homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.211.73.232
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Home / Forums Index / Local / Foo
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: incrediBILL & lawman

Foo Forum

    
Macs are cheaper than PCs
Here's some ammo for you
jamesa

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 11:28 pm on Aug 27, 2004 (gmt 0)

This article does a pretty fair, unbiased analysis IMO.

On the low end the author found that the PCs (Dells) are marginally cheaper, but these low end PCs tend to be "stripped" of features you find included in the low end Macs. When comparing similarly configured machines the Apples are cheaper.

On the high end he found that the the Apples were always cheaper - by a large margin - and more feature-packed.

[linuxinsider.com ]

Lay another myth to rest.

 

yosemite

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 8:09 am on Aug 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Thanks for this. Interesting stuff.

I constantly hear that PCs are cheaper, as if that's the only thing that counts. It isn't.

No matter how people praise their PCs, the fact is, they can't do do some things that my Mac can do. PCs can't run OS X. PCs can't run Garageband (I'm hooked on Garageband). So, no matter how "cheap" a PC is, it is inconsequential, because I still want to use a Mac.

It just gets me how people keep repeating, "But PCs are cheaper. But PCs are cheaper." as if that's the end of it. They aren't listening to me. That's not the point. Even if they are cheaper (and your cite seems to poke holes in that claim), if they can't do what you want it to do, or if you don't enjoy working on them that much, what was the point?

Of course there are things that only run on a PC and of course there are people who enjoy using PCs and feel they are a good "fit" for them. But they should not assume that "one size fits all." What works for them—what they enjoy—may not be right for everyone else.

(BTW, I do own a PC too and I like it fine—it is very useful at times. But I am very glad that I own my Macs and enjoy using them very much.)

4eyes

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 9:57 am on Aug 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

No offense intended james, but that article is hooey - at least from my UK point of view.

I buy my PCs to my exact high spec manufactured by a local PC dealer.
They are a fraction of the cost of the equivalent MAC (and a fair bit cheaper than Dell)

I can also upgrade compenent parts cheaper as well, so the PC stays 'on spec' for longer at a lower cost.

I've nothing against MACs, but to suggest they are cheaper (in the way this article does) is misleading.

ahmedtheking

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 11:09 am on Aug 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Macs rule! I don't see why the world hasn't caught on yet?

Ok some people may argue that software is widely available for PC's, which is true, but on mac, there are always better substitutes!

And, I heard a rumour that Mircosoft are going to start charging people for the new IE!? OMG?! Why would anyone pay for IE?!

Lord Majestic

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 11:21 am on Aug 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

On the high end he found that the the Apples were always cheaper - by a large margin - and more feature-packed.

I like performance and apparently high-end Crays are the cheapest from performance per dollar point of view. Problem is - that high end is way too expensive. Comparing to Dell implies Dell is the cheapest, but at least in the UK this is not the case. Locally assembled computers are very popular because they are very cheap and should things go wrong you can pop into your local store where owner depends on your business rather than wait in queue with Dell.

The author of the article also fails to appreciate that home users are more likely to get Office CD from friend or download it from P2P network rather than pay any meaningful amount for it.

This is the primary advantage of PCs - cheap hardware and cheap or near free software. Who cares if Macs are cheaper if I can't easily run software that I've been running for the last 10 years? And new games, and new this and that - Macs are simply a non-starter to most people.

If you like Macs and they fit you then fair play, but I feel sorry for some of them who were duped into buying Macs by salesmen and ads like that "G4 (5?) is faster than Pentium 4" that failed to highlight simple things that matters to people like inability to run their newest game.

Why would anyone pay for IE?!

I would if there was not good competition offering free browsers. IE (and now Firefox) are the most commonly used applications on my PC - one might say I would not be able to live without a good browser and certainly would pay reasonably amount for IE6 rather than use NN4. Luckily I don't have to as I switched to Firefox full time, but in principle browser is such a widely used application that I think it beats Office in terms of usage and is next to Windows itself.

I will be building a few servers soon and I wonder what would it have cost if I had to go Mac route:

1) AMD 2.5Ghz CPU (+mobo+box)
2) 4 x 250Gb hard drives (1TB in total)
3) 2Gb of RAM
---

My current understanding that I will fit it all under ~ £800 (GBP) or $1,400 (USD).

ahmedtheking

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 11:34 am on Aug 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

True, Firefox is a main competitor of IE, I'm using it now! As a webmaster if fulfills my needs due to the vast amount of extensions it has!

As for servers, Apple servers (and the computers themselves) do tend to cost more, but you're getting UNIX, the most stable system in the world!

Why get a windows server where you will have deal with possible viruses (as they all seem to be pointed at windows OS) when you can get rock steady UNIX and enjoy lots of opensource server software!

Essex_boy

WebmasterWorld Senior Member essex_boy us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 1:52 pm on Aug 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Ive only ever used a MAC once and quite liked it however I only have to walk around PC world to see why i buy PC's instead of MACs.

4eyes

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 1:58 pm on Aug 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Why get a windows server where you will have deal with possible viruses (as they all seem to be pointed at windows OS) when you can get rock steady UNIX and enjoy lots of opensource server software!

You seem to be confusing 'Windows' with PCs

All my PC based servers run Linux of one form or another.

In fact, one of my home PCs runs Linux as well.

This thread is about the relative costs, we have done the 'which is best' thing to death many times over the last few years.

Personally I could not switch to a MAC, cos the software I depend on is just not available for it, (no, not the obvious stuff - the specialist SEO type stuff)

I am sure that most MAC users have a similar problem moving in the opposite direction.

Its irrelevant - they are both just tools - work with what you are familiar with and relax on trying to convice others on what is basically a subjective view (whichever camp you fall in).

Regardless of the 'mine is best' type arguments, the article suggesting that MACs are cheaper is still just plain misleading on something that is NOT subjective.

jamesa

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 4:16 pm on Aug 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

>> I buy my PCs to my exact high spec manufactured by a local PC dealer.
They are a fraction of the cost of the equivalent MAC (and a fair bit cheaper than Dell) <<

And I'm sure that you could assemble your own even cheaper. I agree that saying that "PCs" are cheaper is definitely a stretch. But the article is referring to Dell, and Dell is I think the biggest selling manufacturer in the States and known for their low prices. So for Apple to be comparable or cheaper across the entire product line against Dell is surprising.

>> misleading

Btw, making broad generalizations (i.e.- "Macs are too expensive", "just good for graphics", "no software", etc) is also misleading.

>> Its irrelevant - they are both just tools

Couldn't agree more. I'm so sick of the Mac vs PC threads. Let's not do that here. Honestly I could care less what type of computer someone uses... it's what's better for you that counts. Be glad you have a choice.

yosemite

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 5:31 pm on Aug 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Lord Majestic wrote:

The author of the article also fails to appreciate that home users are more likely to get Office CD from friend or download it from P2P network rather than pay any meaningful amount for it.


"The author of the article also fails to appreciate that home users are more likely to break the law and get illegal copies of Office from a friend or download it from P2P rather than pay any meaningful amount for it."

That sounds like PC users are bootlegging cheapskates. Or, that bootlegging and thieving is more mainstream or more of an option for PC users.

Mac users can get a copy of a CD from a friend too. They can also download Office from P2P, if that's what they want to do. (And some do.) They can be the same kind of bootlegging cheapskates as their PC-using counterparts.

But not everyone wants to do that. And it's the wrong thing to do anyway. I cannot imagine any magazine article even mentioning such a thing. "Sure, PC users could buy Office, but since they can steal it instead, we won't consider the cost of Office in the equation. However, we'll consider the cost on the Mac side of the equation, because . . . errrr . . . because . . ."

Uh. I don't think so.

If you like Macs and they fit you then fair play, but I feel sorry for some of them who were duped into buying Macs by salesmen and ads like that "G4 (5?) is faster than Pentium 4" that failed to highlight simple things that matters to people like inability to run their newest game.

Ack! Not the game thing again!

If someone is a hardcore gamer, then of course they should get a PC. But odds are that if someone is so focused on games, they'll know what kind of system to get anyway.

But many people are not gamers. They want to putter around on the Internet, they want to work on Word Processing documents, they want to watch DVDs, they want to burn CDs and DVDs, they want to fiddle with the pictures from their digital camera, yadda yadda yadda. And a G5 can do all of these things admirably. It also has the fabulous "iApps," which are regarded (by both sides of the aisle) as very user-friendly, very newbie friendly. Just the sort of thing a new computer user would love to have.

One thing I'd like to put to rest here right now: Not everyone is focused on games. I never was much of a gamer, from the start. I never have been. I play Snood, that's about it. Snood is available for the Mac. For people to keep repeating, "But Macs don't have as many games" is pretty meaningless to me and to a lot of other people. Don't care about games. (Besides, it doesn't mean that Macs don't have any games. Many of the most popular are often ported over. Not that I know much about that because I don't play them.)

I think the two things I hear most frequently is "But they're cheaper" and "But you can't play as many games!" Over and over and over again. It's as if I can't get past that with some people. They have this tunnel vision about games and expense, as if that is the only consideration.

Please forgive me, Lord Majestic, a lot of this all really isn't directed at you. Your mention of games just set me off. ;-)

jamesa wrote:

I'm so sick of the Mac vs PC threads. Let's not do that here. Honestly I could care less what type of computer someone uses... it's what's better for you that counts. Be glad you have a choice.

Isn't that the truth. Some things are better (for some people) on the PC, and vice-versa. I have both systems, and get sick of people taking it so personally that I own a Mac (well, a few of them). I can converse about PCs and I don't bash PCs. (Well, maybe a gripe a little sometimes, but who doesn't?) I just want to use what I want to use without people getting in my face about it.

[edited by: yosemite at 5:47 pm (utc) on Aug. 29, 2004]

4eyes

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 5:44 pm on Aug 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Btw, making broad generalizations (i.e.- "Macs are too expensive", "just good for graphics", "no software", etc) is also misleading.

Agreed (but then I didn't say that)

That the Mac is cheaper than Dell is arguable but certainly doesn't 'Lay another myth to rest'.

Dell <> PC

Nor is buying a Dell a reflection of the real cost of buying and using a PC for most readers of WebmasterWorld.

However, there is an argument that it is at least competitive when looked at from the point of view of Joe Public or Coporate buyers, where the machines are going to be used 'out of the box' as specified in the article.

So why aren't they buying them in greater numbers?

Could it be that the main demand is for different specifications than those used to support the main point of the article?

Alternatively, could it be the PC Games market (and ease with which schoolkids can swap pirated software)?

Lord Majestic

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 5:59 pm on Aug 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

That sounds like PC users are bootlegging cheapskates. Or, that bootlegging and thieving is more mainstream or more of an option for PC users.

I was merely quoting what I think is an accurate generalisation - should be added that the choice of software (free or not) is generally better for Wintel boxes.

But many people are not gamers. They want to putter around on the Internet, they want to work on Word Processing documents, they want to watch DVDs, they want to burn CDs and DVDs, they want to fiddle with the pictures from their digital camera, yadda yadda yadda.

Agree, but they also expect to run something new that may attract their attention in the future, on their system without realising, when its too late, that they have Mac and software won't run on it.

Anyway peace to all Mac people. Thanks to you there is choice out there, and I commend Mac-users for taking plunge and doing the ultimate sacrifice for the sake of all computer users - buying Macs ;)

yosemite

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 6:16 pm on Aug 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

I was merely quoting what I think is an accurate generalisation - should be added that the choice of software (free or not) is generally better for Wintel boxes.

You said that users could get a copy of Office (the software mentioned in the article) from a friend or they could download it. Well, Mac users can do the same thing. Office X is readily available on P2P networks. All available Mac software is available on P2P networks.

If you wanted to merely make the point that there is more of a selection of software on the PC, you could have said that, but you didn't. You said that PC users could download (i.e. steal) Office, so the article needn't have included the expense of buying it.

There are cheap (or free) Office alternatives for both platforms. OpenOffice is available for free, on both platforms, for instance. Nisus Writer, a nice word processing package, is quite cheap and only available for the Mac (and of course there are a plethora of cheap Word alternatives available for the PC). But that is neither here nor there. The article was talking about Office, and about buying Office—not stealing it.

With that said, peace to you too. We all should just get what we want to get and what works for us. :)

Bennie

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 10:21 pm on Aug 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

17 inch poewrbook with osx - tell me what PC (PISA CHIT) would be a better web tool?

pageoneresults

WebmasterWorld Senior Member pageoneresults us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 11:26 pm on Aug 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Tell me what PC would be a better web tool?

lol, my new 17.0 Sony Vaio A190 with a Pentium M 1.7. All comparisons aside, it really comes down to the user. I work on both PC and Mac. Each has their strengths and weaknesses although that separation is not as prevalent as it was a year or two ago.

Prices are comparable although you usually get a little more with your Mac, that is just the way it has been since the beginning. ;)

Bennie

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 1:17 am on Aug 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

there are some small differences between a pc and new macs like the fact they are unix based.

All in all if you want to use multiple programs with multiple windows open in each, and you swap documents alot) there is no equal.

You are right that it depends on the user.

4eyes

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 7728 posted 12:11 pm on Aug 30, 2004 (gmt 0)

there are some small differences between a pc and new macs like the fact they are unix based.

PC <> MS Windows

I've been using Linux AND Windows on the same box for years.

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Local / Foo
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved