“When one takes the seamless integration, stability, ease of use, quality engineering, the TCO, and the ability to boot Windows, one can easily conclude that a Mac is not necessarily a more expensive proposition. The argument that Mac’s are too expensive no longer applies. Although you can spend between $600 and several thousand for a Mac, stay within your means and purchase a system that meets your computing demands.”
Fully loaded and hit the ground running. You won’t waste your time shopping around, buying accessories or twice it’s weight in applications and for that they are a bargain. Buying a mac is buying a snapshot in time. It will always do what it does at that exact moment which is work flawlessly and look good doing it. You may not have an upgrade path, have your legacy commercial apps only accessible in a compatibility box or have your hardware rendered obsolete by surprise announcement but you will always have a really, really nice super functional well made high quality superbly integrated computer system.
And a Mercedes isn’t expensive if you factor in quality engineering, durability, reliability, safety. However, most people when they say something is expensive, or not expensive, are talking about the actual amount of money leaving their bank account.
Brilliant!
Concept of depreciation, re-sale value, quality of life, client confidence, picking up hot chicks way too complicated, just can’t see past the sticker price so you drive a dodge?
yeah… but I’ve never heard people say that Mercedes are overpriced, while one hears it all the time about macs.
I think that point the author is trying to make, is that TCO of a Mac computer is (or can be) more than a Windows computer. He refers to another article for this. Compare it to buying a cheap car of a lesser quality, which costs you a lot in maintenance over the years, instead of buying a more expensive car of higher quality, which costs you a lot less in maintenance over the years. In the end, the initially more expensive car may turn out to be the cheaper choice.
Whether TCO of a Mac compared to a Windows computer is higher, I don’t know… maybe in a business environment, but unlikely in a home environment in my opinion. I think initial cost of a Mac and a Windows computer are similar and the price difference that some people are so vocal about, is waaayy overrated. I did notice however that (just like the article referenced for the comments on TCO mentions) the resale value of macs is higher than of other brand computers.
Tell me about it…..
but if we could all by a Mercedes-Benz would we?
If you want Mac OS X, you gotta get the hardware….
But that line of thinking just doesn’t stand up here.
If you compare, feature to feature, a Dell laptop with an Apple laptop, you are paying less for an Apple and you are getting a better computer (and OS) to boot.
Seriously, the last time I bought a computer, I paid around $2,800.00 for an Apple and a comparable Dell machine was around $3,200.00.
You can get a usable PC for $300-400, if you aren’t into video gaming. Where is the $300 Mac?
i understand its a different game since its a used machine but i picked up a used 867mhz powermac g4 for $300 last year that even included a 17″ studio display crt
For $180 I got a used Sawtooth 450 MHz with 768 MB RAM. The 450 MHz processor was actually quite speedy considering the specs, but I finally got a good deal on an OWC processor upgrade and it is now happily humming along at 1.4 GHz. Salvaged a Gig of RAM from a broken computer, and it is now running with 1.5 GB of RAM. The only thing left to upgrade is the video card, but that can wait for a while.
Could I have bought a Mini? Well, sure, but I’m just slowly upgrading the Sawtooth as my needs expand, and it is serving me quite well. If I had planned on buying the upgrades at the same time as the computer, I probably would have just stuck with a Mini. I also prefer towers myself….my next computer will most likely be a new Powermac (or whatever the Intel counterpart is named).
Got my vote. On what’s is Apple’s sale price based? It reminds me of going to auto dealer and having to listen to a “this red honda with a premium stereo is better than the other honda.” No, thanks.
Do you say the same about Sony, Alienware, IBM?
This is a mac vs PC thing. Apple is the only vendor selling mac while with PC there are hundreds of vendors.
Mac’s exclusivity is both a strength and a weakness.
Edited 2006-06-23 22:07
“This is a mac vs PC thing.”
Macs are PCs…..
its the OS that makes the difference….
“Mac’s exclusivity is both a strength and a weakness.”
This is true, Apple screwed themselves by being exclusive……
You’re not forced to buy from Sony, Alienware or IBM in the PC market. If you really wanted to you can roll your own with just half the money spent of a retial PC or Mac and have a smoking machine.
Do you say the same about Sony, Alienware, IBM?
Absolutely. Even moreso, really, because they run the same OS. If the user doesn’t do the activities that require the higher-end hardware, I don’t recommend the higher-end hardware.
Sony is not a fair comparison here though. Unlike Mac, Alienware and IBM, the software Sony adds to justify their high prices has to be removed from the computer to make them stable, and their hardware is often worse than their competitors. I would never recommend Sony computers at any price.
” It reminds me of going to auto dealer and having to listen to a “this red honda with a premium stereo is better than the other honda.” No, thanks.”
You could at least use an analogy that is a bit more accurate. It would be more like going into the dealership and the salesman telling you that over here we have a car that will get you too and from work everyday, but if you want to go out of town you will need to add a few accessories. But over here we have a car that is ready for those cross country trips or weekend vacations.
It is really a question of TCO. With the Mac you get pretty much everything you need to perform the tasks most people will use a computer for. With Windows you have to buy more software if you want to do more than surf and do email. And before you all start calling me a Mac fanatic I also have machines here running Linux and Windows. I can use pretty much any OS I want. It is just that I have found the Mac to be best for my day to day projects. Will that be true in a few years? Only time will tell. If something that better suits my needs comes along I will switch to it.
After all, (And here comes the heresy), a computer is just a tool. You choose which tool is best for the job you have to complete.
You can get a usable PC for $300-400, if you aren’t into video gaming. Where is the $300 Mac?
In the pc market you have hundreds of companies producing thousands of different models from bargain basement to high-end. Apple is just one company and they have chosen to focus on the mid- to high end. Don’t like it ? Though !
Is that consumer’s problem?
