Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

[Silverstring]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

Man hours? It takes a couple of hours on a Sunday afternoon to build a PC and install the OS. There really isn't any cost involved.

"Internet, email, document creation, photo organizing and editing, and games"

A Dell PC will run you around $1000 for a PC that does all of those. A user-built Linux PC will run you around $600 for a PC that does all of those. A Mac will run you about $1200 for the same thing. Equal specs and equal software, but more expensive. How is it not overpriced?

Yeah, it only takes a couple of hours for you perhaps, because you have experience and are an advanced computer user. I'm talking about the regular consumer. And "a couple hours" is misleading. You have to comparison shop and order parts from places like newegg.com. You have to physically build the computer, load bios, install os, load drivers, and troubleshoot. Not only that, but if the computer or parts fail, you have no support but yourself, unless the individual parts are under warranty. Most people don't want to deaL with that for just a couple hundred in savings. PLUS, as rodster mentioned the software bundle is NOT the same.

In fact, I know you're just pulling the $1000 and $600 price figures out of thin air. Comparing Apple to Dell is a fairer comparison than the build your own argument. Going to Dell and customizing an XPS 200(their smallest and quietist desktop to have similar specs to an iMac goes as follows:

Dell XPS 200
-Pentium D 820 Dual Core at 2.80 GHz
-XP Media Center
-No TV Tuner
-128 MB PCI Express x16 ATI Radeon X600 SE
-512 MB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM 533Mhz(2 Slots)
-160GB Serial ATA 7200 RPM
-8X CD/Dual Layer DVD Burner
-17in Digital Flat Panel
-No Microsoft Office Components

17in iMac
-1.83 GHz Intel Core Duo(Check Toms hardware, just like the Pentium M outperformed the Pentium 4 at lower clock speeds, the Core Duo does the same to the Pentium D..you can't get a dell with Core Duo yet)
-Front Row
-128 MB PCI Express ATI Radeon X1600
-512MB of PC2-5300 (667MHz) DDR2 SDRAM
-160GB Serial ATA 7200 RPM
-8x Super Drive Dual Layer CD/DVD

Ok, so now we only compared the BASE level components. The Dell? $1,279. The iMac? $1,299. Go to the website yourself and check if you don't believe me. You didn't want to pay for iSight, or Bluetooth, or built in Airport Extreme(802.11 B/G)? Consider them throw-ins! Plus you get iLife, and there is TONS of value there for the consumer. The Video card and memory are also faster/better on the iMac, and the all-in one design saves desk clutter. What's "overpriced" again?

I don't think the Mac is the "end all" either(I also have a Dell laptop), but I DO think it's a valuable option for consumers in the market for a new computer. It just bugs me when dyed-in-the-wool Mac haters(just as bad as blind Mac zealots) dismiss the platform based on tired, out-of-date platitudes like "It's too slow!" "It's overpriced!" Without making a FAIR comparison of value/features. If a consumer looks at what the Mac has to offer and decides it's not for them, fine. But how many dismiss it out of hand simply because they've been conditioned by all of this misinformation?

As far as my argument about the "build it yourself" stance, as I said, if could apply to Macs AND PCs. Building your own computer, loading it with software you have laying around, and self-support and troubleshooting is NOT, in any way, a fair value comparison with an off-the-shelf PC/Mac.

[Silverstring]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

But it all boils down to what you want the system for. Remember it's always a preference thing. Both OS's have their plus and minus.

Agreed. For instance, if you are a hard-core gamer, or value connectivity to an Xbox 360, the Mac is just NOT an option right now, plain and simple. But many people don't care about either of these things, or running PC-only applications.

Just for clarification, iWork '05 and/or '06 has never been part of a Mac shipping software bundle.

[Macar91]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

And if you are smart...you would buy Apple Stock right now after seeing what the company will be doing over the next several years.

You already missed the train. When the iPods got really popular about 1 1/2 years ago, the stock jumped by at least $20.00 per share. I'd be rich if I bought the shares like I was going to. They split the stocks like 6 months ago and it is starting to go up again.

[ObiWanJenkins]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

Yeah, it only takes a couple of hours for you perhaps, because you have experience and are an advanced computer user. I'm talking about the regular consumer. And "a couple hours" is misleading. You have to comparison shop and order parts from places like newegg.com. You have to physically build the computer, load bios, install os, load drivers, and troubleshoot. Not only that, but if the computer or parts fail, you have no support but yourself, unless the individual parts are under warranty. Most people don't want to deaL with that for just a couple hundred in savings. PLUS, as rodster mentioned the software bundle is NOT the same.

