3
0
I noticed a pattern. There is a class of notebooks (business notebooks I think), like Dell Latitude or Toshiba Tecra, that have inferior performance compared to notebooks that are cheaper- like Dell Inspiron or Toshiba Satellite, or Asus laptops.
Why is that?
The CPU and GPU are faster on cheaper laptops. The only notable difference I see between the two classes is the display resolution. Most of the "business" laptops come with higher screen res. But I don't think that justifies the double price. Is there something in these notebooks that makes them more valuable?
1Screen resolution and build quality. The latter one needs no explaination, about the former: the value of a notebook is not equal to total manufacturing cost, it's the price customers will pay for it. Higher resolution probably doesn't increase manufacturing cost that much, but if you need hi-res screen, you'll be ready to pay for it. Rare features are expensive. – gronostaj – 2013-12-15T15:21:21.503
What @gronostaj is trying to say is: that there isn't a technical reason for the prices, but is all a strategy about the market that each product is made for. – Braiam – 2013-12-15T15:23:05.153
Caveat Emptor. We need to consider the profit margin / markup from cost. For instance are companies selling cheap tablets at a loss or near break/even to gain market share against apple, maybe. I don't think anyone is selling laptops at a loss to gain laptop market share. – Knuckle-Dragger – 2013-12-15T15:24:49.253