brandon11983

I found this article in doing research for my research paper for English. I found it very informative. This is not designed to be more "PC bashing," just information. The article put the two cases in a light I had (and probably many others as well) not thought of.

By Paul Murphy
LinuxInsider
08/26/04 6:00 AM PT

Everyone knows PCs are faster than Macs, but Macs cost more. Right? There are two issues here: cost and performance. Right now I want to focus on the cost side of the myth, leaving performance for another column, possibly in late September


For today, I'm simply going to argue that Macs and PCs are optimized for very different kinds of jobs and thus cater to different perceptions of what constitutes performance. Fundamentally, what counts for both is suitability to purpose, not bits shuffled per second.

That suitability-to-purpose idea is reflected on the cost side by the Mac's commitment to multimedia components, such as the SuperDrive and FireWire connectivity missing on the PC.

On the performance side, it's reflected in the software supplier's commitment to the Mac with the general consequence that Macs are faster where the supplier made good use of unique Mac features such as the true multiprocessing capabilities in OS X or the Altivec short array processor. PCs are faster for software ported, essentially unchanged, from the PC.

Desktop Comparisons

If we take vaguely comparable units from the low end, midrange and high end of the Apple and PC lines using pricing from the Apple and Dell Web stores as of August 21, 2004, we get the comparisons shown in the table.

The Macs have built-in FireWire, Airport Extreme, and 10/100 Ethernet ports along with the OS X operating system and a bundle of software that includes iLife and stuff like AppleWorks, Quicken and the World Book Encyclopedia.

The PCs come with some variant of Microsoft Windows XP and varying levels of discount on Microsoft Office. Thus, Office Professional costs $359 on the low-end Dimension, $319 on the OptiPlex and isn't offered with the Precision bundle.

Oddly, Office Professional for the Mac includes a PC emulator, and the package most comparable to the "Professional" PC edition appears to be called the Standard Edition. It sells at $399 for all Macs.

Macs Over Spec

If we look at these raw cost comparisons carefully, it becomes obvious that none of them really work because the Macs are consistently over spec relative to the PCs. The entry level eMac, for example, costs $350 (78 percent) more than the PC but is usable only to run Windows 98 and other software carried forward from previous generations.

Accept Dell's rather warmly endorsed package of the basic upgrades needed just to run XP comfortably, and the price difference falls to $190 (24 percent). That's still considerably less expensive than the eMac, but still short stereo, an RW/CD/DVD combo, graphics capabilities, wireless connectivity and dual FireWire ports. Adding everything except FireWire brings the price to rough parity but still leaves the PC underspecified relative to the eMac.

The same problems afflict the iMac vs. OptiPlex270 comparison. The base PC is $40 less expensive than the midrange iMac, but the PC lacks the iMac's connectivity and multimedia capabilities. It's possible to add these, but doing so pushes the PC well over the high end of the price range for the iMac.

In this case, you should be aware that the PC represents Dell's latest product generation while Apple has just stopped taking orders for the current iMacs in anticipation of introducing the next generation iMacs in September.

At the High End

The high-end comparison shows the result of the underlying difference in functional focus much more clearly. Like the iMacs, Apple's current G5 offering is actually well past its intended replacement date because of IBM's delays in shipping new CPUs. But the basic box is still a full $1,000 less expensive than Dell's newest Xeons.

As usual, however, the PC lacks the Mac's connectivity features. More importantly, my price comparison above omits the monitors for both because the recommended monitors are designed for different jobs and are not remotely comparable. Dell's 20.1-inch flat panel LCD, at $899 by itself or $700 if bundled with the Precision 670, is just a monitor.

Apple's cinema displays are more than that. They're intended to function at the core of digital production environments. Thus all three models, from the 20 inch to the 30 inch, have things like DVI and dual FireWire ports to enable plug-and-go video recording or media sharing.

In consequence, the price ranges from $1,299 to $3,299, or $600 more than Dell wants for the 20-inch unit, but the additional things they do can't be done with the Dell at any price.

The least unfair comparison, therefore, is obtained by adding the Dell monitor, as the lowest common denominator, to both machines, thereby penalizing Apple's price by the $199 difference between Dell's stand-alone and package price. Do that and the Mac comes in at $3,898 with the Dell at $4,709 -- making the Apple about 20 percent less expensive despite offering more features.

At the low end, therefore, the PC desktops are marginally less expensive than the Macs -- if you can do without their connectivity and multimedia capabilities -- and considerably more expensive if you can't. At the very high end, however, all of the design focus is on multimedia processing and the PCs simply aren't competitive from either hardware or cost perspectives.

[/b]Server Comparisons[/b]

The Dell 2850 is a brand new machine while the Xserve is at the end of its product cycle with the replacement delayed -- only because IBM has been slow to deliver the higher-speed CPUs.

