New iMacs offer more value than competition - report

[AppleInsider]

While some industry watchers are incessant in their pleas for Apple to trim the cost of its Mac computer line in order to better compete, a fresh analysis argues that new iMacs introduced Tuesday already compare quite favorably with their Windows-based counterparts and are likely to boost sales of the sluggish Mac desktop segment.

In a report released to clients on Tuesday, Oppenheimer analyst Yair Reiner compliments Apple for its sweeping overhaul of its much-neglected desktop business -- which includes new iMacs, Mac minis, and Mac Pros -- and commended its efforts to engineer and market greener products.

"We believe the product refreshes announced today will bring renewed momentum to Apple's flagging desktop sales," he wrote. "While the much anticipated update did not break new ground in terms of form factor (as we had hoped), the extent of the hardware improvements is a positive surprise."

Reiner, who's modeling Apple to generate second-quarter per-share earnings of $1.02 on revenues of $8.017 billion, made no changes to his estimates but said "pent up demand" for the new systems could drive upside to his March and fiscal year 2009 desktop predictions. He's currently modeling quarterly shipments of 619,000 desktops and 1.437 million notebooks for the three-month period ending March, while his fiscal year estimate has the Mac maker selling 2.776 million desktops and 6.371 million notebooks.

iMacs deliver more for less

The Oppenheimer analyst also used his report Tuesday to perform a side-by-side comparison of the new iMacs against all-in-one desktops from Dell and HP. He found that the mid-range $1,499 model sports faster CPU and RAM while delivering better or comparable graphics than its rivals while still coming in $100 to $250 cheaper.

He noted that even though the iMac lacks a TV tuner, the $60 to $100 upgrade price for that part doesn't negate the full savings.

A comparison of the low-range models on the market gave a slight edge to the HP TouchSmart IQ500t's two-inch larger and touch-sensitive screen, but the iMac wins handily in the processing, memory, and graphics segments. Reiner gave kudos to Apple for its iLife digital lifestyle suite, which comes with every new Mac and lacks a strong rival. The iMac and HP are priced at $1,199, while the Dell XPS One 20 sells for $899 as configured.

A side-by-side comparison of low-end all-in-one desktops | Source: Yair Reiner of Oppenheimer & Co.

Comparing the mid-range 24" iMac ($1,499) with the Dell XPS One 24 ($1,599) and HP TouchSmart IQ800t ($1,749) reveals a similar pattern. While the iMac's screen is just an inch and a half smaller than the TouchSmart's, Apple's all-in-one desktop with Intel and NVIDIA technology again stands out in terms of performance.

A side-by-side comparison of mid-range all-in-one desktops | Source: Yair Reiner of Oppenheimer & Co.

Oppenheimer & Co. is a New York-based investment bank and full-service investment firm in business for more than 125 years. Coincidentally, the firm – located in lower Manhattan's Financial District just blocks away from Wall Street – shares its name with Apple chief financial officer Peter Oppenheimer.

Reiner reiterates his Outperform rating on shares of Apple with a 12- to 18-month price target of $120.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[uicandrew]

while i appreciate articles that debunk the "Apple tax" myth, the fact that they highlight NVIDIA's integrated graphics over discrete graphics is laughable.

I admit that i haven't seen any benchmarks comparing the 2, but if you gave me a choice, I'd always choose discrete over integrated, unless they were multiple generations apart.

[nagromme]

They forgot to highlight one slight Dell advantage: 0.7 more megapixels of webcam resolution.

(Of course, the usual webcam broadcast size of 320x240 is only 0.076 megapixels anyway, while a 1024x768 emailable snapshot is 0.79 MP. So even the Mac and HP are overkill at 1.3 MP.)

[davebarnes]

The iMac 24-inch uses LEDs for backlighting?
I don't think so.

[macosxp]

While I agree that you get more value for your money overall with an iMac, this study makes no sense. For one thing, it didn't note anything about the HP having more RAM or the Dell having a bigger webcam. For another thing, the XPS One 20" costs more like $1300, not $900. And the study isn't mentioning if the memory is DDR2 or DDR3. And there isn't mention of RESOLUTION -- I personally don't care as much about 24" vs 25" if the 24" one has the same or greater resolution. And when the only software in the comparison is "iLife" it's looking a bit subjective not objective. IMHO, things like Mac OS X which doesn't get viruses, longer lived hardware, and goodies like a motion sensor or internal serge protector are good things to consider. I mean, the study didn't mention how frequently the various computers need to be repaired. The bottom line really is:

For the same kind of computer, Apple does not charge more, yet they over-deliver on specs and quality of hardware. The study gets the right result, wrong method.

[hmurchison]

The iMac isn't a bad computer but it's important to realize one salient fact.


The iMac is your ONLY solution for Macs $1200-2200. They are Apple's high volume computing line.

If you asked HP or Dell about their AIO they'd say that they serve a portion of their clientele that desire AIO form factor but would probably state their minitower desktops are their high volume.

You can view almost any product through the right lens and get the answer you want.

[jcw5002]

Yeah, no LED!

[OriginalG]

22" Touchsmart also has 4GB of memory

[ouragan]

Comparing the mid-range 24" iMac ($1,499) with the Dell XPS One 24 ($1,599) and HP TouchSmart IQ800t ($1,749) reveals a similar pattern. While the iMac's screen is just an inch and a half smaller than the TouchSmart's, Apple's all-in-one desktop with Intel and NVIDIA technology again stands out in terms of performance.

I'm sure that everyone noticed how the comparaison is limited to only 2 models of all-in-one computers, the most expensive on the market.

But, when I open the weekly flyer from Staples, I see an HP tower with an Intel quad-core Core 2 Quad Q8200 CPU, a Blu-Ray drive, a 19 inches screen, a 500 GB hard drive and 4 GB of RAM for only $949 Canadian dollars (regular price is $1219).

iMacs are not competing with the most expensive computers on the market, but quad-core desktop computers that sell for much less.

The same Staples flyer quotes a price of $1699 and $2299 for 2 different models of HP Touchsmart all-in-one computers with Core 2 Duo CPUs and a Blu-Ray drive for the most expensive model.

If you could get a Core 2 Quad HP desktop tower computer with a Blu-Ray drive for only $949, would you really prefer a mid-range iMac model selling for $1799 in Canada? On the Canada AppleStore, iMacs sell for $1399, $1799, $2099 and $2599. See:

http://store.apple.com/ca/browse/hom...ac?mco=MTE2NjM

[minderbinder]

I consider this a bogus comparison, as it ignores any comparison between the iMac and available headless PCs in that price range - those are ALSO the iMac's competition, and those compare much more favorably to the iMac.

This comparison is only of value in a universe in which there doesn't exist a customer who wants a $1200 computer and only considers the iMac because there is no comparable headless mac option in the price range.

[GTL215]

the article clearly states it is comparing the iMacs to other "all in one" computers. Of course Dell and HP make a thousand different computers, each with thousands of different variations. Apple keeps it simple, and gets it right. Any "apple tax" is clearly outweighed by the intangible value of Macs over PCs (hardware design, reliability, OSX, iLife, etc).

[minderbinder]

Originally Posted by GTL215

the article clearly states it is comparing the iMacs to other "all in one" computers. Of course Dell and HP make a thousand different computers, each with thousands of different variations. Apple keeps it simple, and gets it right. Any "apple tax" is clearly outweighed by the intangible value of Macs over PCs (hardware design, reliability, OSX, iLife, etc).

Not the headline.

"New iMacs offer more value than competition"

Since it ignores headless machines, it should be something like "New iMacs offer more value than PC All-in-one's". And that's a far less impressive claim.

And I'd strongly dispute that offering dual core machines when the competition has quads for hundreds less is "getting it right".

[Dueces]

I stopped reading, when after seeing about 5 bisased mistakes in the chart, I came across the golden nugget where they listed iLife and compared it against the 2 windows machines of course with the iMac being at the advantge. Yet no mention of the thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant.

Yea this article isn't biased at all. It's actually the exact type of article I expect to find now on Appleinsider.

Take a nice long drink of that kool-aid.

[wheelhot]

yea, sheesh....then some people will start coming in saying Apple should produce those ugly tower desktops for the consumers (well the MacPro is an expectance cause consumers will definitely not own it unless they are professionals or know that they will need that much horsepower ).

Its a comparison between AiOs!!! Remember before Apple become all popular, people laughed at the idea of AiO, and when Dell and HP see that Apple is making lots of money from their AiO, they decide to join in but of course Apple years of experience in making AiO, frankly toast its competitors.

