Comments on: Ludicrously priced laptops: Apple, HP, Sony

Some laptops, especially ultraportables, brazenly push the envelope on pricing.

[Perry_Clease]

Brooke you are comparing Apples to persimmons.

[Penguinisto]

Indeed - ultraportables have always been higher-priced... the Air is about the only one in the pile that actually qualifies as one.

[Vegaman_Dan]

The MacBook Air is a very high priced piece of equipment. I would not give it any other qualification beyond that- even Macintosh fans prefer other models.

[seven7dust]

@Dan
could you name a few models
I'm very interested in finding a cheaper ultraportable like the Air !
it should have a 13" screen and a full size keyboard and should be as thin as possible

Do the comparisons and you'll soon realize how wrong you are !

[Seaspray0]

First, justify the need for an ultra portable. What are you people, whimps? Can't lift a 6 lb notebook?

[Millerboy]

The Macbook Air sucks, and it's not even an ultraportable. The others are all ultraportables.

[zulu2003]

Dell Mini 12 is comparable to Air in features. Check the price difference before you say but MacBook is faster/fancier etc.

[kockgunner]

@Millerboy:

How is the Air any less an ultraportable than the other computers Brooke compared? They're all 12 and 13 inch notebooks. Next time, at least read the article before making a fool out of yourself.

[nb2000nb]

cheaper than the air??? have you heard of google?
http://www.pcworld.com/article/123867/top_10_ultraportable_laptops.html

most of those have bigger HDs, faster cpu speeds, similar or smaller weight, etc...
"Do the comparisons and you'll soon realize how wrong you are !" -- WRONG

[random truth]

@nb2000nb
The problem is that most of those "ultraportables" are the same size as a regular alumiun macbook. The aluminum macbooks then have, better trackpads, better processors, longer batterylife, better graphics, a cd drive.

[asindhidude]

+1

[SFiorito]

Sorry, but you can get a VAIO Z 690 custom configuration for $1800 with a 3 year warranty, Vista Business, 4GB of RAM, and a free productivity bundle which includes an extra battery, case, and docking station. They're having a promotional -$300 discount if you add an extended warranty plus 2 accessories. The model you picked as an example is the most expensive, but I agree it's ridiculous to spend that much on something that will be obsolete in 2 years. I also don't get the fascination with Blu Ray on a 13" screen???

[BigGuns149]

I agree with you on the the thing about Blu-Ray on a 13" screen, but at least Sony was smart enough to put an HDMI port on it so that you could output the Blu-ray to a larger screen. I remember a few years ago Sony started selling cheaper 15.4" models that had BD-ROM drives, but didn't have an HDMI or DVI out and the screen resolution was far from 1920x1080. Short of using AnyDVD and outputting through VGA there was no way that you could use an external display to output the video to a larger display. Even then not all displays will take a 1920x1080 analog source.

I agree with you though that not all of the Sony's models are obscene. I know for years they were charging ~$200 for a carbon fiber case that only cut ~0.5lb. While that was nice, I think it was a bit of a hard sell even 2-3 years ago when people had a bit more money or at the least were more willing to spend it.

[themoho]

So Blu-Ray on a 13" screen may seem stupid at first, but when you think about, it is really a smart idea. I own quite a few Blu-Ray movies which I enjoy in the comfort of my own home, but right now I can't enjoy them while traveling. While traveling, I am restricted to my DVD collection. The whole point of Blu-Ray on a laptop is to enjoy all the movies you already own. Whats wrong with enjoying your Blu-Ray collection on the go?

I am trying to decide on my next laptop. I own a Falcon Northwest desktop, so the computer will be a secondary not a primary. I currently have a HP 17" as my laptop. I enjoy it, but it is just too darn big. (That's what she said.) I am looking at the Sony Z series and the Apple MB Pro 15. The Apple has a bigger screen and better customer support. The Sony has a Blu-Ray player and twice as large SSD. I still haven't decided on which one to get.

Just my 2 cents.

[gigo1000]

If you are worried about the price you can't afford it!
I wouldn't buy any of them at those prices. However, there must be people out there who have some use for their particular set of features who do buy them - even with their limitations..

[BigGuns149]

I agree. There are some high end 13" models that aren't much heavier than a netbook, but are very similar hardware wise to some desktop replacements. If money were no object I would buy one, but ~$2K is a bit much to spend at the moment. That doesn't mean that they are overpriced for what they are. Merely because something is expensive doesn't make is overpriced. Overpriced means that relative to something comparable in virtually every respect that the price is too high.

