OSX vs. Windows - Page 6

ElDiabloConCaca · #41 November 17th, 2005, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eddiejoepopcorn

...I go to my Pentium III, 233 Ghz...

Any computer running at 233 Gigahertz is going to blow the doors off of any currently-shipping Macintosh computer. That's almost 200 times as fast as the top-end Macintosh!

That's an insanely fast computer you got there, so perhaps that's why the Mac seems so slow in comparison!

nixgeek · #42 November 17th, 2005, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElDiabloConCaca

Any computer running at 233 Gigahertz is going to blow the doors off of any currently-shipping Macintosh computer. That's almost 200 times as fast as the top-end Macintosh!

That's an insanely fast computer you got there, so perhaps that's why the Mac seems so slow in comparison!

God I'd hate to see the heat sink mechanism on that sucker!!! I would probably melt if I were standing next to it.

128shot · #43 November 17th, 2005, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lurk

Then you would be mistaken. Intel and Apple are putting all sorts of DRM doodads into the OS to make it very hard to run on a non-Apple kit. There is a reason the hacked version out now are hacked.

Then their computers better preform and cost around the same as the computers that you can build yourself, cause that is a major, unbelieveabl plus to windows, believe it or not.

It has its drawbacks yes, but if you aren't dumb its nifty.

In order to increase sales, they'll have to drop their prices significantly to sell more units. It is really the only way they can leverage anything against MS or anyone else.

I'd buy a mac right now, but they're more expensive than my custom built comp that does exactly what I need it to...

ElDiabloConCaca · #44 November 17th, 2005, 06:11 PM

Yeah -- because Apple's price points right now just absolutely suck, and no one is buying their machines.[/sarcasm]

Apple's computers aren't priced any higher than a comparatively-spec'ed Intel- or AMD-based machine. There have been plenty of comparisons of equally-configured Apple/Windows machines, and the Apple machines end up costing roughly the same (+- 5%) as their Windows counterparts. If you take into account the price of the freely included software that comes with every Macintosh purchase (iLife, operating system, etc.), the Macs actually cost less than a similarly-spec'ed Windows machine.

The only drawback to Apple machines is that you can't get less than what they sell. You can't take out the optical audio port if you don't need it, and you can't purchase the computers without a hard drive or RAM installed. That's the only reason bargain-basement crappy home-built systems cost less.

In addition, if your hard drive goes out, who are you gonna call for a warranty repair? Western Digital, of course... and if the video card goes, that's another call to ATi... and if the memory craps out, call Crucial.

If anything goes wrong with your Apple computer, you call Apple. One phone call = multiple problems fixed. Apple, according to Consumer Reports, was ranked extremely high in customer service and repair service. They're not perfect, but nobody is, and Apple is doing many, many things to improve their already stellar customer service.

[/rant]

128shot · #45 November 17th, 2005, 06:24 PM

Hmm?

I like the Imac, but for 1,000 dollars I built what they would have gave in for 1,300.

Not including monitor I suppose, but I got that free, along with a stereo system, and some software.

ElDiabloConCaca · #46 November 17th, 2005, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 128shot

I like the Imac, but for 1,000 dollars I built what they would have gave in for 1,300.

Not including monitor I suppose, but I got that free, along with a stereo system, and some software.

Add in the cost of an operating system (Microsoft Windows XP Professional), and you're sitting right at $1300. Add the cost of a monitor and you're higher than the Macintosh. Don't forget the remote control, FireWire camera, wireless networking and bluetooth.

A free OS like Linux would keep you below that, but Linux vs. Mac OS X isn't even a comparison. Windows XP is at least a competitor.

I guess it's just my opinion that even though Apple computers seemingly cost a lot more, you get what you pay for (and a lot more). Communities like this... free GOOD software... free operating system... cutting edge components... nifty deign...

All that is worth an extra ~$200 from me. And Apple actually helps me get a portion of that back by having an outperforming stock that has gone against naysaying for quite some time now.

If all you're looking for is raw number-crunching performance, then it would be silly to purchase a Macintosh computer. Number-crunching is cheap: a motherboard, a processor and memory. A few hundred easy.

contoursvt · #47 November 17th, 2005, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElDiabloConCaca

Apple's computers aren't priced any higher than a comparatively-spec'ed Intel- or AMD-based machine. There have been plenty of comparisons of equally-configured Apple/Windows machines, and the Apple machines end up costing roughly the same (+- 5%) as their Windows counterparts. If you take into account the price of the freely included software that comes with every Macintosh purchase (iLife, operating system, etc.), the Macs actually cost less than a similarly-spec'ed Windows machine.

The only drawback to Apple machines is that you can't get less than what they sell. You can't take out the optical audio port if you don't need it, and you can't purchase the computers without a hard drive or RAM installed. That's the only reason bargain-basement crappy home-built systems cost less.

In addition, if your hard drive goes out, who are you gonna call for a warranty repair? Western Digital, of course... and if the video card goes, that's another call to ATi... and if the memory craps out, call Crucial.

If anything goes wrong with your Apple computer, you call Apple. One phone call = multiple problems fixed. Apple, according to Consumer Reports, was ranked extremely high in customer service and repair service. They're not perfect, but nobody is, and Apple is doing many, many things to improve their already stellar customer service.

[/rant]

Well I think what he was saying is that for someone who is willing to build or have built a custom box and doesnt need the tech support, they can get a much more powerful box for the $$.

If I configured a dualcore 2.3 with 2gig RAM, 7800GT, 250gig drive, DVD burner..etc it would cost $3800 canadian dollars.

If I custom build a dualcore AMD X2 4400 with 2gig RAM, 7800GT, 250gig drive, DVD burner, it would cost $2157 and that would be splurging for a motherboard that the ability to do SLI, has PATA support as well as four SATA channels which are configurable in a number of raid options and also getting 7.1 channel audio. The tower would be an Antec P180 which can hold god knows how many drives, its quiet and cools well and looks good too. This is not a cheapo system. XP pro is also tossed into the equation (OEM Version). For the $1600 or so difference, one can add more drives, a second 7800GT and a widescreen 24" LCD!!

**fryke** · #48 November 18th, 2005, 04:51 PM

Well, those comparisons are always flawed, because Apple gives you a certain amount of configurations, whereas if you build a PC yourself, you have SUCH a wide choice that you can probably build your PC for any price you want. The problem clearly is that if a person is _not_ willing to sacrifice Mac OS X as the operating system, then only a Mac can do: And you're back with what Apple offers.

For years I've been saying (and I still think I'm right): Apple's pricing is good with the iBooks and PowerBooks, but it sucks with the desktops. Well, the mini changed that a bit, of course.