• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

PC vs MAC

PogoPedant said:
Except it doesn't have 3G support, which is weird
Click to expand...

but Steve Jobs said "it's coming"...whatever that means.

Anyway...I decided against it. I'll wait for the widescreen, touchscreen iPod without the phone. I don't want to waste my phone battery charge while listening to music or watching videos. Plus I need a lot more than 8 GB for my music. The beauty of a large capacity iPod is having the right song for whatever mood your in.
 
phyz said:
OK; I'll bite! In the spirit of education,
1. Show me the $500 PC that matches
Core 2 Duo 1.83 GHz
17-inch flat panel LCD
512MB memory
160GB hard drive
24x Combo drive
Intel GMA 950 graphics
Airport Extreme
Ships: Within 24 hours
Free Shipping
$999.00

You said computing power, so I won't hold you to the design esthetic of the iMac.

2. Convince me that it's plug and play, and that it's not a doorstop within six months. For $170, Apple will see to it I get a computer that computes for three years. Surely PC manufacturers will do the same for $85 or less.

I submit to you as a student. Please educate! I certainly haven't priced PCs. Ever. So let it rip...
Click to expand...

Probably find it hard to find a good deal on a direct equivalent non-Mac PC because that would be a rather strange mix of hardware for a PC. However looking at UK prices for the price of the cheapest iMac (£679.00) you get this type of specification in a non-Mac PC (Mesh):

Key Features:
Unbeatable value Core™ 2 Duo Power PC
Genuine Windows® XP Media Center
Free Upgrade to Genuine Vista Home Premium
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E6300 Processor
(1.86GHz ,2MB L2 Cache, 1066MHz)
ASUS PCIe Mainboard-Intel® G946gz Chipset
1024MB DDR2 Memory
Now with 320GB Serial ATA Hard Drive
512MB nVIDIA Geforce 7300GS Graphics
19" Widescreen TFT LCD Display
Sony 18x Super Format DVD Writer
5.1 Channel Surround Sound Audio
8 USB 2.0 ,GB LAN
Now With Cordless Keyboard & Mouse
Classic Warranty-3 Years parts & lab.



By the way how much would the same Mac you asked for a price comparison cost set up with two 320Gb harddiscs configured as RAID 1? ....... ... ;) :p
 
Last edited:
phyz said:
OK; I'll bite! In the spirit of education,
1. Show me the $500 PC that matches
Core 2 Duo 1.83 GHz
17-inch flat panel LCD
512MB memory
160GB hard drive
24x Combo drive
Intel GMA 950 graphics
Airport Extreme
Ships: Within 24 hours
Free Shipping
$999.00
Click to expand...

Yes, I probably spoke too soon. The two comparisons I did were back in October 2005, and September 2004. Back then the iMac prices were $1,599 and $1,749 Canadian. I see the price has dropped to a much more reasonable $1,099.

The comparison I did back in 2004:

Pentium 4 3 GHz, 1MB L2 Cache, 800MHz FSB, Windows XP Home, Genuine Intel® Motherboard 865GBFL Chipset up to 6 fast USB 2.0 Ports, Dual Channel DDR400 Memory support, up to 4GB of system memory, Intel Rapid BIOS Boot, 512MB Dual Channel DDR Kingston RAM, Western Digital 160GB 7200 RPM with 8MB cache Hard Drive, 128MB DDR ATI Radeon 9200SE AGP 8X Graphics Card, 19" Perfectly Flat Monitor, 52x24x52 CD-RW w/BurnProof Technology, 16xDVD Drive, (FREE UPGRADE TO DVD Writer-Burner), DLINK PCI 10/100 NIC, SoundMax 3D Sound, SPX & MIC. Pre-Amplifier, Speakers. Microsoft® Software Bundle [ Word, Works, Money, Encarta… ], Standard Warranty 1 year parts 1 year labour for $1366.

If I stick closer to the actual iMac specs, I can pick up a clone for $897 ($917 if you add speakers), a savings of $832. At that price I can almost get TWO clones for the price of the iMac ($1,749).
Click to expand...
At present, a $549 Dell system has the following:
AMD Sempron 3400+
Windows XP Home (though that only drives the price up)
17 inch E773 CRT monitor
512Meg RAM
160GB HD
48x CD-RW/DVD Combo Drive
NVIDIA GeForece 6150 LE Integrated Graphics GPU
Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio

I save $550.

I can get a generic PC with Dual core Pentium D 805 2.66GHZ 64 Bit processor
512MB RAM
160GB HD
16x DVDRW Superdrive
Intel onboard graphics
17" flat-panel monitor
for $588

I save $511.

You said computing power, so I won't hold you to the design esthetic of the iMac.
Click to expand...
You got me there, they sure look nice. How much tinkering can I do 'under the hood', so to speak? Can I easily upgrade the video, hard drive, RAM, etc. etc.? What happens if the display dies and you're no longer under warranty?

