Macs seem to cost more than PCs - What's the value?

[shawndw]

LOL Berzerker no offense but you sound like the official apple fan boy who jerks off while lookin the curves of the mac computers honestly.

 

EXACTLY ! Whta you pay is the badge!! thats all !!

 

All the rest inside dont worry my friend as its all made in taiwan ! just like HP or Dell etc.

 

My vote goes to performance/ money balance and PC is a winner there and i dnt give a toss how it looks as most of the times its under my desk.lol I actually had a pc once with no case at all just laying on my desk and it had no overheating issues just some dust lol.

 

MAC and their very strict copyrights reminds me the communism era lol..

 

Hats of to OS X (software) is very good.

*crikie* we've found a real live north American troll in it's natural habitat, Look at the size of those jaws better not get too close and remember.

 

[vbetts]

A Mac mini is overpriced a little bit, but nothing out of the box. Problem is people think of the Mac mini as a true desktop, when it's not. Apple right now really has no real desktop(Unless you consider a workstation a desktop). For an Imac, you aren't paying for the parts, you're really paying for the build of the Imac. The Imac's logic board is unlike any type of motherboard or logic board I've really seen. A laptop low power cpu together with desktop ram? Kind of odd actually, the Mac Pro is priced great too.(Besides the video card, but I understand why they charge so much for the video cards. You don't have a huge selection, compared to PC where you have the hd38, hd36, geforce9, geforce8, etc etc.).

 

And don't get me started on Dell, HP, or other prebuilt computer companies like that. They overprice half of their hardware terribly, look at the XPS systems from Dell. Look at the black bird from HP! Running on hd2900s! Terrible!

[Kwaaku]

you would look way cooler in the internet cafe, sitting with you ray-ban's on drinking you low-fat skinny wet latte wilst banging out an "urgent" email to anybodys guess who

[CLiDE FTW!!1]

MacBooks are chick magnets.

[stevesux]

MacBooks are chick magnets.

so you need a computer to get a date ?

Sorry the Macs are made in China, not Taiwan.

Wow ur genius!

Like everyone else has noted you made a very pathetic post.

Yea and everyone else is juping of the cliff..u wanna join them

If you are so anti Apple / Mac then WHY ARE YOU HERE?

Because i can , no seriously read "Macs seem to cost more than PCs - What's the value?" tittleAs Pc user i was pointing out my opinion. Freedom of speech they call it.

*crikie* we've found a real live north American troll in it's natural habitat, Look at the size of those jaws better not get too close and remember.

ur so funny......NOT

He probably targeted this forum so that he could tell all the Mac users here how strongly he feels. Unfortunately for him, against him with his "PC rules" argument, there is almost the whole forum.

with "PC rules" i ment the variety & choices of hardware i can get.Oh and i didnt noticed anything saying "Pc users are not welcome on this forum" if thats the case Moderator pls delete me.

lol, people like that give me little faith in the future of the human race

people like this "Open Source OS'es Support Communism, Use a Real OS and put and end to hate and communism" make me

[Alessandro17]

with "PC rules" i ment the variety & choices of hardware i can get.Oh and i didnt noticed anything saying "Pc users are not welcome on this forum" if thats the case Moderator pls delete me.

 

I don't know why this argument keeps going on. You are preaching to the converted.

The vast majority of us came here because they wanted to run OS X on their PC, and most of us are aware that Macs are (a lot) more expensive than PCs, especially if you pay in Euro. For instance I have proved, and I can prove it again at any time, that a MacBook Pro costs in Italy twice as much as an equivalent Dell.

The only real value for money Mac is the Mac Pro (you can't build an equivalent PC for less), but it is a bit too high end for most.

[stevesux]

Thats why i visit this site aswell because id like to be able to dual boot to mac os on pc hardware.

[Alessandro17]

Thats why i visit this site aswell because id like to be able to dual boot to mac os on pc hardware.

 

There is nothing difficult about it. Ideally build a new computer with compatible hardware: Intel based and choose the mobo with great care: that will make most of the difference.

