Why does Apple charge so much?

[NintendoTogepi]

2000 for a laptop that can't even play games well? :confused:

Their pricing is insane.

[bashveank]

the MBP can't play games well? What games are you playing?

Apple products are expensive because by overpricing they scare away everyone who isn't serious about buying a Mac, effectively creating the perception of the Mac as a luxury good, and ensuring that they have a user base that will obey Apple's every command.

[d_skillz]

the MBP can't play games well? What games are you playing?

Apple products are expensive because by overpricing they scare away everyone who isn't serious about buying a Mac, effectively creating the closest thing to an Apple cult.

LOL

C'mon they make better PCs than Windows, seriously overpriced though.

[NintendoTogepi]

Ok, even if it could, the Apple products are still extremely overpriced.

The cheapest computer they offer is the base level, keyboard-less, mouse-less, monitor-less, Mac Mini...and it's 599 :(

[bashveank]

LOL

C'mon they make better PCs than Windows, seriously overpriced though.

Oh, I love my Mac. Just saying that it is a bit of a luxury good.

ah and you caught me before my edit [insert Acme anvil here]


Ok, even if it could, the Apple products are still extremely overpriced.

The cheapest computer they offer is the base level, keyboard-less, mouse-less, monitor-less, Mac Mini...and it's 599 :(

Yes? and by overpricing they ensure that you'll either get a Mac and love it cause you can't swallow the fact that you wasted all that money if you don't like it, or get something else and always lust after the Mac. Apple's customer satisfaction is the highest in the business.

[lykwydchykyn]

Are you asking why they charge so much, or why people pay so much?

[hvc123]

personnaly i dunno why they are so expensive. i really dont like the MACOS but saying that over the recent years its a shame apple have gone to intel rather than stay with ppc.
i have a iMac 20" (christmas pud shape. not the new one) and guess what o/s is on it........ you guesd it Ubuntu Server!!!!!!!

it runs perfectly on PPC arch its only a baby 1.25GHZ.

[SunnyRabbiera]

LOL

C'mon they make better PCs than Windows, seriously overpriced though.

But windows doesnt make PC :D

And I think there are many companies out there that are just as good or better then apple in the PC market like HP and Dell

[handy]

the MBP can't play games well? What games are you playing?

Apple products are expensive because by overpricing they scare away everyone who isn't serious about buying a Mac, effectively creating the perception of the Mac as a luxury good, and ensuring that they have a user base that will obey Apple's every command.

Rubbish!

[bashveank]

Rubbish!

Are you saying that I'm wrong? Do you have a particular reason for saying that?

[lykwydchykyn]

I feel tha heat... flame war coming!

[handy]

I feel tha heat... flame war coming!

Not from me. :-)

[dominiquec]

Taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pricing.

A well chosen price should do three things :


achieve the financial goals of the company (eg.: profitability)
fit the realities of the marketplace (will customers buy at that price?)
support a product's positioning and be consistent with the other

price is influenced by the type of distribution channel used, the type of promotions used, and the quality of the product variables in the marketing mix

price will usually need to be relatively high if manufacturing is expensive, distribution is exclusive, and the product is supported by extensive advertising and promotional campaigns
a low price can be a viable substitute for product quality, effective promotions, or an energetic selling effort by distributors





From the marketers point of view, an efficient price is a price that is very close to the maximum that customers are prepared to pay. In economic terms, it is a price that shifts most of the consumer surplus to the producer. A good pricing strategy would be the one which could balance between the Price floor(the price below which the organization ends up in losses) and the Price ceiling(the price beyond which the organization experiences a no demand situation).

[stinger30au]

2000 for a laptop that can't even play games well? :confused:

Their pricing is insane.


they do it cos they can :)

[ciscosurfer]

2000 for a laptop that can't even play games well? :confused:

Their pricing is insane.I don't recall Apple marketing to the gaming community.

They make some of sleekest hardware and software out there: that's why they are expensive. They've always been expensive and they'll probably always be this way. They did, however, just come down a few hundred in price. ;-)

[I-75]

If one looks on E-bay, There are a number of older Mac machines that sell well under $40 including the G3. The newer G3's with Tiger OS X and 512 or even 1 GB RAM can be had for around $ 125 +/-. No need to spend $1500 or $2000 on a new Mac when a older one might do.

[the8thstar]

I believe they've had another record profit this year. And their prices are always UP.

Interesting.

If you can't take the price (I don't blame you for that), try OSX86. It's free and it's still laying in a gray area of legality. You won't have the Apple support and software/hardware interoperability edge though.

[techmarks]

I believe they've had another record profit this year. And their prices are always UP.

Interesting.

If you can't take the price (I don't blame you for that), try OSX86. It's free and it's still laying in a gray area of legality. You won't have the Apple support and software/hardware interoperability edge though.



Actually their overall computer sales were down, but they more than made up for that with the phone sales that did very well for them.

I think the price is part of their overall marketing scheme for the Macs, and they will continue to concentrate on that market.

Don't expect any price declines. During economic downturns Apple concentrates more on research and development.

Despite the fact that they use and benefit greatly from using open source, Apple seems to contribute little back.

[the8thstar]

Despite the fact that they use and benefit greatly from using open source, Apple seems to contribute little back.

That's a very pricey one-sided relationship indeed. ;-)

[3rdalbum]

2000 for a laptop that can't even play games well? :confused:

Dude, no $2000 laptop will play the latest games well. Laptops must use low-power components to preserve battery life and ensure a minimum of heat production, because the chassis of a laptop is not really big enough to allow good heat dispersion. The low-power components don't have anywhere near the performance of the higher-powered desktop components.

People who want performance computers, including gamers, buy or build desktops. It also makes it possible to upgrade the graphics card and CPU when their current ones become obsolete.

[handy]

People who want performance computers, including gamers, buy or build desktops. It also makes it possible to upgrade the graphics card and CPU when their current ones become obsolete.

Which you can't do on any Apple notebook or iMac. Though it is possible with some other brand notebooks:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Upgrade-Replace-a-Notebook-Video-Card.3236.0.html

[babylon2233]

Mac uses the same hardware as PC. So, nothing really special. For all Apple fanboy: WAKE UP.

[jeyaganesh]

It is like designer dresses.:lolflag:

[andrewjoy]

Time and time again people do not look at a Macintosh the right way. A Mac is not just a simple box with an os on its the whole package, you pay for the support the amazing hardware software integration the well designed laptop/desktop the look and feel of it and the operating system itself. With a windows pc you buy a basic pc , and you install windows on it ( costing you just under £170) you then have to pay for all the software that you use with it , with a Mac you get almost everything ( apart form office and Photoshop) as part of the os. Then with the windows (and to a smaller extent Linux) you have the big huge pain of hardware support "does xxx work with vista?” “where are the Linux drivers for yyy?" with a Mac all this is taken care of.

However there are a few problems with the price of some Mac "upgrades" the price of memory for a Mac is just ludicrous you can get memory for you Mac with a lifetime guarantee for almost 50% of the price you pay on apple.com, also there graphics cards are a bit " behind" and are slow to upgrade to new ones. They are my own 2 problems with apple.

I am sorry but you get what you pay for in this world.

[lukjad007]

Buying a Mac is like buying a Rolls Royce. No one drives their Rolls, they have a chauffeur to bring them places. If you want to drive your own car, you buy a Ferrari. You also don't tinker with your Rolls Royce, you have a mechanic fine tune it. If you want to tinker, you build your own or buy a pickup truck. Apple is there for a smooth ride, not a rollicking one.

[factotum218]

Time and time again people do not look at a Macintosh the right way.

Bzzzt! Not quite. No one should have to consider looking at it in a certain way in the first place. The computer works for you, not the reverse.

I'm in charge of a newspaper company full of Macs. You really want to know how many power supplies, hard drives, graphics cards, fans, keyboards and mice I've had to replace in the last year alone? Sorry, but from my personal experiences with Apple hardware in the last 11 years I would not recommend one to anyone with any kind of conservative budget. It's been nothing but a money pit.
It' just the usual "you don't need to own one but it's there if you want it" marketing. Macs aren't really anything special. They don't need a virus or malware to crash. They blow up by themselves. You have to make it fell special to you to justify the purchase. Thus the cult of self-back-patting. Just like anything else.

And another thing people need to consider. Microsoft is a software company. Apple is a software AND hardware company, so they can do pretty much whatever the heck they want (and sadly, it shows).

[Frak]

I don't think Apple charges too much for what you get. Sure it's common hardware molded together, but it's molded well. It's easier to create a program/OS/etc. for a single combination of hardware than various. This also helps squash bugs in programming.

Again, as I've said before, Mac's are nearly impervious to overall hardware failure. I remember an iBook with a fried processor. Took it to the Apple Store and they replaced it for free. They didn't need to see any papers or warranty, nor an ID. That's pretty cool to me.

As factotum218 was saying, I call you on it and tell you that I work around Mac's everyday and have very rarely ever had to replace a part. One keyboard at one time, but that was all. We did, though, replace all the mice, because nearly everybody here thinks Mighty Mice are incredibly bad designed (the click mechanism is flaky). BTW, I am an Apple Certified Technician.

Overall, I'm very happy with mine. Just hate Pages in iWork; it's just evil.

[handy]

Buying a Mac is like buying a Rolls Royce. No one drives their Rolls, they have a chauffeur to bring them places. If you want to drive your own car, you buy a Ferrari. You also don't tinker with your Rolls Royce, you have a mechanic fine tune it. If you want to tinker, you build your own or buy a pickup truck. Apple is there for a smooth ride, not a rollicking one.

When you install Arch & Openbox (or whatever DT/WM), you get to have a great deal of fun, you get to customize the machine to suit yourself, control the size of all the fonts that you couldn't get at in Leopard (amongst so many other aspects) & it will run faster too! You get to be the creative engineer instead of the chauffeur driven site seer :)

Also, I agree with Frak; Apple's Mighty Mouse is crap.

[factotum218]

BTW, I am an Apple Certified Technician.

Maybe if I make that a goal our systems here will be exercised of their demons. No wait, never mind, I'm trying to claw my way out of this hell hole that I work in.

In all honesty, I think it may have something to do with the majority of them being iMacs (black ones that will just be outdated again in another year but will be oh so fun to throw away or recycle as Steve-O puts it). We have a few Mac Pro's that rarely give any trouble. But overall my work experiences in the last few years have caused me to now run away screaming from anything with a Mac logo on them.

[lukjad007]

When you install Arch & Openbox (or whatever DT/WM), you get to have a great deal of fun, you get to customize the machine to suit yourself, control the size of all the fonts that you couldn't get at in Leopard (amongst so many other aspects) & it will run faster too! You get to be the creative engineer instead of the chauffeur driven site seer :)

Also, I agree with Frak; Apple's Mighty Mouse is crap.
Agreed.

[bashveank]

When you install Arch & Openbox (or whatever DT/WM), you get to have a great deal of fun, you get to customize the machine to suit yourself, control the size of all the fonts that you couldn't get at in Leopard (amongst so many other aspects) & it will run faster too! You get to be the creative engineer instead of the chauffeur driven site seer :)

Also, I agree with Frak; Apple's Mighty Mouse is crap.

And the Mac tax is for people who don't care to do that.

and I agree about the Mighty Mouse.

[handy]

I've recommended Mac's to people who's personal machines I used to maintain. They all could afford to buy a Mac, & on my advice they did.
That was around 3 years ago when I retired, they have all had no problems in any way with their Mac's, & are so glad that they own them, as opposed to the unreliable mal-ware prone windows rubbish that they had been using.

The reason I did not recommend a Linux distro' is because they are not tech' heads, they do not want to be tech' heads, they just want to do what they want to do, when they want to do it, & that is that.

& also I did not want to maintain their machines, that is what I was retiring from. :-)

[galenorama]

I LOVE my Mac(book)!!!!
Course, my parents paid for it <wink wink>


[Soldierboy]

Why does Apple charge so much?

Because people keep paying that price. Why would they lower the prices when there are masses willing to fork over the amount that they set? Simple economics. Not only this, but in their niche, they have no competition. Who else panders to the artsy, holier-than-thou emo geeks?

[handy]

Because people keep paying that price. Why would they lower the prices when there are masses willing to fork over the amount that they set? Simple economics. Not only this, but in their niche, they have no competition. Who else panders to the artsy, holier-than-thou emo geeks?

You sound like an anti-elitist elitist! :lolflag:

Freedom of choice is great, providing people choose what I think they should choose! :confused:

Sometimes we learn to be more tolerant of other people's choices, (it often comes with age).

What is the problem with someone doing or buying something that you wouldn't yourself? Apart from all of the many & varied side effects of the overpopulated consumer based condition that humanity finds itself in of course.

It matters not how much we think we know about anything, there is always a more educated point of view that will nullify all value in what we hold dear.

I find it interesting how easy it is for people to typecast others due to what products they use, wear, drive, listen to music through, contact people via, where they live, what religious views they have, what colour skin they got born with, which language they speak...

Chauvinism is one of humanities biggest flaws, as it divides us, when tolerance & unity is what will heal us.

[jedimasterk]

Because they target upper class and rich users. Linux users and Windows users are peasants!.:p

[Skripka]

Because they target upper class and rich users. Linux users and Windows users are peasants!.:p

Psssssss- Finr and Interesting Factisms for December 4th:


OSX install disc: ~$100

Windows Vista Ultimate OEM install disc for system builders (via NewEgg): ~$200


Now, what was that about Windows users being peasants? ;)

[slowth5]

Continuing Skripka's comment, when I ran Windows, I felt like I was constantly under siege. I'm talking Defcon 1, imminent catastrophe awaits, final countdown warfare. Maybe this is slight hyperbole, but the more expensive Apple was a welcome alternative when taking into account all of the hours I devoted to securing Windows.

