The PC world and Mac world price so different

Discussion in 'Wasteland' started by nec207, Mar 27, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    #1
    Okay so you all know most PC cost any where from low $300 on low in computer !!! to high on high in computer $1500 !!

    And Mac cost any where from low $1200 on low in computer to high $2,000 on a high in computer!!

    Why is that the case?

    Also it cost $50 for computer technician to look at your computer and $50 to fix it !! But apple computer technician to look at your computer is $100 yes just to look at it !! And than $100 to fix it that is $200 of apple profit!! And that is not parts that is even more over price!!!

    Why is that the case?
     
  2. macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #2
    Mac Mini's start at $599, not $1,200. Once you start pricing out a non-Apple PC against a Mac, the Mac has a overall cheaper price most of the time.
     
  3. simsaladimbamba

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Location:
    located
    #3
    Hasn't this been discussed to death? Didn't you want to switch to Linux, because "Mac users are sick people"? Do you actually have a Mac now or are you still getting malware every two weeks?

    Anyway, Apple wants to make some profit, more than others as it seems, but they also put a lot of work and thought into their products and don't throw (not "through") out trash like many other manufacturers, who sell you 300 USD computers.
    Do you seriously want to compare a 300 USD computer with a 599 USD or 1,199 USD computer?

    Will this thread end in Wasteland?

    And you do realise, there are other, better suited, sub fora here, don't you? Your last bunch of thread all start here.

    So, stalker, you can dislike away as much as you like, you little bugger.
     
  4. thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    #4
    What I mean if you want a high in PC for gaming or video editing you be paying $800 to $1,600 and for Mac for high in for gaming or video editing any where from $1,600 to $2,000.
     
  5. macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #5
    The base Mini can do 4K video editing without a problem. And the one with the better video card can do gaming pretty well. Prices are $599 and $799.
     
  6. macrumors G3

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #6
    You can spend $2-3k on a PC Laptop easy... But that is not what you want to hear is it? Go buy yourself a PC and stop being a baby. :)
     
  7. Contributor

    Scepticalscribe

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    Kite flying
    #7
    In common with most people, I started out with PCs, and thought Mac a sort of esoteric expensive (and self-indulgent) niche product, a niche product, moreover, which was very difficult to access if you used Word (as most of my work world did).

    My laptop PCs were, respectively, an Olivetti, a Toshiba, and a Sony Vaio, all of which were fine machines. In a work world, I have also used HPs, and even smaller Toshibas. I have never bought a Dell, though one place I worked in, used them.

    I switched for a number of reasons.

    I like (no, I love) good design. Sony has it, and so does Apple.

    But really, it was the 'halo effect' of the iPod - not just the stunning ease of using an iPod on a Windows machine (and this is from someone who had to use a timer, pencil and pad to work out how long & how much space ripped tracks would take up on a blank CD, and, worse, embarrassingly, destroyed more blank CDs trying to rip a bizarrely difficult playlist from that wretched system that Windows had in those days). In short, iPods were wonderful, and dead easy to use and install, even on Windows. They were also beautiful, and they could carry your entire music library in one small, devastatingly attractive device.

    Also, Apple has very good customer care, as I discovered when two iPods in succession suffered HDD failure. They were replaced without a whimper.

    As I had been plagued by malware/virus/spam when I used Windows (and I was one of the microscopic minority who actually bought robust anti-spam/virus package), I was understandably pleased when I learned this was not a problem with Apple machines. Add to that, that one could now use Office on Macs, and I was hooked.

    So, OP, the cost difference can be explained away by an original OS; a beautiful design aesthetic; excellent customer care; the fact that you don't get much by way of spam and nothing by way of viruses, and the fact that you can actually run Windows, or Office, or the stuff the rest of the world uses, and still have a Mac.

    Q.E.D.

    Cheers
     
  8. simsaladimbamba

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Location:
    located
    #8
    I could edit video on my 2004 G4 iBook, I could edit HD video on my 2007 iMac and 2008 MacBook and 2008 MacBook Pro and 2009 MacBook Pro.
    Video editing is not that CPU intensive, if you do it correctly and not use the crappy H.264 encoded footage but footage properly transcoded to a video editing codec.

