Critics here seem to conveniently exclude information when stating their rants against the iMac.
Yes, there are other manufacturers with higher-horsepower equipment at similar price points. What makes the difference for the majority of Apple owners is the user-experience compared to say a Windows-based computer.
Putting aside the fact that this article makes comparisons between all-in-one machines that the ranters are ignoring, the system stabilities and general higher-quality software offered by OSX is what really makes it a selling point.
I work as a sys-admin with plenty of Windows machines and Win2k3 servers. We just started to introduce iMacs as desktop replacements and productivity improved and help-desk issues have all but disappeared. While the hardware as stated above may not be cutting edge, the overall fit-and-finish, low-footprint, quietness and the disappearance of system and OS problems has management looking at even more replacements.
If you're ranting is about playing Crysis at 130fps, go elsewhere. Apple is focusing on the general consumer and not interested in niche markets.
And if make the argument that Apple can make more money if they make a "cheap" computer or add the most current CPU's & graphics (i.e. "overheating") all I have to do is point to their $25B bank account with their recession-resistant model, and look at Dell, HP, etc makers which make the machines with your preferred hardware yet are fighting for their survival. What more proof does one need that maybe Apple is doing something right?
I for one am quite happy that Apple ignores your rants. They would be in the same hole as the other PC makers if they listened to you.
I don't see why people can't accept the fact that the iMac is a good deal, compared with the closest similar offerings from Dell and HP. Again, it's for those who want the convenience of a good performing all-in-one computer.
Because buyers aren't limited to "closest similar offerings". And because apple doesn't offer a machine that is a close similar offering to the PC headless machines, so the comparison is inevitable, it's the choice the consumer makes. Apple made that decision, and they get to deal with the consequences.
A consumer who needs a machine can choose between an iMac, a PC AIO, or a PC headless. Insisting that the headless isn't "closest" isn't going to change the fact that some of those consumers are going to see that the PC headless is the best deal and Apple loses that sale.
Might as well say it's a good deal compared with other machines named after fruits, it's just an artificial and arbitrary distinction.
I find the posts more negative and critical lately....I enjoy the humorous comments the most. I think the majority of the complaints are from the techies arguing over the minutia.
I would like to see a 30" top of the line iMac. A full size keyboard on a 10" MBA, a 15" MBA and a 17" MBA alongside the current 13" MBA and alongside the complete MB and MB line. A new 30" monitor and a DVR in AppleTV.
I own the first intel duo 20" iMac, the first intel iBook 2nd gen ATV and the first gen iPhone all with AppleCare. I upgrade the OS, iLife and iWork every time and only buy Apple SW and hardware. Apple serves me well and with a minimum of headaches, wires and looks good too. I would never consider a Windows or Microsoft product.
Yes, compared to other all in one PCs, the iMac is better specs for less money. Slightly.
However, computer shoppers don't limit their choices to AIOs (I don't know anyone who would by that Dell or HP Touchsmart). They don't have to, the way Mac users shopping in a certain price range do. It is compared to "traditional" desktop computers that the iMac looks really bad in terms of value. If you want an AIO, though, go for it.
As it seems that purchasing an expensive Apple requires automatically an Apple Care contract to survive. I couldn't get my machine fixed before taking an AC. During the first year of warranty and 3 repairs later it was still not fixed. I was forced in taking the AC and suddenly it was fixed. I think there is a policy involved, that repairs will be done correctly only if one has an AC.
The not so little local Apple reseller/repair shop was full of machines for repairs, and each time I had to wait a month before my machine was even looked at. Of course a bribe of £50 make you jump the queue, but didn't solve the problem. That didn't made me a happy customer.
Apple care can cost as much as 20% of the initial price.
Every new product comingstraight out of the factory from Apple seems to have faults. Batteries one day, lower slot next, power supply another day, then graphic cards today etc etc.
My £300 PC lasted me 3y with only OS trouble before dying.
My £1500 PB (I had a bit of money before) is now about 4y (although let say 3y old as they finally changed the MB after 1 y), has the same specs as the dead PC, and does the same work. It is just a lot smaller.
Although I like the design but mainly the OS, I will be thinking very hard before splashing that much money again. I probably will go the clone route or Linux.
As for today, there isn't a single model from the Apple catalogue, that will suit my needs and purse. Glossy screen, firewire, no accessories any more.
When one plashes few thousand pounds, I will expect at least the cables to be provided.