An intelligent person should be comparison shopping for any computer purchase, not just running to the local Best Buy and grabbing the first thing they see. A couple of hours is all it takes. If the parts fail, I can return them. With Apple or Dell, you have to go through a long process just to get your one piece of hardware replaced. PC support is awful.

No, the software is not the same, but it is equal in every way. Gimp is just as powerful as Adobe Photoshop, yet it's free compared to $649.00. You do want to edit photos, right? Firefox and Opera are superior to Internet Explorer and Safari. Both free. You want to surf the internet, right? Open Office is as good as Microsoft Office without all the .net garbage. Once again, free compared to $499.

In fact, I know you're just pulling the $1000 and $600 price figures out of thin air. Comparing Apple to Dell is a fairer comparison than the build your own argument. Going to Dell and customizing an XPS 200(their smallest and quietist desktop to have similar specs to an iMac goes as follows:

Dell XPS 200
-Pentium D 820 Dual Core at 2.80 GHz
-XP Media Center
-No TV Tuner
-128 MB PCI Express x16 ATI Radeon X600 SE
-512 MB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM 533Mhz(2 Slots)
-160GB Serial ATA 7200 RPM
-8X CD/Dual Layer DVD Burner
-17in Digital Flat Panel
-No Microsoft Office Components

17in iMac
-1.83 GHz Intel Core Duo(Check Toms hardware, just like the Pentium M outperformed the Pentium 4 at lower clock speeds, the Core Duo does the same to the Pentium D..you can't get a dell with Core Duo yet)
-Front Row
-128 MB PCI Express ATI Radeon X1600
-512MB of PC2-5300 (667MHz) DDR2 SDRAM
-160GB Serial ATA 7200 RPM
-8x Super Drive Dual Layer CD/DVD

Ok, so now we only compared the BASE level components. The Dell? $1,279. The iMac? $1,299. Go to the website yourself and check if you don't believe me. You didn't want to pay for iSight, or Bluetooth, or built in Airport Extreme(802.11 B/G)? Consider them throw-ins! Plus you get iLife, and there is TONS of value there for the consumer. The Video card and memory are also faster/better on the iMac, and the all-in one design saves desk clutter. What's "overpriced" again?

I'm not pulling the $1000 and $600 figures out of thin air. Getting a bunch of crap that you'll never use is NOT value just because it's free. They're both overpriced, but for "internet, email, document creation, photo organizing and editing, and games," you don't need 1.83GHz Core Duo. You're buying a Ferrari as a general purpose vehicle to get to and from work. That's a value?

I don't think the Mac is the "end all" either(I also have a Dell laptop), but I DO think it's a valuable option for consumers in the market for a new computer. It just bugs me when dyed-in-the-wool Mac haters(just as bad as blind Mac zealots) dismiss the platform based on tired, out-of-date platitudes like "It's too slow!" "It's overpriced!" Without making a FAIR comparison of value/features. If a consumer looks at what the Mac has to offer and decides it's not for them, fine. But how many dismiss it out of hand simply because they've been conditioned by all of this misinformation?

As far as my argument about the "build it yourself" stance, as I said, if could apply to Macs AND PCs. Building your own computer, loading it with software you have laying around, and self-support and troubleshooting is NOT, in any way, a fair value comparison with an off-the-shelf PC/Mac.

A Linux PC is by far and away the best value for your money. All you have to pay for is hardware. The core code is the same on all three, and Linux is just as secure as Mac when it comes to viruses. You can easily customize a Linux PC to mimic the Mac or Windows OS in look and feel.

You don't need to have software lying around, because all the software you could ever need is on the net FREE OF CHARGE. Games don't run on Linux natively? Well, you can with Wine. And it's free.

Self support is much better than paying for a limited support warranty that you may never use, and having to jumping through hoops when you do have to use it.

On the plus side, with a Linux PC, you can update individual components as you need instead of having to replace the whole unit every few years. You can't do that with a Mac. If your iMac monitor fails outside of the warranty, you have to pay to have it fixed or buy a whole new Mac.

If a user is only going to do the things you mentioned like email and internet surfing, the Mac is incredibly overpriced. If a user wants excellent video editing and a "pretty GUI," the Mac is a great value. For the average user, a Windows PC is still a better value, though a Linux-based PC is the best value for any user.

