OS X coming to PCs...What the hell?

[Guest:]

You're on the right track, but it has to do with profit margins rather than "overpriced hardware" (which has been debunked). Profit margins on hardware are higher than it is for software. In order to make a similar profit margin as a strictly software company, Apple has to either:

 

1. Sell more copies (which won't happen) or

2. Raise prices (which increases supply but reduces demand, meaning they'll sell even less than they do now).

 

So unless you're rooting for Apple to go bankrupt and have their software in the $5 reject bins, then you need to keep Apple as a hardware vendor.

 

The URL that proves that Macs are not overpriced is really off.

 

The thing with Dell is, though the initial price may be high, prices are driven down the water with Dells multiple coupons and offers.

 

Consider:

 

- 30% Coupon (On Average, these range from 20% to as much as 60%!)

- 12% Student/Employee Discount

- 2% Rewards Cards

- $100 Mail in Rebates

- $25 Dollar Stackable Coupons

 

When you pair these all up.. Dell becomes MUCH MUCH cheaper than an Apple can be.

[ChuckDSanders]

You guys have this all wrong. Its not about profit margin in the hardware at all. I wouldn't be surprised if the profit margin on hardware for macs isn't that high. More importantly if you guys haven't noticed there is a content war brewing. The companies are fighting to get a box into your house so they can sell you {censored}. MS wants you to buy vista so you can buy their games, their software, their online download-able content, IE the new Xbox360 zeipher that is coming out. In addition, apple has made great strides in getting IPods into peoples hands, and inevitably trying to get more people to switch to a mac based platform. Why? well then you get ITunes, and then you can buy all of their APPLE {censored} online. You will see more of this coming, as content on demand kills cable and sat TV companies in the coming years, the hardware and software manufacturers are going to scramble to create new markets. Check it out, information exchanging is about to get a whole lot more interesting.

[Urbz]

Chuck, I think you've got it 100% correct.

I think there's one thing that should be added however: Apple still wants the Mac platform to be the dominant one for all this, and let's not forget the need for computers as word processors that will likely always exist... and whole bunch of other uses that don't directly deal with the internet.

so when I say you're right, I mean in terms of getting online content. AppleTV, iPod, iTunes, iPhone... and finally, your Mac, where everything else can be handled.

[asstastic]

You guys have this all wrong. Its not about profit margin in the hardware at all. I wouldn't be surprised if the profit margin on hardware for macs isn't that high. More importantly if you guys haven't noticed there is a content war brewing. The companies are fighting to get a box into your house so they can sell you {censored}. MS wants you to buy vista so you can buy their games, their software, their online download-able content, IE the new Xbox360 zeipher that is coming out. In addition, apple has made great strides in getting IPods into peoples hands, and inevitably trying to get more people to switch to a mac based platform. Why? well then you get ITunes, and then you can buy all of their APPLE {censored} online. You will see more of this coming, as content on demand kills cable and sat TV companies in the coming years, the hardware and software manufacturers are going to scramble to create new markets. Check it out, information exchanging is about to get a whole lot more interesting.

 

New markets for advertising and content push are ever expanding, just as sure as Moore's Law. We are soon entering the era where directional sound speakers in vending machines will discretely coax us to purchase a 12oz bottle of liquefied sugar. Sony has taken out a patent for directly beaming information into people's brains, imagine the possibilities and stock up on aluminum foil. Every company is rushing to pipeline streaming television into people's phones at exorbitant rates. Seriously, I don't need it. Asside from a brief stint of online gaming I have never paid for content online and refuse to pay $100 a month for cable TV. This new tech is about as interesting as the advertisements the've started showing before films at theatres nationwide. Ite real interesting part will come when this technology leaves the hands of those who created it and becomes embraced as new vehicles of art and culture for the general public. If a content war is truly brewing then my cash is going to stay as neutral as a Swiss bank account.

[A Nonny Moose]

The URL that proves that Macs are not overpriced is really off.

 

The thing with Dell is, though the initial price may be high, prices are driven down the water with Dells multiple coupons and offers.

 

Consider:

 

- 30% Coupon (On Average, these range from 20% to as much as 60%!)

- 12% Student/Employee Discount

- 2% Rewards Cards

- $100 Mail in Rebates

- $25 Dollar Stackable Coupons

 

When you pair these all up.. Dell becomes MUCH MUCH cheaper than an Apple can be.

 

This is called CRYING because something got proven wrong and now this poster is trying to do everything to prove there is an exception.

 

 

From From Macworld

 

But Wednesday afternoon between 4:13pm and 4:37pm, the Dell 2400 was $34 cheaper!

(Corollary: “But when I went through Dell’s XYZ store, it was $27 cheaper!") I chose the cheapest Dell the day of my article, but it’s true that depending on the day (or even the time of day), and which of Dell’s four online stores (Home & Home Office; Small Business; Medium & Large Business; and Government, Education & Healthcare) you go through, the price of a particular system (and even the components of that system) may vary, often significantly. I’ve since seen the Dell system referenced in the column at both higher and lower price points, but mostly around the price noted in the column, so I think that price is a good representation of what someone looking to buy would pay for it. (I also think the above says something about the ease of use—or lack thereof—of using the Dell online store. Those people who spend their days checking “deal” websites for the best possible buy may appreciate these wildly fluctuating prices and different paths to configuring the same computer, but for your average consumer, it’s frustrating.)

Edited February 3, 2007 by A Nonny Moose

[MacMoof]

Macs are overpriced.

 

That's where Apple makes it's money.. by selling garden variety PC hardware in a pretty box for a premium price.

 

The profit for them is all in the hardware, so while licensing the OS to 'beige box' PC owners would increase the marketshare of OSX, it would pretty much kill their profits.. especially considering the support nightmare it would create, having to write an OS that'll run on just about anything you try to install it on.

 

Apple tried licensing back in the Scully days.. it was killing their profit margin, because the people they licensed the technology to were building more powerful computers much cheaper.. in some cases, the clones were half the price of the competing Mac products.

 

That's the way Apple has done things since the Apple II.. they make the money on the hardware.. and they can continue to command a higher price than similarly spec'ed PC's because they have the one thing you can't get on a similarly spec'ed PC: MacOS.

 

That's why Apple will fight tooth and nail to prevent any large scale 'clone' or 'compatible' option. If you want to run MacOS, they want you to buy one of their computers because that's where they're making the money.

 

Finally, you can bet that if Apple decided to license their OS to the likes of Dell, Compaq, Gateway, etc. that it wouldn't take but a minute for Microsoft to immediately quit making things like Office, Word, and Excel for MacOS.. much the way Microsoft quit making Internet Explorer for Mac when Apple started including Safari with their OS.

 

Because selling the OS and Software is where Microsoft makes all it's money.

[macgirl]

How are overpriced, just in this thread are examples of similar configurations that cost more from other vendors.

 

Of course you can always asembly your own PC, and got cheaper parts, but I could never asembly a computer like my 12" PowerBook.

[henchman]

How are overpriced, just in this thread are examples of similar configurations that cost more from other vendors.

 

Of course you can always asembly your own PC, and got cheaper parts, but I could never asembly a computer like my 12" PowerBook.

 

 

No, but there are alot of Quality laptosp that have teh same specs as a MBP that are about 25% or so less.

The HP Business series, as well as one or 2 otehr brands coem to mind.

[MacMoof]

Well.. a 13" MacBook with a 1.83GHz cpu with 512MB RAM and a 60GB Hard drive and 64MB GMA950 video is $1099.

A 2.0GB 13" MacBook with 1GB RAM and 80GB hard drive with 64MB GMA950 video will set you back $1299.

 

Now for $1064.99 you can get a HP notebook with 14.1" screen, 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo CPU, 1GB RAM

160GB Hard drive and 256MB NVIDIA GeForce Go 7400. That's an inch bigger screen, twice the RAM, almost three times the hard drive space and three times the

video memory.. for $35 less money.

 

Add another $100 for a 2GHz Core2Duo CPU and you're at $1164, and you've got an inch bigger screen and twice the

harddrive space and three times the video memory and saving $135.

Edited February 15, 2007 by MacMoof

[Zealot]

How are overpriced, just in this thread are examples of similar configurations that cost more from other vendors.

 

Of course you can always asembly your own PC, and got cheaper parts, but I could never asembly a computer like my 12" PowerBook.

 

I guess the "good" configurations of Apple worth it but i have to disagree with you because their midrange boxes like the Mini; for that money i can have a very good procesor(PC) and next week if i have more money even put it another way better .

So i think its more like if you have the $2.000 buy a mac and you going to receiv something that worth it.

and if you have like 900 you can get a PC with very competitive specs and its upgradeable for less money than a mac so(of course not from brands ,more like asemmbled by your self)so there is NO BLACK OR WHITE in this matter.

 

hate to bee a disagreer(dont know if that word even exists)

 

greetings from Chile.

[MacMoof]

Let's compare the 17" MacBookPro to a comparable HP.

 

A 17" MacBookPro with 256MB video memory (1680x1050 max res), 2GB RAM, 160GB hard drive and an 8x Double Layer SuperDrive will set you back $2799 with a 2.33GHz 4MB cache Intel Core2Duo CPU.

 

For $1599, or $1200 difference in price, you can bag a HP 17" notebook with 256MB video memory (1680x1050 max res), 2GB RAM, 160GB hard drive and an 8x Double Layer drive, and a Core2Duo 2.0Ghz, 4MB cache CPU (which is the fastest they offer in that series).

 

So maybe .33Ghz of speed (about 330 Mhz) is worth another $1200 to you, but to most customers, it isn't.

 

In fact, we can jack the HP up to twice the video memory (512MB), drop in a High Definition burner, and up the hard drive to 320GB, and still be out the door for $2473, or $326 cheaper.. and that's with twice the video ram, a HD burner, and twice the hard drive size.

 

 

 

 

 

Now let's compare the lowest priced Macintosh Apple offers.. the Mini.

 

At $599 you get a 1.66Ghz Core Duo CPU, 512MB RAM, 64MB GMA 950 graphics, 60GB Hard Drive, and a 24x DVD-ROM/CD/rw drive.. no monitor, no keyboard, and no mouse.

 

Closest I can get to that on HP's site is a 1.86 Core Duo CPU, 1GB RAM, 64MB GMA 950 graphics, 160GB Hard Drive, and a 48x max. CD-RW/DVD-ROM combo drive (48x32x16x48x) for $579. Cheeseball keyboard and mouse included.

 

So for $20 LESS money, you got a slightly faster CPU, twice the RAM, over twice the hard drive space, and a twice as fast CDRW drive, plus a keyboard and mouse.

 

Now granted, it's not all packed in a cutesy little box.. but the average customer isn't nearly as interested in what kind of box the computer is stuffed in.. they want to get the most bang for their buck.

 

Now if we beef up the MacMini to the HP machine specs, upgrading to the 1.86GHz CPU, 1GB RAM, 160GB Hard Drive we jack the price up to $1074! And we still have the slower CD/RW drive and no keyboard and mouse, and we're paying $495 more than the HP box.

[henchman]

Also, when looking at the HP business machines, they come WITH the 3 year full warranty.

So, don't forget to add the extra $350,- Apple care option to your MBP.

[MacMoof]

Yea.. don't get me wrong.. i'm a hard core Mac fan and user.. having to use a Windows machine makes me physically ill.. so my price comparisons aren't from the viewpoint of a Windows or Linux 'fanboy'.. i'm just a guy who knows the stuff is too damned expensive for what you get.

 

Their hardware new has just always been way, way overpriced when compared to the 'PC'.. altho before the switch to Intel hardware it was a little harder to compare machine to machine.. or explain the price differences away by saying the hardware in the Mac was far more superior.

 

But with the Intel switch, it's the same hardware in a Mac as it is in a PC.. same chipsets for audio and video, same mainboard/logicboard chipsets, same Intel CPU's, same everything.. just in a pretty box with a different OS installed.

[MacMoof]

You know, I thought since the theory of Macs being overpriced had been 'debunked' by going to Dells website, i'd check Dells prices.

 

Now we know the MacBook sells for $1099, with a 13" display, has 64MB Video RAM, 512MB System memory, a 1.83 C2D CPU, and a 60GB Hard Drive.. also included is a 24x DVD-ROM/CDRW drive.

 

So what does Dell offer?

 

For $1100 Dell will sell you a notebook with a 15.4" display, has 128MB Video RAM, 1GB System memory, 1.83 C2D CPU, and a 120GB Hard Drive.. also included is a 8X CD/DVD Burner (DVD+/-RW) with double-layer DVD+R write capability.

 

So for $1 more, you get 2.4 inches more screen, twice the video RAM, twice the system memory, and twice the hard drive space.. AND a DVD burner! All for $1 more than the MacBook.

 

Now the next level up MacBook has a 13" display, has 64MB Video RAM, 1GB System memory, a 2.0 C2D CPU w/ 4MB cache, a 80GB Hard Drive and a 6x double-layer SuperDrive... that sells for $1299.

 

We bump our Dell up to a 2.0 C2D CPU w/ 4MB cache, and we're still getting 2.4 inches more screen, twice the video RAM, 40GB more hard disk space, 2x faster optical drive, and it's $1156.. or $143 cheaper than the MacBook.

 

 

 

Now let's compare the 17" MacBookPro at $2799. It's got a 17" screen, 256MB video RAM, 2GB System Ram, 2.33Ghz C2D CPU, 160GB Hard Drive, and a 8x double-layer SuperDrive (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW).

 

What can we get from Dell?

 

For $1766, Dell will sell us a notebook with a 17" display, 256MB video RAM, 2GB System Ram, 2.16GHz C2D (fastest they offer in that line), 160GB Hard Drive, and a 8x CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) with double-layer DVD+R write capability.

 

That makes the Dell $1033 cheaper than the MacBookPro. Is 170Mhz more CPU speed worth another $1000 dollars?

 

 

Finally.. let's compare the MacMini At $599 you get a 1.66Ghz Core Duo CPU, 512MB RAM, 64MB GMA 950 graphics, 60GB Hard Drive, and a 24x DVD-ROM/CD/rw drive.. no monitor, no keyboard, and no mouse.

 

What does Dell offer?

 

Nothing that slow.

 

The next level up is the 1.83Ghz MacMini with 512MB system RAM, 80GB Hard Drive, 64MB Video Memory, and a 8x double-layer SuperDrive (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW) at $799.

 

Closest Dell we can find in that range is a 1.86Ghz, 1GB system RAM, 250GB Hard Drive, 256MB Video Ram, and a 16x DVD+/-RW Drive. It also includes, keyboard, mouse, speakers, and a 17 inch E177FP Flat Panel LCD monitor for $909.

 

So for $110 more, you get twice the system memory, 3 times the hard drive space, 4 times the video memory, a DVD burner that's twice as fast, AND a 17" LCD Flat Panel display.

 

Again, it's not in that neat little MacMini case.. but holy {censored} that's a lot more stuff for just $110.

[Rez.]

Looks like someones debunking just got debunked. Nice posts Macmoof.

[glassJAw]

Let's compare the 17" MacBookPro to a comparable HP.

 

A 17" MacBookPro with 256MB video memory (1680x1050 max res), 2GB RAM, 160GB hard drive and an 8x Double Layer SuperDrive will set you back $2799 with a 2.33GHz 4MB cache Intel Core2Duo CPU.

 

For $1599, or $1200 difference in price, you can bag a HP 17" notebook with 256MB video memory (1680x1050 max res), 2GB RAM, 160GB hard drive and an 8x Double Layer drive, and a Core2Duo 2.0Ghz, 4MB cache CPU (which is the fastest they offer in that series).

 

So maybe .33Ghz of speed (about 330 Mhz) is worth another $1200 to you, but to most customers, it isn't.

 

In fact, we can jack the HP up to twice the video memory (512MB), drop in a High Definition burner, and up the hard drive to 320GB, and still be out the door for $2473, or $326 cheaper.. and that's with twice the video ram, a HD burner, and twice the hard drive size.

Now let's compare the lowest priced Macintosh Apple offers.. the Mini.

 

At $599 you get a 1.66Ghz Core Duo CPU, 512MB RAM, 64MB GMA 950 graphics, 60GB Hard Drive, and a 24x DVD-ROM/CD/rw drive.. no monitor, no keyboard, and no mouse.

 

Closest I can get to that on HP's site is a 1.86 Core Duo CPU, 1GB RAM, 64MB GMA 950 graphics, 160GB Hard Drive, and a 48x max. CD-RW/DVD-ROM combo drive (48x32x16x48x) for $579. Cheeseball keyboard and mouse included.

 

So for $20 LESS money, you got a slightly faster CPU, twice the RAM, over twice the hard drive space, and a twice as fast CDRW drive, plus a keyboard and mouse.

 

Now granted, it's not all packed in a cutesy little box.. but the average customer isn't nearly as interested in what kind of box the computer is stuffed in.. they want to get the most bang for their buck.

 

Now if we beef up the MacMini to the HP machine specs, upgrading to the 1.86GHz CPU, 1GB RAM, 160GB Hard Drive we jack the price up to $1074! And we still have the slower CD/RW drive and no keyboard and mouse, and we're paying $495 more than the HP box.

 

You are not taking into consideration that the MacMini is SMALL though.

[Rez.]

You are not taking into consideration that the MacMini is SMALL though.

 

Oh please, Talk about grasping at straws.

[John the Geek]

Oh please, Talk about grasping at straws.

 

Right.

 

We have 15 new Mac minis in our display cases adhesively mounted on the backs of new Apple 20" displays, which are themselves mounted to the walls with VESA mounts.

 

Form-factor can be very important. You can't do that with an HP.

 

Besides, who would want an HP, even at half price? I sure as hell wouldn't. I bought a Mac Pro and a 30" display for a reason. Quality.

 

Besides, what makes your argument valid for anyone other than yourself. Don't like Apple's prices? Don't buy them. I'll continue to buy them and enjoy them greatly.

 

-John

[henchman]

Besides, who would want an HP, even at half price? I sure as hell wouldn't. I bought a Mac Pro and a 30" display for a reason. Quality.

 

Quaility?

 

They all use the same parts.

So, what's the Diff?

 

Quality?

 

Read the hundreds of posts regarding the MPB warping, fading keys, whinig fans, etc.

No wonder they make you pay an extra $350,- if you want a real warranty.

That's how they cover the cost/failure/profit ratio.

Initially, the price doesn't look too bad. Untill you add the extra $350 for 3 year warranty, that is included with other comapnies Business models.

[Dice7]

PC people and Mac people think differently. Some people like computer for looks or as the person above me said "Quality". Depends on what your using it for, personally I would buy a PC only for the factor of playing my Games on it.

 

So Price is a big factor for me, and I know allot of people that prefer "PC" think the same. Though I do like the Mac OS because of the looks and usability of it. Give and Take. And it all in what you need or want.

 

Dice

Edited February 16, 2007 by Dicenet

[John the Geek]

Quaility?

 

They all use the same parts.

So, what's the Diff?

 

My PowerBooks aren't snapping and breaking all the time, our Gateways and Dells are {censored} now because they are mostly cheap plastic.

 

 

Read the hundreds of posts regarding the MPB warping, fading keys, whinig fans, etc.

No wonder they make you pay an extra $350,- if you want a real warranty.

That's how they cover the cost/failure/profit ratio.

Initially, the price doesn't look too bad. Untill you add the extra $350 for 3 year warranty, that is included with other comapnies Business models.

 

I have almost 200 MacBook Pros here that I maintain. They are almost a year old now and only two have had ANY problems. One had a battery fail to hold a charge and the other had the inverter go out. Both were promptly fixed and have been fine since.

 

We only paid $30/per machine for that 3-year warranty. But then we bought bulk too.

[Rez.]

Besides, what makes your argument valid for anyone other than yourself.

I could ask you the same question.

 

Don't like Apple's prices? Don't buy them. I'll continue to buy them and enjoy them greatly.

 

Oh jesus, Here's a hanky, Wipe your eyes.

 

I was merely commenting on an ongoing debate over bang for buck. Someone claimed to have debunked the Macs are too expensive argument, Macmoof debunked the debunker (Atleast I happen to agree with Macmoof). Some random comment amidst all the hard work that went into Macmoof's comparisons of Macs and PCs is just what I originally described it to be, Grasping at straws. I'm glad that you can createJungle-esqu themes by hanging Mac Minis from off of ACDs. It still doesn't mean that for the price of a Mac Mini, You still get less than other PC manufacturers in the same price range - As demonstrated by Macmoof.

[Dice7]

hmm I really think that we are really getting

 

I think this is more for one of the debate sections, like PC's vs Mac's which is better and blah blah blah...

 

oh and I bought over 500 Dell GX520 a year ago and still dont have any issues (other than user issues) with them. so just cause a system does not die in the first year is not a big deal, wait 2 more years and see how many issues there is. they are all still circuit boards and moving parts.

 

Dice

[MacMoof]

Actually, I did take into consideration that the MacMini was small, and mentioned that point.. and there are, no doubt, people who will pay a premium for 'small'.

 

That still doesn't explain away the price difference, since integrating everything on one board (basically a notebook motherboard) and slapping a notebook sized hard drive and optial drive into a small box doesn't make it any more expensive than a comparably spec'ed notebook sans display.

 

And please, spare me with the 'quality' bit. An Intel GMA950 chipset is the same in a Mac as it is a PC. An Intel C2D CPU is the same in a Mac as it is a PC.

 

The only difference between comparably spec'ed PC's and Macs is the OS they're running and the price tag.

 

The average computer buyer is motivated first and formost by PRICE, second by capability, and what the case it's all in looks like is generally last on the list.

 

Apple hardware has always been overpriced. Try reading thru some of Apples history as told by the employees who regularly mention the computers were priced with a huge profit margin.. some employees have even quit because they worked their butts off to keep the production costs low, but the retail price set by management kept climbing.

 

 

 

And let me repeat myself in case it wasn't clear earlier.. I AM a Mac person. I have 4 Macs and a 'Hackintosh'.

 

I just don't ever buy them new, because they're too damned expensive for what you get.

 

I personally could care less about the 'industrial design' of the box all the guts are stuffed in.. I just like MacOS X, it's ease of use, its stability, and it's performance.

 

I've owned several iBooks and PowerBooks.. don't preach to me about any level of 'quality' on those things.. eBay is littered with people selling dead iBooks and PowerBooks for parts or 'as is not working', busted hinges, dead backlights, all the same kinds of problems you have with any other laptop brand.

 

Down the road from me is the local recycling joint with pallet upon pallet of dead G4 eMac and iMac computers most with dead analog power supplies rendering the computer nothing more than a lolly pop colored boat anchor or door stop.

 

With Apple hardware, you don't get anything even remotely approaching any real 'quality' until you get into their high end stuff, like the MacPro or the G5 towers before them.

 

Have a look over at the Mac Rumors site and read all the people with stuck pixels, noisy fans, kernel panic problems, and a host of other 'quality' problems.

 

In the 'quality' department, Apple is no better than any other PC maker.

 

What makes a Mac a 'better' system is the OS, and perhaps most importantly, an OS designed to run on a limited range of hardware.. not the technology under the hood.

 

Which brings this back to the topic of this thread: Apple won't license OSX to run on garden variety 'PC's', because where they make their money isn't in selling the OS, but in selling their overpriced hardware.

[opieum]

I have a hard time believing anything parallels says. First they say They are going to enable the ability to run MacOSX on PCs (which is explicitly against apple policy anyway) and now they have recently gone back and said they wont do it unless apple lets them. Which apparently is not going to happen. The contridictions as a company really do not bolster my confidence in their product. I cannot count on them doing what they will say they will do. 3D was supposed to be out in the latest parallels release as well. Where is that? VMware didnt even announce it they just brought it. Parallels also claimed VMware has not had 3D in their software which is a flat out lie as the ability to run 3D has been in Workstation for about 2 years!!

 

Anyway enough of my rant. I am a bit of a VMware fanboi. But that is cause I use the products and have been for a long time now with very few issues. Parallels has proven to be buggy and the support has been shady at times for me. I prefer a more established company in this case. VMware does not tell you they will do something then not do it. At least I can count on consistency there. Not just feature creep like coherence (sorry but It is just the ability to remove the UI from the program) which I imagine VMware will do something similar and 1 up Parallels on this. They already got the 3D going.

 

/end 2am rant.