[ericyen]

Clearly a selective use of data. All of those manufacturer offer products that span the price range.

[terminalblue]

apple doesnt.

[friday04]

@terminalblue and Brooke Crothers

Why should Apple create a cheap laptop? Every analyst and financial guru thinks Apple should enter the sub-$500 netbook category but what evidence is there that Apple needs to compromise their principles just to sell a few more cheap laptops.

Their laptops are selling just fine at their price point. If you want a cheap laptop, look elsewhere.
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/10/22/apple_earns_904_million_on_sales_of_6_22_billion.html

[dudemanguysondog]

It could just be that apple is too caught up in trying to be the Starbucks of computers.

[geekpundit]

@terminalblue

Yes, they ALL offer a range of prices and options. Dropping out the solid state drive affects price quite a bit. (And puts the Macbook Air down to $1800.)

[homercles82]

Yes Apple is doing well! That article about their sales being down? MALARKEY I TELLS YA! And their laptops sell just fine nevermind that if it wasn't for the iPod or iPhone macs would be relegated to coffee shops and hipsters.

Oh wait

[atomD21]

Careful, all of you! Some of these comments run dangerously close to Blasphemy!! Beware the wrath of the great and powerful Jobs! He will send his iDrones after you! All kidding aside, who right now can justify spending that type of cash on a laptop? Yes, I know they can all be configured differently to bring the price down, but still $1500 is quite a chunk.

[magusat999]

@friday04

What principles? Selling at a price "just because you can" is not a mark of high principles - it's arrogance and inconsideration. Just because laptops are selling at prices which the mainstream really cannot afford (credit cards are not income, and to be factual the vast majority of people buying overpriced gouge-ware are credit users, not people who make enough to drop that kind of dough at the blink of and eye) doesn't mean that they are appropriately priced. It's possible, probable, and down right factual that these things are being sold because consumers are just caught up in the whole game, and blindly spend money - even if it's for something they really shouldn't be purchasing.

[mrcjacobs]

It's obvious from the comments thus far that the point of the post was missed; that the price is extravagant for what you're getting. The manufacturers make cheaper products but that's not the point the author is trying to make.

[ScottRiqui]

Exactly - the article isn't claiming that all the listed manufacturers' products are overpriced and underperforming - just the selected models.

[MafiaPenguin]

+1

[nouser]

I see you can buy the refurbished MacBook Air from Apple for as little as $1,299.

Refurbished MacBook Air 1.8GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
13.3-inch glossy widescreen display
2GB memory
64GB solid-state drive
Built-in 802.11n Wi-Fi and Bluetooth 2.1 + EDR
Built-in iSight Camera

[globalist_agenda]

I basically view laptops as a throw-away item. You are lucky to get 2 years service. They either break - I'm seeing a very high failure rate, or their technology becomes obsolete. They conveniently break just after the 1 year warranty expires. The hard drives from Thailand are junk, screens lose brightness, battery don't hold a charge, AC adapters break, and Nvidia hosed me good with their mobile chip failure. I don't plan to spend more than $600 for a laptop, which works out to $300 a year for the two years I'm lucky to get from it. The grief I get from having failed laptops -- priceless!

[Mikeatle]

I have a PowerBook G4 (that I am using as I write this note) that I bought four years ago as a refurbished unit (it actually dates to 2003). To this day, I haven't had a problem with it. I use it several times a day, just about every day. When I purchased it four years ago, I thought $900 was a bit pricey, but, to be honest, my PB G4 has paid for itself over and over again.

[BigGuns149]

While laptops without a question have higher failure rates than desktops or many other electronic items I've met a lot of people who have gotten 3-4 years out of a laptop. Most reliability surveys(PC World, PC Mag, Consumer Reports, Notebook user, etc.) I have seen put industry wide failure rates at ~25% give or take a couple percentage points over a three year period. I've encountered laptops that have been 7-8 years old. That is pretty atypical, but with a little luck and proper care it is possible.

As for the technology becoming obsolete the same could be said about desktop computers as well. The only difference is that generally except for the HDD and the memory there isn't much that can be easily upgraded on a laptop. In that respect I understand the reluctance to spend a lot of money on a laptop, but I think spending less than $600 can seem a bit silly. If you want to be nitty gritty anything below $600 I have found tends to use obsolete technology (eg. video chipsets and processors that are 2-3 years old).

I think most people would be better off buying a $1000 laptop and keep it for 3 years. The $600 laptop that you buy in two years beyond a little more RAM and slightly more HDD space probably isn't going to be any better than a $1000 machine from 2 years ago. In fact in may be inferior with regards to the graphics chipset since a last generation discrete chip tends to be better then a current generation integrated chip. Overall the odds are in your favor that it will last three years and overall you will probably be more satisfied with the performance.

[champion77]

If you are looking for a great laptop that will last you 8-12 years, the only place you will find one is Apple. Believe me, for the quality you get from Apple, they are NOT overpriced. Any other laptop, I would agree with you. I have a Dell and it's barely holding up after 1 year. My Toshi*ba Satellite only lasted 3.5 years.. My brother-in law has a mac that he has been been rigorously using for 10 years with zero problems.! I can't speak for the other ones this guy rips, but Apple is worth it.

[mattyc09]

I have only had 3 laptops, so I can't say I have a huge amount of experience, but my parents got me a Dell Inspiron 8100 when I graduated high school in 2002. I had that until December of 06. Since it wasn't worth anything by then I didn't sell it. I hauled that thing to class and all around campus and it still works fine (though this year the battery finally got to the point that it won't hold a change it could be replaced. In 06 I got a HP that I had for almost a year, it worked fine. I sold it, but not because anything was wrong with it, but because I wanted to get a Mac. I got a MacBook Pro in Nov 07, still going strong. This thing is used every day between work and home use. It has hardly been babied either. It actually took a drop on pavement when I was coming out of work one day and almost fell on some ice. A dent in the back corner, but otherwise good as new.

I don't think of laptops as throwaway at all.

[cyclelogicpress.com]

Six-year-old Titanium Mac G4 PowerBook still in daily use without a single problem ever.

[Seaspray0]

I have you all beat... 1995 model compaq 5300 which still runs like a top. But why bother buying a laptop that lasts that long if it will be obsolete in 3 years?

[pjhenry1216]

I can't stand when people bring up old macbooks or powerbooks. If you're still using them, you're not putting heavy loads on it. Anything that would put a heavy load on a laptop these days would have no chance of running on those kinds of specs back then. I'm not surprised your powerbook is still running. I've seen regular laptops run for over 5 years as well when you're doing doing more than word processing or web browsing. Plus, Apple still outsources the components. Those components are found in other laptops as well. Its not like they have an exclusive seller. And on top of that, electronics fail after a certain amount of time. It's inherent in its system. Hard drives can only withstand being written to so many times. Circuits give out after extended use. It just happens. Yes, some companies put out cheaper stuff, but they also put out expensive stuff on par with Apple as well. There's nothing gained in your argument to point out all the cheap laptops that fail and then point to the expensive apple laptops that don't fail. Whoopity doo. Expensive laptops from other companies can last just as long too. Please, stop trying to make yourself feel any better about your purchase. Apple makes a solid computer, but its not the next coming of jesus christ.

[artistjoh]

Over the years I have purchased 10 Apple computers including laptopss. The oldest is an iBook from 2001. Out of all those great products that I have loved and still own, only one computer failed and that was a desktop, and that was after 5 years of 8 - 12 hours usage per day, 7 days a week. I could repair it but I have plenty of computers and its humble 2003 specs mean it is not logical to spend the money.

All computers will fail at some time but my personal experience (supported by witnessing the experience of friends in graphic design is that it is common to find professionals working on Macintosh laptops that are several years old.

If the brand of laptop that you buy lasts only a couple of years then save your pennies and buy a better brand. There is a saying in Spanish - The cheap works out expensive. Think about it - if you pay half what I pay for similar specs and your machine lasts 2 years and mine lasts more than 4 years then my machine actually costs less than yours does even though I paid more upfront.

[Kev_Orng]

In 2003, I picked up a 1998 G3 300mhz "Wallstreet" Powerbook for $250 on eBay. It still works great.

It's running OSX Jaguar (it is below the spec cutoff for Panther and higher) and was basically where I kept my Office suite so it would be portable, and a few other basic apps. My video editing and graphic design stayed on my desktop G4, which is still operational after 8 years, although I just replaced both of them with a Macbook Pro a couple months ago.

Who cares if it becomes obsolete? I'd rather replace an obsolete unit at my leisure, then be forced to replace a unit that died before its time. Both of my previous machines worked perfectly until I was ready to replace them.

