Study Finds Macs Cost 2X Windows PCs

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
The author isn't Rob Wright, he does a lot of the game stuff.

MACs are all about flash, so of course they're more expensive, they have flash. Personally, I'm not into flash, and I like windows more than OS X, they both have a bunch of useless features that I don't really need anyway, and sometimes they actually make doing practical things slower.
 
[citation][nom]falchard[/nom]2 letters, HP. Thats why the prices for PC are so low. There are also other venders who sell PCs that low. Tigersdirect, and buypowerPC(even though they are shit).[/citation]
tiger sell parts.
 
Good job Tuan. I'm glad you are taking some of the constructive criticisms from your last article while taking a stand against the more ignorant comments.
My faith is restored.
 
[citation][nom]San Pedro[/nom]The author isn't Rob Wright, he does a lot of the game stuff. MACs are all about flash, so of course they're more expensive, they have flash. Personally, I'm not into flash, and I like windows more than OS X, they both have a bunch of useless features that I don't really need anyway, and sometimes they actually make doing practical things slower. [/citation]

I know, bur sometimes Rob jumps in an he can fight dirty 😀 I give him creds, he can hold his own !

Also I thin the way ppl bashed Tuan on a personal level is BS and they should all be banned ! I mean come on, firing a guy for his opinion, especially when yes, there are big areas where parts can vary or not, and if he happens to think x case or x ps is equivalent, it's no cause to be an a$$ just because we disagree with him.
 
So which is it? A few days ago the mac "price myth" was busted, but today, they cost twice as much. Why even publish this article? Are you trying to make amends for the last Mac piece, or simply trying to confuse and enrage your readers? Seriously, was there an change in the editor position at Tom's? The mix of editorializing, with stats selected to fit your argument is blatant CRAP! You used to be able to implicitly trust the word given on this site. It may as well be a tech tabloid now. My neighborhood newspaper has more sense than to publish writing this amateurish.

Why don't you thoroughly benchmark a few mac systems, and then build PCs with the same capabilities, instead of bullshit comparisons?

Why not just nip this bush league crap in the bud, stop publishing this author, and apologize for becoming a lousy website.

There's a reason Tom's Hardware never sees any mac hardware on it. BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ANY! Why even bring up a system on a hardware page, that is for all purposes NOT UPGRADEABLE?

What kind of business is this ready to alienate its audience? MACs are NOT for enthusiasts. They are for designers who don't give a shit about why their computer works, and Emo kids at coffee shops.

I certainly hope your sponsors are keeping tabs on the site much these days, or you guys may have to get real jobs soon.
 
Tuan you also need to a Xeon (775) quad core system vs the 1 cpu mac pro system as well. Dell and others have them. The 1 cpu mac pro comes with a lot high end server / work station hardware that add a lot of higher cost to the system vs a high end 1 cpu desktop / work station system.


 
A highly configurable and affordable mainstream desktop system would help Apple squelch the Mac knock-offs. A dual or quad core Intel CPU, 2-8GB of DDR2-800, and an upper-mainstream graphics card could compile a system that would greatly increase their market share by appeasing a greater number of peoples wallets (obviously right?). With a greater market share, Mac gaming could actually move away from laughable to acceptable by encouraging more developers to add Mac binaries.

-OS X and Vista user/programmer
 
Tuan

Actually it's not contradictory at all since you are reporting that another group disputed your view that Macs are around the same cost. The problem is that people can't diastiguish that another group says x vs that you actually said it. All your doing is reporting what they said, but some ppl's poor context skills and feeble minds cant distinguish that (not including us skimmers of course 😉)


 
You guys complain waaaaaaayyyyy too much. This mac vs pc fanboy is tiresome.
 
[citation][nom]gandalfthewizard[/nom]You guys complain waaaaaaayyyyy too much. This mac vs pc fanboy is tiresome. [/citation]

Don't say that! We need to keep it that way, like APPLE with their ads full of BS......(Yeah i can create boring clips on my MAC......You know what i can do the same on a PC......But who cares)......
 
The average customers knows **** about technicalities when its time to get a new computer so you can say anything and is gonna buy it......Like APPLE policies these days.....
 
@TUAN...

Okay Tuan answer a question for me....

Why do yo9u keep insisting that the "base" Mac pro has 2 quads ? I went to Apples OWN sight and according to them, you can get a "base" mac pro with ONE processor, one hard drive, and a non workstation card. Yes it's STILL part of the "Pro" line and not the Imac line !

http://store.apple.com/us_smb_78313/browse/home/shop_mac/family/mac_pro

configured as follows:




Processor
o One 2.8GHZ Quad-Core Intel Xeon

Memory
o 2GB (2x1GB)


RAID Card
o None

Hard Drive – Bay 1
o 320GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s


Hard Drive – Bay 2
o None

Hard Drive – Bay 3
o None

Hard Drive – Bay 4
o None

Graphics
o ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB

Optical Drive

o One 16x SuperDrive

Apple Displays
o None

Apple Mouse
o Apple Mighty Mouse

Apple Keyboard and Documentation
o Apple Keyboard + User's Guide

Wireless Options
o None

Modem
o None

Fibre Channel Card
o None

Final Cut Express 4
o None

Aperture 2
o None

Logic Express 8
o None

AppleCare Protection Plan
o None

Mac OS X Server v10.5
o None

MobileMe Membership
o None

Xsan 2
o None

Summary
Purchase Information
Total

$2,299.00
* Ships: 2-4 business days
* Free Shipping
* Next business day delivery available

THIS is a "base" mac pro...and I left off the monitor so you could pick you own !



 
I like the fact that you took a lot of the comments from the other articles, looked into some facts regarding those claims and came out with an article on the opposite side of what you previously wrote. This is closer to journalism (sorta what THG is).

Not to nag but as others had stated you still only looked at Dell. And people are going to continually bring up the point that the PC market is about competition. You mentioned that you wrote this one up quickly in response to our comments - the response is taken with respect, but the effort and consideration may have been lacking due to your wanting to promptly respond. It's not always about speed, taking the time, even a few days to respond can really help the quality of your article and reduce your need to respond to comments like "why just Dell again" by cutting them off before they begin. Being bias in itself (though not as clearly in this article) is not bad, but you need to show that your bias comes with good reason and you took the time to examine other points of view and prove them to be false or whatever. It seemed clear to me you spent more time and effort on your last article and this was a quickie. Some combination of the two articles would have been better for driving your Mac point of view across in a more legit manner. You could have shown that perhaps although Macs are more expensive, there is perhaps good reasoning behind it that provides value.

Journalist in most forms rarely need to respond to their readers but in the new age of online Journalism it is common and actually a very neat part of it. However, my advice is to not respond quickly, but respond correctly.

To the general NPD data comments - I agree with you guys. I didn't see a link to the NPD source data but the reports intent may not be the same as we have here - price/performance. That's just sales data. What you should read from that data if simply that lower-end system met the needs of many people. They are perhaps buying computers or laptops for their children back to school, etc. The PC market offers many inexpensive models and Apple does not. NPD's data simply suggest that there is a huge gap in Apple's line up. This is something I believe the writer noticed as he points this out as a weakness in Apple's business model.
 
i won't bash the author for his opinion, or lack of thought, etc. that has been done more than needs be. however, i'll point out that not everyone buys a computer with the same criteria. some buy on pure hardware specs. some buy on a combo of specs and premium parts (many home-builts). some buy primarily on price. others on design. still others on how the hardware will fit with the software they plan to buy/use. there are others who like to buy based on customer service reputation. there are some customers who like the peace of mind of being able to walk into a store to have their computer serviced or talk to a person about issues they are having. point is, all of these reasons to buy a computer can't be boiled down to just a simple up-front cost of a system. what do you get when you buy a $550 Dell desktop? cheap parts, relatively average to poor support (several surveys to back this up), average looks, no walk-in capability (kiosks don't count - really), but a computer that can get the job done most of the time. what about a $1000 Sony desktop? you get average to above average support, mix of cheap and average parts, decent looks, no walk-in capability, and a computer that gets the job done most of the time. what about a $1500 Mac? best-in-the-business support, walk-in capability in most major cities with actually helpful/passionate employees, decent and above average parts, excellent design both functionally and visually, and a computer that gets the job done a little better than most of the time - maybe even close to 99% of the time. i've bought and used Windows-based computers for over 20 years. in the past 4 years i've bought an iBook, mac Mini, and Mac Pro. have i overpayed? not in my opinion. i'm sure some folks think i have. but the up-front cost is not the only cost i consider when buying. my time is worth something. my frustrations (or lack thereof) are worth something. quietness is worth something (how loud is that $550 Dell?). it ain't just about up-front cost for me. having said all that, i respect that not everyone has the same priorities for buying a computer as i do and that price plays a larger role for some folks just as design, quietness, or expandability play a large role for others. this is why we have choices.
 
I read the other two articles and the comments for the second one...all thirty pages of them last I checked...and I've got to give Tuan props for posting this. It isn't quite a retraction, but I think everybody can agree that it took real guts to do this. I agree with several of the points in this article, including the one about Apple's awkward stock hardware configurations. (Incidentally, this is a point made by countless Tom's Hardware readers in their comments on the last article.) Looking through the comments on this article, I'm glad to see that readers have generally let up on the author this time around. I'm not sure if there might have been an exchange between Tuan and the editors on this subject (I'm just sayin'...), but whatever happened, I was more than a little amused to see this article appear in place of the previous one. :)
 
[citation][nom]tuannguyen[/nom]
I absolutely agree, just not much time today to do a grand follow up with more in depth digging and research. I wanted to do a quick 1 pager follow up concerning the over priced complaint. So I only really had time to look at Dell.However, since Dell and others like it compete in similar spaces, I would not be surprised if the outcome of other manufacturers presented the same picture, that: Apple is getting mopped up in these categories for desktops:- Same or better hardware for less- Apple has no enthusiast or gaming options- Even in mid-range options, Apple has none (so far)- In low cost areas, Apple has some offerings but stab themselves in the foot by locking down the ability to upgrade either the hardware or the display (i'd never buy an iMac for this reason. A display is a critical investment area that can and most often times outlasts the life of the computer its attached to)- Apple saying it's serious about gaming, but none of its hardware configurations indicate so (that's why I still play games on my PC)Apple may be cheaper at times in some areas, but from the looks of it (I looked!), it's really getting a beating in the desktop space -- arguably the biggest space of them all./ Tuan[/citation]
Very well said... Not very many games even bother to support mac.
 
[citation][nom]acoote[/nom]Won't you have the Apple police knocking at your door, shoving their EULA in your face?I also thought there was some way in which apple locked its OS to its machines by means of a hardware code... i.e. you would require some sort of emulation to get it running on stock standard PC hardware. I vaguely remember reading about this, maybe I'm wrong...[/citation]

I've read the same thing. I guess it's pretty obvious, otherwise people all over would be freely breaking the EULA. It's a special addition the motherboard, if I remember correctly, that the installation process looks for before installing the OS. Anybody with more knowledge about this please feel free to correct me where I'm wrong and enlighten us all.
 
Oh, and to add to my previous post, I think there's a loophole in the EULA protecting Apple developers and--if I've got this correct--academic demonstrations (for lack of a better term) of concept regarding an installation of OS X on non-Apple hardware. So all they've got to do is get an "Apple developer" involved in the project and they should be golden.
 
This is crazy. First we have the "macs are cheaper than pcs?!?!?" article, and after days of fully justifiable rants by the readers, we have this "apology" article. THG is becoming a blog. More reputable websites have editors that filter out articles such as these.
 
[citation][nom]tuannguyen[/nom]No, because the 513 has just the same specs and an even bigger gap between it and the iMac. This indicates a even better value for the end user if they went for the 513. The 513 is about $500 cheaper than the iMac for essentially the same internal hardware and is even cheaper than the 530 you mentioned. I don't think I'm being biased this time around. / Tuan[/citation]

If you look at the spec's I quoted you would have noticed that the $849 price comes with the monitor while the Inspiron 513 is $749 without a monitor and $983. So the better equipied (has dedicated graphics) Inspiron 530 still costs less than the 513 and is a lot better than the base iMac.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom