Help me understand Mac hardware...

[sphinx99]

In what way mac hardware differs from PC hardware?
IMHO Macs cease to exist after G5 series ended. For me Macs were
different platform by using PowerPC CPU, different GPU, but now
we have Intel processors (few years ago we called PC platform Wintel) but
new we use Intel CPU's + we can boot Windows.

I don't see difference between iMac and Dell, Lenovo, Toshiba Laptop. Please
anyone tell me what kind of hardware Macs HAVE that PC's DON'T?

Also i felt bad when i saw one guy installing Mac OS X on PC, everything worked OOB he was also buying and using some apps from App Store

Is it true that Mac's are nothing else but brand made laptop like PC's?


What you guys think?

Outside of the CPUs, which are pretty much the same as everyone else's, I think they do a great job on hardware.

All the HMI stuff is excellent. The displays are always top-notch, they keyboards are nice and elegant, the trackpads are the best in the business, and I really do think the magic mouse is the best, most ingenious input device I've ever used.

The power efficiency is also quite amazing. The thoughtfulness and care with which Apple selects HW and customizes the OS to make things as power-efficient as possible is really something.

They also tend to push the envelope on battery tech, mass manufacturing technique and miniaturization.

Apple is an early adopter on some I/O technology as well, from SCSI and USB of yesteryear to Thunderbolt today.

So yes, some of the components are commodity items, and yes in some areas they really skimp just to make a buck, but overall I think Apple hardware is second only to [much more expensive] PC workstation-class hardware, which is saying a lot.

 

[bawbac]

Outside of the CPUs, which are pretty much the same as everyone else's, I think they do a great job on hardware.

All the HMI stuff is excellent. The displays are always top-notch, they keyboards are nice and elegant, the trackpads are the best in the business, and I really do think the magic mouse is the best, most ingenious input device I've ever used.

The power efficiency is also quite amazing. The thoughtfulness and care with which Apple selects HW and customizes the OS to make things as power-efficient as possible is really something.

They also tend to push the envelope on battery tech, mass manufacturing technique and miniaturization.

Apple is an early adopter on some I/O technology as well, from SCSI and USB of yesteryear to Thunderbolt today.

So yes, some of the components are commodity items, and yes in some areas they really skimp just to make a buck, but overall I think Apple hardware is second only to [much more expensive] PC workstation-class hardware, which is saying a lot.

Then why only offer a 1 year warranty?

 

[simsaladimbamba]

Then why only offer a 1 year warranty?

To make money of an extended warranty. Best Buy and other big electronics chains world wide make a lot of money with their extended warranties too, so why shouldn't Apple? And if you are in Europe, you can extend your one year Apple warranty to two years without buying additional Apple Care, as customer protection laws regulate longer standard warranties.

 

[snberk103]

Then why only offer a 1 year warranty?

Because they can. Because Apple is already perceived (with some justification) as being reliable enough that consumers aren't making a purchasing decision based on a warranty. Apple doesn't need the extended warranty to sell products, so why incur the cost?

---

One of the things that is being forgotten about the extended Apple Care is that it doesn't just extend the HW warranty, you also get 3 years of being able to call Apple support just ask 'How do I? questions. It's also a mini one-on-one.

 

[sphinx99]

Then why only offer a 1 year warranty?

I didn't say Apple was a good value, only that the hardware is excellent. The value has always been questionable; if they can deviate from a low-cost, entrenched standard in order to sell you a proprietary alternative at 4x the cost, they will. If they can offer as a costly option what everyone else offers as standard, they will. They're not quite in "less costs more" audiophile consumer electronics territory, but there's no question you'll pay and pay and pay.

Note also that the warranty isn't unprecedented. Think of automotive and how in the last decade, the field was dominated by reliable Japanese autos with tiny warranties, outselling U.S., Korean, British, German and Italian autos with much better warranties, because a reputation for reliability is often worth far more than the warranty that comes with the product in the eyes of many buyers.

 

[r3m1]

Lets face it Apple is a brand - because of the brand we tend to be more relaxed on its failures and over enthusiastic when it comes to the performance of Apple.

Nothing wrong with that - The special Apple flavor to commodity articles is the USP that appeals and so be it.

Think of the big brands and you will find the similarities.

 

[forty2j]

Apple is in the business of selling User Experience. Sometimes, to reach the goal of that experience, they can use common components that are companies use. But it's not the brand of silicon chips that makes an Apple, it's the entire package and how it's used.

 

[snberk103]

Lets face it Apple is a brand - because of the brand we tend to be more relaxed on its failures and over enthusiastic when it comes to the performance of Apple.
...

I don't buy Apple computers because they are "a brand". I buy Apple computers because they produce tools that make my life easier, and my work more productive. I'm lazy. I like easy. I like how I don't have to work or think too hard about how to use my tools. I think and work hard enough using my photography skills, I don't need extra stress working hard to use my computer. I just use them, and then I get to quit work.

I wish people, even in trying to defend Apple, would stop implying that there is no logical reason to use Apple computers - that we use just succumb to the marketing. Apple makes easy to use stuff. Like!

 

[r3m1]

"Easy" is matter of perception and personal preferences; I use both Windows and OSX - the jury is still out on which one is easier to use.

They both work fine and both are capable for the job at hand - I do believe that the Apple experience is a better package and more complete package (HW/SW/Design/Marketing/etc); this however relates to the brand feeling rather than the hard core technology components used.

 

[valleydesign]

Put as simply as possible, apple products cost more because:

-OSX
-Jonny Ive
-Apple Care

Those three things, plus the time you save by not having to fix up windows from time to time make up the cost difference. Think about it. While windows has to make its OS compatible with just about every gpu, cpu, mobo, ect. on the market, Apple carefully selects a handfull of "off the shelf" parts and builds OSX around that selection. It makes sense that windows might have a few more hiccups than OSX.

If it makes sense to you to save a bit of cash or opt for a little higher specs, by all means go buy a pc. If the above things have enough value to you to justify spending a little more on a mac, buy a mac.

In the end of the day both will more or less do the exact same thing. If windows was as TERRIBLE as some people make it out to be no one in the world would purchase a pc. Conversely, if apple products were really so OUTRAGEOUSLY overpriced with absolutely no added value to justify it, no one would waste their money.

I personally choose apple over windows for my design work. But if someone stuck me infront of an equally equipped pc, nothing would stop me from turning out the same quality work.

 

[drsox]

My 2c worth is just this :

I used to buy PCs but changed after 5 years to building my own. After another 5 years of this I now have a Mac and will buy another shortly.
PC makers seem to make their units to a cost target. Apple seems to make their units to a quality and performance target.
Which are you ? Is cost or capability more important to you ?

 

[snberk103]

"Easy" is matter of perception and personal preferences; I use both Windows and OSX - the jury is still out on which one is easier to use.

Yep. That's why we like choice. What works for me doesn't necessarily work for you.

They both work fine and both are capable for the job at hand - I do believe that the Apple experience is a better package and more complete package (HW/SW/Design/Marketing/etc); this however relates to the brand feeling rather than the hard core technology components used.

Where I disagree, is that I don't see "brand" as having anything to do with the "design". Branding is marketing, and nothing more. I agree that Apple is very good at branding and marketing. But that does not necessarily mean they are good at designing. Except in this case they are also very good at designing, and that has nothing to do with the branding. Their entire marketing effort could get turned over to a bunch of baboons tomorrow and they'd still have great designs. And by 'designs' I don't mean just the looks, I mean the whole package. The way that the SW works with the HW, and the way that the SW & HW get of the way and let me just do my work.

In other words - I don't think Apple is just about branding/marketing - they actually have a superior (for me) product to market.

As I said earlier, I don't buy my Macs because of the branding.... I buy them because (for me) they are the best tools for the job.

Put as simply as possible, apple products cost more because:

-OSX
-Jonny Ive
-Apple Care

Those three things, ...

I don't agree. Though perhaps I'm quibbiling. Apple chargse more because they can. That's it.

Those three factors you listed may make Macs more attractive, but the price is set by how much people are willing to spend.

 

[farmermac]

Not many computers have the form factor, design, software, amazing support, that apple does. Components are one part of the package, but since I've switched to macs I realize there's alot more than the components when it comes to a computer

 

[bpaluzzi]

I agree. Apple makes good looking computers that are easy to use for the novice consumer but its tweakability and flexibility can easily be outgrown for those who need higher performance and hardware flexibility without the strict "apples way" myopic way of doing tasks and computer management.

There's a reason apple computers haven't dominated business usage or been deployed in mission critical applications. OS X is restrictive and apple HW is limited.

Just because you don't know how to tweak something doesn't mean it's not tweakable. OS X is _extremely_ tweakable. And FYI, OS X being restrictive would actually be a bonus in most corporate IT departments. As would the limited hardware selection.

 

[r3m1]

The similarities remind me of the car industry; the VAG group which owns Audi and Volkswagen (among others) use the same technologies for their cars across the group, an Audi has beneath its body a lot of shared technologies with Volkswagen (e.g. engines, platform, etc.).

Still you would pay more for an Audi than a Volkswagen; yes, it has to do with design, (premium) branding, marketing, etc.

At the same time both will get you from destination A to B, it just the manner in which they will get the job done.

 

[Gav2k]

To make money of an extended warranty. Best Buy and other big electronics chains world wide make a lot of money with their extended warranties too, so why shouldn't Apple? And if you are in Europe, you can extend your one year Apple warranty to two years without buying additional Apple Care, as customer protection laws regulate longer standard warranties.

Not technically true!

You have a one year warranty yes but during the second year the fault has to have existed and been reported withing the first year or it's not covered!

 

[Oldmanmac]

Parts has nothing to do with price. Price is set by how much the consumer will pay. Period.

I've been a Mac head since the 128 days. Apple ha never been an inexpensive machine.

W C Fields said it best ".. born every minute."

 

[leman]

I've been a Mac head since the 128 days. Apple ha never been an inexpensive machine.

W C Fields said it best ".. born every minute."

Well, Macs are on average slightly more expensive than comparable Windows machines. But Apple simply does not build cheap bricks. Anyone who held a 600$ laptop in their hands will understand why a Mac is more expensive.

 

[sinanziric]

Well PC's are not that cheap too... Hardware is Cheap but software is NOT.

Lets look this way:

Average Desktop PC (custom made)
1000$

iMac
2049$ (what i would buy)

Operating System:

PC OS (Windows Home Premium Retail) minimum 199$

Mac OS - Free
----------------------------------------------------

Basic Home Video Editing

iMovie Mac - 14.95$

PC - at least 80$ for one to be comparable with iMovie (Cyberlink Powerdirector)

-----------------------------------------------------

Screen recording

Mac Screenflow = 99$
PC Camtasia = 299$

This is just example (IMHO) PC software is much more expensive, others
my disagree but this is truth as far i'm concerned

 

[simsaladimbamba]

Basic Home Video Editing

iMovie Mac - 14.95$

PC - at least 80$ for one to be comparable with iMovie (Cyberlink Powerdirector)

iMovie comes with every Mac, thus you don't need to buy it.

Mac Screenflow = 99$
PC Camtasia = 299$

One can even use QuickTime X (included since Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard) to record the screen, but it is nowhere near as good as ScreenFlow or any other screen recording software. It even uses a lot of CPU while other applications don't, doing the same.