Some of us do like it…^_^
You gotta pay for quality, and yes they DO produce quality…..look at the resale value of any “Mirror Door Drive” PowerMac on ebay…..
You get what you pay for.
You get what you pay for.
Sorry, that’s a slogan from the commercial for, “Jimmy Dean’s Pure Pork Sausage”, been running forever here.
Apple will never sell a cheap computer
“Where is the $300 Mac?”
Ebay.com
It will be used of course, but if you want to use Mac OS X, you gotta buy the hardware……yes, for some that may suck, but the Mac OS X is sooooo worth it….
Excuse me honey, but everywhere else in the world, you can’t pick up a machine for $300 – over here, down under, the cheapest I’ve see a computer for is $1000 or so, and believe me, even if you were an end user purely doing typing, it would still be a terrible computer to use.
There is nothing expensive about a mini-Mac, if you do find them expensive, I think the problem has to do YOUR demands for things to some how be insanely cheap, extremely reliable and alot of performance.
The underlying fact is, sure, you can purchase a $300 computer, but it’ll run like a $300 computer – extremely unreliable, poor quality technical support, crap warranty and an operating system (Windows XP) which can bring a grown man to tears due to the lack of an effort by the vendor or operating system producer to make it work seemlessly in respects to working reliably with the said hardware.
You get what you pay for, plus OSX (which is priceless)
I’ve being doing some work temp work these past couple of weeks with a place that uses design apps on running XP.
Its the simple things that really annoy
Like I select a folder using by typing in its number, but to open it from the keyboard, I have to Alt F and O. Why not just follow apples example and use Ctrl O
queer……….
Its the simple things that really annoy
Like I select a folder using by typing in its number, but to open it from the keyboard, I have to Alt F and O. Why not just follow apples example and use Ctrl O
Ever considered hitting the enter key?
does that mean that using OSX I’s have to hit CTRL -O (or command-O) to open a file using the keyboard.
man THAT’s annoying!
I’m so used to hitting the Enter Key I don’t think I could learn a slightly different way of doing things!
(LOL)
Edited 2006-06-24 00:08
It’s called behavioral consistency. Every app, Finder, Word, absolutely anything, uses command-o as the command to open. You’re telling it to do something, so holding the command key is a given. Said thing is open, so the key is o. Hitting enter, without any kind of command modifier, is just typing, hence it renames. OS X has a well thought-out command scheme from top to bottom. It may be obvious enough that enter is open, but a lot of good that does you when you want the keyboard command for rename (F2). The above poster’s mistake was thinking Windows had some degree of symmetry that it obviously doesn’t. It takes me a moment to remember when I’m in Windows or Linux that the keyboard commands are all over the place.
It’s called behavioral consistency. Every app, Finder, Word, absolutely anything, uses command-o as the command to open. You’re telling it to do something, so holding the command key is a given.
I can also open a file/app in the Finder by pressing Cmd-Down Arrow, what is that consistent with?
Said thing is open, so the key is o. Hitting enter, without any kind of command modifier, is just typing, hence it renames.
In that case, the behaviour for dialogue boxes is inconsistent since you can run the default action (Okay/Save/Open) by just pressing Enter.
OS X has a well thought-out command scheme from top to bottom. It may be obvious enough that enter is open, but a lot of good that does you when you want the keyboard command for rename (F2).
What do you want to do most frequently when in a file manager: open a file or rename it?
I can also open a file/app in the Finder by pressing Cmd-Down Arrow, what is that consistent with?
If you press Apple+Down Arrow when a folder is selected, you descend into that folder to view its contents. You can think about files in the same way. It’s also consistent with the fact that Apple+Up Arrow opens the parent folder to the current path.
As for the rest of your comment, just because it isn’t consistent with your “Windows eXPerience” doesn’t mean it isn’t consistent in the Mac OS realm.
I’m still pissed that they changed “New Folder” to Apple+Shift+N since it was Apple+N for as long as I can remember (System 7), but it does bring more consistency to the “New Window” command.
The truth of the matter is that things change, and if we don’t change with them we get left behind. Being flexible is a virtue, not a chore.
You get what you pay for, plus OSX (which is priceless)
I’ve being doing some work temp work these past couple of weeks with a place that uses design apps on running XP.
Its the simple things that really annoy
Like I select a folder using by typing in its number, but to open it from the keyboard, I have to Alt F and O. Why not just follow apples example and use Ctrl O
queer……….
I’m guessing you said this on purpose, so that people would point out that you can just press Enter…?
BTW, if you really are a Mac user you should know it’s not Ctrl-O, but Cmd-O
Anyway, about the “Macs too expensive”, I just got myself a MacBook (non-Pro) and I think it’s a great value. I’ve seen similar notebooks from other makers at the same or higher price, but with a paltry Core Solo instead, no camera and about 50% thicker. And no, it doesn’t get hot
Cheap shot on the “quality engineering”-link. Don’t start editorializing in summaries – please.
i was just thinking the same thing.
if someone is going to editiorialize in the summary then please mark it as such, but i too think it should be avoided.
Lighten up, people. We’re discussing a computer company here, not world peace(tm). Get some perspective
.
Edited 2006-06-23 21:51
World peace is trademarked ? Maybe that’s why we can’t have any 🙁
I agree with Thom, he should be allowed to make his anti Mac cheap shots without people getting on his case.
He is fair and balanced.
He told me so.
Any accusation that he is not fair can be automatically overridden because he owns a Mac!
So leave him alone!
Edited 2006-06-23 23:52
I have been reading OSnews for years. Always as a lurker as I’m not one for posting in forums. But I took the time to register to say goobye to this site, which I once considered one of the best about OSes in general.
Thom’s continual and tiresome *subtle* Mac bashing has been getting on my nerves for months now. I like my tech sites to be either neutral or *openly* fanboyish.
It is evident that Thom wants us to “lighten up” and take his bias as fun. Well, no sorry Thom, perhaps you are not doing the job rightly.
