The Apple Mac Cost Misconception

[continuation]

So now a fanboy's blatantly biased pean to Apple is considered an "article" on tom's hardware?

AS others have pointed out, cherry picking the most expensive PC components to jack up the price of the comparison PC just so you could claim that Mac wasn't overpriced does nothing to boost your credibility.

A $230 Lian Li case - are you kidding me?? Why not go for a $10,000 gold-plated case with diamonds - that way you can claim that Mac is biggest bargain in human history.

Go to Apple Store and configure any Mac, I guarantee I can configure a similar PC with a much lower price. No it won't have a Lian Li case, but what purpose does a Lian Li case serve besides sitting there and looking pretty - which by the way is kinda the whole point of a Mac.

And the person who's "absolutely wrong" is you, the author. Mac OS is absolutely a proprietary OS.
Can I access the source code of Mac OS?
Can I modify Mac OS source code?
Can I get Mac OS fixes from anyone other than Apple?
Does anyone other than Apple have any say in how Mac OS is developed?

The answers to all the above questions are NO. That means Mac OS is proprietary. Simple as that.

 

[Guest]

I actually think the cost comparison is somewhat valid, although I still can't say I would ever buy either. What is Apple if not a boutique PC assembler much like Alienware, Falcon, etc. They are overpriced but all have a distinctive style...and you can upgrade them for significant amounts of money that would be better spent at an online parts store. If you walk in with a Macbook, there is no mistaking it....if you walk in with an Area-51, there is no mistaking it. I think the XPS comparo was a mistake though.

Either way, I can't see me putting out that kind of money based on what I do and what I want...I don't need the style component and like building and configuring my own PCs...if I could get the Mac O/S without the machine I would definately give it a much closer look than my limited use of it up till now.

 

[truerock]

Does anyone know what OS and server hardware Apples uses to deliver iTunes? I tried to Google an answer and couldn't find it. iTunes must take an amazing amount of infrastructure to deliver. Does it all run in one datacenter?

 

[neodude007]

I think Tom's Hardware wins here because they keep you people arguing and posting here and linking this to your friends so they bring in more advertising revenue. Hahaha. What better way to keep people on a website then posting all kinds of PC vs Mac articles where the Mac is made out to be better? NOTHING. And I agree it was very silly to compare a MacBook to an XPS (aka Alienware Jr.) I don't feel like making a detailed post like the above others with way better laptops for the price because it is too obvious and if the author doesn't want to reply to them because they want posts that don't make fun that's too bad.

 

[scimanal]

What I find funny, is how little of any of you have stated any kind of evidence for any sort of opinion you have, some just hate tom, some hate apple, some, OK sorry all love windows.

What's interesting is that you may notice no developers for either platform are saying ANYTHING here. Being one myself I find this banter hilarious, and shows the consumer at its best.

Hardware is hardware, and I am sure some you understand some of what hardware does, at least how powerful it can be. Do any of you understand how even the evidence at Tom's hardware is entirely biased in that a test of say oh, I don't know, a video card is subject to the quality of both hardware and software?

You don't have to answer, but none of the people who have posted know enough about UNIX or BSD to have an informed opinion, nor do you really have a good sense of Windows and its complex system.

Some of you will get angry about this post, and take this personally for some silly reason. The fact is, this site exists because you don't know, and you come to learn. There is nothing wrong with that, its much more convenient to pool the knowledge of many together instead of trying to be great at everything.

I agree with some that this article is not the best, in fact its really not that conclusive at all, but the reason (rant) for its writing is true, you people are simply ridiculous, when you KNOW something, then you can make generic statements and try to sound intelligent.

The point is that since you don't use the full complexities of a system, then the simple truth is you need to decide what basics you like, things like GUI, etc are all USER end parameters, and as such are subject to the personal preference of everyone. Of course they are all different, but if you are knowledgeable, statistics such as 67% (2002 - webinfo) of servers running Linux Based software proves a powerful point, even this site is hosted on one.

What my post boils down to is this, Everyone has a different amount of knowledge concerning systems, and based on that knowledge will make their own decisions, but it must be understood that the small glimpse into the computer world most consumers enjoy such as the enthusiast market at Toms, is just that enthusiasts, and nothing more, so while you have some small right to voice your ideas, try to realize things are simply much more complex than a simple statement such as "I could do it cheaper". And if you can't understand that, then you are not going to get the best system for yourself, or see the world for what it is truly.

 

[tuannguyen]

[citation][nom]Continuation[/nom]So now a fanboy's blatantly biased pean to Apple is considered an "article" on tom's hardware?AS others have pointed out, cherry picking the most expensive PC components to jack up the price of the comparison PC just so you could claim that Mac wasn't overpriced does nothing to boost your credibility.A $230 Lian Li case - are you kidding me?? Why not go for a $10,000 gold-plated case with diamonds - that way you can claim that Mac is biggest bargain in human history. Go to Apple Store and configure any Mac, I guarantee I can configure a similar PC with a much lower price. No it won't have a Lian Li case, but what purpose does a Lian Li case serve besides sitting there and looking pretty - which by the way is kinda the whole point of a Mac. And the person who's "absolutely wrong" is you, the author. Mac OS is absolutely a proprietary OS.Can I access the source code of Mac OS? Can I modify Mac OS source code?Can I get Mac OS fixes from anyone other than Apple?Does anyone other than Apple have any say in how Mac OS is developed?The answers to all the above questions are NO. That means Mac OS is proprietary. Simple as that.[/citation]

- Lian Li case because it's the equivalent to the Mac Pro tower. Get a clue.
- "Can I access the source code of Mac OS?" http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/
- "Can I modify Mac OS source code?" See above.

 

[Mach5Motorsport]

Wow, I'm flattered that you included my reply to your previous article. An yeah Mac OS is proprietary in every sense of the word. I can't expect OS X to run on my AMD PC system. Does it have drivers for my Nvidia 7800 card? Will it run out of the box with my HP laptop? no

OSX is nice eye candy, but it comes with a price.

And yes, MAC hardware is OVERPRICED as spec'd to do the same functions. Your plea to mac owers NOT to upgrade through Apple to save massive $$$$ just further points out the contradiction of what Apple machines are all about: The self-induced "Mac experience" that can only be achieved through Apple. For a high price of admission.

Cherry picking high-end PC maker models is inverted thinking. Rather, the question being why is the Mac rig is spec'd so exepensively when most users can get an even an Intel quad 6600 rig for half the cost from a multitude of vendors.

You should be able to confiently discard all your PC hardware if a Mac were to allow you complete computing freedom and choice.

 

[scimanal]

@ TruRock

Does anyone know what OS and server hardware Apples uses to deliver iTunes? I tried to Google an answer and couldn't find it. iTunes must take an amazing amount of infrastructure to deliver. Does it all run in one datacenter?

iTunes like other apple enterprises is hosted on xserves, they are in various data centers, but it uses mysql and basic web hosting technologies, combines with AJAX and some similar technologies to allow for authenticated file transfers. I would put good money it as well, that the data comes from a SAN structure anyways, and as such doesn't burden the xserves that much at all, since it just interacts with the users.

 

[cjl]

[citation][nom]tuannguyen[/nom]"Since when is the 8700M GT shared Memory" - Read manufacturer specs."Does it not matter the Dell supports SLI and multiple HDDs" - Sure does. For more $."And the author failed to note the Voodoo PC has an SSD" - for an upgrade price.[/citation]
I'm staring at the manufacturer specs right now on the 8700m, and guess what? No shared memory.
[citation][nom]nvidia[/nom]Stream Processors 32
Core Clock (MHz) 625
Shader Clock (MHz) 1250
Memory Clock (MHz) 800
Maximum Memory 512MB
Memory Interface 128-bit[/citation]

Do you see anything about shared memory here? What I see is 512MB of DDR3, which actually makes it a significant improvement over the 256MB of DDR3 on the Apple's 8600.

 

[scimanal]

What would be the purpose of the machine? In video rendering a Q6600 will be miles slower than a Mac Pro, or even similar Work Station class computer due to poor architecture and bandwidth limitations. A quad core anything, can not compete with a machine with multiple Physical CPUs... not to mention any other number of issues...

Windows is anything but "complete computing freedom and choice."

[citation][nom]Mach5Motorsport[/nom]Wow, I'm flattered that you included my reply to your previous article. An yeah Mac OS is proprietary in every sense of the word. I can't expect OS X to run on my AMD PC system. Does it have drivers for my Nvidia 7800 card? Will it run out of the box with my HP laptop? noOSX is nice eye candy, but it comes with a price.And yes, MAC hardware is OVERPRICED as spec'd to do the same functions. Your plea to mac owers NOT to upgrade through Apple to save massive $$$$ just further points out the contradiction of what Apple machines are all about: The self-induced "Mac experience" that can only be achieved through Apple. For a high price of admission.Cherry picking high-end PC maker models is inverted thinking. Rather, the question being why is the Mac rig is spec'd so exepensively when most users can get an even an Intel quad 6600 rig for half the cost from a multitude of vendors. You should be able to confiently discard all your PC hardware if a Mac were to allow you complete computing freedom and choice. [/citation]

 

[tuannguyen]

[citation][nom]cjl[/nom]I'm staring at the manufacturer specs right now on the 8700m, and guess what? No shared memory.Do you see anything about shared memory here? What I see is 512MB of DDR3, which actually makes it a significant improvement over the 256MB of DDR3 on the Apple's 8600.[/citation]


Sigh... do some research please:
http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/xpsnb_m1730?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19

 

[zenmaster]

[citation][nom]tuannguyen[/nom]"Since when is the 8700M GT shared Memory" - Read manufacturer specs."Does it not matter the Dell supports SLI and multiple HDDs" - Sure does. For more $."And the author failed to note the Voodoo PC has an SSD" - for an upgrade price.[/citation]

I think YOU need to read the Specs.
The 8700M GT uses DDR3.

I'm glad you admit you chose a Model that has support for added features such as SLI and other advanced features which you choose not to use instead of selecting a model that does not.

Sadder than sad.

 

[robwright]

[citation][nom]ScotterMonkey[/nom]Sad [and obvious] that you are comparing an overpriced Voodoo PC so you can show a Mac out there equally priced to a PC. This article, along with some others springing up lately on your site, show me that someone high up in your organization has gotten rabid over Apple. This loss of objectivity means I won't be visiting Toms Hardware any more.[/citation]

Rabid over Apple? Huh. I must have missed the company memo.

ScotterMonkey, you claim a loss of objectivity here, but I wonder if you and others read the full article, specifically the part where Tuan chastizes Apple for its hardware upgrade pricing and severely limited hardware options. When highlighting OS X, he also makes a point to praise Vista (Vista!). I consider that to be pretty balanced and objective.

I think some folks are getting carried away, jumping to conclusions and getting a little defensive. I know we're Tom's Hardware. I know you're all PC enthusiasts. But the Mac-hating here is little over-the-top. The mere act and perceived offense of writing about Apple on this site has sent some of you into a rage to the point where you're ready to burn the author at the stake.

 

[Guest]

You do the Mac community a disservice with this article. You fail to be objective in your comparisons, and thus you only fuel the fanboy arguments. Your Mac Pro comparison states "The above is essentially a baseline Mac Pro replicated using the cheapest minimum required components to build." Yet it is trivial to prove this statement entirely false.

For example, replace the Thermaltake 1000W power supply with an equivalent Corsair 1000W model for $60 less. Replace the $277 retail copy of Vista Ultimate with the OEM version for nearly $100 savings. Any number of equivalent cases could be had for less than the Lian-Li you spec'd.

I could go on, but what's the point? Your bias is revealed by your unbalanced comparison and outright false statement; thus your credibility is lost.

 

[T-Bone]

Man-oh-man. I'm guessing the article was really written to get more people to write comments more than anything else. Talk about being biased & dishonest. You say buy a base Mac & get peripherals elsewhere...kinda defeats the whole purpose of getting an "everything's-done-for-you-all-you-need-to-do-is-plug-me-in-and-I'll-work-flawlessly" Mac. Not to mention that 90% of Mac users wouldn't know anything about upgrading or installing hardware; that's what the Mac store's for!

Best quote: "Exaggerated pricing myths on Apple systems aside, Apple’s biggest selling tool is Mac OS X and the fact that you can now run Windows XP or Vista on the same machine native." Keywords XP or Vista. If a Mac can't do Windows then forget about it! If you really want to split hairs and be truly accurate, you'd also have to factor in the cost of adding XP or Vista OS to the Mac. Not to mention the fact that you picked an overpriced PC to do the comparison.

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

I consider the mac OS and the hardware to be one and the same, therefore it should be much more capable than Vista in order to justify me paying so much more to use this exclusive OS. Except it isn't, it let's me surf the web, watch videos, listen to music, in some cases it doesn't even do that as well as vista. So why is it costing me so much?

 

[tuannguyen]

[citation][nom]ChaohsiangChen[/nom]As a side note.If Tom's want to start their Apple infomercial business, then they should start another website called Tom's Fruit or something like that. Tom's Hardware was for enthusiasts, and it should remain so. Otherwise they'll just lose their base readers to sites such as Anandtech, whichi is still run by people who are very enthusiasts minded.[/citation]

So you're generalizing that all Mac users are not enthusiasts? Wow. Talk about narrow minded ignorance. You're welcome to leave the site, no one's holding a gun to asking you to stay since this site has become "Tom's Fruits" to you.

 

[Guest]

Although I don't entirely agree with the article, it makes sense. Obviously everyone here is going to be a fan of the PC, so arguing that an Apple is a good product is going to be a moot point. It would be like the lady that came to my door to try and get me to vote for Obama when I am a hardcore conservative. She may even be right, but I'll be durned if I'll listen to her for a second.

To the comment on OSX being a resource hog, I have no idea what you're talking about. I run OSX Leopard on a 3-4 year old Apple Powerbook G4 12" with only a 1.5GHz PowerPC G4, 1.25GB (maxed out) RAM, and a 100GB Seagate 7200.1 and it does not run slow at all. Even with only a GeForce FX 5200, all the graphical stuff is supported and it all runs smooth as can be. The only reason that I haven't upgraded is because I really like my 12" Powerbook and am going to keep it as long as possible.

OSX is also non-proprietary in that it is fully POSIX compliant now, so it is basically pretty-fied UNIX. I realize the EULA says you can't install it on anything else, but the author here is meaning to say that with OSX Leopard and moving forward, it is now FULLY UNIX compatible, no more smoke and mirrors.

I use both PCs and Macs, being an IT manager at work and a full-time student majoring in computer engineering. Since all of our programming is run in UNIX, it is much easier to code in OSX using Xcode than doing it on the PC. I now no longer use a Windows PC to do any programming as it is all done on my Apple. Fortunately with OSX being fully POSIX-compliant, I am able to compile and run my work locally and have the same results as when I run it on our UNIX clusters at school. You can't do that with a PC, and that's mainly the reason I have an Apple. Being reliable, fast, good-looking, and all-around better polished, are just icing on the cake.

Vista versus OSX is an entirely additional argument that I'm not going to get into. Let's just say I loaded Vista Ultimate on my macked-out Dell E521 desktop at home and I stopped using that PC altogether in the matter of a couple of months. A lot of you guys have never really used OSX and have never seen Expose and a lot of the other graphical features it provides (and has provided many moons before Vista came out), so you can't really appreciate its beauty. I used to be a Mac-hater too, and after forcing myself to use OSX, I fell into its depths.

 

[bradfel]

Probably one of the largest steaming piles of crap I've ever had the misfortune to read...

I've bought three Dell laptops in the last 3 years (one/year in fact). One for me, one for my sister, one for my cousin. Every single one of them, with upgrades, had better hardware ended up costing me less than even the base model MacBooks and MacBook Pros sometimes along the order of $1000 or more.

And the PC vs Mac Pro comparison... embarrassing... you've missed the point entirely. I don't doubt that I could equal the baseline for a less expensive cost, but that isn't the point of building it myself. The entire point is that I can build one that's BETTER for cheaper than it would cost me to do the same thing (if it would even be possible) from Apple... nobody gives a crap about base models, we're in it for the upgraded, more powerful stuff.

 

[skittle]

[citation][nom]tuannguyen[/nom]You spelled "you're" incorrectly.[/citation]

This is the internet. I dont get paid to check spelling and grammer. Although it seems that neither do the Toms' staff.

 

[zenmaster]

[citation][nom]tuannguyen[/nom]Sigh... do some research please:http://www.dell.com/content/produc [...] =dhs&cs=19[/citation]

LOL!!!! OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You are Joking Right?

Do you know the Difference between System Memory and Graphics Memory.

 

[pelagius]

Just one thing. I am not sure how Apples presence in the market makes it any less proprietary. It is proprietary because based upon its EULA and its lack of support for most hardware combinations out there it is proprietary. Notice how I say combinations, because of course it supports a lot of individual components like peripherals, but as far as the main combination of motherboard,cpu,ram supported by OSX this is quite limited.

In fact I would go on to say that Apple is very FOR proprietary hardware. This allows them to have complete control over their hardware prices, and does not allow competitors into their market(OSX). If they had CPUs that ran as well as the Intel ones they would most likely be using them IMO. That way they could truly control which hardware OSX runs on. Just look at Phystar and other companies selling clones they are getting sued for running OSX on other hardware. So I would definitively say that yes Macs are very proprietary hardware wise, of course only when looking at the operating system. But this is still a proprietary system. Yes I could install windows on that same hardware, which would then not be proprietary. But when considering the OS Macs are VERY proprietary hardware wise. And I think that Apple wants to keep it that way.

 

[gxsolace]

HAhaha I love some of these people and how they say stupid stuff like "Tom's is only for enthusiasts" as if Macs are not. PEople like these need to wake up and smell burnt coffee because a comment like that makes PC users look like morons.

"Is mac now paying you guys" another retard argument. I didn't know there was a computer company called Mac.

Posting a Mac article on Tom's is going against the religious establishment that some of you idiots that are so engrossed yourselves in.

I definitely like that comments that point out where the article could be flawed, but some articles are just plain stupid.

 

[cjl]

[citation][nom]tuannguyen[/nom]Sigh... do some research please:http://www.dell.com/content/produc [...] =dhs&cs=19[/citation]
Where does it state that it is shared?

The only thing it says on the base model is this:
[citation]NVIDIA®GeForce®8700M GT graphics[/citation]

On the higher models, it is slightly more enlightening:

[citation]NVIDIA®SLI™Dual GeForce®8700MGT with 512MB2 GDDR3 Memory[/citation]
I would say it's a safe assumption that they use the same cards for the single as for the sli models. In fact, I don't think the 8700 series cards even support shared memory - that is a feature typically reserved for low end cards.

 

[Antioch18]

[citation][nom]tuannguyen[/nom]- Lian Li case because it's the equivalent to the Mac Pro tower. Get a clue.- "Can I access the source code of Mac OS?" http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/- "Can I modify Mac OS source code?" See above.[/citation]

Taken from the source code link you provided:
"Mac OS X 10.5.4 (Darwin 9.4) includes a large number of open source projects. These are listed below as they become available."

I believe the source code Apple provides is only for the open source components they use, as is required by whatever open-source license the software uses. While I have not looked through the entire list, I am almost certain that you will not find the core operating system files in there. If you really could find the entire collection of source files then people would have already modified them to compile and run more widely (not just OSx86 project). But then again, I do not know and am not sure - I just thought I'd point this out for other to pick at.