-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
The common misconception of the expensive Mac
- Thread starter FudgeNuggets
- Start date
OP
FudgeNuggets
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2006
- Location
- Gone Racing
- Thread Starter
- #42
That's what I've alwasy thought/said but then you get sarcastic hater comments like the above "glorified laptop"
I can't speak for the XPS ONE but the iMac does NOT use mobile graphics or CPUs.... Neuro. The Mini does.
That's what I've alwasy thought/said but then you get sarcastic hater comments like the above "glorified laptop"
No hatin' here but that's what I think it is.
It uses a mobile processor, a mobile chipset, a 2.5" HD, so-dimm RAM, and an external power supply. About the only thing it's missing to differentiate it from a laptop is the screen, battery, and input devices. Not that it's a slug, it's a powerful machine and I've completed many SMP folding units with mine. By the way Fudge, you've upgraded yours to a C2D, I'm curious to know what are your CPU temps during full load? Mine are consistently in the 80s. I've thought those temps were high but others with Merom-upgraded minis using them to fold have reported similar load temps.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2005
- Location
- Tau'ri
That's what I've alwasy thought/said but then you get sarcastic hater comments like the above "glorified laptop"
I can't speak for the XPS ONE but the iMac does NOT use mobile graphics or CPUs.... Neuro.
Well then you would be wrong. Typical Mac user not knowing anything about hardware
(Im kidding Fudge, lighten up ) It is using a T7200 processor ( which I had to look up because although Dell lists type of processor, Apple does not, took a bit of digging to find it too) I was asking about the video card because Macs tend to have issues with hardware. Since they moved from the powerpc format (which is when Macs were REALLY expensive) I thought that maybe they went more commercial with other options as well. Since they used a mobile processor technology I thought maybe they would have switched to those nice little laptop videocards that you sometimes see.. the kind that lay flat in a computer ? This would have been a boon for them as it would mean the user could upgrade when they needed to.
Turns out that I stil lfound nothing concrete on the Video card, except that it used a proprietary PCIexpress bus based format called MXM that was 2 years ago though. It was a moot point anyway, as the 2400/2600series does GPU based hardware acceleration for HDTV as good as the 3800 series, and people are not buying macs for games, so perhaps thats why apple does not worry about it.
I am sorry if you took offense to the glorified laptop comment. It was not meant to be an insult. Just a brief description of what it is.
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2001
- Location
- New Iberia, LA
And now for the dissenting vote.
The problem I have with Apple and the reason I call them way overpriced for what you get is because of Apple's marketing strategy, especially in the lower end in desktop systems. For their lower end desktop systems you have just 2 choices; the Mini and the iMac. Leaving styling and footprint aside, since that is part of Apple's marketing strategy to make (IMO) artsie-fartsie lower end offerings instead for a good basic box that can take some user-upgradeable parts without having to jump through hoops, you need to market those 2 machines against other competitor's low and mid stream offerings. After all, that is their main competition, not that Dell all-in-one and that Aopen Mini. So, with that out the way let's look at cost comparisons. I will use Dell as the competitor's machines. And I am configuring each machine's build as close to each other as I can, including hard drive capacity and the inclusion of keyboard and mouse for the Mini, since Apple doesn't include something as basic as that with their Mac Mini system.
Comparison 1: Mac Mini versus Dell Inspiron 530s
Processors:
Mac Mini - Merom C2D @ 1833 MHz (2 MB L2 cache)
Inspiron 530s - E2180 @ 2000 MHz (1 MB L2 cache)
Winner: Tossup between the 2. Mac has more L2 cache but the Dell is faster, making up for the difference.
Graphics:
Both use integrated Intel graphics, but the Dell is using a newer chipset than the Mini that should perform a bit better. Slight advantage for Dell.
Memory:
Both configured with 2 X 512 MB of DDR2-667 ram.
Hard drive:
Mac Mini upgraded to 160 GB hard drive since the Dell comes with a 250 GB drive as their lowest offering. Advantage to Dell.
Optical Drive:
Inspiron comes with a DVD burner standard, low priced Mac Mini doesn't even offer a DVD burner as an option - clear winner for Dell
Keyboard and Mouse:
Standard with the Dell, extra cost option for the Mac Mini. Advantage for Dell.
Modem:
The Dell comes with a modem as a standard feature. That is another extra cost option with the Mini. But since more and more folks are getting broadband access these days I won't add the modem to the cost of the Mini and cut Fudgie a little slack here.
Wireless networking:
Mac Mini comes with built-in 802.11G standard, as well as Bluetooth 2.0+. Dell offers both but are extra cost options. Since the Dell has a built-in modem, I didn't add the wireless option to the build as replacement for the lack of modem on the Mini. I did add the Bluetooth 2.0 option to the Dell, which also offered a free upgrade to a 13-in-1 media card reader. Advantage to Mac Mini this time
Firewire:
Standard on Mac Mini, extra cost option on Dell. Advantage Mac Mini. Added to Dell build.
