While I was looking through a Best Buy add, I saw the a mac with 4 gb ram and 600+ hard drive was $1,200, while a laptop had the smae memory and was around $500. Why are apple products so expensive? This also goes for ipods, ipads, and the others.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Mac vs. PC
- Thread starter Shiny Mew2
- Start date
Apple is expensive because of a bunch of reasons. One is because of the OS; No one runs Snow Leopard, except for macs, and many programs (such as Garage Band etc), run exclusively on Macs. Plus, their OS is pretty sweet, for a Windows person like me.
Second, is because they're an Entertainment company. Their products. Look. Nice. Period. Compared to a similar priced Windows laptop, the Windows laptop will most likely give you a much better performance, with the different OS. However, Macs usually carry LED screens, with higher resolutions, and look very "chic" and "fashionable." People eat that shit up so fast.
From what I've seen at school, many people buy Macs mainly to look different from the Windows crowd (which doesn't work well when I look at my Lecture halls and there's more Macs than there are Windows laptops.) Plus, it's the whole brand hype; people buy for the brand, not for the performance. I asked a few of my friends why they would buy Mac and they replied to the lines of "It's so thin" "It's a mac, it looks nice" "Macs are nicer in general" "Macs are more reliable" (Completely unfounded, there are major engineering issues on some of their unibody laptops, leading to heating problems, and a bunch of other crap).
I have nothing against Mac users. Most of my friends are mac users. However, I wish people would make a bit more informed decisions when buying laptops and buying Apple laptops.
Second, is because they're an Entertainment company. Their products. Look. Nice. Period. Compared to a similar priced Windows laptop, the Windows laptop will most likely give you a much better performance, with the different OS. However, Macs usually carry LED screens, with higher resolutions, and look very "chic" and "fashionable." People eat that shit up so fast.
From what I've seen at school, many people buy Macs mainly to look different from the Windows crowd (which doesn't work well when I look at my Lecture halls and there's more Macs than there are Windows laptops.) Plus, it's the whole brand hype; people buy for the brand, not for the performance. I asked a few of my friends why they would buy Mac and they replied to the lines of "It's so thin" "It's a mac, it looks nice" "Macs are nicer in general" "Macs are more reliable" (Completely unfounded, there are major engineering issues on some of their unibody laptops, leading to heating problems, and a bunch of other crap).
I have nothing against Mac users. Most of my friends are mac users. However, I wish people would make a bit more informed decisions when buying laptops and buying Apple laptops.
Macs are also less susceptible to viruses iirc.
I don't even use a laptop, just a Windows XP computer (which is most prone to viruses, go figure).
I don't even use a laptop, just a Windows XP computer (which is most prone to viruses, go figure).
Um, there's a WHOLE lot more to a computer than RAM and HDD space....
Assuming I'm looking at the same ad, you're comparing this Mac to this laptop. A few things you're not looking at:
Processor speed: 3.06GHz (Mac) vs. 2.26GHz (laptop). This is a HUGE difference in computing power, and processing power can drive up cost.
Display: 21.5" LED display, 1080p resolution (Mac) vs. 15.6" LED display, 720p resolution. Not only is the it a better display, it's also got better resolution. Both factors can up price quite a bit in televisions; in the monitor world, resolution is the key factor.
I can tell that the graphics card in the Mac is better, but it's much harder to give an actual comparison of the two.
All-in-one desktops also generally more spendy than standalone CPUs because of both the inclusion of the monitor and the design convenience (ie because they can); this also will up the price of that Mac in particular. I'm not going to say that none of the cost is associated with the name, but I don't necessarily think the Mac is overpriced. In fact that laptop itself is overpriced, you can get a much better laptop for cheaper.
What you have brought up in the OP is not Mac vs. PC, it's spec A vs spec B. I may or may not address an actual Mac vs PC comparison some other time.
Oh and Macs are just as susceptible to viruses as PCs. There's really two reasons Windows is more prone to viruses: 1) Windows controls a huge percentage of the OS market share, so most viruses are going to be programmed to infect Windows machines, and 2) EXE files are the most common method (to my knowledge) to integrate viruses (various reasons), and EXE files will not work on a Mac. Nothing irks me more than "I have a mac, it can't be a virus," so sorry for coming off short if I did.
Assuming I'm looking at the same ad, you're comparing this Mac to this laptop. A few things you're not looking at:
Processor speed: 3.06GHz (Mac) vs. 2.26GHz (laptop). This is a HUGE difference in computing power, and processing power can drive up cost.
Display: 21.5" LED display, 1080p resolution (Mac) vs. 15.6" LED display, 720p resolution. Not only is the it a better display, it's also got better resolution. Both factors can up price quite a bit in televisions; in the monitor world, resolution is the key factor.
I can tell that the graphics card in the Mac is better, but it's much harder to give an actual comparison of the two.
All-in-one desktops also generally more spendy than standalone CPUs because of both the inclusion of the monitor and the design convenience (ie because they can); this also will up the price of that Mac in particular. I'm not going to say that none of the cost is associated with the name, but I don't necessarily think the Mac is overpriced. In fact that laptop itself is overpriced, you can get a much better laptop for cheaper.
What you have brought up in the OP is not Mac vs. PC, it's spec A vs spec B. I may or may not address an actual Mac vs PC comparison some other time.
Oh and Macs are just as susceptible to viruses as PCs. There's really two reasons Windows is more prone to viruses: 1) Windows controls a huge percentage of the OS market share, so most viruses are going to be programmed to infect Windows machines, and 2) EXE files are the most common method (to my knowledge) to integrate viruses (various reasons), and EXE files will not work on a Mac. Nothing irks me more than "I have a mac, it can't be a virus," so sorry for coming off short if I did.
Avast for mac! Win
It's a mac, and it has virus protection on it! wooh
It's a mac, and it has virus protection on it! wooh
a good portion of customers assume that more expense stuff must be better simply because it costs more. for this reason, almost all computer manufacturers/distributors deliberately overprice their products, but apple takes it to a whole new level. they also benefit from their brand being associated with individuality and coolness - consider the way schoolkids with more expensive clothing were "cooler" than the rest.
(i'm not saying apple stuff isn't good. that mac definitely looks better than that hp. it's just not two and a half times better.)
(i'm not saying apple stuff isn't good. that mac definitely looks better than that hp. it's just not two and a half times better.)
Mac vs PC is like Toyota vs Ferrari...
and the Ferrari is cheaper...
I never really liked macs. However, the only experience I have had with them is at my high school. So, I really can't say for sure which one is better.
and the Ferrari is cheaper...
I never really liked macs. However, the only experience I have had with them is at my high school. So, I really can't say for sure which one is better.
Apple is a fascinating case study as a whole though. It's amazing how marketing and brand imaging have built that company up in the last decade. I mean, there have been better mp3 players than the IPod for the last 5 years at least. The actual computers themselves have already been discussed in the above posts.
One of the only real legitimately superior products I believe they have had is the IPhone when it first came out. It seems like that was the first touch screen phone to really get it right. Now it seems the market has caught up, but during its initial run, the IPhone was pretty unique.
One of the only real legitimately superior products I believe they have had is the IPhone when it first came out. It seems like that was the first touch screen phone to really get it right. Now it seems the market has caught up, but during its initial run, the IPhone was pretty unique.
I was a long time PC user and builder of my own computers before I switched to the Mac. I don't care much for "looks," "price," or any of the factors that have been brought up prior to my post. The main thing I'm looking for is usability; so far, most of the features on Apple's products have been designed thoughtfully, at least from my experience. OS X also tends to be much easier and more elegant to use, as is with much of Apple's other work. While Windows-based PCs tend to focus more on raw specs, Macs emphasize features more related to usability (larger trackpads, lighter weight, bundled iLife suite). Regarding the trackpads, I have yet to find any equivalent Windows-based computers with the same level of multi-touch capabilities. There are other factors, but I'm using that one as a specific example.
I'll address the notion about Mac specs being underpowered next. Consider the law of diminishing returns. When applied in this context, it basically means that there exists a point such that an increase in raw specs will not deliver a susceptible performance gain to the user. This point differs depending on the user, but it has been reached for many taking into account the current level of computer hardware. Back when I was shopping for a laptop, you would be lucky to find a dual core processor and anything better than Intel integrated graphics. Now even Apple includes dual cores and graphics chipsets that rival discrete graphics of the past. All in all, Apple's products are more than powerful enough to satisfy my requirements, while including some nice extra touches throughout.
I'll address the notion about Mac specs being underpowered next. Consider the law of diminishing returns. When applied in this context, it basically means that there exists a point such that an increase in raw specs will not deliver a susceptible performance gain to the user. This point differs depending on the user, but it has been reached for many taking into account the current level of computer hardware. Back when I was shopping for a laptop, you would be lucky to find a dual core processor and anything better than Intel integrated graphics. Now even Apple includes dual cores and graphics chipsets that rival discrete graphics of the past. All in all, Apple's products are more than powerful enough to satisfy my requirements, while including some nice extra touches throughout.
People love "hip" things, things that they think make them look cool and different. Steve Jobs knows this, and he knows people think that Apple products are considered as such. He takes advantage of the customers, just like any smart business man would.
Not saying that Apple products are bad, but I think most people that buy them (Apple's computers in particular) do so only because they look sleek and cool.
Not saying that Apple products are bad, but I think most people that buy them (Apple's computers in particular) do so only because they look sleek and cool.
Please share.
Though the OP's question has been largely answered and this topic has been beaten to hell and back I guess I'll post about my own experiences as it's been on my mind lately.
I got a 2006 macbook. The reasons: garage band, the thing looked nice, and windows xp was giving me fits on our pc. Yeah, not the best reasons save for the last one, but that's probably something around the caliber of most costumer's thought process.
Fast forward a year and I'm very satisfied with the machine. It's damn good looking, garage band is pretty sweet, and OSX is much better than XP in my eyes, with it crashing far less and everything being more "streamlined".
Fast forward to the present dayyyyy and I'm not going to get another mac. The main reason is that I've not gotten great reliability out of it. HD died, battery died fast as hell (and by the time I found out about the early-macbook battery recall I had gone over the cycle limit, which is bullshit), one of the memory sticks died, and to top it all off now it's randomly shutting off on me. I expected far better. And no I don't abuse it; I've used it as a desktop for years as a result of the battery literally lasting 45 seconds. My brother hasn't had much luck either. His logic board, HD, and airport card died. All this is complicated by the fact that macbook-exclusive parts are expensive as shit. Buying an item that typically doesn't have the best shelf life (laptops in general) and is expensive-to-repair to boot doesn't seem like the most prudent idea.
There's also the fact that times have changed due to this:
Lastly there have been plenty of times that I've wanted to run a program but couldn't because well duh. I'd like to be able to access the abundance of open source programs etc available. I think I'd be able to sacrifice a glass trackpad, unibody enclosure, and (maybe) screen quality for a functionally comparable, cheaper machine that has full access to the wealth of the internet.
I got a 2006 macbook. The reasons: garage band, the thing looked nice, and windows xp was giving me fits on our pc. Yeah, not the best reasons save for the last one, but that's probably something around the caliber of most costumer's thought process.
Fast forward a year and I'm very satisfied with the machine. It's damn good looking, garage band is pretty sweet, and OSX is much better than XP in my eyes, with it crashing far less and everything being more "streamlined".
Fast forward to the present dayyyyy and I'm not going to get another mac. The main reason is that I've not gotten great reliability out of it. HD died, battery died fast as hell (and by the time I found out about the early-macbook battery recall I had gone over the cycle limit, which is bullshit), one of the memory sticks died, and to top it all off now it's randomly shutting off on me. I expected far better. And no I don't abuse it; I've used it as a desktop for years as a result of the battery literally lasting 45 seconds. My brother hasn't had much luck either. His logic board, HD, and airport card died. All this is complicated by the fact that macbook-exclusive parts are expensive as shit. Buying an item that typically doesn't have the best shelf life (laptops in general) and is expensive-to-repair to boot doesn't seem like the most prudent idea.
There's also the fact that times have changed due to this:
Apple's products forced competitors to get their asses in gear, and as a result there's less that differentiates them. Nowadays win7 is a perfectly satisfactory OS and laptops in general have gotten more attractive, though yeah they're still not up to par with apple's offerings.
Lastly there have been plenty of times that I've wanted to run a program but couldn't because well duh. I'd like to be able to access the abundance of open source programs etc available. I think I'd be able to sacrifice a glass trackpad, unibody enclosure, and (maybe) screen quality for a functionally comparable, cheaper machine that has full access to the wealth of the internet.
The success behind mac is the comprehensibility and breadth of its line, coupled with excellent customer support.
I didn't buy such-and-such computer from such-and-such retailer-- I bought a mac. As I travel around the world, I pretty much got support wherever I go. Hey, if it's an MAC, than any apple retailer will be bending over the back to help me with it. I have constantly been impressed with support, even here in Japan. What seals it for me is all the built in software-- none of it is top level, but it's usable, and the one-to-one program Apple has is really useful (I've also taken up the classes here in Japan). Also, thank you boot camp, I now can use all those wonderful applications for PC. I just do all my internet surfing on my Apple side (with anti-virus screening) and don't even have to worry about virus protecting the PC side.
They create the image of excellent performance and support, and then they back it up.
There are a lot of wealthy people in this day and age (even in recession), and many are willing to pay the extra money to feel "safe" that they bought with someone "trustworthy".
I didn't buy such-and-such computer from such-and-such retailer-- I bought a mac. As I travel around the world, I pretty much got support wherever I go. Hey, if it's an MAC, than any apple retailer will be bending over the back to help me with it. I have constantly been impressed with support, even here in Japan. What seals it for me is all the built in software-- none of it is top level, but it's usable, and the one-to-one program Apple has is really useful (I've also taken up the classes here in Japan). Also, thank you boot camp, I now can use all those wonderful applications for PC. I just do all my internet surfing on my Apple side (with anti-virus screening) and don't even have to worry about virus protecting the PC side.
They create the image of excellent performance and support, and then they back it up.
There are a lot of wealthy people in this day and age (even in recession), and many are willing to pay the extra money to feel "safe" that they bought with someone "trustworthy".
You are definitely NOT going to go with iPods in terms of audio quality. MP3 Players such as Cowon, and a few models of the iRiver and Sandisk(I'm mostly familiar with these, because they're Korean brands, except for Sandisk) offer the best sound quality, coupled with a good pair of earbuds or headphones, such as Shure, or Sennheisers. Unless you couple the iPod with the SRS pack that's a pain to carry around, to enhance your sound, it's not going to sound up to par with its competitors.
That said, the iPod is still a great product, because of its multi tasking and multi uses such as for the internet, apps, games, and much more. It's much more consumer friendly than the more "hardcore" products on sale.
It's true that Apple has one of the best Customer Services around; they've been constantly been touted by many sources as having the top 3 customer services around. However, I wouldn't say that the only reason to buy a Mac is because of its reliability and its customer service. I know that the current Macbooks carry a few flaws of their own. Their unibody design, while unique, carries huge thermal issues, coupled with the 12 cell battery they stuff in there (Have you seen the insides of a Macbook Pro, or the Air? Barely any room for thermal output, leading to parts dying early, and lower performance.) I took the liberty of doing a one day experiment by sticking in a temperature program that monitored it for 24 hours (with their permissions of course), and I find that even though idle at around 45-55 (decent temperatures, nothing spectacular), I find that they spike up to critical temperatures, to 80-90, even without stressing the processor or graphics card much. Of course, I can't speak for all the macs, because I only tested a small sample (around 5 Macbook pros, with varying specs, and 2 Macbook Airs, one of which was the newer model).
Furthermore, there are other companies that offer great customer service. Lenovo, Dell and Acer are ones I have had personal experiences with, and they've offered me top quality service. Furthermore, these companies I believe are also touted as reliable in terms of Customer Service. Acer took my laptop and fixed it in less than 24 hours, to share a personal anecdote.
Finally, in terms of build, Lenovo has some of the best builds available in the market (their prices are a bit lower than the Macbook pros, but they offer great specs and reliability). They have the magnesium cage that protects the HDD from external damage, and failure. Their thermal vents and cooling system are excellent; using a stress test, my friend's T400 maxed out at 73 degrees Celsius, which is incredible. And their durability is matched by none, except by maybe the Panasonic Tough Book. Funny story: this friend took his T400 and proceeded to beat an annoying friend of ours with the laptop, and suffered only a few scratches, while my friend had his hip hurting for more than a week. Their screen resolution and lighting rivals the Mac, and they offer a GPU that also rivals it, and same with the processors. Their only difference: The Lenovo is around 300-600 dollars cheaper than the Macintosh, offering the same specs, plus Lenovo regularly offers 30% off coupons every few months in promotions, which is another plus.