"Macs are so much more expensive" - actually, I disagree

[joefinan]

People always say that Macs are so much more expensive than a PC, but a few days ago I received my copy of iWork - which got me thinking.

If you take a Mac and a PC of similar spec, the Mac is likely to be more expensive (albeit for a more refined machine with a better OS), but if you then continue to keep them similar, the Mac becomes increasingly cheaper.

The Mac comes with a much greater compliment of software - video editing, Mail (does a PC have this?), photo editing software, DVD authoring software etc.

If you add word processing etc. software, Apple's iWork costs just £45 opposed to MS Office's £304 (amazon.co.uk).

And if you want to upgrade the operating system - Leopard £79, Vista £200.

So I reckon that Macs are actually cheaper!

And by the way, I think iWork is great - especially for £45.

[Osarkon]

Mail (does a PC have this?)

Well yes, it's called Windows Mail. And if you want a more feature complete mail program, there's Windows Live Mail. Which is actually pretty nice I've found.

I do agree with you though.

Macs are definitely cheaper in the long run.

[edesignuk]

You do get a better bundle of software with a Mac in general, but this is party due to the fact they're allowed to ship OS X with certain abilities inbuilt or with packages installed. When Microsoft try to add features available via 3rd parties they immediately wind up in court being accused of being anti-competitive etc. :rolleyes:

[JSchwage]

I agree that Macs may be cheaper in the long run due to all the included software. But, being a new switcher, I have found that there is A LOT more Mac software that you have to pay for. When I used to use Windows, I used a lot of free and open source software. Not so on the Mac. I've found that a lot of free software on the Mac sucks so much it's not even worth it, so I end up buying another application. (Applications like Cyberduck and Open Office come to mind)

But hey, Mac software is so much better than most Windows software. It seems like the developers put more thought into their applications.

Anyway, that's my $.02.

[Rodimus Prime]

People always say that Macs are so much more expensive than a PC, but a few days ago I received my copy of iWork - which got me thinking.

If you take a Mac and a PC of similar spec, the Mac is likely to be more expensive (albeit for a more refined machine with a better OS), but if you then continue to keep them similar, the Mac becomes increasingly cheaper.

The Mac comes with a much greater compliment of software - video editing, Mail (does a PC have this?), photo editing software, DVD authoring software etc.

If you add word processing etc. software, Apple's iWork costs just £45 opposed to MS Office's £304 (amazon.co.uk).

And if you want to upgrade the operating system - Leopard £79, Vista £200.

So I reckon that Macs are actually cheaper!

And by the way, I think iWork is great - especially for £45.

I might want to point out trying to say you have to buy word for a Office for a word processor is wrong. It is not a fair comparison. If you want a word processor just look up the cost of MS Works. Now I do not know exactly how much that cost besides it being a lot less than Office. I honestly do not care because I got Office 07 pro running on my desktop that I got though my college.

Also might hate to break it to you but Office offers a hell of a lot more than iWorks.

[aristobrat]

Also might hate to break it to you but Office offers a hell of a lot more than iWorks.
You'd be referring to Entourage and MSN Messenger (the two apps that come with Office for Mac that don't have an iWork equivalent)?

[andiwm2003]

You'd be referring to Entourage and MSN Messenger (the two apps that come with Office for Mac that don't have an iWork equivalent)?

no, i guess he refers to EXCEL and Word. There is no way to compare Numbers right now to EXCEL if you need a fully featured spreadsheet program. And Pages is a great program but many feel it's not a good word processor. (Can Pages work with endnote, reference manager or similar programs?)

I think that only Keynote is actually better than Powerpoint. Pages is better as a layout program than Word.
But in the end Office is the more fully featured office suite. You can't really compare them.

[janstett]

^ It also offers a database (Access). More sophisticated versions of Office also add Visio, Project, OneNote, and more.

[Dagless]

I've found them to be cheaper from day 1, actually.

A month before I got my PowerBook I had bought a laptop. Laptop was a 3ghz P4, 512mb ram, 15" display. Battery life of an hour (damn P4!).
Then I bough a PowerBook of half the clock speed (that ol' myth) yet it was a much faster machine. Photoshop ran faster, I could produce (basic) music in Garageband. Even the OS was just much faster on the PowerBook. Boot times had the P4 trailing.

The PowerBook was £200 less than the laptop. Lighter, prettier and much longer battery life (even my old batteries now go for 2-4 hours in the right mood).

Then the iMac last year. I bought it with an edu discount and got a machine that nobody else could match for that price and spec point. Plus I got a free £100 iPod. All for £600.

Then add in the resale value. Apple machines hold their value very well. My PowerBook model goes for £500 on eBay. 3 years later and it's only lost half its value. It's mindblowing.

[aross99]

I've alway found that Mac's are priced comparably to PC's when configured similarly, and of similar quality.

Sure, I can get an Acer Laptop for $400, but the whole thing is made of cheap flimsy plastic and a slow CPU with no memory.

Price out a decent Lenovo, or HP laptop with a Core 2 Duo @ 2.2Hgz, Vista Business, etc, and all of a sudden it's the same price as a Mac.

The problem is, people are willing to take the cheap PC's for the lower cost, so we end up with the "PC's are cheaper" argument...

[Sesshi]

I'd say I disagree as well. A Mac is cheaper than a good - and superior in terms of build quality, reliability and flexibility - PC to buy.

In that vein, I would say if you can't afford a better PC, get a Mac.

[::Lisa::]

ITA! When I was converting, I didn't think that way but I certainly realised that straight after, especially when I was buying Leopard and had a source that was willing to let me have an official copy of Leopard for just £65 brand new.

[jwt]

I was under the same assumption, and started pricing a PC at Dell, and for the equivalent hardware the Dell was much much more. Pricing the two machines equivalently, you don't get as much hardware from Dell either. Monitors are cheaper at Dell though.

[carlop]

no, i guess he refers to EXCEL and Word. There is no way to compare Numbers right now to EXCEL if you need a fully featured spreadsheet program. And Pages is a great program but many feel it's not a good word processor. (Can Pages work with endnote, reference manager or similar programs?)

I think that only Keynote is actually better than Powerpoint. Pages is better as a layout program than Word.
But in the end Office is the more fully featured office suite. You can't really compare them.

I totally agree. I really hate it when people tell me iWork (or Google Documents, or Open Office, any other "Office-killer") is comparable to Office. If you think it is, then you shouldn't be using office in the first place. I started salivating when I realised what I could do with Excel and VB. It's a shame OSX-only users will never have that experience, as it seems like Office: Mac is developped as if it was Office's little retarded half brother.

...and don't get me started on the wonders that is Office 2007.


But back to the OP, when I was looking for a new laptop, I did a price comparison on the dell website and with comparable specs (including useless features (for myself) such as the cam), price was either comparable or more to a MBP. So yes, the MBP is not "expensive"... but you'll only know this if you do your research and know what you want.

...just don't start buying mac ram...

[Denali9]

If you consider existing software you bought, moving to a Mac may not always be a very good investment. For someone who does not own a computer and wants to get onboard, in the long run a Mac has an overall cost of ownership that is very similar to a PC., if not cheaper.

What I hate though is Apple policy to keep price at same level until a refresh of their line. Currently, I can purchase similar components found on a Macbook Pro with similar quality for 1200$. The PC world and Intel have very aggressive pricing policy and hence when Apple introduces new processor, it's at very comparable level but 6 months later, it's harder to justify the price difference. I keep having to tell people to buy Apple only soon after a refresh.

And actually, for me and many I know, Apple has not met our needs in the desktop category, I do not want an iMac, the mini is too underpowered and the Mac Pro is overkilled and hence my desktop is from HP and will probably soon be replaced by a box I'll build myself using Unbuntu and Vista to run it. I keep crossing my fingers for next week at Macworld, that Apple will come up with something that would fit my need.

Don't flame me, if your need are met by Apple good for you. From a price perspective and the type of processing power I need, in the desktop category, there is nothing to match my need at a reasonable price.

I totally agree. I really hate it when people tell me iWork (or Google Documents, or Open Office, any other "Office-killer") is comparable to Office. If you think it is, then you shouldn't be using office in the first place. I started salivating when I realised what I could do with Excel and VB. It's a shame OSX-only users will never have that experience, as it seems like Office: Mac is developped as if it was Office's little retarded half brother.

...and don't get me started on the wonders that is Office 2007.


But back to the OP, when I was looking for a new laptop, I did a price comparison on the dell website and with comparable specs (including useless features (for myself) such as the cam), price was either comparable or more to a MBP. So yes, the MBP is not "expensive"... but you'll only know this if you do your research and know what you want.

...just don't start buying mac ram...


Actually, right now I can built a XPS M1530 with exact same specs as a middle MBP for 1499$. That is a lot cheaper than a MBP. This was not the case when the SR MBP came out, they were a very good deal for the specs, they are not as good of a deal anymore. Just want to point out again that as price of component goes down, Apple price should follow the industry but then again if they keep selling, why should they reduce their margin of profit :)

[dejo]

Actually, right now I can built a XPS M1530 with almost the same specs as a middle MBP for 1499$.
Corrected that for you. ;)

[PNW]

If Apple makes exactly the hardware you want, then the Mac is definitely the better deal. But if you're like me and want an iMac level desktop (have all the monitors I want thanks), or my in-laws and want a MacBook level laptop with a 15 or better yet 17 inch screen. Then maybe not so much.

But even when comparing, apples to oranges there are still other factors (many of which weigh in Apple's favor).

OS X is definitely worth more than XP (which is worth more than Vista)

You'll be lucky to get 30% of your purchase price back on the resale of a 4 year old PC, whereas you can easily get 50% (if not more) on a 4 year old Mac. So once you're in it's cheaper to upgrade. Also the lack of viruses and your system directory not slowly corrupting itself over time means you'll be thinking about upgrading less often.

Macs come with a lot of extra hardware (e.g. bluetooth, remote) and software (iLife) that PCs charge extra for. If you use them they add value; if you don't they don't.

As to Office vs iWork: If you need Office you need Office if you don't, you're getting ripped off. iWork is a great collection of apps for home and lightweight business use. It does really amaze me how much better I like the Open Office for Windows' UI than Neo Office

[barijazz]

People always say that Macs are so much more expensive than a PC, but a few days ago I received my copy of iWork - which got me thinking.

If you take a Mac and a PC of similar spec, the Mac is likely to be more expensive (albeit for a more refined machine with a better OS), but if you then continue to keep them similar, the Mac becomes increasingly cheaper.

The Mac comes with a much greater compliment of software - video editing, Mail (does a PC have this?), photo editing software, DVD authoring software etc.

If you add word processing etc. software, Apple's iWork costs just £45 opposed to MS Office's £304 (amazon.co.uk).

And if you want to upgrade the operating system - Leopard £79, Vista £200.

So I reckon that Macs are actually cheaper!

And by the way, I think iWork is great - especially for £45.

I agree that to get the software equivalent of mac OSXs software on a pc costs more than it's worth. But you have to also take into account the average computer user. A 12 year old kid playing World of Wacraft or a 20 year old kid playing World of Warcraft in his mom's basement, and maybe they don't want or need imovie idid iphoto etc. But for the sane people in the world mac is not only a better buy, it's a hell of a lot better buy.

[supremedesigner]

And don't forget that PC users have to pay more for anti-virus programs and they didn't realized it's the same amount of $$ as mac computers. Ya know what I mean?

[thinkband]

Actually, right now I can built a XPS M1530 with exact same specs as a middle MBP for 1499$. That is a lot cheaper than a MBP. This was not the case when the SR MBP came out, they were a very good deal for the specs, they are not as good of a deal anymore. Just want to point out again that as price of component goes down, Apple price should follow the industry but then again if they keep selling, why should they reduce their margin of profit :)

I would like to agree with you on this point. Apple prices are comparable when they first come out but most PC's are updating more often thatn Apple products. It would not be so bad if Apple was to update all their major products on a yearly basis however. Overall I believe they have better products and a superior customer service to ANY. They have a significant amount of US service as opposed to Dell's questionable India outlet or whatever the hell Sony does for their customers (nothing). Service is surprisingly important because laptops break.

Let me tell a quick story. Basically Mom's mini does not turn on anymore (incompatibility issue with mouse software made for both microsoft and mac os. After checking forums, turns out the cd locks up mac computers. Bring the book in the day after out of warranty and a genius fixes the computer within 15 minutes. No charge, no hassle, no long delays waiting for your computer to be repaired across the country. Is this quality of service worth an extra $400? I think so.