Speakers:
Extra cost option for Dell; there is a built-in speaker on the Mini but I don't count that as a true sound system since it's mono and probably crappy quality (I don't know for sure since I've never messed with a Mini, but as small as the Mini is it can't be good). Advantage to neither, but Dell does offer a cheap speaker system with the Dell which I've included in the build.
Warrantee:
Dell has 1 year in-home warrantee with 1 year phone support. Mac Mini has a 1 year hardware warrantee and 90 days phone support. Furthermore, for warrantee service you must either bring in the Mini to a Mac store or send it off for repair. Clear advantage for Dell.
Now, the costs for each of these competitors:
Mac Mini - $797.00
Dell Inspiron 530s - $519.00
Neither has had tax or shipping figured into the price.
Notes on builds:
Dell is configured with Vista Home Premium.
Mac Mini uses a 2.5" notebook hard drive whereas the Dell uses a regular 3.5" desktop drive, so the Mini's disk performance will be less than the Dell.
Neither system configured with a display included.
Dell system has 4 ram slots plus a PCI-e 16x slot for upgrades to memory and video subsytem. Mac Mini has neither. Dell motherboard also has 2 PCI slots too.
In this comparison, the Mac MIni ends up costing $278 more than the Dell. And I've tried to be as fair with the builds for both as I possibly could.
Comparison #2: Lower Midrange System Comparison: 20" Imac versus the Dell Inspiron 530s
Processors:
iMac has 2000 MHz Merom C2D processor, 4 MB L2 cache on an 800 MHz fsb
Inspiron 530s has E6550 2333 MHz Conroe processor, 4 MB L2 cache on a 1333 fsb
Advantage goes to Dell in performance for faster processor speed and faster fsb speed.
Graphics:
Both configured with Radeon HD 2400XT video subsystems. - Advantage to neither.
Memory:
Both configured with 2 X 1 GB of DDR2-667 ram. So advantage to neither in this comparison. However, the iMac uses SODIMMS instead of regualr desktop DIMMS, so you can't choose a faster choice of ram like you can with the Dell. Dell does offer DDR2-800 rams as build choices. The Dell also has 4 ram slots for a more versatile upgrade path.
Slight advantage to Dell for more flexible offerings.
Hard Drive:
Both upgraded to a 320 GB hard drive. Advantage to neither.
Optical Drive:
Both come with DVD burners as standard equipment. Advantage to neither.
Keyboard and mouse:
Both systems come standard with a keyboard and mouse. Advantage to neither.
Modem/Wireless Networking:
iMac comes with 802.11G wireless as standard equipment. The Dell comes with a modem as standard equipment with no wireless, but loses the modem if you add the 802.11N wireless option, which is an extra cost option. iMac has built-in Bluetooth and Inspiron doesn't offer Bluetooth as an option. Advantage this time to the iMac. Added the wireless option to the Dell build.
Firewire:
Standard on the iMac, extra cost option on the Inspiron 530s. Advantage to iMac.
Monitor:
iMac has built- 20" widescreen with webcam. 1680 X 1050 resolution
Inspiron 530s configured with 20" widescreen DVI flat panel with built-in webcam. 1680 X 1050 resolution
Advantage to neither system.
Speakers:
Built-in speakers on iMac; extra cost option for Inspiron 530s. But the built-in speakers don't give a perceptible advantage to the iMac since they aren't upgradeable and you can plug in any speaker system into the Dell. So advantage to neither. Dell system configured with basic speakers, which should be roughly equivalent to the iMac's built-in speakers.
Warrantee:
Dell has 1 year in-home warrantee with 1 year phone support. 20" iMac has a 1 year hardware warrantee and 90 days phone support. Furthermore, for warrantee service you must either bring in the Mini to a Mac store or send it off for repair. Clear advantage for Dell.
Now, the costs for each of these competitors:
20" iMac - $1348.00
Dell Inspiron 530s - $1119.00
Neither has had tax or shipping figured into the price.
Notes on builds:
The Dell Inspiron 530s is configured with XP Home. It can also be configured with Vista Basic for the same price. Vista Home premium is an added cost option.
In this comparison, the 20" iMac ends up costing $229 more than the Dell Inspiron 530s. And again I've tried to be as fair with the builds for both as I possibly could.
Comparison #3: Upper Midrange System Comparison: 24" Imac versus the Dell XPS 420
Processors:
The 24" iMac is configured with a Merom 2.8 GHz C2D processor with 4 MB of L2 cache and runs on a 800 fsb.
The XPS 420 is configured with a Penryn E8400 3.0 GHz processor with 6 MB L2 cache and a 1333 fsb.