Muhahahahahahaha, another ludicrous propagandist drivel... It even seems that for some self-deceptive propagandist the iMac's Intel Core 2 Duo CPU as more "advantages" than an Intel Core 2 Quad (sic)... Pathetic.
Between all these -dishonest intellectually- falsehoods and gross misrepresentations, fact is that anybody with two hands and one hour of spare time can build a PC for half the price of a comparable Mac, with the exact same hardware (minus the shiny case), same brand parts coming from the same factories (Intel, Nvidia, etc), just sold two times more than their casual price by Apple to delusional/self-conditioned fanbois. Keep drinking the kool aid, being in denial for we don't know which reason (brand adulation?) is what make people great and mature.
Muhahahahahahaha, another ludicrous propagandist drivel... It even seems that for some self-deceptive propagandist the iMac's Intel Core 2 Duo CPU as more "advantages" than an Intel Core 2 Quad (sic)... Pathetic.
Between all these -dishonest intellectually- falsehoods and gross misrepresentations, fact is that anybody with two hands and one hour of spare time can build a PC for half the price of a comparable Mac, with the exact same hardware (minus the shiny case), same brand parts coming from the same factories (Intel, Nvidia, etc), just sold two times more than their casual price by Apple to delusional/self-conditioned fanbois. Keep drinking the kool aid, being in denial for we don't know which reason (brand adulation?) is what make people great and mature.
Most people would never consider building a PC. Most people have no idea how to reinstall an OS. Most people.....etc.
What is your point? That some people can build a PC? Seriously, I'm asking. What does the fact that people can build a PC like a Mac have to do with what Apple should do? What does it have to do with the fact that many, many people want a service desk they can bring their computer into the day it stops working?
You can say people buy Apple because it's shiny. But there are tons of every day people who could care less that it's shiny. They want it because it's not Windows and there's a single provider of support behind it.
What the heck, I'll toss my ramblings into the morass.
1. Apple will NEVER compete on price with a build your own system. Neither does Sony or HP or Dell.
2. Apple puts more money into their systems than merely the CPU, GPU, and RAM. They have nice, expensive cases, well designed power supplies, custom PCBs with high-quality components. They will not be price competitive with manufacturers who use cheap or generic any of those things.
3. Apple spends $$$ and charges their customers for "design". It may be intangible to a large degree. And it won't make Call of Duty run any faster. But when it's done poorly (see Dell), people notice. If you don't care about "design" then you'll be unhappy paying for it.
4. AppleInsider didn't write this comparison. "Oppenheimer analyst Yair Reiner" did. AI just summarized it and provided some tables from it. And the tables are clearly watermarked "Draft". I think it's perfectly valid to point out where his(?) analysis falls short, but don't lay it on AI.
All that being said, it is clear there are faster CPUs available that it'd be nice to have seen in these machines - especially CPUs with more cores with 10.6 around the corner that is supposed to support multiple cores better. Apple's never been a GPU leader, but these GPUs are a step up from what they had before even if they do lag the Windows world.
Apple is struggling with the pace of CPU and GPU developments in the Windows world. If they keep a slower release pace, they'll perpetually be behind the power curve. But if they try to keep up and release new products every quarter, they may not recoup their development costs between releases. Them's the breaks when you go with the commodity Intel platform. If it bothers you to be behind the curve, then buy a Windows machine. My white, 1.8GHz iMac is still serving me fine. IMHO, todays machines are so overpowered (except for 3D games) that a few MHz here or there doesn't really make a difference.
Yes, the iMac is decent, nay good, against other all-in-ones.
Sadly that's not what many people care about, when they can get a standalone machine for a fraction of the price that outperforms it. They can choose the monitor they want. Everything they want.
Mac OS X and iLife might be worth $200 on top of the standard price, but that's it. Apple should stand behind their hardware and offer 3 year warranties as standard.
Most people would never consider building a PC. Most people have no idea how to reinstall an OS. Most people.....etc.
What is your point? That some people can build a PC? Seriously, I'm asking. What does the fact that people can build a PC like a Mac have to do with what Apple should do? What does it have to do with the fact that many, many people want a service desk they can bring their computer into the day it stops working?
You can say people buy Apple because it's shiny. But there are tons of every day people who could care less that it's shiny. They want it because it's not Windows and there's a single provider of support behind it.
