Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

iMac vs. VAIO Showdown

Posted by pudge on from the but-i-can-lick-my-imac dept.

paradesign writes "Citing both Apple and Sony's intentions to become the hub of the digital lifestyle, Popular Science has pitted an $1,800 800MHz flat-panel iMac up against a $3,400 1.7GHz Sony Vaio PCV-MXS10 to see which really comes out on top. The bottom line is that the Sony PC -- almost twice as expensive as the iMac -- just narrowly edged out the iMac, with an overall score of 42 to 40."

8 of 86 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Which one can you upgrade? by Red_Winestain · · Score: 2, Informative
    I need to be able to upgrade video cards, monitors, sound cards, add SCSI cards, whatever. Otherwise, I'd think about buying an iMac.

    How about a G4 then? It outperforms the iMac, and still costs less than the Sony. My colleague just got the new 17" LCD Panel and it is simply awesome.

  2. A few notes and FYIs... by gklinger · · Score: 2, Informative
    On the first page they compare the specifications of both machines and they list the iMac as having a "DVD-R" when in fact, the model they are using has a CD-RW/DVD-R. Also, they list the price as being $1799 when the current price is $1899. I'm willing to extend them a little leeway on that issue as this article may have been written before Apple raised the price.

    I'm also curious as to why they didn't equip the iMac with the same amount of ram (512mb) as this is an option Apple offers.

    Last but not least, I couldn't find the Sony Vaio PCV-MXS10 on Sony's website. It appears to be discontinued in favour of the PCV-MXS20 which has a 2GHz Intel Pentium 4 and a 120Mb hard disk.

    The big difference between these two machines is the OS. I chose to buy an Apple because I wanted to run OS X. With a VAIO, I would pretty much be stuck with Windows. Sure, you could install Linux but you would lose support for all the nifty features.

    Overall, the article is a letdown. There isn't any point comparing Apples to oranges. (sorry, couldn't resist)

  3. Notes... by singularity · · Score: 5, Informative

    One of the Smalldog newsletters had some commentary on the comparison. The latest newsletter has not hit the archives yet, but it did bring up some good points:

    1) He mentions that on the iMac "but sound quality and volume are limited." Of course, the Sony includes seperate speakers. For the price difference you could easily pick up a pair of aftermarket speakers.

    2) He mentions how easy the iMac is to set up (and then complains about the set-up screens), then goes on to comment on the Sony "I think we're going to have some fun with this rig - a thought that helps get me through a 45-minute setup."

    3) The author mentions "Windows XP is much more reliable, and somewhat easier to use, than its predecessors." Well, perhaps. How is it in comparison to Mac OS X, though? I have had my new Mac for over three weeks now and have not had a single crash or kernel panic.

    4) He often comments about the poor included software on the Sony.

    All in all, it is a good review, although I wish he would mention more than a couple of times the drastic price difference and the fact that most short-comings on the iMac could be more than made up by the price difference (i.e. He comments that the included photo manipulation software on the Sony is better than iPhoto for adjusting/cropping/etc. For the price difference, though, you could almost pick up Photoshop for Mac OS X).

    Also, I know that GraphicConverter is included on new G4 machines. It is included on the new iMac?

    [Boycotting the Boycott.]

    --
    - (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
    1. Re:Notes... by foobar104 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I have had my new Mac for over three weeks now and have not had a single crash or kernel panic.

      Just to weigh in with my (not entirely on-topic) experience. I've been running OS X on my iMac (G3 400 MHz, 640 MB RAM) since it first went on sale. Don't remember how long ago that was, but it's been a while. The only reason I ever rebooted into OS 9 was to burn CDs and play a couple of games. When 10.1 came out, that ended. I haven't booted OS 9 in forever. I also haven't suffered a single OS crash in forever.

      I did make it kernel panic once. I think I was running 10.0.3 or 10.0.4; can't recall. I unplugged my FireWire CDRW while I had a CDROM in it. The Mac panicked. But that problem was apparently fixed months and months ago.

      Pretty dang stable.

  4. Re:Which one can you upgrade? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Someone recommends a $1000 screen, you comment that you cannot afford a $2500 display, then you somehow make the jump that, therefore, you are going to have to continue to home-build your computers for cost reasons.

    They *do* make cheaper Mac monitors, and almost all shipping G4s include a VGA out.

  5. incorrect assumption about privacy by azosx · · Score: 5, Informative
    A Zen-like simplicity to be sure, until I get to the initial software setup routine, and then Big Brother shows up. Turns out that if I don't enter all my personal information into Apple's online registration forms, I'm not going anywhere. Yes, there's a privacy statement, but I don't think I should have to pony up personal info to use a product I've paid for.


    Fortunately this is not entirely true. True, when turning on your new Apple Computer for the first time you will be presented with a registration screen, but luckly by pressing Command + q, you can simply skip the registration process and finish the initial setup without entering any personal information.

  6. Re:This is really a OS bakeoff. by Erchamion · · Score: 2, Informative

    For further understanding, try the following two links:
    P4 and G4 Comparison Part 1
    P4 and G4 Comparison Part 2

    In summary, from what I've read, it is a good rule of thumb to multiply the G4 clockspeed by 1.33 to get a better comparison, though I'm not sure if this includes acceleration due to Altivec code.

  7. Re:This is really a OS bakeoff. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    The G4 really isn't much faster than its counterpart at the same clock speed unless you count floating point math.

    Actually I don't know if it is even faster at floating point math. What it IS faster at is Vector Processing (Which can include single precision FP math). Fortunately for Apple most of the mutlimedia tasks which are processor intensive are ALSO things that can use the Altavec instructions. (encoding, decoding, rendering graphics effects etc.) So for most multimedia tasks the G4 has a significant advantage.