[Mazda 3s]

Originally Posted by hmurchison

The iMac isn't a bad computer but it's important to realize one salient fact.


The iMac is your ONLY solution for Macs $1200-2200. They are Apple's high volume computing line.

If you asked HP or Dell about their AIO they'd say that they serve a portion of their clientele that desire AIO form factor but would probably state their minitower desktops are their high volume.

You can view almost any product through the right lens and get the answer you want.

Agreed, this article is just doing its best to put Apple in the best possible light -- I mean, what do you expect from a website called "AppleInsider."

That being said, you are totally correct; Apple is very limited with its desktop offerings for consumers whereas competitors like HP and Dell offer a wide range of desktops covering a wide range of price points.

All-in-one Dell/HP machines are by no means their bread and butter and IMHO are just a poor attempt at trying to cash in on what Apple has done with the iMac computers. However, that's not what they excel at -- they are excellent in value with their standalone tower + monitor combos which the overwhelming majority of PC desktop users go for.

With Apple, you're either stuck with pricey, somewhat powerful iMacs or less expensive, underpowered Mac minis. Just because Apple doesn't give you many options on what to choose on the desktop doesn't mean that it's the "RIGHT" or that somehow PCs get it "WRONG" for giving users a wide variety of options to choose from.

I just went to Dell's website and just did a quick pricing run on a Dell Studio machine with a 24" 1080p monitor for $1,049.

Intel® Core™ 2 Quad processor Q9400 (6MB L2, 2.66GHz, 1333FSB)
Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium Edition SP1, 64-Bit
2Yr Ltd Hardware Warranty, InHome Service after Remote Diagnosis
Dell S2409W 24" Full HD Widescreen Flat Panel Monitor
6GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 800MHz - 4DIMMs
640GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache™
16X DVD+/-RW Drive
ATI Radeon HD 3650 256MB supporting HDMI
Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio
Dell Wireless Desktop Keyboard & Mouse

Apple just can't compete with that if all you're after is a fast desktop machine for ~ $1,000. And who cares about the actual tower -- stick it under your desk and forget about it. The only time I could really see it being an issue is if you want to have the computer in the kitchen or something like that where you can't hide the tower.

[Mazda 3s]

Originally Posted by wheelhot

yea, sheesh....then some people will start coming in saying Apple should produce those ugly tower desktops for the consumers (well the MacPro is an expectance cause consumers will definitely not own it unless they are professionals or know that they will need that much horsepower ).

Its a comparison between AiOs!!! Remember before Apple become all popular, people laughed at the idea of AiO, and when Dell and HP see that Apple is making lots of money from their AiO, they decide to join in but of course Apple years of experience in making AiO, frankly toast its competitors.

So just because Apple only offers limited choices on the desktop, computer buyers should limit themselves to the same choices?

[Abster2core]

Originally Posted by ouragan

I'm sure that everyone noticed how the comparaison is limited to only 2 models of all-in-one computers, the most expensive on the market.

But, when I open the weekly flyer from Staples, I see an HP tower with an Intel quad-core Core 2 Quad Q8200 CPU, a Blu-Ray drive, a 19 inches screen, a 500 GB hard drive and 4 GB of RAM for only $949 Canadian dollars (regular price is $1219).

iMacs are not competing with the most expensive computers on the market, but quad-core desktop computers that sell for much less.

The same Staples flyer quotes a price of $1699 and $2299 for 2 different models of HP Touchsmart all-in-one computers with Core 2 Duo CPUs and a Blu-Ray drive for the most expensive model.

If you could get a Core 2 Quad HP desktop tower computer with a Blu-Ray drive for only $949, would you really prefer a mid-range iMac model selling for $1799 in Canada? On the Canada AppleStore, iMacs sell for $1399, $1799, $2099 and $2599. See:

http://store.apple.com/ca/browse/hom...ac?mco=MTE2NjM

Supple references please.

From what I see just perusing it quickly, the processor is really light and I can't find reference that it includes a Blu-Ray drive (reader). Although It does say that it supports Blu-Ray.

What is the 'flyer' number?

[parky]

Originally Posted by Dueces

I stopped reading, when after seeing about 5 bisased mistakes in the chart, I came across the golden nugget where they listed iLife and compared it against the 2 windows machines of course with the iMac being at the advantge. Yet no mention of the thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant.