Thom’s continual and tiresome *subtle* Mac bashing has been getting on my nerves for months now.
So where is this ‘Mac Bashing’? What I see is links to 2 articles, one that shamelessly sells Macs, another that points out some hardware defects in Apple products. In by book this is called BALANCED journalism.
If Thom were to just post summaries of pro-Mac articles, then I would accuse him of bias.
BTW. I own a Mac, Windows PC and Linux PC, and use all three regularly.
Thom, your annoying “jokes” are tiresome. Please do your job, or give it to someone else.
(Let’s see how long this post lasts…)
Sorry but I, also, find it rather unprofessional. You can tell people to lighten up all you want but the fact of the matter is it reflects badly on the site.
What baffles me the most is that people are full of words regarding the negative side I shown a light on (the link) but appear to have no problems whatsoever with the article this was all about; which was horribly pro-Mac and utterly biased towards Apple– beyond reasonable.
I’m sorry, but all I did was a) sarcasm, and b) balance the scale on that story. The fact people only complain about the AppleDefects.com link, one end of the scale, and not the pro-Mac article, the other end, speaks volumes.
So, instead of accusing me of all sorts of weird biases I don’t have, why don’t you look at yourself for a second and think, hey, maybe it’s my own bias preventing me from seeing the whole package?
How about we just accept there’s a professional way to do something and an unprofessional one? It looks to me that most people are complaining about the WAY you did it.
I have ABSOLUTELY no problem with showing both sides to an issue. However, if you want to balance out the content then provide coverage to the other end of the spectrum by giving that link it’s own story (or providing the link in such a way that doesn’t contaminate someone else’s quote and article).
Your ‘sarcasm’ and excuse has the air of ridicule and buffoonery respectively. If that’s your idea of good journalism then I can see why some are taking this site less and less seriously as the days go by…
Cheap shot on the “quality engineering”-link. Don’t start editorializing in summaries – please.
Cheap shot? I think you’ll find it’s the truth. Are you trying to say that those overheating, battery problems and other defects are a myth?
These are things that people, supposedly, pay a premium and good money to Apple for initially in order to get payback in terms of quality and ‘TCO’ (a loaded acronym) in the long run. Thom was perfectly right, and pretty insightful, in pointing that out.
Cheap shot? I think you’ll find it’s the truth. Are you trying to say that those overheating, battery problems and other defects are a myth?
They represent a small minority in a large group of satisfied customers. It’s also a sweeping generalisation to dismiss a companies whole product line based on some faulty specimens of one particular model.
But that’s irrelevant, I objected to turning the story summary into a mini-editorial expressing an opinion thus turning it into flamebait. People can make up their own mind without the sarcastic linkage.
They represent a small minority in a large group of satisfied customers.
Wow, really? Pulled straight from Apple’s PR department. And it gets modded up by fellow Mac fans.
But that’s irrelevant, I objected to turning the story summary into a mini-editorial expressing an opinion
Which part of ‘none of what has actually happened is an opinion’ did you fail to understand? Typical Mac fan. Apple is perfect, there are no defects, a very small number of people have had them, nothing is wrong and any problems people have had is just an opinion. Brilliant.
Edited 2006-06-24 12:13
Honestly, is it too hard to imagine that his comment got modded up because people find it insightful?
If Thom wants to have his say about Apple’s (serious) hardware issues, he could just write a seperate article about it rather than twist the original intent of this one. At the very least, he could have added his usual “my take” to the end and distinguish his opinions from the author’s.
Apple is perfect, there are no defects, a very small number of people have had them, nothing is wrong and any problems people have had is just an opinion
But fortunately you know better, right? Nope, those lying mac-heads won’t fool someone as ‘with it’ as you. No Sir.
Edited 2006-06-24 23:10
It’s a cheap shot because it blows the whole “Apple defect” thing out of proportion. I’ve got three Macs in the house (an iMac CD, a DC PowerMac, and a Macbook), and they all run flawlessly. Meanwhile, the two PCs left in the house* all have some level of weirdness. When the PCs are acting up, do you know what my family does? They go use the iMac, because its always working. Hell, it works more reliably than our toaster, which burns Eggo waffles randomly.
Thom, I think that most of your readership actually have a sense of humour and appreciate your light sattire.
Hell guys, Thom is making a serious point and providing some balance to a seriously one-sided article. It is the job of any journalist to be dispassionate and just linking to articles that sell Apple is hardly that.
Yes, Macs are price competative if you compare them part for part to Wintel machines..and very competative if you also compare the software bundles. The only ‘problem’ that people harp on, is that you don’t have insanly low entry price point. Personally, I don’t think that’s bad. When you get a Mac, you have to start at ‘mid-ranged’ outfitted machines and go up from there, you don’t have the ‘value-leader’ entry level equipped machines to choose from to start adding onto if you wnat (or not). So true, on a simplistic, raw how much comes out of my bank account (or more likely..goes on my credit card) you can’t touch a Dell (or similar)on price..but for fun, go in and trick out that low-end Dell to have similar features you find in a Mini, for instance, and you will come out about the same..give or take depending on the deal-o-the-day from Dell. For folks on incredibly tight budgets, its a no-brainer – get a Dell..for folks with a little more cash – do some real apple-to-apple comparisons..there is really no price difference..it all comes down to OS preference. For me I got tired of the viri, etc and went to a combination of Linux and Macs..for others..they will choose Microsoft. It’s no longer really a hardware cost issue..its all about the realtive strengths/weaknesses (actual and preceived) of the OS’s and the applications.
I want a WUXGA screen on my notebook. Apple does not offer one. I want a 19-inch notebook or I would like a 13.3 WXGA notebook with a nvidia GPU. Apple does not offer these either.
If you want to run OSX you limit your hardware choice and limit your opportunity to change manufacturer with your next purchase because you have gotten used to / need some Mac software.