[perontopsp]

@ globalist_agenda

There are a lot of laptops that do break down after a few years, My 2003 Sony Vaio broke in 2005, my 2004 Toshiba broke in late 2005, and right now I have a gateway, thats about to brake and a Compaq that i bought in 2006, and my beauty, my Samsung NC10 netbook. Now if you really care abut a laptop that lasts long them buy an apple, they only get one problem over time and thats maybe a few dead screen pixels. Plus that only of it around five years old.

Sop if you need a laptop just buy an apple, otherwise don't complain about windows based computers, you already know that they will fail after 2 years or so.

[mrobmsu]

As mentioned, most of these vendors have machines at a variety of price points, though the first few laptops do seem like a poor bargain for what they cost.

I would disagree with the main premise of the article, though, which seems to be that the price of a laptop should be determined by the state of the economy. Just because the economy is doing so badly doesn't mean that manufacturers need to lower the price of a product--it may mean they should emphasize lower end items, but these choices are really up to the consumer.

[lkrupp]

Apple and Mac users/buyers could care less what people like the author of this hit piece think or demand. I'm sure the buyers and owners of the other alleged pricey hardware think the same.

So screw your opinion about what constitutes value. We will continue to buy what we like when we want to, from whom ever we desire, at whatever price we choose to pay. People who make decisions based on price alone always get what they deserve.

[gmcbay]

If Apple/Mac users (and BTW, I am one of them -- I own a Mac desktop, a MacBook and an iPhone in addition to a few PCs) really care so little about what the author thinks of Macs and Apple, how did I know the comments here would be fully of Apple fanboys throwing a hissy fit that he dared to say something bad about Apple before I even got finished reading the article?

It works like clockwork -- post a blog or article mentioning Apple in some negative way (sometimes fair, sometimes not), and you get 100+ comments from Mac diehards telling you how much they don't care about what you just said. Apple has the most overly defensive fanboys on the Internet, and in such a fanboy-rich culture that's really saying something.

[Seaspray0]

Besides, how would Ikrupp maintain that snob value without buying overpriced products?

[magusat999]

What I find funny about this is that I recall when Apple was "on top" (and i was an Apple fanboy with my Powermac 9500 and my Performa Power PC... mehhh) they used to moan and cry about how defensive PC USERS were! The old Mac user crowd is rolling around in their dead Mac cases over how voracious and ingratiating these Mac fanboys have become - but it's only a symptom of being part of the out crowd. I dumped Apple after the bankruptcy - after they tried to dump all of it's customers whom they promised lifetime support (if you have an old powermac or performa you have lifetime support - they LOST the case - so if you have a general concern you should be able to force them to help you).

[Trane Francks]

@gmcbay:

"Apple has the most overly defensive fanboys on the Internet, and in such a fanboy-rich culture that's really saying something."

You should have been here back in the OS/2 Warp days. Oh. My. God. Hell hath no fury like an OS/2 fan scorned.

[doobz94]

@gmcbay

I hate it when anyone who says anything positive about a Mac is flamed and labeled a fanboy. And Apple fanboys are the worst? I'd like to introduce you to the Apple bashers and Microsoft fanboys.

[KHannemann]

I think it's very interesting that the headline reads "Ludicrously priced laptops: Apple, HP, Sony" with Apple leading the list, but in the article he squeezes in an Apple just to make the headline work. Cheap shot all the way.

[Perry_Clease]

Coincidently the latest cover of Wired has "Welcome to the Netbook Age."

We are not all the same shaped pegs, we have different needs, some of which overlap. Some people only need an inexpensive netbook, others need a portable that can do graphic, video, heavy data crunching or whatever. However, to call the price of a more powerful, and probably more robust, computer ludicrous defines ludicrous. Sometimes the trolls are in the comment section and sometimes they are in the byline.

[jwilson00m1]

I think the author might have chosen to list them alphabetically by first letter to avoid the appearance of bias. Guess it didn't work.

[Vegaman_Dan]

Headlines with Apple or Microsoft in them generate pageviews regardless of the topic. Pageviews generate ad revenue. CNET is a business. Make your own connections as appropriate.

[atomD21]

Wait a minute Vegaman Dan... are you daring to say that CNET should be trying to make money!? Don't you know that they are only beholden to us, their readers? Don't you know that they should reformat their site to praise the greatness of whichever company the commenters think is the best at that moment? I just love how people get so worked up over CNET's increasing trend of "sensational" headlines to get people to read the stories, blogs, etc. It's not like CNET invented the idea.