2. Convince me that it's plug and play, and that it's not a doorstop within six months. For $170, Apple will see to it I get a computer that computes for three years. Surely PC manufacturers will do the same for $85 or less.
Click to expand...
I presently have four computers running 24/7, one is a HP Pavillion, two are refurbished systems (including my Linux box), and one is a custom build. I can plug my digital camera, my scanner, or my USB data stick into any of them, and all have been running non-stop for at least a year. None of them are doorstops. Why would you think they'd be doorstops within six months? Convince me I should spend hundreds of dollars more for a computer with very similar specifications.

I submit to you as a student. Please educate! I certainly haven't priced PCs. Ever. So let it rip...
Click to expand...
Not trying to teach you anything, just pointing out some reasons why I haven't run out and purchased an iMac. My wife and my wallet have more sway over me than you do. :D

RayG
 
Bear in mind though that it's not just chip speed. If the mobo doesn't match up the chip performance is poor. That's why a lot of cheap PCs look good on paper but actual performance sucks. I don't know about Mac mobos.
 
Wudang said:
Bear in mind though that it's not just chip speed. If the mobo doesn't match up the chip performance is poor. That's why a lot of cheap PCs look good on paper but actual performance sucks. I don't know about Mac mobos.
Click to expand...

Good point. One easy way of dropping the price is by dropping the quality.

Getting back to comparisons -- In a pure, head-to-head, toe-to-toe matchup between and iMac and a Dell for example:

$1,848 iMac
# 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
# 2GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB
# 250GB Serial ATA drive
# SuperDrive 8X (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
# Keyboard & Mighty Mouse + Mac OS X - U.S. English
# AppleCare Protection Plan for iMac - 3 year warranty
# ATI Radeon X1600 128MB SDRAM
# 17-inch widescreen LCD
# AirPort Extreme
# Bluetooth 2.0 + EDR

$1,698 Dell
# Intel® Core™2 Duo processor E6400 (2.13GHz)
# Genuine Windows® XP Media Center Edition 2005
# 19 inch E197FP Analog Flat Panel
# 2GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz- 2DIMMs
# 250GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache™
# 8x DVD+/-RW Drive
# Intel® Graphics Media Accelerator 3000
# Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio
# 3 year warranty

I save $150 and I get a bigger monitor. (see, size does matter) :p

RayG
 
RayG said:
Yes, I probably spoke too soon.
Click to expand...
That was my point.

I will grant you that for the same price, the PC you get will have better specs than the Mac you get. At least most of the time. Us crazy, deluded, irrational Mac types see something worth paying extra for. PC types don't. And that's OK.

What I wanted to see was the half-priced iMac equivalent. Please remember that Mac prices come down over time, too.

And I don't hope to have any sway with you. You should sway only with your wife.;)
 
I can see people using whatever they want. You're a Mac person? Great! You're a *nix person? Great! But looking over this thread I see a few people talking about their PC dual booting with XP as the second operating system or having some XP system somewhere for certain apps. And not just here, but I hear about dual booting all the time. If the other OSs give you what you want, why the dual boot? That just tells me that you still need Windows to some extent. If you didn't, the you wouldn't have the dual boot. Until that need is replaced Microsoft is still selling you a copy of their OS so you didn't really save anything. Not trying to be pro-MS or belittle the other OSs, but I just wanted to point out that it's the need that's making them money, and until you can relieve that need you are still supporting old Bill.

My very first computer was a Performa 450 and if I recall Windows 3.1 was just getting entrenched. Years later when Windows 98 came out I can remember thinking that Microsoft finally caught up to what my Mac could do years before. Yes, I think they copied just about everything they did but they just marketed it better for a long time and now we are stuck with it. Personally, I haven't had a PC problem in years, no viruses, no crashes, and 99% of my calls are user errors, and this is on 9 servers and about 200 PCs so I don't see what all the Microsoft hate is about. But I don't push PCs or Microsoft on Mac or *nix users, and I don't understand why other people feel the need to push their favorite.

Mac users who don't know Windows inside-out like I do are sure to have problems, as I'm sure I would if I tried to use Linux or a Mac OS. It's just a matter of taste, skill, and what you actually need.

It's like debating what the best tasting food in the world is. Or the old Chevy-Ford debate. There just isn't a "best".

By the way, whatever happened to Novell? I just turned off a Novell server that was sitting quietly in the corner running a single accounting app for the last 6 years on a 66mhz server (64 MB RAM, 1 GB HD). I don't recall ever touching it except when the power went out and I had to turn it on again. It was set up when I started so I never even learned any Novell commands or anything. What a little trooper that was.
 
Ian Osborne said:
Sure, if you must - one of your Top Ten mods is in fact a Mac. But why would you want to?
Click to expand...


Dang it! foiled again!
Actually my personal opinion seems to follow what most people have said in this thread. If you like what you have, then don't worry about it.
The reason I posted this was really out of frustration that stemmed from an article that I read a few months back that compared Macs to (Windows based) PC's head to head. I would give a link, but I can't seem to remember where I read it at. Anyway, the article came to the conclusion that there wasn't any significant difference between the two systems. It did, however, have the Mac come out on top, which I wouldn't have minded, except that it was the category aesthetics that put it in the lead. The problem I had with this is that aesthetics was given the same weight as other categories such as speed, reliability, and security. Now, I understand that aesthetics are important to some (for me, my computer is shoved under my desk, so, meh), but if it is that important, there are plenty of examples of computer case mods, which are most prevalent on PC's. It just kinda frustrated me, so you are people are my sounding board for this.

Have a good day, and enjoy your system, whatever that may be.
 
Starthinker said:
I can see people using whatever they want. You're a Mac person? Great! You're a *nix person? Great! But looking over this thread I see a few people talking about their PC dual booting with XP as the second operating system or having some XP system somewhere for certain apps. And not just here, but I hear about dual booting all the time. If the other OSs give you what you want, why the dual boot? That just tells me that you still need Windows to some extent. If you didn't, the you wouldn't have the dual boot. Until that need is replaced Microsoft is still selling you a copy of their OS so you didn't really save anything. Not trying to be pro-MS or belittle the other OSs, but I just wanted to point out that it's the need that's making them money, and until you can relieve that need you are still supporting old Bill.
Click to expand...

I dual boot because my kids like Windows and we have a huge library of games. To play games is the only reason I boot XP an that machine. Games are the specific software that ties me to Windows. I suppose you wonder why I don't just use Windows for the regular stuff? Certainly it can do what I want, I just can't stand using it.

When I want to get something done I don't want to boot up and see pop up balloons reminding to update my AV software. I don't want it to do anything other than what I want it to. I honestly don't get that experience in Windows. I use XP at work regularly and frequently find myself pleading with it to just do what I asked it to.

Another reason I don't like using Windows is that it isn't very powerful out of the box. To outfit a Windows box with software similar to what open source I use would cost several thousand dollars. I don't have that kind of money and refuse to bootleg. With Linux I get a system that does what I need, the way I'd like it to and a huge collection of very useful software at a price I can afford.

I also just like playing around with this stuff.

That's my reason for dual booting. I'm sure there are others. Of five PCs in the house three dual boot and two are Linux only.
 
The only reason I dislike Macs is because they cause me so much hassle. If I get sent files from a Mac user, I invariably have a problem opening them, if I can at all (for example I can almost never open a Mac video file). Same with audio.

And often I can't open graphics files sent by Mac users, which in my business is a complete pain.

A silly thing, but I often chat on Messenger with a Mac user and the latest version he can get is 5.0 which doesn't have any of the features that make Messenger really good fun (custom emoticons, handwriting, nudges, etc).

I don't care if people want to choose a different machine, OS or software but they should at least ensure what they create is compatible with the vast majority of systems out there.

Iron out that problem and then it's just a case of choosing between two different brands. No different than choosing your car, really.
 
tkingdoll said:
The only reason I dislike Macs is because they cause me so much hassle. If I get sent files from a Mac user, I invariably have a problem opening them, if I can at all (for example I can almost never open a Mac video file). Same with audio.

And often I can't open graphics files sent by Mac users, which in my business is a complete pain.
Click to expand...


I find I can open almost anything on my 'non-windows' PC.

Have you tried loading GIMP for Windows? It supports lots of graphic file types and even if you just opened and converted a file it could useful. It's free which makes it cheap to try.
 
tkingdoll said:
The only reason I dislike Macs is because they cause me so much hassle. If I get sent files from a Mac user, I invariably have a problem opening them, if I can at all (for example I can almost never open a Mac video file). Same with audio.

And often I can't open graphics files sent by Mac users, which in my business is a complete pain.

A silly thing, but I often chat on Messenger with a Mac user and the latest version he can get is 5.0 which doesn't have any of the features that make Messenger really good fun (custom emoticons, handwriting, nudges, etc).

I don't care if people want to choose a different machine, OS or software but they should at least ensure what they create is compatible with the vast majority of systems out there.

Iron out that problem and then it's just a case of choosing between two different brands. No different than choosing your car, really.
Click to expand...


Problem solved with Parallels. The Mac user can now run windows programs on the fly side by side with their OSX stuff.

If your mac user clients have a PPC mac, not an intel one, then there are other solutions (like the suggested GIMP etc. which your mac friend can use to save in a more windows friendly format) and as for the chat program, Adium is a multi-chat-support program that can work for any type of chat system (Messenger, Gtalk, Jabber, AIM etc.) for mac that supports all the functions you describe.

Whenever I hear of someone on a windows platform having trouble with something sent to them by a mac user it is invariably due to the mac user not understanding the abilities they have to save in windows friendly formats.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom