Is Apple Actually Rip-Off?

p1 ama on 19/11/2013 - 19:28

This is a topic that comes up time and time again with both sides saying that they are right. However, I wouldn't mind a proper discussion on the topic, given that there are quite a number of people who are staunchly for or against Apple on this forum.

I've done a bit of research and this is what I've (personally) found. In the desktop market, Apple has two offerings, the iMac and Mac Mini. The Mac Pro also features here, but it's so terribly bad value that it doesn't really warrant inclusion here.

Let's look at the 21.5" iMac.

One thing to note here is that Apple charges exhorbitant prices for upgrades. E.g. $240 for a 250GB SSD and you lose your 1TB hard drive. So the more you upgrade the iMac, the more disproportionately expensive it becomes. But let's look at the base config.

  • 2.7 GHz Core i5
  • 8GB RAM
  • 1TB 5400rpm HDD
  • Intel Iris Pro Graphics
  • Monitor, Keyboard/Mouse, OS included
  • $1599

So my aim is to build a similar or better computer out of parts for less, this is what I could do, trying to match the iMac as much as possible:

  • Fractal Design Define Mini - $129
  • Corsair VS450 - $55
  • ASUS B85M-G - $89
  • Intel Core i5 4670 - $245
  • 1TB Seagate Barracuda - $67
  • Gigabyte Radeon HD7770- $99
  • ASUS PB248Q 24in IPS - $429
  • Logitech MK520 - $59
  • Total - $1172

Assembly and OS should be a maximum of $200. So it comes down nearly $300 cheaper than the Apple alternative. A similar story is told when we look at other models.

This is despite us trying to counter the claims Apple supporters make, e.g. better monitor quality…etc. Here we chose an ASUS PB series IPS screen as well as discrete graphics which will run circles around the Iris Pro graphics.

So what we end up here is an Apple tax of $300. In your opinion, what do you get for this $300 and is it worth it?

Computing

Related Stores

Apple
Apple

Comments

        • sallan75 on 25/11/2013 - 09:44

          Funny how old arguments come around again. The few Apple huggers a decade ago use to cling to their Macs as they were faster at photo and video editing. Then the Opteron and Xeon workstations started appearing and blew the doors off the old Macs for this type of work.

          Considering Mac's use Intel processors now, if you had similar spec PC and Macs and the same software for photo editing, you would find it is mostly in your head that Apple is superior.

    • p1 ama on 20/11/2013 - 21:29
      +4

      I do a lot of photography and photo editing, PC's are crap for this. Just had a look, currently have 52,078 photos sitting in iPhoto - and that's been culled recently.

      What software do you use? Photoshop for Mac and for PC are exactly the same.

      It sync's with my husband's iphone, my ipad etc.

      So does a PC!

      Building pc's takes time and effort and isn't something I consider enjoyable…I have better things to do.

      PC shops will build it for $70, hardly a large expense!

    • IdLikeToBeATree on 20/11/2013 - 22:11
      +3

      "components failing" really? Mac computers are still computers. They have the same bits as a windows pc. Also the last time I got a virus on my pc was about 4 years ago so don't go blaming lack of user common sense on windows

      • itsfree on 21/11/2013 - 00:06
        -3

        You can't honestly tell me with a straight face that, say, Dell computers are manufactured the same way as Apple computers though, right?

        • ProspectiveDarkness on 21/11/2013 - 00:28
          +6

          The 'way' it's manufactured has little bearing on the longevity of specific components - a hard drive will fail whether it's in an Apple, Dell or custom computer. Don't let the nice machined edges fool you, all the components are off the shelf, and share the same likelihood of faults.

        • IdLikeToBeATree on 21/11/2013 - 01:46
          -1

          You think Apple asks for just the working parts for their computers?

        • itsfree on 21/11/2013 - 01:49
          -1

          Could you explain why certain manufacturers' products have higher failure rates than others then?

        • itsfree on 21/11/2013 - 01:49
          -1

          I was addressing your comment about components.

        • IdLikeToBeATree on 21/11/2013 - 01:56
          +1

          Because they perhaps use cheaper parts. This whole topic/discussion makes no sense anyway. How can we compare Apple computers to "PC"

          I'm just saying if you put identical CPU/ram/hard drive in a Mac and a windows PC, they both have the same odds of breaking

        • camelgrass on 21/11/2013 - 04:42
          +1

          A couple comments above are inaccurate.

          The way it's made/engineered does have a bearing on the odds of some components failing. For example excess heat can shorten the lifespan of several components, so optimisation of airflow and cooling is critical.

          Along with heat, vibration and shock can also have an effect on components, so internal engineering like design/layout/optimisation and protection systems like damping are critical. External protection plays a big part as well, and the build quality comes into play here. This is obviously more critical for laptops, and MBPs excell in this department.

        • IdLikeToBeATree on 21/11/2013 - 10:40

          100% agree but this is the fault of windows computer manufacturers rather than component manufacturers like Intel and WD.

        • ThadtheChad on 21/11/2013 - 11:57
          +2

          Actually, I beg to differ here.

          While this happens not very often, there are architectural issues at play that increase the longevity of a notebook and its internal components.

          I'll use my "much hated" XPS m1330 as an example. It was a slightly higher end penryn CPU with the 8400GS (soldered discrete graphics chip). The build quality of this laptop was absolute crap. Very little thought went into the internal arrangement of components, as a result of which, the internal wireless chip (too close to the GPU) died as did the battery (too close to the CPU; right next to the exhaust). The issue was that the cooling solution (heatsink+fan assembly) was intended for the onboard graphics chip+the lower end (base) CPU and consequently absolutely struggled (and failed) when trying to cool my chip and GPU. Just to give you an idea of the temps involved, the GPU would go up to 80+ on low end 3d/GPU accelerated work (heavy flash, mkv etc). To deal with the heating issues, I had to do a copper mod on the GPU/heatsink interface. Then I had to shim the headsink contact with the CPU and undervolt it to 30%ish reducting in core voltage.

          When I first opened my unibody, I was blown away by the space usage. It is not perfect as I have some ("nitpicky") issues with some of the architectural decisions, but it's pretty damn good. Moreover, heat-management is good and the chassis acts as a giant heatsink at times. Apple also undervolts and underclocks (boo!) hardware depending on the heat dissipation requirements of a particular chassis/form factor. To do that there is extensive QA performed thusly leading to a significantly better designed and optimised system. That said, it's not to say that Apple havent "screwed the pooch" on several occasions, remember the heating issues the retina mbps had?

        • mrmarkau67 on 21/11/2013 - 13:13
          +2

          I bought myself a Dell 1558 a few years ago. RAM, Resolution, CPU and graphics all superior on paper to a Macbook Pro costing $500 more. But due to poor engineering decisions, my Dell overheats when gaming and either shuts down losing all docs, or throttles down to 12.5% CPU performance, making everything crawl. Apple laptops represent the best engineering available. You can get equivalent in other brands, but only in their high end ranges.

