale:<br /><br />We're talking about the future "cheap" Apple laptops here, not the top of the line models, which may have better hardware than low-end PC's, but the Apple computers still come at a much, much higher price. Do you really think that an $800 Apple laptop will have hardware that's superior to let's say a $500 netbook? It'll have to use the same components to keep Apple profits in line. C'mon face reality - "Apple tax" is not something that I invented. In buying Apple you're paying for a brand and that's a fact.<br /><br />Anyways, what's a feature in OS X that's not in Vista Home Premium? I dunno but it should be something BIG since per you, Vista Home Premium is "reduced." iLife is a media management suite that's easily replicated. Name one feature in iPhoto that isn't in Picasa as combined with a million other photo editing programs like Paint.net. Does iPhoto support third party plugins? What do you do when you have to perform an action that Apple didn't plan for you? I don't do any movie editing, but there's also ton of software out there. Mac users get comfortable in a walled garden, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a whole world out there.<br /><br />As far as the cost of the upgrades, you gotta make up your mind. Either Windows is "reduced" since it's the Home version or it's "overpriced" but then looking at the Ultimate version. I ordered the Home Windows 7 upgrade for $50, as could anyone with a little bit of planning.

[Yelonde]

@sanenazok<br /><br />Name me one $500 netbook that has the same components as a $800 macbook. This includes a Core 2 duo processor, a geforce graphics card, ddr3 memory, and OSX with ilife (which includes iMovie, iDVD, iPhoto, iWeb, Garageband).My point exactly.<br /><br />Next up, OSX has more features than home-premium, such as-<br /><br />1. Support for more than 1 TB of ram<br />2. Advanced networking options<br />3. Exchange support<br />4. Automated backups built into the OS<br />5. Live-data encryption (only ultimate has this, mind you)<br /><br />and much more. All of the features listed above or either only on buisiness, or ultimate.<br /><br />Next up, you still fail to recognize the fact that no other software suite provides as many, high-quality consumer programs like ilife. Picassa is about the only program that meets the quality, and options of iPhoto, but that is about it. There exist no other free programs that meet the quality, and usability of iDVD, iMovie, iWeb, or garage band. Even a comparable application to garageband would cost nearly $200.<br /><br />Give me a list of free programs that even compare to these iLife applications, and I may deem your comments slightly credible.

[AaronMK]

If I could get a 15-inch macBook pro for $1199 as they are now, I'd have one. I can get comparable or better specs on a PC notebook for under $1000. At $1699 for the cheapest 15-inch macBook, Apple has got to do some serious price reductions if they want to do some real growth in the 15-inch market. I am willing to pay a bit of an Apple premium, but not $700.

[S_C_B1898]

Correct me if I'm wrong. <br />If someone can afford $750 - $800 for a MacBook, then that same someone can afford $1000 if you just wait a couple of months.

[wrieck82]

maybe apple doesn't want the people that can't budget their money properly to buy their products?

[ftckyman]

@ wrieck82<br /><br />Yeah... Cause major retail companies make it a habit of turning away potential customers based on their budgeting practices. I can see major lenders and banks or credit unions, car dealerships and any place you have a chance of opening a line of credit of some form. But a company that deals in full payment upfront...?

[Seaspray0]

@wrieck82. Yea, like those poor people who waste it all on food, rent, and hardly anything else? I don't hate apple computers, I just hate the snobs that use them.

[thomascgty]

Macs are geared towards graphics designers and related jobs; referring to Mac Pro. As for the Mac books lowering the price to that of the PC, expect some quality to be degraded. <br /> <br />How can a manufacturer produce low-cost product without sacrificing the quality or other stuffs related to the product and it manufacturing? <br /> <br />Almost always, business main objective is profitability. Companies will provide low-cost products and still profit by reducing overhead manifacturing costs - quality control, product parts/components, etc.

[AaronMK]

"How can a manufacturer produce low-cost product without sacrificing the quality or other stuffs related to the product and it manufacturing?"<br /><br />The same way PC manufacturers do it. Most of the components in a Mac are not Apple specific. Open it up, and you will find the same hard drives, RAM, etc. that you would find in many PC laptops. Aside from the casing and maybe a proprietary monitor connection, there is nothing really special about Apple hardware.<br /><br />The quality comes from Apple having consistent hardware configurations, and having a nice OS that works well with those configurations. It comes from not putting a lot of extraneous software on the machine that runs on start up and is hard to remove. It comes from having much more intuitive included software for typical computing needs.<br /><br />Guess what, Windows comes with comparable software included in the boxed OS, and probably cost more to develop, partly since they have to support so many configurations. The complete Laptop and OS package is a lot cheaper for a PC. So basically Apple is "better" because of how they configure and develop their products, not because their products cost more to build and develop. "Better" quality does imply higher development and manufacturing costs.<br /><br />If Apple want to sell their computers at prices comparable to their PC counterparts and achieve similar profit margins, they probably could. They'd probably more than make up for the higher prices on volume, but I guess Apple's image as a high end, premium product is much more important to them.

[msjonker]

"How can a manufacturer produce low-cost product without sacrificing the quality or other stuffs related to the product and it manufacturing?" <br /> <br />They can cut into their profit margins, which is what PC makers have to do to stay competitive with each other. However, Apple user's do not have the luxury of direct competition, so they must pay more if they want an Apple computer.

[dudesmiles]

this is a terrible idea apple. keep the mac line the price it is. i dont want welfare check collecting windoze users messing up our community.

[Sausagebiscuit]

Too late. It's the middle class that you don't want eating your macbook babies alive. I hear those people are shady.

[ejeon1989]

"Welfare check collecting windoze users?" So you are saying that 90% of people that own a computer in the world are on welfare? That sounds a bit elitist.

[fitzydog]

@ejeon1989<br /><br />Well, let's face it: Most Macbook users ARE elitist.

[sittingduckz]

Is it not the Mac user that tends to be bearded and musty smelling with an unwashed look... much like a homeless person? <br /> <br />Probably homeless because there overpriced macs just pay for expensive apple showrooms. <br /> <br />But hey what do I know, 90% of the world must be wrong

[nickh2]

"Is it not the Mac user that tends to be bearded and musty smelling with an unwashed look... much like a homeless person?"<br /><br />Nope. Clean shaven, short hair,, shower everyday. 1500 sq ft city center loft, printing press in the back yard, two real, paint on canvas artists and a photographer downstairs.<br /><br />And seven Macs.

[Seaspray0]

@dudesmiles. You place too much value on material posessions as a guage of a person's worth.

[Bobs86]

I am worried about cost cutting programs. These have led to the destruction of many world class corporations. i really appreciate the good quality of Apple products. Please do not let your quality go down the drain.<br /><br />I have always believed that if you take care of the product line, the bottom line will take care of its self.

[mexnexus]

849.00 for a more sturdy MacBook with NO Firewire a combo drive a 160 Gb drive, wifi a webcam and 3 USB ports with mini display port will be a hit. Just One Model. 849.00

[OS11]

Nah, it has to have firewire, otherwise it's too difficult to move files / upgrade from machine to machine, use iMovie, use as an external hard drive, etc.

[Seaspray0]

@OS11. I find network shares and USB v2 works just fine for moving files.

[OS11]

try moving an entire HD and have it remain bootable. it's a breeze with firewire. with usb, impossible.

[hinubite]

The problem here is that everyone wants a mac but doesn't have the money. The thing that makes mac's cool (besides everything and an easy to use format), is that they are exclusive. If everyone could buy a mac, who would want one? It's simply the "rich persons" computer. If you want the best, be prepared to pay for it. That's why when price is not object people will buy the best.

[warpsix]

You hit the nail on the head "If everyone could buy a mac, who would want one?"

[lordmorgul]

"If everyone could buy a mac, who would want one?"<br />I would, because as a computer engineer I value the quality, fit, and finish of the hardware.

[shellcodes_coder]

everyone lol. There are many people out there who care about hardware &#38; software not that vendor locked crap

[Brehhah]

how is 700 ultra cheap. You can get a decent, full sized laptop for 400

[Yelonde]

I could only imagine that multimedia capabilities on a $400 laptop. I would guess that it has oh, none whatsoever.

[Seaspray0]

@Yolonde. That depends on what you want to do with it. If you want it as a portable for web browsing and email, then it will do fine. It would probabaly choke if you tried to do hard core graphics editing, but how many people need it for that? If you sat down and actually determined what you really do on a computer, I bet it's a fraction of what the computer is capable of doing. Think about it. Then you may have an understanding of why the average selling price of laptops is about $750. Alot of people buy just what they need.

[shellcodes_coder]

uggh apple tax with endangered os--snow leopard (os that Charlie Miller loves to hack EASILY)

[Gold_Storm_Mac]

show (if you can) an example of the apple tax

[ckh1272]

@shelly--Charlie Miller hasn't hacked SL. That was Leopard, but way to keep the facts straight and sticking with the subject by throwing out your pointless banter.

