Study Finds Macs Cost 2X Windows PCs

[LoboBrancoTimido]

Much better Tuan Nguyen, not a 10 but I'll give it a 5 out of respect.
Some advices, don't be so biased in your articles, I'm no PC fanboy, this stupid fanboy wars are boring and IMO are kids stuff (people please get a life).
I'm sure you wanted to write a nice article but you need to do research and show correct points with solid statements.
Some of my friends have Macs but I have 4 PCs (Oh boy! I'm must be a PC fanboy!!! -_- Not really but I'm a fanboy for my future wife ), I don't fight with them and I know they love their Macs and actually do work with them. They don't give a shit about style, they just want to work! Some Mac/PC fanboys around here only use their machines to IM, play videogames and search for porn, please go to 4chan, leave Tom's Hardware to people that know what they are doing. XD
IMO you can compare Macs/PCs,PCs running OSX(Thats Ilegal btw)and Macs running Windows if you show quality benchmarks!
Please use some decent pics, don't help THG go down the drain even more, this site is sucking more by the day.
I know you use PCs and Macs and thats a good thing so write a balanced article.
Anyway kudos for ya.

 

[mbmcavoy]

A quick search online shows that Macs generally remain in use longer than PCs, which leads to a lower cost of ownership.
Here's one:
Mac vs PC Life Span

"PCs have a short life span, and a large percentage--around half, according to IDC--are sold to businesses that dutifully recycle them at regular intervals.

Among home users, the epidemic of Windows malware and viruses prompts most users to just dump their existing PC and buy a new one rather than spend hundreds of dollars on tech support to clean it up and keep it working.

Maintaining a PC costs professional users around five times as much as a Mac.

The volume of new Windows PCs sold is therefore more impressive than the installed base of existing PCs. For Macs, the opposite is true. Macs tend to be kept in use longer, for a number of reasons:

• Apple extends support for older machines far longer with its operating system software.
• Older Macs are faster running a newer version of Mac OS X; older PCs can't even run the latest Windows.
• It is easier to support and maintain older Macs; older PCs rapidly become more expensive to maintain.
• Older Macs retain a high resale value, older PCs actually have a negative value after the recycling fees."

As a recent convert, I can attest to some of these.

In my own computer, my own sound card (Creative Audigy) is broken by a windows service pack, and there is no updated driver available that works. Creative actually took legal action against a guy who was fixing their drivers. If I want the full features I paid for to work, I need to pay for a new sound card again. Thanks Creative!

But what about the guy who just wants his computer to work? My father is retired, and not particularly computer-savvy. But he uses his computer to do CAD for his woodworking hobby, and is also working to compile a book.

Dad's Computer #1 (a couple months old): After telling tech support that he was unable to back up his valuable data to DVD-R, they told him to use the system restore disk. It failed to fix the problem, but also erased several months of work. That cost his several hundred dollars at a data recovery lab (mostly successful), and he had to threaten legal action to get them to take back the defective machine. Thanks, Fry's!

Dad's computer #2: His email can only spell check in French because Word 2008 breaks Outlook Express, and he didn't get the version with the full Outlook. It's a known issue with no solution, current or planned. (Except a download from a shady site - uh, wut?) Thanks Microsoft!

Old PCs suck. They are a money hole trying to keep them going, and an even bigger one to replace them frequently when they do get old.

I wanted to try out OS X without spending a lot. I spent a while searching on eBay for used Mac Minis. Old ones go for almost as much as new ones! In contrast, I have tried and failed to give away used Windows PCs of similar age. That does say something about the longevity of Macs...

 

[KITH]

What really bothered me about the last article was the writing. I was surprised to see the same author for both. This article is clear and free of the total utter crap. Good Job.

 

[Guest]

I may be crazy, but in the first article it seemed to me as though the author made a claim along the lines of "Macs aren't actually any more expensive than PCs." Then he only compared PC systems that would prove his point. In the comment section it was very clear that in every case you could find a significantly cheaper PC with the same or better specs.

Now he posts this article and states in the comment section that he's planning on doing "a deeper, more balanced look at the different platforms" by running bechmarks and such.

After showing such a clear bias why would anyone take those tests seriously? If he uses the same methods as he did for the first article, won't we only see the results of tests that favor the Mac? I don't see any way that a study like this could be remotely reliable unless Mr. Nguyen were to recuse himself from the process.

 

[hellcat]

Intel® Core?2 Quad Processor1 Q9300 (2.50GHz,1333MHz FSB, 6MB L2 cache)
Genuine Microsoft® Windows Vista® Home Premium (64-bit) SP1
6GB (6144MB) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM (2-2048MB & 2-1024MB modules)
640GB 7200rpm Serial ATA II/300 hard drive w/ 16MB cache4
18X DVD+/-R/RW SuperMulti Drive featuring Labelflash? Technology6
Stunning Jet-Black Finish with Copper Core Accents
NVIDIA® GeForce® 9800GT 512MB Factory Overclocked (Dual DVI, VGA adapter and TV Out)
Gateway® 15-in-1 media card reader with copy button5
Microsoft® Works 9.0, Microsoft® Money Essentials & Microsoft® Office Home and Student 2007 (60-day complimentary trial period)8
Cyberlink Power2Go
Cyberlink Label Printer for Windows Vista
Gateway 104+ Elite Keyboard
56K PCI Data/Fax Modem
Systemboard with Intel® G33 Chipset
USB Optical 2-Button Wheel Mouse
Microsoft® Windows Vista® Home Premium Media (64-bit)
400-Watt Power Supply
Norton 360 All-in-One Security? 2008 (60-day trial with live updates)7
Gateway® 2.0 USB Speakers
1 Year Parts and Labor Limited Warranty

Price: $1,149.99
This is a system you can get at Best Buy, its a Gateway system


( 800 Watt -- XION SuperNova XON-800F14R-201 Power Supply Quad SLI Ready )
( [=== Quad Core ===] Intel Core 2 Quad Processor Q6600 (4x 2.4GHz/8MB L2 Cache/1066FSB) )
Motherboard ( [SLI] Asus P5N-T Deluxe NVIDIA nForce 780i SLI Chipset w/7.1 Sound, Gb LAN, S-ATA Raid, USB 2.0, IEEE-1394, 3-Way P 3-Way SLI & EPU Technology )
Memory ( 4 GB [2 GB X2] DDR2-800 PC6400 Memory Module Corsair-Value or Major Brand )
( NVIDIA GeForce 9800GT 512MB w/DVI + TV Out Video )
( 500 GB HARD DRIVE [Serial-ATA-II, 3Gb, 7200 RPM, 16M Cache] )
[USB 2.0/eSATA] ( None )
20X Dual Format/Double Layer DVD±R/±RW + CD-R/RW Drive Black )
( 3D Premium Surround Sound Onboard )
( 600W PMPO 3 PCS Super Bass Subwoofer Speaker System )
( Onboard LAN Network (Gb or 10/100) )
( LCD Monitor ViewSonic 19" Widescreen VX1932wm TFT LCD Monitor /w ClearMotiv 2MS Broadcast-Quality Video )
( 12-In-1 Internal Flash Media Card Reader/Writer Black )
( Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate + [Free 60-Day !!!] Microsoft Office 2007(Word, Excel, Outlook, PowerPoint, Access ....) 64-Bit )
( Warranty Service Standard 3-Year Limited Warranty + Lifetime Technical Support )

This system is from Ibuypower

Price: $1,655.00


I heard Steve Jobs said he didn't care about gaming and thought it didn't care if Macs played games. If this is true they'll never give more options. See the options they have now are fine for them because they don't have to do much testing (and writing drivers) to make sure what works for Mac and what doesn't, or paying a company to make a product that works well with Mac. Macs specs are sparse because they work well with the OS, to add more options to hardware would mean spending more money on R&D and most Mac people are happy with the way things are. People have gripes about everything Apple. The Iphone doesn't do certain things (cut and paste) that other phones do. You can only download music from Itunes with the Ipod while most other media players you can use many different systems. People gripe that the Ipod doesn't have an FM tuner (which I could care less about). Apple TV doesn't have a TV tuner.

The thing is Apple fans are happy to deal with whatever Apple makes. Thats fine, people love Apple, and who am I to say their brainwashed or dumb? I have an Ipod and I like it. I wouldn't buy an Iphone (mostly because of AT&T's pricing with email and internet). Right now I wouldn't buy a Mac because I'm happy with my PC. I can get a good gaming PC for under $2000 which is awesome, plus their are thousands of games for it. Now what if PC gaming goes down the tubes and Consoles take over 100%? Then maybe I'd go with a lower end Mac. Lower end Macs and lower end PC's pricing isn't that big of a difference. Its when you get to the higher and where you can find cheaper if you look. Dell has always been expensive (and I think overrated). If I wanted to get a really high end PC I'd go Alienware and get their $5000+ monster. Best bang for the buck right now is PC.

 

[castagnolac]

My suggestion to Apple would be to stop using Xeon processors. Use Q6600s - they are under 200 bucks each.

 

[spartanii]

Oh god, that price misconception article was a pandoras box. The cats out of the bag, the lines have been drawn its time for WAR!

 

[Steveorevo]

@mbmcavoy

I have to agree with you mbmcavoy. I'm a long time Windows user/developer. I'm in the business of creating graphic engines (3D and 2D), have designed various extensions for existing software (Adobe, formerly Macromedia, etc.). I've done a fair share of DirectX development, etc. I've only just started to open up to OSX to gain a larger market share. I first went to buy a used mac that was 5 years old to realize that they tend to keep there price quite well. One look at Macofalltrades.com and its obvious. You'd never see a PC hold its value, because they don't. I thought PCs, are like cars and are NOT INVESTMENTS. You pay for what you use, but I believe thats only true for PCs running Windows. A Mac is another story.

This is also why you pay a premium price for a Mac. The drivers and software are fine tuned to the hardware and because of the tighter relationship they are better supported and unlike PCs WORK. This extends their usefullness. After testing OpenGL on an old mac, I can see why Apples hold true. Turns out that it was cheaper for my to just buy a new Mac as the old ones were just a few hundred less. This would never be the case for me in the PC world. By the time my ATI drivers quit bluescreening my PC, a new card would be out from NVidia or ATI that would outperform the prior (as well as the Mac equivilents). But guess what? They'd have a whole new set of glitches I'd have to accomodate. So I can have cutting edge hardware in the PC/Windows world today that sorta works (or just enough to give M$ my dough), or I can have something 1 year older that DOES work. Hmmm...

Thats the problem with Microsoft, its never great is just 'good enough' and never anything more. I'll be replacing my top of line PC soon, like I do every 2 to 3 years but I'd still have to agree that Macs, unlike PCs, just work. If I wasn't a software developer that had to cater to the masses, but rather a 'user' that had to get stuff done, like video editing. I'd be using a mac to edit and pc as nothing more then an overpriced blue ray burner (Apple has a biff with Blueray -but thats politics).

 

[timaahhh]

[citation][nom]tuannguyen[/nom]Thanks for the feedback guys. Much appreciated. There's a new article coming down the pipe, where I take a bunch of comments into account and include them right into the article. This way, the article will have several takes from several different users and angles. I think this'll help anyone new to the site as well.@JimmyJimmington: Apologies for not putting a retraction into the current article. It's already up. This is why I didn't modify the old articles either. What's written is written, I can only move forward with the feedback everyone gave me. The followup article to the one posted today should address your concern.Going to go out on a limb here and make my direct email available to you all. Feel free to send in any comments/suggestions/more death threats/suicide suggestions:tuannguyen at bestofmedia dot com.This way, you guys can directly contribute to content before it even hits the live site. Hope this is a positive step forward./ Tuan[/citation]
I did read the last article you posted that was the cause of so much controversy. I didn't agree with the PC choices let alone the single vendor choice of comparison. I did think it was cherry picking. I think the Tom's community, though usually a bit over exaggerated, did a good job of responding to not only yours but the many articles Tom's publishes. I am glad you are responding and changing based on points your readers make. Keep it up I look forward to the next one.

 

[onearmedscissorb]

There they go again, just comparing one overpriced computer to another...and the result:

SURPRISE! They're both still overpriced.

 

[Guest]

Just trying to remind everyone - a computer is more than its processor, video card, memory, and hard drive space. One must also consider the pieces of hardware working together. Apple selects chipsets built specifically to work with their components, which are selected to work specifically with one another.

I'm not saying PC makers offerings aren't nice - they deserve a lot more credit than us Apple "fanboys" give them. The trouble I always seem to run into on a PC is driver issue this, DLL issue that (which at face value one might say is in the software, not the hardware, but in reality these software issues are rooted in hardware incompatibility.) And I take care of my various Windows machines with impeccable detail.

Mac OS X is not without its flaws - I have gripes with it that I growl at each day. It's just easier to get over them, as they're generally just features that aren't as "simple" as they should be (thereby just taking a little more time to take advantage of).

It's a matter of preference nowadays. You'll get exactly what you pay for, no matter how much you pay, and your experience with the machine will reflect that.

Just my take.

 

[royalcrown]

[citation][nom]Sandbags[/nom]1) anyone who buys upgrades direct from the manufacturer is a moron. Buy the parts yourself. Even from Dell they're overpriced...2) Mac has a BIG enthusiast community, it;s commonly reffered to as Hollywood. Just take a look inside any TV, movie, or advertising studio and you'll find tweaked out macs all over the place.3) Mac targets the average user, not the low end user, and not the gamer. Less than 10% of people play hard core games on ANY computer, and few of them buy hardware that you can't get in a mac. I beta test and play a LOT of games, but even I have a sub-$200 gaming card. Unless you're a frame rate tweaker, the most popular games (WoW, etc) play VERY well on a mac, under OS X or Windows. 4) people buy Macs not for the hardware, but for iLife and OS X. If you don't want the features of iLife, and don't need "midrange" performance, then go buy a cheap ass system and you'll be happy with it. The hardware, spec for spec, as THG pointed out yesterday, is competitive, and buying upgrades doesn't count since very few people actually do (most Apple sales are in the retail store, not Apple.com, and upgrade options in the store are MUCH more reasonable, if you don't just do them yourself...)[/citation]

sandbags...you're full of crap...How is the single quad mac pro competitive on price at 2200 minus display ?!

 

[MU_Engineer]

[citation][nom]bardia[/nom]This article is a bit more balanced, but I still have issues with it. The author still characterizes people who find Apple expensive as either 1) Hardcore Gamers, or 2) "Loyal Windows Users.Many of us don't fit in either category.[/citation]

Most certainly. All of my machines run Debian Linux regardless of the hardware as Debian will run on literally anything with a CPU and RAM. So it's just a "how much power can I get for X dollars" question and Apple always loses. Sure, you can price out a Dell Precision with a several-year on-site service warranty and ISV certifications that tack on the better part of $1000 and have it somewhat comparable to a base-model Mac Pro in price. But comparing a Mac Pro to a workstation with equal performance that you build yourself is a losing proposition. The author did a MacPro vs. homebuild and had them somewhat close, but that's because he tried to exactly duplicate the MacPro, down to adding in more than $50 just in FireWire cards and putting it in a very high-end Lian Li case. You don't have to do that. You can put the same processors in a Xeon 5200 chipset board and use normal registered DDR2 instead of pricey FB-DIMMs that are just hotter-running and more expensive. You also can put it in a case that costs less than $300. The list goes on. Just because Apple doesn't offer to leave out something doesn't mean you can't consider dropping it in doing your own builds if you do not use it.

[citation]Tuan may like Apple's offerings a lot. Great, I loved my ibook, and love my father's macbook... but seriously, I expect an editor of THG to have a little more common sense when it comes to the intelligence of his readers. [/citation]

Many Apple users have his attitude- they "drank the Kool-Aid" and now have to show the unwashed masses how superior their computers/phones/portable music players are. They are unwilling to accept that Apple isn't the perfect answer to everything computing/phone/music player problem and insist that Apples have fewer problems than everybody else or even are perfect. They seem as if they have been brainwashed, hence the term "Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field." Unfortunately the majority of Macintosh users I know happen to be like that. You can be running an OS that is very, very similar to theirs and not particularly have the highest opinion of Microsoft and *still* run afoul of them just because your hardware doesn't have the Apple logo on it.

