Apple gives a new meaning to solid state.

On 10/26/2013 10:09 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

You don't have to be a geek to install memory.

depends what you call a geek. most people aren't interested in opening
up the computer to install parts, even if it's easy.



you don't need to be an auto mechanic to change a flat tire but most
people don't want to deal with that either.

But they deal with it. You are missing that many people want the
optional ability to change the tire, or open the laptop themselves, or
to have the person of their choice do it for them. The new laptops take
away that option.



But you are probably
right in this case. IIRC Lenovo wanted $240 more for 16gig. I paid under
$100. I do admit, that I got a deal on it, as I found a place that was
going out of business. Otherwise it owuld have cost me $160, from
Crucial. Still a savings.

apple currently charges $200 for 16 gig ddr3 1600 memory.


So. If I decide I wnat to upgrade my memory after the purchase, what is
my option?

that's *less* than lenovo charges, presumably for the same spec memory.
it'd be much worse if lenovo charges more for lower spec memory.

so much for apple being more expensive.

$40 to have the memory preinstalled and fully warranted by one company
is well worth it to many people. no hassles and it just works. if
anything goes wrong, it will be fixed, without anyone blaming it on
faulty third party memory.


See above.
--
PeterN

On 10/25/13 8:43 PM, in article
2013102518431477254-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, "Savageduck"
wrote:

On 2013-10-26 01:00:40 +0000, "MC" said:

nospam wrote:


how many people repair their own laptops? not very many.

Maybe not but they should be, at least, repairable or servicable
without it being cheaper to buy a new one. Come on, at least you
should be able to replace a battery, especially at the price these
products sell for. I mean, they are hardly disposable... or are they?
If so, clever Apple for reeling in those with more money than sense.

Still, Apple is Apple and there will always be the brand whores who
will buy their products, whatever the cost and design. And, I suppose,
that is Apple's strength. Their business model relys on being cult
status and having "brainwashed" their users over the years into
believing their products are better than anything else, when really
they are not. Good luck to them, I say, although the easily led will
not fall for it forever.

MC

It seems that for the sceptic future MacBook buyers, buying AppleCare
is going to be pushed by Apple and other official resellers.

As far as I am concerned, my MBP 17'' is tough as nails, and still
works just fine, and realistically I don't really have a need for
another laptop as my iPad is pretty much filling that role these days.
If anything, one of these days I will probably upgrade to a new 128GB
iPad and keep my battered old MBP for those other odd traveling tasks.

Here is what my battered MBP looks like after taking a drop out of a
case onto my driveway. Not pretty, but it works just fine.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...IMG_0382Ew.jpg


OUCH!

On 10/26/2013 10:09 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

For some strange reason, I like the option, to be able to replace. I
don't like having replacement forced on me.

nothing is forced on anyone.

What are my options when the battery goes?
must I get a new machine, or can the battery be easily replaced?


I suspect that "most
people," and I exclude the gaming crowd, use their computers solely for
Internet browsing, email and occasional word processing. The tablets
changed that somewhat, by making low cost specialized apps available.

many people do little more than that, which is why an ipad works out
well for them. a laptop and certainly a desktop is overkill.

for those who are doing stuff like 3d rendering, video editing, etc.,
they can get a more powerful workstation for those tasks and fall back
to an ipad for the simpler stuff. use the best tool for the job.

it also won't be all that long until some of the more sophisticated
stuff will be done on mobile devices.


What do you mean by "sophisticated stuff?" My point is that from a
purely functional standpoint, an old e-machine would do what a lot of
user want to do. If they wnat a new machine just to play, fine. They
should have the option.

--
PeterN

| I suspect that "most
| people," and I exclude the gaming crowd, use their computers solely for
| Internet browsing, email and occasional word processing. The tablets
| changed that somewhat, by making low cost specialized apps available.
|
| many people do little more than that, which is why an ipad works out
| well for them. a laptop and certainly a desktop is overkill.
|

I don't think it's entirely an issue of what one does. Tablets
are being *marketed* as the more modern replacement for
PCs, but they're just a different tool.

There are the millions of people who don't demand a lot
from their computer, but who do use it a lot for work: students,
academics, scientists, office workers, writers, business
people..... the millions of people who need to use office
software, or other specialized tools. Many of those tools
can work on a tablet, or even on a phone. They don't require
a lot of CPU power, RAM, etc. The issue is not the power
of a tablet but rather simple ergonomics: A large screen,
a good keyboard and a good chair that supports good posture
are the most important factors for anyone who's going to
spend 3 hours writing a paper.

(Though of course college students can get away with
abusing their bodies to some extent, writing term papers
while flopped in a beanbag chair or overstuffed sofa. There's
probably a suite of iCollege apps on the iPhone for iThem,
allowing them to iWrite all of their iPapers without ever
sitting iUp.

On 2013.10.26, 01:02 , RichA wrote:

Well, it kind of makes sense they'd replace ancient 70's electronics
with newer stuff as it came up. But, aerospace companies don't
always operate on the cutting-edge when it comes to electronics
because they want to use stuff that is absolutely proven and
bullet-proof, and this usually lets out the last 3 generations of
processors, etc. I think NASA was on the Intel 486 for their last
space probes even though they haven't been used on Earth for a couple
decades.

They're cutting edge when the design is proposed. But it takes forever
to get to volume production. It is not at all like consumer electronics.

The key criteria are low power consumption for a given function,
availability in MIL qualifying parts (or at least industrial), radiation
hardened in some requirements, second source availability, etc.

The challenge is that devices like cpu's and memory are short lived on
the market (2 - 5 years), but design cycles for avionics are often on
the order of 5 or more years. By the time a design is implemented,
qualified, approved and put into production, many of its parts are
obsolete on the supply side.

To counter that companies do "lifetime" buys (estimate future production
and spares) and buy lots of parts and quarantine them. This ties up
capital (that the US government can sometimes be coerced to pay for
under a support contract). Other alternates are sustaining engineering
efforts to replace parts with others. This entails more qualifying of
the system. Again, the customer pays.

Another possibility is buying from parts brokers. There are risks (no
traceability (certificates) to manufacturer) therebecause parts are
"re-labled" by unsavoury types to look more qualified (esp. temperature
range) than they really are. We would pay screening houses to take in
the parts and qualify them for us. This would drive the cost of a $100
part to $300 - $500 plus tooling costs ($5000 - $25,000 per run). End
customer pays, of course.

--
"Quotation, n: The act of repeating erroneously the words of another."
-Ambrose Bierce

On 2013.10.26, 10:09 , nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

You don't have to be a geek to install memory.

depends what you call a geek. most people aren't interested in opening
up the computer to install parts, even if it's easy.

you don't need to be an auto mechanic to change a flat tire but most
people don't want to deal with that either.

But you are probably
right in this case. IIRC Lenovo wanted $240 more for 16gig. I paid under
$100. I do admit, that I got a deal on it, as I found a place that was
going out of business. Otherwise it owuld have cost me $160, from
Crucial. Still a savings.

apple currently charges $200 for 16 gig ddr3 1600 memory.

Entirely wrong.

If you order a base Mac with 8GB, you get one price.
eg: i7 iMac 3.4 GHz 27": $1,999.00

To "bump" it to 16 GB you pay $200 for 8 GB _more_.
: $2,199.00

So that's $200 for 8 GB more.

I bought a separate 16 GB for less than $200 to ADD 16 GB to my Mac
bringing it to 24 GB for less than $200 (it was $185 with s&h).

--
"Quotation, n: The act of repeating erroneously the words of another."
-Ambrose Bierce

On 2013.10.25, 20:59 , nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

I don't know about 'most people,' but I paid Lenovo for 4 gig of memory,
and bought 16 from Crucial, for much less than half the price Lenovo
wanted to charge. The replacement took less than 15 minutes. I had the
chance to see if I really needed the memory before I bought it, and
saved money in the process.

most people wouldn't know where to start to add their own memory. not
everyone is a geek.

now you decide at the time of purchase instead of later, and apple's
prices aren't all that outrageous, assuming you compare the same type
of memory.

Horse**** as usual. If you need more memory, sites like Crucial guide
the non-geek right to the correct part. Even geekish me relies on them
to be absolutely sure I don't order the wrong part as it's easy enough
to do.

For example on the i7 iMac, selecting the wrong clock timings for a 1600
MHz DDR3 will cause the memory to run at 1033 or 1333 MHz. At that, the
correct timing numbers are counter intuitive.

--
"Quotation, n: The act of repeating erroneously the words of another."
-Ambrose Bierce

On 2013.10.26, 00:57 , RichA wrote:

Some people like the ability to add new memory. What's Apple
charging these days, $500 a gig?

$25 / GB for an 8 GB bump. Which is pretty expensive.
$16.67 / GB for a 24 GB bump. Which is still pretty expensive.

I buy from Crucial. $11.56 / GB - S&H included.

--
"Quotation, n: The act of repeating erroneously the words of another."
-Ambrose Bierce

On 2013.10.26, 01:10 , nospam wrote:
In article ,
RichA wrote:

Some people like the ability to add new memory.

very few do so after purchase.

What's Apple charging these days, $500 a gig?

about $12/gig for ddr3 1600, competitive with most ram vendors.

Wrong.

Apple charge $200 to bump from the included 8 GB to 16 GB. An 8 GB bump.

That's $25/GB.

Crucial: $11.56/GB. S&H included to Canada. Cheaper in the US I
should imagine.



--
"Quotation, n: The act of repeating erroneously the words of another."
-Ambrose Bierce

On 10/26/2013 10:47 AM, Alan Browne wrote:

snip


Another possibility is buying from parts brokers. There are risks (no
traceability (certificates) to manufacturer) therebecause parts are
"re-labled" by unsavoury types to look more qualified (esp. temperature
range) than they really are. We would pay screening houses to take in
the parts and qualify them for us. This would drive the cost of a $100
part to $300 - $500 plus tooling costs ($5000 - $25,000 per run). End
customer pays, of course.


Traceability of structural parts is an FAA requirement. I would be very
surprised if that was not a military requirement for avionics.

--
PeterN