[shellcodes_coder]

@Gold_Storm_Mac: You might want to read this: Charlie Miller: Snow Leopard less secure than Windows vista &#38; 7: http://www.neowin.net/news/main/09/09/16/hacker-snow-leopard-less-secure-than-windows<br /><br />@ckh1272: Leopard is SL, $30 apple tax for a service pack. Core innovation lol, just moving to Intel x64 and they call that core innovation. I would call that crappvation.<br /><br />And unlike ckh1272 and Gold_Storm_Mac who are Apple paid zealots, Charlie Miller was not paid to say that. That's the truth. They can't write secure codes, embracing what was already written--UNIX that's it. I doubt they can't even write their own kernel. LOL

[shellcodes_coder]

That article was never seen in AppleInsider because...well you know why. That would scare the freaking hell out of mac users who think that their system is damn secure!!

[ckh1272]

@shelly--Once again, thanks for proving (once again) that you are a clueless shill. SL is no more of a "service pack" (which is a Windows term BTW) than Win 7 and, yes, I have used both. The costs of both seem to reflect the level of the upgrade. $30 is a fair deal, but you (of course) will find a way to flip that too. Well, flip this: SL is cheaper than Win 7 and it really isn't that big of a deal for either platform to priced the way they are. Get over it and move on with your life please.

[ckh1272]

@shelly--Oh and which article are you referring to?? The Charlie Miller one? Umm, here you go:<br />http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/03/26/pwn2own_contest_winner_macs_are_safer_than_windows.html<br /><br />Good luck with those blinders and that tinfoil hat.

[ckh1272]

Oops, my bad. Here is the whole link:<br />http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/03/26/pwn2own_contest_winner_macs_are_safer_than_windows.html

[ckh1272]

shellcodes_coder says-"And unlike ckh1272 and Gold_Storm_Mac who are Apple paid zealots".<br /><br />@shelly--Too freakin' funny. Believe me, if I were a paid "Apple zealot", you would never catch a break. Good thing that tinfoil hat of yours isn't wrapped too tight. LOL!!

[shellcodes_coder]

@ckh1272 : That article...saw that long time back. You must see this and it's a new one. Charlie Miller was really disappointed to see the security enhancements in endangered os--snow leopard. Charlie Miller: Snow Leopard less secure than Windows vista &#38; 7: http://www.neowin.net/news/main/09/09/16/hacker-snow-leopard-less-secure-than-windows<br /><br />uhmm...please read the whole article. $30 lol, I have acess to Windows 7 Professional x64 RTM and almost every other Microsoft software for free via MSDNAA and their product keys too. LOL

[Gold_Storm_Mac]

Bottom Line: mac users are less likely to encounter malware. apple tax example: not given

[myles taylor]

Apple needs to cut the price of their parts and tier repairs as well. You currently can buy a new Macbook for close to the cost of repairing the logic board in one. They keep cutting the price of the machines without touching the price of the parts. Don't forget about the service Apple. People who are burned when they can't repair a logic board for $800 in a $1000 aren't likely to buy a Mac again. Apple's part pricing is ridiculously outrageous and they need to do something about it.

[OS11]

you don't have to get parts from Apple, plenty of 3rd parties sell them at cost plus 10%.

[fastfred1]

I enjoy reading all this stuff haha. My first mac was a Mac Plus I bought two @$2600.00<br />Next I bought a Mac II $5448.00 Then I got the Lazer Printer around $4000.00 I think I can't remember. You guys are talking about $600/$800 I have to laught. You have to be real young or from another planet....anyone get their sub prime loan yet. <br />Apple offers them?

[tektaktyks]

see,u got it all mixed up,its us who is laughing at you,pc's can do all the things that macs can do for 1/3 of the price,unless your a ******* ...

[Perry_Clease]

"by tektaktyks September 27, 2009 5:52 PM PDT<br />see,u got it all mixed up,its us who is laughing at you,pc's can do all the things that macs can do for 1/3 of the price,unless your a ******* ..."<br /><br />Listen kid, if you think Mac users care if someone like "u" is laughing at us then that would be another thing about which you are wrong. Hell, "u" can't even type worth a damn.

[lordmorgul]

"pc's can do all the things that macs can do for 1/3 of the price"<br /><br />My Mac runs Windows without hacks. This clearly debunks your false claims. Thank you come again.

[espeed623]

@tektaktyks<br />"see,u got it all mixed up,its us who is laughing at you,pc's can do all the things that macs can do for 1/3 of the price,unless your a ******* ..."<br />Hey, guess what! My "I don't care" levels are over 9,000!

[shellcodes_coder]

@lordmorgul: Because that's by design, unlike Apple, Microsoft won't vendor lock it's OS. But to install crap os x, you have to buy their crappy hardware though we can still install OS X on a PC aka hackintosh