XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy   
   From: nuh-uh@nope.com   
      
   On 2026-03-05 04:34, -hh wrote:   
   > On 3/4/26 23:51, Alan wrote:   
   >> On 2026-03-04 18:27, rbowman wrote:   
   >>> On Wed, 4 Mar 2026 18:58:04 -0500, -hh wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 3/4/26 16:33, Joel W. Crump wrote:   
   >>>>> On 3/4/2026 3:59 PM, -hh wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 3/4/26 08:24, Joel W. Crump wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 3/4/2026 6:56 AM, -hh wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 3/4/26 00:36, Joel W. Crump wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On 3/4/2026 12:15 AM, Alan wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Which still doesn't address that there is a performance increase   
   >>>>>>>>>> (a speed increase) in switching from the 256GB SSD to the 512GB   
   >>>>>>>>>> SSD.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> OK, and it costs $800.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> False; the performance increase being discussed happened at +$200.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> What is 600+200?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> That $800 is the total cost isn't germane to the context, which was   
   >>>>>> the $200 incremental cost for going from 256 to 512GB.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Bullshit, Apple demands cash, people pay.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> That people do pay ... and often enough that Apple stays in   
   >>>> business ...   
   >>>> is proof that their marketplace pricing isn't far from correct.   
   >>>   
   >>> How the Macbook Neo performs in the market will be interesting. $600   
   >>> certainly is a low entry price for an Apple computer but there are many   
   >>> choices in the x64 world in that range too. Will it attract the   
   >>> Chromebook and bottom shelf laptop crowd that is spending less than   
   >>> $400?   
   >   
   > Agreed.  On the surface, it initially seemed to me to be merely an iPad   
   > with an attached keyboard, but it is also de-contented in that it   
   > doesn't have a touchscreen.  Looks like the product line segmentation   
   > that Apple set for adding a touchscreen & detachable keyboard is ~$100.   
      
   That's probably quite accurate. I mean, the processor IS an A18 Pro.   
      
   :-)   
      
   >   
   >   
   >>> When I bought the Swift 3 6 years ago it was $680 so that is in the same   
   >>> range. However it has 16 GB of RAM and double the SSD.   
   >   
   > The customer segment for both appears to be more the EDU market, for   
   > which the use case is similarly quite light duty like what Joel is   
   > apparently content with.   
   >   
   > But when comparing costs, that's become a harder challenge as the AI   
   > surge has driven up hardware costs already, so that has to be baked into   
   > any new product offering today, including their component price   
   > expectations for the next year.  For example, I thought I read this   
   > spring that Apple's price for memory from Samsung has reportedly doubled.   
   >   
   > Personally, I've noticed that an SSD that I bought ~17 months ago is now   
   > selling for roughly twice what I bought mine for.  Similarly, on HDDs, I   
   > needed a new backup spare and just spent $280 for a 12TB...versus three   
   > years when a 14TB was $183: that's +50% more for 15% less capacity.   
      
   I don't think Apple expects to make much money on these, but they don't   
   need to if it encourages a lot of new customers whose next computer will   
   then (very probably) be a better Mac.   
      
   :-)   
      
   >   
   >   
   >>> Oh, and the fingerprint reader wasn't a $100 option.   
   >>>   
   >> To be completely clear, the extra $100 gets you the fingerprint reader...   
   >> ...AND a 512GB SSD.   
   >>   
   >> So it's a better deal than you gave it credit for.   
   >   
   > I overlooked that on my first quick read-through on the product; its an   
   > interesting bundling choice.   
   John Gruber (Daring Fireball) observed that the 256GB version without   
   TouchID makes a lot of sense for the education market.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)