My advice: whenever you hear somebody say "PC," just walk the other way. The "PC" bit is a very good way to identify an Apple zealot as everybody else says "computer" or "machine" when referring to a personal computer. Don't bother to argue with them as you're as likely to convince them of anything as you are to convince a rock.

 

[MU_Engineer]

[citation][nom]jlange[/nom]Just trying to remind everyone - a computer is more than its processor, video card, memory, and hard drive space. One must also consider the pieces of hardware working together. Apple selects chipsets built specifically to work with their components, which are selected to work specifically with one another.[/citation]

Wow. Apple is such a genius for figuring out how to do that! Maybe in ten years the rest of the industry will do something similar to prevent people from putting incompatible parts together. Maybe they will make it physically impossible to use components that are not compatible with each other by altering the type of slot or socket said parts use. Because I just hate it when I accidentally put a Q9450 in an i810 board and it doesn't work correctly.

[citation]I'm not saying PC makers offerings aren't nice - they deserve a lot more credit than us Apple "fanboys" give them. The trouble I always seem to run into on a PC is driver issue this, DLL issue that (which at face value one might say is in the software, not the hardware, but in reality these software issues are rooted in hardware incompatibility.)[/citation]

Yes, it's totally a hardware issue, because a PCIe x1 card only works in *some* PCIe x1 slots, yessir.

[citation]Mac OS X is not without its flaws - I have gripes with it that I growl at each day. It's just easier to get over them, as they're generally just features that aren't as "simple" as they should be (thereby just taking a little more time to take advantage of).[/citation]

It's a feature, not a bug!

[citation]It's a matter of preference nowadays. You'll get exactly what you pay for, no matter how much you pay, and your experience with the machine will reflect that.Just my take.[/citation]

Then why is my PIII Celeron HTPC working well when I got it off a trash pile? I didn't pay a single cent for it.

 

[randomizer]

[citation][nom]TEAMSWITCHER[/nom]Software developers take note, Windows users like cheap hardware and if you want to sell software to the masses, you better make sure that it runs well on ho-hum system specs.[/citation]
Not a fan of todays "next-gen" software? Join the club, I could rant about that all day

 

[ic00]

Having read an article like this time and time again, I'm wondering why authors like to use Dell pricing trying to make some points between PC and Mac for more or less? THG is a hardware site, why would let Dell tell what your options are? Are authors just get lazy or incapable of building systems nowadays?

For any DIYer, and being one for 10 years myself, we all know there're greater options than Dell could offer. It's easy to find something to compare to, but not smart making it a standard.

Don't lose the DIY spirit.

 

[royalcrown]

[citation][nom]Steveorevo[/nom]@mbmcavoy I have to agree with you mbmcavoy. I'm a long time Windows user/developer. I'm in the business of creating graphic engines (3D and 2D), have designed various extensions for existing software (Adobe, formerly Macromedia, etc.). I've done a fair share of DirectX development, etc. I've only just started to open up to OSX to gain a larger market share. I first went to buy a used mac that was 5 years old to realize that they tend to keep there price quite well. One look at Macofalltrades.com and its obvious. You'd never see a PC hold its value, because they don't. I thought PCs, are like cars and are NOT INVESTMENTS. You pay for what you use, but I believe thats only true for PCs running Windows. A Mac is another story. This is also why you pay a premium price for a Mac. The drivers and software are fine tuned to the hardware and because of the tighter relationship they are better supported and unlike PCs WORK. This extends their usefullness. After testing OpenGL on an old mac, I can see why Apples hold true. Turns out that it was cheaper for my to just buy a new Mac as the old ones were just a few hundred less. This would never be the case for me in the PC world. By the time my ATI drivers quit bluescreening my PC, a new card would be out from NVidia or ATI that would outperform the prior (as well as the Mac equivilents). But guess what? They'd have a whole new set of glitches I'd have to accomodate. So I can have cutting edge hardware in the PC/Windows world today that sorta works (or just enough to give M$ my dough), or I can have something 1 year older that DOES work. Hmmm...Thats the problem with Microsoft, its never great is just 'good enough' and never anything more. I'll be replacing my top of line PC soon, like I do every 2 to 3 years but I'd still have to agree that Macs, unlike PCs, just work. If I wasn't a software developer that had to cater to the masses, but rather a 'user' that had to get stuff done, like video editing. I'd be using a mac to edit and pc as nothing more then an overpriced blue ray burner (Apple has a biff with Blueray -but thats politics). [/citation]