[random truth]

Its just alphabetical order...

[ddhboy]

Honestly, I think that the air should be taken out of production all together and replaced with a netbook macbook. Its not like you can even argue that it is an ultraportable now, since severyone has 7 inch monitors and sony has their Vaio P, which you could put in your pocket. The air can't be making apple a great deal of money anyway, especially since it rivals the macbook pro in cost.

[sflocal]

We use a bunch of netbooks for our mobile staff. They are horrible. They are ridiculously slow and barely useable even as a minimalist laptop. Why did we get them? Because management decided only based on price.

This is what happens when people base their purchases on price alone. You get what you pay for. If the laptops discussed above seem pricey to you, don't buy it. Usually there is a lot of under-the-hood engineering going on to get them to work at the level they do and there is a cost associated with that. You failed miserably to realize that.

The upper-scale ultraportables are for a niche market. If you're happy with your $500 netbook, more power to you. I myself could never use one due to the performance issues. It's simply not a 9-to-5 machine.

And btw, I own a Macbook Air. It was probably the most expensive laptop I have purchased to date. It is also the best laptop I've ever owned. Every colleague and friend that owns one has nothing but high-praise for them and factored in more than just price alone when making a purchase. This was my first non-Wintel notebook machine I've purchased too.

I too agree with KHannemann. The way you included the MBA at the end of the article was a complete cheap shot obviously meant to gather readers to what was obviously a very biased column with no real content or journalistic quality.

If cost alone matters to you, then I'll bet management at CNet will determine the cost of keeping you on staff is just too high given the kind of articles you create. Time to polish that resume!

[BigGuns149]

I agree with you that the comparison between some of the high end ultraportable and a netbook seem silly. Even the low watt versions of the Core2Duo still trumph the Atom in performance. The author seems to forget that the Atom N270 is a single core processor with only 512Kib of L2 cache and he is insinuating that the performance is comparable. I agree with him that the prices on some of these ultraportable is stratospheric, but you are getting more performance for the premium.

I agree with you though that I would suggest this guy to polish his resume, because in the current economy I am sure that heads are going to roll and frankly much like you I wouldn't miss this guys silly commentary.

[pjhenry1216]

Its odd that I've only seen people comment about how great the Air is, yet I've never seen published reviews give it all that much. They all will tell you the same. It just isn't good enough to be anything other than an accessory to another more powerful laptop or desktop. I'm not saying its terrible and I'm not saying netbooks do any better, however, I've never seen any reviewer worth their salt saying its the best laptop they've ever seen.

[seven7dust]

So the Air is the cheapest among the lot
it's also the thinnest ,has the highest battery life ,runs a better O.S
has better specs which include a 9400M and a bigger SSD drive
and has iLife bundled
So why is the Air Compared to these rip-offs again ???
it's value for money when compared to the others

[RMarch]

Read up on the Vaio Z a little bit. It blows the doors of the updated Macbook Air - not even close.

If you are a professional photograper nothing can touch the horsepower in a 3.4 lbs package with the absolute best 1600 x 900 resolution 13.1 inch screen on the market. Color saturation alone is worth every penny. Through in 64 bit Vista coupled with 64 bit CS4 and 4 Gb DDR3 Ram and we are talking a whole different ballgame.

Not everyone surfs the web and does email all day. Maybe this makes something like the Vaio Z a niche product, but thank god for the niche. This in no way says something like a Macbook Air is not a nifty little laptop, but not for serious graphics processing.

Also FYI - the Nvidia 9300M and the 9400M are virtually the sae chip - just designed for different motherboard setups.

[RMarch]

Oh and by the way, the article completely forgets to mention that the Sony has a 128 Gb SSD RAID 0 configuration. Yes that's right, it is actually 2 64 Gb SSDs in a RAID array. Absolutely stunning performance. The latest model (for the same price) has 2 x 128 Gb drives in a RAID 0 maiking for a blindingly fast 256 Gb array.

Simply put, you get what you pay for. Now, if you are going to use this tiny beast to surf the web for nearly $4000 dollars, well that's just not the point. Very few people need this kind of laptop - but for those who do, thank goodness it exists.

