I recently bought one of the new dual core PowerMacs. Having used the machine for a couple of weeks, I thought I would share some of my observations and feelings about it. First, let me get my biases out in the open. I have, for about four years, very happily used Linux on my desktop. Doing so has made me very comfortable with the UNIX environment in general, and with GNOME specifically. During that time, I have used OS X machines on a regular basis, so I am quite comfortable in that environment as well. Since I switched to Linux, I have not used Windows for anything more than the occasional bit of software testing or lab work, and generally feel quite uncomfortable with it. Thus, this article is very much written from the perspective of someone who finds OS X and Linux pleasing on principle. I implore the reader to make his own value judgments based on my comments.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-07
Rayiner's point was, if I have comparably specified systems, does one perform notably better than the other? Is there evidence of better quality construction in one rather than the other? And secondarily, how do prices compare.
Unfortunately Rayiner never procured the X2 from a vendor he built it himself. So the point is moot and so is the comparison.
Hand picking components will always garauntee you will recieve the components you like and meet your expectation. Yes? It doesn't matter if he picked Eversham or Alienware and at any price. Raynier would have found something to hate about them. Possibly the same things he hated about the G5 because he didn't pick the components.
I am sure niether of the manufactures sell the exact same case, fans, harddrive, keybaord, mouse as the one Rayiner picked. So the dicsussion is baseless.
What he seems to have found is that similar spec machines, one G5 running Tiger, the other X2 running Ubuntu/Gnome, the X2 performs a bit better. He has looked at the internals and found no particularly remarkable quality in the G5, except for the case, which he agrees (my words) is a wonder of modern metal bashing.
My point is he would have found the same unremarkable qualities buying a X2 4400+ machine from any vendor take makes more than one machine (not custom assemblers of course) and sells them for a profit.
I am not sure how to explain such an obvious point any better.
You build something by picking things you like you will almost always like the whole package. If you bought something ready made chances are you will find something to dislike about it.
A custom taliored suit, tailored to you specifications will always fit and feel better than a readymade one from say Armani, Lanvin or Brioni. And chances are it will cost you less. A turbocharged 330i pushing 400+ hp with the after market shocks tuned to your liking with tires of your liking will always feel/drive better than a stock M3 with factory everything according to you.
Not that this is the end of the world, not that this makes Apple an awful company, or people who buy Apple stupid. No, but it is a fact.
No it is not the end of the world. But the comparison isn't fair for the reasons I have outlined above.
By all means if this revew compared two vendors' products. You wouldn't have heard a peep from me. But to compare a DIY PC with hand picked components specifically know to be silent and complainig that a ready made product isn't as silent seems unecessary.
Edited 2005-11-17 20:14
Member since:2005-10-12
My point is he would have found the same unremarkable qualities buying a X2 4400+ machine from any vendor take makes more than one machine (not custom assemblers of course) and sells them for a profit.
I am not sure how to explain such an obvious point any better.
You build something by picking things you like you will almost always like the whole package. If you bought something ready made chances are you will find something to dislike about it.
This is maybe not doing the subject justice.
First, noise is a known problem on the G5. It is not that he picked a superquiet set of components, and found them quieter. It is that the G5 is noisy, period, and he gives very good reasons in terms of components why this is. You can tell that noise is a problem from the Mac newsgroups. I think this is remarkable, considering that in the past Apple has taken serious risks with overheating to avoid noise - as with the Cube, and noise is very important to the sensitive and creative people who are Apple's target market. So, it doesn't meet his point to argue that a home built system is quieter. To meet his point, you will have to show that the G5 is not noisy. Seems a hopeless case.
In terms of components, yes, you're right. He used pretty standard, branded, components. He would have discovered roughly the same components in most PC manufacturers' hardware. With some arguable shortcuts, these he also found in the G5. But that was the point. We are always hearing about the superior quality of the Apple hardware. What he has shown (and what lots of other people have shown - in fact, what anyone who has opened the case knows) is that the hardware is not superior quality. It does indeed consist of the same stuff that goes into all PCs. But this is what he is pointing out.
Finally, he showed that an X2 roughly comparably configured is of slightly superior performance. Whether his system was home assembled or not is immaterial. Any roughly similarly configured X2, and his was not very special, would show the same, regardless of who put it together. This is interesting because we have always been told that some mystical qualities of the PPC processor and Apple main board somehow made it perform above its weight. He shows that this is just false.
He then goes into the question of value, and I agree that here he is on weaker ground. His approach has probably led him to understate the Apple value gap. I think that buying a bunch of components at retail is likely to lead to higher costs than buying the same set of components packaged by a supplier. They buy in bulk, you buy them one at a time, and labour is a very small part of the cost. This is the reverse of what you argue, and why your argument seems dubious on this point. This is why I looked at Evesham for a comparison, and Evesham does seem to prove that for less money you get an enormous amount more computer. Very roughly, at the high end, buying a given spec from Apple seems to about double the price as against buying it from a known good quality supplier. At least here in Europe.
The Mini is a special case: that form factor at that performance level is simply not obtainable elsewhere. So you get into a different question with the Mini: do you want to take the performance hit for the form factor? Different issue. I posted some material on what the performance hit in terms of spec was likely to be, and it is quite large, but the form factor makes it apples and oranges.
This is all about THE FACTS.
Now we come to explanations and justifications, and everyone defending Apple's higher prices may be right. This is not to me the interesting part. Yes, maybe they do spend more on R&D. Yes, maybe they do have lower market share than Dell. Yes, maybe the OS is better, or at least, maybe some people like it better. Yes, the cases are absolutely beautiful. I like the orange stitching on my Levis, too. This is not the point. The point is, to have Apple people, in their advocacy, stop misrepresenting THE FACTS about the platform.
Some of us are old enough to remember the debates about the former Soviet Union. The Ukraine famine, the purges. There were two distinct issues. First, what happened, the facts? Second, were there excuses and explanations? You noticed though, as with Apple, that very few of those impressed with the excuses were very eager to recognise "the facts". And with similar reasons - the facts really were not very palatable and once admitted, the justifications seemed, well, a bit thin somehow.
Member since:
2005-10-12
Go have a look. This is the Evesham one in the UK - a pretty well respected, value but quality supplier:
http://www.evesham.com/PCs/Info.asp?e=AD71C5B2-CD64-49BD-8DBD-8932A...
Then you can head on over to macwarehouse.co.uk and check out prices on the G5.
Rayiner's point was, if I have comparably specified systems, does one perform notably better than the other? Is there evidence of better quality construction in one rather than the other? And secondarily, how do prices compare.
What he seems to have found is that similar spec machines, one G5 running Tiger, the other X2 running Ubuntu/Gnome, the X2 performs a bit better. He has looked at the internals and found no particularly remarkable quality in the G5, except for the case, which he agrees (my words) is a wonder of modern metal bashing.
Then, he's looked at value, added up his bits and found the result cheaper. Now, you have to agree, adding up the bits is not particularly fair - I think it actually favours Apple in the comparison - which is why I checked out Evesham. My conclusion was, at least in the UK, you are paying more for Apple, and getting less. A lot less. Less memory, less drive, less graphics, and less flat screen. Oh, and less speakers.
Not that this is the end of the world, not that this makes Apple an awful company, or people who buy Apple stupid. No, but it is a fact.