[CalBoy]

If you take a Mac and a PC of similar spec, the Mac is likely to be more expensive (albeit for a more refined machine with a better OS), but if you then continue to keep them similar, the Mac becomes increasingly cheaper.

I partially disagree with this point. In many cases (especially in the case of notebooks), getting the same specs can be very difficult. When you factor in battery life, thin/thickness, and weight, getting the same specs as a macbook/macbook pro can be very difficult. If you do find one, it will almost certainly be the same, and often times more.

The Mac comes with a much greater compliment of software - video editing, Mail (does a PC have this?), photo editing software, DVD authoring software etc.
True, though there are many good free alternatives on Windows as well.

If you add word processing etc. software, Apple's iWork costs just £45 opposed to MS Office's £304 (amazon.co.uk).
This is not a fair comparison at all. iWork includes only 3 apps (word processor, presentation, and spreadsheet apps) while the high end Office for Windows has a laundry list of apps, many of which are important for many people (ie, Access for a tutorial center, where I used to work). If you want to compare Office and iWork, compare the basic version of Office to iWork, which gives you a closer price comparison.

Nonetheless, Office is a bit overpriced, so I'll give you that point (though the 320 Pound difference you indicated is not valid; the difference is more realistically about $70[since I'm in the US]).

And if you want to upgrade the operating system - Leopard £79, Vista £200.
That seems rather steep. Here in the States, Leopard is $129 and a Vista upgrade is ~$100-$200 (depending on version). Thus, Vista can be $30 cheaper or $70 more expensive to upgrade than Leopard. Nonetheless, I feel the need to point out that OS X often has more consistent and frequent upgrades, thus making it more expensive over a set period of time (ie, since XP came out, there have been a few versions of OS X, but only two versions of Windows).

So I reckon that Macs are actually cheaper!
Technically, two of your points were focused on optional software. One needn't buy Office or iWork. NeoOffice/OpenOffice are free alternatives to both. In addition, one doesn't need to update OSs every time. It's a question of whether one likes the features offered by particular software that warrants an upgrade. Hence, Macs are sometimes cheaper than PCs, but not always.

As for the hardware costs, I'll my use points above to point out that it's very difficult to ascertain whether or not Macs are really expensive since many aspects are highly subjective to individual buyers (I might not care about weight as much as the next person, etc).

In the long run, I think both cost roughly the same. It really all boils down to what you like best, and that's what you should go with. :)

[joefinan]

Ok. I'm wrong.

[Music_Producer]

One thing people tend to overlook is the resale value of a mac. My $1200 averatec is worth $200 on ebay.. while my 12 " powerbook G4 sold for a solid $895 .. so buying a new macbook was just a $100-$150 additional expense for me. You simply cannot argue against that.

[CF Fighter]

I'm about to switch to a Mac laptop, still will use a Windows desktop though, and I've spent hours upon hours the last week researching laptops and I just keep coming back to the Macbook. You know people say "Spec out a 2.2 ghz C2D, 4gb RAM (Aftermarket), Vista Ultimate, WIFI Draft-N, Bluetooth and then come speak to us again." But what they forget to mention is weight and size, both of which if you get those in a laptop will send the price up a bit. I specced out a M1330 and could not get within 2 hundred dollars of of a white 2.2 SR Macbook even with a student discount. Also I won't have to buy an antivirus program every year

[CalBoy]

Ok. I'm wrong.

No! You're not. I was just pointing out how you need to broaden your analysis. :o ;)

[chrismac00]

I also think that Macs are cheaper. You get more than what you pay for I think. My dad was always telling me that a MacBook was too expensive but then I explained to him.

He wanted to get me a Dell that was about $900 in total with all the things that I need. And then I explained all the details especially iLife, which was one thing that really attracted me to Macs. For me iLife should cost like $400 and it comes with any Mac. There aren't any viruses and that keeps you from spending about $70 a year on Anti-Virus software. And Macs go super fast and they include a webcam. So I finally convinced him but he told me to wait until Summer 2008, but he surprised me for Christmas. So I guess he took my advice and bought it, because it's cheaper in the long run.

And I'm happy!:apple::apple::):)

[pr5owner]

omg do you ppl have a freaking clue AT ALL computer computers?

DELL IS NOT THE ONLY OTHER BRAND other than apple open your eyes!

FFS both dell and apple dont even make hardware.

quanta and compal make dell laptops (depending on line, inspiron or latitude, xps, etc)

Asus and Honhai (and previously Quanta) make the MB and MBPs

macs are more expensive? you disagree? well how about this comparison

MB Black ($1,649.00)
2.2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1GB 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM - 2x512MB
160GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
Superdrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Keyboard/Mac OS - U.S. English
AirPort Extreme Card & Bluetooth


Asus F8SA-X2 ($1099.99)
2.2GHz (SAME CPU)
1GB Ram 667MHz (SAME Ram Amount and speed)
160GB HDD (SAME HDD)
DVDRW (both have super multi's)
ABGN WIFI AND BLUETOOTH (included)

diffrence?

the Asus has an ATi HD 2600 512MB ram
5 USB Ports instead of a useless amount of 2
VGA out
DVi OUT
Svideo OUT
1.3MP swivel camera

what makes the MB black worth it? NOTHING

FFS $~600 can buy you TWO eee pc's

thats 3 laptops with 1 absolutely wasting the MB in graphical performance and 2 ultra mobile laptops. (WTF would you pay $1200 for a crappy notebook with onboard graphics?)

wanna try again?

MBP 17"
$3,099.00
******* 1680x1050 screen
2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB 667 DDR2 - 2x1GB SO-DIMMs
160GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
MacBook Pro 17-inch Widescreen Display
Backlit Keyboard/Mac OS - U.S. English
no fracking card reader
1 year warranty
only 90 days of tele support WTF kind of cheap asses are they?

Asus G2S-A1 (newegg)
$1749.99
WUXGA (1920x1080)
SAME CPU
SAME RAM
SAME HDD
LIGHT SCRIBE ODD (mac doesnt have this)
SAME VIDEO CARD!
5x USB PORTS!!! NOT ******** 3
Svideo OUT
VGA OUT
HDMI OUT
Comes with a gaming mouse
A CARD READER!!!!!!!!! 5in1
1.3mp camera

1 Year accidental damage (you break it, they replace it)
2 year warranty (PARTS AND LABOR!)

you wanna say apples worth it? yeah right, there are about 20 more laptops similar in spec to the asus. thats $1350 cheaper, you can buy 2 additional laptops, probably faster than the MB's IN ADDITION to the Asus and still be cheaper than this rip off POS MBP 17"

[pr5owner]

I also think that Macs are cheaper. You get more than what you pay for I think. My dad was always telling me that a MacBook was too expensive but then I explained to him.

He wanted to get me a Dell that was about $900 in total with all the things that I need. And then I explained all the details especially iLife, which was one thing that really attracted me to Macs. For me iLife should cost like $400 and it comes with any Mac. There aren't any viruses and that keeps you from spending about $70 a year on Anti-Virus software. And Macs go super fast and they include a webcam. So I finally convinced him but he told me to wait until Summer 2008, but he surprised me for Christmas. So I guess he took my advice and bought it, because it's cheaper in the long run.

And I'm happy!:apple::apple::):)

its cheaper in the long run? HOW? again, DELLS are not the only freaking brand name out there, open your eyes. dell is actaully more of a rip off than apple is. $70 a year for AV software? when you can run ubuntu for free? no... macs go super fast? not incomparison with XFCE linux distros, macs have the same HW, actaully thats a lie, macs have inferior HW since with asus whitebooks you can put your own QUALITy components inside. apple uses the cheapest garbage ram they can find and charge you some rediculous price for it.

EX: 4GB of ram in a mac costs ******** $770 for an UPGRADE (this is some kind of cheap samsung or hynix ram i would assume) running at the standard 667MHz speed

on newegg $109 for 4GB of OCZ (life time warranty) ultra high speed DDR2 800MHz ram

ive already made use of the OCZ warranty when i fried my 1GB rally usb drive from static shock, they sent me a 2GB USB flash rally 2 OVERNIGHT FEDEX.

OCZ has unbelievably good service.

[pr5owner]

And don't forget that PC users have to pay more for anti-virus programs and they didn't realized it's the same amount of $$ as mac computers. Ya know what I mean?

i didnt think a free AV program such as AVG or Avast would cost $1350 (see above)

also PC users dont have to use av programs at all if running linux, plus linux comes with free AV programs (see eee pc)

I've alway found that Mac's are priced comparably to PC's when configured similarly, and of similar quality.

Sure, I can get an Acer Laptop for $400, but the whole thing is made of cheap flimsy plastic and a slow CPU with no memory.

Price out a decent Lenovo, or HP laptop with a Core 2 Duo @ 2.2Hgz, Vista Business, etc, and all of a sudden it's the same price as a Mac.

The problem is, people are willing to take the cheap PC's for the lower cost, so we end up with the "PC's are cheaper" argument...

you may need to rephrase your statement

yeah Acer aspire line of laptops are total crap
acer ferarri and acer travelmate high end laptops which are still cheaper than the mac equiv are made with carbon fiber.

HPs are garbage and i dont even concider them computers
lenovo is for business only

why not compare Asus, MSI, Sager/Clevo, hell even LG, but not sony.

a $1200 Acer laptop will have an 8600GT 256MB video card, 2GB of ram, 2.2GHz cpu, and a 250GB HDD

no $1200 MB is going to cut it.

also there is no mac laptop for under $1000 but there are TONS of PC laptops for $600 that out perform the mac.

[dejo]

pr5owner, please read this: http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4542947&postcount=15

[CalBoy]

pr5owner, please read this: http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=4542947&postcount=15

I was going to say something similar, but since you've already done all the work for me...;) :D

pr5owner, please keep in mind that there are other specs that are important for notebooks outside of the traditional CPU/RAM considerations you've given us. For example, weight and size are two very important factors for most notebook buyers (especially for those who travel).

[canucks-17]

Christ sakes pr5owner, cool your jets. That ASUS is ugly as **** and the eee is worthless (power, size, operating system, etc). Besides they can't run OS X, in my mind a main selling point. Also, that thing is a gaming computer, not a Professional Workstation.

[K-Funk]

I just ordered a 2.2 Ghz Dell Vostro 14-inch with 2 GB of RAM and a 160 GB hard drive for $749. I configured a comparable MacBook on the Apple website, and it came to $1524!

So for my purposes, the Dell cost less than half as much. Now I'm sure the Mac has some stuff that's better than the Dell, but nothing I need. (I would never use iLife.)

I'm sure that depending on your needs, Macs might compare more favorably with different configurations, but the bottom line is that you can get a good PC laptop for under $1000, which is impossible with a Mac.

It is true that Macs have incredible resale value. That's not really relevant for me because I plan to use my new Dell until it doesn't run anymore!

[66217]

That's true, there are cheaper PC's out there. But normally, similar PC's and Macs would cost the same.

Now, there are some other things that I prefer from Macs than purely hardware. For one, Mac OS X is incredible, and also the design, I am yet to see another either Desktop or Laptop design that competes with a Mac.

[Music_Producer]

pr5owner.. first I'll prescribe you an anxiolytic agent.. someone's really pissed off about the price comparison :p When I buy an Apple product, I buy it for the operating system, and the hardware too (hell it's beautiful!) That's like marrying a beautiful woman who can cook awesome food as well! (ok ok don't flame me please hehe)

Like I said earlier, I bought a $1200 pc laptop which was top of the line (this was after I had purchased a 12" powerbook g4) Top of the line regarding specs and weight too.

Sure the pc laptop beat the powerbook in terms of specs.. but on a more practical level.. it sucked (windows obviously) Damn thing would heat up while I would just be using quicken! I was running pro apps on the powerbook and it remained cool.. silent beast. The pc laptop is worth $200 now, we don't use it.. it's a paperweight (not to mention the bloody 40 minute battery life) I gave it to my wife and she didn't want it.. she wanted a macbook after using that pc for a few hours.

The 12" powerbook sold for more than $850. Paid a $100-$150 more and got a new macbook for my wife.

So please, before you a burst another vein.. go ahead and buy an Acer or whatever. I don't know about you.. but I like a return on my investment. When I buy an Apple product, I get more than a 100% ROI! And I love using it for the OS and the hardware form. After 2 years when your Acer fetches $200 on ebay, and my macbook pro gets me $950 or so.. then you'll know which one is more 'expensive' in the long run.

And I bought a separate card reader for $25. :rolleyes:

[MINI.ME]

Macs can be more expensive than PC's, but in the long run, which computer lasts longer? Mac! Why? Well, the main reason would be that they are virus-free. I have a 3.5 year old Dell PC at home (which has been replaced by the new iMac), and just one single virus can stuff everything up!

An iMac G3 I used at school booted in 1:20. Dude, that's quicker than my Dell (2:15)! :D

So even though Macs can cost a bit more than a PC, it's all worth it in the long run.

[netdog]

Curiously, compared to similarly specced workstations from Dell and HP, the Apple Mac Pro 2.8 Octo is a real bargain, even if you want to just run Windows on it.

[wordmunger]

Those Asus computers are 5.7 and 9.6 pounds. They are 1.5 and 1.83 inches thick. You pay for portability. Try spec'ing a computer that's actually the same physical size as a MacBook.

Also every MacBook user knows you can spec the same white MacBook for $150 less than a BlackBook.

[clevin]

If you take a Mac and a PC of similar spec,
problem is

YOU HAVE TO, "if" is a delusion! you have no choice! why "if"?

while with windows, you have so many cheap alternatives w/o paying for unnecessary, expensive, low quality hadrwares
The Mac comes with a much greater compliment of software - video editing, Mail (does a PC have this?), photo editing software, DVD authoring software etc.
cab't blame windows, did you know M$ paied $600m just for the bundle of media player 11?
and you ask if windows have mail pre-installed? first I would suggest you try to dig some information about windows before making comparison.
and yes, windows has mail pre-installed
also, windows media player will automatically download codec when playing video files.
windows also has weather forecast pre-installed, windows also has directX pre-installed, windows also has media center pre-installed, ...etc..

If you add word processing etc. software, Apple's iWork costs just £45 opposed to MS Office's £304 (amazon.co.uk).
huh, why is there a mac version of M$ Office? and so many people here are excited about it?
And if you want to upgrade the operating system - Leopard £79, Vista £200.
And by the way, I think iWork is great - especially for £45.
huh, you pay windows update every 6 years? so its 200/6=33.3
for OSX, its every two years, so its 79/2=40
not to mention M$ wrote all its own system, while OSX have (MY GUESS) majority codes ready for them by OSS. Its actually more expensive for end users for NO reason!

Originally Posted by supremedesigner
And don't forget that PC users have to pay more for anti-virus programs and they didn't realized it's the same amount of $$ as mac computers. Ya know what I mean?
this type of 5 years old mis-information keeps popping up, do mac users live in a sealed world and really know nothing about pc anymore? please, at least know your enemy before making statement.

please, mac IS expensive, lets just put that to rest once and for all.

there are more any more (probably ~40% of current mac users based on the change in marketshare) new users who REALLY know PC and windows. This type of absurd comparison won't go very far. And Im gonna say it will backfire.

[DoogieWoogie]

please, mac IS expensive, lets just put that to rest once and for all.

there are more (m)any more (probably ~40% of current mac users based on the change in marketshare) new users who REALLY know PC and windows. This type of absurd comparison won't go very far. And Im gonna say it will backfire.

You have just contradicted yourself - you say that Macs are expensive then in the next paragraph you say the comparison is absurd.

[brguitarist]

I really hate these arguments, but I am fully convinced that macs really are not expensive. For the same specs IN GENERAL, macs are cheaper (standard configs for apple are high-end systems in he PC world). EVEN if some PC systems may be cheaper than their respective mac machine, the mac is sure to outlast the PC, making it a better investment...

[PNW]

, why is there a mac version of M$ Office? and so many people here are excited about it?

Comparing iWork to MS Office is like comparing a mini to a Mac Pro. If you need the latter there is no substitute, but for the vast numbers of us who only ever needed to former the reduced cost is welcome.



this type of 5 years old mis-information keeps popping up, do mac users live in a sealed world and really know nothing about pc anymore? please, at least know your enemy before making statement.


For the most part yes, but still running a Windows box requires being or having free access to near IT support staff level of skill. Not so much with OS X

[clevin]

Comparing iWork to MS Office is like comparing a mini to a Mac Pro. If you need the latter there is no substitute, but for the vast numbers of us who only ever needed to former the reduced cost is welcome.


well, to talk about reducing the cost, isn't openoffice the best solution? and If I remember correctly, it is cross-platform, and cost $0

For the most part yes, but still running a Windows box requires being or having free access to near IT support staff level of skill. Not so much with OS X

it IS meaningless to generalize users,

I need no IT with my windows box for 8 years, and my 4 years old laptop didn't need any re-installation of windows in 4 years. Is that representative of all windows users? probably not.

SOME mac users still "think" windows anti-virus app costs users a fortune, is that representative of the understanding of windows from mac users? I don't know

NO IT help needed for mac users? are you sure? I know my mb can't print to department copier, even with IT help. is that representative?

95% of the world computer users need IT support? Im not sure about that.

For any normal/average users, with a mac, or a pc, with which he need more IT support? Now thats a good question, and I don't think you can be sure about the answer.

[wordmunger]

Again, the Vostro is thicker, wider, and deeper than a Macbook. You pay for portability. The Vostro is 57 percent larger than the Macbook. In fact, it is bigger (in volume) than a 17-inch MacBook pro.

[chewietobbacca]

The reason why Mac's tend to last longer / have better resale value is this:

Mac's go through fewer hardware refreshes! Hence, if you want a recent Mac, you're going to either have to pay for the new one coming out sometime within the next year or two (gulp) or buy the one that was released a year ago, which is your only option.

Case in point with PC's: When I recently built my high end enthusiast computer, I started doing research in March 2007. At that time, the P965 Intel motherboard was the reigning mainstream/performance motherboard from Intel. B the time I actually built my computer in late August 2007, the Intel P35 had been released which was superior in every fashion to the P965 and made the P965 irrelevant. I could've paid $160 for a P965 in March, but 5-6 months later, I was paying $160 for the P35 whereas the P965 had dropped to below $100.

Denali9 made a great point: if you buy a Mac at its refresh, it's worth its value in hardware. Buy it a little bit later? Not so much. For instance, the Mac Pro with Penryn is a pretty good buy, especially with the 1600fbs processors which will be priced fairly high for PC release. Wait 6 months? Eh not so much. For example, when Intel release quad cores, the Q6600 was priced close to $1000. After a half a year, it's currently at its $266 price.

It's pretty clear that the reason why PC's depreciate faster is because there is more and better and cheaper hardware available at a faster pace! Basically, there's more competition and more variety to choose from.

The Mac Pro may be worth its price now, but in a year when Nehalem comes out and makes old server/workstations outdated? Well, PC's may have the flexibility to move on but someone who wants a Mac Pro is either going to wait for a refresh within the next year or pay a premium on outdated hardware.

And whoever suggested that hardware was going to fail because of viruses - it still came from a software issue, and honestly, virii don't just magically show up. You have to download sketchy things to get sketchy results. If you never open email attachments from unknown sources, download porn or pirated software, you should be virus free 99% of the time.

[K-Funk]

Again, the Vostro is thicker, wider, and deeper than a Macbook. You pay for portability. The Vostro is 57 percent larger than the Macbook. In fact, it is bigger (in volume) than a 17-inch MacBook pro.That's true. But I don't think there's that much value to reducing a laptop's thickness, because you're still constrained by the screen size.

For example, if you make a laptop 1-inch thin instead of 2-inches thin, you've cut the volume in half, but would an average person look at the 1-inch version and say, "It's half as big!" No. I think it's more useful to compare surface area (and, of course, weight).

[PNW]

well, to talk about reducing the cost, isn't openoffice the best solution? and If I remember correctly, it is cross-platform, and cost $0

For reducing cost yes, but both the Mac version of OO, which requires you to install/run X, and NeoOffice which runs natively are IMHO kind of lame when compared to the Windows and Linux versions of OO. So at $80 iWork 08 was really welcome


it IS meaningless to generalize users,

I need no IT with my windows box for 8 years, and my 4 years old laptop didn't need any re-installation of windows in 4 years. Is that representative of all windows users? probably not.

SOME mac users still "think" windows anti-virus app costs users a fortune, is that representative of the understanding of windows from mac users? I don't know

NO IT help needed for mac users? are you sure? I know my mb can't print to department copier, even with IT help. is that representative?

95% of the world computer users need IT support? Im not sure about that.

For any normal/average users, with a mac, or a pc, with which he need more IT support? Now thats a good question, and I don't think you can be sure about the answer.

First I didn't say need an IT department, I said "near IT support staff level of skill". There's a difference.

How many Windows users toss out their boxes after 2-3 years because they are "too slow", when all they really need to do is to wipe the drive and reinstall the OS?
How many Windows users know you no longer need to shell out "protection" payments to Symantic or McCaffee? Most of my XP using friends/ family didn't until I told them.

[clevin]

For reducing cost yes, but both the Mac version of OO, which requires you to install/run X, and NeoOffice which runs natively are IMHO kind of lame when compared to the Windows and Linux versions of OO. So at $80 iWork 08 was really welcome

indeed, and its much faster under windows. if our initial intention of the office suite comparison is indeed as OP stated, then OO under windows is cheaper than iWork under OSX, without being "lame"....

actually, if you ask me, M$ office vs. iWork should not be a issue here when OP tried to compare the expense of windows box and Mac. It just makes no sense.

First I didn't say need an IT department, I said "near IT support staff level of skill". There's a difference.

How many Windows users toss out their boxes after 2-3 years because they are "too slow", when all they really need to do is to wipe the drive and reinstall the OS?
How many Windows users know you no longer need to shell out "protection" payments to Symantic or McCaffee? Most of my XP using friends/ family didn't until I told them.
Its still hard to imagine 95% of the computer users in this world are that "High Tech".

There might be one or two or maybe 10 things you can argue against windows, just as you did. but I highly doubt windows being popular is because its difficult to use. and Im sure there are 20 or 30 things people can argue against OSX.

You ask how many windows users do this or that. but as far as percentage is concerned, how many mac users make stupid mistakes as well?

To be honest, I never heard anybody around me that actually paid Norton for anything. You just can't generalize the whole user population based on own experience. after all, there are how many windows users out there?

[K-Funk]

Here's what I see as the problem in Apple's product line-up.

Take someone like me, who wants a computer primarily for web-browsing and word-processing. Even if I like OS X better than Windows, I'm not going to pay over $1000 for a MacBook when I can get a comparable PC for hundreds less.

On the other hand, Apple has done such a good job of marketing that a ton of people who really know nothing about computers (and don't care about operating systems) will indeed pay hundreds extra for a MacBook because it's "cooler."

[killerrobot]

I totally agree. I really hate it when people tell me iWork (or Google Documents, or Open Office, any other "Office-killer") is comparable to Office. If you think it is, then you shouldn't be using office in the first place. I started salivating when I realised what I could do with Excel and VB. It's a shame OSX-only users will never have that experience, as it seems like Office: Mac is developped as if it was Office's little retarded half brother.


Office was originally designed for Mac, and then went to windows world. It still has many more features on the Mac side than the Windows side.

And don't forget that PC users have to pay more for anti-virus programs and they didn't realized it's the same amount of $$ as mac computers. Ya know what I mean?

Any windows user still paying for an AV program needs to stop paying for it and use AVG or another free one.

Macs can be more expensive than PC's, but in the long run, which computer lasts longer? Mac! Why? Well, the main reason would be that they are virus-free. I have a 3.5 year old Dell PC at home (which has been replaced by the new iMac), and just one single virus can stuff everything up!

An iMac G3 I used at school booted in 1:20. Dude, that's quicker than my Dell (2:15)! :D


So did your 3.5 year old Dell quit working or did you quit caring about using it?
I would say the main reason for lag is the user. Get all the crap out of startup that doesn't need to be there, and realize the limits of the machine. I have a 12 year old 486 that boots Windows 3.x in 50 seconds.

after all, there are how many windows users out there?

Even more now that they can run on Mac.

So which one is more expensive - the one that people are willing to pay the most money for based on their needs. 25k for the most pimped out mac is more expensive than 600 for a dell desktop and 25k dropped on a pc is more than the mac mini.

[silbeej]

Yes they are overpriced, but then again so are some cars, and some foods, and some houses, but who cares? You get what you pay for, and the quality is a lot higher, and i feel that my MBP was worth every penny. I was a poor college student, and i still am, but my purchase was worth it for i feel that macs are built a lot better, and what you are getting is a superior product to any other system.

[clevin]

You get what you pay for, and the quality is a lot higher

I honestly have problem with this claim, my experience with MB of 18 months old are full of hardware defects, just hard to agree with that "high quality" claim.

[chrismac00]

Why buy a laptop(i won't say Dell because everyone gets angry??) that is cheap and won't last you long..I rather work really hard and buy a Mac then buy a cheap Asus, Everex, (dell), compaq, etc.. The Mac will definitely last way longer than those..

Maybe some of you guys are just mad because Apple is better than anyone out there(in my point of view)

[clevin]

I rather work really hard and buy a Mac then buy a cheap Asus, Everex, (dell), compaq, etc.. The Mac will definitely last way longer than those..


the only problem, that "definitely last way longer" statement is just wrong, why do you think mac will last longer than other computer? please enlighten me.

[PNW]

indeed, and its much faster under windows. if our initial intention of the office suite comparison is indeed as OP stated, then OO under windows is cheaper than iWork under OSX, without being "lame"....

actually, if you ask me, M$ office vs. iWork should not be a issue here when OP tried to compare the expense of windows box and Mac. It just makes no sense.

Agreed.


Its still hard to imagine 95% of the computer users in this world are that "High Tech".

I'll admit that I'm just postulating still consider that a large number of the 95% (and by some reports it's less these days)

1 Are in a corporate environment where IT is a given.
2 Are owned by IT pros or users who've spent enough time on boards to get a job in desktop support if they wanted one.
3 Are owned by users who can and do draw on someone in group 2.
4 Are owned by users who just buy a new computer every 2-3 years when their software starts causing problems.


Maybe some of you guys are just mad because Apple is better than anyone out there(in my point of view)

Mad's a little strong. I've always been a little disgruntled because while I think Apple makes the best OS on the planet, their hardware selection leaves a lot to be desired. But that's just me, and as I've said before Vista is onerous enough for me to suck it up and go with Apple's hardware when I buy a new box next month.

[K-Funk]

I think we're confusing cost with value. Macs may be a better value for the money (depending on your preferences), but PCs are generally cheaper, in my opinion.

[stainlessliquid]

The arguement only works for certain markets that would actually use iLife.

Is the Mac cheaper as a gaming machine? God no. Mac Pro's with an 8800GT are a whole grand more expensive than something at Newegg, you could build 2 great gaming PC's for the price of one Mac Pro and have money to spare.

Professional 2D work? No. Your only options are a 24" iMac (due to the absolutely horrendous screen in the 20") and a Mac (book) Pro. A $700 PC with a Core 2 Duo and 4gbs of ram would be extremely good for Professional 2D work.

Professional video editting? Maybe. Mac Pro's are not terribly more expensive than a PC workstation. Plus they have Final Cut Pro which adds to their value.

The quality arguement is just extremely false. The only quality you are getting is the outer case. I dont remember a SINGLE mac that has never had major hardware problems when its first released. Maybe the Intel Mac Mini didnt have problems, but the G4 Mini had VGA problems for its entire lifespan because Apple didnt feel like following VESA standards. Mac hardware is riddled with problems just like PC's, Apple tries to save money too (look at the beautiful TN display in the iMac, talk about high quality). OS X is the only real thing that sets a Mac apart from a PC, the hardware is more or less the same quality unless you get an Emachine.

[dejo]

I honestly have problem with this claim, my experience with MB of 18 months old are full of hardware defects, just hard to agree with that "high quality" claim.
C'mon, clevin, you should know better than to base an entire product's reliability on your own personal experience. Wasn't it you who said: "You just can't generalize the whole user population based on own experience"?

[clevin]

C'mon, clevin, you should know better than to base an entire product's reliability on your own personal experience. Wasn't it you who said: "You just can't generalize the whole user population based on own experience"?

indeed, I do think my claim went a little too far. even tho it was a response for the statement that obviously has no merit. lol maybe im just too exhausted today.:(

PS. I want to add. My MB is rev A, and I think the RSS is wide spread for rev A MB, so are screen flickering. I think apple's QC is NOT good, especially for new products, rev A macs, and maybe OSX 10.x.0~10.x.3. For me, that shows the quality of apple's products aren't much different from any other hardware/software companies. and unfortunately they are worse than others in my case.

[pr5owner]

Yes they are overpriced, but then again so are some cars, and some foods, and some houses, but who cares? You get what you pay for, and the quality is a lot higher, and i feel that my MBP was worth every penny. I was a poor college student, and i still am, but my purchase was worth it for i feel that macs are built a lot better, and what you are getting is a superior product to any other system.


are you kidding me? apple doesnt make hardware, you realise that right? sometimes they dont even do the design 100%

1G ipod shuffle = Asus
2G and other ipods = Hon Hai (some cheap china company)
older MB = Quanta, quality sucked, tried compal, quality sucked
older MBP = Asus quality was ok,
Newer MBP = Asus and Hon Hai
iphone = Hon Hai
ipod touch = Hon Hai

all china made, all cheap, Asus probably has the highest quality between Quanta and Compal.

oh guess who makes dells? QUANTA!!!!!!!!!!! so in reality the older G4s and dells were made by the same company.

soemtimes you dont get what you pay for. EX? Volkswagon, they are all made in mexico. they are cheap garbage but they are sold for sometimes 5-8 K more than other cars in the same class with MORE features.

EDIT: do not confuse COMPAL with COMPAQ, although COMPAL makes some units for compaq i believe.

oh BTW Sony, HP, COMPAQ, IBM, DELL NONE OF THEM REALLY make laptop hardware, they dont even design them half the time. they are all made by ODMs

[pr5owner]

OS X is the only real thing that sets a Mac apart from a PC, the hardware is more or less the same quality unless you get an Emachine.

OSX can be ran on X86 and X64's too,

the quality is actaully cheap garbage, if you take your MBP or MP's appart you will notice the HDD;s are just cheap seagates or maxtors with low cache

the ram is cheap samsung or hynix ram (both are garbage),

the video cards are all low end with slow clock speeds

the motherboards are as cheap as they come since Hon Hai makes them (Foxconn),

Apple is there to make money, plain and simple, they really dont care about you or what you think is good. they care about their shareholders and what they can do to make more money. Cheap products, minimal support (hence 90day free support when it should be free lifetime phone support, only 1 yr warranty? shipping not included? thats real cheap) maximum profit (IE OVERCHARGE!)

[pr5owner]

The 12" powerbook sold for more than $850. Paid a $100-$150 more and got a new macbook for my wife.

So please, before you a burst another vein.. go ahead and buy an Acer or whatever. I don't know about you.. but I like a return on my investment. When I buy an Apple product, I get more than a 100% ROI! And I love using it for the OS and the hardware form. After 2 years when your Acer fetches $200 on ebay, and my macbook pro gets me $950 or so.. then you'll know which one is more 'expensive' in the long run.

And I bought a separate card reader for $25. :rolleyes:

My acer was $1400 (5672) i can sell it for about $800 right now, it was manufactured 0206 (feb 2006)

thats ok resale value to me, cars dont even have that kind of resale value.

oh BTW i bought a card reader too that does SDHC for $3 (well 10 of them for 30 and sold the other 8 for $10 a peice) but i dont always have the card reader on me, its sitting on my desk just incase i need to read SDHC. however if im to buy even an eee pc it comes with an SDHC so i really dont need it anymore if i get a new laptop.

also its not cheaper for a mac in the long run, i can upgrade my Core Duo to a Core 2 Duo, i already reflashed my bios to accept any new cpu. if i throw in a 2.2GHz core 2 duo ill only pay like $300 and ill have a faster computer than the Macbook.

2.2GHz, 2GB 667 Ram, 100GB HDD (i can throw in any SATA 2.5 HDD), any network card i want, i prefer atheros cards over crappy intel ones. so ABGNEI? the bluetooth 2.0 EDR was already in the machine. hell i can even upgrade the video card i believe since ive seen ppl go from X1400 to X1600.

can you upgrade anything on your mac other than ram? or maybe your hdd?

[stainlessliquid]

Thats another ironic point, all mac hardware is made by PC makers and designed by Intel (another PC motherboard maker). And Foxconn has some bad stuff, I cant believe they use that, I guess they were the lowest bidder. ASUS, Intel, and Gigabyte are all good PC manufacturers, I find it funny that Foxconn makes Apple boards. ASUS must have costed too much and bit into Apple's ridiculous margins. Whats next, PC Chips?

[chrismac00]

the only problem, that "definitely last way longer" statement is just wrong, why do you think mac will last longer than other computer? please enlighten me.


They are just good. I hear all the time people saying they have iBooks and eMacs and stuff like that, they are like 5 years old. You wouldn't normally say that a PC can last 5 years. In some way, you are right, PC's are cheaper and I knew Macs were expensive but I had to wait even though everyday I would be more tempted to buy a PC. Don't get me wrong, I still like Windows, its just in my point of view Macs(preferably the Mac OS) is better.

[pr5owner]

They are just good. I hear all the time people saying they have iBooks and eMacs and stuff like that, they are like 5 years old. You wouldn't normally say that a PC can last 5 years. In some way, you are right, PC's are cheaper and I knew Macs were expensive but I had to wait even though everyday I would be more tempted to buy a PC. Don't get me wrong, I still like Windows, its just in my point of view Macs(preferably the Mac OS) is better.

my computer from 2002 is still in use, and its still overclocked LMAO.
Duron 700MHz @ 1.1Ghz, 384MB ram GF2MX video WOOOO.... (i broke the GHz barrier before cpus were running stock at at that speed)
that computer has never ran its stock CPU speed from day one and it still boots faster than most vista machines with XP

macs are actaully the same as pcs, same parts inside, most of the time cheaper parts since its all made in china.

[stainlessliquid]

My mom uses a 700mhz pentium 3 HP that came with Windows ME (it was pre-release too, one of the very first shipments of PC's that came with it before it went on sale as standalone). It works fine, never needed any repair at all, the last time I reinstalled the OS was when XP came out and I put it on there, even the slow ass HDD still works. Ive tried to get her to get a new computer since that computer is so old but she is fine with it as it is. It has seen some upgrades, I upgraded the TNT 2 card to a Radeon 8500LE, and upgraded the ram to 768mbs for Photoshop, but this was all several years ago.

The transfer speeds are painfully slow because of the HDD, but put a new one in there and it would be fiine.

So thats a PC thats running on 8 years without any problems. I have actually been using its old 4x CD-RW as my main burner up until last year when I finally got a DVD-RW for my main PC.

[thinkband]

I think people need to face it, if you buy something, you tend to get ripped off. The only way to not get ripped off is by actually making your own computer from the motherboard up so you know exactly what is in your computer.

It is not like Dell or Asus rip you off less than Apple does, they ALL do. Perhaps Apple (and I do admit) has a higher margin than most PCs due to design, name brand, and a successful OS. I gotta admit, Vista was not made for the consumer right now. It was made for the consumer a year from now. It just slows down the presumably fast laptops.

Also, believe it or not, no viruses is a good reason to get an Apple. Just the $70 a year someone would need to pay for PC protection (and even that does not work) will pay for the cost difference between your Dell and Macbook pro.

Overall it is hard to deny that Apple is more consumer friendly at this time.

Spec to spec comparing with a Dell, the Apple seems overpriced, but there is no doubt that a Leopard based macbook pro with similar specs to a Vista XPS will outperform it in almost every area, especially after 6 months of time since PC's like to slow down overtime (Been a Pc user my whole life).

[PNW]

Just the $70 a year someone would need to pay for PC protection (and even that does not work) will pay for the cost difference between your Dell and Macbook pro.

No home user needs to pay anything per year for Windows virus protection. There are several solid anti virus programs out their for free with free updates. Do that, run as a limited user, and use some common sense and you will never get a virus on your Windows box.

The fact that's it's a pain in the arse to run XP as a limited user is a good reason to get a Mac, but it doesn't add to the cost of a Windows box.