Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

jefhatfield

Retired
Jul 9, 2000
8,803
0
the average consumer wants that mhz-ghz thing to look fast

to them a bus is a transportation vehicle on four wheels and "cache" is what is in the wallet ..."pipelines" push your poo into the ocean and "risc" is riding your harley without a helmet:p
 

atomwork

macrumors 6502
Jun 5, 2001
331
209
Miami Beach
Prices Europe

I don't really think you guys see that the right way. The prices are now with the euro almost the same, don't forget that prices in Europe have added already the 16% tax in it. That might seem higher. If you buy a mac here in the US it looks good but wait until they ad the local and state tax on 4500... hahah. You'll see!

Regarding the high price. Give me a break. A Hyundai cost less then a Beemer too!!!. Good products deserve a fair price. Well may be the mass market can't affort it but thats life.
 

humantech

macrumors member
Jan 27, 2002
30
0
Inland northwest
Expensive really is a relative term...

First Off, I really enjoy reading the posts on this site- You guys and gals have some very diverse viewpoints and always make for enjoyable reading!

I am a mac freak, through and through. Also a Realist. Also a musician with a background in recording on the mac ( and the PC- EEEWWw.... Sends chills up my spine) I'm also an Apple Certified Warranty Tech- working on my OS X certification, a paid consultant and the owner of an Apple Specialist Retail store. I opened the store on faith and a shoestring, so I'm not at all an elitist, nor am I rich.
Thats my background. Let me give you my point of view on pricing of Apples products.
Apple makes a GREAT product. All the way around.
They do charge a LITTLE more for it. They should. Its a better product.Its a free market economy ( well, not Counting M$) :)
Consumers pay the extra price if they want the machine. What is needed to help cost justify the purchase is an understandable explanation of the advantages of the Mac Experience.
As a store owner and salesperson, I can say from first hand experience, that since OS X hit 10.1 ( the first "Ready for prime time release" IMHO), I have been converting between 4-7 PC users per week. Linux users too. These are NEW Mac Users. No problem. Just let them play and they buy it. COST IS NOT A FACTOR.
Most people are more than willing to pay a few more dollars to get something that works.We've even got a trade in your pc towards a Mac promo going ( want cheap pcs? Just check us out on ebay)
Bottom line- Class and quality count more than sheer speed- Just ask Alpha why he has a Harley and not 2 or 3 crotch rockets. If you have to ask, you wouldnt understand.... :)
As for the fastest hardware out there, Apple doesnt need to have it. Why? Bottlenecks. Reduced margins. No appreciable gain in marketshare and making less money on the same sales. That would be fiscally irresponsible of them. At this point in time, they would get no additional sales out of having faster hardware than they do, and they would either have to raise prices, or kill their margin. The reason they are able to make the experience to the end user so great is all about balance. Tweak the hardware, tweak the software,Tweak the apps,Tweak the appliances. Put money in the bank. Stay in business. Stay the course of providing the best user experience. Not the fastest hardware. The most PRODUCTIVE and ENJOYABLE systems.
Having said that, With OS X, its a brand new world. Quartz extreme will start the process of OS X doing things other OS's have never done. Hardware will start to evolve ( think of the amount of Resources apple has dedicated to OS X and NOT hardware for the last 3 years. They are now getting into the TWEAK the hardware phase. ) My guess tells me that by january ( next macworld) Apples hardware will begin to spank anyone else out there. Sure, there will be faster COMPONENTS out there. But Overall system performance will be GREAT. Look at the throughput on the Xserve. Look at the real world benchmarks rolling out on that vs its competitors. The Pro line is next.
To say Apple should lower its prices is silly. When someone says to me, with a straight face AND can back it up, that running a pc works better than a Mac, then they should lower prices. Until that time, you arent buying an ATA 100 Hard drive, a PC 133 bus and Dual Gig G4's. You are buying a Mac. That means something. You will get your work done. you will enjoy it. You will be ragged on by your pc friends until they use it, then they will spew specs at you because they have no other recourse. Dont worry- Their Just Jealous...;)
As always my 2 cents-
humantech
 

PFY

macrumors newbie
May 22, 2002
5
0
Re: Prices Europe

Originally posted by atomwork
I don't really think you guys see that the right way. The prices are now with the euro almost the same, don't forget that prices in Europe have added already the 16% tax in it. That might seem higher. If you buy a mac here in the US it looks good but wait until they ad the local and state tax on 4500... hahah. You'll see!

Regarding the high price. Give me a break. A Hyundai cost less then a Beemer too!!!. Good products deserve a fair price. Well may be the mass market can't affort it but thats life.

The only problem is that Apple's European prices (without VAT) are on average 20% higher than their US prices. Of course the Euro's value has risen in the past few month, but hey why can't Apple lower the prices accordingly? After all this might finaly renew the enthusiasm among the European Apple faithfull.
 

gopher

macrumors 65816
Mar 31, 2002
1,475
0
Maryland, USA
Alex, I still disagree with you. Macs aren't $500 more expensive than PCs and still slower. Find me a PC that is $500 less than a Mac and yet faster, and I'll find you a Mac that is as fast as that PC for the same price or less. Look at what I did earlier for the Dell that was quoted. If you must compare Macs to PCs, compare new machines whose every quality is backed by the manufacturer. Even Dell can't guarantee the operating system will work on the system you install it on. Even Dell doesn't make a listing of devices that won't work with Windows XP, but there are plenty as well. With Apple, we know what works, what doesn't, how easy it is the configure, and if we don't the person at the Applecare phoneline can help us. Apple is going even as far as to custom build your system at their retail store. With a PC you need to be educated as a system engineer to get things working all the time. With a Mac you just need to be able to follow the directions on the screen. The net cost of building a PC and making it run will always be higher than the net cost of plugging a Mac and running it.

What artist has the knowledge to build their own highly clocked dual Athlon? Clocked machines by the way have a chance of lasting a very short time should you not have the technical knowhow to keep it going. So your arguement about that Athlon is moot unless you can train the average artist to become a systems engineer knowledgeable in how to modify hardware to one's hearts content. And what artist is going to have the time to clock a machine to precisely the speed they want? What artist has a hardware technician at their beckoning call in case something goes wrong. I want something that works, is fast, and doesn't break down to the point it needs a technician it breaks down. For that there is Macintosh. For the rest of the people who can spend the money on hardware gurus there are PCs. But a hardware guru invariably costs more than machines. So the Macintosh is cheaper by far in the longrun.
 

madamimadam

macrumors 65816
Jan 3, 2002
1,281
0
Re: Re: Prices Europe

Originally posted by PFY


The only problem is that Apple's European prices (without VAT) are on average 20% higher than their US prices. Of course the Euro's value has risen in the past few month, but hey why can't Apple lower the prices accordingly? After all this might finaly renew the enthusiasm among the European Apple faithfull.

When it comes down to it, unfortunately, Apple is still a big corporation and such "niceness" would not even pass the though patterns of the board of directors when it came to long term ways to make more "dosh".

I love Apple but there are SO many times that I love to hate Apple and that is because corporations are bastards to earn more big bucks.
 

CountZero

macrumors member
May 5, 2002
47
0
NYC
After reading all the posts in this thread, guess what it reminds me of? CARS.

The whole PC vs Mac is kind of like comparing American cars to European cars. American's being PC and European's being Mac.

American cars tends to have larger engine, bigger body, more toys, etc. Whereas European cars have more efficient engines, better handling, and (probably) more class. Oh and European cars cost a bit more too in general.

Which one is better? Depends on what you can afford, what you use it for, etc. I don't think there is a definitive answer here. Each to his/her own.

Personally I am a recent 'switcher' and love my Mac. Still use PC at home and at work, to earn a good living so I can have time to enjoy my Mac. And I prefer European cars over American any days of the year.

At the end of the day, no one is forcing you to buy what you think is over priced computer system/car. If you can't afford or don't think it is worth the money, DON'T buy it.
 

gopher

macrumors 65816
Mar 31, 2002
1,475
0
Maryland, USA
Agreed to some extent...Apple does make it easier to buy if you go through their store. You can get 3 months same as cash, and up to a 5 year loan to purchase one of their computers. We are talking less than $1 a day in many cases to purchase one of their iMacs. For someone who can't afford $1 a day, I feel sorry for you, but that's what jobs are for. Even McDonalds will give that to you. And ask for Student and Government discounts, Apple has them for both students and teachers, for government employees and agencies.
 

alex_ant

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2002
2,473
0
All up in your bidness
Originally posted by gopher
Alex, I still disagree with you. Macs aren't $500 more expensive than PCs and still slower. Find me a PC that is $500 less than a Mac and yet faster, and I'll find you a Mac that is as fast as that PC for the same price or less.

Look at what I did earlier for the Dell that was quoted. If you must compare Macs to PCs, compare new machines whose every quality is backed by the manufacturer.

See below.
Even Dell can't guarantee the operating system will work on the system you install it on. Even Dell doesn't make a listing of devices that won't work with Windows XP, but there are plenty as well. With Apple, we know what works, what doesn't, how easy it is the configure, and if we don't the person at the Applecare phoneline can help us.

Yes, I never said this wasn't the case. It doesn't make Macs any cheaper, though, and the whole thing I'm getting at is that PCs have a better price/performance ratio. Not necessarily price/usability, or price/simplicity, but price/performance - this is what a lot (the majority?) of people look at.
Apple is going even as far as to custom build your system at their retail store. With a PC you need to be educated as a system engineer to get things working all the time. With a Mac you just need to be able to follow the directions on the screen.

This is extremely exaggerated and untrue. Most people get by just fine with Windows XP. If they didn't, the Mac would have a lot more than 3.48% market share.
The net cost of building a PC and making it run will always be higher than the net cost of plugging a Mac and running it.

Debatable.
What artist has the knowledge to build their own highly clocked dual Athlon?

Who says they have to build their own? There are plenty of lesser-known build-to-order and mom & pop computer companies that would be more than happy to build & assemble a reliable and working computer for you, who will include a multi-year warranty for free (unlike Apple) and multi-year free tech support (unlike Apple). The lesser-known, "beige box" companies, taken together, make up the largest segment of PC retailers. Let's put that 933MHz G4 you brought up earlier up against, say, a custom-configured Systemax computer for example. I'll bold the superior components in each.

The Mac:
933Mhz G4
512 PC133 SDRAM
80Gb HD
Superdrive
Geforce 4 Titanium
15" studio display
Gigabit Ethernet
56k modem
Pro Speakers
Mac OS X+ iApps
1-year warranty,
------
Total: $3407


The Systemax:
Athlon XP 2100+ (which will beat a dual GHz Mac at non-AltiVec tasks)
1GB 266MHz DDR SDRAM
Dual 120GB ATA drives
Dual SuperDrives
GeForce4 Titanium
15" LCD monitor
10/100 Ethernet (or drop in a GigE card for <$100)
Sound Blaster Audigy
44 watt speakers w/ subwoofer
USRobotics 56K Modem
MS Intellimouse / Internet Keyboard
Windows XP Home / Works Suite
Headphones
3 year warranty, 3 years on site & lifetime phone support
------
Total: $2710

Now I want you to find me a Mac that performs just as well as the Systemax for the same price, like you said you'd do.
Clocked machines by the way have a chance of lasting a very short time should you not have the technical knowhow to keep it going.

This is plain false.
So your arguement about that Athlon is moot unless you can train the average artist to become a systems engineer knowledgeable in how to modify hardware to one's hearts content.

The Systemax comes from the factory ready to go out of the box, just like the Apple. No systems engineer degree required. Clickety click, you're on the Net, just like the Mac. Is XP inferior to OS X? Yes. It's not inferior to the extent you say it is, though - millions of people are perfectly happy with it.
And what artist is going to have the time to clock a machine to precisely the speed they want? What artist has a hardware technician at their beckoning call in case something goes wrong.

If something goes wrong, call Systemax, just as you'd call Apple.
I want something that works, is fast, and doesn't break down to the point it needs a technician it breaks down. For that there is Macintosh. For the rest of the people who can spend the money on hardware gurus there are PCs. But a hardware guru invariably costs more than machines. So the Macintosh is cheaper by far in the longrun.
I don't understand why you continue to flog a dead horse. Just because you can open up a PC to tinker with it doesn't mean you have to. If something goes wrong, you can call the company and have them pick it up and fix it for you, and it's just like calling Apple and having them do the same. I seriously think you read too much Apple sales literature. I like Macs too, but I'm perfectly willing to admit that they get their butts kicked by PCs performance-wise on a regular basis - why can't you be too?

Alex
 

Penguiner

macrumors newbie
Jul 14, 2002
1
0
Hi,

I'm a newbie to these forums.
Here's what I would like to say.