[ObiWanJenkins]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

You already missed the train. When the iPods got really popular about 1 1/2 years ago, the stock jumped by at least $20.00 per share. I'd be rich if I bought the shares like I was going to. They split the stocks like 6 months ago and it is starting to go up again.

And if Apple released OSX as a software OS, Apple would be as big as Microsoft in a short time.

[Silverstring]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

An intelligent person should be comparison shopping for any computer purchase, not just running to the local Best Buy and grabbing the first thing they see. A couple of hours is all it takes. If the parts fail, I can return them. With Apple or Dell, you have to go through a long process just to get your one piece of hardware replaced. PC support is awful.

No, the software is not the same, but it is equal in every way. Gimp is just as powerful as Adobe Photoshop, yet it's free compared to $649.00. You do want to edit photos, right? Firefox and Opera are superior to Internet Explorer and Safari. Both free. You want to surf the internet, right? Open Office is as good as Microsoft Office without all the .net garbage. Once again, free compared to $499.



I'm not pulling the $1000 and $600 figures out of thin air. Getting a bunch of crap that you'll never use is NOT value just because it's free. They're both overpriced, but for "internet, email, document creation, photo organizing and editing, and games," you don't need 1.83GHz Core Duo. You're buying a Ferrari as a general purpose vehicle to get to and from work. That's a value?



A Linux PC is by far and away the best value for your money. All you have to pay for is hardware. The core code is the same on all three, and Linux is just as secure as Mac when it comes to viruses. You can easily customize a Linux PC to mimic the Mac or Windows OS in look and feel.

You don't need to have software lying around, because all the software you could ever need is on the net FREE OF CHARGE. Games don't run on Linux natively? Well, you can with Wine. And it's free.

Self support is much better than paying for a limited support warranty that you may never use, and having to jumping through hoops when you do have to use it.

On the plus side, with a Linux PC, you can update individual components as you need instead of having to replace the whole unit every few years. You can't do that with a Mac. If your iMac monitor fails outside of the warranty, you have to pay to have it fixed or buy a whole new Mac.

If a user is only going to do the things you mentioned like email and internet surfing, the Mac is incredibly overpriced. If a user wants excellent video editing and a "pretty GUI," the Mac is a great value. For the average user, a Windows PC is still a better value, though a Linux-based PC is the best value for any user.

OK, so what I can distill from that is this: Any commercially available computer and software, is, by default, "overpriced", because one can either get a free alternative which, by your definition, is equivalent, or they can build the PC themselves.

In which case, my original point still applies and was not disproved:

For those who don't want to build their own computer or use open source software for whatever reason, check out the Macs! They're a good value, even with same and/or superior base specs to anyone who isn't a self-build/homebrew devotee.

[ObiWanJenkins]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

OK, so what I can distill from that is this: Any commercially available computer and software, is, by default, "overpriced", because one can either get a free alternative which, by your definition, is equivalent, or they can build the PC themselves.

In which case, my original point still applies and was not disproved:

For those who don't want to build their own computer or use open source software for whatever reason, check out the Macs! They're a good value, even with same and/or superior base specs to anyone who isn't a self-build/homebrew devotee.

Superior specs do not equal value. A Windows PC is still the best value for the money. You ignore the problem with all-in-one hardware. You've ignored the customization aspects of a PC. You've spoken nothing about value than to say the Mac processor is more powerful than the average PC processor. By that logic, all of us should own luxury cars because they offer more at a higher price.

If you are into video editing and graphical design, buy a Mac over a PC. If you're going to use your computer to read email or surf the web, a PC is much better suited to you for the money.

[Silverstring]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

Superior specs do not equal value. A Windows PC is still the best value for the money. You ignore the problem with all-in-one hardware. You've ignored the customization aspects of a PC. You've spoken nothing about value than to say the Mac processor is more powerful than the average PC processor. By that logic, all of us should own luxury cars because they offer more at a higher price.

If you are into video editing and graphical design, buy a Mac over a PC. If you're going to use your computer to read email or surf the web, a PC is much better suited to you for the money.

I haven't ignored anything. You call the all-in-one a "problem", but I consider it a solution, if space and aesthetics matter more than upgradeability. See, and I don't mean to offend you in any way, but you seem to be a hard-core "techie", and thus, it's difficult for you to imagine the average consumer perspective. I'd like to see some specs on how many tower-owning PC users with expandability options have ever actually employed them.

