how on earth can apple justify its outrageous prices?
..went to pc world yesterday - saw a compaq pressario 6000 - £1399 inc vat
next to it
pm g4 / 933 - £3399 inc vat
£2 thousand more - is the mac that much better?
i always knew apple prices were daft - but this is something else !
the g4 had a nicer screen imho and was verrrry fast but the pc was pretty nippy too - shame it looked so crappy.
next to it
pm g4 / 933 - £3399 inc vat
£2 thousand more - is the mac that much better?
i always knew apple prices were daft - but this is something else !
the g4 had a nicer screen imho and was verrrry fast but the pc was pretty nippy too - shame it looked so crappy.
Comments
If you want a Windows or Linux based PC, GO BUY ONE.
There's a LOT more to owning a Mac than simple hardware specifications. It's called the User Experience. In a thousand ways, Mac OS X's interface and layout are easier and more logical than that of Windows -- and most CERTAINLY of the Linux breeds.
I suspect you just want a simple flame war rather than a serious discussion, though.
This thread will probably be locked in 3, 2...
- Brad
<strong>Please.
If you want a Windows or Linux based PC, GO BUY ONE.
There's a LOT more to owning a Mac than simple hardware specifications. It's called the User Experience. In a thousand ways, Mac OS X's interface and layout are easier and more logical than that of Windows -- and most CERTAINLY of the Linux breeds.
I suspect you just want a simple flame war rather than a serious discussion, though.
This thread will probably be locked in 3, 2...
- Brad</strong><hr></blockquote>
Did thought that many people can not afford such expensive computers ever cross your mind?
End of Line
You can get a dual 1GHz PowerMac for £2000 (166MHz) or a dual 867MHz one for £1350, but with no monitor.
The monitor would have hiked up prices (especially if it was an Apple one): any idea what is was?
[ 08-16-2002: Message edited by: Stoo ]</p>
Some people can't afford fancy cars to drive around or name-brand clothes to wear or big-screen TVs and surround systems to watch movies, but they still bet along fine, don't they?
You see, some people think of Macs as luxury computers. I have not problem with that thought. In just about every market you will find a company that charges a higher premium for a higher quality product that satisfies a core consumer group.
There will always be cheaper computers in the market, just like there are cheaper cars and clothes and TVs. You just have to remember that quality often comes at a cost.
(Cheaper != Better) == true
No matter how little money you see a PC for, you won't find one with the logic board on a hinged door that makes adding memory a 5 second job. PC makers just can't commit money for development like Apple does, because all they care about is the bottom line.
But aside from that, Apple is the only company that makes the hardware and the software, so there's really no basis for comparison in the PC world. When you buy a Mac, you get some of the best hardware design in the industry (if not THE best). Look at the Titanium Powerbook. There is nothing, and I mean NOTHING that compares to it in the PC world. In PC land, you have two choices - Features or slim and light. Not both. The Powerbook is the only laptop in the industry that gives you both. What's that worth to you?
And I suppose you think all the R&D for OS X and the iApps and the rest of Apple's software gets paid for by a donation from a wealthy eccentric alpaca farmer? No, guess where they make most of their money? Yeah, that's right - the hardware.
And let's face it - you get very high quality components in Power Macs. None of this HP/Dell/Gateway scraping the bottom of the barrel for the cheapest possible optical drive. It's a conscious choice you make when you decide to buy a Mac.
And finally, Macs really aren't that expensive compared to PCs. If you match up, say, a Dell tower, and give it *every* feature the G4 tower has by default, the prices are very similar. If you're complaining that the G4 tower isn't $999, then you obviously don't care about a lot of the features Apple includes by default in the towers and you'd rather have a stripped down model with nothing.
And if that's what you really want, then you deserve a Dell today.
The cannot honestly justify the prices of a great many of their products, but the release of the new powermacs is encouraging.
The DP867 at 1699, while 100 more than the previous entry level Powermac now sports dual 867 versus a single 800, 1MB of L3 cache per chip versus no L3 on the single 800, 2 ATA controllers, 2 full size drive bays and DDR over the outgoing QS.
Not as pretty, but a much improved offering which certainly compares with a single 2.2Ghz P4 on DDR.
It's still more expensive, but not so much as your topic post suggests.
Apple is scared right now, and that's good, when they get scared by a stint of sustained consumer coolness, they tend to gravitate towards more appropriate pricing.
Running the two machines side by side, I don't suspect the Compaq could best the Mac in any of the macs target markets (photoshop, DV-edit, DVD-authoring).
At the higher-end PC's are clearly 'faster' for less money, but that compaq is not one of those models.
Elitist f*k.
I personally think that Macs should be for everyone.
Apple's prices are high because their sales numbers are too low to amortize the expense of R&D, and other fixed manufacturing costs.
If Apple wants to achieve a 10% market share ( and they have to to survive, development costs are rising ) they will have to face facts and release a machine that everyone can afford.
The magic mark is $1000.
The sales brouchure has to compare well to a PC for the same price ( Compaq, Dell, whatever ).
It is an unfortunate reality for Apple that the boxes that are our computers are a commodity item. Its the software that isnt. People dont buy Macs because they look cool ( its good they do however, they cost so bloody much ), they buy them because 'its a macintosh', 'it just works better', its easy to use'.
There is a handy rule of thumb that says that something has to be twice as good as what you've already got ( in some way ) for people to change to it. That means that OS X has to be twice as easy to use/productive as Windows to get people to buy a Mac. But it also has to be the same price. As soon as the PC is half the price ( and for a cheap one it is ) that balances out the benefits of OS X.
Apple can win market share, by introducing a compelling machine ( the iBook is, for entry level notebook buyers ). If they do, they will get the 10% market share they are looking for, and they will be able to spread their fixed costs across a much larger number of sales, further reducing the cost of machines, and driving more sales.
Retrenching their position will fail. Machine prices will rise, untill, like NeXT, they are forced to move to x86, and fail on the sharp thorns of a million different devices.
Ever notice how High End brands tread the low end waters carefully. Remember the BMW 3ti? You don't want to muddle your class with garbage. We don't need cheap crappy Macs like Powercomputing and Starmax's. Ick. I want design chops and good fit and finish. That's worth alot to me and evidently from the prices of used Macs...to others as well.
Apple is certainly comfortable being a kind of mid-luxury brand, but if they have the opportunity to compromise their standards a little and reach a greater market... make no mistake, they'll do it. (In certain small ways, they have already, in fact.) But until the time is right (if it's ever right) they'll keep on doing what they do, and charge the prices that they always have.
BTW, the initial post isn't completely w/o merit, but it's a ridiculous example -- compare comparable computers, not a mid-level Compaq with Apple's high-end dual.
[ 08-16-2002: Message edited by: Hobbes ]</p>
What? people with less money are somewhat sub human? People with less money somehow deserve to be second class citizens?
Pleeeaaase!
The macintosh is the computer for the rest of us - all it had to do now is actually become the computer for the rest of us.
if u think that people with less money are somehow less than you then go knock on Microsoft's door - I'm sure there's a job waiting for you somewhere.
..i'm no pauper , i drive a merc s-class , i live in a multi-million pound house in west london..ok?
..but i dont like being ripped off...
..the price difference between the powermacs and the imacs is considerable , yet the perceived user experience isn't.
..pc world was rather a liberating experience , seeing the pc components available to buy and build yourself was very thought provoking.
..the attitude of so many mac users - the elitist bull §hit attitude they have , is one of the main reasons i'm sick of the things..you guys wanna wake up and smell the roses!
..there is an alternative...pc's were crap - i agree - but .. i dunno- convince me
When will i be able to open .avi files or .exe for starters..
IF i could do that with a mac - id stay with the things.
err.. that comapq was the top of the range compaq- p4 @ 2.2 Ghz , GeForce 4mx 64 - sounds familiar?
spec comp. to a top end mac except the £££.
i dropped plnety of mazoolas in the past..next time im more careful.
one thing i do know - laptops - you can keep 'em...
the layout of the keyboard sucks.
as for .exe, get virtual PC.
i, on the other hand, would love to see how you plan on working with your spiffy fast machine once the full weight of digital rights management have fallen on your cheap price sensetive can.
have fun playing approved games and approved music where you pay per song while MS and the RIAA track everything you buy and listen to. i like my no DRM mac land just fine thank you.
to me, that justify's the price in a heartbeat.
<strong>..i'm no pauper , i drive a merc s-class , i live in a multi-million pound house in west london..ok?
</strong>
Bragging about how much money you have, how nice your car is and your palatial digs in an exclusive neighborhood smacks of an elitist bull §hit attitude... whoops, my mistake!
<strong>
..the attitude of so many mac users - the elitist bull §hit attitude they have , is one of the main reasons i'm sick of the things..you guys wanna wake up and smell the roses!
</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's we Mac users that have the the elitist bull §hit attitude. Thanks for setting us straight!
pcs arebetter value , macs are stupidly overpriced.
..and no matter how much dough ya got..its stil galling to blow plenty of dosh on something which is 90% a pc.
the fact is - apple needs to differentiate itself from the big pc world and QUICK !
So, Apple has to invest more to make their machine, which is risking more, so in turn they need to earn greater margins to survive.
On top of that, they create a lot of software, some of which is given away for free. That money is made on the purchase of a Mac.
If you don't want the ability to run iDVD, iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto, Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Mac OS X, and all of the little things that add up to become a Macintosh, then you really don't need a Mac. If you don't want the possibility of running Rendevous, then you shouldn't pay the premium for a Mac. If you really don't need any of those products, then you probably don't need a Mac. If you'd rather buy them one at a time, as you decide you need them, then a PC might be a better choice. The cost will balance out over the life of your machine instead of paying up front.
Mac users pay upfront for what I consider a much greater potential. It's easy to measure MHZ, but it's almost impossible to measure how much stress is reduced using iDVD instead of who-knows-what.
..but is the apple stuff superior to whats on oem or pc stuff ?
..my ixus digital works grate on a pc - via the pcs built in imaging system.. the os-x version is ok , but the canon macromedia prog wont work on x.
..so i guess i gotta buy a new camera along with a new mac?