Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 5th Jun 2007 14:37 UTC, submitted by Alexandros Roussos
Thread beginning with comment 245557
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
but I dare you to find me a PC notebook with similar specs and price as the new MBP's.
One day ago it would have been very easy to find a PC notebook of waaay better value (specs/price) than a MBP.
Sure this one is decent now, in 2 months no, in 6 months it's f--king insanely expensive.
But per cubic inch they are.. Sigh..
A sigh doesn't prove anything
But whatever. My reasons for using a Mac don't have anything to do with their alleged decorative quality. I find it quite condescending from you to suggest so.
You're the one that brought up "design".
By the way: there are as many ways to prove that Macs are cheaper as there are ways to prove they are more expensive than comparatively spec'd PC's. I'm not even going in to this, because my original point was that Apple doesn't charge a so called hardware tax.
Actually, there's only one objective way. And I already know that a similarly equipped Dell is less expensive than the same PC MacBook. That's just fact. I'll pay more to be able to use OSX, but I'm not going to lie to myself and others about what's going on.
The only figure that matters in this debate is if Apple makes absurdly high margins on their hardware they obviously charge a "hardware tax", well they don't. (though they make good money).
You pay more for the hardware in order to have the pleasure to use OSX. There's nothing wrong with that, but let's be honest.
I agree that Apple hardware might be somewhat more expensive (they don't [want to] compete on the low end) , but I dare you to find me a PC notebook with similar specs and price as the new MBP's.
If we're just talking hardware, then Dell will beat Apple everyday by a large margin. I'm not talking Dell list price here.
Listen, coming from a Unix background, I like OSX. It gives me something that Linux (Gnome/KDE) will never be able to do. But I'm not entering the reality distortion field just because I use OSX.
@Lambda.
You know as well an anyone that Apple's notebooks are thinner than any other. Hence the "more features per cubic inch". What's there to prove?
Considering "design". In my native language (dutch) the word means slightly more than just good looks, it also means better function beacuse of choices made by Apple other than what hardware has been picked from Intel's and Nvidea's the shelves.
Cost:
You are forgetting TCO. As far as I know that's one of the other 'objective' ways.





Member since:
2007-01-30
@Lambda
But per cubic inch they are.. Sigh..
But whatever. My reasons for using a Mac don't have anything to do with their alleged decorative quality. I find it quite condescending from you to suggest so.
By the way: there are as many ways to prove that Macs are cheaper as there are ways to prove they are more expensive than comparatively spec'd PC's. I'm not even going in to this, because my original point was that Apple doesn't charge a so called hardware tax.
The only figure that matters in this debate is if Apple makes absurdly high margins on their hardware they obviously charge a "hardware tax", well they don't. (though they make good money).
I agree that Apple hardware might be somewhat more expensive (they don't [want to] compete on the low end) , but I dare you to find me a PC notebook with similar specs and price as the new MBP's.