• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Mac vs PC

daSkeptic said:
In a way it does. Macs and PCs are not exclusively used by, nor marketed to, the average home user. Both platforms sometimes find themselves lined up along side Sun, SGI, and others when a company is making decisions.
Click to expand...

No, not really. The vast majority of the time neither even make it past initial considerations of options.
 
Can I just add (and I haven't read about half the pages in this thread, I'm skimming at work) that comparisons in price between a mac and the equivalent PC are flawed in that You can only customise macs a little compared to PCs?
Saying that for $1000 I can get X mac and X PC will cost $1004 is one-sided.
What about the mac equivalent of Y PC? If I want a cheap netbook, what are apple going to compete with? If I don't give a damn about firewire (and I don't) then why do I have to pay for it?
 
moopet said:
Can I just add (and I haven't read about half the pages in this thread, I'm skimming at work) that comparisons in price between a mac and the equivalent PC are flawed in that You can only customise macs a little compared to PCs?
Saying that for $1000 I can get X mac and X PC will cost $1004 is one-sided.
What about the mac equivalent of Y PC? If I want a cheap netbook, what are apple going to compete with? If I don't give a damn about firewire (and I don't) then why do I have to pay for it?
Click to expand...

Sounds like what you're saying is that Apple is different, that they don't necessarily make the same kind of products (configurable systems, netbooks, etc.) as those with whom they are perceived to compete. Is that right?
 
daSkeptic said:
Sounds like what you're saying is that Apple is different, that they don't necessarily make the same kind of products (configurable systems, netbooks, etc.) as those with whom they are perceived to compete. Is that right?
Click to expand...

Right. I'm saying that regardless of my own opinion on either system, the common comparisons are not fair ones.
 
moopet said:
Right. I'm saying that regardless of my own opinion on either system, the common comparisons are not fair ones.
Click to expand...

I would agree with this. Apple is not after the exact same market as others. There is certainly some overlap, and that's why Apple's marketing is seen to go after PC users. But there are undoubtedly areas that are being avoided (e.g. field-upgradable systems for the average consumer). It shouldn't be surprising that their product offering is different.

I personally see nothing wrong with this. There's no law that says a company must make a product for everyone. While I am a Mac user, if I had a need that Apple couldn't satisfy I'd go elsewhere. I certainly wouldn't sit around demanding a Waldorf Salad when it's not on the menu.
 
Last edited:
Also on the issue of price comparisons, if you walk into a store and buy a Lenovo or an HP or whatever, it'll likely come with Windows and a whole bunch of free trials for Microsoft Office, anti-virus software, etc.

So how strongly is the bill that you pay subsidized by these companies whose stuff ends up on your machine? I have no idea if it's a significant amount or not, maybe someone here does?
 
phantomb said:
Also on the issue of price comparisons, if you walk into a store and buy a Lenovo or an HP or whatever, it'll likely come with Windows and a whole bunch of free trials for Microsoft Office, anti-virus software, etc.

So how strongly is the bill that you pay subsidized by these companies whose stuff ends up on your machine? I have no idea if it's a significant amount or not, maybe someone here does?
Click to expand...

Not much.

Most of the price comes from hardware. Subsidizing the cost has more to do with manufacturer discounts than software, if memory serves.

I mean, take Windows Vista Home Premium x64. Cost $99 at the time I built my computer. MS Office 2007 was about the same.

Can't imagine the price is pulled down that much because of software.
 
phantomb said:
Also on the issue of price comparisons, if you walk into a store and buy a Lenovo or an HP or whatever, it'll likely come with Windows and a whole bunch of free trials for Microsoft Office, anti-virus software, etc.

So how strongly is the bill that you pay subsidized by these companies whose stuff ends up on your machine? I have no idea if it's a significant amount or not, maybe someone here does?
Click to expand...

Lenovo, not so much-- they're a pretty no-frills company. HP may have some trial software on it, but not MS Office. As far as I know, no major system builder ships free trials of Office with their systems. The AV software is less a subsidy and more a pitch to get percentages of sales-- Dell and HP get a cut when they get Symantec or McAffee more rubes subscribers.

But yes, system builders and software manufacturers do some profit-sharing deals. Apple also does this, though with fewer software manufacturers. That's commerce for you.
 
Price

Is there any doubt that a Mac is more expensive than a non-Mac counterpart?

MAC PRO: $2,499.00

One 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processor
3GB (three 1GB) memory
640GB hard drive
18x double-layer SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 with 512MB

Apple Mouse
Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad (English) and User's Guide

$2,499.00
----------------------------------

NON-MAC BUILD, SAME OR BETTER COMPONENTS: $962.95

(Listed at retail prices)

Intel Xeon W3520 Bloomfield 2.66GHz 4 x 256KB L2 Cache 8MB L3 Cache LGA 1366 130W Quad-Core Server Processor - Retail $309.99
Intel Workstation Board WX58BP $236.99
1 TB drive $84.99
Pioneer 18x Dual Layer Internal RoHS SuperDrive (Green Friendly) $99.99
Geforce 9500 Gt Pcie 2.0 512MB DDR2 VGA Dvi-i HDTV-7 Rohs $52.99
4GB RAM $78.99
Get the apple mouse and keyboard if you like for $100.

$962.95
 
daSkeptic said:
Please read the thread. We've gone over this already. Short summary: Rough tech-specs aren't necessarily the whole story.
Click to expand...

I will probably not read all of the posts on this thread. If there are few which you think make your point succinctly, I would be glad to read them.
--
I can put together the same or better components for a much lower price. Do you dispute this? Price certainly is an important element of any discussion comparing Apple computers to other computers, and building the same computer as an Apple-branded computer is a good place to start if you wish to compare only the operating systems.

It is unfortunate that people think in terms of "Mac vs. PC" because PC is a very generic term. Many companies build computers, including Apple. Apple also develops operating system software but requires that the OS run only on Apple computers.

What is the purpose of this thread?

Is it to compare the computers that Apple builds with computers built by any company anywhere?

Is it to compare the operating system software that Apple makes to the operating system software that Microsoft makes?

Is it to do both?
 
I don't want to start a new thread so: Apple kills netbook hackintoshes with new update

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/hackintosh-atom-osx-snow-leopard,9038.html

This is interesting to me. As mentioned in the article this won't effect Psystar but the update goes after the only media device on the market Apple has not put out itself (a netbook). Is this reading too much into it or does this show they are definitely working on a tablet running on something other than the atom such as culv?
 
Policenaut said:
I don't want to start a new thread so: Apple kills netbook hackintoshes with new update

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/hackintosh-atom-osx-snow-leopard,9038.html

This is interesting to me. As mentioned in the article this won't effect Psystar but the update goes after the only media device on the market Apple has not put out itself (a netbook). Is this reading too much into it or does this show they are definitely working on a tablet running on something other than the atom such as culv?
Click to expand...

First, since Apple does not use the Atom processor themselves, and do not allow to install Mac OS X on non-Apple branded hardware, I fail to see why people seem to think Apple has some sort of obligation. I do not think Apple has 'broken' anything, as lots of commenters put it, since there was nothing there to begin with. Again, lots of people seem to forget that Apple is a hardware vendor first and foremost, and only bundles its hardware with their own OS to make a better overall computer package (in their opinion, and that of most of their customers).

Second, in my opinion, Apple has put out two devices that fulfill the advertised purpose of netbooks, namely mobile computing: The iPhone and the iPod touch. The problem here seem to be that people do not see and want netbooks as mobile computing devices, with a user interface, shape, size and form optimized for that, but that they want a cheap laptop which does everything as well as the larger, more expensive counterparts. As they want a cheap Mac. Which Apple does not make, since Apple believes neither they nor anyone else can make a cheap computer that fulfills Apple's quality standards as they understand them.
 
You are extrapolating into my post. I have said none of the things you speak of. I don't think Apple has any obligations to support Atom. OSX supported it for some reason (maybe they were going to use atom at some point but never got around to it) and then they removed that support with the latest update. I personally don't care but point it out because I think this is possibly a sign they have something relatively close to release (a tablet according to just about every mac rumor site) and they want to wipe out the hackintosh netbook community before its official announcement since that is too close to their own product. They have every right to. I am speculating on a possible reason for them pulling atom support now.

And netbooks are not comparable to iphones/touch. Why do you think there have been heavy rumors that Apple wants to take a share of the netbook market by making a tablet? They know they have a hole in their lineup and they think a tablet will plug it. I have my doubts. Personally I would much rather have an Apple netbook than a tablet but we'll see if it actually is released and at what price.
 
Policenaut said:
You are extrapolating into my post. I have said none of the things you speak of. I don't think Apple has any obligations to support Atom. OSX supported it for some reason (maybe they were going to use atom at some point but never got around to it) and then they removed that support with the latest update. I personally don't care but point it out because I think this is possibly a sign they have something relatively close to release (a tablet according to just about every mac rumor site) and they want to wipe out the hackintosh netbook community before its official announcement since that is too close to their own product. They have every right to. I am speculating on a possible reason for them pulling atom support now.

And netbooks are not comparable to iphones/touch. Why do you think there have been heavy rumors that Apple wants to take a share of the netbook market by making a tablet? They know they have a hole in their lineup and they think a tablet will plug it. I have my doubts. Personally I would much rather have an Apple netbook than a tablet but we'll see if it actually is released and at what price.
Click to expand...

I've been hearing Apple tablet rumors for a decade now. I'll believe it when it finally hits the market.
 
elgarak said:
Second, in my opinion, Apple has put out two devices that fulfill the advertised purpose of netbooks, namely mobile computing: The iPhone and the iPod touch. The problem here seem to be that people do not see and want netbooks as mobile computing devices, with a user interface, shape, size and form optimized for that, but that they want a cheap laptop which does everything as well as the larger, more expensive counterparts. As they want a cheap Mac. Which Apple does not make, since Apple believes neither they nor anyone else can make a cheap computer that fulfills Apple's quality standards as they understand them.
Click to expand...

This is patently false. The iPhone and iTouch are Apple's answer to PDAs and smart phones, not netbooks. There are several segments of the computer-using market that Apple has nothing to address, and it's those that Apple is criticized on. The netbook market is one of those segments.
 
rwp said:
I can put together the same or better components for a much lower price. Do you dispute this? Price certainly is an important element of any discussion comparing Apple computers to other computers, and building the same computer as an Apple-branded computer is a good place to start if you wish to compare only the operating systems.
Click to expand...

As has already been discussed, this is not as simple a prospect as one might think. There is far more to it than simply gathering up some parts and slapping them together. There are issues of quality and support, not to mention the overhead involved. If you're going to compare yourself to Apple, you need to start by defining exactly what it is they do. I guarantee it is a lot more than simply mounting a motherboard and plugging things in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom