Ok, so I'm going to start one of these.... I'm not here to apple bash, I like them in their own place, but i've heard a lot of yay/naying on it recently and felt like voicing my thoughts without derailing other threads....
I built my own PC at the end of last year.
Core I7 950 3GHz Quad core
Gigabyte UD7 mobo
6GB DDR3 memory
1.5TB SATA 6Gb/S drive
Sapphire ATI Radeon 5870
Blue Ray RW drive
new Case and 100W Corsair PSU.
plus Windows 7 Pro
total cost just shy of £1400.
Now I'm a heavy gamer, and it's fair to say I'm engrained in MS tech, and have been for most of my life. My first PC was DOS and Win 3.11, and i've worked along and up as i've got older.
I don't really do and media work beyond tinkering with some screenshots or the odd digital photo from my phone or compact camera. I also tend to prefer a machine i can upgrade over time to help keep up with the times without replacing the whole PC, eg memory, graphics, hard drive, and occasionally CPU...
So if I take a look at what I can get from Apple that as closely as possible matches what I bought....
I looked at the Mac Pro, as it's unfair to compare to macbooks or imac's.
Now there are 2 base models, and since it's starting price was £2000, I went for that one...
So i customise the machine to closer match what I got already... CPU is a xeon instead of Core i7 and is slower by 0.2GHz.
I can match the memory and the graphics card, but cannot get a 6gb/s hard drive, so go for a 1TB SATA 3gb one.
Apple do not support blue ray at this time, still, so cannot get one of these added either.
I leave off all addons (except for the display port converters )and support options, and the total cost comes to: £2450.
£1100 in difference.
So you can argue, that Mac OSX comes with some stuff bundled.... OK so lets add a few bits of software to the Windows PC...
Full Nero 10 suite with Blue ray support: £60
Let's add Cyberlink PowerDVD 10 as well: £55
I'll also add Cubase Studio 5: £300
and let's add Serif Photo and Draw Plus X2: £100
So we're still £500-600 under the price of the mac, with software that should cover most if not all of what a basic mac has, and in some respects exceeds it.
If you wanted to do full video editing or really go into photo manipulation etc, then arguably Final Cut Pro is enough of a reason to want a mac, and Adobe CS works on both platforms.
But as a bog standard home user, who wants a home pc to play with, work with the family video's, play some music, touch up the holiday pictures.... as a gamer it's generally inadviseable, though with steam now porting to mac this is improving...
I just cannot see, beyond the specialist role, how/why a Mac is better than a normal PC, especially not to the cost of £500-1000 extra. I can do 95% of what that mac does for 1/2-2/3 of the price.
AMLightfoot (27th July 2011), BatchFile (17th January 2011), BenABF (13th January 2011), bossman (12th January 2011), Diello (12th January 2011), jpaterson (14th January 2011), linuxgirlie (12th January 2011), Rawns (17th January 2011), Robz (12th January 2011), Rydra (12th January 2011), skell (12th January 2011), stevenlong1985 (12th January 2011), tech_guy (14th January 2011), TronXP (12th January 2011), webman (12th January 2011), wesleyw (14th January 2011)
A very well worded argument and sums up almost perfectly the reason why I stick with "PC" based systems.
I know you can get the Macs that have the monitor built in but for £220 you can get a 24" monitor as well.
Also I'm guessing you meant a 1000W PSU rather than 100W?
thanks to whoever neg rep'd me.
For what MACs are, that picture is a great argument.
But I agree they are better for video editing and such like simply for the specialist software designed for it!
Not enough said. Stop perpetuating this nonsense! YOU ARE BUYING A COMPLETE SYSTEM, INCLUDING AN OPERATING SYSTEM, AND A PACK OF SOFTWARE!
You are not buying off the shelf components and sticking them together and hoping they work well. You are buying a custom designed machine, with components that have been tested and are guaranteed to work together, with the Apple OS which has taken many years to develop, and is arguably better than Windows in many ways.
The upgrade costs are comparable to those charged by companies like HP. Go get one of their workstation machines and see how much a hard disk upgrade is, or a processor upgrade. The RAM, for example, in the Mac Pro is ECC RAM, not your usual cheapo stuff. It is server grade RAM.
So, please, before posting threads like this, think about it!