[sneezymarble]

The only real value for money Mac is the Mac Pro (you can't build an equivalent PC for less), but it is a bit too high end for most.

 

I don't think the statement "you can't build an equivalent PC for less" is true. For a person that's somewhat capable, building a Hack Pro costs significantly less. The system in my sig only cost $1200 and is able to outperform the similarly configured quad core Mac Pro that Apple offers, at least according to Geekbench (x86 and x64). Of course, I don't think that proves the case convincingly since the system in my sig is nowhere near as expandable as an actual quad core Mac Pro. But, if I was just looking to get the performance of a quad core Mac Pro and had no plans to expand past 8GB or add another core, I'd be paying 3.63x less than the closest quad core configuration (8GB, 8800GT) from Apple.

 

But, let’s set that expample aside and look at the cost of building a nearly identical Hack Pro. I'm going to assume that a savvy Mac Pro buyer would configure a sort of "bare bones" machine from Apple and then add things like a 1TB drive and more ram on their own as there is simply no doubt that Apple charges a premium for those "upgrades." However, most of the people that I know that buy Mac Pros configure them as they want them directly from apple, so I'll also do a price comparison that way too. So, let’s take a look:

 

Mac 1a

Apple Mac Pro "Bare Bones"

2.8GHz Quad Core Harpertown x2 (8 Cores)

2GB FB-DIMM DDR2 800

320GB SATA 3GB/s

8800GT 512MB

Dual Layer DVD Burner

Apple Wireless Mighty Mouse

Apple Wireless Keyboard

Leopard 10.5.2

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

Total: $2999.00

 

Mac 1b (Configured from Apple)

2.8GHz Quad Core Harpertown x2 (8 Cores)

16GB FB-DIMM DDR2 800

1TB SATA 3GB/s

1TB SATA 3GB/s

8800GT 512MB

Dual Layer DVD Burner

Apple Wireless Mighty Mouse

Apple Wireless Keyboard

Leopard 10.5.2

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

Total: $7249.00

 

Hack 1a

2.83GHz Quad Core Harpertown x2 (8 Cores)

2GB FB-DIMM DDR2 800

320GB SATA 3GB/s

8800GT 512MB

Dual Layer DVD Burner

Apple Wireless Mighty Mouse

Apple Wireless Keyboard

Leopard 10.5.2

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

Total: $2303.91

 

Hack 1b

2.83GHz Quad Core Harpertown x2 (8 Cores)

16GB FB-DIMM DDR2 800

1TB SATA 3GB/s

1TB SATA 3GB/s

8800GT 512MB

Dual Layer DVD Burner

Apple Wireless Mighty Mouse

Apple Wireless Keyboard

Leopard 10.5.2

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

Total: $3501.87

 

In the Hack builds I have not listed the server chassis and the dual LGA771 Intel 5400 motherboard but they are included in the total. So, comparing the Mac 1a and the Hack 1a, the Hack 1a saves you 30% over the authentic Mac. There are some obvious places where buying the 1a from Apple may make up the 30%. You get Apple's service, you don't have to bother installing a hacked version of OSX, and you get an actual Mac Pro chassis. The value of those extras depend on the person wanting a Mac (or Hack) Pro. In my case the 30% savings is significant since I feel capable and comfortable supporting my own system and I don't really care what the case looks like. To the average consumer the 30% difference is well worth it to get the service and perhaps, to a much lesser extent, the case.

 

But, there's the biggest problem. The average consumer of Mac Pros is also less likely to configure a "Bare Bones" system from Apple and then upgrade it themselves. So, an average Apple consumer will likely configure the 1b system straight from Apple. As you can see the price difference between the Mac 1b and the Hack 1b is very significant. It amounts to a 107% difference! Or, nearly double the cost of the Hack 1b.