My point is that when it comes to hardware comparison, claiming that "iMacs offer more value than competition" is simply a self-deceptive and dishonest garbage, and thus need some kind of ludicrous chart to deceive its audience. Now I have no problem with people loving their Mac (I love OSX too), as far as they remain intellectually honest, i.e. does not act like blind and servile fanbois or in this case like a propagandist on a payroll. When you look at hardware upgrade offers from Apple they are nearly always a scam (once again at least -if not more!- twice the casual price) and simply an insult to their customers, with unfortunately some people asking for more.
n.b.: anybody can still drop $10 to any computer shop to have its hardware parts mounted, its OS installed, by a professional.
I find the posts more negative and critical lately....I enjoy the humorous comments the most. I think the majority of the complaints are from the techies arguing over the minutia.
I would like to see a 30" top of the line iMac. A full size keyboard on a 10" MBA, a 15" MBA and a 17" MBA alongside the current 13" MBA and alongside the complete MB and MB line. A new 30" monitor and a DVR in AppleTV.
I own the first intel duo 20" iMac, the first intel iBook 2nd gen ATV and the first gen iPhone all with AppleCare. I upgrade the OS, iLife and iWork every time and only buy Apple SW and hardware. Apple serves me well and with a minimum of headaches, wires and looks good too. I would never consider a Windows or Microsoft product.
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.
Still, iLife doesn't justify the cost of the Mac over a PC though. For anyone on a budget or doesnt want to break the bank, PC's are still the better value for it does practically everything a Mac does. This doesn't mean Mac's suck though. It just means its geared towards a different market segment.
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?
Well, it's a local flyer valid for a week, from February 25 to March 3, 2009.
The ad number for the specific computer is 780280/681876/738572...A6734F
I didn't visit the local Staples store as I'm waiting for a Core i7 desktop computer with either Snow Leopard on an iMac or Windows 7 on an HP tower.
It's possible that you could get similar deals through the online Staples store for the US, Britain or Canada. I didn't go much into details as I'm not a buyer for the moment. For instance, the Blu-Ray drive is probably read only and the 500 GB hard disk is small. But it comes with a 19 inches screen and a sales price of $949.
I don't know if Apple will ever get its act together and understand that I am not going to pay an $800 premium so that Steve Jobs, Tim Cook, Ron Johnson and Phil Schiller can all get their fat stock option bonuses. I don't care if they have to live with only a $15 million salary, plus full family health coverage. They should work like the rest of us do and earn a decent salary through their work.
I'm not going to pay an $800 premium on my next computer so that these corporate fat cats can enjoy undeserved, extravagant and unrealistic stock option bonuses. Sorry, I'm not that kind of a person.
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.
The dishonesty in the article is ignoring the routine large discounts Dell and HP offer, unlike Apple.
10 second to find
Quote:
20% off all Dell XPS ONE 20 & 24 All-in-One Desktops $1599+ thru Mar 11, 2009
Coupon Code: XHWMW?N$PJ4JLR
25% off HP Touchsmart All-in-One Desktops (IQ500t w/ 22in LCD), $1299+
Coupon Code: DT4575
If the coupon's expired, wait a week for the next. It might be 30%.
Another minute, barely trying, to start accumulating additional stackable discounts, like
Quote:
STACKABLE $30 off HP Laptops & Desktops Coupon Code: SV2132 Apr 30, 2009
HP Coupon $10 off Orders $50+ Coupon Code: SV2130 Apr 30, 2009
...etc. If discounts were infrequent, AI's schtick of not even mentioning them would be excusable. But it's Dell&HP's core business model.
Unless they need one immediately, only idiots pay more than 80% of list price for Dell and HP,a fact that has been pointed out numerous times.
Second, this is a ridiculous snapshot -- the first day a commodity tech product is released, it better be at least comparable to its now dated competitors, who have had no chance to leapfrog it in value. Intel reacts to AMD, nVidia to ATI/AMD on prices in a single day.
Given Apple's past standard practice, these iMac prices and parts will be in play for some time. Dell/HP could react on price to the iMac (which they have known, sans the details, was coming for some time) and in a month, perhaps weeks, will have surpassed many iMac commodity hardware CPU RAM HDD specs. Their all-in-ones mobos are old and they have laptop variants to adapt.
But AI will have no reason to follow those moves.
This post does not "criticize Apple" "defend Dell and HP", "make claims about overall value", or OS's, bundled software, usability, "integrated ecosystems", yadda yadda
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.