To the OP, you are comparing an i7 machine with Xeon which isn't even in the same ball park. You are comparing a 'home user' machine with a 'workstation'.
Apple do not make a non-all-in-one machine designed for normal home users.
As I mentioned in another article. When the Lotus Elise came out, it used a Rover 1.8L engine. The same engine that was used in the Rover 25/45/75. Same engine, VERY different cars.
PS. It wasn't me who neg-repped.
by the same token you could say bmws are bad as you can get all the same equipment in a ford fiesta for much less (even comparing a 3 series to a mondeo)
its right tool for right job (and to an extend percieved right tool for right job)
persnoannly i find macs annoying to use but thats probably because im so used to windows and some things you take for granted in windows macs just dont do the same/at all and im sure the reverse is true. My main issue is why as it is pc hardware cant i buy osx as an os for my homebuilt pc and dual boot rather than having to buy an apple shiny box
anyone have a side by side comparison of workstation machines based on the apple spec?
ie: a like for like comparison with a Windows PC from HP / Dell / etc ...
might do that tonight for fun .... urgh too sad for words am I
I dislike most Mac users, I don't mind the hardware though...
wow 3 neg reps for my post! good going guys! if you wanna neg rep me, have the cajones to say who you are and why, rather than just saying "rubbish" and leaving it at that.
Anyways...I am not anti-apple, but having taken one apart (not too long ago), they do use standard parts (apart from mobo and ram which as stated are close to server spec!!).
Whilst I agree the OS is better than windows, you will find the world uses windows apart from the specialist apps which I have already said! I have nothing against apple, just have problems that they charge extortionate prices for mostly standard parts and then put their logo on it!! And yes I know Dell and HP do the same, which is why I dont use them either!
I know how frustrating Macs can be to an experienced Windows user who has never used one before, but also know that if you give them a chance, they can be enjoyable to use. Ultimately, it's a choice. An objective decision with no right or wrong answer, so I have no idea why we need threads like these...
Bloomfield (microprocessor) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Its funny isnt it, you say "So, please, before posting threads like this, think about it!" yet you don't think about your post...
Last edited by j17sparky; 12th January 2011 at 02:08 PM.
Ok, so I built my PC by hand....
You can buy a Dell system, essentially the same specs as I built for £1500-1600. That is both their XPS high end work stations and their alienware gaming systems.
and if you want to compare the imac's, the highest spec one they do is the only one that matches what i bought, and still costs £2000+. And then you still have an item that is difficult to upgrade, with heavy limits on what you can upgrade.
If you look at the lower end, you can buy a basic desktop for £350, the nearest to that from apple is the mac mini at £600+.
Laptops, they start at £870 from apple for their lowest. My aunt just bought a lenovo one for £360.
So again, why would a 'normal' home user want one over a PC? Most of what you can do with a mac you can now do in windows 7, and what you can't do you can get software that does it for minimal cost. They are generally too expensive for standard home family user, wont do what a teenage gamer wants to do without fiddling, and too expensive for most high end users, unless they are specialising in media work?
If it's a 'status' thing for showing off then fine, you're paying for that. Bundled software? Sure, except you can still buy software that does the same thing for a lot less for the PC, or if your good with google, go open source and a lot of it is free. Reliability? I bought a new PC because the old one, was old... It had been running almost solidly for 3 years, and apart from a fried graphics card, was still running as well at the end of 3 years as it was when i got it.
My parents have a 10 year old TIME pc, that albeit is running a bit slow now, but is still going.
i have used apples, in fact i borrowed one for my honeymoon as it was smaller/lighter than the 19" laptop i had at the time. And for uploading photo's, and browsing the net, yeah it worked, and easily. But I didn't pay the £950 for it in the first place.
But for the ability to upload pictures to facebook, itunes, and video editing that can be done with a £50 suite off the shelf, for half the price, I'm really not seeing it here.
Apple to me is like the David Blaine of the computer world; they have extravagant stunts that look great, but when you really get down to it, they are living in their own little world and most of what they do is trickery and mind tricks.
Apple Macs and Windows PC's are different, I personally would always prefer building my own PC and in my opinion saving some money in the process. However, Apple has proven they can produce decent equipment and Mac's are very often preferred in certain fields such as media work.
nephilim (27th July 2011)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)