        • ThadtheChad on 21/11/2013 - 13:21
          +1

          Tell me about it mate. I have to use a specc'd up Dell Vostro 3550 at work. You'd think that with a quad core i7 and heaps of RAM and a discrete graphics chip, it would be good and fast.

          God no, it's a real PoS. Heats up insanely (even when not using the GPU much) and instabilities due to the various hardware hacks they've made (e.g. USB3 controller is not native so causes issues when transferring huge amounts of data using USB ext hdds). Moreover, their implementation of switchable graphics is just a clusterfk. Pull out power cord and graphics switch to onboard; however, the ATI driver cannot cope with that and …BAM crash. I lost a few hours worth of work yesterday. :(

        • pascal03 on 21/11/2013 - 13:45

          Its just volume…

          PC sells a lot more than Apple, of course you will hear more failures.

          I'm not on either pc or apple camp. I'm just trying to give you perspective.

        • IdLikeToBeATree on 21/11/2013 - 14:28

          This is still all the fault of the laptop manufacturers for bad design. I would agree that apple have a higher build quality and smarter design with their laptops. But if we are talking desktop computers their is no way that components will die more often in a windows pc than a mac as long as they are smartly put together with sufficient cooling

        • Sammyboy on 23/11/2013 - 15:47

          Dell Alienware laptop is just as well built as any shiny Apple

        • teyc on 25/11/2013 - 10:39

          +1 I have a Dell Vostro Piece of Sh** and it is running at 84 C on 4 cores on no load. Just reading OzB. Anyone touting a Dell on OzB gets my -1 straightaway. It is no bargain because you are throwing good money after bad.

          I had changed out the thermal paste because it was hitting 99 C. With this type of build quality, I couldn't in good conscience sell it second hand.

  • biozet on 20/11/2013 - 13:52

    fashionable things are overpriced… spec wise it doesn't add up but it tends to run smoothly and without fault.
    The important thing to point out is that all the parts are made by pc manufacturers…often mid range…specifically designed so it lasts.

  • bargainjargon on 20/11/2013 - 14:21

    I can get the OS for around $30 (uni staff). Still, the price difference isn't too bad. I thought the difference would be more than that. If I preferred using the Mac OS to Windows and had to get a Mac, I probably wouldn't be mad about the price difference.

  • jdesign on 20/11/2013 - 16:08
    +2

    was using PCs before 2008, each year needs to format due system slows down for some reason + viruses i suppose.
    bought a 2008 macbook pro, never reformat it until i sold it on 2011. runs as the first time i had it. And you can actually sells a mac for a decent price.

    now have 2 macbook pro, the older 2011 model is still being used to edit videos for my wedding video business. not saying that mac doesn't have any defects / failures, but its hassle free and for some reason more stable ( i used to have a high end PCs which had like 3k graphic cards because doing videos, but it just keep crashing)

    • scrimshaw on 20/11/2013 - 16:23
      +8

      each year needs to format due system slows down for some reason + viruses i suppose.

      This is a rather popular myth about Windows.
      The slow down is caused by the lack of OS maintenance and bad PC usage practices.

      For e.g installing apps without unticking the checkboxes when the installer offers to include bloatware into the program group.

      • ThadtheChad on 20/11/2013 - 16:33
        +4

        This is a rather popular myth about Windows.
        The slow down is caused by the lack of OS maintenance and bad PC usage practices.

        +10000000

      • yk300 on 20/11/2013 - 19:43
        +2

        If you look at how Windows was designed, it is expected to have such 'crappy' behaviour. For example, Windows' design is GUI oriented - no power under the hood compared to a Unix OS, use of a what-seems-to-always-be-bloated registry, weird standards but that is very arguable. With all this in mind, then of course one would have to 'clean' the OS all the time/format the system.

        From my personal experience, Mac OS also slows down but at slower pace. I have not used Linux long enough to comment but it appears to be pretty stable.

      • itsfree on 21/11/2013 - 00:08
        +1

        installing apps without unticking the checkboxes when the installer offers to include bloatware into the program group

        The great thing about OS X is that you don't even have to worry about this BS…

        • galapogos01 on 21/11/2013 - 08:25
          +1

          You do understand that the only reason you don't currently have to worry about it is that OSX is the underdog. Once it gains popularity, it will also gain spyware, viruses, ad-supported software, etc.

          That software developers accept a cheque for including the Ask toolbar in their installer is not a Windows problem.

        • ThadtheChad on 21/11/2013 - 12:43

          You do understand that the only reason you don't currently have to worry about it is that OSX is the underdog. Once it gains popularity, it will also gain spyware, viruses, ad-supported software, etc.

          It's already happened. :) There are a whole heap of vulnerabilities for OS X.

          http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-49/pr…

          List of vulns in descending order of CVSS rating

  • RockyRaccoon on 20/11/2013 - 16:32

    You'll not get a two sided discussion here. So why are you bothering?

    What about in fairness, discussing what the same system will cost if you buy it from Dell or HP, what price differential is there? Can they supply it as cheap as a build your own system?

    The price you quote, are they all from the same supplier or do you look around?

    the OS isnt supposed to be used on non Apple equipment, just because you cant doesnt make it legal. Apple provides the OS at lower cost as a service to owners. So you rip it off and dont put a value on it. Gee I can get movies less than buying them in the store but that doesnt make it a bargain.

    Also with you Apple you get bundled some free software.

    This is not to say you cant build things cheaper, but when something goes wrong, again you have to trouble shoot the components.

    All power to those who can and do this, but what is your point? I know I pay more for my Apple gear than a build it yourself unit, nothing new here. BTW with so much Apple bashing many of my Apple friends who used to contribute to this site just dont like the self righteous attitude of those here who believe their way is the only way and dont share the bargains like they used to.

    So the staunchness you refer to is not as staunch any more. And the staunchness was mainly in reaction to those self righteous know it alls who have felt every post for an Apple product requires "apple is shit" responses.

    This is a bargain site to share bargains if you like Coke, then Pepsi isnt a bargain when its cheaper.

    Although Scotty even forgets that

    • _Bruce_ on 20/11/2013 - 16:50
      +5

      Wondering if you read many comments before writing this rant. Community looks fairly balanced overall to me.

    • scrimshaw on 20/11/2013 - 16:55
      +5

      I can see only 1 comment here that is blatantly anti-Apple. (ethereal88)

      Most of the comments here seem to be from people who actually own a Mac. And I think we're having a pretty civil discussion here, don't you think?

    • RockyRaccoon on 20/11/2013 - 20:58

      Bruce The "rant" aspect of that part of my post wasnt just confined to this thread. And also those here who just make similar remarks like Devok

      My first and main points were directed mainly the tone of the OP, who I was targeting, hence the questions asked of him, although its interesting to see that he hasnt even made further any contribution since starting this off.

      Scrimshaw, maybe you have negative votes hiding posts as Devok is also one who just rubbished it with emotive words.

      But again I go back to the OP where it really was a little loaded and so far it's been a hit and run post.

      But like everything some posts set off some buttons in all of us and that can color our interpretations… :)

    • p1 ama on 20/11/2013 - 21:10

      But again I go back to the OP where it really was a little loaded and so far it's been a hit and run post.

      A little unfair, given that I've been a little busy to reply and I've chimed in below. I don't think that my post was loaded in any way.

      What about in fairness, discussing what the same system will cost if you buy it from Dell or HP, what price differential is there? Can they supply it as cheap as a build your own system?

      I included assembly costs in my calculations, if you actually read it, so I think this is fair, you get a fully assembled and built computer.

      The price you quote, are they all from the same supplier or do you look around?

      Same supplier, PCCG. But the prices are pretty standard around Australia.

      Also with you Apple you get bundled some free software.

      Nothing that already free and open source software can't match. There's actually lots of free, high quality, software out there. I use OpenOffice.org and it's excellent.

      This is not to say you cant build things cheaper, but when something goes wrong, again you have to trouble shoot the components.

      No you don't, if you buy a system pre-built, you take it back to the store when something goes wrong and they fix it for you. ALTERNATIVELY, you can fix it yourself, which is something you can't do with Apple.

      All power to those who can and do this, but what is your point? I know I pay more for my Apple gear than a build it yourself unit, nothing new here. BTW with so much Apple bashing many of my Apple friends who used to contribute to this site just dont like the self righteous attitude of those here who believe their way is the only way and dont share the bargains like they used to.

      I know you do too, hence, I pointed out that there is a difference, which amounted to something like $300, then I invited people who use Apple to discuss whether this $300 was worth it.

      So the staunchness you refer to is not as staunch any more. And the staunchness was mainly in reaction to those self righteous know it alls who have felt every post for an Apple product requires "apple is shit" responses.

      What are you even talking about? In my post, I invited discussions on whether the "Apple Tax" is worth it. You say you use Apple products, you agree that they are more expensive, but you haven't talked about what benefits they bring that makes the extra price worthwhile. All you've done is pull the strawman and attack my post, which I think is silly.

  • Devils Advocate on 20/11/2013 - 18:24
    +1

    $217 isn't $300

  • p1 ama on 20/11/2013 - 21:02
    +3

    Hey guys,

    Really nice seeing the debate and how everyone is actually discussing based on experience and merits rather than "APPLE IS CRAP, APPLE IS EXPENSIVE, PC IS STUPID…etc." which was what I was hoping for when I opened this thread.

    In response to some of the people who said that I didn't include a PSU in my config, I did, it's the Corsair VS450, which is powerful enough for the system we are building. Also, I did factor in Windows and the assembly costs at the end, as I said I would give $200 for Windows and assembly, which is more than what it actually will cost, Windows is around $100 for an OEM copy and most shops will assemble for $70, but will drop that down to $60 if you haggle them a bit.

    In terms of specs and whatever, I haven't tried to build a computer that is spec-for-spec the same as an iMac, that's one of the aims, but what I've done is tried to find a computer that can do the same tasks and is as similar as possible to an iMac, taking into consideration what Mac users often tout are benefits of the Mac. I've gone for an LCD screen that is top notch, a case that is as silent and good looking as possible and I picked a small case as well, as size is often something that some people find is important.

    For me, restrictiveness is a big thing - one of the reasons why I will never go the Apple route. For some people, they think of their computers as appliances, use as-is and sell, buy a new one when the time comes. This is a pretty bad way of looking at it and the non-upgradability of Macs really get at me, especially considering that Apple is locking them down more and more every day.

    The only upgrade you can do with the iMac is upgrade the RAM, apart from that, nothing else is user upgradable. So what happens when you want to upgrade your HDD to an SSD or upgrade that 1TB HDD to a larger capacity one? You just can't. I understand that CPU, motherboard…etc. might be fundamental components to a computer, but at the VERY MINIMUM, RAM must be user-upgradable and HDD/SSD must be user upgradable. The iMac only allows RAM upgrades, the new Retina MBPs and MBAs do not allow for ANY upgrades, which is a real shame.

    What this allows is for Apple to charge exorbitant upgrade costs, like $240 for a 250GB SSD? That's ridiculous given that a Samsung 840 Evo is like $160 on OzBargain every few days. We also have to factor in that Apple are taking out the 1TB HDD, which costs like $60, so in fact, they are overcharging $140, almost double.

    I know Apple is not the only company that does this, but I think they are one of the worst in terms of overcharging. The same deal goes for their iPads - $598 for 16GB iPad Air, $899 for 128GB - I can tell you right now that 128GB of NAND does not cost $300. Tablets I don't mind so much because they are consumer items, but computers are not consumer items, they need to be upgradable and I won't buy any Apple (or any other manufacturer) notebook that doesn't allow RAM and HDD/SSD upgrades.

    For me, another thing I don't like about Apple is the "consumerisation" of the PC market - computers are (to me) tools which should be aligned with their specific use-case scenario, they are not appliances like TVs, microwaves, tablets or phones. This is because most people who go out and buy TVs do the same thing with them (i.e. watch them), most people who go out and buy tablets do the same thing too (i.e. look at web pages and play some games, use some apps…etc.).

    Computers are not like this, there are many different people with many different needs. Personally, I use my PC for study and programming (so large monitors are a must), I do video editing (powerful CPU, GPU for CUDA) and I value responsiveness, so a large SSD is in. I also have a plethora of expansion cards on my computer as well.

    I know this is wishywashy, but this is very philosophy of PCs, this is why we have processors going into sockets and PCI-E slots, otherwise, everything would just be soldered down.

    Apple's iMac doesn't really appeal to anybody (or any market) in my analysis anyway:
    - Gaming - No, because no discrete graphics/weak discrete graphics
    - Video editors - No, because can't take advantage of CUDA acceleration
    - Typical internet/email/facebook/online shopping/word processing usage - too expensive, a $500 box is sufficient for these tasks.

    So at the end of the day, the iMac is a device fielded as an average of all things, suits no particular purpose well and is marketed and hyped up to sell as much as it currently is. The one thing that Apple is very good at is telling people what they need. When you buy an iMac, you don't get the computer YOU WANT, you get the computer Apple WANTS YOU TO HAVE, maybe I'm just old school, but to me, there's a world of difference between the two.

    • epicaricacy on 20/11/2013 - 22:13
      +4

      Apple's iMac doesn't really appeal to anybody (or any market) in my analysis anyway:
      - Gaming - No, because no discrete graphics/weak discrete graphics
      - Video editors - No, because can't take advantage of CUDA acceleration
      - Typical internet/email/facebook/online shopping/word processing usage - too expensive, a $500 box is sufficient for these tasks.

      I'm afraid your market-analysis rather sucks, as iMacs appeal to a number of people. Check the sales…. you will also find most (serious) photographers use Macs. I also do video editing, and a lot of Internet and word processing. Do I want a crappy $500 box on my desk with a shitty monitor to do that? No thanks.

      So at the end of the day, the iMac is a device fielded as an average of all things, suits no particular purpose well and is marketed and hyped up to sell as much as it currently is. The one thing that Apple is very good at is telling people what they need. When you buy an iMac, you don't get the computer YOU WANT, you get the computer Apple WANTS YOU TO HAVE, maybe I'm just old school, but to me, there's a world of difference between the two.

      It suits my purposes perfectly.

      • Photo-editing with Photoshop and Lightroom - fast (with 32Gb RAM and a Fusion drive, everything is just about immediate - including starting photoshop)
      • Video editing. I have a family, and will often create videos on the iMac. No problems at all.
      • When I purchases my iMac, I made choices relating to size, processor, RAM, hard drive, input device, video card…. and it is the computer I want.
      • sallan75 on 25/11/2013 - 09:57

        With a PC you are not limited to a shitty $500 PC. If you spent the same money on a PC as you spend on a MAC you could get something that also looks good and performs well. 32GB of RAM can be put in a PC too and Intel have RST (Rapid Storage Technology) which is similar to Fusion drive and been around longer.

    • thetownfool on 20/11/2013 - 22:17
      +7

      So at the end of the day, the iMac is a device fielded as an average of all things, suits no particular purpose well and is marketed and hyped up to sell as much as it currently is. The one thing that Apple is very good at is telling people what they need. When you buy an iMac, you don't get the computer YOU WANT, you get the computer Apple WANTS YOU TO HAVE, maybe I'm just old school, but to me, there's a world of difference between the two.

      You're entitled to your opinion, but if you've made that decision already why ask the question? Different strokes for different folks. I used to love building my own PCs as a student, but since I've started working full time and had a family I don't have the time or desire to research it all. I also can now afford to buy macs which I couldn't before.

      What I've found hasn't been that restrictive at all. My iMac is almost 3 years old, I have a one year old air, they do EXACTLY what I want them to. My last Dell laptop and custom desktop both lasted under 2 years before components failed. My parents have also gone through a Dell desktop in that time. Yes I'm invested in the apple ecosystem, but that's fine, I actually like it and it all syncs well with my phones and my wife's ipad.

      So people on forums would call me an iSheep, an idiot etc. So be it, my own brother in law has said it. I don't stress about what computer I have or phone I use. They don't define me. It's odd how people get so upset over it. And yes, my 27" iMac's design and screen looks f***ing amazing and makes me smile a little seeing it on my desk. I don't feel I'm a bad person for being happy to pay for that.

      In short, you're analysis is flawed (obviously, as macs must appeal to a market from the fact they sell a lot of them). I think you're very focused on the money side of things and customisation. That's not wrong, but there are those of use who aren't. We're not wrong either. I want something that works, that I don't have to put time in to, that will last years with minimal involvement and that looks good. I'll pay $300 for that.

      • p1 ama on 21/11/2013 - 02:22
        -2

        That was a really informative read! I actually understood a lot from that. I asked the question to have a bit of discussion on what exactly it is about Apple or Macs that make people so willing to spend a few hundred more on and I think what you said makes good sense.

        I know you might have been called iSheep on forums or by others, but I don't think that at all, I'm not into the whole name calling business as I think it's pretty silly. I completely agree that there are different focuses - to me, a couple of hundred is a lot of money and expandability is a big thing, but I understand that for a lot of people these aren't important factors, but rather they have other factors on which they choose Apple, I was trying to find out what those factors were through discussion - I fully respect people who choose to use an iMac :)

        • RockyRaccoon on 21/11/2013 - 04:57
          +1

          Paul

          Thanks for coming back to discuss. I made only the observation about you not being present at that time, now you are here and showing interest in what is posted as replies, its worth making some points.

          As I said, you loaded your assumptions based on what you thought was important to everyone. Frankly that is the same problem that all non Apple manufacturers have made.

          Usability that suits a programmer, like getting lower level access to a system, fastest processing power are not suitable to everyone.

          As you indicate Apple users have been called iSheep because they dont care about the specs, but they do care about the experience, which is different to yours.

          As I said previously Coke users dont like Pepsi, to try and analyse the ingredients to justify this is very hard.

          Sure Apple can make things cheaper and are highly profitable. But unfortunately there is no alternative that gives me the same experience. Other factors that some above raised like resale and life span are things that also need to be factored in.

          As a programmer seeking faster systems, as this increases your productivity, simple tasks like word processing for example are mainly influenced by the dexterity of the user with a keyboard.

          Yes most users dont just use word processing, the point being that users are diverse and output speed is determined not just by the CPU in tasks by us average joes. Going back a few years before WYSIWYG, word processing required understanding of all the commands which you have ingrained in your brain. Ctrl keys, > ** prefixes, etc. Then Apple popularised the interface the Mouse etc.

          For the then casual computer user a typewriter with whiteout was faster than having to look up a manual to recall all the commands we now get with pull down menu's.

          So without going into more history, like the Tablet revolution that Apple brought on. The masses can get involved with technology when technology makes it easy. That involves programming, which you love to do.

          So the professional tools you use, while fantastic for you arent always the best for the rest.

          As a programmer if you can understand what motivates others, you can make things easier for them, the best vehicle is the one people can drive. And vehicles come in all shapes, forklifts, buses, trucks, scooters, etc.

    • renza on 21/11/2013 - 04:44
      +2

      The only upgrade you can do with the iMac is upgrade the RAM, apart from that, nothing else is user upgradable. So what happens when you want to upgrade your HDD to an SSD or upgrade that 1TB HDD to a larger capacity one? You just can't.

      You have to consider the average home user. I'd bet that the vast majority of them would NEVER upgrade their computer during its lifetime, be it a Mac or a PC. Really becomes a non-issue for most users out there.

      What this allows is for Apple to charge exorbitant upgrade costs, like $240 for a 250GB SSD? That's ridiculous given that a Samsung 840 Evo is like $160 on OzBargain every few days. We also have to factor in that Apple are taking out the 1TB HDD, which costs like $60, so in fact, they are overcharging $140, almost double.

      Yep because you are comparing apples with apples, right? Wrong. The SSDs supplied in the latest iMacs and Macbooks are PCI-e based, and have some pretty impressive write/read speeds. a 240gb equivalent pci-e ssd (eg. a Revodrive) costs much more than you standard SATA SSD.

      computers are not consumer items

      by what definition? they most certainty are consumer items!

      Apple's iMac doesn't really appeal to anybody (or any market) in my analysis anyway:
      - Gaming - No, because no discrete graphics/weak discrete graphics

      You can get a GTX780m as an option if you wish. I wouldn't call that weak by any means.