 

With slight variations these percentages scale across each Mac Pro configuration and this gives you a pretty good idea of what to expect. So, if you're the sort of Apple consumer that configures bare bones and then upgrades yourself, there is less of a reason to build a Hack Pro. If you're the sort of Apple consumer that just hops on the website configures what you really want and then clicks "buy", you really need somebody to tell you to go the bare bones route. On the other hand, if you're a pretty tech savvy PC or Mac user I think the 30% savings on a bare bones system is significant. That 30% should scale the same whether your end goal is the 2.8GHz, 3.0GHz, or 3.2GHz system as a bare bones system or with 4, 8, 16 or 32GB of RAM and multiple TB HD's.

 

Getting OSX running on my PC was hardly a difficult task. In fact, I believe it took me even less time than it did to install Vista x64. That even includes the time I spent messing around with kexts and stuff. Nevertheless, the bottom line is that the statement "you can't build an equivalent PC for less" is simply false. Please keep in mind that I'm not trying to argue that there is no value in a Mac Pro. On the contrary, I believe I showed that value depends, in large part, on the individual buying the system and that for some users there is greater value in buying a Mac from Apple.

[CLiDE FTW!!1]

so you need a computer to get a date ?

Who says I want to date them?

 

I think literacy is weak with this one.

 

And some people do "need a computer to get a date", that's why places like eharomony exist. Welcome to the 21st century.

[Alessandro17]

sneezymarble,

 

I am the kind of person who would buy what you call a "Apple Mac Pro "Bare Bones" and add most upgrades myself (more HDs, more RAM, a second DVD Burner...). However I'd take the 8800GT 512MB and upgrade the first HD to 500GB from Apple, the difference in price is very reasonable. I wouldn't build my own hack in this case, hardly worth the trouble, and I am pretty sure Apple can do it better than myself.

But having said that, I really don't need all that power. I am planning to build a new Nehalem based hack next year (at least if I have the money).

However if Apple decided to fill the gap between the iMac and the Mac Pro once and forever, that would be a different matter.

[sneezymarble]

Fair enough. As I said, the 30% difference in price between the perfectly matching Hack Pro and the Mac Pro may not be worth it to some people. However, if you're not even after the insane performance and upgrade-ability of a Mac Pro, for the price of the cheapest iMac offering right now you can build a system with desktop parts as opposed to server parts that performs better than a 2.8GHz Quad Core Mac Pro in OSX. In that case you're saving something like 350%. That's pretty significant.

[Alessandro17]

However, if you're not even after the insane performance and upgrade-ability of a Mac Pro, for the price of the cheapest iMac offering right now you can build a system with desktop parts as opposed to server parts that performs better than a 2.8GHz Quad Core Mac Pro in OSX. In that case you're saving something like 350%. That's pretty significant.

 

Absolutely. That is why I built 3 hacks in 1 year and I am planning to build another one next year.

[ludacrisvp]

The Mac Pro is utterly amazing, way more powerful than any windows based PC.

I have had mine for a few days, nothing slows it down.

[Nano2k]

The Mac Pro is utterly amazing, way more powerful than any windows based PC.

I have had mine for a few days, nothing slows it down.

 

That is typically the sort of argument that makes PC power users jump in their chairs because it's totally irrealistic and without any technical proof whatsoever. If OS X was such a performance OS, the overclockers would use it and there would be a lot of overclocking and benchmarking software to use it with.

 

OSX is a great OS to use and I like it a lot, but it's definitely not faster than Windows. On the same machine even Vista 64bits feels a lot snappier than OSX.

 

And none of that "your osx is slower because you do not have an original mac" BS because we all know that it's not true.

 

Your machine is probably fast in heavy multi-tasking, but it's nothing out of this world. It's only a PC with a nice case and a nice OS for which you paid a lot of money.

 

Btw a fast processor nowadays is something running between 4 and 5ghz.

 

My 2 cents.

[vbetts]

The Mac Pro is utterly amazing, way more powerful than any windows based PC.

I have had mine for a few days, nothing slows it down.

I would easily disagree with that, any Mac pro with the quad core solutions and up(Not the dual dual cpu configuration) are nice, but there are still PCs that can take them on. Skulltrail is a great platform, however it's not been really optimized at all.

[sneezymarble]

The Mac Pro is utterly amazing, way more powerful than any windows based PC.

 

That's just not true. An 8 core Skulltrail or any Intel 5400 system running Windows will perform just about the same as the current crop of Mac Pros with the same CPU and RAM. What's more is that you can easily get OSX running on 5400 system and in those cases performance will be exactly the same. Quad core "Hack Pros" handily destroy official Quad Core Mac Pros while costing significantly less. The system on my sig cost 363% less than a current Quad Core Mac Pro and performs 29% better in Geekbench under OSX. Surprisingly, in OSX it only performs only 10% slower in Geekbench than the 2.8GHz 8 core system with the same amount of ram!

 

Mac Pros are simply not "way more powerful than...windows based PC." Theoretically, since a PC and Mac can have almost identical hardware there should be no raw "power" advantage to one or the other. The operating system may facilitate performance advantages in certain scenarios but now that Windows can run on Macs and OSX can run on properly configured PCs your assertion is simply meaningless. Hack Pros are cheaper, perform the same and sometimes better, and can run OSX. The things that make official Mac Pros "amazing" are the case, the service you get with it's purchase, and not needing to tweak things to get it running.

 

Also, it's worth noting that, with the exception of the Sun Microsystem Sun Fire X4450 system, the three highest performing systems in Geekbench 2 are running Windows. The highest Windows GB2 score is 12000 and the highest OSX GB2 score is 10996.

[zeamp]

And none of that "your osx is slower because you do not have an original mac" BS because we all know that it's not true.

 

And that was REALLY confirmed when the first production Intel-based Macs hit the market. Everybody and their Mom was already running Intel CPU's on their Winblowz machines. We know the truth, Steve. But we still love you.

[capt_cope]

Just to jump on the dog pile, a "real" mac isn't any faster than a pc equivalent. In fact, if you measure value, macs are rather weak. For the cost of a mac pro (bare bones, or with all the trimmings) I can build a faster pc. My lowly hack, listed in my sig, cost me about $900 to build, and it's faster than a real quad core mac pro (2x dual core xenon) and it gives about the same performance as our 8 core mac. All while costing far less, with more ram, a better graphics card, and more hd space. So no, your real deal, ultra high performance, snazzy cased mac pro isn't much better than my pc, and mine cost way less, allowing me to buy important things, like soap, haircuts, and some nice lacoste polos.

 

Oh and as to the service bit, my computers come with a life-time warranty at no cost, with live, local, support that knows what the hell is going on. I can replace any component in my pc for less than the cost of apple care. Not to mention I could replace every component in my rig two times over without costing as much as a real mac. So the whole "great service" approach doesn't really hook me. I see it's value if you don't know anything about computers, but I'm guessing that doesn't apply on a forum dedicated to a hacked up operating system.

[2LMan]

:censored2:

[ludacrisvp]

Wow quite an argument from one simple comment.

 

Did anyone realize that I have a Hack of my own?

 

I doubt it based on what people have been saying.

I wanted a Dual Quad Xeon system, Apple was the only one that delivered.

I went to Dell / HP / Alienware / Gateway and not one of them was a dual processor quad core, the best was a single intel core 2 quad.

I also liked the fact that it will run OSX perfectly, no more worries about breaking the install when installing something, or having applications that don't work.

I do have this machine dual booting with Windows Vista Ultimate x64 and it is very fast inside of windows too. 5.9 for all ratings with the HD at 5.7.

You can be happy for me / pissed at me / think I am stupid for buying a Mac Pro... Guess what? I DONT CARE, It is what I wanted.

Why doesnt everyone here that is criticizing what I have said about the Mac Pro do the same to those that have the 17" MacBook Pro? It can cost more than the Mac Pro that I have and they dont have anywhere near the performance. I had one and returned it for this. It was a 17" 1920x1200 2.6Ghz 4gb RAM 200gb 7200rpm hard drive.

 

The bottom line is I like the Mac Pro, it does what I need it to do.

It is silent in comparison to the HackPro I was using and the whole unit is very pleasing.

 

One other reason I went with this was my student discount, it was $3400 or so including the extra Ram from newegg, and taxes. It was cheaper than the MBP.

[sneezymarble]

Wow quite an argument from one simple comment.

 

Did anyone realize that I have a Hack of my own?

 

I doubt it based on what people have been saying.

I wanted a Dual Quad Xeon system, Apple was the only one that delivered.

I went to Dell / HP / Alienware / Gateway and not one of them was a dual processor quad core, the best was a single intel core 2 quad.

I also liked the fact that it will run OSX perfectly, no more worries about breaking the install when installing something, or having applications that don't work.

I do have this machine dual booting with Windows Vista Ultimate x64 and it is very fast inside of windows too. 5.9 for all ratings with the HD at 5.7.

You can be happy for me / pissed at me / think I am stupid for buying a Mac Pro... Guess what? I DONT CARE, It is what I wanted.

Why doesnt everyone here that is criticizing what I have said about the Mac Pro do the same to those that have the 17" MacBook Pro? It can cost more than the Mac Pro that I have and they dont have anywhere near the performance. I had one and returned it for this. It was a 17" 1920x1200 2.6Ghz 4gb RAM 200gb 7200rpm hard drive.

 

The bottom line is I like the Mac Pro, it does what I need it to do.

It is silent in comparison to the HackPro I was using and the whole unit is very pleasing.

 

One other reason I went with this was my student discount, it was $3400 or so including the extra Ram from newegg, and taxes. It was cheaper than the MBP.

 

I don't think anyone cares that you bought a Mac Pro. I'm happy for you and I don't think your stupid at all. I have no doubt it performs well, looks cool, and you enjoy it. We're just annoyed that you came in here and made an assertion that is simply false. Look, I've outlined all this in this thread prior to your comment but there are great reasons to buy a Mac. Those reasons, however, depend upon the consumer more than they do the actual product. For somebody with a sufficient amount of technical savvy there's just no reason to get a Mac right now when you can build your own for signficantly less and have it perform significantly better. And that's where we all felt the rub.

 

As I've already outlined, it's just not true that a Mac Pro is "way more powerful than any windows based PC." Furthermore, as I've already mentioned, a properly configured "windows based PC" can run OSX just as fast as a similarly configured Mac.

 

So, you can love your Mac, and for good reasons. But, you can't go around asserting that it's "way more powerful than any windows based PC" because that's just not true.

[vbetts]

I went to Dell / HP / Alienware / Gateway and not one of them was a dual processor quad core, the best was a single intel core 2 quad.

None of the desktops do, but the Macpro isn't a desktop. It's a workstation, so you need to compare workstation to workstation.

http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/con...dwjap&s=bsd

 

But judging by the price of a single cpu precision, then what the price is after you add a second cpu, the Mac pro is a steal with its prices.

[capt_cope]

If a mac pro is what you wanted, and it is what you bought... what is there to fault with that? The only point was that to me (important bit there) a real mac doesn't hold up well in a "value" based comparison with a rig I can build. Obviously we place different weights on different features. That said there are some facts that can't be argued, mainly that for the cost of a mac pro, one can build a "hack pro" that is as powerful and has more trimmings.

 

Like I said, you either buy into the mac, or you don't. Neither answer is wrong there, just don't go thinking you've got something that nothing else can compare to.

[benzslrpee]

who cares really? you can *always* build something cheaper if you do it yourself but the point is that most...ok that may not be quite true, let's say "a lot" of people really couldn't give a rat's ass in regards to hunting for computer parts online, spend a weekend with screwdrivers/boot CDs/manuals just to build a machine that they'll occasionally game on.

 

it just so happens that some are willing to spend more on a commodity item and some would rather spend less. the "value" of the transaction is up to the buyer, after all, i see six or seven Range Rovers on the way to work despite their notorious gas consumption, cost and reliability. it's obviously worth it to the owner. some don't {censored} and moan when they plunk down the cash for a MBP, iMac or Mac Pro and others have to whine like an old lady complaining how her {censored} used to stay up by themselves.