Now I've found Ubuntu, so I welcome the peace of mind without the obligatory incredible shrinking wallet, as it were.

[the8thstar]

With any Linux and Unix-like OS you get the same level of security as you do with Macs.

Software / hardware integration is great on my laptop. It's as if HP products were made for Linux and vice-versa

The only noticeable difference b/w a basic Linux and OS X is Apple's sleek looking OS with nice apps on it. Still, the price you have to pay for this gadget is WAY TOO HIGH and the whole thing is UNNECESSARY for daily use.

[lykwydchykyn]

With any Linux and Unix-like OS you get the same level of security as you do with Macs.


Actually, you get a bit more with Linux due to natural diversification. Macs are much more of a monoculture.

[Swarms]

I find people who judge other peoples character, on what operating system they use sad. :)

[slowth5]

We all have a nasty little bit of ego that guides many of our thoughts and perceptions. I choose OS xyz because I think it's superior. Knowing that I'm always right, anyone who doesn't choose OS xyz is an utter fool. It's tough to realize that what works for you might not work for everyone else. Humility is not an innate human trait.

[donkyhotay]

In answer to the original question as to why the charge so much I think the answer is obvious... because they can and people will pay it.

[thomashome]

Ok, even if it could, the Apple products are still extremely overpriced.

The cheapest computer they offer is the base level, keyboard-less, mouse-less, monitor-less, Mac Mini...and it's 599 :(

$599 I work that out to be £400 that's cheap but less me guess? You go with the ASDA or WalMart special?

Compare a Apple to a Alienware! Not to a WalMart computer.

[letriste]

And I think there are many companies out there that are just as good or better than apple in the PC market like HP and Dell

You must be joking. HP vs Apple in build quality? that's like comparing fisher-price and rolls-royce...

And I'd rather pay a premium for a computer that would last me a couple of years and still be sold at a decent price (for me) than buy a POS that most probably would break, or at least not be worth more than a used toothpick in a few years.

And for top(ish) of the line CPUs and GPUs you have to pay more, especially when it's put in a proper housing (unibody etc) with a usable trackpad (not sold on the new one, though). The only thing that really sucks on mac notebooks are the screens. Compare pricing for thinkpads vs macbooks, and you'll see that the pricing isn't really that bad. Though quality is better on thinkpads, useability is better on macbooks. And you can run OSX legally on them if you care to.

I'm not a SJ fanboy, but i like macs somewhat. Using OSX now, but i have ubuntu on it too, mainly for checking it out.

[Frak]

You must be joking. HP vs Apple in build quality? that's like comparing fisher-price and rolls-royce...

And I'd rather pay a premium for a computer that would last me a couple of years and still be sold at a decent price (for me) than buy a POS that most probably would break, or at least not be worth more than a used toothpick in a few years.

And for top(ish) of the line CPUs and GPUs you have to pay more, especially when it's put in a proper housing (unibody etc) with a usable trackpad (not sold on the new one, though). The only thing that really sucks on mac notebooks are the screens. Compare pricing for thinkpads vs macbooks, and you'll see that the pricing isn't really that bad. Though quality is better on thinkpads, useability is better on macbooks. And you can run OSX legally on them if you care to.

I'm not a SJ fanboy, but i like macs somewhat. Using OSX now, but i have ubuntu on it too, mainly for checking it out.
For the price of a basic iMac, I can build one hell of a gaming rig. I see no point in paying that much, even though they are well designed. The rig would last me longer (in terms of longevity) than a Mac would.

[madverb]

For the price of a basic iMac, I can build one hell of a gaming rig. I see no point in paying that much, even though they are well designed. The rig would last me longer (in terms of longevity) than a Mac would.

True that!

If Photoshop was released for Linux it would make owning an Apple pointless.

[bashveank]

For the price of a basic iMac, I can build one hell of a gaming rig. I see no point in paying that much, even though they are well designed. The rig would last me longer (in terms of longevity) than a Mac would.

Speaking from experience, a gaming rig looses value much more quickly than an iMac.
Around July 2006 I built a PC with a Thermaltake Armor, AMD 64 X2 4200+, eVGA GeForce 7900GT, an eVGA SLI motherboard, and 2GB Kingston RAM. It cost me around $1,500, if I were to build the same machine today it would cost less that $250. A Core Duo iMac from July 2006 runs for at least $450 on eBay, almost twice as much for the Core 2 Duo.

[Frak]

Original Post
Actually your gaming rig would loose value much faster than the iMac. The parts inside the gaming rig give it it's value and will very quickly loose value. The iMac's value is in it's design and build quality, that doesn't depreciate nearly as quickly.

Edited Post
Speaking from experience, a gaming rig looses value much more quickly than an iMac.

Edited Post (2)
Speaking from experience, a gaming rig looses value much more quickly than an iMac.
Around July 2006 I built a PC with a Thermaltake Armor, AMD 64 X2 4200+, eVGA GeForce 7900GT, an eVGA SLI motherboard, and 2GB Kingston RAM. It cost me around $1,500, if I were to build the same machine today it would cost less that $250. A Core Duo iMac from July 2006 runs for at least $450 on eBay, almost twice as much for the Core 2 Duo.

As long as I take good care of my parts and keep it up to date, I care not the value of my computer. If anybody comes up to me and says "Ha! My Mac is worth more than yours because of it's sheer build quality; just look at your dumb little case", I'd wonder why she bought a looking glass that was made by the Amish.

My computer needs to last 2 years. After that, it's going to the Salvation Army or being clustered for F@H. An iMac will not last you 5 years and keep itself up to date, and I do not expect any computer to do that.

Oh, and there's no difference in Mac build parts and regular consumer parts. Same design specs (and same manufacturers).

EDIT
For your 2nd edit, the only reason Mac's keep value is only because Apple locks OS X onto the Mac platform, so it doesn't matter what it's made of as long as OS X runs on it (for the people who want it).

[bashveank]

As long as I take good care of my parts and keep it up to date, I care not the value of my computer. If anybody comes up to me and says "Ha! My Mac is worth more than yours because of it's sheer build quality; just look at your dumb little case", I'd wonder why she bought a looking glass that was made by the Amish.

My computer needs to last 2 years. After that, it's going to the Salvation Army or being clustered for F@H. An iMac will not last you 5 years and keep itself up to date, and I do not expect any computer to do that.

Oh, and there's no difference in Mac build parts and regular consumer parts. Same design specs (and same manufacturers).

EDIT
For your 2nd edit, the only reason Mac's keep value is only because Apple locks OS X onto the Mac platform, so it doesn't matter what it's made of as long as OS X runs on it (for the people who want it).

Than please explain how a gaming rig would last me longer (in terms of longevity) than a Mac would. if it's value decreases exponentially over the iMac's and after 2 years they're both toast anyway.

[Frak]

Than please explain how a gaming rig would if it's value decreases exponentially over the iMac's and after 2 years they're both toast anyway.
I can open it up, replace a part, and have it upgraded without spending an initial $3,000 just for a glorified case of parts.

[sportscrazed2]

i know they are not really better but the idea that i can sell it for half the price i buy it for 3 years later has got me considering a mac. that way the next one will cost about the same as a similary priced pc. i don't want my house turning into a pc landfill i only need 1 desktop and 1 laptop at any given time

[SuperSonic4]

People will pay for it. I think they're throwing money down the drain but that is just me

[bashveank]

I can open it up, replace a part, and have it upgraded without spending an initial $3,000 just for a glorified case of parts.

Well than I suppose our purposes are different, my only upgrades are done to older boxes that still have some use as a workstation. For me, it's more trouble than it's worth to upgrade gaming boxes.

[Frak]

Well than I suppose our purposes are different, my only upgrades are done to older boxes that still have some use as a workstation. For me, it's more trouble than it's worth to upgrade gaming boxes.
I've never seen the issue. Gaming rigs are no different from mere office workstations. I guess if you have a watercooling system or phase-changer, it could make it a bit more difficult (of course, the PowerMac G5 also had a watercooler).

My only main upgrades are CPU, RAM, and Graphics; these, all of which can be replaced within a mere 1-5 minutes (RAM - 1 minute, Graphics - 2 to 3 minutes, CPU - Possibly 5 and maybe more minutes if it's complicated, but almost none with a clip-on).

Pro is, my parts for my gaming rig don't cost as much as my Mac Pro. The 8800 Mac edition cost soo much more when I bought it than the regular general computer version.

[Skripka]

I've never seen the issue. Gaming rigs are no different from mere office workstations. I guess if you have a watercooling system or phase-changer, it could make it a bit more difficult (of course, the PowerMac G5 also had a watercooler).

My only main upgrades are CPU, RAM, and Graphics; these, all of which can be replaced within a mere 1-5 minutes (RAM - 1 minute, Graphics - 2 to 3 minutes, CPU - Possibly 5 and maybe more minutes if it's complicated, but almost none with a clip-on).

Pro is, my parts for my gaming rig don't cost as much as my Mac Pro. The 8800 Mac edition cost soo much more when I bought it than the regular general computer version.

Beat me to it.

Throw in a new CPU and some more memory-and you have a new machine. GPU upgrades are less noticable unless you're doing intensive graphics work....but changing out a CPU is as easy as removing the cooler/lifting CPU release lever and replacing CPU/locking the CPU lever/clean off old ArcticSilver5 from CPU cooler/apply new ArcticSilver5/lock down CPU cooler. And BAM your machine gets a massive facelift.

Why people are fine with the notion of computers as monolithic throw away items is beyond me. It bugs me especially on laptops...where a $3000 machine is trash after a few years and completely nonupgradeable by design.

[handy]

True that!

If Photoshop was released for Linux it would make owning an Apple pointless.

All you needed was an "imho", or a "for me" in your above statement for it to be valid.

[bashveank]

I've never seen the issue. Gaming rigs are no different from mere office workstations. I guess if you have a watercooling system or phase-changer, it could make it a bit more difficult (of course, the PowerMac G5 also had a watercooler).

My only main upgrades are CPU, RAM, and Graphics; these, all of which can be replaced within a mere 1-5 minutes (RAM - 1 minute, Graphics - 2 to 3 minutes, CPU - Possibly 5 and maybe more minutes if it's complicated, but almost none with a clip-on).

Pro is, my parts for my gaming rig don't cost as much as my Mac Pro. The 8800 Mac edition cost soo much more when I bought it than the regular general computer version.

It's not that the process of physically upgrading the machine is too time consuming, but that the price isn't worth the upgrade. For me, upgrades are to keep a machine usable, I just upgraded an old box with integrated graphics to a GeForce 6200 so that I can use multiple monitors, for example. Forking out the price of a brand new video card to get 10fps or so more when my current gpu preforms fine on a lower setting doesn't make much sense to me.

[Frak]

It's not that the process of physically upgrading the machine is too time consuming, but that the price isn't worth the upgrade. For me, upgrades are to keep a machine usable, I just upgraded an old box with integrated graphics to a GeForce 6200 so that I can use multiple monitors, for example. Forking out the price of a brand new video card to get 10fps or so more when my current gpu preforms fine on a lower setting doesn't make much sense to me.
Yes, what about keeping the machine usable? After 5 years, you'll have to replace an iMac to allow it to update to the latest OS version. Upgrading an iMac involves buying a new iMac. At least with an open rig, I am able to remove components and upgrade them to the newest version.

What I'm trying to get accross is, it's more sensable to upgrade modules of a system than it is to keep replacing a system IMHO. Allowing access to all the parts opens up performance benefits. While you're right that Mac's will last awhile, it is also true that I could possibly buy the same system later for a cheaper price and recieve more features, which would be more beneficiary than to stick with a system, statically, for some years.

[handy]

My iMac is fine for the moment, admittedly the biggest problem with it is how fast it will age solely due to the inability to upgrade the GPU.

For me this is ok, I rarely use Leopard, just to play GW or modify my web site, so on Arch this machine will continue its present job as the machine which is mainly for surfing the web, watching vid's, controlling IPCop & the NAS/torrent slave & such.

If I am tempted by some brilliant game that becomes available one way or another on a distro based machine that needs more CPU/GPU horsepower than my Athlon 64 3500+ single core, 2Gb DDR, 7950gt/512Mb rig, then I may build another game machine & continue to use the current Athlon based machine for testing, burning, converting vid formats, or what have you. This machine has 6 x 5.25" drive bays currently with 3 x drive drawers in it, which makes it incredibly convenient for testing distro's/OS's & backing up partitions/drives.

[bashveank]

Yes, what about keeping the machine usable? After 5 years, you'll have to replace an iMac to allow it to update to the latest OS version. Upgrading an iMac involves buying a new iMac. At least with an open rig, I am able to remove components and upgrade them to the newest version.

What I'm trying to get accross is, it's more sensable to upgrade modules of a system than it is to keep replacing a system IMHO. Allowing access to all the parts opens up performance benefits. While you're right that Mac's will last awhile, it is also true that I could possibly buy the same system later for a cheaper price and recieve more features, which would be more beneficiary than to stick with a system, statically, for some years.

My iMac G5 is almost 5 years old and it runs Leopard like a dream.
What I'm arguing is that upgrading the internals of a computer isn't necessary. I have 5 running computers, an iMac and 4 beige boxes. They're all serving their purpose as well as they were when I built or bought them and I've spent under $100 on upgrades. Even when I did upgrade a computer it wasn't because it needed more power, I just needed more features, more drive space, more ports, adding WAN capability, etc...