Yea this article isn't biased at all. It's actually the exact type of article I expect to find now on Appleinsider.

Take a nice long drink of that kool-aid.

Yes well you seem to have missed that the iMac comes with iLife included and the PC's do NOT come with all the software that they can run. List the comparable software that is included for free on the PC's please?

[Marvin]

I saw a comparison recently that compared processors between the iMac and a high end AIO and it even had a quad 2.33GHz in it and they gave the 2.66GHz dual core iMac the points. For certain tasks, the dual core will be faster but not in general.

There is also a laptop showing on Engadget that has a Core i7 in it so if they can put a Core i7 desktop chip in a laptop, Apple could have at least put Core 2 Quad in their iMac.

Not to mention in a few months, we get Grand Central. It will be used for OpenCL presumably but for software that isn't written to take advantage of OpenCL, it will be largely a worthless addition for the iMac.

Originally Posted by hmurchison

The iMac isn't a bad computer but it's important to realize one salient fact.

The iMac is your ONLY solution for Macs $1200-2200. They are Apple's high volume computing line.

If you asked HP or Dell about their AIO they'd say that they serve a portion of their clientele that desire AIO form factor but would probably state their minitower desktops are their high volume.

You can view almost any product through the right lens and get the answer you want.

Exactly. What's funny is that when there is a mention about Apple not offering a tower, iMac fans say that the iMac is all you need and covers the place of a tower. Then when it comes to comparing value, they say 'ah but it's not a tower though is it, it's an AIO so you can only compare prices with other AIOs'.

Either it is a mid-range tower replacement or it isn't. If it is then we are perfectly within our rights to compare it with PC towers and it falls far short in terms of value. If it's not a replacement then there is an important element missing in Apple's lineup.

[parky]

Originally Posted by Mazda 3s

Agreed, this article is just doing its best to put Apple in the best possible light -- I mean, what do you expect from a website called "AppleInsider."

That being said, you are totally correct; Apple is very limited with its desktop offerings for consumers whereas competitors like HP and Dell offer a wide range of desktops covering a wide range of price points.

All-in-one Dell/HP machines are by no means their bread and butter and IMHO are just a poor attempt at trying to cash in on what Apple has done with the iMac computers. However, that's not what they excel at -- they are excellent in value with their standalone tower + monitor combos which the overwhelming majority of PC desktop users go for.

With Apple, you're either stuck with pricey, somewhat powerful iMacs or less expensive, underpowered Mac minis. Just because Apple doesn't give you many options on what to choose on the desktop doesn't mean that it's the "RIGHT" or that somehow PCs get it "WRONG" for giving users a wide variety of options to choose from.

I just went to Dell's website and just did a quick pricing run on a Dell Studio machine with a 24" 1080p monitor for $1,049.



Apple just can't compete with that if all you're after is a fast desktop machine for ~ $1,000. And who cares about the actual tower -- stick it under your desk and forget about it. The only time I could really see it being an issue is if you want to have the computer in the kitchen or something like that where you can't hide the tower.

Then why do you bother reading AppleInsider?
Why do all these Mac haters feel they need to vent their frustration at owning a PC by visiting Mac news sites and wasting their time?
Who cares what crap Dell you can buy, remember this is APPLEINSIDER NOT DELLINSIDER!

[bdkennedy1]

Ummmm, I hardly think that Apple neglects it's desktop business.

Just because they don't have 17 different versions of the iMac to update every 2 months means they are neglecting their desktop business?

[walshbj]

Originally Posted by Dueces

I stopped reading, when after seeing about 5 bisased mistakes in the chart, I came across the golden nugget where they listed iLife and compared it against the 2 windows machines of course with the iMac being at the advantge. Yet no mention of the thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant.

Yea this article isn't biased at all. It's actually the exact type of article I expect to find now on Appleinsider.

Take a nice long drink of that kool-aid.

I hear what you're saying. But then in turn should every Windows story point out that iLife can't run under Windows? Or that OS X isn't supported on non-Mac hardware? Just asking.

If the point is that AppleInsider has some bias - well, ok, thanks. They also expose problems and bugs from time to time. It's not a big deal to me.

