The high price of Apple computers

[apowerr]

Believe me, they are not, Apple plays to a more affluent audience which does not look for the best bargain dell

When did bargain Dells get brought up? Apple has a higher mark up than other Computer manufacturers, theres no disputing it. Compare Hardware to costs and Apple will lose every time. (Mainly in the case of desktops, the laptops are more fairly priced)

Their ideal customer has enough disposable income to buy a laptop, a desktop and an ipod.

That's the 'ideal customer' for any business.

A more educated consumer that's happy to pay a premium for good design.

More educated customers are more likely to go after the best cost to performance, not necessarily the best 'design'.

First of all 1000 euro/ month is very little to earn for a professional, I think you'll find that they earn many times that figure. Given the dodgy nature of your statistics, you will excuse me if I take your assurances with a pinch of salt.

Oh yeah, a resident of Italy's views about Italy are definently 'dodgy'.

LOL, that's like saying you have a house with a leaky roof, but it's OK, because you can always put more buckets on the floor to stop the house flooding. Point is, you shouldn't have to worry about that {censored}. That's why some people pay extra for Apple's products...

No, his example was like saying if you don't let everyone into your house, you have a lower chance of being robbed. (i.e. be careful!)

Please find me a similar speced sized notebook, I bet around the same cost/value. What is wrong with the Macbook that you find it not getting value for your money?

Nothing is wrong with the Macbook, but it's cost to performance is again lagging behind it's competitors.

HP dv25004t:

Processor: Intel C2D T7500 @ 2.2 Ghz

RAM: 2 GB 667 Mhz Ram

HDD: 160 GB 5,400 RPM HD

Video: Nvidia 8400m GS w/ 64mb vram

Wifi, Bluetooth, Microphone, Webcam Built in

$1,489

Macbook:

Processor: Intel C2D T7400 @ 2.16 Ghz

RAM: 2 GB 667 Mhz RamHDD: 160 GB 5,400 RPM

Video: Intel GMA950

Wifi, Bluetooth, Microphone, Webcam Built in

$1,649

[empreality]

Something I want to point out though, most of the people that buy a Mac are computer-retarded...

 

Basically they are buying a system that is a complete over kill for their every day use... Okay, I bet $1000000000 that most of the people with a macbook on this forum can't even make a good movie using their mac or something even amazing in PhotoShop...

 

And since, gaming is still very weak on a Mac...Then what the hell are you guys using all those fancy hardware like dual core processors, gigs of ram, etc. etc. To post updates on facebook? Post half-nude photos on myspace? Whore around forums? Hmmm...The last time I checked Firefox/Opera/Safari did not require that much hardware requirements to work...

 

Case in point, when you are getting a mac, most of the time it is a complete over-kill...Just like getting FiOS or Cable internet if you're not into gaming, business, or piracy...Basically you're are wasting your own money on {censored} you are not even going to need...

 

This is where Macs literally fail price-wise, because they don't allow much flexibility with what you want in your mac? Pretty much every mac is like a powerhouse, already able to watch HD movies and what not....Okay, congrats...But what if there is this person...Hmmm...Lets say has a job....And needs a computer.....Wait wait! Oh yeah, TO WORK!

 

Sooooo...You are saying, a Mac will be great for a lawyer? Hm? Because OMG, I know that winning a lawsuit is nothing without Dual-Core processors!!!

 

Basically, Macs are like high-end pcs....Falcon NW, VoodooPC....Basically for an average joe, the systems are an over-kill from the start...

 

Basically, go {censored} your self if you are saying the Macs are perfectly priced for their hardware...Because you know what, most of you probably can't even prove that you actually need a dual-core processor, 120gig harddrive, or even a Geforce 8600..... A freakin 8600?! WTF, what in Mac OSX actually requires such a card...Come on be serious...Are you encoding music/movies like crazy(pirate much?)...Idk...

 

Macs = Over-kill for an average user.

 

Worried about viruses? Then just use Firefox/Opera...It is not that hard...

[~pcwiz]

Going back to design and the venting holes on the bottom of PC laptops, even though some may have the venting holes, I've had no problem using them on my lap or a cushion without overheating.

[nikonnut]

"Something I want to point out though, most of the people that buy a Mac are computer-retarded..."

 

That is an excellent point. I can't tell you how many times I've been in a big box store and wandered over to the Apple area and heard the following exchange...

 

Customer : I need a computer

Sales Rep : What are you going to do with it?

Customer : I want to check my e-mail and surf the net.

Sales Rep : Let's look at this MacBook Pro..

 

At some point this person may come in contact with a $300.00 Dell and think "WTF?!? I've been had!"

 

So are Macs over priced? I don't care because my graphics design/photography demands one (it's the platform I learned on) and I like the Mac/Photoshop interface. However, I bet there are multitudes out there that will never use their Mac to the fullest and think they got taken in the process

[Alessandro17]

Congrats, people, I believe you have found the key. A Mac might or might not be good value for money, but in any case it is overkill for most people. A €800 laptop is more than enough for most, and that is what I had in mind all the time, but you found the right way to express it.

[~pcwiz]

I don't know about Sales Reps trying to take you in but yes, for normal average users a Mac is not a good choice. I found a funny thing. A Mac Pro with the least minimal options costs $2200. A Mac Pro with all the options that apple lets you choose is $19,456 !! But, if you look at what you're getting, the price doesn't seem too high. $2200 is cheap for a Dual Intel Xeon system. I think you get what you pay for with the desktop line of Apple computers but the same cannot be said for the portables.

[Alessandro17]

$2200 is cheap for a Dual Intel Xeon system. I think you get what you pay for with the desktop line of Apple computers but the same cannot be said for the portables.

 

My hackintosh costs a lot less, has a lot more (true, it doesn't have two processors, just one Quad) and performs a lot better.

[consolation]

Congrats, people, I believe you have found the key. A Mac might or might not be good value for money, but in any case it is overkill for most people. A €800 laptop is more than enough for most, and that is what I had in mind all the time, but you found the right way to express it.

 

 

Exactly, but that's why Mac's are better value for money. Since most computers are over powered for a typical user, it's the ephermal design class and quality that contributes to a good user experience. A computer that looks good, feels good to use the way the customer wants and doesn't require the user to be vigilant against malware. Hence, Apple competes on the experience, not whether you could by a generic PC with 20GB more HD space or something. And, yes you do pay a premium for it, just as you pay a premium for good wine. When you go to buy a bottle of wine you don't look at which one has the highest alcohol content; you look for the one that will give you the best experience, then pay for the privilege.

[~pcwiz]

My hackintosh costs a lot less, has a lot more (true, it doesn't have two processors, just one Quad) and performs a lot better.

 

Using a legit copy of OS X is one of the benefits of using OS X. Face it, using a Hackintosh does not match the experience of using a mac. I'm curious though, how do you know your system is better than dual Intel Xeon? Did you compare Xbench scores with a real Mac Pro or something?

[consolation]

When did bargain Dells get brought up? Apple has a higher mark up than other Computer manufacturers, theres no disputing it. Compare Hardware to costs and Apple will lose every time.

Apple does not compete on HW spec....

More educated customers are more likely to go after the best cost to performance, not necessarily the best 'design'.Oh yeah, a resident of Italy's views about Italy are definently 'dodgy'.

As it's been pointed out most new computers are overpowered anyway, so it's the design that matters. Google the stats for Italy, and see who's closer to the mark..

That's the 'ideal customer' for any business

yes, but that's the customer apple targets, not the ones which have to budget carefully. Oh, they do make a token effort in that direction, but who really wants a mac mini?

[Alessandro17]

I'm curious though, how do you know your system is better than dual Intel Xeon? Did you compare Xbench scores with a real Mac Pro or something?

 

Yes I did. Besides it is pretty obvious. The Mac Pro in your example has 1GB RAM, 2 Xeons running at 2.0 GHz and a NVIDIA GeForce 7300.

Mine has 4GB RAM Crucial Ballistix, a Q6600 running at 2,4 GHz and GeForce 7900GT.

A Mac Pro with specs comparable to mine would cost Eur 3,721.99.

[~pcwiz]

Yep, then its overpriced (ut you may pay a bit extra to get the nice case) The only things I can think of that would justify the price would be OS/Software and design

[Alessandro17]

Yep, then its overpriced (ut you may pay a bit extra to get the nice case) The only things I can think of that would justify the price would be OS/Software and design

 

And you pay about 3 times as much? (a hackintosh with my specs can be built for about €1200/1300)

[~pcwiz]

Yeah I guess you can't really justify the price. Unless OS X and the case costs $1000

[empreality]

Basically the Mac OSX is just a scam for you to buy the over-kill, pricey computer...

[Alessandro17]

Basically the Mac OSX is just a scam for you to buy the over-kill, pricey computer...

 

You are right. After all many people in this forum, including myself, seem to prefer Linux because of its flexibility (and ease of install as well, funny that it might sound: Linux is supposed to support all beige hardware out of the box, plus you select all the software you want during install, provided you are using a distribution released in DVD format).

[~pcwiz]

Exactly. I used to think what Apple was doing is great and fair but now when you take a deeper look into it this is what it comes to. Other than design, innovation, and a good looking OS, I can't really congratulate them on anything more.

[consolation]

Exactly. I used to think what Apple was doing is great and fair but now when you take a deeper look into it this is what it comes to. Other than design, innovation, and a good looking OS, I can't really congratulate them on anything more.

 

How about on making a s**t load of money? That's what corporations are about, no matter how touchy-feely their marketing is.

[RedSox]

Thats the whole point. Theres 15.4" PC laptop with better specs that is better than the MacBook. The 15.4" costs almost half less than the MacBook with the 13.3 screen.

True but try finding something like iLife that also integrates well to the PRO APPS (Final Cut, Logic, Shake), whereas regardless of price, you can't find good software that does the job so well.Example: FCP = $1199 Mac Only, used on many TV shows even some Feature Films.Avid Symphony (most use macs) but the cost is over $100,000And the bang for the buck, intergrated camera, iLife 08, iWorks 08 (all work with ANY MS OFFICE document for only $79.00), the machine is a killer.Now I will agree, the GPU is weak - until this is changed, it will always remain a sticky thorn until rectified which they did somewhat with a 20" glossy screen iMac with FW 800 for a $100 more.Also, these PC laptops you looked at - did it have FIREWIRE? Ability to run a screen 1900x1440? Tightly integrated software that in some way APPLE just trusts the user whereas MS has activation for everything and all their programs try to go online (snooping) which means extra CPU cycles.

Exactly. I used to think what Apple was doing is great and fair but now when you take a deeper look into it this is what it comes to. Other than design, innovation, and a good looking OS, I can't really congratulate them on anything more.

I'm an AVID PC user - - and used to defend MS all the time - now ask yourself - everything you do with VISTA means pop up - plus my HIGH END FIREWIRE AUDIO interface doesn't even have a VISTA driver, not to mention it takes forever to install.Then as keynote mocked (a little) one price, $129, not 5 different version, plus as I just stated, Apple and software (even 3rd party) all seem to work together whereas if you are a MS developer and want the MS certified, you have to pay thousands for that sticker - - and if you don't have it now, to my knowledge, I don't think Vista will install - and again, if you take for example a sound file and drag it to ACID or SONAR, the program does nothing whereas on a Mac, anything can export to PDF (Macs have built in PDF reader), export to word, for internet, phones, podcasts, and thats almost for any program - from iWork Pages document to creating a video to creating a website in less than 5 minutes.There is no competition for Apple and their 3rd party software developers - everything just works - I just wish we could learn to overclock them - that would be cool. Or would that be hot (pun pun pun).I used to think the whole experience thing was a farce - - but after my first hackntosh, I feel in love, then when I got a real mac, the programs are so creative, and the templates really get you going.In a nutshell, this is what it is... Bill Gates, Left Brain (EE/Programmer), Steve Jobs Right (Creative) - then you have something like this....Unreal 2004 Windows 500+ MBUnreal 2004 OSX 236MB or so. So what is the extra 264 MB needed for?Peace - - I love both and there was a time when PROS (Audio/Video) needed both (Giga and a few other APPS), but Apple is sneakingly biting away not only at the computer market with MACS....But a large chunk of:• Music Business• Best Looking MP3 players (okay not really mp3, but you know what I mean, and they are slick)• Communications (iPhone)• Television/Feature Film (Avid:$100,000 or Apple FCP $1199), Pro Tools TDM $10,000+ or Logic and Apogee ($499 and $1499)• Getting big mom and pop sales with new iMac• All their programs are YouTube exportable - • Website development - can make a website in minutes, with .MAC, the end user can do a LOT of things, and I do mean a lot.• Release new products almost every quarter - something that's never been done with Motorola Power PC and soon QUAD CORES in everthing and MBP's will come standard with 4GB• NEW OS in about one week - - OSX already (IN MY HUMBLE OPINION) blows Vista away- I can only imagine what Leopard will do, 300+ advancements and only once price and $9.95 for anyone who bought a Mac from Oct 1-Dec 29th.• Making dents in digital arena (Photoshop/Aperture) and will probably have more products to come.PLUS PLUS PLUS - - if you want, VM Fusion or Parallels will run windows if need be. So, imagine, deciding if you want to switch - - for $1199, you get a decent computer, duo core 2, that runs windows without a hitch side by side.I just don't understand why Microsoft can't come up with an operating system that is hands down, shows what took 5+ years and also has something similar to iLife 08 - - why can't they do that, why, why, why?! And one PRO Microsoft Zealot said, after reviewing Vista, it was in his opinion that Vista was made with MSFT best interest in mind instead of the consumer, whereas OSX leans more toward the user.Just my .02 cents.peace

[~pcwiz]

That is way to much for me to read but consider this:Mac apps may look nice but there are windows programs that do the same function. And no ones doubting that OS X isn't easy and convenient but for a new user who only wants basic functionality (no video editing, website making, etc.), the Mac is a total rip off.

You are right. After all many people in this forum, including myself, seem to prefer Linux because of its flexibility (and ease of install as well, funny that it might sound: Linux is supposed to support all beige hardware out of the box, plus you select all the software you want during install, provided you are using a distribution released in DVD format).

Linux is good for experienced users but it isn't the best for n00bs (by this I mean newbies). Its flexible, easy to install, most apps are free and new distros are user friendly but when you're dealing with Linux, you won't always be using a GUI. You're going to use the command line at some point which is uncomfortable for new users. Also, if I may point out, Linux bootloaders are easy to install but its a real pain uninstalling them (I installed Ubuntu but I didn't use it much so I removed the bootloader and now I boot Ubuntu via a bootable bootloader floppy). So, for newbies, I hate to say, Windows (XP ) is the best OS and its the easiest to use alternative to OS X (but don't think for a second that Vista is ANY GOOD AT ALL).

[Alessandro17]

Also, if I may point out, Linux bootloaders are easy to install but its a real pain uninstalling them (I installed Ubuntu but I didn't use it much so I removed the bootloader and now I boot Ubuntu via a bootable bootloader floppy). So, for newbies, I hate to say, Windows (XP ) is the best OS and its the easiest to use alternative to OS X (but don't think for a second that Vista is ANY GOOD AT ALL).

 

Somebody should tell Linux newbies a secret: don't mess up your MBR! Install GRUB or LILO to your root partition, and then use a boot manager like (for instance) Acronis OS Selector.

[acumos]

I tried Osx86 and it doesn't seem to be what people say. It's a little hard to use. For example try to enlarge a window with "+": you have to resize it manually, the doesn't fit to the screen. Try to close an application with "x": it remains active and you have to close it from dock or top bar! Try to reduce an application such as messenger: mac creates such a virtual disk...very strange. Windows in this aspects is very simple and usable. If you click "enlarge" the window fits automatically the screen. There is a bar with reduced application apart closed application. There is a notification area where you can find application in activity such as a download manager, msn, and so on...

[Azurael]

Regardless of performance, there are significant differences between a Mac Pro and a Quad-Core hack.

 

You can't, for example, put FB-DIMMs in a hackintosh unless you build it with an Intel 5000-based workstation/server board, at which point, for the same CPU speed, it'll probably cost the same. FB-DIMMs might work slower in practice, but you have the flexibility to add ridiculous amounts of RAM without sacrificing performance, and you also have ECC. That might not make much difference to you, but to the average person buying that grade of machine, it does.

 

You also don't usually get the PCIe flexibility (and I'm not talking about worthless SLi here.)

 

You also don't get a machine that's as quiet as a Mac Pro without shelling out a lot of money.

 

You can't compare a hackintosh to a Mac Pro. Look at competing workstation systems from PC OEMs and you'll see a lot less price difference. Plus, I bet none of those even is as quiet as a Mac Pro (which would mean a lot to a recording engineer or others in the music industry, for example.)

 

That withstanding, most people here would probably rather have a Q6600-based hackintosh and overclok the bejesus out of it for a quarter of the money (myself included) - remember, the likelihood is that you're not the person Apple is trying to sell a Mac Pro to.

[Headrush69]

Exactly. I used to think what Apple was doing is great and fair but now when you take a deeper look into it this is what it comes to. Other than design, innovation, and a good looking OS, I can't really congratulate them on anything more.

Taking a deeper look you can also seen that a very large number of "Linux" apps compile and run fine on OS X also. (Or with minor configuration changes)

Right now I have KDE 3.5 and a beta of KDE 4 running on my second Hack. Just because you don't see it, or its not commonly used doesn't mean its not able to be flexible. (Same thing can be said for any OS, not just OSX)

 

If people's argument over flexibility is the choice in core elements like the desktop GUI, etc, it's a proprietary/commercial product and that's not gonna change.

(Same way you can hack Windows, essentially what they give you is what you are going to get.)

 

Mac apps may look nice but there are windows programs that do the same function.

I've always maintained that it's the little things people ignore that make a difference why I prefer OS X.

Universal Drag-N-Drop support on OS X blows all the other OSes away but is often underused or under advertised as a feature of OS X.

 

And no ones doubting that OS X isn't easy and convenient but for a new user who only wants basic functionality (no video editing, website making, etc.), the Mac is a total rip off.

Don't all new Macs come with iLife that has iMovie, iDVD, and iWeb?

 

Maybe it would be better to say illegal hackintoshes that didn't come with iLife don't have video editing, website making, etc.

[Colonel Ingus]

no ones doubting that OS X isn't easy and convenient but for a new user who only wants basic functionality (no video editing, website making, etc.), the Mac is a total rip off.

Learn your products OS X does not come with those programs. Plus people that switch from PC's to Macs are happy enough that they don't have to worry about viruses anymore. Everything else is just frosting on the cake