Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by clevin, Aug 6, 2008.
This is a little bit like saying that Valentino's insistence on preferred fabrics and careful tailoring of clothes has led to feature discrepancies with Walmart, where a pair of jeans can be had for $9.99....
Maybe it would be worth considering the shocking option that Apple can sell more expensive computers to fashion conscious people because fashion conscious people actually pay for better looking products. I mean, I know that's crazy talk, but....
If you, Clevin, care about specs above all else then build your own PC. Sure it will be a big ugly monstrosity and might die with no customer support in a year or two, but you'll be able to brag that you overclocked a 3.0GHz chip to 3.1GHz.
Holy cow! Talk about some meaningless statistics. Of course, if you compare the averages then Apple is way more expensive. Apple doesn't compete at the low end. So if you take an average of every laptop from $300 to $3000 and then compare it to Apple's $1000 to $3000...wow...who would have thought the average would be higher on Apple's side. What a useless "study".
ha, somebody like to get personal
sorry, not my data, not my article, simple report from NDP. take whatever you want. (PS. I built PC before, I think you either overestimate the difficulties, or you underestimate the easy-ness of it, and guess what, it lasts just as long as your brand new macs)
PS2. I highly doubt NDP include any DIY PCs. I don't even understand where your question came from.
A for the mobile processor in desktop, IDK, I don't see the point, how much space it can save? and how much energy it can save? I really don't see the point.
Yawn, yawn. What's the resell value of the Dell? What's the resale value of the Apple? Ever heard of TCO (Total Cost of Ownership)? Ever heard of customer satisfaction? Ever heard of an upgrade path where the machine you buy now will be good for the next four or five iterations of the OS not just the one that's loaded on it? Ever wanted a computer to look aesthetically pleasing? Ever wanted an OS you actually like using? Need I go on?
This sounds familar lol...
So all Mac users are rich? And all PC owners are cheap & idiots?
I can get behind that kind of logic.
well, when you spend $300 on a desktop, $400 for a laptop, how much resell do you want? when you spend $1000 on a desktop, or $1100 on a laptop, you sure would like to resell for more.
PS. how much does 4 years old apple MB resell for now? you have any numbers?
wowowowowow, now cheap=idiot? Mr., thats neither true, nor nice.
Yeah, these stats are a bit misleading to say the least. It's sort of like saying 'the average price of a car is $X, but the average price of a Mercedes is $Z! Wowzers! And you can get both with the same engine!'
Take it up with your linked article writers then. That's their quote, not mine.
Impossible! MBs haven't been around for 4 years yet!
It's just that you post stuff like this all the time (don't say you don't) When's the last time you posted something about how great macs are?
Anyway, Mobile processors these days are on par with their desktop counterparts, they just don't generate as much heat (hence why they're used in Macs). And of course the AVERAGE Mac costs more than the AVERAGE PC since when has apple been in the cheap computer market?
Simple fact lies PC's are cheaper, and if you are computer literate and know a bit or two about computers building one will 9 out of 10 times be better, but for the consumer market, people whom are not all computer literate would like a package that works. And most PC packages just suck you buy one cause you need to send emails or write a letter or two but the experience is no fun (unless you got a gaming computer)
The Macs look good and work well and have designs unlike any other computer manufacturer plus customers services and generally a more richer experiance.
So yea it will cost you, but I have yet to see someone who regretted buying apple products (well now at least before I couldn't say the same thing)
Not far short of what you paid for it. In £££s your are looking on ebay at the moment somewhere between £700-£1000. As an aside, I sold an old iSight camera a while back for twice what I paid for it - Apple products hold their value - this cannot be ignored. Just look at the iPhone. People who are selling their old one to upgrade are laughing - you'd never get that with a BB or a Nokia.
