Slashdot Mirror
Is the Dell XPS One Better than the Apple iMac?
An anonymous reader writes "The Apple iMac is probably the standard all-in-one desktop computer. Great operating system, built-in software and design around solid, but pretty normal, hardware guts. According to Walter Mossberg, there's a new kid in town that not only matches it but is 'sightly ahead': the Dell XPS One. His latest review is already causing the usual suspects to weigh in. Mossberg says it is a better machine, but Vista and its built-in software make it inferior than Apple iMac's Leopard and iLife suite. Would you choose the better hardware of the Dell XPS One -which is more expensive- or the elegant design and software of the Apple iMac?"
"Would you choose the better hardware of the Dell XPS One -which is more expensive- or the elegant design and software of the Apple iMac?"
Personally, I'm still choosing neither. Why? Because I can't afford them and I don't spend enough time using a desktop machine to justify it if I could. I put money into my laptops, because that's where I live and work. For my desktop, I want a big case that I can dig around and play in. And for the most part it's all cheap stuff. Would an imac be nice? Sure. Just like a Mercedes would be a lot nicer than my '95 Taurus. But the Taurus and my gateway case with a motherboard I got on special at Frys do the job - and that is enough.
When family our friends are looking for a new home pc - if they are looking for something in the price range of the imac - I encourage them to go that route without hesitation.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
If I could only choose between the 2 of them, I'd go with the cheaper one. If I could choose anything else, I'd never get an all-in-one computer. I just hate having to part with a good LCD monitor every time I want to upgrade or switch computers.
I don't quite understand why they rate the XPS one higher than the iMac.
First off, let's compare tech specs.
iMac (Low-end) $1199
20" wsxga+ screen
1GB Ram
250GB HDD
Dual Layer DVD burner
ATI Radeon HD 2400XT (128MB)
802.11n Wireless
XPS ONE (Low-End) $1399
20" wsxga+ screen
2GB Ram
250GB HDD
DVD burner Integrated Video
"WiFi" (doesn't say which)
Now notice that the only thing the dell beats the mac in is memory. However, for $150 you can upgrade to the same amount when you order an iMac (or get a stick on newegg for half that), and have a machine that still is $50 LESS (and with a real video card, a dual layer burner, and guaranteed 802.11n). Gizmodo also already agreed that Leopard was the better operating system (see the link in the article below the video). So this begs me to ask, why do they consider the more expensive, less equipped, and weaker operating system computer better than the other?
I choose the Dell XPS One. If I'm going to have to throw the whole thing out once it becomes obsolete, I'm going to buy the one that's going to last the longest.
I hate to say it but I think that the Mac is a better solution for most people.
I just told my father to get a Mac.
He is tired of the security problems with his PCs. He has 3 PCs right now. One at his home here, one at his place in North Georgia, and a Laptop.
All he uses his computer for is Email, digital pictures, and paying bills on line.
I could set him up with Ubuntu but where would he find support for it when I am not around? I don't know how good Dell is at Ubuntu support and frankly he isn't the most technical person on the planet.
Apple has figured out what most people want to do with a PC at home and produce a nice bundle that just works.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
It goes to eleven.
No one buys a computer just for the hardware. Hardware is pretty useless without software. If someone is only choosing the Dell over a Mac because the hardware is slightly better, then they deserve Vista.
Choose the best tool for the job. If you'll be more productive with OS X, and you're only choosing between these two systems, then obviously choose the iMac.
Developers: We can use your help.
Why? Because the iMac comes with Leopard and the Dell comes with Vista. I have been recommending Macs to everyone now that they contain Intel chips. You can buy a Mac and if you hate OS X, you can just install Windows or Linux. You can't install OS X after you realized Windows Vista sucks on your brand new Dell.
With Boot Camp - although I prefer VMware for my legacy windows needs - you are guaranteed a machine with excellent Windows driver support. Apple provides all the drivers you need right on the Leopard DVD.
Want to try something new and have a perfect fallback plan if you hate your new OS? You get the iMac. If you buy the Dell and hate Vista you're out of luck unless you find a Linux distro the suits your needs. Unfortunately, as a Linux user since the mid-90's, I still can't recommend it as a viable home desktop alternative for most people I know.
You know you can take that money you save and buy Windows XP and install it on the Mac. You know you can do that now, right? So why not have the best of both worlds, or even, run Windows programs in the Mac OS using VMware or Parallel software. You can also find software for the Mac to do what you want to do by going to sites like www.versiontracker.com and finding and alternative, or even the same Company makes a Mac version. The quote "for what I use a computer for" doesn't apply anymore.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
12345
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Yes but if you don't build fences, houses, or furniture but you do do case modes, build models, or other small craft style jobs then the Dremel tool is a better tool for you!
It probably includes Photoshop Elements and not full Photoshop.
My wife is really into digital scrapbooking. She has both Photoshop Elements and Gimp. She actually likes Gimp more than Elements.
From what I have seen iLife is a good tool for the average user.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
It is the software that you have to live with, and Leopard is hands-down better than Vista could ever hope to be.
The imac was not designed for price, it was designed for all-in-one ergonomics, fitting into a lounge setting and all of that. As in, if it isn't all-in-one it really isn't in the running.
and yet I have to concede that the Dell XPS One is an impressive looking AIO. I dare say its industrial design appears to be superior to the iMac's. It also bests the iMac with its TV tuner and Blu-ray option. I also have to admit that I'm typing on my office machine - an Inspiron - that I bought because Apple no longer offered a low-end laptop with dedicated graphics; consequently I have grown to appreciate Dell hardware. However, Dells will never run OS X (without hax0ring), and OS X is far superior to Windows. I am so much more productive on my G5 than on my Dell, but until I can justify purchasing a MacBook Pro for the office I'll be on my Inspiron. Even though Dell hardware may be nice for what it is, and even though I was justified in getting a Dell over a Mac for my business, I'd still opt for and recommend a Mac if at all possible.
Part of the hardcore faithful who believed in Apple long before it was cool again to do so
I wish I had recommended mac to my family, they use linux now, and I HATE fixing there problems. I like fixing things, but not more than once, and they aren't young enough to learn new tricks
Before you jump on the specs, find out what actually comes in the box. The Dell has a faster CPU; 2.2GHz vs 2.0 in the Mac, as well as a tv tuner, more RAM, and A/B/G/N wireless. The video card? The 2400XT 128MB is something of a joke card and not really worth bringing into this argument. Integrated video will stand up just fine comparatively. The rest of the specs are the same, and yet you are here insisting the Mac has better hardware? Try again.
That may be 3.1416% for Apple's share of the entire market. But the iMac has got something like 90% of the all-in-one market.
Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
But if forced at gunpoint I'd pick the mac. First, I like simple and elegant. Second, Dells all run Microsoft OS and I absolutely hate the way MS writes their software. MS software all seems bass-ackwards to me, starting with the directory seperator ("\ is ass backwards, Bill) to its double click.
If there is one thing that confounds me when I'm trying to show someone how to use a computer it's that godoffal damned fuckwitted doubleclick. I wind up exasperated saying "click on the icon and press 'enter'. It's easier. Its frustrating to new users.
And it's pointless. There's no reason why you should have to have two clicks in a certain time period; one click should highlight, a second should execute. Especially since MS and Linux mice have more than one button!
There are so many things I hate about MS software (not even including bloat, bugs, etc) I'd run out of bits listing them all.
So give me a few new parts and let me install Linux. If I have to buy a whole box it'll be a mac.
-mcgrew
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
I saw OSX with a Unix core, commercial application like Office and Adobe, and said screw it and bought an iBook. i got the stablity of Unix with the commerical software support that Linux lacked. Further more it just works. After I graduated from college and went out into the real world I quickly understood the value of my time. I need things that work. Yes, Apple costs more up front, but the amount of time it saves me not having to tweak this, find some missing dependency that, is well worth the extra cost.
Last year my Dad was needing a new computer. I got him the 17" iMac with the ATI video card (instead of the integrated graphics) and one year later, the number of support calls I've gotten?
1: He had one question about setting up Mail with his new DSL provider. (And I have to admit, I even had to call their tech support because they had some screwy config)
I set up and went back home. He had no problems getting Turbo Tax to install and use it. Now he had some initial questions the first couple days on how to use tabbed browsing and why he needed FireFox for some sites.
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
Mmmm, Apple pi!
-- Alastair
That also brings into point my first consideration. I remember back in the 70's or 80's when a lot of the American car companies were having trouble because of the new Japanese models. American companies kept putting out more and more of what they wanted the public to buy and the Japanese companies were finding out what sold and focusing on that. It was only when American companies began to realize what was going on that they started listening to customers instead of telling them what was good or desirable.
American car companies still haven't learned the lessons form the '70s and '80s. They still refuse to produce fuel efficient autos. Though there are more flex fuel American autos where are the hybrid and all electric vehicles? GM withdrew the one all electric vehicle they had, the EV1 while there was a waiting list of people wanting to buy, or lease as GM was only leasing them, one.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Actually, the 24" iMac is a great deal if you're looking for a professional LCD.
It uses a H-IPS panel, which provides great color accuracy, contrast, and brightness from almost any viewing angle. There are only a couple other 24" H-IPS displays on the market, and they cost $1250-$1500. Yes, just for the screen.
So, in effect, you're getting the rest of the iMac for $300-$550.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
The original Macintosh, from 1984 was an all-in-one. It's been their mantra under Steve, and will continue to be. Having an easy to use computer that you can also move at will by just unplugging one power cord, moving it, and then just plugging it back in is nice, and always has been. The question is why have all other attempts at duplicating this idea sucked so much, for so long?
