The Wide, Wide World of Apple

[MadImmortalMan]

Including Vista Ultimate, I come in at $1027.88. Now, try to tell me how much of a steal that Mac Pro is, at $2,499.00

I'll sell you a sticker with an apple on it for your case for $1400 if you want. 

[Valdemar]

And, BB, consider our bitching a payback for all your Mac comments in PC threads :p 

V

But I'm very deliberate in PC threads.  I don't say "PCs are crap, M$ is teh evol".  I just, you know, bring up Apple.

And I only point out why Apple have no reason to be particullary smug given it is now down to overpriced design

V

[derspiess]

Speculation is that the luster may be fading from Apple's brand.  iPhone users are up in arms over Apple's approval process for apps in the app store (particularly the Google Phone app) and Apple's overall customer satisfaction fell pretty sharply last quarter (though they still rank first due to the fanboy delusion factor). 

Looks like it's time for Steve Jobs to swoop in & save the day with his new liver.

[derspiess]

Btw, my sister in law who is in visiting was looking for a new iPod.  But now she wants a: Zune

[DisturbedPervert]

The best feature I see in Snow Leopard is the more reliable disc eject.

What?  Mac's still don't have a mechanical disc eject button?

[DontSayBanana]

What?  Mac's still don't have a mechanical disc eject button?

There's no room in the current crop of MacBooks- they've got them thin and light, but they had to sacrifice a lot of safety mechanisms (particularly cooling- those things run HOT) to do so.

[Ed Anger]

 

[Jaron]

Someone told me they saw a blind woman touch an iMac and get her vision back..

[Barrister]

You know I very nicely made a specific Apple thread so I could talk about Apple stuff.  You're free to come and piss on Steve Jobs if you really want, but I wonder why?

Apple computer themselves are reasonably priced when you look at the exact components.  When I bought my Mac Pro I priced out identical PCs, and the price was almost identical.  But you had to be very specific in what you were pricing out - in the case of the Mac Pro that meant pricing out a quad-core Xeon.  Or if you compare an iMac you have to compare to other all-on-one form factors.

But one thing that Apple will screw you on is memory.  I really don't know why.  That's why I ordered my system with the factory minimum in both RAM and harddrive - because non-Apple components would be much cheaper.  But the system itself was fairly priced.

You know, I decided to verify the bolded part. On Newegg, I could piece together an equivalent system (downgrading the OpenGL 3.0 GTX 120 to an OpenGL 2.1 GeForce 9500 GT, upgrading the DVD±R to 22x for reasons of exact models not being available, and assuming a 950W power supply to be on the safe side). The only things I haven't factored in are keyboard and mouse. Oh, and I added a bluetooth adapter to make sure that functionality was present.

Some things to note: almost no manufacturers use DDR3 1066; there's some DDR2 1066, but most DDR3 systems have a faster FSB.

Including Vista Ultimate, I come in at $1027.88. Now, try to tell me how much of a steal that Mac Pro is, at $2,499.00

Without even looking I am almost certain I know what you did wrong.

What kind of processor did you price out?

The current Mac Pro uses:

8-core: Two 2.26GHz, 2.66GHz, or 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon 5500 series processors
Quad-core: One 2.66GHz or 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon 3500 series processor

You can definitely price out a cheaper quad or octo-core computer at the same speeds.  But they won't be Nehalem Xeon processors, which are much more expensive.

What did you use for memory?

The current Mac Pro uses:

1066MHz DDR3 ECC SDRAM
8-core: Eight memory slots (four per processor) supporting up to 32GB of main memory using 1GB, 2GB, or 4GB DIMMs
Quad-core: Four memory slots supporting up to 8GB of main memory using 1GB or 2GB DIMMs

I believe the ECC part is more expensive and not what you'd typically put in a home system.  I don't know the current system as well (I have the '08 model) but it was also FD-DIMM memory, which again is more expensive.

The computer is certainly expensive.  You could certainly make the argument that for what I use it for I could find a computer that is just as good for a whole lot less.  But for those basic components I don't think you can say Apple overcharges compared to what other manufacturers would charge for the exact same components.



Oh, there is one other thing on Apple pricing.  Apple components tend to be very price-competitive (again - for identical components) when first announced or released.  however Apple doesn't reduce the price of its computers over time.  So if you buy a system that is a year or more since its last hardware refresh the price of the system will be unchanged, while the price of the components will have dropped.

[Barrister]

What?  Mac's still don't have a mechanical disc eject button?

There's no room in the current crop of MacBooks- they've got them thin and light, but they had to sacrifice a lot of safety mechanisms (particularly cooling- those things run HOT) to do so.

Good Lord, where do you get this stuff?

I mean really.  "they had to sacrifice a lot of safety mechanisms"?  I'm going to ask you to either prove that statement or retract it.  And by prove it I mean link me to some kind of independent review that says Apple sacrifices safety mechanisms.

Apple doesn't do separate disc eject buttons.  They never have.  My Mac Pro, which has an enormous amount of space, doesn't have one.  It has nothing to do with safety or room, it's a design decision.

If that bothers you, fine.  BUt don't just make shit up about why they do it.

[Berkut]

That is like saying that an Apple is not over-priced, because if you waste a huge amount of money on another computer that also has overly expensive components with giant profit margins that provide no real benefit to the user, then in fact it is about the same.

No, it is still grossly over-priced, since normal people don't buy Xeon processors or waste money on DDR3 ECC RAM.

You are essentially arguing that a Ferrari is not overly expensive because it is no more pricey than an equivalent Porscha, except that in this case the Toyota actually performs as well or better anyway.

That is the real kicker - your $2500 doesn't really get you anything. Sure, if I price out a PC with A Quad Xeon, it will cost a fortune as well. On the other hand, I could price out a PC that will perform as well or better than your Mac *without* a Xeon, and will cost a lot less. Because you don't need a Xeon, and you don't need ECC memory, and you would be much better off spending a fraction of the cost of those items on a better video card, for example.

[Barrister]

You are essentially arguing that a Ferrari is not overly expensive because it is no more pricey than an equivalent Porscha, except that in this case the Toyota actually performs as well or better anyway.

That is the anti-Martinus analogy, in that it is correct.

I wouldn't say that a Toyota "performs well or better" that a Ferrari.  In certain circumstances the Ferrari will very clearly outperform your Toyota.  However both are probably just as effective at driving you to work during rush-hour traffic.  Which when you consider that most of what I do on my Mac is surf the web and play WoW pretty much is the computing equivalent to driving in rush hour traffic.   

[DisturbedPervert]

Apple doesn't do separate disc eject buttons.  They never have.  My Mac Pro, which has an enormous amount of space, doesn't have one.  It has nothing to do with safety or room, it's a design decision.

I've never understood, what is the point of this design decision? 

[DontSayBanana]

Kentsfield. 2.66GHz quad-core, 16MB cache.

All of the RAM I was looking at was ECC unbuffered.

I went by numbers, not by names.

EDIT: BTW, before you start spouting off how "fair" it is, here's another thing to consider- a system that's entirely composed of bleeding-edge-in-its-category manufacture won't necessarily play well together. It's already caused problems with chipsets in both iMacs and MBPs.

[DontSayBanana]

Apple doesn't do separate disc eject buttons.  They never have.  My Mac Pro, which has an enormous amount of space, doesn't have one.  It has nothing to do with safety or room, it's a design decision.

I've never understood, what is the point of this design decision? 

Who knows? In terms of big names, they're the only ones who don't do it. I would also question that "design decision" considering numerous reports of stuck CDs.