On 10/9/2011 10:39 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 09 Oct 2011 22:00:38 -0400, Michael
wrote:
An Apple costs more than a Windows computer -
although not all that much when comparable performance is taken into
account,
I beg to differ. In 2009, I went through some effort to compare Dell
and Apple computahs selling just before Christmas time:
I looked at the all in one's. Dell doesn't even sell an i7, or even an
i5 Biggest they have is an i3, Don't have a 27 inch monnitor, don't have
a 1 TB hard drive. In addition the all in one Mac's have non-laptop
components.
That's the issue I was referring to, Jeff. the Mac is called "too
expensive", and it is compared to a machine that doesn't exist, so a
cheaper machine is trotted out as a comparison.
So yes, the Mac is a whole lot more expensive than a machine that is a
whole lot less capable. And infinitely more expensive than a machine
that doesn't exist.
As I said, the closest thing I found is a Sony, and it's over 2K for a
much smaller screen. Do not want.
The big one is that the
cost of the firewire port is not included in the PC pricing, because
few PC's actually use firewire. I plan to bring the spreadsheet up to
date sometime in November, when Christmas prices and goodies appear.
I do use firewire. And will use Thunderbolt. Check out the specs vs USB3.
because the Apple mentality does not sell computers that are
ready to be obsolete, such as the horribly underpowered Vista basic
machines.
Interesting. My customers problems seem to revolve around hardware
and software that was insufficiently tested and is therefore infested
with bugs. The problem is not that either was obsolete. It was that
they were permaturely released. Since whomever makes it to market
first usually wins, it's understandable.
Mine tend to revolve around security issues, and updates that turn off
needed functions to "enhance" security. As I joke with them, I note that
the most secure computer is one that doesn't work any more.
But I digress. The people who own Windows computers that I
work on manage to feel that they have gotten a better and cheaper deal,
when in fact, by the time they have paid me for a few fixes, they have
surpassed the cost of "That pricey Apple computer". They also tend to
quote the price of some half a$$ed cheap PC and something like the 27
inch i7 iMac when comparing prices. Check ot the high end Sony all in
one, then we can talk about prices in more of an apple to apple fashion
8^) (not that you've complained about Apple prices AFAIK.
Well, you're entitled to your opinion. I don't consider paying for
repairs in advance in the form of AppleCare as a great improvement.
Don't use Applecare, and don't need it. The one issue with the bad
Rubycon caps a few years back was taken care of via recall. And that hit
many manufacturers, Dell included. I did have a server power supply go
bad once. Haven't counted the PC machines.
I'll be sure to include the 27" iMac in my comparison, but it might
not be against an overpriced Sony. Nobody else has a 27" so I'll
compare the smaller screens. Very roughly, the Apple 21.5" iMac
starts at $1200. The Dell Inspiron 2320 all-in-one with a 23" screen
starts at $950.
And there we go. I use a 27 inch Imac at work, and I don't want
another dinky screen.
As far as my outside computer support goes, I can make up that
difference in a short time. A couple service calls, and they might as
well spent the extra money on the Mac.
Or they can try the Geek Squad.
In in the professional world, no one seems to add the labor cost of the
armies of support personnel needed to keep the Windows machines running.
Adds a tad to the price.
I don't have much contact with IT except when they get into trouble.
As far as I can determine, most of IT consists of supporting users,
not machines. As near as I can determine, the level of user support
is about equal, whether Windoze, Mac, or Linux.
Windows and Mac. Windows is around 95 percent of the work. The biggest
problem on the Mac side is the permissions, a side effect of switching
to a Unix based system. If not for the Windows support, I wouldn't do
support at all (permission fixes take mere seconds. Weird situation,
since I'm actually a videographer.
but yeah, I'm entitled to my opinion, and you are entitled to yours. If
you want to compare lesser Windows machines to Mac's have at it.
I do have the experience of working a lot with both types - actually
Linux too, but only at home. A lot. 8 hours a day with the Mac, maybe 6
a day with Windows. I don't dislike one or another, but I do put a
premium on the thing working. My Mac's work a whole lot more, and allow
me to meet my deadlines much better than the Windows machines. And that
part is fact, not opinion.
- 73 de Mike N3LI -