Comments on: Study: Average Mac Computer Price More That Twice That of Average PC

By: Logic

Logic — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 04:05:39 +0000

Why won’t anyone take note that all modern computers are essentially the same in terms of hardware. The “I’m a PC” commercials make PC synonomous with Windows, they are not the same. Real power users use PCs because they can build and modify them however they want, but they use Linux or at the very least dual boot to avoid Windows as much as possible.

By: meinrosebud

meinrosebud — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 06:28:53 +0000

Lies, damn lies & statistics.

By: steveald

steveald — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 20:45:36 +0000

As always, you can get statistics to make any argument you want. One thing you left off is the fact that the initial cpu purchase is never the sum total of the cost of owning a computer. Add functional software, virus protection, malware protection, and tech support costs in there and it starts evening out rapidly. Put a price on ease-of use and the bargain isn't so much of a bargain anymore.
Of course there's also the argument that a Mercedes costs more than a KIA too.

By: Bloomy

Bloomy — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 03:52:57 +0000

How about completing the total cost of ownership calculation. Buying a computer is only the cost of the hardware and software. How about working out the cost of time lost because Windows doesnt do things nicely, easily or intuitively.

Just the other day I was with a co-worker at a coffee shop with free wifi connection. I had my iPhone and MacBook connected and browsing the web in about 20 seconds, a.

We both struggled to get the Windows Mobile to connect, and even then still had trouble getting it to surf the web. The laptop was a little easier but still not as easy as the MacBook.

time cost for Apple = 20secs
time cost for Windows = 5 minutes and still counting.

So what if the hardware is cheap. If it doesnt do what you want it to do in a time effective manner, then it ends up costing more.

Its an old Project Management concept. Everything is contrained by Time, Cost, and Scope. If one of those things changes there is a direct impact on the other two.

I used to call it the "Good, Cheap, Quick" triangle. If you pick two of them, then you cant or wont have the other. Try applying this to any situation.

Bloomy!

By: McDave

McDave — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 02:26:06 +0000

OK, I’ll bite! That one’s easy – Windows machines are half price because they’re half a computer!

Anyway, I thought we’d got past this hardware-spec/$ that Wintel dominance fooled us with for decades. The only thing useful about a computer is properly-designed software you use on it and that’s missing from Windows (look high & low, you’ll never find it!). The stuff that comes bundled with the Mac is better than what literally millions of Windows developers can come up with!

Windows computers are like a kit-car; they might do something useful if you have the time & the patience. With a Mac you just jump in & get on with your journey. So you have a simple choice spend your money on a Mac or waste half of it on a PC!

( Besides doesn’t Vista need twice the spec to run at the same speed as a Mac?)

McD

By: Dexxie

Dexxie — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 01:57:29 +0000

Heh, I had a manager at work about 6 months ago, tell me that he was looking at buying a Mac, because he thought they seemed pretty cheap for what he was getting.

I scoffed, and made the off-hand, ill thought out bet, that I could get him an equivalent PC for nearly half the price, $1000 less...

Turns out I wasn't far wrong. The total price of the PC including Vista Ultimate, the 24" Widescreen monitor, more RAM, bigger HDD, and the same CPU came to $1300.

I just don't see the point for 90% of people to pay that much extra for a Mac, that now they run on Intel Hardware, have no advantage, besides some pretty specific software packs.

By: EzyLee

EzyLee — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 22:23:06 +0000

Meh, you get what you pay for.