[letriste]

For the price of a basic iMac, I can build one hell of a gaming rig. I see no point in paying that much, even though they are well designed. The rig would last me longer (in terms of longevity) than a Mac would.

I was obviously talking about the notebook side of things. iMacs are neat, but expensive. Though the HP "imac" seems more stupid and overpriced. mac mini is overpriced IMHO. macpro not so much, but getting old with no price cuts.

Compare macpro to voodoo or alienware.

I don't hate HP, BTW, I just think their laptops feel cheap(er than they are...)

I think where apple has the edge over everybody is on mobile devices, from iPod to iPhone to MacBooks. (MBAir not so much...)

[Frak]

I was obviously talking about the notebook side of things. iMacs are neat, but expensive. Though the HP "imac" seems more stupid and overpriced. mac mini is overpriced IMHO. macpro not so much, but getting old with no price cuts.

Compare macpro to voodoo or alienware.

I don't hate HP, BTW, I just think their laptops feel cheap(er than they are...)

I think where apple has the edge over everybody is on mobile devices, from iPod to iPhone to MacBooks. (MBAir not so much...)
I have no problem buying a Macbook, because I'm unable to justify costs on any manual form of build. Though, I have a problem buying a laptop, because I cannot justify the benefit in my normal daily activity.

[sportscrazed2]

i have a problem with apple pricing too. i want a new laptop and was considering a macbook but thought it would be too small but i don't need the power of the pro or feel like spending 2000. not to mention i could get a laptop with faster processor, more ram, and larger harddrive for $800.

[letriste]

i have a problem with apple pricing too. i want a new laptop and was considering a macbook but thought it would be too small but i don't need the power of the pro or feel like spending 2000. not to mention i could get a laptop with faster processor, more ram, and larger harddrive for $800.

I'm in a similar situation myself. My powerbook g4, still going strong, needs a worthy successor, and i can (though barely) afford a MBP, but i'm considering others. I need a 15" notebook with good build quality and good specs. Lenovo t500/w500 looks tempting. Just don't know if i dare leaving osx. surely won't be going MSwindows full time, though.

How does the BQ on the new Dell XPS 1530 stack up against apple or lenovo? Any thoughts?

Hijack:)

[tsali]

I configured two machines -

Mac Pro Dual QuadCore Xeon - $6,950 USD

Dell Precision T7400 (exact same specs as the Mac) - $7700 USD

Now what was that about Apples being expensive?

Go run some experiments with online stores. Build machines to comparable spec.

As far as modular upgrades, I've never understood how this is practical. What sense does it make to put a new, fast processor onto an obsolete mobo chipset? Why jeopardize new components with a waning power supply? Why hobble a fast motherboard with an old IDE hard disk? About the only practical re-usable component might be the case...

I used Macs exclusively up to 2006 when I built my own box (from Newegg) at an intial cost savings of ~$250 over a similar Mac (that was with openSUSE 10.1). Since OpenSUSE 10.1 was an utter disaster, I bought WinXP/Vista OEM, reducing that cost advantage to ~$100.

If I had it to go over, I would buy a Mac. It's simply a better value for me.

[Skripka]

I configured two machines -

Mac Pro Dual QuadCore Xeon - $6,950 USD

Dell Precision T7400 (exact same specs as the Mac) - $7700 USD

Now what was that about Apples being expensive?

Go run some experiments with online stores. Build machines to comparable spec.

As far as modular upgrades, I've never understood how this is practical. What sense does it make to put a new, fast processor onto an obsolete mobo chipset? Why jeopardize new components with a waning power supply? Why hobble a fast motherboard with an old IDE hard disk? About the only practical re-usable component might be the case...

I used Macs exclusively up to 2006 when I built my own box (from Newegg) at an intial cost savings of ~$250 over a similar Mac (that was with openSUSE 10.1). Since OpenSUSE 10.1 was an utter disaster, I bought WinXP/Vista OEM, reducing that cost advantage to ~$100.

If I had it to go over, I would buy a Mac. It's simply a better value for me.

I did the math when I first built my box, and the box was cheaper than a Windows rig--and the whole rig with monitor and keyboard was still cheaper than a mac.

Keep the box, cycle parts through it. As your hardware gets older start swapping things out. The AMD6400 is a "new" chip on my very old k9n neo (I used to run a 4200+)-and odds are I'll buy a k9n2 Platinum some time soon--why? Because $100 every now and again is still cheaper than buying a new machine-especially an Apple. I'm one of those gradual kind of people. That board was "old" and obsolete when I got it-and someone offloaded it to me-their loss and my gain.

Power supplies wear out-so replace as needed to, most non-gamers wouldn't need much more than a $70 power supply. GPU upgrades are best for when your machine no longer has well supported drivers-or you need the processing power (for games or what have you), as that upgrade is less noticeable.

The only wrench in this comes when manufacturers choose different defacto socket/header/rail types. If I ever want to go beyond an AM2 socket (dual core) to a quad-core, I'll need an AM2+ mobo hence the k9n2---odds are that won't be for some time as there are very few applications which throttle my AMD6400+....the only things which really strain my current rig are windows games (a la Crysis), and the k9n only has a 1000Mhz FSB


If you upgrade gradually, you're less prone to suffer at shifts in hardware spec. I.e. running IDE drives when SATAII has been out for a while, you're also less likely to drop off the deep-end of driver support. Snipe sales, and buy 2nd tier not top of the line; as the difference is greater in $$$$ than performance

[tsali]

I did the math when I first built my box, and the box was cheaper than a Windows rig--and the whole rig with monitor and keyboard was still cheaper than a mac.

I've never been able to make this work to any significant advantage without sacrificing something.

If you upgrade gradually, you're less prone to suffer at shifts in hardware spec.

Yet you are never able to get the full performance capability you paid for from the parts you buy because they are hobbled by the older ones. I have always considered the mobo and cpu as "matched" components. Like I said, I don't see any point to installing a fluffy new processor on an old chipset. It's a waste of a decent processor.

Things work together as a system . I firmly believe that building any other way is throwing money down the toilet.

[Skripka]

Yet you are never able to get the full performance capability you paid for from the parts you buy because they are hobbled by the older ones. I have always considered the mobo and cpu as "matched" components. Like I said, I don't see any point to installing a fluffy new processor on an old chipset. It's a waste of a decent processor.

Things work together as a system . I firmly believe that building any other way is throwing money down the toilet.

If you want to lay down $3000 at a time for a brand new hardware everything, by all means. If when you're upgrading you want to upgrade for the very top of the line, yes odds are you won't get the most out of your new component. Not only that-top of the line is as expensive as it gets-and you'd be justiofied in being annoyed that your extra-expensive component does not function to the maximum---hence why I don't buy top of the line.


Little ol me, I find there's no good reason at all to think of a computer as a monolithic throw away item....as Apple clearly does.

When you down the line, find a bottleneck at your CPU-that can be fixed, if you find a bottleneck on your GPU-that can be fixed; there's no reason whatsoever to write off an entire box of hardware at a time...or box with a very expensive nice monitor, as is the case with the iMac.

[Maxxtsch]

the MBP can't play games well? What games are you playing?

Apple products are expensive because by overpricing they scare away everyone who isn't serious about buying a Mac, effectively creating the perception of the Mac as a luxury good, and ensuring that they have a user base that will obey Apple's every command.

I'm a hard core Windows guy, I've used almost every Mac Power Mac for some time in the late 80's, and I've used g3's and g4's and even the new g5 that hual's ***, but for the kinda money your puting in to a Machine like that you can build a PC's with Linux and/or Windows that can out preform it. I have proven this time and time again.

Windows/Linux Combo FTW:guitar:

[Frak]

Mac Pro Dual QuadCore Xeon - $6,950 USD

Dell Precision T7400 (exact same specs as the Mac) - $7700 USD

Basic Dual-Core iMac - $1,199

XPS 630 Intel Quad Core w/ ATi Radeon HD 4850 512MB, 6GB DDR2, and a 640GB SATA - $1,199

[tsali]

Basic Dual-Core iMac - $1,199

XPS 630 Intel Quad Core w/ ATi Radeon HD 4850 512MB, 6GB DDR2, and a 640GB SATA - $1,199

You forgot add a monitor, speakers and a modem: $1519

sorry, no cigar

[Demio]

You forgot add a monitor, speakers and a modem: $1519

sorry, no cigar

You also forgot to add the slim form factor and the fact that the iMac is an all-in-one instead of a regular desktop machine ;)

Please, you're comparing Apples with Bananas... :confused:

[Frak]

You forgot add a monitor, speakers and a modem: $1519

sorry, no cigar
I happen to already have those parts, and the ones that come from Apple suck ***. The monitor has a slow response time, the speakers are sub par, and your modem is either on board or if you mean the one YOUR ISP ASSIGNS YOU, that comes with your bill.

Sorry, your addons still fail.

[Chrisj303]

I don't care if Macs cost a bit more money - they are worth it.

[handy]

We have Macs in our house & I'm typing on my alu iMac now, via Arch/Xfce. I used to run an IT technical service where 99.9% of my customers used the windows OS. I built a lot of machines for customers & the odd one for myself. :-)

I don't believe that Macs are better value. They are just different, (& sometimes for whatever reason) that difference suits some people more than the other choices that are available to them.

For both my wife & I, (who have totally different uses for computers) the 24" iMac was a perfect solution for us due to its excellent use of the limited space available in each of our offices.

In her business, my Wife uses software not available under Linux, that is available under OSX (this allowed her escape from the MS OS), so she had been using a G4 notebook for her work for some time. The addition of the iMac was a great improvement for the work she does; due to the large screen. She continues to carry the notebook to the studio where she teaches music.
_________

As far a upgrading machines is concerned, the iMac is worse than a notebook, as RAM is the only thing you can get at without removing the screen glass, after which you can change the drives & that is it. Apple chose not to build so as to enable the upgrade of either the CPU or the GPU, which is a possibility with some (non-Apple) notebooks. I was aware of this when I purchased the iMacs, & obviously accepted the limitations in favour of the advantages for us as mentioned previously.

I find that the ability to upgrade the graphic card on a machine, from time to time, is a prime way to extend the life of a box that is used for gaming (in particular).

My other main working/testing/gaming machine has never shown any CPU strain from whatever I throw at it.

The problem that has arisen to strike many of us, is that due to the major change in technology bought about by tossing AGP & bringing in PCI Express, I have had to in the past spend an extra amount of money to buy a graphic card that is based on a PCI-e GPU that has been grafted onto an AGP card, all in an effort not to have to replace an otherwise perfectly good motherboard, a CPU that has more power than I have so far needed, & enough (redundant) RAM that has allowed the machine run various distos/OS's & never need to run /swap.

I'm at the point now where I'm weighing up whether to use my non-Apple box as a server. It is a waste of CPU power for my server needs, I set it up with FreeNAS yesterday, & will use it to test the system for a while, whilst I think about the boxes future. I will get to see how much CPU is required amongst other things that FreeNAS reports, so it will allow me to at least know what my minimum hardware requirements are.

I know that when this machine is eventually replaced, that it won't be by an Apple product. :-)

[Frak]

Handy, what is your feeling on Mighty Mice?

[handy]

Handy, what is your feeling on Mighty Mice?

They suck, big time.

I threw mine in a draw never to be used again, within the first few hours of using the new machine.

Was that the response you expected Frak?

One day I'll give it to someone I don't like. :lolflag:

[Frak]

They suck, big time.

I threw mine in a draw never to be used again, within the first few hours of using the new machine.

Was that the response you expected Frak?

One day I'll give it to someone I don't like. :lolflag:
I was hoping you didn't like it, for else, I'd have to call you a freak or somethng. :lolflag:

[handy]

I was hoping you didn't like it, for else, I'd have to call you a freak or somethng. :lolflag:

I've certainly been called worse, & I'm old enough not to care. Unless of course they are big & cranky & close enough to be able to catch me. :P

[tsali]

I happen to already have those parts, and the ones that come from Apple suck ***. The monitor has a slow response time, the speakers are sub par, and your modem is either on board or if you mean the one YOUR ISP ASSIGNS YOU, that comes with your bill.


Now you're just being obtuse. You must compare component for component. You didn't do that. I was also speaking of a 56k dial up modem. The Mac has one by default, therefore you must include it for comparison.

[Frak]

Now you're just being obtuse. You must compare component for component. You didn't do that. I was also speaking of a 56k dial up modem. The Mac has one by default, therefore you must include it for comparison.
The mac does NOT have one by default. You have to buy a USB modem at the time of purchase.

[sportscrazed2]

reason plain and simple, they charge so much because they can get away with it. they don't give a **** about marketshare it's simple economics they chose the price that will maximize their profits

[tsali]

The mac does NOT have one by default. You have to buy a USB modem at the time of purchase.

Ok, so knock off $20 from the Dell. My last iMac had one integral to the system. I didn't realize they'd taken them out.

[Swarms]

The mac does NOT have one by default. You have to buy a USB modem at the time of purchase.

He still has a point.

Frankly I do not understand that people get so worked up about this, why is it important for you Frak to know why people pay more for stuff from Apple?

Don't you have anything better to do? Shouldn't we be like saving the planet or something? :)

[Grant A.]

I can sum up the whole solution to this topic quite easily:

Supply and demand normally dictate prices, but with software, it's different. Software prices are based on research and development costs instead of supply and demand. So it doesn't matter what market share Apple has, their products will always be the prices they are.

[tact]

Mac uses the same hardware as PC. So, nothing really special. For all Apple fanboy: WAKE UP.