It's their blog and they're going to write it the way they want to, probably on how it will draw the most traffic and ad-clickers. Complaining about bias on a site like this isn't really going to do much.

[roehlstation]

Originally Posted by ouragan

I'm sure that everyone noticed how the comparaison is limited to only 2 models of all-in-one computers, the most expensive on the market.

But, when I open the weekly flyer from Staples, I see an HP tower with an Intel quad-core Core 2 Quad Q8200 CPU, a Blu-Ray drive, a 19 inches screen, a 500 GB hard drive and 4 GB of RAM for only $949 Canadian dollars (regular price is $1219).

iMacs are not competing with the most expensive computers on the market, but quad-core desktop computers that sell for much less.

The same Staples flyer quotes a price of $1699 and $2299 for 2 different models of HP Touchsmart all-in-one computers with Core 2 Duo CPUs and a Blu-Ray drive for the most expensive model.

If you could get a Core 2 Quad HP desktop tower computer with a Blu-Ray drive for only $949, would you really prefer a mid-range iMac model selling for $1799 in Canada? On the Canada AppleStore, iMacs sell for $1399, $1799, $2099 and $2599. See:

http://store.apple.com/ca/browse/hom...ac?mco=MTE2NjM

One thing to keep in mind, HPs use very low end logic boards (in some cases refurbished logic boards), a very low end Power Supply. The moment you want to upgrade your video card, more often than not you are also going to have to upgrade that 250-300 watt PSU to a 450 to run almost any video card on the market.

[Mazda 3s]

Originally Posted by parky

Then why do you bother reading AppleInsider?
Why do all these Mac haters feel they need to vent their frustration at owning a PC by visiting Mac news sites and wasting their time?
Who cares what crap Dell you can buy, remember this is APPLEINSIDER NOT DELLINSIDER!

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black? Why does AppleInsider need to post an article everyday comparing Macs to PCs and saying how superior they are or how "PCs sales are down" or how "Apple machines offer better value than PCs" or "Netbooks are ravaging PC sales" etc.

If this is an "Apple" site, why do the editors feel that they have to talk so much about PCs all the time?

Does it have something to prove? AppleInsider takes every opportunity it can to push PCs into the mud; what's wrong with calling them out if they go over the line with their comparisons?

And I own Apple products which is why I visit this site. Is my opinion somehow not valid?

[yensid98]

I don't get all the negativity about this report. I'd suspect most everyone who reads this site is a Mac fan so why are we arguing that the iMac isn't that good of a deal? Either this site is being overrun by haters or suddenly people are getting extremely cynical.

Apple doubled the speed and drives of the iMacs while lowering the prices. That to me sounds like something to crow about. Some people may want more but personally I'm very impressed with the update.

[bluedalmatian]

I think the problem for Apple is most people only compare the hardware but with the Mac its the software that makes it worth the extra money

[flipdude]

Originally Posted by Dueces

I stopped reading, when after seeing about 5 bisased mistakes in the chart, I came across the golden nugget where they listed iLife and compared it against the 2 windows machines of course with the iMac being at the advantge. Yet no mention of the thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant.

Yea this article isn't biased at all. It's actually the exact type of article I expect to find now on Appleinsider.

Take a nice long drink of that kool-aid.

Totally agree with you! AppleInsider has become extremely biased and I no longer intend to visit it simply because I'm sick and tired of hearing unreasonable justifications supporting Apple no matter what they do.

I'm an Apple fan but come on, you cannot support them in every decision they make! Especially when they decide to put the 9400M integrated graphics into their 2 lowest end iMacs. The previous model had discrete graphics cards and it's simply laughable to compare integrated graphics with dedicated as in this article. Check the tests yourself...http://www.notebookcheck.net/Compari...rds.130.0.html

Why should I buy a computer that just downgraded it's graphics card? Especially to a card designed for notebooks like the Macbook?

[Marvin]

Originally Posted by parky

Why do all these Mac haters feel they need to vent their frustration at owning a PC by visiting Mac news sites and wasting their time?
Who cares what crap Dell you can buy, remember this is APPLEINSIDER NOT DELLINSIDER!

It's the OS. Apple are well aware of this fact and say it openly when referring to the Japanese market. It's because they make good software.