    If you only look at specs and money when looking at Macs, you don't need a Mac, as your priorities lie somewhere else (getting the fastest computer for as less money as you can spend).
    With a Mac you get more than just specs, you get good design, a good OS, quite good parts for the most part for the size of the computer, less power use (my 2007 iMac and 2009 MBP use less power during high CPU use than most equally equipped Windows boxes) and some more.

    It seems it takes you almost a year to get a Mac and haven't made up your mind yet. It took me two repairs of my Samsung X30 laptop in 2004 in less than a month to decide to get rid of that nine months old computer and buying me my iBook (yeah, before all the crazy iPhone **** started to get John and Jane to be aware of Mac OS X).
    I used that "slow" iBook more than my "double specced" AMD PC even with more advanced software (except with one software for which I had a dedicated GPU, which was **** when playing games, but could beat the crap out of any other gaming GPU when composing video in Combustion) and eventually sold the PC.
    Do you know why? Not because I spend 1,200 € on the iBook and only 500 € on the PC (excluding the 500 € GPU in there), but because Mac OS X was tailored to my way of thinking and actually made me do things faster.

    Just look at the Windows Control Panel:
    Windows XP (or Windows 5.1):
    [​IMG]
    Windows 7 (or Windows 6.1):
    [​IMG]

    And now look at System Preferences in Mac OS X:
    Mac OS X 10.3 Panther
    [​IMG]
    Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard
    [​IMG]

    System Preferences is more logical than Control Panel and easier to navigate, Windows 2000's and Windows XP' Control Panel were okay too, just alphabetically organised. Windows 7's Control Panel has categories like System Preferences, but it opens another new window foe each ****ing section.

    But who are we kidding with these threads. They all end the same, and probably no one will be persuaded, that one is better than the other, as it is subjective.

    Go, buy a Windows PC, there can be had good ones for the money you want to spend, and Windows 7 is a fairly good OS. You don't need a Mac. You either want it or you don't. The same goes for Windows PCs. You want them, you don't need them.

    Unless you make money with them of course and your software is only available for one platform. If it is for Windows, you can still buy a Mac. If it is for Mac OS X, you could buy a Hackintosh.
    Yeah, maybe you should build a Hackintosh, thus you can get that hardware and those specs and spend less money and just have a box.
     
  9. macrumors 603

    mobilehaathi

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Anthropocene
    #9
    OOhhh, fresh topic!
     
  10. thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    #10
    You do have point here.

    But not sure what you mean by Video editing is not that CPU intensive, if you do it correctly and not use the crappy H.264 encoded footage but footage properly transcoded to a video editing codec.
    It not uncommon for video editing for one hour HD video to take 4 or 5 hours.
     
  11. simsaladimbamba

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Location:
    located
    #11
    Yes, if you use a highly compressive codec for the footage, but since transcoding or importing footage is not video editing, but more like prep, I don't count it as video editing.
    But since most consumers have consumer grade cameras, which use a highly compressive coded, since consumers don't want to attach TB HDDs to their camcorders, importing/transcoding footage becomes part of the "editing" process I suppose.

    I can edit 1080p HD on my 2007 iMac, if it is properly transcoded (DNxHD or ProRes or CineForm), but if I would use H.264 encoded 1080p footage, my 2007 iMac would crawl to its knees.
     
  12. chrf097, Mar 27, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 27, 2012

    macrumors 68040

    chrf097

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2011
    Location:
    Earth
    #12
    Is there really a point continuing this discussion?

    Apple PCs cost more than most other PCs because of the build quality. Laptops that cost 300 - 400 - 500$, are made of a lot of plastic and crappy materials. I can find over 10 different computers made of high-quality materials with the exact same specs as say, a Macbook Pro, and they're going to be around the same price.

    I call troll on this one. We can just stop with this one.
     
  13. macrumors 603

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #13
    If you spec it out similarly, sometimes a price difference is still there. Sometimes it's significant. Sometimes it's not. It really varies. There are some little things I find annoying from every oem (including Apple), but these comparisons usually end up quite biased. They don't include a reasonable sampling. Instead people always pick configurations that agree with their predetermined conclusion. That's what makes these debates so boring. In the end if you wish to run OSX, Apple is the only official route. Even a lot of the guys who own hackintoshes also own genuine macs.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page