[seven7dust]

maybe yr right about the specs being a bit better but not by much and yr forgetting the thinness !
but still photographers r better off getting a 17" Macbook pro
it has a HD screen at 1900X1600 resolution
and way faster specs and graphics not to mention the super high battery life
it maybe bigger but that shoudnt matter much to professional photographers !
also I've noticed that most photographers I've seen use Macs
Because the Mac O.S is designed to make photos look more realistic or something like that !
not too sure about that but it's wat I've heard !

[jorgebob]

RMarch,

You're right about the graphics processing abilities of the Air, you'd be better off using a MacBook Pro. The Air wasn't made for that use as its primary function. Our in-house photographer uses an Air but dumps everything to a MacPro to do her color work. The managing director of my company just switched from a Windows machine to the new Air model. It's perfect for his business apps and presentations in a light package since he doesn't do graphics work.

Please don't tell me that you are using a laptop screen for color work because just about every laptop comes with a screen that falls short for professional color work. The pros I know use an external monitor for that.

I work in a color retouch shop that does images for many national and international clients and batch process 4000-5000 images at a time and that kind of work is better done on a workstation, I have no idea what you do in your workflow so I mention my quantity as a reference. Also, I don't know what your level of competency is so don't take this as a slam but some of our smaller clients let photographers do some of the color work on images to save money but quite often we end up reworking the files from scratch.

[Vegaman_Dan]

The MBA has never held the title of lightest or thinnest laptop... ever. It's advertising hype. There have been lighter and thinner laptops in the past, and there were even such laptops during the MBA's initial advertising.

Don't read too much into it. The MBA is good for people who want to be seen using it. It has its niche.

[seven7dust]

@dan
I was comparing it to all the machines listed above
no doubt they may be better machines than the Air
but from the ones listed above the Air is the clear winner

[pithenumber]

on your first post 77dust

and it only has one USB port, I usually have 2 USB devices in the system at once, a mouse and a flash drive, I have a third one for ultraportables: the CD drive

the MBA has good specs, but it has a fatal flaw, too bad for Apple, I was thinking of a 2gen MBA

[Vorgamorth]

I must quote my father here. He liked to buy, fix up and sell old cars, and invariably I'd ask him when he finished, "What's this one worth?"

He'd reply, "It's worth what someone will pay for it."

The author finds these laptops to be ludicrously priced in the same way most of us find a Ferrari to be ludicrously priced. But you don't buy a Ferrari for the same reasons you buy a Honda, for example. Same thing here. This is partly a tenuous grasp of economics, and partly sour grapes, imho.

[3rdalbum]

But how many people actually buy these things?

Of the comparatively few people who own a Macbook Air, about half of them also own a Macbook or even a Macbook Pro. Unscientific survey conducted on a forum. Almost nobody owns one of the HP, Sony, Toshiba or Fujitsu ultraportables, and if so they usually own a desktop machine and not another laptop. In other words, the Macbook Air sells to the fanbois.

[Trane Francks]

@3rdalbum:

"But how many people actually buy these things?"

Same argument applies for those buying Ferraris, I suppose.

[random truth]

@Trane Francks
People in rich suburbia are probably the main customers.

THIS.

I really don't want to start a PC vs. Mac thing, but this is the reason why I am and will continue to be a Mac user. Macs don't have this two or three year lifespan that so many (not all) of these garbage Windows PCs have. You can buy one, use it for years and years, and while it may no longer be the fastest computer on the block, it doesn't outlive its usefulness nearly as fast as their PC counterparts do.

[Seaspray0]

FUD! You have no idea what the lifespans of computers are.

[pjhenry1216]

Ugh. This same old completely incorrect argument... AGAIN. PCs 'outlive' their usefulness because the apps being run require more power. They don't just fail apart. If you're still running a laptop with specs from more than 2 or 3 years ago, you're not going to be able to run anything that requires a heavy load. Maybe you can put a heavy load on it relatively speaking, but a heavy load on a modern laptop will far outweigh a heavy load on a 4 year old laptop. Plus, people upgrade non-apple notebooks more often because its affordable to do so, not because they *have* to. Many higher quality, NON-apple notebooks last just as long when used in the same way as apple notebooks.

[pithenumber]

I have a laptop with an early Pentium M, it runs fine

throw Crysis at it and I can guarantee that it will not end well

I got a new computer because the last one wasn't powerful enough to run applications that I would use on it

PC's outlive their "useable" lifespan most of the time

[random truth]

Ill comment from my point of view. I have owned 5 laptops. 1 of them was a cheap windows laptop, three were windows laptops that costed upward of $1500 (I needed the performance), 1 was a Macbook that costed 1,299. I am very hard on my stuff. That said the windows laptops did not last more than 6 months before breaking requiring repairs that would cost more than the computer. However I have had the macbook for over a year and it has yet to have a single problem.

[polaris20]

An Apple MacBook Air is also available for $1800, and is still a very capable machine, especially for its weight and size.

[Vegaman_Dan]

There are other brands that offer the same or better performance, battery life, size, and capabilities. Some more than others, less in other areas. Take a look at the Portege R500 or R600 running Ubuntu, for example. That can be done for less than half the price of the MBA.

[seven7dust]

@dan
r you kiddding
those laptops first of run ubuntu which is not ideal for many
they r thicker than the Air and they run intel graphics
the only plus is they have a optical drive which is useless in a ultra-portable IMO !

and they cost as much as the Air, your half the price non-sense is baseless
plzz do some research before trolling the Comments section !
not saying those r bad machines BTW !

[Seaspray0]

Ultra portables are really only needed for a specific nich... those who travel extensively and actually need to travel very light. Your problem is seperating the want from the need. Even though you would want an ultra portable, the odds are highly against you needing it. Why waste the money? It's just not worth it to spend $$$ more to lug a 3 lb laptop with your 30 lb luggage through the airport vs a 6 lb laptop and your 30 lb of luggage. Wimps is more like it. If you had to lug a 1990 compaq "luggable" (two suitcases) portable computer through an airport, you wouldn't be complaining about the 6 lb that alot of laptops weight today that are much more capable at half the price. You're just plain disgusting.

[DKrudop]

You want a BMW, you pay for a BMW. If you only have the wherewithall for a Hyundai, get a Hyundai. BMW is not going lower their prices because a columnist thinks they're too expensive, neither should any computer company. Every computer company ( yes, Apple too) has more affordable laptops than the ones mentioned. Kwitchyerbitchin'.

[martin1212]

Way to miss the point. The columnist is talking about specific machines that have poor performance/price ratios. The fact that other machines are more affordable is completely irrelevant, the point is that these specific machines are not worth the money being asked for them.

[Seaspray0]

But, do you need a BMW? Justify it as a need and not a want, and then I'll listen.

[gkflyboy]

Most Apple "Fanboys" will agree - the Air is a bit overpriced. Most are going for the much cheaper last-year's models at Apple's Refurbished store.

Would rather see the base Air at $1499, but then there is the "Apple Tax"...

We can all mostly agree, though, that over $1500 for a laptop in today's Economy is a bit outrageous.

[dennisl59]

Agreed, anyone that pays more than $1,500 for a new OR refurb'd laptop has more money than sense, in my opinion.

[Perry_Clease]

"Agreed, anyone that pays more than $1,500 for a new OR refurb'd laptop has more money than sense, in my opinion."

Maybe they have more money because they have more sense, or cents as the case may be.

[websterphreaky]

LETS FACE Brooke Crothers, APPLE HAS ALWAYS BEEN OVER-PRICED!! Only you Apple Hacks have always LOVED TO IGNORE IT!!

Mac portables have ALWAYS been behind the Technology Curve .... why, BECAUSE Apple has NEVER MADE OR ENGINEERED their own notebooks! From the very beginning, Sony / IBM DESIGNED and MANUFACTURED ALL of Apple's portable from Japan .... got an old PowerBook? Turn it over - MADE IN JAPAN!

Apple ANYTHING = The Mac "Premium" .... for a year old technology.

Now lets see if CNut the Apple Pimps, Censors this Truth About Apple.

[sanjayb]

There is no truth in anything u wrote. Apple behind the technology curve? Take a look at the specs of the Macbook Pro line and tell me where are they are a year behind the competition?

Do some research fool.

[seven7dust]

it's all about the Mac O.S
some people want a better and more advanced O.S that works flawlessly

and BTW using a Unibody shell, DDR3 ram ,Nvidia 9400m graphics chip and led backlit displays
can hardly be called behind the curve

[seven7dust]

also
having a faster processor and more ram hardly qualifies for better technology in my books !
a Laptop should be compared on all fronts
be it the Led display ,the iSight camera, the multi-touch trackpad or the magsafe connector !
Macbooks have better technology all round, and they also run a more advanced Operating system
than their Pc counteparts !
So buy a Macbook for the latest in technology not just specs !
the only fault I can give Apple is the lack of blu-ray but I haven't jumped on the blu-ray bandwagon yet
So it's doesn't bother me much !

Apple don't compete in the low end of the market
but at the premium segments they r very competitively priced !

[nickh2]

Freakywebster! I'm surprised. Really.

How on earth do you find the time to troll Apple articles on cnet?
I would have thought you had your hands full trolling Apple articles on Digg. Or was it Wired?

Oh, wait. It was both of them.

What a busy life you must lead.

[Vegaman_Dan]

I think it's honest to say that most people stopped reading your comment the moment you started using ALL CAPS. Any chance of being taken seriously was lost right there.

[The_happy_switcher]

Time for a new keyboard. Your cap key is obviously broken.

[eeycee]

Hey I just upgraded my (bottom of the line) 2006 (*yup* ancient) imac with all the LATEST mac software without a gitch. good luck trying it on a PC!! Bonus, my (very loved) puter works better! Cheers

[magusat999]

It doesn't matter to me if he uses caps - my eyes SEE, not HEAR - when is that old archaic and poindexter response to capitals going to cease... get over it.

Anywho, it's true that Apple has always been overpriced - that's one of the reasons the PC market thrives. You want to go from XP to Vista? Throw in some ram, maybe upgrade your cpu... your there. You want to go from OS9 to OSX - sorry buddy, you have to buy a WHOLE NEW MACHINE. Ridiculous. Apple has always played the hardware pimping game - and if you really checked out what you get for different prices, you would notice that they don't add on - they take something away and replace it with something else: with Apple, you never get more bang for your bucks - you pay more and you get something else instead of the other.

HP is a joke - they have always sold underperforming products at nosebleed prices. For instance, I have had and Epson printer that out lasted 4 HP printers - the only reason I had to get rid of it, after 5-6 years of service was because Epson simply stopped writing drivers. Other than that it performed as well as it did on day one of purchase. HP printers, on the other hand, got progressively worse as time passed - to the point of malfunction. They bled ink everywhere, splotched up prints, and while I could print 50 full color photo prints (8x10) with my Epson - HP was playing the "ink game". barely 10 full color prints and the colors start degrading. Did I mention that HP printers are more expensive than Epson - and their inks?

On the PC side, HP doesn't fare much better. The first clue is the proprietary hardware setup. I can buy a PC from Alienware - it will be just as expensive as the HP - but I can change things without paying Alienware up the yin-yang. Not so with HP. If you buy from them, get ready to be stuck in the "HP Plan". You can do minor upgrades, like a card here and there - but change the motherboard / case / power supply - anything important - well, it just won't happen without HP getting some dollars from you.

I have an HP workstation right now, and it came with a paltry 250w power supply. I can go to Newegg, Frys, Tiger Direct and purchase a 550w PSU for $60.00 - but it won't fit in HP's proprietary case. HP has (had) one on their site - 300w for $250.00. tad expensive - doncha think? And nobody uses under 400w ( this has been so for the last 4-5 years). It's more like HP giving you the kiss-off. BTW - I didn't, and never would buy a PC from HP - it was about to be thrown away and my boss gave it to me.

HP and Sony have a similar way of thinking - they think things should be priced according to what logo / marketing scheme they have going for it. That slick "VIAO" logo, the HP Branding - surely people think of anything those are blessed with as being worth more cash - even when it really isn't. Sony has taken the label pimping to extraordinary heights. "Bravia", "Wega"; don't those bring back fond memories of high priced TVs that are in some trash heap now? Both Sony and HP make pigs and put lipstick on them - selling them like high priced ******, when they are just back street hookers. Their products are faulty, over-priced and not well supported.

All these companies should be shut down and hauled in to the magistrate for de-frauding the public and price-gouging. Nobody spends $3000.00 on a laptop thinking "I hope this thing has ancient hardware...". When you pay more you should get more for your money. The question is not when Will Apple, HP, or Sony "get it" - but how tight does the consumer's belt have to get... to "Get it" and stop being a patsy for these boardroom hustlers???

[pithenumber]

@77dust
uhhh, no
Apple uses old processors, where's the i7 in their product line?
DDR3 is found in PC's as expensive as Macs

the unibody doesn't matter for me, its a case. If the case surrounds the components and protects them sufficiently, it works. On the inside Macs are PC's with a chip that Apple uses to maintain its walled garden

If you want Mac OS, get a Hackintosh, not a Mac!