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel Boorstin
On a side note, I can't believe I just made an argument that a Mac was cheaper from a hardware standpoint.
*head asplode*
Depending on what the configuration is some Macs are cheaper than equivalent Windows PC. this has been true for a few years. The key though is that you have to start with a Mac then configure a Windows PC to the same specs as Apple doesn't offer nearly as many configurations as PC OEMs.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Intel's desktop processor page
The Dells have either a E4500 or E6550
2.2 GHz clock / 2 MB cache / 800 MHz FSB
2.33 GHz / 4 MB / 1333 MHz
All ship with only 667 MHz DIMMs
Intel's mobile processor page
The iMacs have either a T7300, T7700, or X7900.
2.0 GHz / 4 MB / 800 MHz
2.4 GHz / 4 MB / 800 MHz
2.8 GHz / 4 MB / 800 MHz
All ship with only 667MHz SO-DIMMS
BTW, if a 128MB 2400XT is a joke, then WTF do you call integrated video?
The highest specced XPS ONEs have Mobility Radeon HD 2400's, memory is unlisted
while BASE iMacs have Mobility? Radeon HD 2400 XT's with 128MB GDDR3
The highest end iMacs have Mobility? Radeon HD 2600 PROs with 256MB GDDR3.
The iMac has better specs, flat out. It most likely uses a lot less power and weighs less also. The XPS ONE is a very well integrated _PC_ for sure, and has other nice features the iMac doesn't. I think Dell did a great job with the hardware integration and bundled features, and it is somewhat on par with the iMacs, IF you leave Leopard and iLife out of the picture anyway.
Personally, those speakers have got to go!
Yes, I know Apple makes laptops too. I have no problem with them if you're a Mac person. I just don't "get" the whole category of computers that the iMac and XPS One fit into. What is it, the bigger screen vs. a laptop? Hell, you could buy a laptop *and* a 24" LCD screen for less than an XPS One, and then you'd have a really nice computer with the same huge screen *and* it'd be fully portable!
I agree compeatly. A laptop is a terrific all-in-one and if you want a larger monitor get one.
FalconShould there be a Law?
If I'm going to have to throw the whole thing out once it becomes obsolete, I'm going to buy the one that's going to last the longest.
If I were to go strictly on how long it would last I'd have to pick the iMac. I bought 2 Macs that were about 3 years old when I bought them. The first one I got 1992, it lasted until 2000. The second I got in 2000 a few months after the first one died, it died in 2006. During the same tyme I bought 2 brand new Windows PCs. In the first year the hdd and the motherboard had to be replaced on both. And because of OS crashes I had to reinstall Windows on both a bunch of tymes.
Oh, and the PCs were major brands. The first was a Gateway and the second was an HP.
FalconShould there be a Law?
or something like that?
According to the Fool Apple's market share is 6.3% slice of the domestic PC market, twice what you say. However that's still a small share of the market. However it looks as if Apple Macintosh Computers Likely To Gain Market Share. And a Wharton Prof Debunks Market Share Myth.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I swear I am going to go crazy if I keep hearing people say industrial design when referring to every single product (especially Apple products) under the sun.
What ever happened to the word 'design?' Do you catch the ghey if you just say something has a nice design? Do you have to say 'industrial' before 'design' so you sound all high-tech? Is it like 'design' is a homosexual concept to men, so you have to say 'industrial' to make it sound manly?
I mean, I get it. I have a Mac Pro at home and a Power Mac G5 at work. Industrial design is probably the best way to describe them. It is NOT the best way to describe other products which are simply well-designed. I have an iPhone, nice design. The Dell XPSOne looks very well designed. But what the hell is industrial about it? It was bad enough when every review of an Apple product that in some way incorporated metal had to say it had great industrial design. But now we're applying it to plastic Dells, too?
What's next, man, I really like the industrial design of your tie?
arrrrgh!!!!
Virtualization isn't really a joke, but I've had nothing but bad luck with Parallels. It has corrupted my Windows startup partition three times, and caused my first ever kernel panic in OSX (I've been using since 10.0). It even broke booting up in Bootcamp mode because of whatever it did to Windows.
When making any purchase it's about the right tool for the job. A 4x4 jeep in NYC, planting a cactus in Siberia, etc. makes no sense. Consumers need help in becoming better educated in the computer purchasing process and this does not help matters. First and foremost they need to be informed that there is no Ipod of computers as it's simply a more complex situation. The right computer from both a hard and software perspective requires a little investigation into the consumer to ensure you get the right tool for the job.