I have a powerbook but my next computer wont be a Mac.
I want a WUXGA screen on my notebook. Apple does not offer one. I want a 19-inch notebook or I would like a 13.3 WXGA notebook with a nvidia GPU. Apple does not offer these either.
And Apple are the hardware experts; if they don’t offer one, maybe there is a bloody good reason – just as if I turned up to a car mechanic and demanded that a cappacino modification should be added to my car, so that I can have a cappacino whose presssure is derived from the engine, I would be laughed at, so I laugh at your request for those ‘features’.
Here is a hint – Apple are making PORTABLE COMPUTERS! maybe they looked at your “demands” and realised that YOU make up SWEET f–k ALL of the computer market place, and thus they would make NO MONEY off selling laptops like that – just because YOU demand something, doesn’t make it good business sense to provide the said computer.
Apple is providing for the ‘sweet spot’ of the computer world, and quite frankly, they couldn’t care less about your niche 5%.
Well after reading this went to apple’s online store. No hope for me. To be happy with a mac i still need a g5 to even get a tower. Your talking $2,900 for a mac that i would be happy with. I can go the intel route wich i tried first and do the mini. Can barley get any hardware that way. The hardware is good on the intel without the mini but its built into my monitor. Thats just plain terrible IMHO! Please do not get me wrong i would love to get a mac for a change. I run linux myself and would be happy with OS X i think. But with out me spending a extra grand or more i could not be satisfied at the moment buying a mac. They have the better OS and software by default, hardware can’t compare as of yet.
“Well after reading this went to apple’s online store. No hope for me. To be happy with a mac i still need a g5 to even get a tower. Your talking $2,900 for a mac that i would be happy with. I can go the intel route wich i tried first and do the mini. Can barley get ”
I don’t know what you are looking at, but you can get a G5 dual processor, dual core, (that’s 4 processors folks), for about $3,200. You can get the straight dual core G5 for under $2,000. If these aren’t enough processing power then I don’t know what you are going to do. You might want to start looking for a good used mini computer because I don’t think you are going to find better prices on the Wintel side of the equation.
Price drops from $2900 to $1800 on the intel side running linux. $1,100 is a big deal to me.
Well, ask yourself this … if you could (legally) buy a copy of OSX that ran on off-the-shelf vanilla PCs, would you pay the Apple Tax in order to get it?
Those of you who believe that you can’t get a similarly equipped PC at about half the price of what Apple is charging for their hardware (yes, you may have to build), then you’ve spent too much time drinking Apple’s kool-aid. Sure, it won’t look as pretty as a shiny new Mac, but for those of you who need to buy shiny things to impress your friends, well … then the Mac is for you. But here’s a tip. Just buy a desk where you can put the PC in the cabinet if it’s really that ugly to you. Nobody will know the difference.
Ok, one might argue that the hardware and software offers a seamless package, but honestly .. I just don’t have a lot of problems with hardware these days at is.
Edited 2006-06-23 22:21
Those of you who believe that you can’t get a similarly equipped PC at about half the price of what Apple is charging for their hardware (yes, you may have to build), then you’ve spent too much time drinking Apple’s kool-aid. Sure, it won’t look as pretty as a shiny new Mac, but for those of you who need to buy shiny things to impress your friends, well … then the Mac is for you. But here’s a tip. Just buy a desk where you can put the PC in the cabinet if it’s really that ugly to you. Nobody will know the difference.
So, basically you’re saying it’s similarly equipped, but it is not pre-built, it’s not aesthetically pleasing and I’m sure it also won’t be as silent as a Mac and it probably doesn’t come with an OS either. That’s not “similar” at all to me. That’s like saying a Lada is similar to a Mercedes because they both have an engine, 4 wheels, 5 doors and get you from point A to B.
If you build the same pc with piece for piece the same hardware as an Apple, you definitely won’t save 50% of the Apple price. (you will save, but not that much) Despite what you seem to think, for a lot of people the aestethical and ergonomical aspect is important too and is part of the value of a computer. I don’t care what other people think about my pc, but I do want a good looking case which is easily accessible. And for my next pc, I’ll definitely be looking into making it very silent.
So, basically you’re saying it’s similarly equipped, but it is not pre-built, it’s not aesthetically pleasing
Yes, it will be pre-built (though you could save more by building it yourself, just like it costs less to install your own car stereo) and as silent, but not as aesthetically pleasing .. I’ve already made that point
And the case will be as easy to open as any Mac you’ll find.
and I’m sure it also won’t be as silent as a Mac and it probably doesn’t come with an OS either
Right, that’s what I meant .. what if it came with OSX? This isn’t a PC vs Mac debate. It’s a question of whether Macs are too expensive.
If you build the same pc with piece for piece the same hardware as an Apple, you definitely won’t save 50% of the Apple price. (you will save, but not that much)
Ok, maybe 50% is a bit much, but you would save quite a lot .. definitely several hundred for the higher-end ones. Do you really want to pay that much more for something that looks prettier on your desk? Most PCs don’t have the luster that Macs do, but they’re not exactly beige anymore either.
[quote]Despite what you seem to think, for a lot of people the aestethical and ergonomical aspect is important too and is part of the value of a computer.[/quote]
WTF is this about ergonomics? Do most Mac users even use the default keyboard and mouse?
Maybe I exaggerated a bit in my answer, but 50% is a bit much and it depends on how you compare. If you think for example that you can easily do without a nice looking box, then sure, you can save on that. The computer will give just the same performance, but the question is whether it is still “similarly equipped”. I guess for some people it is, while for others it won’t.
I mentioned about the OS, because I think it’s unfair to “save” money by not including an OS in the non-Mac computer. As for the ergonomical aspect, I was referring to the noise most computers make; I assume ergonomical is the wrong word for that.