More importantly, the Xserve is designed for a very different role than the PC. It runs Unix and so can do anything the PC server can, but the design optimizations target work that the PC is very poorly suited to doing -- streaming out multigigabyte digital imaging files. Thus it has additional connectivity and a matching Xserve RAID array aimed at completing the package needed by digital media developers.

The Xserve RAID package uses very large, and individually slow, ATA drives in parallel to offer cheap ($10,999 for 3.5 TB) bulk storage for large multimedia files that are usually stored and retrieved via serial I/O. For this type of application, what counts most are reliability and sustained I/O streaming -- requirements that are met very well by a design combining RAID protection with highly parallel ATA.

Dell doesn't offer an Xserve RAID equivalent, and the 2850's PC design is not internally well suited to continuous sequential I/O. Instead, it's optimized for short but high speed I/O bursts of the kind associated with document or database storage and retrieval.

Client Access Rights

The killer issue, however, on comparing Apple's X-serve to the Dell 2850 is that Apple doesn't charge for client access rights. As a result, the Dell 2850, which costs nearly 30 percent more than the Xserve before software, costs more than twice as much as the X-serve once Microsoft's $3,295 charge for a 25-user license gets counted.

At the server level, therefore, a less unfair comparison would be to the Sun V20Z. Sun's machine, like Apple's, is 64-bit capable, has page protection, runs Unix and provides for full SMP. For roughly similar dual-CPU, 2-GB units with Unix, Sun wants about $1,250 bucks more than Apple with most of that difference accounted for by Sun's use of UltraSCSI 320 I/O in place of serial ATA.

Interestingly, strip out the OS and Sun's hardware is about $600 less expensive than Dell's. Include OS licensing for access by fifty general office users and you can buy both competing servers for the price of one Dell 2850.

Laptop Comparisons

The notebook comparisons are comparatively clean and decisive.

Dell's low-end Inspiron 5150 ($1,079 after 10 percent discount) offers a 15-inch display but is otherwise not competitive with Apple's 12-inch iBook ($1,099). Dell doesn't offer anything to compete with Apple's 17-inch Titaniums ($2,799) at the high end.

In between, both Apple's 12-inch and 15-inch PowerBooks are less expensive and include more extensive connectivity capabilities than do the PCs.

So, bottom line, are PCs cheaper than Macs? No, despite what you read in the PC press, it's the other way around. Compare Apples to apples, and Macs are cheaper than PCs.

Desktops
Price
Configuration

eMac
$799
17" CRT, 1.25GHz PowerPC G4
256MB DDR333 SDRAM
ATI Radeon 9200 32MB DDR
40GB Ultra ATA drive
14W stereo system
AppleCombo drive


Dell
Dimension 2400
$449
Intel Celeron processor at 2.40GHz
128MB shared DDR SDRAM at 266MHz
17" (16.0"vis) CRT Monitor
40GB Ultra/ATA 100 Hard Drive
Integrated Intel Extreme 3D Graphics

iMac
$1,799
17-inch widescreen LCD
1.25GHz PowerPC G4
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
64MB DDR video memory
256MB DDR333 SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA hard drive
SuperDrive
Apple Pro Speakers
AirPort Extreme Ready
Bluetooth Option

Dell
OptiPlex GX270
$1,759
3.0 Ghz P4/800; 256MB, DDR, non ECC, 333Mhz
80GB EIDE 7200RPM,
8X DVD+RW
Dell UltraSharp 1703FP flat panel
64MB, nVidia, GeForce 4MX


G5 Dual
$2,999
Dual 2.5GHz PowerPC G5
1.25GHz frontside bus/processor
512K L2 cache/processor
512MB DDR400 SDRAM
Expandable to 8GB SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA
8x SuperDrive
Three PCI-X Slots
ATI Radeon 9600 XT
128MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem

Dell
Precision 670
$4,009
2 x 3.4Ghz Xeon
512MB
160GB SATA, 7200 RPM Hard Drive
8X DVD+RW/+R
128MB PCI x16 (DVI/VGA) ATI FireGL V3100,



Server Comparisons

Servers
Price
Configuration

Apple X-Serve
$4,399

2GB, 160GB, 2 x 2Ghz G5
unlimited users
MacOS- X

Dell 2850
$9,370

2GB, 2 x 73GB, 2 x 3.2Ghz Xeon
Windows 2003/XP Server
25 users

Sun V20Z
$5,699
2GB, 2 x 73GB, 2 x Opteron 248,
Solaris x86

Laptop Comparisons

Notebooks
Price
Configuration

Dell 12"
$2,214

Inspiron 700M, 1.6Ghz PM, 256MB, 60GB
Intel Extreme Graphics
XP Professional

Apple 12"
$1,599
Powerbook, 12", 1.33Ghz, 256MB, 60GB
NVIDIA GeForce FX (64MB)

Dell 15"
$2,677
Inspiron 9100, 3.2Ghz P4, 512MB, 80GB
RADEON 9700 (64MB)
XP Professional

Apple 15"
$2,499
Powerbook 15", 1.5Ghz, 512MB, 80GB
Radeon 9700 (64MB)


Article can be found here.

__________________
Well behaved women rarely make history.

docbungle

Well, you're comparing a mac to a store-bought Dell. Most people here, it seems, like to build their own pc, with their own configuration, depending on what they want or need. It is far cheaper and more tailored to one's needs to do it that way. Store-bought pcs will never have the power or performance of a tailor-built pc, unless, of course, you want to spend a gazillion dollars on it.

Having said that, this article isn't really saying anything new. The fact remains that when I walk into a store and look at computers, macs are the most expensive of the bunch. Not that I wouldn't like one, it's just that I build my own, and that's just the way I prefer it to be. And, by doing it that way, I save a bunch of cash.

__________________
Bad Luck City

Lasereth

Yeah, docbungle has it right. People don't say Macs are more expensive than store-bought PCs (even though in most cases they are a bit more expensive), they say they're more expensive than custom PCs.

You can build your own PC, but not your own Mac. This results in PCs being far cheaper for the price and performance ratio. For $400 you can build a PC that would cost nearly a thousand from Macintosh and perform exactly the same.

-Lasereth

__________________
"A Darwinian attacks his theory, seeking to find flaws. An ID believer defends his theory, seeking to conceal flaws." -Roger Ebert

brandon11983

Did you read the article Lasareth? It basically contradicted your statement of being able to build a $400 PC with the functionality of an $800 (let alone the $999 model with the SuperDrive) eMac. I would like to see you build a $400 PC that has all the functionality of an eMac. I hope this doesn't come off snobbish, I seriously have been out of the custom PC game for a while, so I'm curious to see what you come up with. Understand this must be legit, and you've already blown $200 of your budget on Windows XP Home. Best of luck.

__________________
Well behaved women rarely make history.

Xepidemic

what in the world?! total bullshit.. i got a 700m with those specs for around $900! and some people who waited for an even better deal got it for $750!

and as for desktops
Dell 8400

8400 System w/ 400GB SATA Drive, 20" LCD, 1GB DDR2, GF 6800
$1507

* SAVE $110! 1GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz (2x512M)
* 400GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM)
* Dual Drives: 16x DVD + FREE UPGRADE! 16x DVD+RW/+R w/ dbl layer write
* 20.1 in 2001FP Dell Ultrasharp Digital Flat Panel Display
* 256MB PCI Express x16 Nvidia GeForce 6800 GTO Graphics Card
* Sound Blaster Live! 24-bit ADVANCED HD Audio

can you beat those specs for the price?

kutulu

When you build a computer you don't pay retail for XP. You buy the OEM version that is about $70-120.

kutulu

I don't have time to go through all the crap to meet this challenge but here is a pre-built computer that meets the specs of the emac:

http://shop1.outpost.com/product/4199463, $279.99
It should be no problem finding a 32MB 9200 vid card and a 17" CRT monitor for $120.

Personally, I think the author lost all credibility when he tried to mask his Dell vs Mac arguement as a PC vs Mac arguement. If you are comparing a low end PC to a Mac you should be looking at an EMachine or a GQ brand. On the high end, a comparison between an Alienware PC with either the best P4 or FX-53. Alienware offers more levels of customization than Dell does. You can pimp the Alienware out to the point that you are paying over 7k. You can also pimp out the Dual G5 up to well over 10k.

JJRousseau

Mmmmmm. Sweet pimped out G5. <lustful drool>

I noticed that the new iMac G5 is priced lower than the previous iMac G4. I was wondering if this is just from our increased Canadian dollar or if Apple is trying to price more aggressively. At $2500CDN for the 20 inch G5, it's a good value.

JJRousseau

Back to this article, i think it's hard to compare Apples to PCs on price or performance. People who tinker and customize their systems will always buy PC. On the other hand, the Graphics/multimedia buffs (and the anti-Microsaft crowd) will tend toward Apple.

bal8664

Most people don't build their PC's. Most people buy them from a store or online. With that in mind, Apples computers are competetivly priced with anything that matches their specs.

merkerguitars

Well the big thing is back in the day when Motorola made the processors for Macs Motorola made most of the money off of a Mac computer which made them really really expensive....every since they changed to using IBM processors (I think) they can make money per computer than the CPU maker.

__________________
Donate now! Ask me How!

Please use the search function it is your friend.

Look at my mustang please feel free to comment!

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=26985

Lasereth

Straight from the Apple Online store:

<B>eMac - $999</B>
1.25 GHz CPU PowerPC G4
256 MB PC2700 RAM
80 GB HDD
MacOS
56k Modem
Monitor built in
MacOS
CD-RW

<B>PC $400</B>
AMD Athlon XP 2000+ 1.7 GHz $50
ASRock Mobo $40
256 MB PC2700 RAM $40
80 GB HDD $60
17" Monitor $80
CD-RW $30
Case $20
XP Home - $70
LAN, sound, video $FREE on mobo

-Lasereth

__________________
"A Darwinian attacks his theory, seeking to find flaws. An ID believer defends his theory, seeking to conceal flaws." -Roger Ebert

brandon11983

The $999 eMac comes with a SuperDrive, not the CD-RW drive. The combo drive model is $799. You also forgot to add 2 FireWire ports, and the software to edit video, make your own music, and burn DVD's. It will still be a bit cheaper though. Oh well. To each his own.

__________________
Well behaved women rarely make history.

Lasereth

Add $10 for a DVD-CDRW combo. The motherboard I mentioned has two (or four? can't remember) firewire ports as well but no one uses those unless you have a digicam. Windows XP Home Edition has built in video editing, music creation, and CD/DVD burning software. So basically $410 instead of $400.

-Lasereth

__________________
"A Darwinian attacks his theory, seeking to find flaws. An ID believer defends his theory, seeking to conceal flaws." -Roger Ebert

Willravel

I can appreciate what you're trying to say, but the Athlon 1.7 is no where near as fast as the 1.25 G4. The Mac comes with a nice big warrante. It bears repeating that you made the mistake of listing the Mac as having a CD-RW drive. The Superdrive has full cd dvd read burn abilities (cd-r at 24x, cd-rw at 10x, and dvd-r at 8x). Also, the eMac has a stereo system with 16 watts of resonant, digitally amplified sound. Compare that to the tiny “sound systems” typically found on PCs. The eMac also features a mini VGA output jack that works with an optional Apple VGA Display Adapter and supports video mirroring, just in case you want something more than the 17 in flat CRT built in. There also has to be some value in the fact that you don't have to assemble a Mac. Also, is the $70 monitor you mentioned a flat screen? This needs to be more specific.

docbungle

Ugh. Will it never end? This is almost like arguing politics. Listen, macs are cool, ok? I like them. I don't own one, though. Why? Because I built a screaming fast, top of the line AMD system for around $1,200.00. In order to achieve this, I was able to use a plethora of spare parts I had lying around the house from previous pcs. This is the essence of why this article and all of these little nittpicky comments don't mean anything at all to me. I can mix and match parts however the hell I please, and this gives me free reign over every aspect of my pc's price, performance and appearance. I will never buy a computer, be it a mac or a pc, off of a store shelf. It just doesn't make any sense.

__________________
Bad Luck City

Lasereth

An Athlon XP 2000+ would be just as fast as a G4 CPU within an OS. The G4 CPU might do better in gaming, but you're not gonna play games on a POS 256 MB RAM system with onboard video anyway. It may bear repeating that I messed up the "supercombo" or whatever it is drive, but let's take it a step further: the eMac at $800 only has a CD-RW. Fair and square now. The PC is still $400 and the eMac is still $800. The video dual display can be fixed by buying a $15 videocard with dual display features or even spending the extra $10 or $15 on a mobo that supports it. The 17" Monitor is flat screen or regular, whichever you want (flat screens offer no advantages if ya ask me, I like flat screens and regulars the same). The warranty is nice, but as explained earlier in this thread, people who are building a PC won't need a warranty.

I'm arguing that storebought Macs are more expensive than custom-built PCs. Storebought PCs have no advantages over Macs.

-Lasereth

__________________
"A Darwinian attacks his theory, seeking to find flaws. An ID believer defends his theory, seeking to conceal flaws." -Roger Ebert

bal8664

To me they make a huge difference, Generally the Quality of a flat screen monitors pictrue is much higher, also theres much less glare. And of course the corners arn't bent in :P Maybe i'm just picky because i do graphic design work though.

CityOfAngels

Waay too long of an article to read, especially when the topic is Macs.

__________________
The words "love" and "life" go together. It is almost as if they are one. You must love to live, and you must live to love, or you have never lived nor loved at all.

tellumFS

I think that trying to compare Macs to PCs on price is wrong. As is on performance. The G4 closer to the end of the line wasn't really competive anymore. The place to compete is on "user experience". And quite frankly, that's what Apple does. Sure it tries the specmanship business, but really they work on selling a shiny OS in a shiny box that people think is pretty cool. And they do a darn good job. I'd love to buy the box if it came with out a monitor for cheap. I don't want to pay for a G5 just to get a modern Apple desktop sans monitor.