Slashdot Mirror
Puncturing the "PCs Are Cheaper Than Macs" Myth
jcatcw writes "The recently converted Scot Finnie went notebook shopping. At the high end of the notebook spectrum, in order to get comparable power and features, a Dell machine comes in $650 over the Apple, and it was clunkier and weighed more. Sony couldn't beat the Apple either. Midrange and low-end machines, though, turn out to be pretty comparable, with more choices in the PC arena but some good values if you happen to want what Apple has decided you need. So, if you're talking name-brand hardware, it's just no longer the case that PCs are cheaper than Macs."
PC laptops are horrendously overpriced, which now matches Mac lineups.
Honestly, if you are looking at value, build a desktop. Unfortunately, with a laptop, you are stuck with whatever options you might be able to select, which on a Mac is even less than through sellers like Dell. Why can't I select my own components to go in a laptop?
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
I can run FireFox just as fast and secure on my $650 low-end laptop as I can on a $3,000 PowerBook. I have just as much storage on gmail with my low-end laptop as I do when I log in on my PowerBook. Believe it or not, Open Office actually runs more reliably on my cheap laptop than it does on my expensive PowerBook.
Why do I need to spend an extra $2,350 for a PowerBook again?
But if you wanted that notebook to have a WUXGA screen and a 160GB 7200rpm hard disk, or with a nVidia graphics card with 512MB of ram, you couldn't chose an Apple if you wanted to, as they've only just figured out people might want that. And you still can't get a 512MB graphics adaptor in an Apple, come to think of it. Apple don't offer everything out there, so if you do want something Apple doesn't have, you have to go somewhere else. There is no choice.
Before the flames start - I have a 13" Macbook.
That said - servicing the damn things sucks. I routinely gut Dell laptops in the field to replace/upgrade hard drives, ram, WIFI cards - even CPUs. Good luck doing that with a Mac.
Other flaws: No docking stations for Macbook/Macbook Pros and no option for 7200 RPM hard drives. I can't understand why Apple wouldn't give that option to a high-end laptop consumer.
Apple has made tremendous strides in converting corporate IT guys like me. They still have a way to go to really take share from the big guys.
-ted
Gladly, before the 1 year guarantee was over, one of the 18 imacs that we have at the office broke down (so much for great quality!). I called Apple which didn`t have us as a customer in their system (what kind of database is that which forgets a corporate customer that bought 18 computers?). When one of the Dells breaks, they send a tech. which replaces quickly the damaged parts, usually in 1 business day.
Apple told us they were not going to send a tech. from the company, that we needed to contact ourselves a partner in our area and gave us a phone #. I called that company and wanted to have my customer number. I told him we bought the macs using the Apple website. Then he told me in order for them to fix the imac we have to have a customer number, wont give me a RMA, and suggested ME to BRING THE MACHINE TO THE SHOP to look at it.
I went back to Apple which finally gave us our customer number. Called the shop again and they told us you need "our" client number, not Apples, so no chance for an RMA...
This situation pissed me off. Corporate customers do not have time to deal with problems like this. I realized then, Apple is not prepared for business customers, it all looked like a small, home-based, local-shop operation. The entire day wasted learning this didn't make me very happy either.
To summarize: Broken Apple database, inattentive support from two companies, not fast solution to downtime, profit lost.
The research on pricing might be right and it might be wrong, but I'm willing to spend the extra money to run Mac OS X (legally) on supported hardware. I prefer not to deal with Linux but I would take it over Windows anyday. Some people don't care or they have applications that require Windows. I can boot into or virtually run Windows, Linux, or MacOS X on my Macbook Pro if I need/want to--and I am happy with the choices I have.
I am also a Final Cut Studio user, so I'm not going to be able to use an El Cheapo PC laptop (I'll have to beef up the HD, the video card, memory, etc. *AND* buy Sony, Adobe, and/or Avid software). That makes buying a PC laptop more expensive--at least as much as a well-equipped Macbook Pro w/ FCS2.
If you're not that picky about the OS or have needs that push the limits, I suppose a $500 laptop from Acer makes you happy. Some people, however, wouldn't or couldn't use that bargain laptop if you gave it to them for free.
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
I'll believe it when I see it. As it is, I see that machine on edealinfo.com for $650, which is quite a jump from $430.
I was talking about notebooks, sonny boy.
That being said, does 11"x11"x2" for $519.97 work for you? link.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
One of which is the small form factor, as you mention. The other is that it's cool-running and has near-silent operation. I have a MacM Mini serving as my HTPC (inside a storage ottoman, no less) and it is definitely a good choice for that use. The only thing comparable on the Windows side is a VIA chipset (I have a mini-ITX based PC in my garage) which doesn't compare performace wise. If you're looking for a "desktop" computer for general use, and not taking anything but the hardware into consideration, I'd agree that the bottom-of-the-line Mac Minis don't compete well against comparibly priced Windows boxes.