Big advantage to the Dell system with a processr that's faster, with more L2 cache and runs on a faster fsb speed.
Memory:
The 24" iMac is configured with 2 X 1 GB DDR2-667 SO-DIMMS
The XPS 420 is configured with 2 X 1 GB and 2 X 512 MB DDR2-800 DIMMS (minimum config)
Clear advantage to the XPS 420 with faster memory and larger installed memory size. Neither is upgradeable in these configurations without removing presently installed sticks of ram however.
Graphics:
The 24" iMac has the ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO graphics chip with 256 MB of video ram. And no upgrade choices either.
The XPS 420 is configured with the nVidia GeForce 8800 GT 512MB video card. Several upgrade choices with this computer also.
Decisive advantage to the XPS 420 system. Apple isn't even playing in the same league as the Dell, much less the same ballpark.
Hard Drive:
The 24" iMac comes with a 500 GB hard drive standard.
The Dell XPS 420 had to be upgraded to the 500 GB hard drive.
Slight advantage 24" iMac.
Optical Drive:
Both come with DVD burners as standard equipment. Advantage to neither.
Keyboard and mouse:
Both systems come standard with a keyboard and mouse. Advantage to neither.
Modem/Wireless Networking:
The 24" iMac comes with 802.11G wireless and Bluetooth as standard equipment.
The Dell XPS 420 offers 802.11N and Bluetooth as extra cost options. Slight advantage to the iMac.
Monitor:
The iMac has a 24" widescreen with webcam built-in.
The XPS 420 was configured with the 2408WFP widescreen flat panel. It doesn't have integrated webcam like the iMac.
Advantage to iMac.
Speakers:
Built-in speakers on iMac; extra cost option for Inspiron 530s. But the built-in speakers don't give a perceptible advantage to the iMac since they aren't upgradeable and you can plug in any speaker system into the Dell. So advantage to neither. Dell system configured with 2.1 speaker system, which should be better than the iMac's built-in speakers.
Warrantee:
Dell has 1 year in-home warrantee with 1 year phone support. 20" iMac has a 1 year hardware warrantee and 90 days phone support. Furthermore, for warrantee service you must either bring in the Mini to a Mac store or send it off for repair. Clear advantage for Dell.
Now, the costs for each of these competitors:
24" iMac - $2249.00
Dell Inspiron 530s - $2129.00
Neither has had tax or shipping figured into the price.
Notes on builds:
XPS 420 comes configured with Vista Home Premium
In this comparison, the 24" iMac ends up costing $120 more than the Dell XPS 420. But this time I wasn't trying to be as fair as possible on the builds, at least as far as the memory, graphics and processors are concerned. I tried building as good a gaming system as possible out of these systems without going overboard. And in this comparison, the 24" iMac not only gets spanked on price but also it lags far behind in performance in comparison to the Dell XPS 420 system.
So Fudge old boy, if you throw out the cutsie-pie element out of the equation and have these systems being compared to their true competition (instead of niche machines), you see that they are overpriced for what you get. After all, it's Apple's choice to build machines that fit into niche categories like the little hot plate Mini and the all-in-one iMacs. So you have to compare them to machines that would be their more direct competitors than the niche offerings like Dell's all-in-one or the Aopen hot plate. And all three of the Dell systems I configured are actually pretty decent looking. The two Inspirons are slimline models that are kind of stylish and the XPS 420 is a nice looking box too. Also, the Mac Mini is based on a chipset that is over 2 years old and is wayyy long in the tooth. And both the Mac Mini and the iMacs are using mobile processors in desktop systems and that limits their performance in comparison to the Dell offerings.
As far as the comment about buying a machine that can run all 3 OS's (Windows, Linux and OSX); well that's because Apple has closed all the competition out legally for using their OS on non-Apple hardware. It's not a physical hardware limitation as Apple is using the same basic components as every other x86 computer manufacturer. And to me that is a reason to stay away from their monopolitic and predatory practices.
The problem I have with Apple and the reason I call them way overpriced for what you get is because of Apple's marketing strategy, especially in the lower end in desktop systems. For their lower end desktop systems you have just 2 choices; the Mini and the iMac. Leaving styling and footprint aside, since that is part of Apple's marketing strategy to make (IMO) artsie-fartsie lower end offerings instead for a good basic box that can take some user-upgradeable parts without having to jump through hoops, you need to market those 2 machines against other competitor's low and mid stream offerings. After all, that is their main competition, not that Dell all-in-one and that Aopen Mini. So, with that out the way let's look at cost comparisons. I will use Dell as the competitor's machines. And I am configuring each machine's build as close to each other as I can, including hard drive capacity and the inclusion of keyboard and mouse for the Mini, since Apple doesn't include something as basic as that with their Mac Mini system.
Comparison 1: Mac Mini versus Dell Inspiron 530s
Processors:
Mac Mini - Merom C2D @ 1833 MHz (2 MB L2 cache)
Inspiron 530s - E2180 @ 2000 MHz (1 MB L2 cache)
Winner: Tossup between the 2. Mac has more L2 cache but the Dell is faster, making up for the difference.
Graphics:
Both use integrated Intel graphics, but the Dell is using a newer chipset than the Mini that should perform a bit better. Slight advantage for Dell.
Memory:
Both configured with 2 X 512 MB of DDR2-667 ram.
Hard drive:
Mac Mini upgraded to 160 GB hard drive since the Dell comes with a 250 GB drive as their lowest offering. Advantage to Dell.
Optical Drive:
Inspiron comes with a DVD burner standard, low priced Mac Mini doesn't even offer a DVD burner as an option - clear winner for Dell
Keyboard and Mouse:
Standard with the Dell, extra cost option for the Mac Mini. Advantage for Dell.
Modem:
The Dell comes with a modem as a standard feature. That is another extra cost option with the Mini. But since more and more folks are getting broadband access these days I won't add the modem to the cost of the Mini and cut Fudgie a little slack here.
Wireless networking:
Mac Mini comes with built-in 802.11G standard, as well as Bluetooth 2.0+. Dell offers both but are extra cost options. Since the Dell has a built-in modem, I didn't add the wireless option to the build as replacement for the lack of modem on the Mini. I did add the Bluetooth 2.0 option to the Dell, which also offered a free upgrade to a 13-in-1 media card reader. Advantage to Mac Mini this time
Firewire:
Standard on Mac Mini, extra cost option on Dell. Advantage Mac Mini. Added to Dell build.
Speakers:
Extra cost option for Dell; there is a built-in speaker on the Mini but I don't count that as a true sound system since it's mono and probably crappy quality (I don't know for sure since I've never messed with a Mini, but as small as the Mini is it can't be good). Advantage to neither, but Dell does offer a cheap speaker system with the Dell which I've included in the build.
Warrantee:
Dell has 1 year in-home warrantee with 1 year phone support. Mac Mini has a 1 year hardware warrantee and 90 days phone support. Furthermore, for warrantee service you must either bring in the Mini to a Mac store or send it off for repair. Clear advantage for Dell.
Now, the costs for each of these competitors:
Mac Mini - $797.00
Dell Inspiron 530s - $519.00
Neither has had tax or shipping figured into the price.
Notes on builds:
Dell is configured with Vista Home Premium.
Mac Mini uses a 2.5" notebook hard drive whereas the Dell uses a regular 3.5" desktop drive, so the Mini's disk performance will be less than the Dell.
Neither system configured with a display included.
Dell system has 4 ram slots plus a PCI-e 16x slot for upgrades to memory and video subsytem. Mac Mini has neither. Dell motherboard also has 2 PCI slots too.
In this comparison, the Mac MIni ends up costing $278 more than the Dell. And I've tried to be as fair with the builds for both as I possibly could.
Comparison #2: Lower Midrange System Comparison: 20" Imac versus the Dell Inspiron 530s
Processors:
iMac has 2000 MHz Merom C2D processor, 4 MB L2 cache on an 800 MHz fsb
Inspiron 530s has E6550 2333 MHz Conroe processor, 4 MB L2 cache on a 1333 fsb
Advantage goes to Dell in performance for faster processor speed and faster fsb speed.
Graphics:
Both configured with Radeon HD 2400XT video subsystems. - Advantage to neither.
Memory:
Both configured with 2 X 1 GB of DDR2-667 ram. So advantage to neither in this comparison. However, the iMac uses SODIMMS instead of regualr desktop DIMMS, so you can't choose a faster choice of ram like you can with the Dell. Dell does offer DDR2-800 rams as build choices. The Dell also has 4 ram slots for a more versatile upgrade path.
Slight advantage to Dell for more flexible offerings.
Hard Drive:
Both upgraded to a 320 GB hard drive. Advantage to neither.
Optical Drive:
Both come with DVD burners as standard equipment. Advantage to neither.
Keyboard and mouse:
Both systems come standard with a keyboard and mouse. Advantage to neither.
Modem/Wireless Networking:
iMac comes with 802.11G wireless as standard equipment. The Dell comes with a modem as standard equipment with no wireless, but loses the modem if you add the 802.11N wireless option, which is an extra cost option. iMac has built-in Bluetooth and Inspiron doesn't offer Bluetooth as an option. Advantage this time to the iMac. Added the wireless option to the Dell build.
Firewire:
Standard on the iMac, extra cost option on the Inspiron 530s. Advantage to iMac.
Monitor:
iMac has built- 20" widescreen with webcam. 1680 X 1050 resolution
Inspiron 530s configured with 20" widescreen DVI flat panel with built-in webcam. 1680 X 1050 resolution
Advantage to neither system.
Speakers:
Built-in speakers on iMac; extra cost option for Inspiron 530s. But the built-in speakers don't give a perceptible advantage to the iMac since they aren't upgradeable and you can plug in any speaker system into the Dell. So advantage to neither. Dell system configured with basic speakers, which should be roughly equivalent to the iMac's built-in speakers.
Warrantee:
Dell has 1 year in-home warrantee with 1 year phone support. 20" iMac has a 1 year hardware warrantee and 90 days phone support. Furthermore, for warrantee service you must either bring in the Mini to a Mac store or send it off for repair. Clear advantage for Dell.
Now, the costs for each of these competitors:
20" iMac - $1348.00
Dell Inspiron 530s - $1119.00
Neither has had tax or shipping figured into the price.
Notes on builds:
The Dell Inspiron 530s is configured with XP Home. It can also be configured with Vista Basic for the same price. Vista Home premium is an added cost option.
In this comparison, the 20" iMac ends up costing $229 more than the Dell Inspiron 530s. And again I've tried to be as fair with the builds for both as I possibly could.
Comparison #3: Upper Midrange System Comparison: 24" Imac versus the Dell XPS 420
Processors:
The 24" iMac is configured with a Merom 2.8 GHz C2D processor with 4 MB of L2 cache and runs on a 800 fsb.
The XPS 420 is configured with a Penryn E8400 3.0 GHz processor with 6 MB L2 cache and a 1333 fsb.
Big advantage to the Dell system with a processr that's faster, with more L2 cache and runs on a faster fsb speed.
Memory:
The 24" iMac is configured with 2 X 1 GB DDR2-667 SO-DIMMS
The XPS 420 is configured with 2 X 1 GB and 2 X 512 MB DDR2-800 DIMMS (minimum config)
Clear advantage to the XPS 420 with faster memory and larger installed memory size. Neither is upgradeable in these configurations without removing presently installed sticks of ram however.
Graphics:
The 24" iMac has the ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO graphics chip with 256 MB of video ram. And no upgrade choices either.
The XPS 420 is configured with the nVidia GeForce 8800 GT 512MB video card. Several upgrade choices with this computer also.
Decisive advantage to the XPS 420 system. Apple isn't even playing in the same league as the Dell, much less the same ballpark.
Hard Drive:
The 24" iMac comes with a 500 GB hard drive standard.
The Dell XPS 420 had to be upgraded to the 500 GB hard drive.
Slight advantage 24" iMac.
Optical Drive:
Both come with DVD burners as standard equipment. Advantage to neither.
Keyboard and mouse:
Both systems come standard with a keyboard and mouse. Advantage to neither.
Modem/Wireless Networking:
The 24" iMac comes with 802.11G wireless and Bluetooth as standard equipment.
The Dell XPS 420 offers 802.11N and Bluetooth as extra cost options. Slight advantage to the iMac.
Monitor:
The iMac has a 24" widescreen with webcam built-in.
The XPS 420 was configured with the 2408WFP widescreen flat panel. It doesn't have integrated webcam like the iMac.
Advantage to iMac.
Speakers:
Built-in speakers on iMac; extra cost option for Inspiron 530s. But the built-in speakers don't give a perceptible advantage to the iMac since they aren't upgradeable and you can plug in any speaker system into the Dell. So advantage to neither. Dell system configured with 2.1 speaker system, which should be better than the iMac's built-in speakers.
Warrantee:
Dell has 1 year in-home warrantee with 1 year phone support. 20" iMac has a 1 year hardware warrantee and 90 days phone support. Furthermore, for warrantee service you must either bring in the Mini to a Mac store or send it off for repair. Clear advantage for Dell.
Now, the costs for each of these competitors:
24" iMac - $2249.00
Dell Inspiron 530s - $2129.00
Neither has had tax or shipping figured into the price.
Notes on builds:
XPS 420 comes configured with Vista Home Premium
In this comparison, the 24" iMac ends up costing $120 more than the Dell XPS 420. But this time I wasn't trying to be as fair as possible on the builds, at least as far as the memory, graphics and processors are concerned. I tried building as good a gaming system as possible out of these systems without going overboard. And in this comparison, the 24" iMac not only gets spanked on price but also it lags far behind in performance in comparison to the Dell XPS 420 system.
So Fudge old boy, if you throw out the cutsie-pie element out of the equation and have these systems being compared to their true competition (instead of niche machines), you see that they are overpriced for what you get. After all, it's Apple's choice to build machines that fit into niche categories like the little hot plate Mini and the all-in-one iMacs. So you have to compare them to machines that would be their more direct competitors than the niche offerings like Dell's all-in-one or the Aopen hot plate. And all three of the Dell systems I configured are actually pretty decent looking. The two Inspirons are slimline models that are kind of stylish and the XPS 420 is a nice looking box too. Also, the Mac Mini is based on a chipset that is over 2 years old and is wayyy long in the tooth. And both the Mac Mini and the iMacs are using mobile processors in desktop systems and that limits their performance in comparison to the Dell offerings.
As far as the comment about buying a machine that can run all 3 OS's (Windows, Linux and OSX); well that's because Apple has closed all the competition out legally for using their OS on non-Apple hardware. It's not a physical hardware limitation as Apple is using the same basic components as every other x86 computer manufacturer. And to me that is a reason to stay away from their monopolitic and predatory practices.
Last edited:
OP
FudgeNuggets
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2006
- Location
- Gone Racing
- Thread Starter
- #47
Again Doc, the only Dell you can FAIRLY compare to the iMac is the XPS ONE. You've got your data on the Mini a bit mixed up. The $599 Mini comes the a CDRW-DVDROM aka ComboDrive while the $799 one comes with a CDRW/DVDRM aka Superdrive. The $799 Mac Mini comes with a 2GHZ Core2Duo. You were applying the $799 price tag to the $599 Mini's specs.
My bad on the iMac..... I guess they also use the Meroms like the Minis (Peryns now) they also use the Core2Extreme where the mini doesn't (At least not stock)
My bad on the iMac..... I guess they also use the Meroms like the Minis (Peryns now) they also use the Core2Extreme where the mini doesn't (At least not stock)
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2006
I don't see how you can declare this a win for Apple, since it's the Microsoft OS that supports the Mac hardware, while OS X doesn't support jack outside of their product line.And one major plus due to that switch, compared to the other PC manufacture options available, is that I can run 3 OS's on the Mac natively. Mac OS, Windows (XP or Vista), or many flavors of Linux. The PC can only support 2 of those out of the box (and to try get Mac OS 10.5 on PC's requires a lot of hoop jumping and exactly the right hardware).
For my money, (considering the hardware is almost exactly identical) I'd rather have the machine that can run 3 OS's instead of just 2.
- Blackstar
- Joined
- May 29, 2004
- Location
- South Carolina
I don't see why we can only compare it to the xps one(which I have never heard of before this thread). I think it's even fair to compare it to computers you can build yourself. This is a forum for overclocking enthusiasts and I'm one of those people who like building a good overclocking computer.
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2001
- Location
- New Iberia, LA
Fudge, again I stress that the Macs are trying to gain headway in the PC market, not the other way around. So they have to go head to head with their competition, which mainly is the type machines I compared to. After all, Apple is the one that has their all-in-one units that are trying to get market share from the rest of the market, not the other way around. So that makes my compares totally valid. But seeing Dell come out with their own all-in-one like the iMacs also shows that there is a market for those kind of machines too and that other manufacturers look to be going directly for Apple's bread and butter machines with their new offerings.
As for the Mac Mini, I did build my compare rig from the cheap version. After you add the bigger hard drive and the mouse and keyboard, the cost came up to what you see in my post. If starting off with the more expensive system would have been more cost efficient, then that's my bad but it's also Apple's too for setting their configurations up so goofy. The cheap Mac Mini cannot be upgraded to a DVD burner, just a drive that can burn CD's and read DVD's.
And the iMacs positively use the mobile processors, like has been said. That puts their machines at a definite performance disadvantage in most setups with the iMacs. Apple doesn't presently build any computers that use a LGA775 processor as far as I know of. They either use the mobiles or they use the server class LGA771 and FBDIMMs with the Mac Pro. BTW, I do think the Mac Pro is a good machine and decently priced for what it is. But it's too much machine for the majority of people out there. And that's one point where I think Apple is really missing the boat in their computer offerings. They have no viable machine in the higher end single processor computer class. And no single processor machine with a quad core. It's a glaring hole in their lineup, IMO.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2001
- Location
- Rosemount, MN
As others have mentioned dell is big into deals. Their regular prices are competitive and then if you buy at the right time you can get crazy 80% retail deals. I bought a server this way from them. Normal price was over $4000 and I paid arround $1500.
Anyways I agree with the "buy what you want and stop bickering" folks. Some people like Apples and some people like Dells. Each has their pluses and minuses. What's with all of the hate anyways. There was a similarly stupid arguement about Monster cable here awhile ago too.
Anyways I agree with the "buy what you want and stop bickering" folks. Some people like Apples and some people like Dells. Each has their pluses and minuses. What's with all of the hate anyways. There was a similarly stupid arguement about Monster cable here awhile ago too.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2003
Diff between $320 and $599 is ALOT of money to alot of people so to many yes, that is expensive. (almost double the price)
Also apples prices dont change until a new model comes out, so that year old mac mini stays @ 599, until a new model comes out while other companis like dell, adjust pricing as needed when new things come out, often dell has new stuff before the market can get it
Also apples prices dont change until a new model comes out, so that year old mac mini stays @ 599, until a new model comes out while other companis like dell, adjust pricing as needed when new things come out, often dell has new stuff before the market can get it
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2003
So then thats no the PC worlds problem if they can have a cheaper computer then apple sells.
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2007
This is an interesting topic.
undoubtedly I believe that manufactured Computers of any kind are going to be premium cost.
Those who (as myself) build our own systems to our needs or to to those similarly manufactured systems.
I have a MacPro 2.6Ghz and MacBookPro 2.2Ghz
Custom PCs ive built: AMD Opteron (replaced the original single-core AMD 3200 64bit cpu) DFI NF4 mobo maxed ram, 6800 GFX Card ~$700-800 (CPU< PSU, HDD, GFX, Sound & RAM)
Q6600 Quad-core intel system, max ram, ASUS P5, 8800 ~$600~800$
MacPro 2x2Dual Core Xeons @ 2.66 4Gb Ram, ATI X1900XT ~$2800
MacBookPro Intel Core2Duo 2gb ram, nVidia 8600GT ~$2000
Whats great about building my PC's, I can test out various hardware at anytime, swap out a similair CPU for future ugrades, upgrade my OS , change video cards.
Not so great limited to a variety of OS', windows xp, vista, and alot of Linux options.
Warranties are so-so (THANKS FOR NEWEGG!! theyre the middle helping man in all of my hardware purchases) tech support is up in the air forums are the best bet, Tech shops or phone support, ehhh not so much. hard to deal with the manufactures alot of the times.
Incredibly fast machines. easy to diagnose issues.
My macs.
Whats great about my MacPro, is it handles each process and core simultaneously unlike any other mobo ive used, great handling under OSX. Tige & Leopard. not to mention Windows XP. The hardware is completely advanced compared to alot of OEM and System builders parts.
Some limitations for parts/hardware are OSX supported graphics cards (but under XP no issues!), sound cards are so-so...externals arent that bad, but the built in one isnt that bad or the best but works.
Swap out harddrives EASILY, removing components is a sinch.
Technical support is awesome, you get a standard 1-year warranty, plus you can get a 3 year extended warranty on top of that. so your covered if your components fail or something happens. they send you out cross-shipment parts for gfx cards, harddrives, optical drives, memory etc etc perfect!
I can install OS X tiger, leopard, Windows XP, vista 32 & 64 bit. an assortment of Linux OS's its endless. i love the set up.
The only reason i like the pro so much is its flexibility. sure after a few months ~ years i wont be able to swap out Motherboards/logicboards but this already advanced enough, CPUs may or may not be able to upgrade. but they certainly retain value. so i could bank off of it towards a future MacPro desktop system if need be, but im happy with this one.
Macbookpro encompasses laot of the iMac desktop system into a portable high powered reliable machine. its so easy tomanage and work from, lightweight and dependable. the intergrated gfx card is incredible as well.
i like both sides, i love to build machines and use manufactured reliable machines.
if somethings good its good. yknow i cant custom build my own HDTV (yet) but if i could id definitely love to do it but for now manufactured sets are the way it is lol.
undoubtedly I believe that manufactured Computers of any kind are going to be premium cost.
Those who (as myself) build our own systems to our needs or to to those similarly manufactured systems.
I have a MacPro 2.6Ghz and MacBookPro 2.2Ghz
Custom PCs ive built: AMD Opteron (replaced the original single-core AMD 3200 64bit cpu) DFI NF4 mobo maxed ram, 6800 GFX Card ~$700-800 (CPU< PSU, HDD, GFX, Sound & RAM)
Q6600 Quad-core intel system, max ram, ASUS P5, 8800 ~$600~800$
MacPro 2x2Dual Core Xeons @ 2.66 4Gb Ram, ATI X1900XT ~$2800
MacBookPro Intel Core2Duo 2gb ram, nVidia 8600GT ~$2000
Whats great about building my PC's, I can test out various hardware at anytime, swap out a similair CPU for future ugrades, upgrade my OS , change video cards.
Not so great limited to a variety of OS', windows xp, vista, and alot of Linux options.
Warranties are so-so (THANKS FOR NEWEGG!! theyre the middle helping man in all of my hardware purchases) tech support is up in the air forums are the best bet, Tech shops or phone support, ehhh not so much. hard to deal with the manufactures alot of the times.
Incredibly fast machines. easy to diagnose issues.
My macs.
Whats great about my MacPro, is it handles each process and core simultaneously unlike any other mobo ive used, great handling under OSX. Tige & Leopard. not to mention Windows XP. The hardware is completely advanced compared to alot of OEM and System builders parts.
Some limitations for parts/hardware are OSX supported graphics cards (but under XP no issues!), sound cards are so-so...externals arent that bad, but the built in one isnt that bad or the best but works.
Swap out harddrives EASILY, removing components is a sinch.
Technical support is awesome, you get a standard 1-year warranty, plus you can get a 3 year extended warranty on top of that. so your covered if your components fail or something happens. they send you out cross-shipment parts for gfx cards, harddrives, optical drives, memory etc etc perfect!
I can install OS X tiger, leopard, Windows XP, vista 32 & 64 bit. an assortment of Linux OS's its endless. i love the set up.
The only reason i like the pro so much is its flexibility. sure after a few months ~ years i wont be able to swap out Motherboards/logicboards but this already advanced enough, CPUs may or may not be able to upgrade. but they certainly retain value. so i could bank off of it towards a future MacPro desktop system if need be, but im happy with this one.
Macbookpro encompasses laot of the iMac desktop system into a portable high powered reliable machine. its so easy tomanage and work from, lightweight and dependable. the intergrated gfx card is incredible as well.
i like both sides, i love to build machines and use manufactured reliable machines.
if somethings good its good. yknow i cant custom build my own HDTV (yet) but if i could id definitely love to do it but for now manufactured sets are the way it is lol.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2008
Good work fudge... You proved a major misconception... *thumbs up*
And, I would take Mac OS over Windows for certain things...
I hate to burst your bubble fudgenuggets... But in my case, my laptop was cheaper than a Macbook Pro and has very comparable specs...
My Dell Inspiron 1520
C2D T7500 2.2Ghz
2GB RAM 667Mhz-->upgraded myself, Dell wanted $125 for 1GB to 2GB upgrade, which was ridiculous considering I did it for $40.
120GB 7200RPM HDD
8600M GT 256MB
15.4" 1440x900
I think the price was around $1500
A Macbook Pro with a T7700 and a webcam was $1999... 200Mhz more and a webcam I'll never use..
*thumbs up*And, I would take Mac OS over Windows for certain things...
I hate to burst your bubble fudgenuggets... But in my case, my laptop was cheaper than a Macbook Pro and has very comparable specs...
My Dell Inspiron 1520
C2D T7500 2.2Ghz
2GB RAM 667Mhz-->upgraded myself, Dell wanted $125 for 1GB to 2GB upgrade, which was ridiculous considering I did it for $40.
120GB 7200RPM HDD
8600M GT 256MB
15.4" 1440x900
I think the price was around $1500
A Macbook Pro with a T7700 and a webcam was $1999... 200Mhz more and a webcam I'll never use..
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2004
If by that you mean Apple does not support installing their OS on generic PC's, then you are right, and that's a good thing. Apple is still primarily a hardware company, they make more money in hardware sales such as computers and iPods than they do in software, unlike Microsoft. So it really is a win for both companies when more Macs get sold since MS does not care what computer you run their OS on. Apple sells more computers, MS sells more OS's. Win win. And technically, MS isn't 'supporting' Apple hardware, Apple is now using the same type of hardware as other PC makers and writing drivers to support a Windows install.
One of the big advantages that Apple has is their software is designed to only work with a very specific line of hardware. Now, that particular hardware is now of the x86 variety, allowing more OS options than just Mac OS or (PPC) Linux. Having tighter tolerances on hardware compatibility makes for a more trouble free stable experience and is much easier to troubleshoot and bug fix.
It's a 'win' for Apple because more and more people are realizing that not only do they not have to give up their Windows OS if they choose, but they can run more OS options than if they just got a regular PC and therefore more applications. They can freely choose which they like, and if they want to try the suite of Apple's own available applications, they can dual boot (or even tri-boot with some tweaking) to whatever OS they desire.
For me personally, I just can't see the point in spending X amount of dollars for one particular machine with one or two OS options, where I can spend the same amount, get the exact same hardware, and have more OS and application choices.
- Blackstar
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2001
- Location
- New Iberia, LA
If you don't mind paying a somewhat healthy price premium for the hardware, which I proved with my comparisons of the Mac Mini and iMac, Blackstar.
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2004
I can't see the point in using OSX when not only do I have essentially no clue how to use MacOS, but all of my software that I use is mostly incompatible with MacOS (as well as Linux).
The fact of the matter is, despite Mac's decreasing prices and OS compatibility, there are still cheaper PCs out there that can do the same job. Well, besides looking stylish while sipping "coffee" at Starbucks. If stylish and trendy features are what you want then by all means get a mac. I'll stick to building PCs and overclocking
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2008
Why do extra work that's not needed? They don't want the OS to go away from their hardware... Since they keep it under control like that, they can better address problems in software and hardware.