I've never seen any evidence that HP is using recycled motherboards. In fact, HP uses the same Chinese suppliers as Apple.
As for the power supply, HP uses just the right power supply for their computers. I changed a graphic card, but never needed to change the power supply on my HP desktop. In some scenarios, I guess that you may need a new power supply if you rebuild your computer with power hungry components. But then, you'd be better off with a brand new computer.
I must say that the HP quality seems to be better than Apple, judging by the number of Apple product recalls and warranty extensions. The myth of the Apple quality is just a myth that doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
You pay more for an Apple computer because Apple's senior management is overpaid through stock options. That's the sad truth.
Critics here seem to conveniently exclude information when stating their rants against the iMac.
Yes, there are other manufacturers with higher-horsepower equipment at similar price points. What makes the difference for the majority of Apple owners is the user-experience compared to say a Windows-based computer.
Putting aside the fact that this article makes comparisons between all-in-one machines that the ranters are ignoring, the system stabilities and general higher-quality software offered by OSX is what really makes it a selling point.
I work as a sys-admin with plenty of Windows machines and Win2k3 servers. We just started to introduce iMacs as desktop replacements and productivity improved and help-desk issues have all but disappeared. While the hardware as stated above may not be cutting edge, the overall fit-and-finish, low-footprint, quietness and the disappearance of system and OS problems has management looking at even more replacements.
If you're ranting is about playing Crysis at 130fps, go elsewhere. Apple is focusing on the general consumer and not interested in niche markets.
And if make the argument that Apple can make more money if they make a "cheap" computer or add the most current CPU's & graphics (i.e. "overheating") all I have to do is point to their $25B bank account with their recession-resistant model, and look at Dell, HP, etc makers which make the machines with your preferred hardware yet are fighting for their survival. What more proof does one need that maybe Apple is doing something right?
I for one am quite happy that Apple ignores your rants. They would be in the same hole as the other PC makers if they listened to you.
90% of Apples' recent success is down to Vista and 10% down to Apple.
And remember that *success* is relative Apple will sell approx 12m machines in a market that overall worldwide will comprise approx 260m machines.
You?re wasting your time trying to explain the value of a mac to some of these people. I?ve tried many times. All they see is sticker price, the Dell or HP is cheaper...it?s better. They can?t understand that the value is more than the sticker price. Personally a free PC computer is worthless to me, I could use it for a door stop, but other than that I don?t even want it. If a computer doesn?t come with all the benefits of Apple design, OSX, iLife and iWork it?s useless, it has no value at all.
Comments
Yes, there are other manufacturers with higher-horsepower equipment at similar price points. What makes the difference for the majority of Apple owners is the user-experience compared to say a Windows-based computer.
Putting aside the fact that this article makes comparisons between all-in-one machines that the ranters are ignoring, the system stabilities and general higher-quality software offered by OSX is what really makes it a selling point.
I work as a sys-admin with plenty of Windows machines and Win2k3 servers. We just started to introduce iMacs as desktop replacements and productivity improved and help-desk issues have all but disappeared. While the hardware as stated above may not be cutting edge, the overall fit-and-finish, low-footprint, quietness and the disappearance of system and OS problems has management looking at even more replacements.
If you're ranting is about playing Crysis at 130fps, go elsewhere. Apple is focusing on the general consumer and not interested in niche markets.
And if make the argument that Apple can make more money if they make a "cheap" computer or add the most current CPU's & graphics (i.e. "overheating") all I have to do is point to their $25B bank account with their recession-resistant model, and look at Dell, HP, etc makers which make the machines with your preferred hardware yet are fighting for their survival. What more proof does one need that maybe Apple is doing something right?
I for one am quite happy that Apple ignores your rants. They would be in the same hole as the other PC makers if they listened to you.
I don't see why people can't accept the fact that the iMac is a good deal, compared with the closest similar offerings from Dell and HP. Again, it's for those who want the convenience of a good performing all-in-one computer.
Because buyers aren't limited to "closest similar offerings". And because apple doesn't offer a machine that is a close similar offering to the PC headless machines, so the comparison is inevitable, it's the choice the consumer makes. Apple made that decision, and they get to deal with the consequences.
A consumer who needs a machine can choose between an iMac, a PC AIO, or a PC headless. Insisting that the headless isn't "closest" isn't going to change the fact that some of those consumers are going to see that the PC headless is the best deal and Apple loses that sale.
Might as well say it's a good deal compared with other machines named after fruits, it's just an artificial and arbitrary distinction.
I would like to see a 30" top of the line iMac. A full size keyboard on a 10" MBA, a 15" MBA and a 17" MBA alongside the current 13" MBA and alongside the complete MB and MB line. A new 30" monitor and a DVR in AppleTV.
I own the first intel duo 20" iMac, the first intel iBook 2nd gen ATV and the first gen iPhone all with AppleCare. I upgrade the OS, iLife and iWork every time and only buy Apple SW and hardware. Apple serves me well and with a minimum of headaches, wires and looks good too. I would never consider a Windows or Microsoft product.
Any thoughts?
However, computer shoppers don't limit their choices to AIOs (I don't know anyone who would by that Dell or HP Touchsmart). They don't have to, the way Mac users shopping in a certain price range do. It is compared to "traditional" desktop computers that the iMac looks really bad in terms of value. If you want an AIO, though, go for it.
The not so little local Apple reseller/repair shop was full of machines for repairs, and each time I had to wait a month before my machine was even looked at. Of course a bribe of £50 make you jump the queue, but didn't solve the problem. That didn't made me a happy customer.
Apple care can cost as much as 20% of the initial price.
Every new product comingstraight out of the factory from Apple seems to have faults. Batteries one day, lower slot next, power supply another day, then graphic cards today etc etc.
My £300 PC lasted me 3y with only OS trouble before dying.
My £1500 PB (I had a bit of money before) is now about 4y (although let say 3y old as they finally changed the MB after 1 y), has the same specs as the dead PC, and does the same work. It is just a lot smaller.
Although I like the design but mainly the OS, I will be thinking very hard before splashing that much money again. I probably will go the clone route or Linux.
As for today, there isn't a single model from the Apple catalogue, that will suit my needs and purse. Glossy screen, firewire, no accessories any more.
When one plashes few thousand pounds, I will expect at least the cables to be provided.
Between all these -dishonest intellectually- falsehoods and gross misrepresentations, fact is that anybody with two hands and one hour of spare time can build a PC for half the price of a comparable Mac, with the exact same hardware (minus the shiny case), same brand parts coming from the same factories (Intel, Nvidia, etc), just sold two times more than their casual price by Apple to delusional/self-conditioned fanbois. Keep drinking the kool aid, being in denial for we don't know which reason (brand adulation?) is what make people great and mature.
Muhahahahahahaha, another ludicrous propagandist drivel... It even seems that for some self-deceptive propagandist the iMac's Intel Core 2 Duo CPU as more "advantages" than an Intel Core 2 Quad (sic)... Pathetic.
Between all these -dishonest intellectually- falsehoods and gross misrepresentations, fact is that anybody with two hands and one hour of spare time can build a PC for half the price of a comparable Mac, with the exact same hardware (minus the shiny case), same brand parts coming from the same factories (Intel, Nvidia, etc), just sold two times more than their casual price by Apple to delusional/self-conditioned fanbois. Keep drinking the kool aid, being in denial for we don't know which reason (brand adulation?) is what make people great and mature.
Most people would never consider building a PC. Most people have no idea how to reinstall an OS. Most people.....etc.
What is your point? That some people can build a PC? Seriously, I'm asking. What does the fact that people can build a PC like a Mac have to do with what Apple should do? What does it have to do with the fact that many, many people want a service desk they can bring their computer into the day it stops working?
You can say people buy Apple because it's shiny. But there are tons of every day people who could care less that it's shiny. They want it because it's not Windows and there's a single provider of support behind it.
-Switchy
1. Apple will NEVER compete on price with a build your own system. Neither does Sony or HP or Dell.
2. Apple puts more money into their systems than merely the CPU, GPU, and RAM. They have nice, expensive cases, well designed power supplies, custom PCBs with high-quality components. They will not be price competitive with manufacturers who use cheap or generic any of those things.
3. Apple spends $$$ and charges their customers for "design". It may be intangible to a large degree. And it won't make Call of Duty run any faster. But when it's done poorly (see Dell), people notice. If you don't care about "design" then you'll be unhappy paying for it.
4. AppleInsider didn't write this comparison. "Oppenheimer analyst Yair Reiner" did. AI just summarized it and provided some tables from it. And the tables are clearly watermarked "Draft". I think it's perfectly valid to point out where his(?) analysis falls short, but don't lay it on AI.
All that being said, it is clear there are faster CPUs available that it'd be nice to have seen in these machines - especially CPUs with more cores with 10.6 around the corner that is supposed to support multiple cores better. Apple's never been a GPU leader, but these GPUs are a step up from what they had before even if they do lag the Windows world.
Apple is struggling with the pace of CPU and GPU developments in the Windows world. If they keep a slower release pace, they'll perpetually be behind the power curve. But if they try to keep up and release new products every quarter, they may not recoup their development costs between releases. Them's the breaks when you go with the commodity Intel platform. If it bothers you to be behind the curve, then buy a Windows machine. My white, 1.8GHz iMac is still serving me fine. IMHO, todays machines are so overpowered (except for 3D games) that a few MHz here or there doesn't really make a difference.
- Jasen.
Yes, the iMac is decent, nay good, against other all-in-ones.
Sadly that's not what many people care about, when they can get a standalone machine for a fraction of the price that outperforms it. They can choose the monitor they want. Everything they want.
Mac OS X and iLife might be worth $200 on top of the standard price, but that's it. Apple should stand behind their hardware and offer 3 year warranties as standard.
Most people would never consider building a PC. Most people have no idea how to reinstall an OS. Most people.....etc.
What is your point? That some people can build a PC? Seriously, I'm asking. What does the fact that people can build a PC like a Mac have to do with what Apple should do? What does it have to do with the fact that many, many people want a service desk they can bring their computer into the day it stops working?
You can say people buy Apple because it's shiny. But there are tons of every day people who could care less that it's shiny. They want it because it's not Windows and there's a single provider of support behind it.
My point is that when it comes to hardware comparison, claiming that "iMacs offer more value than competition" is simply a self-deceptive and dishonest garbage, and thus need some kind of ludicrous chart to deceive its audience. Now I have no problem with people loving their Mac (I love OSX too), as far as they remain intellectually honest, i.e. does not act like blind and servile fanbois or in this case like a propagandist on a payroll. When you look at hardware upgrade offers from Apple they are nearly always a scam (once again at least -if not more!- twice the casual price) and simply an insult to their customers, with unfortunately some people asking for more.
n.b.: anybody can still drop $10 to any computer shop to have its hardware parts mounted, its OS installed, by a professional.
I find the posts more negative and critical lately....I enjoy the humorous comments the most. I think the majority of the complaints are from the techies arguing over the minutia.
I would like to see a 30" top of the line iMac. A full size keyboard on a 10" MBA, a 15" MBA and a 17" MBA alongside the current 13" MBA and alongside the complete MB and MB line. A new 30" monitor and a DVR in AppleTV.
I own the first intel duo 20" iMac, the first intel iBook 2nd gen ATV and the first gen iPhone all with AppleCare. I upgrade the OS, iLife and iWork every time and only buy Apple SW and hardware. Apple serves me well and with a minimum of headaches, wires and looks good too. I would never consider a Windows or Microsoft product.
Any thoughts?
any thoughts?
are you independently wealthy?
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.
Still, iLife doesn't justify the cost of the Mac over a PC though. For anyone on a budget or doesnt want to break the bank, PC's are still the better value for it does practically everything a Mac does. This doesn't mean Mac's suck though. It just means its geared towards a different market segment.
Supply 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?
Well, it's a local flyer valid for a week, from February 25 to March 3, 2009.
The ad number for the specific computer is 780280/681876/738572...A6734F
I didn't visit the local Staples store as I'm waiting for a Core i7 desktop computer with either Snow Leopard on an iMac or Windows 7 on an HP tower.
It's possible that you could get similar deals through the online Staples store for the US, Britain or Canada. I didn't go much into details as I'm not a buyer for the moment. For instance, the Blu-Ray drive is probably read only and the 500 GB hard disk is small. But it comes with a 19 inches screen and a sales price of $949.
I don't know if Apple will ever get its act together and understand that I am not going to pay an $800 premium so that Steve Jobs, Tim Cook, Ron Johnson and Phil Schiller can all get their fat stock option bonuses. I don't care if they have to live with only a $15 million salary, plus full family health coverage. They should work like the rest of us do and earn a decent salary through their work.
I'm not going to pay an $800 premium on my next computer so that these corporate fat cats can enjoy undeserved, extravagant and unrealistic stock option bonuses. Sorry, I'm not that kind of a person.
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.
ilife is kiddie software with (IMO) little value.
10 second to find
20% off all Dell XPS ONE 20 & 24 All-in-One Desktops $1599+ thru Mar 11, 2009
Coupon Code: XHWMW?N$PJ4JLR
25% off HP Touchsmart All-in-One Desktops (IQ500t w/ 22in LCD), $1299+
Coupon Code: DT4575
If the coupon's expired, wait a week for the next. It might be 30%.
Another minute, barely trying, to start accumulating additional stackable discounts, like
STACKABLE $30 off HP Laptops & Desktops Coupon Code: SV2132 Apr 30, 2009
HP Coupon $10 off Orders $50+ Coupon Code: SV2130 Apr 30, 2009
...etc. If discounts were infrequent, AI's schtick of not even mentioning them would be excusable. But it's Dell&HP's core business model.
Unless they need one immediately, only idiots pay more than 80% of list price for Dell and HP,a fact that has been pointed out numerous times.
Second, this is a ridiculous snapshot -- the first day a commodity tech product is released, it better be at least comparable to its now dated competitors, who have had no chance to leapfrog it in value. Intel reacts to AMD, nVidia to ATI/AMD on prices in a single day.
Given Apple's past standard practice, these iMac prices and parts will be in play for some time. Dell/HP could react on price to the iMac (which they have known, sans the details, was coming for some time) and in a month, perhaps weeks, will have surpassed many iMac commodity hardware CPU RAM HDD specs. Their all-in-ones mobos are old and they have laptop variants to adapt.
But AI will have no reason to follow those moves.
This post does not "criticize Apple" "defend Dell and HP", "make claims about overall value", or OS's, bundled software, usability, "integrated ecosystems", yadda yadda
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.
I've never seen any evidence that HP is using recycled motherboards. In fact, HP uses the same Chinese suppliers as Apple.
As for the power supply, HP uses just the right power supply for their computers. I changed a graphic card, but never needed to change the power supply on my HP desktop. In some scenarios, I guess that you may need a new power supply if you rebuild your computer with power hungry components. But then, you'd be better off with a brand new computer.
I must say that the HP quality seems to be better than Apple, judging by the number of Apple product recalls and warranty extensions. The myth of the Apple quality is just a myth that doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
You pay more for an Apple computer because Apple's senior management is overpaid through stock options. That's the sad truth.
Critics here seem to conveniently exclude information when stating their rants against the iMac.
Yes, there are other manufacturers with higher-horsepower equipment at similar price points. What makes the difference for the majority of Apple owners is the user-experience compared to say a Windows-based computer.
Putting aside the fact that this article makes comparisons between all-in-one machines that the ranters are ignoring, the system stabilities and general higher-quality software offered by OSX is what really makes it a selling point.
I work as a sys-admin with plenty of Windows machines and Win2k3 servers. We just started to introduce iMacs as desktop replacements and productivity improved and help-desk issues have all but disappeared. While the hardware as stated above may not be cutting edge, the overall fit-and-finish, low-footprint, quietness and the disappearance of system and OS problems has management looking at even more replacements.
If you're ranting is about playing Crysis at 130fps, go elsewhere. Apple is focusing on the general consumer and not interested in niche markets.
And if make the argument that Apple can make more money if they make a "cheap" computer or add the most current CPU's & graphics (i.e. "overheating") all I have to do is point to their $25B bank account with their recession-resistant model, and look at Dell, HP, etc makers which make the machines with your preferred hardware yet are fighting for their survival. What more proof does one need that maybe Apple is doing something right?
I for one am quite happy that Apple ignores your rants. They would be in the same hole as the other PC makers if they listened to you.
90% of Apples' recent success is down to Vista and 10% down to Apple.
And remember that *success* is relative Apple will sell approx 12m machines in a market that overall worldwide will comprise approx 260m machines.
perspective...
You?re wasting your time trying to explain the value of a mac to some of these people. I?ve tried many times. All they see is sticker price, the Dell or HP is cheaper...it?s better. They can?t understand that the value is more than the sticker price. Personally a free PC computer is worthless to me, I could use it for a door stop, but other than that I don?t even want it. If a computer doesn?t come with all the benefits of Apple design, OSX, iLife and iWork it?s useless, it has no value at all.
iWork??
really?