I don't understand why people post articles like this in a forum dedicated toward something. It would be like me coming up to you and saying your shoes or clothes or for that matter your face sucks and it cost you more. Why? I am not going to argue with you about anything, I work at Best Buy, sell both Macs and PCs, and guess what, its a computer. This should be the end of this thread because fighting on the internet is like the special olympics, even if you win, you are still retarded...
Hahahaha good point, wont see me posting on these type of threads again
It seems to me that some people her are missing the point that these numbers are telling us. The numbers are for the average price for both PC´s and Mac´s. This numbers tell us very little, and as most statisticians (and of course sociologists) should know, the average number isn´t necessary the best one to use. The Median would be a better way to measure this.
Most PC´s in the sub 6-500$ have quite low specs. This will usually mean that when you buy a PC for 500$ you won´t get the same CPU as you get in the MacBook, nor the same quality on the screen.
The MacBook on the other hand got a pretty good lcd-screen and a rather good CPU.
In march I bought a new lap, and I decided for a new HP that in the US wold cost 500-550$, and this gave me a Core 2 duo 1.6Ghz CPU. The laptop was quite cheap, and it was exactly what I needed for my use. (Mainly typing, bookkeeping, e-mail and surfing.) This just show that most PC´s are sold at a low price and with pretty good specs for this price.
The figures this "research" reports only tell us that PC´s are sold cheaper than Mac´s. Not which one you will give you the most for your money.
And the original report does list a number of caveats along this line. Sadly they are absent from the article that clevin linked. They just took the most inflammatory aspect of it and ran with it.
They should stick to ***ing with people using a universal remote.
I guess we have to wait to find out !
Well, isn't that actually sad? it doesn't retain its value any better than PCs, because they are identical inside. Good for you people would like to pay more for your used stuff. But hey, im not sure in the long run, after switching to Intel platform for 4 years or longer, anything could hold. It might, but we have to wait and see..
haha, there are more topic than necessary here at MR. as long as its information, better than fake imagination, isn't it
no worries, there are more than enough "Im happy" posts or favorable praises, I just report some cold data, doesn't hurt whole "happy" picture, just get people more information and look at the industry more objectively. I believe it helps people in making correct judgments.
I just don't think "correct" always equals to "favorable to apple"..
I don't know if its "on par", I do know its "excessive" for most day to day use. I don't argue if the performance of the CPU is good, I just don't see the point of using it instead of desktop CPUs, especially if its more expensive, which I don't know.
Apple has been in cheap computer market 2 years ago, and is still selling mac mini, in case you forgot. This report simply reflect a fact, you can explain it any way you think is correct. fact is still there.
oh, I actually didn't read the original report, other than the one quoted by gizmodo.
No need to be sad, you can quote them!
Erm... Ahem... do you mean to say (based on your argument related to skew) the median? In technical parlance everywhere I roam, average and mean are synonymous.
It's not that a mobile processor is nearly as fast as an equivalently clocked desktop processor. It's that they are more expensive, and don't go up to the high-end (~3 GHz quad-core).
And this study just looks weird to me. What do they mean by "average" anyway? Did they average the prices of all PC and Mac models? Did they average the prices of computers people bought? And this doesn't mean that Macs are worse value or overpriced than PCs. (I'm sure that the average Mac Pro is much more expensive than the average Mac mini.)
Approximately half the heat (65 W dual-core -> 35 W dual-core, 95 W quad-core -> 45 W quad-core), which translates into power and space savings. This allows Apple to make an all-in-one instead of having to resort to a minitower.
Slightly twisted though, aren't they?
Shouldn't the amount of machines sold add weight the fact?
I think they should.
Yes, Macs are more expensive. Probably more than they need to be. Over the last couple of years, I feel like Apple has gotten more greedy and started emulating their less than savory industry rivals.
But damn. They sell as many Macs in a year as Dell does in a month. No matter how you slice it, THAT should account for something.
You don't want me to resort to using a car metaphor do you?
how would you like to put into the formula of the amount of machines sold?
You're kidding right?