"Value" is whatever the individual makes it out to be, but I was speaking from a general perspective. To you, you see value in "upgradability", and are willing to deal with the separate components and cables and size that allows for that ability. Others want a simple, elegant solution that takes up minimal space above or under their desktop, and don't care about upgradability. Just like buying ANY consumer product, they all have their pros and cons, and buying one over the other is a constant give and take. Customization options with a PC? Like what for example? Sure, you can put exactly what motherboard you want in there, exactly what video card, exactly what optical drive, etc. However, tons of users neither want to nor care about this, and go their whole computer-owning life not even knowing what they have. The difference in our approach comes from you attempting to apply your own personal sense of value to a broader demographic, while I am allowing for a multiplicity of perspective and saying that a similarly spec-ed, commercially built PC is as much as a similarly spec-ed, commercially built Mac, so the Mac, RELATIVE to PC, is not "overpriced".

Doing basic tasks and don't need all that processing power? Buy a Mac Mini then. You have to compare Apples to Apples (no pun intended) and Oranges to Oranges.

[Rodster]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

I haven't ignored anything. You call the all-in-one a "problem", but I consider it a solution, if space and aesthetics matter more than upgradeability. See, and I don't mean to offend you in any way, but you seem to be a hard-core "techie", and thus, it's difficult for you to imagine the average consumer perspective. I'd like to see some specs on how many tower-owning PC users with expandability options have ever actually employed them.

"Value" is whatever the individual makes it out to be, but I was speaking from a general perspective. To you, you see value in "upgradability", and are willing to deal with the separate components and cables and size that allows for that ability. Others want a simple, elegant solution that takes up minimal space above or under their desktop, and don't care about upgradability. Just like buying ANY consumer product, they all have their pros and cons, and buying one over the other is a constant give and take. Customization options with a PC? Like what for example? Sure, you can put exactly what motherboard you want in there, exactly what video card, exactly what optical drive, etc. However, tons of users neither want to nor care about this, and go their whole computer-owning life not even knowing what they have. The difference in our approach comes from you attempting to apply your own personal sense of value to a broader demographic, while I am allowing for a multiplicity of perspective and saying that a similarly spec-ed, commercially built PC is as much as a similarly spec-ed, commercially built Mac, so the Mac, RELATIVE to PC, is not "overpriced".

Doing basic tasks and don't need all that processing power? Buy a Mac Mini then. You have to compare Apples to Apples (no pun intended) and Oranges to Oranges.

The AIO system is nice for the average Joe Schmoe, but usually J.S. is going to to look at a Dell which now comes with a 17" flat panel for around $499-$599 so if you were to go up against a mini or imac I would choose the Dell. While the mac mini maybe nice for some there are added costs if you don't have a spare keyboard+mouse+monitor lying around. I have never liked the performance of the mac mini to be honest.

As far as those who build their own PC's (gamer's) yes most if not all will take advantage of the customization features with their system. I agree that most who buy PC's are looking for their hand to be held before and after the sale. Those like me who put systems together find it unnecessary.

[Rodster]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

Superior specs do not equal value. A Windows PC is still the best value for the money. You ignore the problem with all-in-one hardware. You've ignored the customization aspects of a PC. You've spoken nothing about value than to say the Mac processor is more powerful than the average PC processor. By that logic, all of us should own luxury cars because they offer more at a higher price.

If you are into video editing and graphical design, buy a Mac over a PC. If you're going to use your computer to read email or surf the web, a PC is much better suited to you for the money.

I totally agree, software is priced less and hardware as well if you have a Windows based PC. Graphics and Audio cards are more plentiful, more advanced and costs less than their Mac counterpart.

There are things that the mac can do much better and faster than a Windows based PC such as you mentioned but I have find the overall feel and responsive of Windows XP better than Mac OSX. Anandtech wrote an article about that when he compared a top of the line Power Mac versus a comparable XP system.

[ObiWanJenkins]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

I totally agree, software is priced less and hardware as well if you have a Windows based PC. Graphics and Audio cards are more plentiful, more advanced and costs less than their Mac counterpart.

There are things that the mac can do much better and faster than a Windows based PC such as you mentioned but I have find the overall feel and responsive of Windows XP better than Mac OSX. Anandtech wrote an article about that when he compared a top of the line Power Mac versus a comparable XP system.

Don;t get me wrong. I love Macs for video and such, but I would never recommend one to a person on a budget who just wants basic functions. I just don't see any value in one.

Doing basic tasks and don't need all that processing power? Buy a Mac Mini then. You have to compare Apples to Apples (no pun intended) and Oranges to Oranges.

Ok. Let's compare. A Mac Mini is $499.00. An Apple monitor is $799.00. The mouse and keyboard are $49.00 and $29.00 respectively. Total $1378.00

A Dell XPS 400 is $1269.00. A Dell monitor is included. The mouse and keyboard are included. Total $1269.00.

A Dell E310, which is comparable to the Mac Mini is $1048.00, and comes with a monitor, keyboard, and mouse. Total $1048.00

You lose all credibility if you say the Mac Mini is a value when compared to a Windows PC.

[Rodster]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

Don;t get me wrong. I love Macs for video and such, but I would never recommend one to a person on a budget who just wants basic functions. I just don't see any value in one.

No argument from me totally agree

Ok. Let's compare. A Mac Mini is $499.00. An Apple monitor is $799.00. The mouse and keyboard are $49.00 and $29.00 respectively. Total $1378.00

A Dell XPS 400 is $1269.00. A Dell monitor is included. The mouse and keyboard are included. Total $1269.00.

A Dell E310, which is comparable to the Mac Mini is $1048.00, and comes with a monitor, keyboard, and mouse. Total $1048.00

You lose all credibility if you say the Mac Mini is a value when compared to a Windows PC.

On the flip side you don't have to buy an Apple monitor any PC monitor+keyboard+mouse will do.

I know this post was directed towards Silverstring, but that's what I was getting at a comparable Dell has a overall better value. With one exception Macs DO TEND to hold their value a little better than most PC's, that's do to the Apple name and quality of the machine. I can probably still get 65-75% of the original purchase price of my eMac if I wanted to sell it.

I think all of us Silverstring included are pretty much on the same page when it comes to Apple product. For his liking he puts tends to put more of a premium on Macs than you or I, which is not a bad thing.

At least Silverstring is not like your typical Mac Zealout/Freak who starts the name calling if you don't worship Steve Jobs or Apple. I've enjoyed this civil conversation.

[ObiWanJenkins]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

No argument from me totally agree




On the flip side you don't have to buy an Apple monitor any PC monitor+keyboard+mouse will do.

I know this post was directed towards Silverstring, but that's what I was getting at a comparable Dell has a overall better value. With one exception Macs DO TEND to hold their value a little better than most PC's, that's do to the Apple name and quality of the machine. I can probably still get 65-75% of the original purchase price of my eMac if I wanted to sell it.

I think all of us Silverstring included are pretty much on the same page when it comes to Apple product. For his liking he puts tends to put more of a premium on Macs than you or I, which is not a bad thing.

At least Silverstring is not like your typical Mac Zealout/Freak who starts the name calling if you don't worship Steve Jobs or Apple. I've enjoyed this civil conversation.

I did not mention that because the listed price for the Dell was $499. I wanted to stay will the same manufacturer for the accessories in the example. You are so right about the resale value, which makes the Mac a little less overpriced in the long run.

Oh my, would anyone dare blasphemy the name the Great and Powerful Jobs?

[Silverstring]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

Oh my, would anyone dare blasphemy the name the Great and Powerful Jobs?

Yeah, I would. What the **** is up with not mentioning the battery life of the new MacBook Pro in either the keynote or on the specs page?!?!?!? I know the available models were pre-production, but come on......

[mgoblue]

Re: Apple Computers now with latest Intel Processors

ahhh, the joys of a PC vs. Mac battle...fun fun fun, it should be added to the list of conversation topics rarely brought up, like politics, religion, etc...people are so dead set in their ways (on both sides) that nothing's gonna change

Mac's have their place, I just personally prefer Windows or a Unix/Linux distro. For a generic computer user I'd recommend a 400ish dollar Dell, there's no need for Suzy Homemaker to spend all the money on a higher end PC or Mac IMO. For graphic design type stuff (like people I work with), Macs are great, and they swear by them.

For my personal use, I get the benefit from various software (purchased and downloaded) that going to a Mac from a PC wouldn't make sense. I think the software availability issue is greater than some think, I have a friend who's not a gamer, and she sold her mac on ebay because she couldn't play a random game she might like, or install some stupid game someone e-mailed her. Even if it doesn't happen often, not being able to do something really doesn't sit well with people.