Hehehe...I am hardly a mac fanboy but if it lets you sleep better at night pls think of me as one for what i am about to write:
I hope you will learn to see, babylon2233, that just because two items are made of the same hardware it does NOT necessarily follow that there will be no significant difference between the two items - your, "...same hardware....So, nothing really special".

I could wax on about the nature of the logical fallacy you are espousing but will not. I will instead just give examples of "same hardware" with vast differences how "special" they are:
Rolls Royce:Hyundai
jayaganesh's "designer dress": walmart cotton dress
roast lamb dinner cooked by me: roast lamb dinner cooked by you

Having dealt with your logically fallacious argument and (hopefully) having opened up your eyes to the very real possibility that two items made of the same (kinds of) hardware, could in fact be VASTLY different in how "special" they are:
...lets look at the real question, "DESPITE having similar hardware - are Mac's in any more "special" than PC's?"

In considering this question we need to remember that when comparing Mac to PC ...its NOT just about hardware. The reason being that a Mac doesn't come as hardware alone.

A Mac is a combination of an operating system AND hardware that were tailored and designed specifically for one another.

What about PC's? Despite the fact that nearly all PC's come with Windows pre-loaded, and despite the pretty stickers that declare "built for Microsoft xxxxxx", the operating system and the hardware are NOT actually completely tailored for each other. This goes for Wintel as well as Lintel etc... The hardware AND the operating systems are all as "general purpose" as can be. This is VASTLY different to Mactel.

Does this make Mac's special in any degree above Wintel/Lintel PC's? Is it a case of Rolls:Hyundai or a case of Honda:Toyota?

Well, I leave that to debate. Just learn the one point i am making, babylon2233 - that just because two items are made of substantially the same hardware they are not necessarily equal. :)

[Skripka]

I could wax on about the nature of the logical fallacy you are espousing but will not. I will instead just give examples of "same hardware" with vast differences how "special" they are:
Rolls Royce:Hyundai
jayaganesh's "designer dress": walmart cotton dress
roast lamb dinner cooked by me: roast lamb dinner cooked by you

You do realize how stupid the above above comparison sounds?



You DO know that The difference between RAM in a Mac and RAM made by Samsung that you buy from NewEgg-is that you pay $500 per DIMM when you buy it from Apple? The only difference between a Hitachi HDD and a HDD purchased through Apple is that the later costs 5 times as much? Don't you?

Don't you? Because you clearly don't as evidenced by the above post.

Apple just rebrands generic hardware (usually made by Samsung for RAM, and often Hitachi for HDDs for example), and calls it their own. They do absolutely nothing to "design" it. They just rebrand it for the sake of their EULA. The only thing they custom call for is HDCP on the motherboards (YAY we LOVE DRM!!), and a firmware chip to keep OSX locked to it (YAY!! MORE DRM We love that TOO!!).

Their OS is tested and distributed on a VERY limited number of hardware configurations--this means that they know things will work-when hardware is purchased through them.



OSX runs beautifully on generic Intel hardware-if it didn't we wouldn't have the OSx86 people. Note I am NOTE advertising or recommending what they do here.

The difference between a PC and a Mac is what OS they US, and the box they are housed in. That is it. A Mac is a Personal Computer too.

[Frak]

Exactly, the Optical Drive is always is Mitsumi that runs on the USB 2.0 bus. The hard drive is a Maxtor or Seagate (always). The Graphics is usually a PNY with a Mac label affixed to it. Finally, the motherboard is just a foxconn with an EFI on-board.

I know this because I've taken apart my own Mac and looked.

[Skripka]

Exactly, the Optical Drive is always is Mitsumi that runs on the USB 2.0 bus. The hard drive is a Maxtor or Seagate (always). The Graphics is usually a PNY with a Mac label affixed to it. Finally, the motherboard is just a foxconn with an EFI on-board.

I know this because I've taken apart my own Mac and looked.

Well, my UnderPoweredBook had a Hitachi in it, so there :tongue:

[macintosh]

But windows doesnt make PC :D

And I think there are many companies out there that are just as good or better then apple in the PC market like HP and Dell

Ah yes the lovely fall apart HP and the Toxic Dell what wonderful computers! Put Ubuntu on it and let that kernel panic happen as the hardware inside is made by cheap Japanese company who cannot make hardware for there lives! No wonder they come with Windows and it's silly Movie Maker the Software equivalent for the hardware it runs on!

[Frak]

Ah yes the lovely fall apart HP and the Toxic Dell what wonderful computers! Put Ubuntu on it and let that kernel panic happen as the hardware inside is made by cheap Japanese company who cannot make hardware for there lives! No wonder they come with Windows and it's silly Movie Maker the Software equivalent for the hardware it runs on!
Almost all the boards created for HP are either Intel, Biostar, Foxconn, or MSI. All of these brands, except Intel, are Taiwanese. These also are some of the best build-quality boards out there. Dell used to use PC-Chips, but they broke a contract, so Dell is known to use Intel, Biostar, and ASUS (or ASRock) boards, which are all of great build quality.

You're an obvious troll, and you seem to admit it. You put out plain opinions and constitute them as fact. I just basically called you on your opinion here with my own, which logically classifies them both as opinion, but either way, you're going to say I'm wrong, call me a fanboy or something (I don't care), and try to plead with others to support your own opinion. Never changes, really.

[the8thstar]

I wonder how Apple can justify selling pricey PCs when the economy is doing so badly right now. I guess they're gonna start downsizing to keep their levels of cash.

[handy]

Exactly, the Optical Drive is always is Mitsumi that runs on the USB 2.0 bus. The hard drive is a Maxtor or Seagate (always). The Graphics is usually a PNY with a Mac label affixed to it. Finally, the motherboard is just a foxconn with an EFI on-board.

I know this because I've taken apart my own Mac and looked.

My iMac had the noisy optical drive replaced a few months ago under warranty & they put some a different branded drive in. I wondered if they looked in my bookmarks & saw the firmware upgrade link & thought, we'll fix him? Though I doubt it. :-)

I was going to flash the firmware when the machine's warranty was over.

Well, my UnderPoweredBook had a Hitachi in it, so there :tongue:

Hitachi bought IBM's drive business off them. I always considered the IBM Deskstars to be the best quality HDDs on the market & would choose Hitachi over Western Digital.

[KiwiNZ]

I said it a 1000 times , comparing Apples to apples , oranges to oranges , Apple Computers are not over priced.

[handy]

I said it a 1000 times , comparing Apples to apples , oranges to oranges , Apple Computers are not over priced.

You need to be careful KiwiNZ, someone may report you for adding combustible material to an unresolvable discussion. :-)

[sportscrazed2]

someone please convince me these aren't a waste of money my current laptop is 17" and i love it but i want to get something smaller for school but not too small and give this laptop to my brother. i just dont' want to buy a 13" laptop and feel like it's too small.

[jrusso2]

I am amazed that the old Macbooks used are worth as much as buying a new cheap Windows laptop.

[Skripka]

someone please convince me these aren't a waste of money my current laptop is 17" and i love it but i want to get something smaller for school but not too small and give this laptop to my brother. i just dont' want to buy a 13" laptop and feel like it's too small.

Is DRM on the monitor port a good enough reason that it isn't worth it? (i.e. any non HDCP monitors you have will not work)

http://www.defectivebydesign.org/day01-macbook

[KiwiNZ]

You need to be careful KiwiNZ, someone may report you for adding combustible material to an unresolvable discussion. :-)

I will report myself :)

I was adding sauce to the Apple , or was it Apple Source to the pork :P

[tsali]

You do realize how stupid the above above comparison sounds?



You DO know that The difference between RAM in a Mac and RAM made by Samsung that you buy from NewEgg-is that you pay $500 per DIMM when you buy it from Apple? The only difference between a Hitachi HDD and a HDD purchased through Apple is that the later costs 5 times as much? Don't you?

Don't you? Because you clearly don't as evidenced by the above post.

Apple just rebrands generic hardware (usually made by Samsung for RAM, and often Hitachi for HDDs for example), and calls it their own. They do absolutely nothing to "design" it. They just rebrand it for the sake of their EULA. The only thing they custom call for is HDCP on the motherboards (YAY we LOVE DRM!!), and a firmware chip to keep OSX locked to it (YAY!! MORE DRM We love that TOO!!).

Their OS is tested and distributed on a VERY limited number of hardware configurations--this means that they know things will work-when hardware is purchased through them.



OSX runs beautifully on generic Intel hardware-if it didn't we wouldn't have the OSx86 people. Note I am NOTE advertising or recommending what they do here.

The difference between a PC and a Mac is what OS they US, and the box they are housed in. That is it. A Mac is a Personal Computer too.

You missed tact's point completely.

He was trying to say that the WAY these parts come together in a system may be entirely different in an Apple than in a PC.

There was a time many years back when Rolls Royce used GM automatic transmissions.

Does that mean that a Chevy with the same transmission = Rolls Royce?

Now, I'd be willing to bet that if one could load OS X on say, a Sony Vaio or Dell XPS that quite few folks would buy those machines instead of Macs. I think OS X is an integral part of the Mac system.

[Skripka]

You missed tact's point completely.

He was trying to say that the WAY these parts come together in a system may be entirely different in an Apple than in a PC.

There was a time many years back when Rolls Royce used GM automatic transmissions.

Does that mean that a Chevy with the same transmission = Rolls Royce?

Now, I'd be willing to bet that if one could load OS X on say, a Sony Vaio or Dell XPS that quite few folks would buy those machines instead of Macs. I think OS X is an integral part of the Mac system.

WTF does that mean, "way in which" computer components "come together"? You fold Flap A into Slot A-and after that you throw on an OS. It is that simple.

All these metaphors comparing car assembly and the like and computer assembly ignore the fact that anyone can assemble a computer from parts and do a good job of it-it requires a bit of patience but is something that can easily be done well in an afternoon or less by someone with no prior experience and a small bit of supervision.

Computer components are completely neutral-some are made better than others yes; but so long as the quality is there they are very interchangeable-all this is evidenced by how Apple outsources all of it's hardware to normal giants in the hardware industry.


I agree with you, OSX is the only reason Apple is able to charge and sell it's hardware at the prices it does. If OSX was commercially available for generic Intel hardware without EFI hacks, Apple Computer only sell iPods and Iphones.

[Frak]

Now, I'd be willing to bet that if one could load OS X on say, a Sony Vaio or Dell XPS that quite few folks would buy those machines instead of Macs. I think OS X is an integral part of the Mac system.

I guess somebody missed the boat.

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

http://www.insanelymac.com/

And a little news from the VoodooXNU team (XNU is the OS X Kernel)
21 Dec 2008

Yes, we know the 9.6 kernel sources are up - we started working on it a few minutes after it was made available :-) The bad news is that Apple made a lot of changes in the kernel, most of them directly modifying the same parts that Voodoo does. So the port is almost going to be a rewrite. Expect it to take a few weeks. Early January is a good ETA for a beta of Voodoo 2.0.

16 Dec 2008

bumby has confirmed that the new Nehalem-core based Intel Core i7 processors work with Voodoo kernel (Apple stock kernel doesn't work yet). It requires using the busratio= boot flag. The next update should include native support for Core i7.

15 Dec 2008

Apple has released Leopard 10.5.6 - which means new kernel! The 9.6.0 xnu kernel source code is not up yet, but we'll be working to bring you Voodoo 9.6.0 as soon as we get our hands on the source archive.

And let's not forget the EFI-X chip: http://www.efi-x.com/index.php?language=english
Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FQlmYWczVI

[inxygnuu]

Think of it like webkinz (http://www.webkinz.com/us_en/)
They are simply a stuffed animal, but they come with a fancy outside coating, and a fancy inside coating, but overall, they are simply stuffed animals.

[Chrisj303]

The people that bitch the most about Apple, tend to be those that just can't afford one....but want one.

[Frak]

The people that bitch the most about Apple, tend to be those that just can't afford one....but want one.
The people who are die hard Mac fans are usually the ones, who in the deep back of their head, think they've just paid much more than they should for a polished OS. Besides that, it's just an OS.

I own 3 Mac's myself, 4 if you count my Lisa. I stopped liking Apple computers when I started hacking the XNU kernel and finding all the plain similarities in hardware.

[SuperSonic4]

I wouldn't accept a free apple unless I was going to sell it on.

Most people on these forums are wise enought o choose function over style.
mp3 players there are far better options than the iPod and cheaper too

7digital offers better quality and drm free songs than iTunes although the library is less extensive

A new pc with windows is far cheaper than a mac for equal specs even when software costs are incorporated. Plus you can reject the EULA and still use the PC (you might be able to do it with macs but I doubt it). Windows are infinitly more upgradeable too.

Every video playing software that exists > Quicktime but you have to have it should you want iTunes which in turn is necessary for updating the newest iPods/any iPod properly for I bet apple does not like amarok updating them.

Apple is for people who prefer style over function and like chucking £20 notes on the fire.

[KiwiNZ]

Generalisations are usually wrong , yours is no exception.

I have been in IT for more years than I care to remember. I have used all possible options with regards to personal computers.

I have settled on Mac for , form , reliability , build quality , ease of use and purpose.


I wouldn't accept a free apple unless I was going to sell it on.

Most people on these forums are wise enought o choose function over style.
mp3 players there are far better options than the iPod and cheaper too

7digital offers better quality and drm free songs than iTunes although the library is less extensive

A new pc with windows is far cheaper than a mac for equal specs even when software costs are incorporated. Plus you can reject the EULA and still use the PC (you might be able to do it with macs but I doubt it). Windows are infinitly more upgradeable too.

Every video playing software that exists > Quicktime but you have to have it should you want iTunes which in turn is necessary for updating the newest iPods/any iPod properly for I bet apple does not like amarok updating them.

Apple is for people who prefer style over function and like chucking £20 notes on the fire.

[tsali]

WTF does that mean, "way in which" computer components "come together"? You fold Flap A into Slot A-and after that you throw on an OS. It is that simple.

No, I do not think it's that simple. If we can't find common ground on that, then we've no further basis for discussion.

I guess somebody missed the boat.

Sorry, Frak, the OSx86 doesn't count as a viable consumer option. It's a geek hack, little more.

WHEN it can be bundled with full support of both hardware vendor AND Apple, then I accept its viability as a consumer alternative.

[tsali]

All these metaphors comparing car assembly and the like and computer assembly ignore the fact that anyone can assemble a computer from parts and do a good job of it-it requires a bit of patience but is something that can easily be done well in an afternoon or less by someone with no prior experience and a small bit of supervision.

Lastly, please provide a components list that will allow me to build a machine IDENTICAL to the iMac in an afternoon.

People are known to pay for style and form as well. Last I checked, I don't think you can order this from Newegg...

[tsali]

Most people on these forums are wise enought o choose function over style.

I always laugh at these kinds of statements.

A life reduced to function only isn't worth living. It isn't even human.

[igknighted]

LOL

C'mon they make better PCs than Windows, seriously overpriced though.

Last time I checked, microsoft didn't make PC's. And there are many PCs (Dell XPS 1330, 1530 laptops, HP's touch screen PC, many Sony and Toshiba laptops... to name a few) that look and work just as well as the apple ones. The hardware you get from apple is the same as you get elsewhere, the only difference is you get OSX. If OSX is worth it, by all means go buy a mac. I don't think a mediocre, closed at every turn OS is worth the huge markup you pay. But that's me. If you think it is worth it, by all means, go for it.

Oh... and the apple service? If you think going to the genius bar at the mall is great service, by all means keep doing it. Personally, I'll take my PC to a the local repair shop if I need any work where I have a great, personal relationship with the techs (if it's something I can't do on my own). Not only do I then have some say as to what happens to my PC, but I support local business. Win-Win.

[Frak]

WHEN it can be bundled with full support of both hardware vendor AND Apple, then I accept its viability as a consumer alternative.

http://store.psystar.com/

There you can buy a computer with OS X, Windows, and/or Linux pre-installed with full support from the vendor.

There are companies in various countries that now use OSx86, though, as a result of Apple's OS monopoly not being a legal binding. (Therefore, anybody has the right to install OS X on any computer they wish with no legal repercussions)

[Swarms]

Last time I checked, microsoft didn't make PC's. And there are many PCs (Dell XPS 1330, 1530 laptops, HP's touch screen PC, many Sony and Toshiba laptops... to name a few) that look and work just as well as the apple ones. The hardware you get from apple is the same as you get elsewhere, the only difference is you get OSX. If OSX is worth it, by all means go buy a mac. I don't think a mediocre, closed at every turn OS is worth the huge markup you pay. But that's me. If you think it is worth it, by all means, go for it.

Ok, show me another aluminium and glass laptop with a backlit keyboard. I am not being very specific...
Afterwards we can make a poll to let people pick out the more beautiful laptop.

Note: I am not trying to prove you wrong, simply curious.

[handy]

The people that bitch the most about Apple, tend to be those that just can't afford one....but want one.

I bitch, & we have 3 that I bought & 1 that our daughter bought for herself in the house, amongst other non-Apple boxes.

But I agree, there is a lot of bitching from people that are reacting to price & the odd macatroid that has rubbed their personality the wrong way. :-)

[handy]

I wouldn't accept a free apple unless I was going to sell it on.

I'm all for freedom of choice.


Most people on these forums are wise enought o choose function over style.

You have absolutely no basis for that statement, you just pulled it out of thin air.


mp3 players there are far better options than the iPod and cheaper too

I disagree, the iPod for my old eyes is the easiest of any mp3 player I have ever seen to operate.
That is the sole purpose I bought it, the added bonus that I can so easily sync my contacts on the Leopard side of my iMac is just icing on the cake. I don't listen to music these days, but love well read audio books, which is what lives on most of the 8Gb of storage on my iPod. (None were bought from Apple's store by the way.)


A new pc with windows is far cheaper than a mac for equal specs even when software costs are incorporated. Plus you can reject the EULA and still use the PC (you might be able to do it with macs but I doubt it). Windows are infinitly more upgradeable too.

I happily use Arch on my iMac, which was bought for the space advantage in my already crowded office, as I have detailed previously in this thread.

As far as non-Apple machines are concerned, I've been building them since 1995, & hacking Amiga hardware before that; 10 years of the building experience was during existence of my IT technical service business.

I agree that all notebooks & Apple's iMacs are extremely limited as far as upgrading is concerned. A few rare notebooks made by non-Apple manufacturers can have their GPU &/or their CPU's upgraded.

People that buy any brand of notebook or Apple's iMac aren't expecting to be able to upgrade any more than the RAM & possibly the HDD size.

There really exists no argument against Apple regarding upgradability on these products, beyond the slim one that Apple could have joined the list of the producers that build the very rare notebooks (they could have done it with the iMac too) with the inherent ability to upgrade their GPU or CPU.


Apple is for people who prefer style over function and like chucking £20 notes on the fire.

:lolflag: You are writing as though you are quite a young person.

You should have been taught that such generalisations without backing, are nought but an appeal to the emotions that leave logic behind.

Such statements always fail to win any points, though they are quite often what flame wars exist on, hot air. :-)

[MikeTheC]

There are companies in various countries that now use OSx86, though, as a result of Apple's OS monopoly not being a legal binding. (Therefore, anybody has the right to install OS X on any computer they wish with no legal repercussions)

Hmm? Where'd you get that from? Apple, to the extent that one can argue they're a monopoly, does not operate in an illegal fashion, nor are they in violation of any laws. They do not engage in anti-competitive behavior, do not use leverage in one arena to shut out others in another one, and so forth and so on.

Installing Mac OS X on anything other than Apple hardware is a violation of the Apple EULA. Period, plain and simple. Now, whether Apple is likely to come after you personally for putting Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware is a separate matter. That being said, if businesses are doing it, then that would become somewhat more problematic. Besides, what business would want to not just risk tort action by Apple, but have no warranty or support for their intended platform (that is, a "Mac")? If I ran a business, I certainly would want support, and that means I would certainly need to make sure everything was on the straight-and-narrow.

[Frak]

Hmm? Where'd you get that from? Apple, to the extent that one can argue they're a monopoly, does not operate in an illegal fashion, nor are they in violation of any laws. They do not engage in anti-competitive behavior, do not use leverage in one arena to shut out others in another one, and so forth and so on.

Installing Mac OS X on anything other than Apple hardware is a violation of the Apple EULA. Period, plain and simple. Now, whether Apple is likely to come after you personally for putting Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware is a separate matter. That being said, if businesses are doing it, then that would become somewhat more problematic. Besides, what business would want to not just risk tort action by Apple, but have no warranty or support for their intended platform (that is, a "Mac")? If I ran a business, I certainly would want support, and that means I would certainly need to make sure everything was on the straight-and-narrow.
OK, you misunderstood what I said.

It is not of legal binding -> It is not legally enforceable. In some countries, the part that says "OS X may not be installed on any non-apple branded/labeled (it's changed a bit) computers" is not legally enforceable since it, in itself, may be a violation of another law entirely.

[tsali]

In some countries, the part that says "OS X may not be installed on any non-apple branded/labeled (it's changed a bit) computers" is not legally enforceable since it, in itself, may be a violation of another law entirely.


If it is being installed not in accordance with the Apple EULA, it's piracy, plain and simple. It doesn't matter what country your in or what their legal structure is like. The EULA is an "AGREEMENT" between Apple and the User...not LAW. However, Apple has the option of pursuing action against those who violate the terms of that EULA, just as Pystar is being hammered by Apple now...

http://www.engadget.com/2008/12/23/psystars-lawyers-take-another-hit-say-apple-didnt-copyright-o?icid=sphere_cnet_inline

http://www.engadget.com/2008/07/16/apples-lawsuit-against-psystar-examined/

[KiwiNZ]

Can you please provide proof of your claim . Please provide examples and the appropriate supporting statute.

Your statement concerns me as it could be seen as promoting illegal actions which is not allowed here.


OK, you misunderstood what I said.

It is not of legal binding -> It is not legally enforceable. In some countries, the part that says "OS X may not be installed on any non-apple branded/labeled (it's changed a bit) computers" is not legally enforceable since it, in itself, may be a violation of another law entirely.

[NoSmokingBandit]

If it is being installed not in accordance with the Apple EULA, it's piracy, plain and simple. It doesn't matter what country your in or what their legal structure is like. The EULA is an "AGREEMENT" between Apple and the User...not LAW. However, Apple has the option of pursuing action against those who violate the terms of that EULA, just as Pystar is being hammered by Apple now...

http://www.engadget.com/2008/12/23/psystars-lawyers-take-another-hit-say-apple-didnt-copyright-o?icid=sphere_cnet_inline

http://www.engadget.com/2008/07/16/apples-lawsuit-against-psystar-examined/

So by your interpretation, Apple could put anything in the EULA and it would be legal? What if apple put in "every time you boot up your mac you must kill a hobo." According to you, that would be legal because its an agreement between you and apple, not the law.
Good day.

[handy]

EULA's have in the past been found to contain invalid components as this example involving AT&T demonstrates:

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080831104451947&query=psystar

[tact]

You do realize how stupid the above above comparison sounds?


You missed tact's point completely.

hehehe...indeed he did. He ranted on as if I were saying that Macs ARE better totally neglecting the point i made (and repeated in a summary) .


He was trying to say that the WAY these parts come together in a system may be entirely different in an Apple than in a PC.

Clearly you are a master of understanding. :)

And the two key words in what you wrote as about my point are:
"way" (as in "the way these parts (including OS) come together), and
"may" (as in "may be entirely different in an Apple")

In the words of my original post:
"Does this make Mac's special in any degree above Wintel/Lintel PC's? [...]

Well, I leave that to debate. Just learn the one point i am making, babylon2233 - that just because two items are made of substantially the same hardware they are not necessarily equal. :smile:"

Now I will actually make a comment or three about Mac's and whether I personally think they are worth what they cost (bringing myself back to the OP's question "Why does Apple charge so much?"


Now, I'd be willing to bet that if one could load OS X on say, a Sony Vaio or Dell XPS that quite few folks would buy those machines instead of Macs. I think OS X is an integral part of the Mac system.
I saw a fellow running OS X (bare metal) on a Dell laptop. It looked nice. But a lot of things didn't work in that "package". Lets call it a "package" for now... the package being made up of the Dell hardware and OS X as operating system.

Dell/OS X "package"
It would not resume properly after sleep. It would hang at times without warning. Many of the power saving features available in the hardware would not work properly.

This package (Dell/OS X) definitely did not work as well as another "package" - a package comprised of genuine Mac hardware and OS X. (Lets call this package "a Mac" since that is the commonly used term).

So to restate the above paragraph more succinctly: The Dell/OS X package I saw was definitely not as good as "a Mac".

Lets not draw conclusions here yet... hold on ye PC boi's... hold your fire a moment (or longer if ya carn't reed so dun gud an takes ya self more than a moment to read on).

Dell/XP "package"
That same Dell laptop originally came with Windows XP Pro. As a package (Dell/XP) it worked pretty well. It still had its share of issues but the work the OEM vendor (Dell) put in did a lot to polish the product.

In my opinion though - the end result of this package (Dell/XP) was/is not as good as "a Mac". My opinion is based on comparison with a new unibody Macbook - so my opinion stands a lot on performance, engineering, finish, and fit.
Performance - the Macbook ran Windows XP, Solaris 2008.11, and Ubuntu 8.10 in three separate Virtualbox VMs simultaneously full screen on 3 separate Mac desktop spaces with no impact to the host OS speed in the 4th desktop space. After weeks of abuse the Macbook is still yet to lock up or fail to resume etc...

The similarly spec'd (RAM, CPU, HDD) Dell/XP package suffered terribly under a similar load (three VM's at once). It also suffers the usual windows problems of occasional lockups, catastrophic crashes, and over time - system slowdown necessitating a reinstall of Windows.

Engineering (and toss in fit and finish) - The aluminium Macbook has a solid feel, looks great, and the LED illuminated screen dazzlingly good, the keyboard and trackpad both a pleasure to use.

The Dell creaked/flexed in my hands, the plastic case did not invoke feelings of admiration nor impression of longevity. The keyboard, screen, trackpad - well... "ordinary".

Unnecessarily repeating - "Not as good as a Mac".

Dell/Linux "package"
The very same Dell hardware as discussed in the above two packages was also installed with 2 varietals of Ubuntu. I will only summarise: Under Gutsy there were problems with hardware. Under Intrepid all the hardware was recognised and as a package (Dell/Intrepid) it worked pretty well.

However - the three simultaneous VM's scenario saw the host OS (intrepid) stutter and there were at times long delays before the system would respond to demands like opening a folder etc.

So again in my opinion this package (Dell/Linux) was/is not as good as "a Mac". As noted already performance was impacted (not as badly as the Dell/XP package). And all the comments I made about the Engineering, Fit, and Finish are obviously the same as per the Dell/XP package.

So summarising:
The Dell/OS X package - not as good as a Mac
The Dell/XP package - not as good as a Mac
The Dell/Linux package - not as good as a Mac

Now since the OP question is "Why does Apple charge so much?" I need to bring $$ into the equasion...
The unibody aluminium Macbook referred to in all the above as the "a Mac" package cost MYR4799

The similarly spec'd Dell referred to in the above Dell/XP package cost MYR5426 (you knock off the price of the windows operating system to work out how much the Dell/Linux package might cost. You are going to have to knock off MYR625 to get down to the Macbook price)

So even on the basic of cost - the Dell/xxxxxx packages are - not as good as a Mac. Thats why I bought it, my first Mac. (Oh and it runs Intrepid well on bare metal, even better in a VM where I can run it full screen and not have to dual boot). hehe

Cheers and Beers.

[NoSmokingBandit]

Its ironic that you post that comparison up there^^
I am, at the moment, typing in firefox on Leopard which is running on my home-built pc. All of my hardware works; it sleeps/wakes; i have audio, ethernet, usb, firewire, full video acceleration (8600gt), dvd read/write..... well, you get the idea, everything works :D

I would calssify this as better than a mac. Why is that, you ask? Because it only cost me about $600 and its above the specs of an imac (2.66ghz core2duo/4gb 800mhz ram/500+160gb hdd/an actual video card instead of laptop hardware).
The best part is that with newer kernel hacks (voodoo kernel) i can run updates right from apple and everything works without issue. Apple's hardware is no different than anybody elses (though a bit shinier), whatever they may want you to think. Thats why they say a mac isnt a Personal Computer, they think that Macs are made with magic and unicorn poop.

If you know this guy with osx on his dell, tell him to google "openhaltrestart.kext" It will fix his sleep/wake issues.

[tact]

The Dell referred to in my post above cost MYR5426 as noted. As a follow up to the above, just to be as fair as possible, I visited the Dell website (Malaysia) and did a custom configuration of a Dell XPS M1330 to more closely reflect the pricing side of the equasion presented.

Its like this:
Macbook - MYR4799 (includes OS X)
(no change from previous post)

Dell XPS M1330 - MYR4609 (includes Windows OS)
(customised to come as close as possible to the standard spec Macbook 13" hardware. Added: LED Display, NVIDIA video card, SB HD audio card. Removed: MS Office, Antivirus, etc etc)

This makes theoretically equivalent Dell cheaper than a Macbook however it has a number of deficiencies that would make a significant impact on the pricing if Dell included them.

In the above spec the Dell has a larger HDD than the Macbook (250GB as opposed to 160GB) (actually its a free upgrade limited offer by Dell). However ...

The Dell is still lacking in the following areas:
- Dell: NVIDIA(R) GeForce(TM) 8400M GS with 128MB GDDR3 dedicated graphic memory
+ Mac: NVIDIA GeForce 9400M graphics processor with 256MB of DDR3 SDRAM

- Dell: CPU 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Processor with 2MB Cache, 667 MHz FSB
+ Mac: CPU 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor with 3MB Cache running 1:1 with processor speed. 1066MHz frontside bus

- Dell: Memory 4GB (2x2048MB) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM
+ Mac: Memory 4GB (2x2048MB) 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM

- Dell: 0.3 MP built in cam
+ Mac: 1.3MP built in cam

- Dell: Integrated 10/100 Ethernet
+ Mac: Integrated 10/100/Gigabit Ethernet

+ Mac: Multi touch touchpad
+ Mac: Audio input and output ports - combined digital/optical/analog

+ Dell: 8 in 1 memory card reader
+ Dell: fingerprint reader
+ Dell: Travel remote

So toss all that in a salad bowl and see whether you reckon a Mac is still so terribly expensive. The way I see it there wouldn't be a lot of difference in the pricing if every difference were levelled.

So to the OP - "Why does Apple charge so much?" Do they really charge so much considering what you get and how much something equivalent from another vendor costs? :)

Cheers and Beers

[tact]

Its ironic that you post that comparison up there^^
I am, at the moment, typing in firefox on Leopard which is running on my home-built pc. All of my hardware works; it sleeps/wakes; i have audio, ethernet, usb, firewire, full video acceleration (8600gt), dvd read/write..... well, you get the idea, everything works :D


Sorry but you cannot say your PC is better than a Mac based on the price and upgradability factors inherent in your home-brew PC. Reason being its an orange and you cannot compare oranges to apples. If Apple sold all the individual bits so a person could home-build a box full of apple bits, including OS X - its still not a Mac. ;)

In any case - I am glad your system all works for you.

A different system (the Dell laptop mentioned in previous posts) comes with a completely different experience. That Dell laptop would not suspend/resume reliably with Gutsy but would with Intrepid.

The company issued Dell laptop that I have used for a number of years now is another story altogether. I removed XP and installed Ubuntu from day 1. It would never suspend/resume with Edgy, would suspend/resume with Fiesty, would not suspend/resume with Gutsy, was unreliable with Hardy, works great with Intrepid.

Variations in user experience:
1. Different hardware and same OS - different results. (i.e. Your home-built PC and that other dude's Dell laptop both running OS X)

2. Same hardware and different variants of the same OS - different results (My company issued Dell laptop with Edgy/Fiesty/Gutsy/Hardy/Intrepid)

Now we are getting to the real difference between PC's and Mac's... You will never get that kind of variation in experience with that package called "a Mac". (i.e. Mac hardware and OS X).

Its bleedingly obvious why, so it pains me to state: A Mac is that "package" which includes BOTH hardware (yes - ordinary dogsbody hardware like other vendors use and not so overly expensive as demonstrated by now) AND an OS that are BUILT to go together.

Linux variants, Windows variants, etc etc.. all have to try to, or be tweaked by OEM vendors to, accomodate a huge variety of hardware configurations and permutations.

Thats why some boxes will suspend/resume, and others will not when running the same OS. Thats why the same box will suspend/resume with Fiesty or Intrepid but not with Gutsy or Hardy.

There have been some improvements to Ubuntu (core system stuff like the Pulseaudio audio subsystem for example) that just will not run at all for some people on hardware that ran previous versions of ubuntu wonderfully. Should the linux developer community that are ubuntu pause and say "Ohhhh our forward thinking quantum leap in functionality, crossing over to pulseaudio, should be reversed because it won't work for some people on certain hardware that would run ALSA?" Of course not.

Does this kind of thing happen to Mac owners? Of course not.

Even in the case of Microsoft with all its muscle and influence - for all that is worth... there are still class action suits being brought to court because "Vista Ready" hardware stickers were, in some cases, worth less than the glue used to affix them to certain boxes or boards.

This is a phenomena totally absent from Mac scenarios.

In the case of a Mac - the OS, its developers, its support crews, et al, are focussed on a far smaller sampling/variety of hardware components.

Agreed the hardware bits that get inside Apple boxes and become Macs may not be any different, or any more special, to what may also go into Sony's/Dells or home-built boxes, and it has already been shown that similarly spec'd Macs and Dells are similarly priced so there is no price penalty really - the point is that in the case of the Mac the field, the scope for variations, is narrowed considerably. This makes the task of matching OS to hardware so much easier to get right.

Who else can compare to that? .... look for a vendor who spec's/designs/controls BOTH the hardware and OS that makes up the "package".

Dell/Windows/Linux? - Hmmmm not quite the same. So it can never be as good as a Mac
Sony/Windows? - As above
HP/Windows/Linux? - As above
Sun/Solaris? - Ahhh that has potential to be as good as a Mac :)
IBM/AIX/OS/2 - Ahhh that too may have the potential to be as good as a Mac
Commodore/AmigaOS
others?

Cheers and Beers

[tsali]

So by your interpretation, Apple could put anything in the EULA and it would be legal? What if apple put in "every time you boot up your mac you must kill a hobo." According to you, that would be legal because its an agreement between you and apple, not the law.
Good day.

Yes, they could put almost anything they darn well please in it. There are specific laws against contracting murder. However, it would not be illegal for them to put in some lesser direction, say, "you will park on your neighbors lawn" or something equally stupid.

The court would require you to behave as a "reasonable person" in the face of an unreasonable contract. A "reasonable person" would reject the contract.

The bigger question is why you would continue to use software in which the EULA contains content objectionable to you?

Do you think it's ok for people to load, run and use OS X in a manner that is prohibited by the EULA when parts of it may conflict with local law? It should be just the opposite...when you can't comply with the EULA because of local statute or vice-versa, then you shouldn't use the software at all.

What I think is that some people will USE the conflict as a loophole to pirate with impunity because they believe they would win in a court case if it came to that. I would only hope they would have discussed this tactic with their lawyers prior.

[notwen]

This thread is funny, lawl.

I owned a iBook G3 until it's screen died, never had a single issue w/ it. That said, I can agree that to some(including myself) the price of Apple machines is a bit much, but that will always depend on the wallet/frugality of the person interested.

I custom build my desktops and enjoy the ability/option of adding components at my leisure and also knowing the price range spectrum I can expect for the various components(also knowing that these are prices I can accept and find worth said price). As far as my replacement laptop I purchased the first wave of N-Series models sold by Dell, a Inspiron 1420n. It serves my needs and I purchased it knowing the nuances that come w/ PCs(laptops and desktop both) and Linux distributions.

My personal opinion of Apple is that they do tend to overcharge for their products, but the way that they do market them they have control over many situations a home/business user may encounter by limiting the hardware specifications and OS(I do enjoy OSX). They also keep these hardware specifications/models to a very low number, enabling them to provide very good technical support(although it also costs comes w/ a price tag, kinda high, just my opinion) to the average user.

In the end it all comes down to personal preference to what you need from your machine and also to the amount you feel that said machine is worth. So in my personal opinion, Apples are overpriced, but if you can afford it, then who am I to judge? =]

To each their own. *cheers*

[Frak]

Your statement concerns me as it could be seen as promoting illegal actions which is not allowed here.

If you live in a country in which a contract is not legally enforceable, it's not an illegal action. It would be, in fact, the problem of the issuer, not the user. If I go and buy Mac OS X, and my law states that Apple cannot restrict what computer it goes onto, then I am allowed to install it on any computer I want to.

This is within laws of who it encapsulates, and I cannot be of charge if the law says otherwise. It is the responsibility of anybody reading it to take the warning and check their own laws to see if it applies to them.

It could only be seen as me advocating as an illegal action if you are an Apple fanboy and want to make sure I can't, i.e. one of great influence, make anybody change their mind. There's a difference between a warning and a threat.

[gjoellee]

2000 for a laptop that can't even play games well? :confused:

Their pricing is insane.

yeah, when you think about Mac OS X is actually a fork from Free BSD. Mac does however focus a lot on great design and that costs a lot of money.

[NoSmokingBandit]

Yes, they could put almost anything they darn well please in it. There are specific laws against contracting murder. However, it would not be illegal for them to put in some lesser direction, say, "you will park on your neighbors lawn" or something equally stupid.


And there are laws about tying products together. There are tons of anti-trust laws over here in the USA. Idk where you live, so those laws might not matter, but if those laws dont matter they probably dont give a crap about copyright wither, so its all moot.
The point is that you just contradicted yourself by saying that the EULA has nothing to do with the law, unless its breaking the law...

@Tact.
Yes, i can say my pc is better. Why? Because 'better' is a relative term. I can say apples are better than oranges too depending on my purpose for that said fruit. Oranges wouldnt make a very good pie, so for me apples are better.
For me, my pc is better than a mac becuase it allows me to upgrade, it runs osx without flaws (not any that i've noticed anyway), and has saved me a ton of money.
A Mac could be better for someone who doesnt want to think about what parts are in their computer, doesnt mind spending 2x the market standard, and likes shiny toys. Better is relative.

The term Mac is just a brand. If apple did sell the parts to build one the end product would still be a mac because a mac is just a computer built from parts Steve Jobs has blessed with his holy water.

[tsali]

Never mind...there's no reasoning with pirates.

[rfruth]

Apple doesn't unbundle their support like Dell, HP etc does (i.e. phone them for support and they want a credit card number), call Apple and you get support no CC needed (now if the support is worth it is another matter)

[tact]

Yes, i can say my pc is better. Why? Because 'better' is a relative term. I can say apples are better than oranges too depending on my purpose for that said fruit. Oranges wouldnt make a very good pie, so for me apples are better.


And because "better" is so apparently "relative" that it has pretty much no meaning at all to you - I can say a beer is "better" than a broomstick because that useless broomstick cannot do my taxes online.

Seriously my friend even "relative" terms have meaning and must be related ("relative"!) back to some common ground that can be used as a basis for comparison. Looking at "relative" from an entirely different derivation.. your "relatives" wouldn't be your "relatives" if you were not "related" by shared bloodlines

Bringing this back to the thread in hand. You cannot compare a laptop to a desktop and criticise the laptop for being lower powered and more expensive. Similarly you cannot compare your home-built box of bits to an iMac. Well you COULD but it would not be at all RELATED to the title of the thread.

The OP question is "Why does Apple charge so much?". For that to have any relevance you have to relate the "...charge so much" to something. Apple charges so much for what as compared to what? In that context it is useless and pointless to say Apple is more expensive than a marshmellow. Those two objects are not really comparable items and so the relative prices are irrelevant to the topic.

Your box of home-built bits comes closest to which Mac? Send pics... send specs... send pricing? Then we can all make our mind up as to matters such as the worth of your construct as against the Mac YOU choose to compare your box to.

I did a fair and thorough comparison of two laptops and showed empirically that the Macbook is "better" on performance and price.


If apple did sell the parts to build one the end product would still be a mac because a mac is just a computer built from parts Steve Jobs has blessed with his holy water.

You really think that if you had all the bits needed to assemble a Macbook or iMac - that the resultant product you assemble would have the same build quality as a factory Mac, and that others, purchasers, would not think that still the factory assembled unit would be the better buy?

Blessings on ya bro...

Cheers

[handy]

Never mind...there's no reasoning with pirates.

You could start a VERY complex argument with a statement like that.

If we have a look at the state our planet is in due to the multiple levels of environmental damage that has been & is being done at an ever accelerating rate due to the paradigms of consumerism being promoted at ever more sophisticated levels by the corporate giants & the governments that they control. Which also of course brings in to the discussion the social/cultural/ethnic/educational & political ramification of this extremely selfish & short sighted mindset that is championed by the unelected corporate giants that run so much of our world.

I consider piracy to often be a revolutionary act, just as using legally free software & doing anything else that takes energy away from the so called corporate elite & all of the bunnies that have been brand washed by them.

The only way we can be free of this dead end system is to starve it any way we can & to feed alternatives.

If people say that it is impossible to change the system & create a new one, or that there is nothing wrong with the current one, then they are currently lost to the consumer paradigm.

[KiwiNZ]

Piracy is NOT supported by this Forum ...Period

[KiwiNZ]

This thread is drifting and becoming a troll magnet, I am closing it in the interim

[KiwiNZ]

re-opened ,please make this enjoyable and no trolling

Thankyou

[Swarms]

Apple's hardware is reasonably priced
;)

[Fzang]

Apple's products are expensive for the same reason that ferrai, sony, jewelery and many other things are expensive, it's luxury and shows "I can afford more than netbooks and used cars"

A mac is more than just a laptop, like a ferrai is more than just a car. Only very few people have these things and so it's more prestigious to have something that not many others have. Have you ever thought "woohoo! I have windows with the amazing aero effects and transparent glass!"... but oh wait, nearly everyone has that..

I don't think I've explained it very clearly even though I tried. Macs are not overpriced laptops, they're macs where the software looks just as good as hardware, not just "laptops" from bestbuy

[Swarms]

Apple's products are expensive for the same reason that ferrai, sony, jewelery and many other things are expensive, it's luxury and shows "I can afford more than netbooks and used cars"

A mac is more than just a laptop, like a ferrai is more than just a car. Only very few people have these things and so it's more prestigious to have something that not many others have. Have you ever thought "woohoo! I have windows with the amazing aero effects and transparent glass!"... but oh wait, nearly everyone has that..

I don't think I've explained it very clearly even though I tried. Macs are not overpriced laptops, they're macs where the software looks just as good as hardware, not just "laptops" from bestbuy
Be careful, in a little you will get swarmed in people saying that there are absolutely no difference between Macs and other computers. Though your argument is a part of what I believe is correct.

[surfgeek]

Just to give my view.. I am a mac user (mainly) we have 4 in the house and all the family love using them. Ibooks & iMacs are very good value, build quality is far better than any pc I have seen,they have innovation, style, good looks, a great OS, the best "included" software of any manufacturer. They just work and very well. I am using a G5 imac which is 2 1/2 years old and never had any configuration problems and I install everything going. Games are now much better supported.

[handy]

Apple's products are expensive for the same reason that ferrai, sony, jewelery and many other things are expensive, it's luxury and shows "I can afford more than netbooks and used cars"

A mac is more than just a laptop, like a ferrai is more than just a car. Only very few people have these things and so it's more prestigious to have something that not many others have. Have you ever thought "woohoo! I have windows with the amazing aero effects and transparent glass!"... but oh wait, nearly everyone has that..

I don't think I've explained it very clearly even though I tried. Macs are not overpriced laptops, they're macs where the software looks just as good as hardware, not just "laptops" from bestbuy


Though your argument is a part of what I believe is correct.

For some people, yes.

People & there situations are far too complex for there to be a simple black & white answer on this topic.

Some will never understand that it is possible for a Mac to be the best solution to a certain set of circumstances. Just as the same can be said for a windows PC, & one variety of distro will be more suitable than another, under the right set of circumstances.

It is good for us to appreciate that there are sets of circumstances that we may never imagine, that will make something (that for whatever reason we may hold a prejudice against), the perfect solution.

Because some people are held under the sway of glamour, & face it, glamour is one of the marketroids most powerful weapons, it does not mean that everyone else who buys a product bought it for reasons based on glamour. Many people are not impressed by conspicuous consumption.

As the effects of consumerism gradually start to permeate human consciousness, the ugly side of glamour will become recognised for what it is.

[Swarms]

Hence why I said "a part of".

[handy]

Hence why I said "a part of".

That was me agreeing with you... ;-)

[tact]

For some people, yes.

People & there situations are far too complex for there to be a simple black & white answer on this topic.

hehehe disagree. Surely in respect to this topic ("Why does Apple charge so much?") a black and white answer could be reached if one defines a little more clearly the "what it is" that Apple supposedly charges so much for.

The OP has not contributed any further concerning what it is that in his opinion/observation Apple charges so much for. So in that void if posters wanted to choose a particular Apple product and compare it to a similar/same item pricewise that at least is not a total waste of time.

There seems to be a lot of presumption in this thread by some that Apple gear is expensive. Even the OP's question presumes its a fact that Apple "charges so much". The presumptions see some posters making blanket claims that Apple charges twice the price for the same ordinary hardware that goes into non-apple branded PCs.

What to say? - I am not at all an Apple fanboi, nor at all trying to defend Apple pricing policies. My own experience with Apple products is limited to one Macbook I purchased a month ago.

I will admit that prior to lookng into purchasing my new laptop I had this impression that Macs would be expensive. But the new unibody "carved from a block of metal" Macbooks at least got me looking at the cost benefit analysis, considering Macs - eventually leading to me purchasing one.

In my very limited experience with Apple and its products and pricing, as has been detailed in past posts in which I compared to a similarly spec'd Dell Laptop, and the playing field levelled for features that the Dell lacks and cannot be added to the Dell laptop - I reckon that the price/worth of the two machines are about the same. Thus the reason for my purchasing a Macbook.

As a result I am beginning to question the origins and validity of my previously held conviction/impression/assumption that Mac's and anything and everything Apple would be outright expensive. It may well be that Apple does equal "expensive". I am not saying that Apple is not expensive.

What i am saying is that I had certain impressions and now am questioning them.

There is no doubt that the notions that Apple=Expensive exists widely (and apart from my one experience with the Macbook - may still be well deserved). After I purchased my Macbook two different people (amongst several) curiously enough had the same response, "...that would have left you with no change out of RM10,000 for sure".

That Macbook actually cost me RM4799. That is less than half what people assumed I would have paid for it. Its price, as all must by now be bored with me repeating, is about the price one would expect to pay for a top end Dell equivalent laptop.

Even the most expensive Mac's on the Malaysian Apple website, the Macbook Pro and the Mac Pro come in under RM10,000 (RM7199 and RM9799 respectively).

So the notion that Apple=Expensive is strong. And even the notion that an Apple would be twice the price of something equivalent is strong. I guess this deserves more of a look to see if the notions are justified at all :)


Because some people are held under the sway of glamour, & face it, glamour is one of the marketroids most powerful weapons, it does not mean that everyone else who buys a product bought it for reasons based on glamour. Many people are not impressed by conspicuous consumption.

As the effects of consumerism gradually start to permeate human consciousness, the ugly side of glamour will become recognised for what it is.

Not sure what you are trying to say here with regards to Apple products. But forget about Mac's and Apple specifically... Surely in all things, since cavemen times, beauty, style, glamour have been appreciated.

A beautiful sunset has nothing to set it apart from any other sunset than the beauty it is named for, and it costs no more than any other sunset. Yet people pay for photos of beautiful sunsets. No one pays for pics of "ordinary" sunsets.

Even the food we eat - tests have shown that in portions of food with the exact same taste, where one sample has been coloured some weird unexpected colour - people reject the odd coloured sample and even say it tastes bad.

I don't see the downside to the appreciation of beauty or glamour nor it attracting a higher premium.

[handy]

I will always stand up & fight for your right to disagree tact.

Though I do disagree with your above statements. :-D

I won't waste my time discussing the perceived value of glamour & all it entails, as I don't expect my words will be powerful enough to change a person's paradigms, in any regard.

In the developed world, at least, we have been born into perceiving the world through these paradigms, amongst other complex filters (paradigms by any other name).

Some parts of our cognitive machinery are under our own control; we can modify the way we perceive, if we try real hard, sometimes... :-)

[Edit:] It just occurred to me that the movie Looking for Mr. Goodbar, is a prime exposition of the subject of glamour & superficiality & the paradigms we inherit.

[loveandequality]

They are not over priced. They just put the best componets and the most simple one with elegance that is what they charge you for something that works in a simple way. Also they give away ilife wich is a $79 for free with the purchase wich includes a music maker and a movie maker. Also is the only machine that can have all the OS that exist in a virtual machine or what ever method.

[loveandequality]

MAcs are just better than PC.

[cardinals_fan]

Also is the only machine that can have all the OS that exist in a virtual machine or what ever method.
Solely because Apple locks their OS in and refuses to allow you to run it on something else.
MAcs are just better than PC.
Are they slide rules then?

[mips]

They are not over priced.

They just put the best componets and the most simple one with elegance that is what they charge you for something that works in a simple way.

Also they give away ilife wich is a $79 for free with the purchase wich includes a music maker and a movie maker.

Also is the only machine that can have all the OS that exist in a virtual machine or what ever method.


I would beg to differ.

For the price of a 24" iMac I'm can build myself four more powerfull PCs with even newer&better components and they also look great. The great thing is I can also upgrade them. Ever tried to upgrade an iMac? You are stuck with your gfx card, to upgrade the HD you have to dissasemble the whole frigging machine. Faster or newer dvd burner etc? Good luck!

Trust me, there is no such thing as a free lunch. iLife is just worked into the price. It's a common marketing method used by all companies as people like to believe they are receicving something for free.

Your last sentence does not make any sense to me, care to explain it again? I can also run just about any OS in a VM and I have more choice as to VMs.


Macs might be pretty but they are very impractical and expensive in the long run as your upgrade path is severely limited. If you like pretty use one by all means but I think the concept is crap as they lock you in at every level.

I wonder if people realise that Apple motherboards etc are actually made by companies like Foxconn etc and the quality of a Apple MB vs a non-Apple Foxconn one is no different.

[tsali]

For the price of a 24" iMac I'm can build myself four more powerfull PCs with even newer&better components and they also look great.

All with 24" monitors and the same capabilities? Interesting. I've never been able to make this work no matter how I manipulate Newegg.

Macs might be pretty but they are very impractical and expensive in the long run as your upgrade path is severely limited. If you like pretty use one by all means but I think the concept is crap as they lock you in at every level.


My last Mac remained quite usable and useful for almost 6 years...well beyond the usable lifespan of similar Wintels. A 6 year old non-Mac is little more than a doorstop these days. I never felt locked in...the machine always did everything I could ask of it.

The whole "upgrade" argument is a red herring anyway, for reasons previously noted. If you treat your parts as parts and not as an integrated system (e.g. upgrade a processor into an old mobo) then you cheat yourself out of the capability of the new components.

Simply put > upgrading old hardware is a waste of money.

[aceinthenight]

Everytime I try to build a computer with the same specs as my iMac on Newegg, it comes to about 200 dollars cheaper, and that doesnt include that OS X is 150 bucks, and the fact that my monitor, my error-correcting ram ( which would cost much much more than the ram on newegg), my superior motherboard, stand in one design, much better keyboard, along with superior drivers...

Also I paid that much for it 6 months ago when building my own computer with even simliar specs was 500 dollars more.

[MikeTheC]

Building a system to identical specs, particularly laptops, is an exercise in futility, primarily because (Linux notwithstanding) you typically don't save anything, or not nearly as much as many like to think.

A $700 PC laptop is not equal to a $999 MacBook. What's better or worse is hit-or-miss (though I'll grant you you'll frequently have a better graphics card). Once you get to the same specs on each, the price difference is usually nearly nil. Then, once you get up to the better (i.e. >$1500) laptops, you may have a somewhat easier time, but you're not going to see more than a couple hundred bucks' difference.

When it comes to desktop systems, sure, I'll give you that one. Why do you think Hackintosh is so popular a project? Of course, I've yet to see a DIY case that looked as aesthetically pleasing as one of Apple's. More functional, yes. Structural quality, sure. Appearance? Not a chance.

As for AIOs, well... have you folks seen the big black one that's a near dead-on copy of the iMac? It just goes to show who has original ideas and who copies.

[mips]

All with 24" monitors and the same capabilities? Interesting. I've never been able to make this work no matter how I manipulate Newegg.


Over here an entry level 24" iMac costs US$2520.79, http://www.zastore.co.za/step2.php?code=APPLMB325&item=IMAC%20INTEL%20-%20200805

My quad core, 4GB Ram, 500GB HD, 22" LCD cost me less than 1/4 of that many months ago, prices have dropped in the mean time as well.

[aceinthenight]

Over here an entry level 24" iMac costs US$2520.79, http://www.zastore.co.za/step2.php?code=APPLMB325&item=IMAC%20INTEL%20-%20200805

My quad core, 4GB Ram, 500GB HD, 22" LCD cost me less than 1/4 of that many months ago, prices have dropped in the mean time as well.

Yeah, and my hi end, all specs maxed out cost me less than 2000 in the US.

Remember, the ram that comes in Apple computers is error-correcting - it's much more expensive than even then ram you can buy extra for then that is not error correcting.

[vpsville]

There is nothing special about Mac hardware most of the time. Sometimes they release a box that is a couple of months ahead of the PC world, but that's rare (dual quad core machines come to mind).

Apple excels in software. Their software is easy to use and easy to teach. It isn't overly complicated like many Windows equivalents are. It is also less prone to viruses and self-inflicted damage.

They are annoying if you are used to the power of Ubuntu, and that single button mouse makes me want to jump out a window, but they are popular with a lot of casual users who just want a dependable box.

[aceinthenight]

There is nothing special about Mac hardware most of the time. Sometimes they release a box that is a couple of months ahead of the PC world, but that's rare (dual quad core machines come to mind).

Apple excels in software. Their software is easy to use and easy to teach. It isn't overly complicated like many Windows equivalents are. It is also less prone to viruses and self-inflicted damage.

They are annoying if you are used to the power of Ubuntu, and that single button mouse makes me want to jump out a window, but they are popular with a lot of casual users who just want a dependable box.

The mouse isnt single button. It has 4 buttons...

Ubuntu doesnt have more power than OS X... I dont get why people say this. I love Ubuntu, but OS X is a much better OS.

[issih]

Macs are computers..pretty computers. People sometimes pay extra for pretty things.

If you stop comparing macs to a home built rig put together for the purposes of upgradeability and performance, which they do not, and never have competed against, and instead compare it to a similarly high end consumer manufacturers equivalent products (e.g. sony) the price is often very similar, and sometimes in apples favour.

Its horses for courses, if you want the biggest bang for your buck - don't buy a mac. If you want the best upgradeability - don't buy a mac. If you want the very latest graphics and the most ram - don't buy a mac.

If you want a pretty, well screwed together machine that comes with decent, easily accessible, hardware support and you quite like OS-X then a mac might be for you, if you will swallow the cost.

Its a piece of hardware, its a good bit of hardware, and its elegant (imho), thats all some people are after. Different people want different things

How many times can this keep coming up?

[aceinthenight]

Macs are computers..pretty computers. People sometimes pay extra for pretty things.

If you stop comparing macs to a home built rig put together for the purposes of upgradeability and performance, which they do not, and never have competed against, and instead compare it to a similarly high end consumer manufacturers equivalent products (e.g. sony) the price is often very similar, and sometimes in apples favour.

Its horses for courses, if you want the biggest bang for your buck - don't buy a mac. If you want the best upgradeability - don't buy a mac. If you want the very latest graphics and the most ram - don't buy a mac.

If you want a pretty, well screwed together machine that comes with decent, easily accessible, hardware support and you quite like OS-X then a mac might be for you, if you will swallow the cost.

Its a piece of hardware, its a good bit of hardware, and its elegant (imho), thats all some people are after. Different people want different things

How many times can this keep coming up?

I would think if you want the most stable system, with the easiest to use operating system, with the best built in apps, the best creative apps, best scientific support, and best quality of hardware, go Apple. If you want to game, upgrade, customize the look of your OS?, be cheap, PC is the way to go.

[aysiu]

A $700 PC laptop is not equal to a $999 MacBook. What's better or worse is hit-or-miss (though I'll grant you you'll frequently have a better graphics card). Once you get to the same specs on each, the price difference is usually nearly nil. I just did a comparison.

The cheapest Macbook (US$999) has these specs:
2.0 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB
120GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)

The 13" Dell Inspiron (US$699) has these specs:
Intel® Pentium™ Dual Core T4200 (2.0GHz/800Mhz FSB/1MB cache) 3GB2 Shared Dual Channel DDR2 (2 Dimms) Size: 250GB4 SATA Hard Drive (5400RPM) 8X Slot Load CD / DVD Burner (Dual Layer DVD+/-RW Drive) If you upgrade the Inspiron graphics card to the Nvidia (to match the Macbook's graphics card), that adds another US$100, but it's still US$200 less than the Macbook and has a bigger hard drive and more RAM.

So, I think you're wrong.

[KiwiNZ]

What $ value is placed on build quality?

I have worked on servicing Dells for some years and when I compare the build quality of a Dell to a Mac I have to say the Mac is streets ahead

[aysiu]

What $ value is placed on build quality?

I have worked on servicing Dells for some years and when I compare the build quality of a Dell to a Mac I have to say the Mac is streets ahead
Well, that's obviously up to the consumer to decide. I'm not saying Macs are a rip-off. My wife has a Macbook Pro she paid a small fortune for, but she loves her Mac, and I think it was worth every penny.

But to say that similar specs will lead to similar prices is a bald-faced lie.

[MikeTheC]

I just did a comparison.

The cheapest Macbook (US$999) has these specs:
2.0 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB
120GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Actually, it's been revised and now has a 1066MHz FSB.

[aceinthenight]

I just did a comparison.

The cheapest Macbook (US$999) has these specs:
2.0 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB
120GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)

The 13" Dell Inspiron (US$699) has these specs:
Intel® Pentium™ Dual Core T4200 (2.0GHz/800Mhz FSB/1MB cache) 3GB2 Shared Dual Channel DDR2 (2 Dimms) Size: 250GB4 SATA Hard Drive (5400RPM) 8X Slot Load CD / DVD Burner (Dual Layer DVD+/-RW Drive) If you upgrade the Inspiron graphics card to the Nvidia (to match the Macbook's graphics card), that adds another US$100, but it's still US$200 less than the Macbook and has a bigger hard drive and more RAM.

So, I think you're wrong.

Error processing ram...

Also the fact that the Mac OS simply works better with the hardware versus anything else. It really is a total package; I mean, if you want to run Linux on a Mac, its good, and Mac's are proven to run Windows faster with the same spec hardware...

[aceinthenight]

What $ value is placed on build quality?

I have worked on servicing Dells for some years and when I compare the build quality of a Dell to a Mac I have to say the Mac is streets ahead

I'm glad to here you say that.

[aysiu]

I see the argument has shifted from Macs are the same price as Windows PCs with the same specs to Macs are more expensive than equivalent Windows PCs but offer a better experience that makes the price difference worth it.

I wasn't arguing with the second (that's a matter of personal opinion whether you think the price difference is worth it or not). I was contesting the first with quantifiables.

[tsali]

My quad core, 4GB Ram, 500GB HD, 22" LCD cost me less than 1/4 of that many months ago, prices have dropped in the mean time as well.


So you are telling me you built this machine with all the same capabilities of that iMac for $630?

Sorry, I don't buy it.

BTW, a 22" monitor <> a 24" monitor.

[KiwiNZ]

Build quality is quantifiable. You pick up an open Dell Laptop and creaks and cracks with joints moving and stressing. Do the same with a Macbook unibody and there is none of that .

The screen hinges on the Mac and superior to that of a Dell or HP Acer etc

These a just a few examples

[cardinals_fan]

Build quality is quantifiable. You pick up an open Dell Laptop and creaks and cracks with joints moving and stressing. Do the same with a Macbook unibody and there is none of that .

The screen hinges on the Mac and superior to that of a Dell or HP Acer etc

These a just a few examples
How about a Thinkpad?

[swoll1980]

I did a little research and if I go to micro center and byob for the price of that 24" imac I could build a computer with twin intel quad core cpu, twin GeForce gtx 1gb DDR3 overclocked video cards, a high end asus motherboard, 4gb of DDR3 performance ram. 1tb hard drive,and a 120gb high speed hard drive, a liquid cooling system, all the fans, power supply, nic, modem,case,dvd (you get the idea) and twin 22" displays and still have money left over to buy an OS although I wouldn't

[KiwiNZ]

How about a Thinkpad?

The metal hinges on the Thinkpads are good but the rest of the chassis still feels flimsy. The thinkpads lid surface is horrible , sort rubbery feel and hard to clean.

[tsali]

I did a little research and if I go to micro center and byob for the price of that 24" imac I could build a computer with twin intel quad core cpu, twin GeForce gtx 1gb DDR3 overclocked video cards, a high end asus motherboard, 4gb of DDR3 performance ram. 1tb hard drive,and a 120gb high speed hard drive, a liquid cooling system, all the fans, power supply, nic, modem,case,dvd (you get the idea) and twin 22" displays and still have money left over to buy an OS although I wouldn't

Of course you can. I can buy TWO Hyundai Elantras, put on 20" rims, killer sound and maybe even a turbocharger....

But that won't make them equivalent to a BMW 3 series

[swoll1980]

Of course you can. I can buy TWO Hyundai Elantras, put on 20" rims, killer sound and maybe even a turbocharger....

But that won't make them equivalent to a BMW 3 series

Your right my byob wouldn't be equivalent to a imac it would blow it away

[KiwiNZ]

I don,t buy into the " my ones bigger than your one" routine

It boils done to this

1. Do you like it
2. Does it do what you want
3. Are you happy with your purchase

If yes then its the greatest thing for you , the only one that needs satisfying

[aceinthenight]

Your right my byob wouldn't be equivalent to a imac it would blow it away

Your byob could have the highest specs in the world, my Mac will have 5 times the build quality, an actual guarantee it will work, and it's operating system will always be the most advanced in the world.

[cardinals_fan]

Your byob could have the highest specs in the world, my Mac will have 5 times the build quality for my purposes, an actual guarantee it will work for my uses, and it's operating system will always be the most advanced in the world for me
Fixed that for you.

[swoll1980]

Your byob could have the highest specs in the world, my Mac will have 5 times the build quality, an actual guarantee it will work, and it's operating system will always be the most advanced in the world.

I have two 6 year old budget dells with celerons and a 10 year old budget compaq with a celeron all of them run 24 hours a day 7 days a week, and I never had to fix anything on them, all of them have all there original hardware right down to the keyboards and mice. I have an xbox that's like 7 years old that still works fine. My mom has my atari 2600 that still works. I also have a C=64 that's like 25 years old, got it for Christmas when I was like 6-7. I haven't fired it up in like 3 years but last I checked it still worked too, so I don't worry about warranties, and such to much. Keep the dust of of them, and they last forever

[zzzuppermen]

My first computer was an old Classic II running System 7.0.6, so I'm quite a Mac fan, like a sweet childhood memory. For me Macs ARE special.

But are they? Technically speaking, IMHO, they have a high probability to be better. Think about it. Apple designs/assembles their own hardware to run their OS on it (with bundled and add-on branded software). A PC is more of a collection of hardware put together by end users or OEM companies. You don't have the sense of unity. By creating an OS to run on PCs, you are writing software for almost an infinite number of hardware variations.

There are of course standards and agreements, but still the odds that all hardware will work are small. Apple's OSs are built to run on a small group of selected hardware. The probability that a Mac will work out of the box, and continue to do so is significantly higher as for any PC.

Just plain theory. I will choose a Mac over a PC if it suites the job. But that's just me.

[Hagablog]

Apple's hardware is undoubtably dear, but all this scaring away competition is a load of rubbish. I mean, Apple are in the end a comercial company. Any fool can see it makes no commercial sence to reduce your custommer base intentionally.

Recently I was looking about for a machine I could prat around on and how to really USE. I already own a mac and am a self confessed fanboy, but I looked at dells, hps, sonys... But the difference in price among comparative machines to my macbook were not that astounding. Especially when you think of the software; with the pc you have to uninstall windoze and then hope allthe hardware works with linux. With the mac you get a great os plus all the iLife software.

[handy]

I happen to be one of Apple's prime shareholders.

Yes, I have been doing incredibly well lately. The computer side of the business is steady, but boy, don't I make some money out of the peripherals? That wasn't actually a question. :-)

So personally I am really quite happy with the pricing policy of Apple. They have been making what? I do forget, but I think it was 6 billion in the last financial year, as far a profits go, & profits are all I'm interested in. If Apple weren't making the profits then I would invest in MS or Intel or AMD, who care's? I don't, just give me the money.

It is so interesting to watch all the people that get SO anti corporations, when in reality they are missing the point, it is really ME, the tiny little share holder that is totally screwing our environment & our societies.

Huh! I almost feel guilt free, because the people don't notice me. :lolflag:

[cprofitt]

Your byob could have the highest specs in the world, my Mac will have 5 times the build quality, an actual guarantee it will work, and it's operating system will always be the most advanced in the world.

OS X is not the most advanced... technically it is one of the least secure modern operating systems as well. The desktops I build are of higher quality than anything Apple makes and I know 100% what goes in to both.

The laptops are VERY high quality, but when I bought mine I was not willing to pay $1152 more for a slight upgrade in looks and marginal upgrade in quality over my Lenovo T500.

My Lenovo was $1347 (it is actually $1280 right now due to a sale) vs. the roughly equivalent MacBook Pro 15" at $2499. With the current price difference I could almost buy two Lenovos for the price of one MacBook Pro... not a good value IMHO.

[georgegerm]

LOL

C'mon they make better PCs than Windows, seriously overpriced though.

thats the reason he responded that way, is not a matter of it being better than windows but creating an image of complete superiority, thus making themselves a must have ... provided u get the cash and can spare it..
you will be then in wow macs users elite club, the super top of the pops, mr rolls royce of the computer world, (what nonsense)
yet as u end it, it is better than windblows, but the price is just an illusion
and as we ubuntu users know it is NOT a MUST to use apple computers ....
any linux distro on any laptop is a lot cooler than a mac or windblows for me..

[tsali]

OS X is not the most advanced... technically it is one of the least secure modern operating systems as well. The desktops I build are of higher quality than anything Apple makes and I know 100% what goes in to both.

The laptops are VERY high quality, but when I bought mine I was not willing to pay $1152 more for a slight upgrade in looks and marginal upgrade in quality over my Lenovo T500.

My Lenovo was $1347 (it is actually $1280 right now due to a sale) vs. the roughly equivalent MacBook Pro 15" at $2499. With the current price difference I could almost buy two Lenovos for the price of one MacBook Pro... not a good value IMHO.

Surely you didn't use the terms "Lenovo" and "quality" in the same post?

In my experience with hundreds of Lenovo machines, there has been little relationship between the two.