DELL compares its prices with Macs

[MacModMachine]

Alienware??? (Yes I am familiar.) I am at least glad you did not bring up the cost factor at the same time you are mentioning Alienware.

ummm....alienware makes a 11.6" laptop thats 899 and has better video then all of the macline of pro's,

im pro mac....and never support dell in anything,

but im not sure where your going with that.

 

[panzer06]

ummm....alienware makes a 11.6" laptop thats 899 and has better video then all of the macline of pro's,

im pro mac....and never support dell in anything,

but im not sure where your going with that.

Probably that in general Alienware is a premium brand and more on par with Mac pricing, which is why I bought ASUS for my gaming rig. It was a lot less expensive than the comparable Alienware (11" pseudo gaming rig aside).

Cheers,

 

[GamecockMac]

This is just Apple PR. It's a well known fact that Apple is very skimpy about R&D. Most companies spend a lot more than Apple on R&D. Microsoft - about 10X more than Apple, Nokia - about 8x more (in absolute values) and so on.

It's not about who spends the most on R&D, it's about who gets the most bang for their buck, and over the past few years it would be difficult for anyone (except trolls and haters) to argue that Apple isn't leading the pack in that regard.

 

[TZRaceR6]

This is just Apple PR. It's a well known fact that Apple is very skimpy about R&D. Most companies spend a lot more than Apple on R&D. Microsoft - about 10X more than Apple, Nokia - about 8x more (in absolute values) and so on.

While I'm sure it is fun to just make **** up (as you have), this is from the 2009 10K Apple Report:

"R&D spend climbed once again, up 20 percent ($224 million) for a total $1.3 billion. Snow Leopard development apparently cost the company $71 million."

Skimpy? An increase in 20% on R&D in one year is hardly skimpy.

Oh yeah, and Microsoft spent 8.7 billion on R&D and was down 3% this past year. You can do the math from this extrapolated data.

 

[Gamedevpro]

this is how i view it.

Person wants to buy a computer for college, he has $1000 (the sweet spot for most college students)

and checks a mac and this dell. He likes the mac because of its build quality and it has the best boasted customer service in the whole USA, the extra creature features (such as the mag-safe connector, and nice keyboard that lights up) but the draw back is mainly the $2000 price tag before tax, very limited support ( have to buy apple care later on), sometimes very biased user base, left behind in the tech race such as getting the newest tech first like the icore series (took them a year before they got it after the pc market), and also unprotected system (no viable virus protection if user base gets to big).

The dell offers the same speck for speck wise and runs at the same speed (there is no difference between the dell's i7 and the apple's i7 both have 2 core hyper threading allowing up to 2 real and 2 digital cores),more choices in color and style, and a better graphics card, also savings of over $1200 over the mac which is his price range. but the draw back is that it is made of plastic (some people consider this better in drops but only in some cases), considered bad quality (unless you take care of it some people think its just a cheap dell and toss it around, depends on user), bad support, and we can't forget you need virus protection.

Things that are the same:
they are both around the same power ( processor, ram, screen)
both claim to have good support
both use windows
both can get simple and advanced needs (such as web browsing to photoshop)
and both offer promotions for being a student

Things that are different:
the $1200 price difference
the dell comes with windows standard
the mac is (claimed to be more stable)
Dell (claimed to have bad quality)
and the dell lacks OSX
mac has better battery life
resale value of mac

Things that should not be in the equation due to bias thoughts:

-TCO or total cost of ownership should not be be in the equation, based on how you take care of your computer and you being smart about scams your TCO should be very low basically just the electric bill which isn't very different from the two computers and virus protection can be found for free, such as AVG, Avast, Rising, Avria, BitDefender, Clamwin, PC tools Software, and much more. also if your with AT&T, Comcast, Verison, Sprint, or TimeWarner, all provide internet virus protection in their base packages whether you want it or not so you pay for it even if you not using it.
Read http://www.mastermindit.biz/freeantivirus.html and see that you are not using you service to your full potential. also

(YOU MUST HAVE PROVIDERS EMAIL LIKE soandso@comcast.net or vice versa.)
for AT&T users get McAfee (if U-verse customers)
att.com/t5/Security/How-To-Download-and-Install-AT-amp-T-Internet-Security-Suite/td-p/295

for AT&T users DSL (you get Bellsouth)
HOW TO GET IT: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070716145430AAJUHYp

for Comcast users get Norton
http://security.comcast.net/

- personal experiences such as (crashes, bugs, viruses, and system failings) most of these events could be triggered by anything unless proven or it is a mass effect.

- and bias arguments.

-also ebay should not be the alternative to compete with the dell as to getting a mac, the dell is factory new and ebay is too unpredictable in value to put a good stance.

Conclusion, in a survey 1 out of every 20 people decided to get the mac with a credit card or some sort of loan to make the difference in this price range others just got the dell.

in survey 1 out of 100 people had bugs or problems with quality/misuse on the dell. as done by several schools.

due to the 1:10 ratio of mac to pc users problems might seem more often on the pc.

so there for it is which option you want?

 

[lilo777]

While I'm sure it is fun to just make **** up (as you have), this is from the 2009 10K Apple Report:

"R&D spend climbed once again, up 20 percent ($224 million) for a total $1.3 billion. Snow Leopard development apparently cost the company $71 million."

Skimpy? An increase in 20% on R&D in one year is hardly skimpy.

Oh yeah, and Microsoft spent 8.7 billion on R&D and was down 3% this past year. You can do the math from this extrapolated data.

I used data from two years ago. It used to be 10 billion vs 1 billion. So, it's not 10x now. It's just 5x. Given that Apple now is a larger corporation than Microsoft , it means that it is really skimpy on R&D.

 

[GamecockMac]

I used data from two years ago. It used to be 10 billion vs 1 billion. So, it's not 10x now. It's just 5x. Given that Apple now is a larger corporation than Microsoft , it means that it is really skimpy on R&D.

And as I already pointed out, Apple is getting at least 5x more out of their "skimpy" R&D expenditure than all of the money that Microsoft pours down the drain each year in a desperate attempt to stay relevant in the tech world. Focused R&D is working wonders at Apple versus the "throw money at it and see what sticks" approach at Microsoft.

 

[TopHatPlus]

This type of attitude is what give Mac users a bad name.

(page 4)

i disagree, although its not completely true there is alot of grounds

i wanted to mountain bike, it cost me $3000 for a nice setup, i owned a $300 bike from canadian tire and i broke it in 3 weeks just riding on the roads.... not even hitting easy trails >_< it was depressing

i wanted a decent electric guitar $900

T.V. 26" $500

if you intend to use your products more intensely then the average 75 year old couple you do need to spend a decent bit of coin, you wanna get into racing cars? there is countless examples. hockey? soccer? football?

if you want to movie edit or produce music?? or surf the web in a cafe for more then 2 hours and have a reliable system??? it is going to cost you

 

[TZRaceR6]

I used data from two years ago. It used to be 10 billion vs 1 billion. So, it's not 10x now. It's just 5x. Given that Apple now is a larger corporation than Microsoft , it means that it is really skimpy on R&D.

Larger corporation? I think you mean valued higher... yeah, for the first time in May this year, Apple was valued higher than Microsoft. However, net profit of $14.6 billion for Microsoft compared to $5.7 billion for Apple, means larger disposable income for Microsoft. Which is the larger corporation again?

So where shall you try and pull data next to try and prove you points? Maybe we can go back 10 years ago, which was the last time Apple was valued higher than Microsoft. I don't know, just pick and chose what you can find out there that could possibly help your point of view.

 

[HLdan]

I used data from two years ago. It used to be 10 billion vs 1 billion. So, it's not 10x now. It's just 5x. Given that Apple now is a larger corporation than Microsoft , it means that it is really skimpy on R&D.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, period!

 

[revelated]

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, period!

Beat me to it.

Apple is currently more profitable than Microsoft. They are not "larger", and I doubt they ever will be, mostly because they don't care to be.

 

[lilo777]

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, period!

Why is that? Apple does have higher capitalization. That's one (and most common) way of comparing the public companies. I do not see you offering any other ways. Perhaps it's you who does not have any idea. When a company has $46 billion in cash and spends $1.3 billion a year on R&D, what do you call it? I call it greedy and very shortsighted. I found the ranking of top R&D spenders among tech companies for 2006 year. It looks very interesting:

Technology's Top R&D Spenders
RANK COMPANY BUSINESS R&D SPENDING IN 2006 (millions)
1 MICROSOFT Software $6,584
2 IBM Computers $6,107
3 INTEL Semiconductors $5,873
4 CISCO SYSTEMS Communications $4,067
5 HEWLETT PACKARD Computers $3,591
6 TEXAS INSTRUMENTS Semiconductors $2,195
7 SUN MICROSYSTEMS Computers $2,046
8 ORACLE Software $1,872
9 SAP Software $1,781
10 EMC Storage $1,245
11 GOOGLE Software $1,228
12 ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES Semiconductors $1,205
13 BROADCOM Semiconductors $1,117
14 SYMANTEC Software $950
15 YAHOO Internet Services $833
16 SEAGATE Storage $805
17 CA Software $715
18 APPLE Consumer $715
19 MICRON TECHNOLOGY Semiconductors $656
20 NVIDIA* Semiconductors $554

Well, at least Apple bit Nvidia.

 

[ncdasa]

its the OS...

I would have to say that its the OS that gives mac the edge. I have many times wished to spend half the money that I do on a macbook pro and get a PC laptop with twice the hardware...

There is no doubt about it apple is a proud egotistical company with a brainwashed fan base that grovel a and beg for every next opportunity to throw exorbitant amounts of money at apples new little gadgets. That being said, and me many times resenting that fact, I cant in good conscience allow my self to waste 1,000 $ on a windows machine. Why would you spend 1,000 $ on a machine which only performs two functions: runs anti virus software, and gradually slows down an breaks?

As far as iam concerned apple exploits people, and its their OS backing them, which allows them to. Otherwise if you could hackintosh a wide variety of PC laptops, i bet you would see apples sales start to plumit.

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

Apple spends more than most other companies on R&D. Either that or other companies have retarded people who work the R&D departments. Hardware components also include the chassis, battery, keyboard, trackpad, LCD panel, etc. And there's also software that Macs have that is useful versus the adware, trialware, and other junkware stuff that isn't useful at all past 30 days on Windows PCs. I have no doubt that a Mac has a better LCD panel, longer battery life, better keyboard, and trackpad than the Dell. After all, this is Apples to Apples right?

 

[lilo777]

Apple spends more than most other companies on R&D. Either that or other companies have retarded people who work the R&D departments. Hardware components also include the chassis, battery, keyboard, trackpad, LCD panel, etc. And there's also software that Macs have that is useful versus the adware, trialware, and other junkware stuff that isn't useful at all past 30 days on Windows PCs. I have no doubt that a Mac has a better LCD panel, longer battery life, better keyboard, and trackpad than the Dell. After all, this is Apples to Apples right?

That is so incorrect! Here is why.

Dell Precision M6500 has WUXGA RGB LED Edge To Edge Back-Lit Display (1920x1200). Notice RGB LED as opposite to cheaper white LED used by Apple. Apple does not offer RGB LED backlit screens.

Dell Latitude XT2 XFR Multi-Touch Tablet PC - up to 19 hours battery life. It also has very special keyboard as one can see on this picture:

Apple trackpads are probably the best, but that's about it. Everything else - you can find better options on PC side.

 

[revelated]

I would have to say that its the OS that gives mac the edge. I have many times wished to spend half the money that I do on a macbook pro and get a PC laptop with twice the hardware...
...
As far as iam concerned apple exploits people, and its their OS backing them, which allows them to. Otherwise if you could hackintosh a wide variety of PC laptops, i bet you would see apples sales start to plumit.

People have been hacking PCs to run OS X forever. The results?

• Drivers that can't be found or are not supported, or just don't work.
• Battery life that absolutely reeks, even on otherwise efficient machines. Or they'll start out nice and great but over time and charging, they'll get to the point of about 30 minutes of life off the plug. Eventually with some, it won't work unless it's plugged in, signaling a dead battery. I don't find MacBooks having that problem.
• Hours and hours of effort. If you calculate time as money, most people waste thousands of dollars trying to hack PCs to run OS X because they think it's a better deal.
• PC hardware WILL go down. Even if you're running an efficient OS it will go down. Macs...they'll go down, but not nearly as soon and not nearly as frequent.

To each their own. If people want to hack their stuff to run OSX that's their business. Frankly, as an IT worker I view my time as equivalent to money - and assuming about $150 per hour billable, that means I don't have time to be futzing around trying to force a PC to run an OS just to save a few bucks, only to have it break down later as it eventually will.

 

[TZRaceR6]

Why is that? Apple does have higher capitalization. That's one (and most common) way of comparing the public companies. I do not see you offering any other ways. Perhaps it's you who does not have any idea. When a company has $46 billion in cash and spends $1.3 billion a year on R&D, what do you call it? I call it greedy and very shortsighted. I found the ranking of top R&D spenders among tech companies for 2006 year. It looks very interesting:

Well, at least Apple bit Nvidia.

Well, at least you know how to follow my directions. Except next time, instead of pulling data from 4 years ago to try and make your point, why not go back 10 or even 20? You really are grasping at straws.

So where shall you try and pull data next to try and prove you points? Maybe we can go back 10 years ago, which was the last time Apple was valued higher than Microsoft. I don't know, just pick and chose what you can find out there that could possibly help your point of view.

 

[lilo777]

This picture shows Dell notebook in its intended working environment (the picture is from Dell web site). It shows what its keyboard can endure. Obviously none of the Apple laptops can do this.

 

[SurferMan]

It's a magnetic attachment system for power cords. If you happen to trip over the cord, it just pulls away from the computer (and doesn't bring the computer tumbling to the floor). It's great.

Agree, this is pry my favorite feature of my MBP, genius whoever came up with this. So many times I moved and caught the cord or tripped if I had it on the couch plugged in, any other laptop would have slammed on the ground or broken where the connector plugs in.

 

[HLdan]

This picture shows Dell notebook in its intended working environment (the picture is from Dell web site). It shows what its keyboard can endure. Obviously none of the Apple laptops can do this.

Once again, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, Period! That picture shows a Dell notebook in a combat environment from very dusty grounds. What facts do you have to support that Apple's keyboards can't deal with high dust environments. We're not talking about water, we're talking about dust since that's what's shown in the pic right?
Obviously you haven't seen the Macbook Air that survived a plane crash? It was bent up badly but still booted up and worked aside from expected screen damage.
Take a look see. http://gizmodo.com/5215296/unibody-construction-helps-macbook-air-survive-plane-crash

At least I can support facts rather than spewing made up stuff and information from years back like you tend to do.

 

[kernkraft]

I have been using Macs since 2005 and I completely lost reality about computing prices involving PCs. But I'm getting tired with my unibody C2Ds and the super/mega glossy displays, so I checked Dell's website.

I don't mean to upset anybody, but when I wanted to see how much an i3 would cost with a smaller screen (to replace my 2.53GHz mid-2009 13" MBP) and how much I would have to spend to get a 15" i5 (to replace my late-2008 2.53GHz 15" MBP), I was shocked.

The prices for the 15" was almost as little as third and less than half of Apple's prices. That included an aluminium housing and anti-glare display. Honestly, for the first time in years, I was considering buying a Windows-based machine. I sold my MacBook Air for £700 a few weeks ago and I was hesitating between sticking with the 13" MBP and buying a new Air when it gets refreshed.

But I never thought that my old C2D Air with less than 2GHz could fund a brand new quad-core machine. Perhaps the specs are not identical with a 15" i5 MBP. But the two most important factors about computer hardware to me tend to be the screen size and the processor. I can upgrade the RAM and the HDD later, but if I want an i3 or i5, Apple's range is pretty outdated for the money.

 

[JacaByte]

I'm an Apple user whose sitting in his room with a working Mirror Door Drive G4, a working Power Mac 9500/200, a working Performa 6400 (it's the oldest computer I've seen with IDE) and a baseline 2010 15" MBP. I'm very happy with all these computers, especially the MBP of course. My sister has a 2007 Inspiron she bought from Dell. She's happy with it also.

I use my laptop for gaming, internet browsing, programming, office and AutoCADD. My sister uses hers for writing.

The moral of the story? To each their own. Dell seems to think their high volume, low profit market strategy yields better built computers than Apple's low volume, high profit strategy. There's a reason Apple doesn't sell computers for $200-$300 less than they do; they don't want to turn into Dell/Acer/HP/you name it. They're not competing solely on the basis of price and the moment they do they'll lose out.

But Dell and Microsoft see fit to launch ad campaigns that directly attack Apple. Why are they so afraid of Apple? Well, even though Microsoft has a 89% market share in the operating system department (different sources state wildly different numbers here, so if you still think it's 92% or whatever look it up) Dell has a 24% market share of laptops purchased by college students, a figure that is second only to Apple at 27%.

There are just enough people with Macs floating around that everybody either owns a Mac or knows somebody who does. This gives everybody a chance to see what a Mac can do that's so special, and Apple has wisely chosen to invest in soft, unobtrusive aesthetics; a MacBook can draw a crowd if it's a black sheep among white and has never been seen before, I've seen it happen before. People are curious about them, but are usually repelled by price. If price weren't an issue odds are (almost) everybody would have an Apple.

This picture shows Dell notebook in its intended working environment (the picture is from Dell web site). It shows what its keyboard can endure. Obviously none of the Apple laptops can do this.

It shows a keyboard that's covered in dust, it doesn't show a keyboard that works after being covered in dust. Correlation ≠ causation. All your argument whittles down to is a red herring.

 

[JacaByte]

Only...and this is the sad part... you find data several years old to show Apple is bigger than Microsoft

This is hogwash: Apple has a higher market capitalization as of May 26th, 2010. This means that according to the index used by the S&P 500 Apple is a more profitable company than Microsoft. But the important part is that this data is not several years old, it's actually a little more than 2 months old.

 

[eponym]

Thats because they are Quad Core processors, not dual core like Apple's.

They're still older, slower, simpler CPUs. The MBP's i7 has a 58% higher clock speed. Integrated graphics processing. Newer instruction set. A bunch of other advanced features etc etc

It's total manipulative b.s. and is preying on the ignorance of the public.

 

[lilo777]

[/B]

Once again, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, Period! That picture shows a Dell notebook in a combat environment from very dusty grounds. What facts do you have to support that Apple's keyboards can't deal with high dust environments. We're not talking about water, we're talking about dust since that's what's shown in the pic right?
Obviously you haven't seen the Macbook Air that survived a plane crash? It was bent up badly but still booted up and worked aside from expected screen damage.
Take a look see. http://gizmodo.com/5215296/unibody-construction-helps-macbook-air-survive-plane-crash

At least I can support facts rather than spewing made up stuff and information from years back like you tend to do.

It's actually very simple. As per Dell web site: "The Latitude XFR has been independently tested to meet military (MIL-STD-810G) and IP54 (Ingress Protection) standards for operation in extreme, challenging conditions-including drops of up to 3 feet." Has any MBP been tested to meet MIL-STD-810G and/or IP54? I do not need to convince you. Normal people understand what I am talking about. But you are free to drop your MBP from 3 feet or dust it up a little. Oh, and I wonder if Moshi offers ClearGuard Keyboard Protector for Latitude XFR as they do for MBP? I doubt that. Why would that be the case? BTW, how is the full-body InvisibleShield doing on your MBP?

It shows a keyboard that's covered in dust, it doesn't show a keyboard that works after being covered in dust. Correlation ≠ causation. All your argument whittles down to is a red herring.

It's a photo from the official Dell web site. It just highlights the fact that Latitude XFR has been independently tested to meet military (MIL-STD-810G) and IP54 (Ingress Protection). I think I do have much more valid argument than yours which is purely based on your own experience/opinion. Somehow I suspect that US military use Dell laptops and not Apple's (on the field that is).