Of course, Macs have an-ease-of-use that's quite simply, sublime. As an example, every time a family member has visited and wanted access to our wireless network with their PC, it's been a hassle to set up. On the other hand, I took my Mac to my parents or in-laws and hopped on their wireless networks with nary a hitch.
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
And I disagree with his premise. He dismisses the "in between" SKUs as "niches". From my point of view, the truth is exactly the opposite: the Mac SKUs themselves are the niches.
I think most people would agree with me.
His premise is that the mac SKUs are the baseline machines, but the whole cornucopia of customized machines at Dell is some type of niche market. I think you both would be well-served to look up the definition of the word "niche".
In fact, I'd be willing to bet that for all configurations except for the niche Mac models, you'd get a significantly better deal customizing a notebook at dell.com.
If we can, from this, draw the conclusion that "Everybody knows PCs are cheaper than Macs, right? Wrong!", then I am Cindy Lauper.
In fact, the only conclusion that we can draw from this guy's analysis is that Dell does not offer a direct feature-by-feature competitor to the MacBook Pro 17. Perhaps Lenovo, HP, Toshiba, Compaq, etc. offer one? I don't know or care enough to look, but what I do know is that with all of those options and all that competition out there, you are bound to get a better deal on a Windows notebook than a MacBook the overwhelming majority of the time.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
I agree with this, however I've found that the quality of the applications and consistency of user interfaces is far superior to Windows.
I'd say that Macs and PCs have a similar number of *good* applications.
And I've yet to find a text editor on any platform that can compare to TextMate.
I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
The fact that it looks like a modern piece of electronics that will fit unobtrusively in tight places, rather than looking like a big clunky piece of office machinery in your home, does help.
Of course they are. I spent a lot of time comparing the two when I recently replaced my music/video workstation. There's just no comparison. It would have cost me very nearly twice as much to go with Apple for the very same hardware, even if Apple had a configuration that fit my needs. And that's before even beginning to buy software. I use an expensive professional PCI audio interface that fits my needs precisely, so the Mac Pro was the only Apple product I could have chosen.
I would very much have liked to be using Logic Pro on a Mac Pro. It's what I learned on, and I enjoy the Mac interface, but not enough to go the extra price. But I'm running Sonar on a PC that has almost exactly the same specs as the Mac Pro and I came in at more than $1400 below the Apple system. Oh, and I also like using the DXi plugins, so that limited me to Windows. I could have found VST or RTAS equivalents, but I have a large investment in DXi gizmos.
I got 2 bucks worth of hope in the form of a couple of Lotto tickets sitting in my wallet. If I hit the number, I promise I'll switch to the Mac Pro, Logic Pro setup right away. But I'll keep the PC to run some virtual instruments and connect them via optical SPDIF. It might suprise the serious Mac fans, but I am able to be productive (and creative) on my PC.
You are welcome on my lawn.
That's exactly what I did with my works Dell Inspiron Dual Core (well I shrunk the XP Pro partition). I made space and put Ubuntu on it. Wifi has never worked on it neither has the built in modem. If I need either I have to reboot in to XP. I had to install a utility to get the integrated graphics to work with any kind of acceleration. Other people with the machine ended running a VM to run Linux within XP. I had to rebuild and patch the kernel to get my client's VPN to work. All very user friendly. Not!
I have the machine because I was given it for work and because I have a *N*X project which has scripts in it that are not BSD friendly. The battery lasts about a couple of hours. Tomorrow I fly from the UK to La La Land on one of my regular jaunts there. The works Dell is being wrapped in clothing and put in my case and going through the hold. My 2 year old iBook is going in my hand luggage because the battery lasts long enough for what I need over the 18 hour trip, it's small, it's light and I can run everything I need on it (except that build).
Towards the end of the year I will upgrade to a Mac Book Pro and run both XP and Linux in VMs. 95% of work will be done in OS-X.
Sorry but when Linux is consumer friendly I'll use it full time but that's not the case now and I cost far too much to spend development and consultancy time googling for fixes, patching kernels and recompiling on my development machine.
BASELINE, CHEAPEST MACBOOK: $1099
CHIP: 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
RAM: 1 gig, DDR2 533mhz
DRIVE: 80 gig
VIDEO: Integrated Intel with 64 megs (not a typo!) shared memory.
DELL INSPIRON 1501: $799 (from Dell's site
CHIP: Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 2GHz
RAM: 1 gig DDR2 533mhz
DRIVE: 120 gigs
VIDEO: ATI Radeon Xpress1150 256 megs dedicated memory
So where does Apple win? Dell just gave me a technically superior machine -- 64 bit processor, larger hard drive, insanely better video card. The Dell also comes with Vista Home, if you're wondering -- I didn't cheat and go for some freeDOS or anything. For three hundred less.
Oh, the Macbook is smaller. Whooptee do. That doesn't matter at all to me; it's purely subjective if it matters to you, but is it really worth 300 more dollars and a crappier machine?
This was just the first random Dell I saw, so don't give me wah-wah-wah Dell sucks or Inspiron sucks. When I was shopping for a laptop I actually did consider a Macbook until I saw how much more I could get from other manufacturers for less money -- Toshiba and HP had similar prices for similar machines. (I ended up with an HP.) IBM's Thinkpad came very close, but the specs were close enough that you could call it a borderline case and the Thinkpad came out like a hundred dollars more.
mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
Unfortunately, I needed a dual-core 2GB system with a 160GB HD in it and a 15" wide screen, sub 6# weight, and sturdy frame w/ wireless G, Bluetooth, FW400/800, and USB 2.0 hi-speed support. Dang, Dell comes in at $3K for that, and fails to meet the FW and weight limits, never mind the battery life.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
.......I think it's time to allow companies to produce OS/X based clones.....
Obviously you are not a Mac user. Computers are much more than a piece of hardware with some software grafted on or in. They are a synergistic system. Apple is the ONLY personal computer maker who builds both as an integrated system "that just works". Why should they give up that exclusive advantage? Just to compete with MS for something nebulous called 'marketshare'?
By what logic do you suppose that allowing clones would help their high end hardware business? They have nothing to gain and lots to lose by trying to compete in the cutthroat PC business.
All theory is gray
Priced maybe, but feature wise it's not even close. http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product
If we upgrade the mini to match the stats of that HP (gig of ram, 250 gig harddrive, dvd burner) well, we can't even match them, but we get close.. we're still stuck with a worse video card and only 180 gig harddrive.. but it still costs twice as much! $1074 for the closely equipped mini, compared to $549 for the HP.
Maybe you think the athlon64 x2 isn't as good as a core 2 duo.. that's ok, upgrading the PC to a core 2 duo makes it $669. Still cheaper, and the harddrive is even bigger.
Apple doesn't compete in the sub-$1000 range.. the mini is underpowered compared to PCs in the same price range.
I'm not suggesting that they start selling boxed OS/X to load on any X86 clone out there. I'm suggesting that they license a few OEM's to build systems guaranteed "to just work", just like the Apple equivalents. But either limit them contractually to the low end or just have enough faith in their own abilities to make their high-end hardware appealing enough to compete.
I guess I'm assuming that most of Apple's current mac customer base would stick with Apple hardware, either because they can already afford it, or because they're 'cult of Apple' types that would pay extra even if they didn't have to. Maybe that's a false assumption. But if it's not, then low-end clones would mean Apple's computers would be running a 'more mainstream' OS, and would have more available applications. That's got to be good for Apple. Whether it's better they their current monopoly control of a non-mainstream system with limited application availability is an interesting question. I just wonder whether they're asking it of themselves these days.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
It's not that Macs cost more initially, the question is "why is the same hardware worth less when it's pre-loaded with Windows?"
...a little humor there if you didn't spot it...
Anyway, long term, Macs win hands down in price/maintenance/resale. Yes, we resell Macs after 4-6 years. Most of the PCs are in the dumpster by then.
Most of the stuff on
What the grandparent is trying to say is that you didn't actually list the hardware specifications. There is more than one model of Mac Pro, and I for one seriously doubt that you could undercut one at the same price, unless you build it yourself, and then that would be for perhaps a couple of hundred dollars. I know this because I have played the hardware spec game of Apple vs. PC for more than ten years, and since the G4, the only significant difference in hardware has been the processor. Now with the Intels, I'd have to say that by claiming a $1400 savings, you're blowing smoke. Unless you went with a completely different mid-range, single-core processor vs. the four-core offerings Apple currently has. Also, the PCI vs. the PCIe motherboard will also mean a significant price difference (not to mention it's hard to find video cards for it.) But at that point, the machine is already nothing like the Mac Pro and the comparison fails.
"Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
There are drivers for many, many graphics chips on the Mac. The cards themselves are different. You can actually MOD an AGP graphics card from a PC to work on a Mac. Does it take different drivers? No, those are already included with the OS. Modding a PC card for Apple use involves reflashing the BIOS, possibly desoldering and moving a few resistors, and for certain older Macs, either severing the connection to a few pins on the AGP connector or putting tape across them (see below for reason). You're crazy if you think you're going to convince me that all that comes down to drivers (especially when the modded card uses the exact same drivers as the Mac version of said card would use after you finish with it).
If you plug an AGP 8X card into and older mac it won't even POWER ON. Why? Because Apple decided to take a few "reserved for future use" pins noted in the AGP spec and do something else with them.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain