Apple Display vs. Dell - so, why the price difference?

Discussion in 'Buying Tips, Advice and Discussion (archive)' started by Shacklebolt, May 14, 2005.

  1. Shacklebolt macrumors 6502a

    Shacklebolt

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    #1
    So, I'm biting the bullet, selling my awesome 15" Apple Studio Dislay LCD (ADC, not that other kind), and I was doing it so I could buy myself a 20" Apple Cinema display. But I'm having second thoughts on the Cinema display after checking out the Dell 2005FPW or whatever it is. The price difference is rather monstorous (I'm a student, so the apple display would cost 699 as opposed to 524 for the Dell), so can anyone speculate as to why? I like the design of the Apple monitor more, and sure, it's more elegant, but 175 bucks? That's a lot of dough. Aside from that, doesn't anyone know where I can get the dell display cheaper than 524?
     
  2. wrldwzrd89 macrumors G5

    wrldwzrd89

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    Solon, OH
    #2
    I'm going to look at this from Dell's perspective instead of from Apple's perspective.

    The reason Dell is able to get away with charging $524 for their monitor is that they sell in such high volumes (especially to businesses) that they can afford to run periodic specials and take a hit on their profits to promote additional sales. Apple simply lacks the sales volume to use this approach.
     
  3. sbb155 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    #3
    It is actually basic

    If you read some annual reports or financial statements, it sometimes is very interesting!

    Apple's gross margins are a lot higher than dell.
    In other words, apple wants to make more profit from the monitor than dell.
    Greedy? Maybe, or maybe they are just looking out for their shareholders.

    The price difference is mostly because Apple wants to make a higher profit per monitor than dell wants to.
    Dell has razor thin margins, while apple's are very high.
    Apple could easily sell the monitor for less, but they want to make higher profits on fatter margins for the apple moniker. And they must know what they are doing, because a lot of people buy the apple monitor, just for the name and the design, rather than the performance.
     
  4. asif786 macrumors 65816

    asif786

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Location:
    London, UK.
    #4
    in the end, it always comes down to looks. i'm getting a 20" cinema display next month, and i'll be getting the apple one. why? because every morning when i see the display, i dont want to think 'goddamnit, i wish i bought the apple instead of the dell". i think the apple 20" is reasonably priced. i expect we're all used to paying a little extra for the apple brand and aesthetics..

    also, i guess i would rather be contributing to apple's bottom line instead of dell's. :)

    plus, i'm just using it as a fancy pictureframe on my window-ledge, so it *has* to look good :D
     
  5. OCOTILLO macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Location:
    Houston, TX
  6. Calihafan macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    #6
    Identical?

    You all DO know that the display in the Apple display is identical to the one in the Dell display? They're both manufactured by Philips? Yeah... unless you really need the aesthetic to fit into the office, I'd go with the Dell. I mean, you can villianize them all you want, and I don't like them either, but when the display is identical... I think it depends - are the looks worth $450? If not, go with the Dell. I don't like Dell, they suck, but the display is the display.

    Calih
     
  7. aswitcher macrumors 603

    aswitcher

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2003
    Location:
    Canberra OZ
    #7

    Yeah, that pretty much killed it for me givent he rpice difference. When I go to buy I'll go Dell and save...especially on the 24" dell versus 23" Apple displays
     
  8. asif786 macrumors 65816

    asif786

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Location:
    London, UK.
    #8
    yep, there was a comparison the other day that showed there's really no difference. of course, there are a few contributing factors when picking a display:

    a) what's the price difference? int he case of the 20" the difference is just under 200 bucks. obviously, as you look at larger displays the difference will be higher. that's when it's harder to decide.

    b) if you go and spend say $3000 on getting a new powermac, why not get a matching display? sure, youll pay a couple of hundred more, but if you can spend $3000 on a comp, then you may as well get the whole package, right?
     
  9. sbb155 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    #9
    It is very simple, getting back to the profits issue.
    Would you rather have a few hundred in your wallet or in apple shareholders wallets?

    Really, it is that simple.

    Interestingly, some people prefer one side (less $$$ in their wallet) and others prefer more $$ in their wallet.

    Apple has done brilliant marketing, getting people to pay sometimes 50% more for the same screen. Got to hand it to them. Most companies can't pull off that kind of marketing.
     
  10. dornoforpyros macrumors 68040

    dornoforpyros

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Location:
    Calgary, AB
    #10

    umm I know for a student $175 isn't pocket change but I hardley consider it to be monstorous. $400-$500 is monstorouse but $175?

    Then again since the recent price drop on the apple displays they have become much more appealing to me.
     
  11. asif786 macrumors 65816

    asif786

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Location:
    London, UK.
    #11
    let's be honest, it's not *exactly* the same thing. the insides are the same, not the outsides. you're paying more for what the product looks like.

    and apple isn't the only company that's pulled this off. people buy expensive tv's all the time. at the end of the day a tv is a tv. but you pay a premium because of how it'll look in your house. another example is food: you can buy unbranded gummi bears from wal-mart or branded ones from another supermarket. they're both really the same thing..

    umm, ok that last point was kinda lame but i wont cut it out :p
     
  12. Prelude2Tragedy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #12
    This weekend the dell 2005 is only 400 bucks. There are 35% coupons and 90 dollar off stackable coupons. You can find them in deal forums like fatwallet and such.
     
  13. sbb155 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    #13
    I agree asif, apple isn't the only company to pull it off. but most companies can't pull off a charge of 50% premium for their name.
    The apple name really has allowed apple to produce very high margins on everything.

    From the apple website, and dell's, you can see that gross margins for apple were nearly 30%, while for dell they were almost 9%.

    So, on the average, when apple sells an item they mark it up 30% from their cost, and dell marks it up 9% from their cost.

    I think apple stuff is a little overpriced, which is obvious when you look at their financial statements. Of course, to other people, a 30% markup may be completely reasonable to have an aluminum colored casing and an apple logo on the item.

    That is why apple has brilliant marketing... they can make people believe that things are worth a markup, when the performance is equal... again, I got to hand it to them....really a great way to make profits - just mark things up more than you r competition, and get people to buy them! Really an amazing company if you ask me.
     
  14. Xenious macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Location:
    Texas, USA
    #14
    Not all the insides are the same. The LCD panel itself is the same, the controller chipsets and the backlights are different.

    I think ars technica had a good comparison review between them.

    IMHO if you are getting it for mac use only I'd suggest the apple display. If you want to use it on a PC as well I'd suggest the Dell as it has some additional 1:1 fixed pixel modes (ie 640x480 shows up as 640x480 with black bar areas instead of stretched to the monitor size).
     
  15. witness macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2005
    Location:
    Austria
    #15
    Another factor that no one seems to think of is that the Dell is height adjustable. I find it very strange that Apple's monitors and now iMac's are not height adjustable, all you can do is tilt them. They might look nice, but if you have to stick a book or two under it it might not look so pretty.

    Also, another thing is that the dell supports svideo and composite inputs.
     
  16. noel4r macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #16
    As much as I'd rather have an Apple display, I got a 2005fpw a month ago for $424.00 including tax, free shipping. How can you beat that? I can't wait until next week when I get my Dual 1.8...Yeah!!!
     
  17. cmvsm macrumors 6502a

    cmvsm

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2004
    #17
    Apple displays all the way, especially with the price drop...of which I didn't get to take part... :eek:

    If you are frantic about an extra $175 bucks for quality AND asthethics, then maybe you should try not only the Dell monitor, but $399 Win box as well... :D
     
  18. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #18
    The Apple display is SWOP certified for colour rendition. I doubt the Dell display is that close but it depends on what you need.
     
  19. beyelka macrumors newbie

    beyelka

    Joined:
    May 14, 2005
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #19
    DELL 2405FPW Display v. Apple 23"

    I was also in the market for a new Monitor, was comparing prices Dell v. Apple.

    I ended up getting the Dell (with the additional "SoundBar" attachment). Bonuses were:
    1> approx. AUD$1,200 cheaper for the Dell.
    2> AUD$1,660 v. AUD$2,795; Dell v. Apple.
    3> 5 input sources (DVI, VGA, S-Video, Composite, Video)
    4> Picture in Picture from the 'video'-style inputs onto the DVI or VGA modes
    5> Height, rotation, tilt adjustable
    6> Pivotable Display to Portrait (w/support in Tiger)

    I thought the price difference was definately repeatable :p

    OK, the Dell is obviously not in the same design-camp as Apple, the aluminium surround on the Apple is nice, but, let's face it... most of the time you are looking at what's displayed on the screen, *not* the edges. Having said that, the matt black surround on the Dell is less "in-your-face" than the aluminium of Apple.

    Oh, and *no* dead pixels. (Though admittedly I haven't seen a dead pixel on an Apple 23" either.)

    In short, one very happy camper! :)
     
  20. jsalzer macrumors 6502a

    jsalzer

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    #20
    R&D Costs don't change with market share

    Dell and Apple have to do the same R&D to put out a monitor.

    Microsoft and Apple have to do the same R&D to put out an OS.

    Having a smaller market share doesn't mean you pay less for these things. How do you compensate? A larger markup.

    Near as I'm concerned, we should all feel honored to contribute that extra markup to Apple's R&D!

    (I also enjoy paying state taxes. Heck, I like my paved roads and take full advantage of them. Worth every penny! Think how much it would cost me to build my own. Or to have to use gravel roads. Or, the equivalent, to use a Wintel machine.)
     
  21. sbb155 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    #21
    jsalzer-
    You are exactly the kind of person that apple wants to market their products to... someone who justifies the higher price and supports the high margin! Bravo! I am glad you are helping to keep apple in business. (and their shareholders wealthy)
     
  22. aaandrewww macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    #22
    the Dell can be had for $400 today check fatwallet.com for the coupons.
     
  23. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #23
    The Apple's are nice, and may even be better, but that can be quite a difference in money. For a poor student, I'd say go with the cheaper option. The Dell's aren't that bad, but be forwarned, you do get what you pay for.

    Of course, how "poor" could you be to be able to afford a couple of hundred for an LCD. :p You may not get much for that 15" ACD.
     
  24. jsalzer macrumors 6502a

    jsalzer

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    #24
    I feel special now

    I feel so special now. Apple wants me! Finally, someone wants me! ;)

    Now, I didn't say that I always pay their price - just that I understand why it is what it is. And when I do pay, I understand that I'm pulling more weight than a Wintel user is to keep my favorite computer manufacturer alive and healthy. (Says the Pismo owner who hasn't contributed significantly in years.)

    I used to work in a small, sinking, underfunded, understaffed college. All of the agencies (government and private) that send you paperwork to fill out don't quite care that the paperwork took me the same amount of time to complete their forms that it took for a person in an office with 100 times the staff to do it. The cost in man hours didn't change because of the size of the college or the size of the staff, which placed a much greater burden on me than my counterparts in larger schools. Apple R&D is in the same situation. Lowering their price won't increase their market share of monitors (considering that Wintel users will never believe an Apple monitor will work with their systems). So, you make the monitor great and hope you can get the higher markup.

    I'm still all snuggly and warm that Steve loves me. :)
     
  25. sjpetry macrumors 65816

    sjpetry

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Location:
    Tamarindo, Costa Rica
    #25
    Honored?

    Talk about being brainwashed. :rolleyes:
     

Share This Page