Outstanding article; I'm glad you put these thoughts into words and published them because I've felt similarly this week since I've had time and reason to reminisce on my 2010 MacBook. I had AutoCAD on that poor little computer, working at the pace it could handle.
This is such a better deal than I had growing up, Apple has to be taking a bath on these.
My high school required students to bring their own laptops to school when I started in 2010. Their shopping list suggested a MacBook Pro 13" with a case - I looked up "MacBook Pro price" for the first time in my life and just about walked into traffic. I didn't have a laptop to bring, I didn't want to bring the wrong kind of laptop and get double-screwed, so I bit the bullet and brought my car savings to the Apple store at the mall. A tremendously thoughtful sales rep told me "that's crazy, what school requires a MacBook Pro for 9th graders?", led me to the white unibody MacBooks on the side, and showed me that if I was buying it for school, I would get a discount on the laptop, a free inkjet printer (with ink!), and a free iPod Touch. This blew my mind. I thought it was a scam.
If I recall, that model of MacBook compared admirably against the same year's base model MacBook Pro 13 on a stat sheet but felt worse in hand. The MacBook Neo might actually bring up the rear on fit and finish at the expense of I/O and like, the questionable idea of running an A-series chip in a laptop running Tahoe and Chrome. I'm thrilled with this release.
Wow props to that sales rep. Not many would pass on the opportunity to sell something more expensive. I'm assuming they make some sort of (paltry) commission
I've had a similar experience with Apple Store employees many, many times: I walk in and vaguely describe what I want, and they steer me to the cheapest item they sell that could possibly meet my stated requirements.
I've also returned Apple products multiple times, once (recently) without the packaging, and once several days past the return window. They refunded me every time, no questions asked.
This makes me wonder if it's part of their training?
It is - you’re not trained to upsell, only to give the customer what they need to do what they want.
Can be a little annoying (an employee actively tried to downsell my partner, even though they knew what they wanted), but overall it’s a nice practice.
That assumption would be wrong, and is why you get that kind of service from them. They may have targets of units sold but the real target is customer satisfaction and part of that is getting the customer into the right product so they're happy with it
They are a highly NPS driven operation. It makes sense: if you keep NPS above a certain threshold each sale begets additional sales from other customers. They manage people and places to what customers say in NPS surveys but don’t allow tolerate soliciting ratings. It’s simple, thus scalable.
My experience is that they are more focused on finding the right product for your needs. I've been there more than once where they happily downsell a customer.
At some point in the 2000s I was buying a laptop at an Apple retail store, and just before we processed the transaction the salesperson asked if I was a student.
> I'm assuming they make some sort of (paltry) commission
I worked at an Apple Store in 2010. There was no commission. I was a sales person at the time.
A college student had a bad interaction with one of our sales people and asked a manager to be helped by a female employee. We had none available and I was asked to assist her because I wasn't aggressive.
An asshole pathological liar, who later got fired, had tried to upsell her for no reason. The MacBooks with Intel processors were plenty fast. A 13" MacBook Pro was more expensive and offered no benefits for her student needs. I don't remember the rest other than she bought the MacBook, which was what she wanted when she came in.
> This is such a better deal than I had growing up, Apple has to be taking a bath on these.
Apple doesn't sell anything where they're taking a bath; their margins have been high 30's to low 40's for many years. All of the technology in the Neo already existed; they didn't have to create anything new.
To me the price seems to be so uncharactaristically low for Apple during a time where hardware prices are rising across the board that this almost feels like an attempt to try and capture the desktop market. During a time where Microsoft is fumbling with Windows on every front, having a competitively priced Macbook even for budget-concious people seems like a smart move that will pay off even without direct high margins.
Capture the student market 100%. I’d buy one for my kids tomorrow. These machines are made with an iPhone chip so they’re going to be great at browsing the web and studying. I wouldn’t buy one for myself To do actual work on but for light users it’s the perfect device. Start them early and get them hooked in the ecosystem so they’re grow up and keep buying iPhones, Apple Watches, AirPods, and iPads.
You have to compare with the base iPad, which costs only about half of the Neo. The Neo adds a keyboard (but without Touch ID for the base model), a larger screen but without touch, a somewhat better but also binned SoC (which the next iPad refresh will very likely also get) and more storage. It seems roughly in line, relative to the price difference.
It's more expensive if you want Touch ID, and on par ($350 + $250) if you don't. However, the $250 Magic Keyboard is heavily overpriced, the actual keyboard can't be more than $10-20.
Anecdotally, at universities now, it seems like across domains, iPads are increasingly popular as ways to take notes and study. I wonder what the business model is here given their similar use cases with the neo for the student.
Why? Lots of companies sell Windows Laptops for under $200 (a 1/3rd the price of this). Personally I'd expect Apple's costs to be lower. Plus, Apple gets services money (iCloud, AppleTV+, ...)
And I must make a correction, he doesn't explicitly mention trusting his kids with a 5k Leica. He's using a 10k M11 as a family camera and he lets his wife use it.
Still, I'd imagine a family with this type of money would have no issue giving the kids 500$ MacBook.
I should of brought up the thread where someone felt they needed to buy each daughters a Tesla...
> K-to-12 edu customers don’t care for that and just want a keyboard with a screen with dead-simple admin options.
Which is why I highly doubt this is a play for the K-12 education space. Lots of school-owned chromebook repairs get done at the district level before making their way to the OEM for RMA/replacement. There's no way Apple is supporting that system, they'll want all repairs done under their roof. Not to mention MacOS adminware options lag behind what's built-into ChromeOS. Are you really gonna tell your severely-underpaid sysadmin to put 10,000 devices on Kandji? They'll walk into traffic before you finish speaking.
Agreed. The SWEs already receive a steady supply of conflicting demands from every possible business unit; the value add for these teams is a working PMO to prioritize the requests coming in.
Google bought out HTC 8 years ago to the day, and if I recall correctly that exacerbated a lot of the tension in the Android OEM space that the original Google Pixel rollout caused in the first place.
I've been a pixel guy since HTC was making them for google, and honestly jumping from the 6 to the 9 has made me think that pastures are greener someplace else.
This is true for bricks, but it is not true if your dog starts up your car and hits a pedestrian. Collisions caused by non-human drivers are a fascinating edge case for the times we're in.
It is very much true for dogs in that case: (1) it is your dog (2) it is your car (3) it is your responsibility to make sure your car can not be started by your dog (4) the pedestrian has a reasonable expectation that a vehicle that is parked without a person in it has been made safe to the point that it will not suddenly start to move without an operator in it and dogs don't qualify.
what if your car was parked in a normal way that a reasonable person would not expect to be able to be started by a dog, but the dog did several things that no reasonable person would expect and started it anyway?
You can 'what if' this until the cows come home but you are responsible, period.
I don't know what kind of drivers education you get where you live but where I live and have lived one of the basic bits is that you know how to park and lock your vehicle safely and that includes removing the ignition key (assuming your car has one) and setting the parking brake. You aim the wheels at the kerb (if there is one) when you're on an incline. And if you're in a stick shift you set the gear to neutral (in some countries they will teach you to set the gear to 1st or reverse, for various reasons).
We also have road worthiness assessments that ensure that all these systems work as advertised. You could let a pack of dogs loose in my car in any external circumstance and they would not be able to move it, though I'd hate to clean up the interior afterwards.
I agree. The dog smashed the window, hot–wired the ignition, released the parking brake, shifted to drive, and turned the wheel towards the opposite side of the road where a mother was pushing a stroller, killing the baby. I know, crazy right, but I swear I'm not lying, the neighbor caught it on camera.
Who's liable?
I think this would be a freak accident. Nobody would be liable.
You would not be guilty of a crime, because that requires intent.
But you would be liable for civil damages, because that does not. There are multiple theories for which to establish liability, but most likely this would be treated as negligence.
Well at that point we might as well say it's gremlins that you summoned, so who knows, there are no laws about gremlins hot-wiring cars. If you summoned them, are they _your_ gremlins, or do they have their own agency. How guilty are you, really... At some point it becomes a bit silly to go into what-if scenarios, it helps to look at exact cases.
> I agree. The dog smashed the window, hot–wired the ignition,
> released the parking brake, shifted to drive, and turned the
> wheel towards the opposite side of the road where a mother was
> pushing a stroller, killing the baby. I know, crazy right, but
> I swear I'm not lying, the neighbor caught it on camera.
> Who's liable?
You are. It's still your dog. If you would replace dog with child the case would be identical (but more plausible). This is really not as interesting as you think it is. The fact that you have a sentient dog is going to be laughed out of court and your neighbor will be in the docket together with you for attempting to mislead the court with your AI generated footage. See, two can play at that.
When you make such ridiculously contrived examples turnaround is fair play.
What if you have an email in your inbox warning you that 1) this specific bush attracts bats and 2) there were in fact bats seen near you bush and 3) bats were observed almost biting a child before. And you also have "how do I fuck up them kids by planting a bush that attracts bats" in your browser history. It's a spectrum you know.
Well, if it was a bush known to also attract children, it was on your property, and the child was in fact attracted by it and also on your property, and the presence of the bush created the danger of bat bites, the principal of “attractive nuisance” is in play.
My favorite manager told me a similar analogy before I left, but with a caveat; a good manager has to provide cover for the team, but it's up to the team to hold the manager up - just like an umbrella.
Well that's clearly an example of putting the cart before the horse. You should be able to sleep at night so long as you remember that Git isn't what enables Palantir to power an army of federalized brownshirts; it's the people making the tools explicitly for an army of federalized brownshirts with Git that are morally culpable.
Okay, that's where you draw the line. But someone provides power to their data center and their offices. Someone provides hand-held devices. Someone provides network connectivity. Someone has a contract to house and feed these agents. Someone has the logistical and fleet services for their vehicles. Someone is likely the landlord to their buildings. Someone has a contract to clean the buildings. Someone is a deciding to buy a block of Palantir stock versus some other software company. Someone runs the private prison into which people are herded. An attorney has a choice to file a charge or not file a charge. A judge has the choice to bend over backward to give ICE/CBP the benefit of the doubt, or be skeptical.
Baking a roll of bread is not immoral. Baking bread as part of a contract to feed the gestapo, is.
There are people who would not sleep at night knowing that the tool they created was enabling such things. I believe some are looking to make "semi-open" source licenses that add more restrictions.
reply