But, for example, my brother seems to be somewhat obsessed about making his pc silent, so he bought a very silent Zallman PSU, which cost around 100$. He doesn’t like a ‘grey’ box, so he has a Thermaltake Tsunami case. I’ll admit, it’s a nice computer and it’s waaaay more silent than my old P4, but all these things add up. Well, it was a very powerful machine at the time he bought it, so it’s no surprise that it was pretty expensive, but anyways. My point is that if you want this kind of things on a non-mac computer, you’ll also pay a bit for it. It is however right that Apple simply doesn’t give you the choice to buy a ‘more basic’ model.
Mmm.. and another remark about the high-end. You are right about that, you’ll gradually save more as you upgrade the amount of ram and diskspace. Those kind of “upgrades” are particularly expensive at Apple. The couple of people that I know who have a Mac laptop have bought extra ram from a regular computer store.
I mentioned about the OS, because I think it’s unfair to “save” money by not including an OS in the non-Mac computer.
Dude, you missed my point entirely
What I was trying to do was paint a senario where these kinds of computers came with OSX. If they did, some people would still choose to pay the Apple Tax, but I bet most wouldn’t.
As for silent PCs, yeah .. I guess you’ll pay a pretty penny if you just don’t want to hear them at all, but my 3yo Dell sits in the living room and I never hera it except when the fridge turns off, and even then it is so quiet, that it doesn’t even register with me consciously unless I actually make a point to listen to it. Reality check – even mid-range PCs don’t sound like jumbo jets anymore
Well, ask yourself this … if you could (legally) buy a copy of OSX that ran on off-the-shelf vanilla PCs, would you pay the Apple Tax in order to get it?
Those of you who believe that you can’t get a similarly equipped PC at about half the price of what Apple is charging for their hardware (yes, you may have to build), then you’ve spent too much time drinking Apple’s kool-aid. Sure, it won’t look as pretty as a shiny new Mac, but for those of you who need to buy shiny things to impress your friends, well … then the Mac is for you. But here’s a tip. Just buy a desk where you can put the PC in the cabinet if it’s really that ugly to you. Nobody will know the difference.
Sure, for a desktop I would probably have considered another manufacturer if Apple sold a non-EFI OS X, particularly considering that there is still no tower configuration from Apple using Intel (yet). The iMac was tempting tough.
In the case of a notebook, which is what I actually was looking for, it’s a different story and I ultimately went with a MacBook, which had the right price & features for me.
As for your “shiny things to impress your friends” comment, well… that’s sad if you really believe it.
When people compare Apples with self builds or cheap e-machines type computers, but never seem to compare like to like, which is to compare Apple to Sony, or at the same time compare Sonys as well to self builds.
What is the point of say, you can get a self build for the half price of a Mac, when at the same time it also half the price of Sonys, IBMs and most dells
Its a pointless argument
When we start seeing propaganda articles like “The Misconception Sonys/IBMs/BrandX Are Too Expensive” your point would come into play. If someone writes an article questioning peoples conceptions and opinions people and seeks to influence them otherwise, some backlash and outrage are to be expected.
I am not on either side, I have owned a mac previously and own a few pcs right now. I am just trying to help you out here. You did say you didn’t get it. I hope this sheds some light on some peoples indignation over the issue.
Thom Holwerda, I believe you have pushed me. When Eugenia basicly ran this site – even though she posted her thoughts on the issue in the forums, she never changed the links in the summary for her personal feelings.
I was a paying subscriber, but not anymore.
Edited 2006-06-23 22:45
I think the new Intel Macs generally compare well with similar PCs when it comes to value, especially if you take Mac OS X and the bundled software into account. For example, compare a Mac Mini with an equivalent Core Duo mini PC, or the iMac with a similar all-in-one PC. From what I’ve seen those kind of consumer PCs aren’t significantly cheaper, and in a lot of cases are noisier and inferior in quality.
Of course if those budget Macs don’t meet your needs for whatever reason then it can be a different story. For example, I’m mainly using my PC for DTP, graphics and web design. I don’t require a system with high end 3D graphics or a super fast CPU, but I do want a very quiet computer, with upgradability and support for a dual headed display. I’m too used to working with a couple of 22″ monitors to go back to a single screen, which rules out the iMac and Mac Mini. Obviously Apple sell the Power Mac G5 and that would suite my needs, but apart from being noisier than I’d like, they’re much more expensive than any PC I’d consider buying.
The cheapest G5 is $2000 and with 512Mb RAM, a 160Gb hard drive, and 128Mb GeForce 6600LE graphics, it isn’t a particularly high spec system. My very low noise PC built with high quality components cost little more than half the price of that Mac. Even having to use Windows rather than Mac OS X, I think my PC was a better purchase considering how well it meets my needs.
I’m certainly not saying that Apple’s computers are a rip-off, but when it comes to more unusual preferences and specialist requirements, the PC’s flexible configuration options can give it a big advantage when it comes to price.
Undoubtedly. If I was building a task-specific box, a PC (running Linux if I could get away with it), is the way I’d go. No point in spending more money than you have to for something that does only one thing.
However, as general purpose computers, Macs are absolutely great. Need something to put in the study for everyone to use? Get a Mac. Need a laptop for a college student to use for papers and IM? Get a Mac. As someone who has to support machines for friends and family, I recommend Apple for purely selfish reasons. They just plain have fewer problems.
Ever since my mom got a Mac, I’ve had -zero- frantic phone calls. She even figured out how to video-chat with me on iChat, and now I’m teaching her iWeb so she can set up a web-page for her interior-decorating work. The machine was hardly cheap, about $500 more than a comparably specced cheapie from a low-tier vendor. Amortized over say four years of life, that works out to about the same as what I spend every month on soda and snickers from vending machines on campus…
I can’t believe we’re going through this argument again.
I think I’m now officially too old for OSNews…
And a Mercedes isn’t expensive if you factor in quality engineering, durability, reliability, safety.