and it's who's fault you felt the need to update you graphics card constantly ?on your pc ? you coulda kept the old one. Let's see you get a new card for the mac...oh wait there isn't a new card to have driver problems with. BTW, if you have pc's that have all these problems, you have a garbage pc...even a low end model (reasonably thought out) is hassle free for the most part.

 

[royalcrown]

[citation][nom]mbmcavoy[/nom]A quick search online shows that Macs generally remain in use longer than PCs, which leads to a lower cost of ownership.Here's one:Mac vs PC Life Span"PCs have a short life span, and a large percentage--around half, according to IDC--are sold to businesses that dutifully recycle them at regular intervals. Among home users, the epidemic of Windows malware and viruses prompts most users to just dump their existing PC and buy a new one rather than spend hundreds of dollars on tech support to clean it up and keep it working. Maintaining a PC costs professional users around five times as much as a Mac. The volume of new Windows PCs sold is therefore more impressive than the installed base of existing PCs. For Macs, the opposite is true. Macs tend to be kept in use longer, for a number of reasons: • Apple extends support for older machines far longer with its operating system software.• Older Macs are faster running a newer version of Mac OS X; older PCs can't even run the latest Windows.• It is easier to support and maintain older Macs; older PCs rapidly become more expensive to maintain.• Older Macs retain a high resale value, older PCs actually have a negative value after the recycling fees."As a recent convert, I can attest to some of these.In my own computer, my own sound card (Creative Audigy) is broken by a windows service pack, and there is no updated driver available that works. Creative actually took legal action against a guy who was fixing their drivers. If I want the full features I paid for to work, I need to pay for a new sound card again. Thanks Creative!But what about the guy who just wants his computer to work? My father is retired, and not particularly computer-savvy. But he uses his computer to do CAD for his woodworking hobby, and is also working to compile a book.Dad's Computer #1 (a couple months old): After telling tech support that he was unable to back up his valuable data to DVD-R, they told him to use the system restore disk. It failed to fix the problem, but also erased several months of work. That cost his several hundred dollars at a data recovery lab (mostly successful), and he had to threaten legal action to get them to take back the defective machine. Thanks, Fry's!Dad's computer #2: His email can only spell check in French because Word 2008 breaks Outlook Express, and he didn't get the version with the full Outlook. It's a known issue with no solution, current or planned. (Except a download from a shady site - uh, wut?) Thanks Microsoft!Old PCs suck. They are a money hole trying to keep them going, and an even bigger one to replace them frequently when they do get old.I wanted to try out OS X without spending a lot. I spent a while searching on eBay for used Mac Minis. Old ones go for almost as much as new ones! In contrast, I have tried and failed to give away used Windows PCs of similar age. That does say something about the longevity of Macs...[/citation]

so how come my friends and I have woking pc's that are 5 years old ? could it be that your dad bought cheap oem junk (dell, hp, etc), if you buy a whole system for super cheap, guess what, cheap parts ! If you buy good parts for a low price, it runs forever.

 

[vladtepes]

WHATEVER!!! OSX86 works fine!!!

 

[vladtepes]

OH my: MY profile data: "Join date : 01/01/1970"
WTF?. Talk about 2k bug!!!
And OSX86 half the price, double the pleasure

 

[MrPeeCeeParts]

Gaming rigs do compete with Macs (price range) and you still get more performance for less money. So, even though I don't have any data to back this up, I'm positive that, worldwide, PCs priced in the Mac range (gaming rigs) outsell Macs.

 

[MrPeeCeeParts]

Also, afer reading all the comments I don't think anyone gave any tips for the upcoming article (maybe they all sent emails instead?)

There are several things I'd like to see:
- As some have already pointed out, pricing a mac against a single model from a single manufacturer doesn't really say much. Pricing it against the top three sellers (for example) AND against a do-it-yourself computer would be more enlightening. I think anyone already knows the outcome, but anyway. Also compare them with the most basic optiones and with some serious hardware extras (yes, I know Macs' RAM is awfuly overpriced, but some people are just computer illiterate and don't even know how to install those -not my case -)

-I'd like to see a comparition in the three most significant segments:
+ "high end" towers
+ "normal" desktops
+ laptops

-And last but not least (and I really think many people would love to see this), some old school Tom's Hardware benchmarks. Since you mentioned you were planning to put OSX on a PC it sounds like you had already planned this; still, it's worth mentioning it! How will the Mac PCs perform in Windows (I guess Vista "should" be used, although my all time favourite is XP 64bit) against their opponents? Pro's & cons with finding drivers, etc. How do the PC's with OSX installed perform against the Mac PCs? Difficulties found when preparing the setup, etc.

And that's about it.

 

[Steveorevo]

ITS ABOUT THE SOFTWARE STUPID!

[citation][nom]royalcrown[/nom]and it's who's fault you felt the need to update you graphics card constantly ?on your pc ? you coulda kept the old one.[/citation]

No I couldn't. Windows Vista's 'aero' needs more hardware to make up for crappy PC/Windows software.

Intel Hardware or not, Mac drivers go through more testing and compatibility because it is a proprietary system. Ironically leveraging technologies like 'OpenGL' vs DirectX (isn't that proprietary?).

This is why even OpenGL on a Mac Mini with hardly any 3D acceleration using a crappy GMA graphics chip appears to do its desktop magic as if it were a higher end NVidia system. The Mac holds its value because the software writers did a better job optimizing their code for the 'cheap' hardware. This is the same reason why so many PC users running Vista were burned when they found out that Vista 'aero' didn't fly on their old PC hardware that lacked 3D acceleration. Its because M$ bloatware relied on users having to purchase more hardware to accommodate their slacker software writers and line hardware manufacturer's pockets. It resulted in a class action lawsuit because of false advertising... does anybody remember this?!

Its not about the hardware, its about the software. This is what you are paying for when you pay for that Mac 'premium'. True 64 bit vs 32 bit. You will never see a a Windows XP box that can address more the 4gigs of memory unless its Server XP64 or Vista 64bit. But that'll just run your 'WinTel' 32bit software slower. So whats the advantage for Windows users? Its no wonder why so many PC users like myself are so touchy on this subject. Until Adobe starts cranking out killer apps that leverage the new 64bit Vista on PC hardware, everyone in the PC world will just have to hold their breath and be envious. Or try to justify how many dollars they've saved. You get what you pay for.

However, those of us that can afford a Mac get to run applications like Maya and Final Cut that outperform their PC equivalents. So the bottom line is that if you use computers to just play games ... get a PC. BUT if you want to get real work done faster (or play games now that BootCamp allows you to downgrade to XP) buy a Mac.

You can always build a 'faster PC' to run MS-DOS too if thats your bag, but if you want something more then 'cool' but actually functional, I'd say go with the Mac. This is coming from a latest DELL XPS user who writes software for both platforms. I now use my Mini to manage my personal data because it works without having to reboot every week (less 'malicious code updates').

 

[Houndsteeth]

1) Apple doesn't design computers for gamers. This is true beyond even a shadow of a doubt. They do run games fairly well, but this is why you don't see an options with a huge video card and just enough processor to run it. This is also why you don't see a large number of after-market video card retailers for the Macintosh.

2) Apple doesn't design computers for the DIY enthusiast crowd. I know, because I am one of these (as well as owning a Mac for my 9-5 job that pays the bills). You can "hack" OS X to run on one of your frankenboxen if you want to, but it is an entirely grey operation (ie, you are violating the EULA, but is it really enforceable if you aren't doing it for profit?). I have, and surprisingly, it ran pretty good (I even had sound and OpenGL accelerated video after finding the right drivers). True sign of an enthusiast, to make something run where it shouldn't.

3) I did say I work with a Mac for my 9-5 job (self-employed as a freelance UI programmer). I really appreciate having a stable work environment that I can rely on working the same way every time, no matter which application I am running. I am also running multiple guest operating systems using VMWare Fusion in order to test my work on multiple platforms. Granted, I could probably do this on a Dell or HP workstation, but I would pay at least the same price for the hardware (I regularly need more than 20 GB of RAM, and gaming "enthusiast" motherboards only support up to 8, so I require a Workstation-class level of hardware). And I wouldn't get the intangible benefits that I appreciate from using a very refined operating system and development environment, as well as access to several graphic and audio applications that I use day in, day out.

If you don't like Macs, don't buy them. If you feel a righteous zeal zing through your body every time you hear/see and Apple advertisement, and you feel you absolutely MUST start a crusade to remove Apple from the planet, by all means, post with rabid enthusiasm. Just remember that Intel, IBM, and even Microsoft rely upon Apple to innovate the industry so they can follow the way. If you eliminate that piece of the industry, you will undoubtedly stifle innovation, as much as if AMD were to leave the CPU market to Intel. And we all know what would happen to Intel processors if that were to happen...

 

[royalcrown]

[citation][nom]Houndsteeth[/nom]1) Apple doesn't design computers for gamers. This is true beyond even a shadow of a doubt. They do run games fairly well, but this is why you don't see an options with a huge video card and just enough processor to run it. This is also why you don't see a large number of after-market video card retailers for the Macintosh.2) Apple doesn't design computers for the DIY enthusiast crowd. I know, because I am one of these (as well as owning a Mac for my 9-5 job that pays the bills). You can "hack" OS X to run on one of your frankenboxen if you want to, but it is an entirely grey operation (ie, you are violating the EULA, but is it really enforceable if you aren't doing it for profit?). I have, and surprisingly, it ran pretty good (I even had sound and OpenGL accelerated video after finding the right drivers). True sign of an enthusiast, to make something run where it shouldn't.3) I did say I work with a Mac for my 9-5 job (self-employed as a freelance UI programmer). I really appreciate having a stable work environment that I can rely on working the same way every time, no matter which application I am running. I am also running multiple guest operating systems using VMWare Fusion in order to test my work on multiple platforms. Granted, I could probably do this on a Dell or HP workstation, but I would pay at least the same price for the hardware (I regularly need more than 20 GB of RAM, and gaming "enthusiast" motherboards only support up to 8, so I require a Workstation-class level of hardware). And I wouldn't get the intangible benefits that I appreciate from using a very refined operating system and development environment, as well as access to several graphic and audio applications that I use day in, day out.If you don't like Macs, don't buy them. If you feel a righteous zeal zing through your body every time you hear/see and Apple advertisement, and you feel you absolutely MUST start a crusade to remove Apple from the planet, by all means, post with rabid enthusiasm. Just remember that Intel, IBM, and even Microsoft rely upon Apple to innovate the industry so they can follow the way. If you eliminate that piece of the industry, you will undoubtedly stifle innovation, as much as if AMD were to leave the CPU market to Intel. And we all know what would happen to Intel processors if that were to happen...[/citation]

Innovate as in firewire ? we have that too, albeit 1394 a and not b mostly. I don't hate macs, i just think all this, pc's are unreliable is just as much a bunch of bs as macs are cheaper arguments. A poorly built pc will run like crap, and a decent pc, decent components, correctly thought out is pretty damn reliable as well. As far as AERO, it runs fine if you don't have the wrong chipset (like intel pressured microsoft to "certify" crap integrated low end chips instead of what MS thought was the minimum spec. It runs just fine on the new igps anyhow.