If Apple only sold hardware that ran Windows, they would very likely be out of business or a much smaller business. This is why they get so annoyed at people like Psystar and the people posting guides on how to hack netbooks to run OS X. They are taking Apple's best selling point and giving it to people who don't care for their hardware options.

The short of it is that Apple are using their software to sell overpriced, novelty hardware. This is because of design and nothing else. They want people to use (what they think are) aesthetically pleasing machines. People who want value for money over aesthetics don't come into the picture.

This is because they know that a mid-range machine will sell more than any other model and they probably don't think they can make it unique enough so that it becomes a good identity - the majority sales of it will make it identify the company but in a less unique way.

If that's the case, I'd disagree because a Core 2 Quad cube could easily differentiate itself from the mass of huge plastic quad-core PCs.

[Abster2core]

Originally Posted by flipdude

Totally agree with you! AppleInsider has become extremely biased and I no longer intend to visit it simply because I'm sick and tired of hearing unreasonable justifications supporting Apple no matter what they do.

I'm an Apple fan but come on, you cannot support them in every decision they make! Especially when they decide to put the 9400M integrated graphics into their 2 lowest end iMacs. The previous model had discrete graphics cards and it's simply laughable to compare integrated graphics with dedicated as in this article. Check the tests yourself...http://www.notebookcheck.net/Compari...rds.130.0.html

Why should I buy a computer that just downgraded it's graphics card? Especially to a card designed for notebooks like the Macbook?

Anybody notice the number of 1st time crappers hitting the sites lately?

[flipdude]

Originally Posted by parky

Then why do you bother reading AppleInsider?
Why do all these Mac haters feel they need to vent their frustration at owning a PC by visiting Mac news sites and wasting their time?
Who cares what crap Dell you can buy, remember this is APPLEINSIDER NOT DELLINSIDER!

That's beside the point. I'm a mac lover myself but I don't go around justifying the stupid decisions that Apple makes. And as with any good news source, objectivity is key...and AppleInsider is definitely not that. We come here for the news about Apple, not to be spoonfed how wonderful Apple is.

[flipdude]

Originally Posted by Abster2core

Anybody notice the number of 1st time crappers hitting the sites lately?

Uh, for you information, I've been checking AppleInsider for the past few years. Never registered because I didn't see the point in arguing with Apple fanboys like you.

[GTL215]

Originally Posted by parky

Then why do you bother reading AppleInsider?
Why do all these Mac haters feel they need to vent their frustration at owning a PC by visiting Mac news sites and wasting their time?
Who cares what crap Dell you can buy, remember this is APPLEINSIDER NOT DELLINSIDER!

AMEN i was just going to say the same thing. Somebody said this type of article is "exactly what they expect to see anymore on this site" (paraphrased). What else would you expect? I'm sure there are sites out there with Dell "fanboys" talking up how they're better than Apple. Go there and enjoy company amongst like-minded apple-haters. That's fine, but it always amazes me that people who dislike Apple always manage to find their way onto APPLE FAN SITES and feel the need to bash people.

[iReality85]

These types of comparison reports are laughable. This is comparing a low-end 24" iMac with certain all-in-one PC configurations, from manufacturers. A real comparison of "value" would be to compare a maxed-out, high-end iMac with a comparable custom-built PC.

Maxed-out iMac (hardware only):

Base 24" @ 3GHz: $2200
Additional 4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM: +$1000
Wireless Mouse: +$20
Wireless Keyboard: +$30

Total: $3250

Now, I'm not going to put together a shopping cart's list of parts needed to build a custom PC of equal hardware capability (I do not have the time at the moment, and there are many combinations of high-end parts to select from), but suffice to say, it would not cost a cool $3250! Of particular note is Apple's absurd pricing for 4 GBs of SDRAM (remember: it already comes pre-configured with 4GBs, so that price is already built into the base price). Not only is Apple solely offering sticks of 1066MHz (which is the very low end of DDR3 speed), they are ripping you off somewhere upwards of $800 for just 4 GBs of additional SDRAM. That's ridiculous. If you feel the need to waste money on memory like that, go ahead. Point is, if you truely want to discover the real "value" in what Apple is offering via the iMac (or lack there of), you need to compare their maxed out model to what you could likewise build on your own, not what comes preset by other manufacturers.

[GTL215]

[QUOTE=flipdude;1384970]AppleInsider has become extremely biased [QUOTE]

haha - what do you expect?? That's why people come here! To read about apple products! THIS IS NOT "unbiased-tech-review-insider.com" ITS ALL ABOUT APPLE AROUND HERE - go somewhere else! Hah...always amazes me!

Not to mention, this article was reporting on an anlysis and comparison done by a STOCK ANALYST, not AppleInsider.

[yensid98]

Originally Posted by flipdude

We come here for the news about Apple, not to be spoonfed how wonderful Apple is.

Well then maybe this isn't the site for you and you should stop visiting it. Find a site that reports in a way you agree with and enjoy yourself. Why make attacking comments? Your words won't change the report you just read. If you want to vent frustration to AppleInsider by all means do, but there is no need to involve the rest of us in it.

[Abster2core]

Originally Posted by Dueces

I stopped reading, when after seeing about 5 bisased mistakes in the chart, I came across the golden nugget where they listed iLife and compared it against the 2 windows machines of course with the iMac being at the advantge. Yet no mention of the thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant.

Yea this article isn't biased at all. It's actually the exact type of article I expect to find now on Appleinsider.

Take a nice long drink of that kool-aid.

Hey AH. Name one of the "…thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant." Careful now.

And while you are at it, name one of the "…thousands of other software titles that the iMac all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the other 2 can.

[elroth]

Originally Posted by Dueces

I stopped reading, when after seeing about 5 bisased mistakes in the chart, I came across the golden nugget where they listed iLife and compared it against the 2 windows machines of course with the iMac being at the advantge. Yet no mention of the thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant.

Yea this article isn't biased at all. It's actually the exact type of article I expect to find now on Appleinsider.

Take a nice long drink of that kool-aid.

Are you on drugs?

iLife comes free with the computer - if Dell or HP gave you any decent software in the box, it would have been included also as an advantage for them. All those titles you're talking about would add hundreds of dollars to the price. Sheesh.

[walshbj]

Originally Posted by Marvin

It's the OS. Apple are well aware of this fact and say it openly when referring to the Japanese market. It's because they make good software.

If Apple only sold hardware that ran Windows, they would very likely be out of business or a much smaller business. This is why they get so annoyed at people like Psystar and the people posting guides on how to hack netbooks to run OS X. They are taking Apple's best selling point and giving it to people who don't care for their hardware options.

The short of it is that Apple are using their software to sell overpriced, novelty hardware. This is because of design and nothing else. They want people to use (what they think are) aesthetically pleasing machines. People who want value for money over aesthetics don't come into the picture.

This is because they know that a mid-range machine will sell more than any other model and they probably don't think they can make it unique enough so that it becomes a good identity - the majority sales of it will make it identify the company but in a less unique way.

If that's the case, I'd disagree because a Core 2 Quad cube could easily differentiate itself from the mass of huge plastic quad-core PCs.

It's not just the software. Design counts. You don't think Mag-safe is significant? I do. Do you think the iPhone touch interface is significant? I do. Are we supposed to wait for Dell to come up with stuff like this? It's easy to label magsafe etc as trivial, but without Apple who would ever push some changes?

What about the Genius Bar? Does HP have a presence at your mall? When you have a software problem does Apple blame your hardware manufacturer?

The software is good, but there's more.

[elroth]

Originally Posted by iReality85

These types of comparison reports are laughable. This is comparing a low-end 24" iMac with certain all-in-one PC configurations, from manufacturers. A real comparison of "value" would be to compare a maxed-out, high-end iMac with a comparable custom-built PC.

You're grasping at straws. The comparison is for those people who want the advantages of an all-in-one. Is that so hard to understand?

Nowhere does the report say this is the best computer you can buy (or put together) for a certain amount of money. It merely says that for comparable manufacturers' all-in-ones, Apple has slightly better value than Dell or HP.

[macosxp]

Originally Posted by elroth

Are you on drugs?

iLife comes free with the computer - if Dell or HP gave you any decent software in the box, it would have been included also as an advantage for them. All those titles you're talking about would add hundreds of dollars to the price. Sheesh.

To be perfectly fair, if you get a Dell it will come with Microsoft Works, and Windows also has some iLife-like software things like Windows Photo Gallery, Windows Media Player and Movie Maker.

Of course, iLife is still way better than anything Microsoft offers... but that doesn't make the comparison anything close to objective.