For example, thus far those modded up to the limelight regarding Macs are certainly right about how easy it is to use especially for older folks. However, have you ever tried to get a retiree in their 50s used to working on Windows their whole lives to use a Mac? Heck they don't want to learn anything new much less a completely new operating system regardless of how much safer or easier it is over time. I know a number of people who tried because they were told it'd be incredibly easy but it really isn't for many. Buying a Mac and booting Windows is not necessarily the ideal solution either as perhaps they'd loose out on the benefit of their wiz-kid grandson who lives nearby and loves canabolizing HPs or something.
The most important step in educating consumers on computer purchasing I think is first to get folks to understand that comparing Macs and Windows-based PCs is like comparing apples and oranges (no pun intended.) Sure they're both fruit and if you're hungry both will do the job. But if you know nothing of what an apple or orange is but hate tangerines, peeling things, have a vitamin C deficiency and countless other specifics aren't introduced into the decision then you'll have a less than optimal outcome at best.
Also, computers to some degree are luxury items and thus a qualitative analysis of price I think further confuses folks in what's an already nebulous situation. Someone may laugh at the $100 difference between the two machines Walt compared but would clearly go with the cheapest if not properly informed about the dramatic differences in the experience they'd have with each. Wouldn't you buy the cheaper hammer if both appeared and were proposed to you as being the same?
As with buying a car and many other items one needs to find out about their past experiences, current needs, customer support and product life expectations and a number of other particulars to find the ideal solution. I even see grandmas do so with power tools in Home Depot worth a fraction of the cost of a new computer but with computers uneducated folks are overwhelmed... and we're not helping matters with over-simplifications.
That's just my POV... no more, no less.
With apple you're paying more for what they think is stylish looks and a brand name.
You nailed that one right on the head. I've been using Macs since the late 1980s.
At first I paid more because the Mac had that whole "GUI" thing, and I thought it was important. Of course, the "GUI" was just a bunch of hooey, until Microsoft brought Windows 3.1 to market. Then the "GUI" actually was worthwhile.
But I still stubbornly continued to use the Mac because I thought I could get a lot done with it, using flashy, stupid tools like HyperCard and AppleScript. I realize now that they were just hogwash, but for a long time I thought I was really productive with them. I ran a 1,200 page website with BBEdit and AppleScript, but I was just fooling myself. Deep inside, I was just transfixed by the smooth beige of the PowerMac series of desktops and towers.
Then the G3 and G4 machines came out, and I was transfixed by the colors and the spicy new advertising. Again I was confused. They *seemed* like reliable computers. When OS X came out, it seemed like a more powerful and stable OS, but in retrospect, I was just taken in by the fact that the hardware and the software *seemed* to work so well together. But of course, that was just an illusion.
Now that I use a Mac laptop and Leopard, it's the same thing, only worse. All of the Mac-only apps really suck, and I'm only keeping my Mac because of those bitchin' "'I'm a PC.' 'And I'm a Mac!'" ads. Goddammit! I just wish Apple would stop messing with my teenie little brain! Give me strength so I can escape the grip of their stylish good looks and that overwhelmingly powerful brand name! Please! Help me!
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
The best desktop machine I've ever owned is a HP Pavillion a6120n. I bought it at Circuit City during an end-of-model clearance, along with a Samsung 22" LCD, for $700. It has E4400 C2D processor, 2Gb memory, 400Gb storage, 7600gt (128Mb) DVI graphics, and a dual-layer burner.
Once home, I immediately wiped Vista and loaded OSX. The machine just screams. It's very, very stable; and some say, runs faster than an actual Mac.
Compared to an iMac or Mac Pro, I saved between $1000 and $3000.
Not only that, but now that there is an EFI emulator floating around, I was able to load Leopard from a retail distro I bought at the Apple store. I can take Apple updates and everything. Just like having the real thing - only better!!
Another thing that some Mac fanatics gloss over is that Apple has never really competed for the low-end or mid-low-end computer segment, though. I'm not even talking about beige boxes--just look at a cheap Dell vs. Apple's offering. The Mac Mini has style, smallness, lower power consumption (and of course OS X) going for it... and pretty much nothing else. The phrase "low-end Macintosh notebook" is nothing more than a contradiction. I haven't priced them recently, but last I checked the cheapest one they offered was over 2.5x the price of the cheapest full-featured Intel notebook available.
The budget crowd is probably the BIGGEST group of consumers, and for these people Apple is still nowhere near competitive. That's not necessarily a bad thing, mind you--in my opinion, Apple SHOULDN'T be cutting any corners trying to offer a bargain-basement option--but it's still something the fanboys tend to neglect when they spout off about how "Macs are cheaper now!!!!!!!!!". No, they aren't. They're arguably cheaper for a very specific middle-of-the-road, I'm-not-ever-going-to-bother-building-my-own minority market segment. But, the thing is, Macs weren't designed to compete with PC's cost-effective hardware... it was designed to be a cohesive hardware + software package, and in this regard they blow away Windows entirely.