Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by Aadhil, Aug 7, 2010.
Looks like Dell has caught the "Apple Tax" bug
huh? there is more to a computer than those specs
Exactly my point. Saying macs are inferior because of a set of specs is dumb.
I paid 3.5x more for a silver computer. Boy, am I stupid.
I don't get the point you're trying to make
You're showing a dell computer that is being sold for 600 and saying they caught the apple tax, when an i5 MBP is going to run you at least 1,800
Look at the paper clipping. Look at both specs then compare the pricing in relation to the specs. Let me know if when (if you ever do) you get it. If you don't; then I'm sad for you
As people have already said, there's more to a computer than just the 5-6 specs given. Both are from different companies, have different cases, different LCD/LED panels and a bit different design.
I have an iMac, yeah it cost more, but it's better. How, one might ask? It's silent, the same size as 21.5" monitors, 1 cable attached giving me a clean desk to use for things OTHER than just the computer. I quit buying PC's because of those reasons. The macs are just better. I'm far more productive with the computer as well.
If I were doing High performance computing, sure I'd run linux on a set of PC servers, but I'm not. I'm taking photographs, writing e-mail, doing web design, listening to music and stuff like that.
The price differential of me not having to be a sysadmin at work and at home added to the productivity and more things I'm doing with the iMac make it worth more to me.
People who care about $2-500 difference in price of a computer, likely should save their money for something they really need like: food, shelter, clothing, retirement and a car.
You mean the gateway i5 is lower priced than the dull i3?
See Post # 3
Yep. Most PC users like to say that Macs are over priced because they cost more for the same specs. Well here's two PCs which have the same scenario!
Yea, there's a small difference here. The "Apple tax" is a lot more.
It is. But I don't mind it. There is more than the specs, as said by others. The quality of the build. The battery life. The trackpad. The thinness.
If I bought only a computer for the price/performance ratio, it would have came from Newegg in several cardboard boxes
I think you're all missing the humor in what he's posted. The reasons have been explained, but this was no time to go off the guy.
I think we all know why we invested the money we did on a Mac.
Still, the Dell probably costs more because Gateway pieces their computers together with charred remnants of Packard Bells and orphans.
If you aren't using a mac for what it can do, then you wasted your money. Do some research before you purchase something. There is a lot that "silver computer" then just a case and an apple on it.
Reminds me of a old lady with a Corvette. Driving under 45 on the freeway.
The "Apple tax" only applies so silly products like the battery charger. IN general most Apple products are genius and best-of-class and deserve the high price.
What is it that it can do that justifies the price?
Provide unique and better user experiences that anything else?
*snort* Besides the 'Dell tax' on those computers, it seems that they almost look identical. I had to look again to see that they were from different manufacturers.
I think the 'Apple tax' is worth it for some people. I'm very happy with my MacBook Pro, but that 'Apple tax' might not be worth it for someone else (like a gamer, or someone who needs a high-powered server solution that would be filled better by a PC with Linux on it.)
Aadhil, maybe you should do some homework before you post stuff like that. One major difference between the two notebooks: The Dell comes with an ATI graphics card while the Gateway only has a cheap Intel onboard graphic. That already justifies the price difference, especially since the two CPUs are on par with their performance.
That's a fundamentally objective call. I see nothing that clearly classifies OS X as a 'better user experience'. Indeed, in my experience over several years, OS X tends to get in the way of production more often than XP or Win 7.
And 'unique'? What's 'unique' about it? Bungie Jumping stark nakes wearing a bob-the-builder hat singing 'Waltzing Mathilda' would be quite 'unique' - not a great idea though.
I think anyone who still makes the "Apple Tax" argument is just plain ignorant and just the market that Dell, Toshiba, HP, and many other traditional PC makers are after.
Apple isn't about cheap, black plastic boxes with circuits and poor packaging. Apple is about a fine attention to detail in every little thing they do:
-The sleek aluminum unibody design of that MacBook Pro
-Its Magsafe battery cord that prevents you from sending your computer flying when you trip over it
-The ten-hour lithium polymer battery whose non-user removable status allows for more space in including such a battery
-The well thought out glass multitouch trackpad, which is one-of-a-kind in this industry (Apple is the only laptop maker that actually pays attention to the trackpad)
-The illuminated backlit keyboard
-The nicely placed speakers on a MacBook Pro
-The battery power indicator built-in to the side of each MacBook
-The packaging of the computer with an included handle for carrying
-The interior packaging of the computer which includes neatly laid-out instruction manuals and booklets, restore DVDs, and Apple stickers
You don't get any of that in a cheap PC. You really do receive what you pay for. If you can't appreciate the little aesthetics, then you really cannot fully appreciate life.
A lot of companies rush out products in a "me too!" game. They rush to pump out tablet PCs in the wake of the iPad, showing off prototypes that won't even hit production for months or years in which by then their specs will be vastly underpowered for their time or they'll try and rush out a product with lots of "powerful" specs -- surely more "powerful" than the iPad without paying any attention to the small details. These tablets will be plastic slates utilizing a stylus, running Windows 7 at an awkward 16:9 resolution, and then these companies will scratch their heads in confusion as they still don't understand how their new "better" product is still being outsold by the iPad.
You can release a product with "great specs" and pay not attention to the manufacturing and design process. You can try and cut costs, releasing some plastic piece of junk and announce all over the newswire that you've come out with "THE iPad Killer" and see it fail. Or you can spend time and money developing a product which not only looks gorgeous but also runs just what is required in order to have a great product. The electronics market is always changing. Currently people care more about just what a product can do for them rather than how powerful it is because regardless of how powerful something is, if it cannot offer a fluid user experience then there just isn't a market for it.
Look at Creative. They tried taking the iPod head-on with a line of MP3 players that had more storage capacity at the time, an FM radio tuner (something the iPod did not offer at the time), and lower price points. What happened? Creative didn't pay any attention to detail. Their UI was horrible, their controls were even more awkward. The earbuds weren't memorable. Nothing was. There was no streamlined user experience. You purchased a Creative MP3 player and that was it -- you owned it, and Creative no longer really had anything to do with you. When you purchased an iPod, you "felt" like you were part of a community. Your earbuds were "recognizable". You could plug it into iTunes and check out the latest new songs. You could browse the latest top charts and download free singles of the week all from the same application you used to sync your music. If you ever had any issues, you could walk it into one of several hundred stores and get help. The packaging was hip, flashy, and worth keeping around.
Attention to detail -- not everyone appreciates it. I'm glad that I do.
Aside from the battery, most of those options you mention are subjective and its worth is in the eye of the beholder. Plus calling someone ignorant because they do believe there's an apple tax (and has proof to back it up) borders on fanboyism. Yes the battery life is one of the best if not the best on the market. You sacrifice user replaceable for that battery life and for many that sacrifice is too big.
the battery power indicator had to be moved because you cannot pull the battery to see it. Its kind of lame since the OS tells you what your battery life is.
So you highlighting that box that you get the laptop in has a handle as a reason why we pay more for a MB[P]
All in all apple has a great reputation for paying attention to the smallest detail and its paid off, the down side is that you pay for it. Many people do not want to 1,200 for a 13" C2D laptop, even if the cardboard box has a handle on it. They can spend half that, get a decent laptop and travel with it.
Don't get me wrong I'd buy a MBP over a dell any day, but highlighting the battery indicator, how its packaged neatly in the box (every other computer maker neatly packs their computer too ) and the handle on the card board box is a bit lame.
Are you forgetting 50% of the reason for buying a Mac - OS X? Some people just do not want to deal with Windows anymore with all the bugginess, crashing and viruses. Even I as a lifetime Windows user have to admit that fonts are drawn better in OS X and the overall UI is more consistent.
Until it is technically impossible to run osx on non apple hardware (no Eula rants please), the only apple tax I will happily pay is for iOS devices and Apple software.
If I were in the market for a laptop, i would only consider apple hardware, but on the desktop, I want to choose my equipment (from an osx hcl of course...)
You know maybe if hardware was more locked down for Windows, people would have had much better user experiences over the years instead of all those BSOD.
That argument of being buggy/crashing and even viruses is out of date. Microsoft has done a great job with Windows 7. My windows 7 install hasn't crashed once and I'm using the free MS antivirus software and malware has not been a problem and the performance of win7 great.
Is Win7 better then OSX, no, as apple has done a better job with the OS, thanks to its unix underpinnings, better UI and core foundation levels that provide the user with a fast, efficient stable OS. I support windows desktop and servers at my job and with the newer OS, I'm seeing a markedly difference in stability over XP and that was quite stable as well.