1°) ARE MAC'S TOO EXPENSIVE ?
Here's my answer. to compare prices, you should take items that can be compared. And if you consider the quality of components included into Apple's hardware, you should compare it to IBM, Compaq, Toshiba or HP. At least. And if you compare a Mac to those machines, then MAC's are more expensive, but the price difference you'll see isn't a real barrier on buying a Mac.

2°) HAVE MACS BETTER PERFORMANCE THAN PC'S ?
Well, a lot has been written already on this forum and in this thread.
Some are telling that Macs are slower, some that they are faster.
I do not doubt that all of the contributers to this thread are computer freaks that will push their machines until the engine blows.
But to be honest, who really cares about that performance question ?

Who NEEDS to play Quake or RTCW in 120 fps, when 30 are enough to have fluid game ?
Who NEEDs to spell check a 1200 pages long document daily in less than 30 seconds ?
Who NEEDS to have a script of several Photoshop filters applied in seconds instead of minutes ?
Who NEEDS to get 3D rendering of a complex scene every day ?
Who NEEDS to have lightning fast video special FX's to be calculated in less than 4 hours ?

Those who really NEED to do this are skilled professionals who work for big companies. Those do not care if the computer costs 500 dollars less or more.
So, when you do not NEED that much performance, what's the point in arguing if the Pc's faster than a Mac. OK, my friend tells me he can RIP DVD's on is PC in less than 4 hours. It will take me more than an entire night to get the same result. I don't care. I have a Powermac G4/400 with 140 GB disk storage and 1,2 GB RAM. And I must tell that this machine is enough for almost all my needs : word processing, spreadsheets, some graphics work, some video editing, gaming (with WC3, Alice or diablo II). I don't do 3D modeling or rendering and I guess this is the only domain where my Mac would be too slow. But are we all 3D renderers ?
 

madamimadam

macrumors 65816
Jan 3, 2002
1,281
0
Originally posted by Penguiner
Hi,

I'm a newbie to these forums.
Here's what I would like to say.

1°) ARE MAC'S TOO EXPENSIVE ?
Here's my answer. to compare prices, you should take items that can be compared. And if you consider the quality of components included into Apple's hardware, you should compare it to IBM, Compaq, Toshiba or HP. At least. And if you compare a Mac to those machines, then MAC's are more expensive, but the price difference you'll see isn't a real barrier on buying a Mac.

2°) HAVE MACS BETTER PERFORMANCE THAN PC'S ?
Well, a lot has been written already on this forum and in this thread.
Some are telling that Macs are slower, some that they are faster.
I do not doubt that all of the contributers to this thread are computer freaks that will push their machines until the engine blows.
But to be honest, who really cares about that performance question ?

Who NEEDS to play Quake or RTCW in 120 fps, when 30 are enough to have fluid game ?
Who NEEDs to spell check a 1200 pages long document daily in less than 30 seconds ?
Who NEEDS to have a script of several Photoshop filters applied in seconds instead of minutes ?
Who NEEDS to get 3D rendering of a complex scene every day ?
Who NEEDS to have lightning fast video special FX's to be calculated in less than 4 hours ?

Those who really NEED to do this are skilled professionals who work for big companies. Those do not care if the computer costs 500 dollars less or more.
So, when you do not NEED that much performance, what's the point in arguing if the Pc's faster than a Mac. OK, my friend tells me he can RIP DVD's on is PC in less than 4 hours. It will take me more than an entire night to get the same result. I don't care. I have a Powermac G4/400 with 140 GB disk storage and 1,2 GB RAM. And I must tell that this machine is enough for almost all my needs : word processing, spreadsheets, some graphics work, some video editing, gaming (with WC3, Alice or diablo II). I don't do 3D modeling or rendering and I guess this is the only domain where my Mac would be too slow. But are we all 3D renderers ?

BRAVO to the newbie... I like your style. As an added point to your Quake comment, the human eye can only see 12 fps but it is important to have about 30 for things like when you hit a very 3D complex part of the game and that 30 is significantly hindered but, theorectically, we can not notice anything over 12.
 

tjwett

macrumors 68000
May 6, 2002
1,880
0
Brooklyn, NYC
first off, i'm with alex_ant on this one. i like Macs better but i do know that they pretty much suck. i also liked to watch Perfect Strangers. that sucked too. there is no denying that they are seriously slower and anyone who claims otherwise is on glue or in denial. and believe it or not, there are people...

"Who NEEDS to play Quake or RTCW in 120 fps, when 30 are enough to have fluid game ?
Who NEEDs to spell check a 1200 pages long document daily in less than 30 seconds ?
Who NEEDS to have a script of several Photoshop filters applied in seconds instead of minutes ?
Who NEEDS to get 3D rendering of a complex scene every day ?
Who NEEDS to have lightning fast video special FX's to be calculated in less than 4 hours ?"

...and these are called "power users" and Apple has not catered to us in a very long time. all the fixed benchmarks in the world can not make our machines fast. i don't hate Apple. i just don't live in the fantasy that they are worth their price or even close to as fast as the rest of the computing world. as i've said before: Apple makes the claim of "Pentium Crushing Power" but the tests are always conducted running tasks specially designed for the Mac OS, the G4 and AltiVec. Macs are only fast in Appleland running Apple software, at the Apple headquarters, by Christina Applegate while she's eating a shiny macintosh apple. Out in the real world, where most apps are just ported across platforms, the Mac continues to get spanked on a daily basis and that's what counts. other processors are just plain fast and they don't require a patheticly biased benchmark to prove it. and more importantly, they don't require special coding to make them fast. Apple is not only slowing down it's users but the all the developers who waste their time coding for AltiVec, which is now a rarity and thus adding to the slowness of the Mac. i'm not here to bash Apple but atleast be honest with yourselves. these are slow, overpriced computers that could be running the best operating system ever, if only they could handle it.
 

mmmdreg

macrumors 65816
Apr 14, 2002
1,393
0
Sydney, Australia
generally, the more you pay, the more you get and this is true up to a point with Macs...however, they are probably a tad overpriced for the general consumer looking for a good system..
 

gopher

macrumors 65816
Mar 31, 2002
1,475
0
Maryland, USA
The Mac:
933Mhz G4
512 PC133 SDRAM
80Gb HD
Superdrive
Geforce 4 Titanium
15" studio display
Gigabit Ethernet
56k modem
Pro Speakers
Mac OS X+
iApps

1-year warranty,

------
Total: $3407
------
The Systemax:
Athlon XP 2100+ (which will beat a dual GHz Mac at non-AltiVec tasks)
1GB 266MHz DDR SDRAM
Dual 120GB ATA drives
Dual SuperDrives
GeForce4 Titanium
15" LCD monitor
10/100 Ethernet (or drop in a GigE card for <$100)
Sound Blaster Audigy
44 watt speakers w/ subwoofer
USRobotics 56K Modem
MS Intellimouse / Internet Keyboard
Windows XP Home / Works Suite
Headphones
3 year warranty, 3 years on site & lifetime phone support
------
Total: $2710


[/B]
Alex I already told you you could find the same machine at Smalldog for $1200 less. Why are you using yesterday's Mac prices?
http://www.smalldog.com/product/40906

"PowerMac G4/933 256/60/Superdrive/GeForce4 Dual w/ 256mb RAM upgrade ($400 mail in rebate with monitor purchase from Apple until 8/12/02)


* Condition: new, never used, 1 year warranty
* Part Number: 2/APPM8666
* Platform: Mac
* Price: 2299.00
* Product Status: Available "

OK so it is 60 GB, but you can sure find another 20 GB Firewire for less than $100. Display normally costs $500, rebate brings that to $100.
Mac still costs $160 less once you factor in 256 MB of RAM.
 

jefhatfield

Retired
Jul 9, 2000
8,803
0
i pick up every mac and pc magazine i see on the rack, and from what i see, the pc is the faster computer for the power users and gamers

but most of us are not into that type of power

pentium 4 and athlon are going into .09 micron processing which will make those chips able to last longer than a transmeta on a portable and also be able to go to 4 ghz in 2004...3 ghz by this december on p4 is a possibility

i can't see using that type of speed

some analysts say that wintel will easily support 4 GB of ram and in some multiprocessor models, support a terabyte of ram...again, why?

i am happy with g4 is and that is enough power for 99 percent of us mortals who clog away at the computer

our day in the sun at 2 ghz will come in less than a year i predict
 

alex_ant

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2002
2,473
0
All up in your bidness
Originally posted by madamimadamtimallen


BRAVO to the newbie... I like your style. As an added point to your Quake comment, the human eye can only see 12 fps but it is important to have about 30 for things like when you hit a very 3D complex part of the game and that 30 is significantly hindered but, theorectically, we can not notice anything over 12.
I think the number is actually something like 60, but I get your drift anyway. :)
 

atomwork

macrumors 6502
Jun 5, 2001
331
209
Miami Beach
OS X

Hi guys,

I like to add something what might help to see it form a different point of view. Its now only about power and speed, this discussion. If feel that there are quite some more things relevant to the price tag. I think some were already pointed out before.But i just didn't have the time to read almost 99 posts.

There is just no company like apple out there that builds everything for their consumers. Yes we can compare IBM, Toshiba, Dell etc... So what do they do? Build the hardware and thats it! But on every machine runs that weird windows. Now i can ask, why don't some companies start to build their own destop software but i guess they would be pretty quick out of business if the system won't run other PC apps.

So it is a good thing to have a computer without windows and still so much to get for it. Everytime i have clients here or friends pass by they are amazed about that kind of system. OS X. I think its really great. My G4 flys on it. The looks and the feel and everything that comes with it is great. Even the Microsoft applications look better then on the PC, so they said. I don't need to mention the 22" cinema display that blows them.

So speaking about all of this, I just cannot imagine why people still complain about the price tag that comes with all that great equipment. OK i saw that the prices in europe are slightly different but still not really far off.

Yesterday I saw the new Gateway commercial. OK, tying to be fancy stylish but somehow the company still didn't got some great designers for their money. As I was looking at it closely i saw that it was in my point of view only generic PC trash. So, let those people have it for 700 bucks.

--
Don't spank me now:)))
---
Cheers,
 

Wry Cooter

macrumors 6502
Mar 10, 2002
418
0
I think its important that Apple keep some computer of theirs priced around the 600 dollar range simply because the PC manufacturers are hammering the airwaves with such ads. I know apple does not want to enter a commodities market, which is what the PC side has become, but they need to keep this market in mind. Price is the most compelling reason that many buyers do NOT buy mac.
 

alex_ant

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2002
2,473
0
All up in your bidness
Originally posted by gopher

Alex I already told you you could find the same machine at Smalldog for $1200 less. Why are you using yesterday's Mac prices?

Those are actually today's Apple Store prices... my mistake.
http://www.smalldog.com/product/40906

"PowerMac G4/933 256/60/Superdrive/GeForce4 Dual w/ 256mb RAM upgrade ($400 mail in rebate with monitor purchase from Apple until 8/12/02)

* Condition: new, never used, 1 year warranty
* Part Number: 2/APPM8666
* Platform: Mac
* Price: 2299.00
* Product Status: Available "

OK so it is 60 GB, but you can sure find another 20 GB Firewire for less than $100. Display normally costs $500, rebate brings that to $100.
Mac still costs $160 less once you factor in 256 MB of RAM.
Sigh... so my target price then is $2399 (including monitor) - $500 = $1899 now, eh?

Athlon 2000+ (which will come close to a dual GHz Mac at non-AltiVec tasks, if it doesn't beat it)
256MB 266MHz DDR SDRAM
60GB ATA drive
SuperDrive
GeForce4 Titanium
15" LCD monitor
10/100 Ethernet (or drop in a GigE card for <$100)
Speakers
56K modem
Keyboard/mouse
Windows XP Home
Office XP Small Business
Warranty equivalent to the Mac's
----
$1729. $670 cheaper than the Mac. You can nitpick over all the components and whatnot - swapping most of them and replacing them with something else before ordering is trivial. I'm only trying to give an example of how it is possible to buy a quality PC much faster than a similarly priced Mac from a reputable manufacturer for less money than that Mac, and I think I have, unless you're going to lead me to some kind of grey market Mac chop shop or something.

So, yes, you must now show me a $1729 Mac that will meet or beat this Athlon in performance, like you said you would.

Alex
 

alex_ant

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2002
2,473
0
All up in your bidness
Originally posted by Wry Cooter
I think its important that Apple keep some computer of theirs priced around the 600 dollar range simply because the PC manufacturers are hammering the airwaves with such ads. I know apple does not want to enter a commodities market, which is what the PC side has become, but they need to keep this market in mind. Price is the most compelling reason that many buyers do NOT buy mac.
I agree. They ought to stick a Sahara G3 into the old iMac and lower it to around $600, with maybe a slight redesign. (The low end model is $650 or something in the education store, and they have to be making a killer profit even off that.)
 

alex_ant

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2002
2,473
0
All up in your bidness
Re: OS X

Originally posted by atomwork
So it is a good thing to have a computer without windows and still so much to get for it. Everytime i have clients here or friends pass by they are amazed about that kind of system. OS X. I think its really great. My G4 flys on it. The looks and the feel and everything that comes with it is great. Even the Microsoft applications look better then on the PC, so they said. I don't need to mention the 22" cinema display that blows them.

So speaking about all of this, I just cannot imagine why people still complain about the price tag that comes with all that great equipment. OK i saw that the prices in europe are slightly different but still not really far off.

Yesterday I saw the new Gateway commercial. OK, tying to be fancy stylish but somehow the company still didn't got some great designers for their money. As I was looking at it closely i saw that it was in my point of view only generic PC trash. So, let those people have it for 700 bucks.
Yup, when you pay that extra for the Mac, it's not speed you're getting - it's an excellent OS, great software, great hardware design (even if it's yesterday's great hardware design :)), ease of use, trouble-free hardware and software interoperability, and so on. This is what I think justifies the extra cost - not any sort of speed advantage. I think Macs are a good value even if they are generally priced higher than PCs. That's why I bought one and love using it, even if it is slow...

Alex
 

DidotCicero

macrumors newbie
Jul 13, 2002
15
0
Netherlands
Expensive Macs

I think Macs are expensive, although there's a lot value for money.

Call me crazy, but I bought my Mac secondhand 4 years ago from a design company. They replaced it with a new machine
I was a graphic design student and couldn't afford a new mac.
So I bought this PowerComputing PowerBase 240. As said earlier in this forum, macs keep their value a lot longer. It was made in 1997 and is still a pleasure to work with.
I've recently given it a harttransplant, now it has a PowerLogix 400 mHz G3 processor, along with a 40 Gb HDD and 128 Mb RAM. I felt the machine got a bit slow compared with my G4 450 mHz DoubleProcessor w. 1,5 Gb RAM at work.
Even with these (and other) upgrades I'm still way off the price of a new Mac. This way I saved money to buy all of my software. There's no single illegal copy of software (yes, including fonts) on my machine. I think that's important too! [How many of you Consumer Macusers with your brandnew machines can say that too?]
No I can't run MacOSX. I really don't care. I will buy me an secondhand iBook if I get really stuck (I can imagine that iTools/.Mac might be only accessed through MacOSX in the near future), but for now I'll keep my PowerBase thank you very much.
Eventually it is not the machine that matters, it's what you do with it!
(as long as it is a Mac, ofcourse)
For me a Mac isn't a status symbol, it's my collegue. Together, we get the job done.
 

gopher

macrumors 65816
Mar 31, 2002
1,475
0
Maryland, USA
You failed to mention the link you found that at...I did not. Face it...I back up my statements. You do not. Who do you think you are kidding? Someone unknown company? As I said before most people don't know how to build their own PCs and don't want to have the bother. And you can get a refurbished G4/933 with superdrive, Titanium GPU, for $1799. http://www.smalldog.com/product/41169

Not bad. If you want to find elcheapo you can get elcheapo Mac as well. Just need to know where to shop.

Originally posted by alex_ant

Those are actually today's Apple Store prices... my mistake.

Sigh... so my target price then is $2399 (including monitor) - $500 = $1899 now, eh?

Athlon 2000+ (which will come close to a dual GHz Mac at non-AltiVec tasks, if it doesn't beat it)
256MB 266MHz DDR SDRAM
60GB ATA drive
SuperDrive
GeForce4 Titanium
15" LCD monitor
10/100 Ethernet (or drop in a GigE card for <$100)
Speakers
56K modem
Keyboard/mouse
Windows XP Home
Office XP Small Business
Warranty equivalent to the Mac's
----
$1729. $670 cheaper than the Mac. You can nitpick over all the components and whatnot - swapping most of them and replacing them with something else before ordering is trivial. I'm only trying to give an example of how it is possible to buy a quality PC much faster than a similarly priced Mac from a reputable manufacturer for less money than that Mac, and I think I have, unless you're going to lead me to some kind of grey market Mac chop shop or something.

So, yes, you must now show me a $1729 Mac that will meet or beat this Athlon in performance, like you said you would.

Alex [/B]
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.