Yeah… you mean like these:
http://www.schmidp.com/macbook/whine/
http://www.petitiononline.com/whinefix/
http://neom.ca/mb/?p=22
http://www.tuaw.com/2006/05/04/macbook-pro-heat-problem-heats-up/
http://digg.com/apple/MacBook_Discoloration_Solution_-_Nail_Polish_…
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a rabid Mac fan, but I could do without all the revA problems…
Every brand has it’s problems once in a while. To continue the comparison the Mercedes A-Class and the now infamous “Moose test” come to mind ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moose_test )
it’s so simple, the resale value of macs is much higher than pc equivalent. buy a macbook and you can sell pretty much at the same value as when you bought it 2 months ago. buy a oem laptop and it’ll drop in half in 2 months.
now that the hardware is relatively equivalent, the software value is much more apparent. mac os x just runs a shedload of software that linux users and windows users wish they had.
and because the hardware devices are more limited, the permutations for testing is much lower, less bugs, more stable.
Why would anybody want a $300 mac.
Neal Saferstein
Why would anybody want a $300 mac.
The question you should be asking here is: Why would anybody want a $300 computer? Because if you are making price comparisons between Macs and PCs, you are at least considering them to be comparable.
Now as to why a $300 computer, the answer is that for many people computers were good enough for their purposes 5 or more years ago. A modern $300 computer can perform those functions and more, more reliably than computers costing thousands used to be able to. For people like my grandparents a $600 computer is overkill.
Now I don’t doubt that Mac OS X is cool and easy to use (though not for file management), and I don’t doubt that a $600 Mac is worth $600. But it is a little disturbing that Mac OS X apparently needs a $600 computer (when new) to do what Windows 2000 (or a cleaned-down XP) could do just fine with even a $200 PC.
So don’t tell me how cool Mac OS X is, or how priceless it is (irrelevant in a price discussion). As far as I am concerned, the overhead of Mac OS X is the main reason why Macs are more expensive than Windows machines. Not the design (inside or out), not the luxury, not even the brand.
“Why would anybody want a $300 mac.”
Because they agree with you that its better, but they only have $300. They have, strangely enough, more taste than money.
Ohh my god is this a tiring topic. Buy whatever you think works for the job and what you can afford.
blabla.. who gives a shit, i cant believe people really waste their time discussing about that nonsense.
get a life.
This is getting boring…
We’ve heard it all a million times, OS X is priceless ‘with unique application like iTunes which the limits of bloat…er…user comfort’ so its okay for Apple to set crazy prices.
The comparison with Mercedes is incorrect. While, a large portion of the price of a Mercedes is for the brand name, with a Mercedes you actually get technical benefits as well. That’s not true with a Mac. Anything that can be done on a Mac can be done cheaper, faster and better on an alternative setup. This goes for both laptops and desktops.
I have nothing against Apple in principle, I think it’s great how their marketing team works. These guys are pros. But I do hate when people say that Mac is a better deal that alternatives. It’s not.
P.S. Feel free to show a Mac product that can’t be beaten in terms of price and performance at the same time. I wish the OSnews crew wouldn’t shove their worshipping of Apple down our throats and would focus on checking their email. I wonder why they extended their alternative OS deadline, when they dont even have time to check their mail?
Hurry up Alternative OS contest! I’m tired of reading this tired troll tripe!
With a Kapitol K?
Seriously, I’ve NEVER understood all the praise for the “quality” – they are very pretty, but shoddy construction, poor engineering and a ‘toaster’ mentality on upgrades and repair just do not a well made product make in my book.
The normal joke about the “Fisher Price” computer really does seem spot on at times – except that’s insulting Fisher Prices quality control and durability.
The normal joke about the “Fisher Price” computer really does seem spot on at times
Isn’t ‘Fisher Price computer’ mostly used to describe a computer running XP when using it’s infamous default RGB-blue theme?
If you want a desktop – say you want to play a game here and there on it – Apple offers _nothing_ remotely resembling good value. My current desktop cost the equivalent of US$1300 or so, and massively outspecs the cheapest PowerMac (which costs $2000) – double the RAM, faster video card, faster processor, second HDD.
The top of the line PowerMac has a faster processor, sure, but to upgrade from the standard video card to my 7800GT would cost $350 – that’s more than I spent for mine in total, with no upgrade. And the system costs a small fortune anyway.
In short, their laptops aren’t so bad in many ways, but if you happen to want a reasonably powerful desktop, Apple is most definately a more expensive proposition.
I was reading that site for a moment when I stumbled upon this priceless thing:
http://www.appledefects.com/?p=10
I’m also heavily against that sarcastic linking.
Perhaps Thom feels that owning a couple of macs gives him some unique privilege to subtly bash the platform. I wonder what could happen if he turned his subtle sarcasm against Linux for example…
A different set of overly-sensitive whiny fanboys would threaten to leave the forum? Oh no, Apple’s products aren’t super magical ultra high quality obilisks from the hidden dimension of Perfect Happy Faeries, and Thom counterbalanced the usual lopsided sycophancy with a link that clearly hurt so many feelings. Get over it. Sometimes platform enthusiasts are like little children.
A different set of overly-sensitive whiny fanboys would threaten to leave the forum?
But despite that it would still be a 150+ post thread in no time. LOL!
Anyway, everybody knows that only Windows users do not display any sensitive fanboi behavior whatsoever. There’s no need to, because they’re running an OS superior to anything else available right now. It must be; almost everybody chooses it when buying a new PC.
Edited 2006-06-24 10:44
Some percentage of users for any platform are love-sick. There must be at least five Windows users that would defend their platform’s honor by threatening to leave a forum. Windows probably has a disproportionately low number of such people because they’re less threatened by the world because practically everyone uses Windows. Just the same you’ll find the disgruntled Windows user whining about how everything on the Internet revolves around Linux. Just look through Digg comments for Linux stories randomly, and you’ll see. On the other hand, making stupid comments about Windows is a pass-time of users of all platforms. Perhaps it’s just that all of such people have left all forums because everyone gets their rocks off by commenting about the Start menu.
When these articles are linked to, I usually read them and then try to have a look and see whether what they are saying is halfway reasonable. So, there being a distinct lack of any specific information on this particular article, I went to macwarehouse.co.uk who sell both macs and pcs, and tried to see what I have to spend on a Mac desktop, versus what I could spend on a PC.
Not trying to match the Mac. That is not the point. The point is to see what is available and how much it costs. I may not need or want the exact mac configuration.
For £449 ex vat from Apple you seem to get a Mini with 17inch flat screen, keyboard and mouse, 1.5G processor Core Solo, 515MB, 60G disk, CD writer/DVD reader.
The first thing I do is look over on the PC side of the site and see how many PCs are on offer below this price. Lets allow 150 for a screen, which is actually over the top. This leaves us around £300 to play with.
Right at the high end you get this for 300:
Lenovo 3000 J105 8259 – Tower… Lenovo 3000 J105 8259 – Tower – 1 x Sempron 3400+ / 2 GHz – RAM 512 MB – HD 1 x 160 GB – DVD-Writer – Win XP Home
Here we are around no. 60 out of around 300 that are on offer. We are a bit over on the spec at this point. We have a DVD write, a bigger disk. Maybe the graphics are better? They cannot be worse!
Now, lets look at the low end from the same guys at Macwarehouse.uk. It is a Maxdata running Linux at £125. I know these have had good reviews on another site which carried them, and I know, please don’t tell me, they are not comparable in spec. These are the specs:
VALUE CEL D 2.26GHZ 256MB 40GB CD LAN MOD MIDITOWER LINUX 1YR RTB
In between numbers 1 and 60 there are lots and lots of systems from name brand suppliers, with varying configurations, all seeming at least as good value as, – and in most cases in the second half of the list better value than – the Mini.
This is making no sort of sense. There is a strong argument for moving away from Windows. There may even be arguments for thinking OSX is better than the alternatives, including Windows. But if the only way to get it is to spend way over the top for this fairly crappy hardware, it makes no sense.
Now, is the problem Apple, or is the problem the hardware?
Fortunately we can answer this question in the UK, because Evesham sells the AOpen Windows version of the Mini. Here is one for £500 inc vat:
Mini PC (Jul06)
* Genuine Windows® XP Media Centre Edition 2005
* Intel® Celeron® M380 (1.6GHz, 1MB L2 cache, 400MHz)
* 512MB DDR-2 533MHz RAM
* 40GB 5400rpm hard disk
* Integrated Intel 915 graphics
* Bronze 1 year warranty
Take off the VAT and we are at about 415 for a relative dog compared to the Apple offer – worse processor, smaller disk, no monitor.
In this case the problem is not that there are cheaper higher spec alternatives to the Apple product, if you try to match it exactly. There likely are not.
The problem is that both of these alternatives, the Apple one and the Evesham one, are dreadful value for a desktop PC, and if that is what you are looking for, do not buy any of them. The Apple one is only relatively better. Its still a dog. If you want a desktop, go buy from the bottom 60 of the Macwarehouse list.
The problem is, Apple has a tiny selection of hardware, and it’s boutique stuff. You want an ordinary, work gear type desktop, the product range just does not have one in it. Its not the end of the world. No-one would suggest going to Ralph Lauren for a pair of work boots, and Lauren is a perfectly viable business. But what it does say is that these articles about how everyone should switch, when there is actually nothing to switch to, are just stupid. Really stupid.
About as stupid as telling people to go to Lauren for their workboots.
If you look at what Evesham offers as an entry level system for roughly the same price range, in normal desktops, you find this (of course, with a DVD writer) for £450 including VAT:
Axis STR
* Genuine Windows® XP Home Edition
* AMD Sempron 64 processor 3000+
* 2 x 256MB DDR RAM (PC3200) 400MHz
* 160GB 7200rpm Serial ATA hard drive with 8MB buffer
* Direct 2D/3D graphics (on board)
* 17” Viewsonic VA702 monitor
* Bronze 1 year warranty
Partcode:
AXISSTRJUL06
It tells you what the problem is with Apple. If you are buying from Evesham, and you really want a tiny jacket pocket machine, they will sell you one. But they also have ‘proper desktops’ like this, that are reasonably specified and reasonable value.
Apple’s problem is the hardware product range. Where is the Mac equivalent of this thing? It is nowhere to be found. Its boutique computing.
Edited 2006-06-24 13:34
From the first paragraph:
In another post, “Apple’s End-To-End Model Leads to Innovation and User Experience” I explain how Apple’s end-to-end model of building hardware and software leads to a better user experience.
It’s a good thing he explained what the other post was about, because I would have had no clue going by the title alone.
I realy love the Mercedes comparison. There is just one problem with that: a Mercedes doesn’t get build in Taiwan for the same amount of money as a Hundai.
The higher prices are due to a higher margin Apple takes, which they can do because there is no competition in building Macs and by that no competition for runnning OS X.
Thats a fine argument if you realy want to run OS X, however that is only a question of personal taste. I would prefer a well integrated Gnome desktop at any time.
My guess is Thom Holwerda is turning out to be the next Paul Thurrott. I’m getting sick and tired of your Apple related posts… We all know you hate Apple so stop it already. By bashing Apple products/users, you won’t get more clicks here, that is for sure.
This argument has become lame. Look at the apple website, they pull stunts like 512MB on computers that cost 3K+. Fully loaded, hit the ground running?
How could it possibly be that without clone/generic parts available that it would be comparable or cheaper? Its not possible. And this isn’t expressed in reality.
From the IPOD being way more expensive to comparable product, this also exists in Macs vs. PC.
Its okay for zealots and fanatics to pay premium, but then to preach intangibles like TCO and other poppycock and balderdash to try and rectify of equivocate the prices is just boring.
Please, enjoy the obsolete computer in front of you, be it Mac or be it PC, and stop proselytizing.
Its okay for zealots and fanatics to pay premium, but then to preach intangibles like TCO and other poppycock and balderdash to try and rectify of equivocate the prices is just boring.
It’s not poppycock at all. Any car owner will tell you that the cost of purchasing a machine is only part of the cost of owning it. Every hour you spend dicking with a computer getting it to work is an hour you could spend doing something else. My dad lost 6 hours of work last month because of the idoitic way internet explorer handles opening documents from a website*. He was working towards a deadline that was less than a day away. That’s hundreds of dollars of lost productivity from a single incident. That’s a *tangible* cost. The cost of the extra stress, the risk of missing the deadline, etc, is intangible, but certainly not negligable.
I know very few people who consider their Windows machines dependable. The value of dependability, fit and finish, and other intangible things might be hard to define, but its hard to argue that its zero.
*) Internet Explorer will download it into a temporary directory, making all edits to that document dissapear later. OS X will download documents to your desktop first.
It took your dad six hours to figure out right-click and “save target as”? No wonder Apple has a market.
Yeess…right, so macs are cheap now.
Uhm, let’s see: core duo 1,8ghz ,1280×800 13″ screen, 512 mb ram, 60gb hdd, shi**y intel gma950 graphic chip for about 1200€.
Well I got myself a really nice looking Asus ONE YEAR AGO with 1gb ram, 80gb hdd, 15″ screen (same res) and a mobility x700 128 mb vram (don’t have a dual core, but thewre were no mobile dual cores back then) for 1300€.
Now that Apple has switched to standard pc components we can really appreciate how overpriced these macs are; it’s going to be even worse with desktop systems, if you factor you can buy the hardware you want and build your own pc (best bang for your buck), but you can’t do the same with a mac.
I also don’t think we should be buying hardware on the basis of the software bundled.
The pricing is much less disparate in the United States. I’ve got a $1300 Macbook (2.0 GHz), and the equivalent Dell is $1207. For the extra $100 the Macbook costs, it has an integrated webcam, bluetooth, a remote, and runs OS X.
I think you’re also discounting the ergonomics involved. The Macbook is a really nicely designed machine*. It doesn’t have any dohickies hanging off the outside, there’s nothing to get caught as you’re putting it in and taking it out of your bag. It’s got a nice rubberized surface into which the keyboard is embedded, so its really easy to keep clean just by wiping down. These aren’t features you see on a spec list, but I’d much rather have these things than a few extra MHz that people are willing to pony up $100 or more for.
*) At least, the ones that don’t overheat
Total Cost of Ownership.
Now who is it that thought up that ambiguous unquantifiable phrase to explain why their systems were better, when most knew they were just talking BS?
I love the way Mac fanboys are using MS crap to justify the higher prices of their systems.
“When one takes the seamless integration, stability, ease of use, quality engineering, the TCO, and the ability to boot Windows, one can easily conclude that a Mac is not necessarily a more expensive proposition”
Sorry, but I’ll think twice before having Apple influence my opinion trough OSnews.
I still think they’re expensive things compared to what I can buy for x*86, to the point of just not being reasonable if you’re not rich, or sponsored.
“a) sarcasm, and b) balance the scale on that story.”
To me it didn’t feel like sarcasm. I’d prefer if you made that clearer the first time around.
Since I was seriously interested in Apple products (laptops) I was hoping to find some extra information here, in a well-written post.
Instead I get an article ridiculizing the readership of your website, at least those with an opinion that doesn’t align with your own.
It almost looks like you want people to think you’re not a serious publication… just my honest opinion.
do any of you non mac users care what the hell is going on in the mac world? are you threatened? Paranoid that Steve Jobs will take your precious Windows away from you? that Apple will eventually be the only computer manufacture in the end?
if you dont like Apple, and hate OSX… and it annoyes you that they don’t make a computer for you….SO FRIGGIN WHAT….
why do you people waste SO MUCH energy bashing apple or the mac… or OSX….
don;t even give me any bologna about the “mac zealots” i read these forums…. there are FAR MORE “anti-mac” Zealots out there!!!!!!
love…. buy what you want…. use it in what ever fasion you’d like…. and F’ off!
thanks
bye
I don’t think it’s editorializing to link to recent defects. Maybe Thom could have made it more explicit, but that link deserves to be there if some other guy is claiming the machines are of high quality.
I use Macs almost exclusively now, mostly glad to be away from Windows, but I still pull my hair out over various problems. I am not surprised by QC problems, and my experience is that my notebook fails to wake from sleep mode about as often as my Dell, for example.
What’s more, OSX is the only OS I’ve had to reinstall, after pulling out a USB drive which I unmounted but didn’t really unmount. The thing made the Finder extremely unstable, necessitating a hard reboot, and after that nothing could repair the boot volume.
I consider that a defect. On a PC, I expect a yanked thumb drive to potentially corrupt the data on the thumb drive. It should not render a computer unbootable.
“What’s more, OSX is the only OS I’ve had to reinstall, after pulling out a USB drive which I unmounted but didn’t really unmount. The thing made the Finder extremely unstable, necessitating a hard reboot, and after that nothing could repair the boot volume.”
bologna!
i am sure you pissed the finder off (we all know the finder is a POS… but a OS reinstall?
bologna!
Yes, an OS reinstall.
After that hard reboot, the machine would boot to a blank blue screen and never progress beyond that point.
I booted to single-user mode, which still worked; from there, I discovered that the boot volume was corrupted. But running fsck -yf would never fully fix it. After about 6 hours of trying many things, I had to use the restore disks. The boot volume was incurably corrupted.
I can’t figure exactly what happened, only that it shouldn’t have happened.