      • Video editors - No, because can't take advantage of CUDA acceleration

      Yep, because Final Cut Pro is not immensely popular or anything. It's not like people have ever used a mac for any serious production, yet alone some top Hollywood movies. CUDA is not crucial in video editing - it actually does a pretty poor job at encoding H.264 but its fine for a quick and dirty export. Oh, and by the way, OS X does support CUDA if you are so inclined.

      • Typical internet/email/facebook/online shopping/word processing usage - too expensive, a $500 box is sufficient for these tasks.

      This is where you've left out a critical part. User experience. The way that OS X is integrated with the hardware (moreso on laptops) provides a much better user experience - the touchpad on the macbooks is around 100x better than anything you'll find on a PC laptop. And it makes a massive difference. Gestures, smooth scrolling, it all adds up and really takes a lot of frustration out that you get from using the crappy PC touchpads. Sure you could use a mouse, but in most cases, i actually prefer the apple touchpad.

      Now, you may think what I've written is pretty biased, but I have been a PC user for as long as I can recall, I am a PC gamer, I use a PC as my daily machine. And I also love my macbook which i've had for just over a year.

      • ozhunter on 21/11/2013 - 04:54

        the touchpad on the macbooks is around 100x better than anything you'll find on a PC laptop. And it makes a massive difference. Gestures, smooth scrolling, it all adds up and really takes a lot of frustration out that you get from using the crappy PC touchpads. Sure you could use a mouse, but in most cases, i actually prefer the apple touchpad.

        The Samsung ativ 9 Plus has a really good trackpad from reviews(macbooks slightly better) and just using it a fair bit instore.

        • RockyRaccoon on 21/11/2013 - 05:10

          You bring up a good point about all this discussion.

          The difference being that every aspect of a computer that is provided prepackaged can be compared to a new product that has just been released. Tomorrow there could be a better input device than even the trackpad.

          So for the true computer nut, being able to upgrade a system on a regular basis to keep on top of all the latest and greatest will be important, but others just want to use their computer and will have to accept that this means that in most cases you have to draw a line.

          And by being provided by the manufacturer means that when a later version of the software that runs the computer is released, then there is less issue about compatibility. Again for the dedicated user, this may mean a short period of working out a fix be it some command or driver, but for many others this becomes a real issue.

          Many Mac users come from a different perspective and are not just into computers for computers sake

    • WixZ on 21/11/2013 - 09:54

      Apple's iMac doesn't really appeal to anybody (or any market) in my analysis anyway:

      You forgot iOS/OSX developer

      • Gaming - No, because no discrete graphics/weak discrete graphics

      Not everyone need to play everything on max. If you do the 27 inch model can be upgraded with GTX 780m which also have CUDA.

      • Typical internet/email/facebook/online shopping/word processing usage - too expensive, a $500 box is sufficient for these tasks.

      Most people prefer to buy notebook for this task

  • camelgrass on 21/11/2013 - 07:08

    Why is it that people who work in creative areas such as photography, music production, video and movie production, design (graphic, digital, web), or are otherwise serious enthusiasts in any number of these areas, are more likely to work with macs? In that I mean more likely compared to the general population.

    • mudvin on 21/11/2013 - 09:00
      +2

      Hangover from the past mostly, when the big design tools first came out : Creative Suite, Photoshop etc, they were designed for Mac (Which was Power PC at the time) and the PC ports ran like rubbish, Thus Mac became the defacto choice for those in design.

      Nowdays with Macs being X86 the design tools run the same (or better) than Mac, but there is still the opinion within the industry that macs are better.

      The other reason is that (due to the above) certain groups have made large investments in software that can only run on mac, the cost to move over would exceed the savings in hardware cost.

      • camelgrass on 22/11/2013 - 05:51

        That's a long hangover. :)

        Following on from that, why initially did software companies design some of the best creative tools available at the time mainly for the mac? In those days Apple had such a small market share. Was it because Apple had itself designed some great software, therefore most people working in creative industries were already using macs?

    • p1 ama on 21/11/2013 - 13:31
      -4

      Marketing, hangover from the past as Mudvin says, not many other reasons really. Also aesthetic appeal I guess. Most (if not all software) is available for both Mac and PC these days, with the exception of Final Cut Pro and other Apple software.

      Apart from that it's the whole "wannabe" thing as well. There are a lot of people out there who think that owning a DSLR with a couple of lenses and a Mac at home instantly makes them a photographer, so it's that whole image as well.

  • biozet on 21/11/2013 - 09:24

    and they're fashionable…clones who work in those industries like to be fashionable.

  • cheaphor on 21/11/2013 - 09:43

    If you buy a $500 PC it's crap. If you buy a $2000 mac it's great, if you buy a proper pc for $2000 it's sensational. But not from Harvey Norman or JB you need to get the non mainstream stuff. There are super notebook PCs like the venom BlackBook that are built like a rock and absolutely fly in the performance department.

    If your comparing the $2000 asus or Toshiba you got at harvies or JBs to a Mac it's because JB made $1000 selling it to you. All $500 PCs are garbage. Remember JB and harvies bully Toshiba, HP and Asus into providing cost down models to rip customers off, this in the long run costs the brand, but meanwhile everyone makes money. With apple they don't do this, so they just make money. If you want a real PC look at speciality PC brands, there are some better spec machines out there right now the technology is up there, at the end of the day they all run on Intel technology mac or pc. You just need to know how to drive it, kind of like a sports car.

  • helmutiffe on 21/11/2013 - 10:11
    +2

    The "Apple Tax" is more-or-less refunded when you re-sell the computer on the used market.

    IMO the most financially sensible way to buy Apple computers is to take advantage of their insane resale value after 12-24 months (depending on product and release cycle). Better yet if you bought new with EDU pricing or random special deals.

    .. at which time you can then decide to reinvest that into buying a new machine, as a kind of regular buy-use-sell-upgrade cycle that keeps you with the latest tech without having to spend too much or slowly accumulate a closet full of random computer parts along the way.

  • biozet on 21/11/2013 - 10:50

    Apple=
    intel cpu
    foxcon motherboard
    lian li case
    ??? ram
    ??? psu
    ??? gpu
    nice apple sticker

    but of course the whole is greater than the sum of its parts…

  • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2013 - 11:10
    +1

    I couldn't justify the price for Apple myself, until I used it. The reliability and resale value factor is worth more. The lack of hassle is the most sought after feature if you feel that you want to avoid so much crashing of applications which stops you from doing daily tasks, then you may want to try apple. However if your interest is exploring and learning computers then windows is better because if you learn problems, only then you learn solutions..it teaches you technical aspects of computing.

    Personally I'm glad to have started off with windows and then switched to apple. This way I have reasonable understanding of computers and as I don't have so much time in my hand and have little more savings and just want to get my tasks done, I like apple. I think you should just get the experience of both OS's and then decide, it totally depends on what you expect out of a computer.

    • yargnairod on 21/11/2013 - 12:38
      +2

      Sorry but clearly you do not have an understanding of computers if you think that Windows crashes all the time. A myth which is not only untrue but perhaps the opposite of the truth. i believe Windows (7 or 8) to be at least as stable and FAR less buggy than OSX (although as the defacto operating system Windows is the target of far more viruses etc). When you think about the fact that Windows supports literally hundreds or thousands of configurations vs the amount of models that Apple have to support this is amazing.

      I'm showing my age by saying this but computers are commodities nowadays. The prices of computers is a tiny fraction of what people's wages are so if one of my users prefers to use a Mac then so be it.

      On the other hand let buying an Imac (or any all in one that cannot upgrade hard drive/ram) is a terrible idea. The only advantage are aesthetics which apple admittedly do well. I have a four year old (late 2009) imac 27" with i7 processor and it's feels slow (Creative suite bounces up and down a lot) for one reason. The hard drive is a 1 tb hitachi. Why can't I upgrade it???!!! If my hard drive had a crashed head (not an uncommon occurance) 1 year and 1 day after i bought it I would be in for a hefty repair bill. Does anyone else think this is strange for a $3000 machine?

      I do like their notebook offerings a bit more. Especially the air.

      The apple tax does exist but it's overstated however question whether buying an all in one is even a good idea in the first place

      • hangdog on 21/11/2013 - 12:48
        +2

        I have a four year old (late 2009) imac 27" with i7 processor and it's feels slow (Creative suite bounces up and down a lot) for one reason. The hard drive is a 1 tb hitachi. Why can't I upgrade it???!!!

        You can upgrade it: http://www.ifixit.com/Guide/iMac+Intel+27-Inch+EMC+2309+and+….

        Granted, it is significantly more of a pain in the arse than busting open a tower case, but it's well within the capabilities of anyone who already knows their way around the insides of a PC.

        • ThadtheChad on 21/11/2013 - 12:58

          Doesn't look too hard. Throw in a 256GB/512GB SSD and it should be blazing fast.

        • RockyRaccoon on 21/11/2013 - 13:54

          Well put Hangdog.

          So many of those who declare they love tinkering with their machines, cant seem to do a google search. There are a number of Mac sites and youtube videos that cover many aspects of upgrading your Mac.

          Xlr8yourmac.com covers so many upgrades and how to's

          My 27in iMac has an SSD drive which was easy to install, in my case I removed the internal DVD drive, and bingo its installed, my DVD drive is now external, as its rarely used.

      • [Deactivated] on 22/11/2013 - 08:11

        Sorry but clearly you do not have an understanding of computers if you think that Windows crashes all the time. A myth which is not only untrue but perhaps the opposite of the truth.

        My experience is anecdotal, I don't claim it as a general fact because in the end I am a consumer. I do not have an in-depth knowledge about programming OS's. But I have used it for more than 18 years and I have good maintenance habits. I never had problems with viruses or backups, did not install bad software, defrayed hdd etc. and despite of just regular use, it crashed on me and it does have many hardware and software compatibility issues. The problems were different at different times, but in general were too much of a hassle which led to it's instability and unreliability in different ways.

        When you think about the fact that Windows supports literally hundreds or thousands of configurations vs the amount of models that Apple have to support this is amazing.

        This is true, I do not disagree.

        I too, do not consider OS's and computer anything more than tools, i don't care about loyalty to some brand either. In the end it needs to serve our purpose and needs. Different OS's are better for different use and preferences, so I won't argue what is better than the other. I know it doesn't matter but I have studied CS with some other certs so I understand how they work (just to say I'm not a noob downloading toolbars and clicking on spam or downloading malware).

  • syme321 on 21/11/2013 - 11:34
    +1

    I've never had an Apple product but know plenty that do, one key difference to me (hardware specs & user experience aside), seems to be the support of their products. The level seems to exceed what I have experienced with other manufacturers eg replacing stuff when it is partly the end users fault or honouring a warrantee when the product is out of their obliged support period.

    Good support costs money.

    • May4th on 21/11/2013 - 12:59
      +1

      support and warranty will almost always cost you more since you are paying for peace of mind and labour. another advantage of PCs is that if you have rudimentary tech knowledge or know how to youtube you can replace most components easily. e.g. my last desktop lasted me more than 6 years. then it died - put in a new HDD and PSU and good as new - off to be mum's dedicated "check weather and news" machine

  • lostn on 21/11/2013 - 14:45

    They do charge a premium for what you get, but they do that because they can. They're in a strong enough position to sell products based on marketing.

    The stuff they sell is good, but overpriced for what you get, as you have made the case already on their computers.

    As far as mobile devices, Apple fans will argue that their CPUs are faster than Android devices, explaining the price differences. That may be true, but for a lot of people it's more than you need, so you're paying extra for little noticeable gain.

    They are functional products if you can afford them, but many can make do without the stuff you're paying a premium for.

    If you buy a phone on contract, it's no more expensive than the competition.

  • nimnomnimy on 21/11/2013 - 14:49

    i use both a pc and mac's - im probably a bit apple biassed so take that into consideration when reading below.

    i would say, if you have the extra money and use the computer for abit of everything - buy a mac
    but if you want to use it primarily for gaming - buy a pc

    here is why mac is better
    1 - the packaging and buying experience
    2 - mac build quality is better and they take the smaller things into consideration (eg. macsafe connector on my laptop has saved me dropping my laptop a thousand times)
    3 - you cant get retina screens as far as i know on pc (especially useful for photoshop, excel and multitasking)
    4 - mac can easily run windows
    5 - average resell value is higher so it somewhat offsets the higher initial cost if you go with a standard build
    6 - mac is less prone to viruses
    7 - bundled software is better on a mac (garageband, photobooth, ilife, iworks)
    8 - no bloatware (better out of box experience)
    9 - major os releases are either really cheap or free
    10 - os requires less maintenance (eg. disk defrag) to run smoothly over time

    here is why pc is better
    1 - games (better compatibility and the ability to easily upgrade cpu/graphics card to keep the pc going for years)
    2 - microsoft office is much more feature rich on pc (thats a big one for many people including me)
    3 - cheaper upfront

    thats just my opinion, dont read it like 10 pros for mac, 2 pros for pc - its about whats important to you and how your use your computer

    • theguyrules on 21/11/2013 - 15:01

      Yeah, Office on Mac sucks, but thats not much of a surprise.

      • nimnomnimy on 21/11/2013 - 15:05

        well you can dual boot on mac and run windows with office on a mac so i wouldnt say it sucks.

        that said, microsoft office will almost always be a better experience on pc

    • IdLikeToBeATree on 21/11/2013 - 15:04
      +3

      No.3 I am fairly positive you can get really high definition pc monitors

      • ProspectiveDarkness on 21/11/2013 - 15:49
        +1

        And ultrabooks like the Ativ Book 9+ and the Lenovo Yoga 2 Pro have 3200 x 1800 displays, as ozhunter mentions, and others like LG, Toshiba and Asus use 2560 x 1440.

    • ozhunter on 21/11/2013 - 15:10

      I guess it depends on what windows computer you are comparing it too. Not sure if your comparing the macbook or imac. I'll compare it to the Samsung Ativ 9 Plus(had a difficult time choosing between it and the rMBP 13)

      1. really…?
      2. I wouldn't exactly say the macbook is better, but I did like how the body of it is thick even though it made it heavier
      3. Ativ 9 has a 3200x1800 display. There's other high end laptops suchs as the zenbook, kirabook, Lenovo T540P
      4. Depends what you download/whats sites you visit
      5. I haven't really tried any of them yet, but Office and Google Docs works great for me
      6. I'd consider some of those iPrograms bloatware.
      7. I have never done a disk defrag and my pc works fine. I think it's because of TRIM support which windows has had for a while now.
    • p1 ama on 21/11/2013 - 20:58
      1. Packaging - it's just a box, buying experience - what does this mean?
      2. Yep, completely agree, but PCs are catching up in this department pretty quickly.
      3. I think some other users below have pointed out that high res screens are available for PCs
      4. Yes, I agree, you get the "best of both worlds" aspect with Macs
      5. Yes, I agree with this as well.
      6. Not necessarily, safe browsing habits will save you, viruses are going to be targeting Macs more in the future due to increased market share.
      7. Yes, but there are free and open source alternatives to most of the software included for free.
      8. No, some companies are pretty good with bloatware, if not, then going the DIY PC route is bloatware free
      9. Microsoft moving to the same model - Windows 8 -> 8.1
      10. Disk defrags have been automated since Windows 7, irrelevant since SSDs
      • Daabido on 09/12/2013 - 05:21

        "Packaging - it's just a box, buying experience - what does this mean?"

        I hope you don't say that to your girlfriend when she tries to surprise you by just wearing an oversized bow!

  • kenan3cn on 21/11/2013 - 16:27
    +1

    I would like to just point out that Apple computers along with their operating system, are very stable. That's something creative professionals value a lot. People use computers for other serious stuff besides gaming you know. Imagine you have mountains of audio&visual materials and are constantly making changes to them. Your computer rarely gets a rest since it has been busy rendering one scene after another. And you decide you should take a snap. You lay down on your couch for around half an hour and when you wake up you discover your system had crashed due to a driver issue. With hours of hard work gone, the only hint you've got from you "custom-built cheap beast gaming PC" is some error message like #X09850E43234@#%$%#$@$%#, which you probably have no idea what the hell it means.

    • ProspectiveDarkness on 21/11/2013 - 16:32
      +4

      PC's these days are not nearly as fragile as you make them out to be - if you set everything up properly and don't screw with it. Driver issues just don't just suddenly happen out of the blue, they happen if you've been tinkering around your system - and if you're capable of that, you should be capable of fixing the problem. And no, the error message is usually comprehensive, or at least Google-able.

      And you do know that Microsoft's main revenue comes from Enterprise, right? Can't be that unstable, if it's valued by professionals (there seems to be a popular misconception that that word refers only to graphics artists and the like… which is wrong)

      • kenan3cn on 21/11/2013 - 16:41
        +2

        Well, I've got an iMac, a desktop PC and a Macbook air in the house. I do most of my work on the iMac and the Mac Pro at my work place. I've never encountered any issue with them. But just last month when I was trying to update my Windows PC to Windows 8.1(from Windows 8), it presented me with the "cursor in the middle of the black screen" problem, which didn't even care about showing an error message. Googled the problem and I wasn't the only one, seemed to be an issue related to display driver but none of the solutions suggested worked for me. I had to enter the recovery mode and erased everything on the HDD. I just couldn't risk doing serious stuff on that PC any more. :-(

        • theguyrules on 21/11/2013 - 16:45

          Exactly what happened to me a week ago, updating to Windows 8.1.
          Luckily I keep everything on a separate drive to the OS so the re-install didn't take more than half a day(including downloading).
          How can they release something that legitimately bricks peoples PCs?

        • kenan3cn on 21/11/2013 - 16:53
          +2

          "How can they release something that legitimately bricks peoples PCs?"
          Exactly what I thought. I was kind of excited for Windows 8.1 after reading about all those improvements, but in the end I was frustrated.

      • theguyrules on 21/11/2013 - 16:43

        I know my way around a computer very well, but I've had my desktop PC crash a few times since I've had it. ie:
        Updating from Windows 8 to Windows 8.1 caused a boot loop, and with googling the ONLY way to fix it was a full format and reinstall.

        Never had any errors even close to this bad with my MacBook Pro.

        • scrimshaw on 21/11/2013 - 16:55
          +2

          Microsoft has to deal with pretty much an unlimited number of combinations of hardware and drivers.
          You may have people using Intel, AMD CPUs, Nvidia and AMD and Intel GPU's, dozens of different brands of motherboards, different network adapter types, different types of storage, and the list goes on. The problem is increased when you realize that hardware manufacturers also have to submit their hardware and drivers for WHQL testing to ensure that it works properly in Windows.

          Apple on the other hand, has a very short and limited product line. They keep everything pretty standardised — every iMac runs an Intel processor, a Foxconn motherboard, a certain brand of network adapter etc. Since apple directly sources their own hardware, they can also easily do their own in-house testing.

          This makes it much easier for the software developer to account for possible bugs and driver incompatibilities. But that doesn't mean OSX Mavericks is perfect. Google "Mavericks update causing Kernel Panics" and see how many hits you get.

        • ThadtheChad on 21/11/2013 - 17:00

          Well, I think a lot of people seem to confuse these things. An update to Windows 8.1 is the same as the upgrade to Mavericks. Mountain Lion was stable and fast… Mavericks not so much. I've had freezes and crashes on more than one occasion within the last 1 month.

          When you're using an OS where all the heavy lifting is abstracted from the user, these things happen. Most of the absolutely rock solid systems I've seen are *nix variants that require a high level of technical expertise to operate and manage.

        • theguyrules on 21/11/2013 - 17:15
          +2

          Not confused - ML to Mavericks has been a perfectly smooth transition.

        • ProspectiveDarkness on 21/11/2013 - 17:17

          Not for everyone, though. This is why anecdotes are a useless basis for sweeping generalisations.

        • theguyrules on 21/11/2013 - 17:17
          +1

          Of course, I realize this.
          But this is another reason why I personally prefer OS X.

        • ThadtheChad on 21/11/2013 - 17:19

          Not confused - ML to Mavericks has been a perfectly smooth transition.

          Transition was fine. However, daily usage wasn't. With the exact same set of apps (I don't use the core OS for much; I use VMs for applications), I started seeing slight freezes and on some occasions, even crashes. Kinda expected this though as I have a full disc clone prior to installing Mavericks, so nothing to stress about. Just CBF'd rolling back.

        • RockyRaccoon on 21/11/2013 - 22:44
          +1

          absolutely. You know its the benefit of having a closed system, the very issue that PC people hate.

          Its like everything, it comes to trade offs, the more open, the more you can tinker with the system, the more issues of compatibility and then issues that others can get into the system and manipulate it for the wrong reasons.

          Like the Internet. Great for freedom of expression, but some can manipulate that freedom and use it inappropriately.

          I love not having to worry about viruses, or the slow down that a virus checker imposes. But I pay a price, I cant always get the cheapest peripherals.

          So in a sense there is no argument because there is no common ground to argue.

          As for errors with any update, Macs and PC's both have these, its a risk with all systems when you update. Personally I always wait for .02 of any release, that saves a lot of pain. That goes for Windows or MacOS. Let some other bunny find them and it often means 3rd party software can catch up.

      • kenan3cn on 21/11/2013 - 16:50

        I know enterprises tend to use PCs and there are professionals other than CREATIVE PROFESSIONALS(yes that's the phrase I used). But I've never worked for them so I can't speak for their experiences. And there seems to be a frustrating popular misconception that CREATIVE PROFESSIONALS refers to GRAPHICS DESIGNERS and the like.

        • ProspectiveDarkness on 21/11/2013 - 17:01

          Sure, but you also said this:

          People use computers for other serious stuff besides gaming you know

          Implying that PC's are only best for gaming… and then you go on to only talk about your 'creative professionals' and sidestep every other professional industry.

          CREATIVE PROFESSIONALS refers to GRAPHICS DESIGNERS and the like.

          Okay then… you conveniently missed the rest of the phrase: and the like

    • yargnairod on 21/11/2013 - 16:47

      You show a complete ignorance to the windows side of the world. Windows 7 is amazingly stable so much so that if you get a blue screen these days it's much more likely to be a hardware fault. OSX on the other hand….. Mavericks looks more like a beta. It really is no wonder when Microsoft has an open beta of their operating system for many months whereas apple just release it and get the poor suckers stupid enough to install it to beta test for them.

      Why are you comparing a "cheap beast gaming PC" with a production machine? If it's for serious work than you should be looking at a quatro series card and their drivers. Gamers pretty much accept some instability for performance.

      • kenan3cn on 21/11/2013 - 16:57

        My mistake. What I'm trying to say is all Macs do serious work very well. But I think comparing cheap beast gaming PCs to the computers that can do serious works is exactly what the commenters are doing in the thread. That's why I used that as comparison in the first place.

        • p1 ama on 21/11/2013 - 19:55

          What says that a cheap beast gaming PC can't do serious work? That's a misconception. My PC, whilst not a "cheap beast gaming PC" runs Windows, isn't expensive and I use it for study, work and stuff like video editing and it runs without a hiccup.

          I think that both Windows and OSX are equally as stable, otherwise enterprise corporations, universities, government departments, schools…etc. wouldn't use Windows, so I don't think calling Windows computers unreliable and unable to do serious work fair.

    • p1 ama on 21/11/2013 - 19:58

      I don't game, apart from the odd race on Need For Speed. I use my PC for studies, work, programming and also "creative tasks".

      When my PC is idling, I use it for protein folding with the Folding at Home project, so I don't think my computer gets much rest either. I use Windows and I have never, ever gotten an error message like that. So I don't think that that is fair to say that Windows is unstable.

  • StopThatBus on 21/11/2013 - 16:44
    +1

    Here's my 2 cents. I hate mac fanboys..
    1st CENT: My Desktop is a MacPro Tower 2008 2.8ghz Quad Core blah blah blah… This year it's 5 years old and still runs the latest Mac OSX At this stage most Pc would be needing Replacing I just threw a SSD in mine and it's super fast Shut/down and restart in 40 seconds. It runs all Adobe super fast. I pay the extra to buy mac because I know from the past it should last up to 8-10 years before replacing it. I bought it second hand for 1200$ Seems a good deal.
    There super helpful on the phone and can offer you great advice with out having to go into a fanboy store.
    Second Cent:
    2 weeks I bought a MacBookPRo Retina Refurbished from apple Australia looked on there website then called up to order it they had 5 left in Australia i knew they were releasing a new model. Refurbished MBP model comes with new battery, New top case and new bottom case. On top of that it has a full Apple 1 year Warranty the same as Brand new models and saves 400$ of new. I thought that was a good deal.

    So there's my story my two cents

    • ozf1 on 21/11/2013 - 17:07
      +1

      I echo that, i bought a last gen model from Designwyse during their 'firesale', saving about $1k, I bought another MBP a few years back from Gumtree for more than I paid comparatively from Designwyse.

  • ozf1 on 21/11/2013 - 16:59

    MODS PLEASE DELETE, DUPE!

  • ozf1 on 21/11/2013 - 17:02

    Once you go Mac, you never go back. igadgets… not, Macs yes IMHO.
    I started life as a PC user, but 8 or so years ago (After getting sick of Viruses etc), I bit the bullet bigtime and bought a MBP15" antiglare "not shiny excess cost there", have never looked back, in fact, it's still going now, all it's needed is a new HDD (as a matter of fact last week), a new battery and upgrade of RAM. I have taken it to apple store way out of warranty and have never had to pay for troubleshooting and diagnostics, when the HDD went and gave me a warning shot a couple of years back. It pays to pay for quality.
    By the way people quoting the high prices of Macs, look at the Vaios and top of the line Samsungs, near same specs, near same prices, totally different market.
    Only shame is there are no $500.00 MacBooks for the lower end of the market.

    • ThadtheChad on 21/11/2013 - 17:06
      -1

      I started life as a PC user, but 8 or so years ago (After getting sick of Viruses etc)

      FFS /facepalm

      http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/123492#comment-1701167

    • ozf1 on 21/11/2013 - 17:21

      :( :=(

      • ThadtheChad on 21/11/2013 - 17:24
        +1

        Hey to be fair, you won't find a lot of viruses for OS X. :) So cheer up mate. Safe computing habits never hurt anyone.

        That said most OSX and IOS 0days are sold for a metric shitton of money in the "marketplace". So malware writers will not neglect it anymore.

        • ozf1 on 21/11/2013 - 18:05

          All valid points, at least you use both, and know both sides. I have encountered countless Mac haters, family included! Even heard anecdotes of a recruiting/employment agency where this person works, giving Macs to employees to do their work on, and they ALL HATED THEM!and gave them back to go back to windows.
          Sounds like a lot of BS to me, but that was her jealous reaction when she first saw my pre-unibody all silver MacBook Pro.
          She now struts around with the latest iPhone and iPad!
          By the way I am not a windows hater, I just prefer Mac.

        • ThadtheChad on 21/11/2013 - 18:33

          Her story sounds very sus. :) There are rabid mac-haters and windows-haters who pour vitriol on their "target" without any fact/basis. Best you can do is ignore them. :)

        • ozf1 on 21/11/2013 - 21:51

          Exactly, it happened at a family get together she heard other family members complimenting the look of the laptop, it was/still is pretty different to all the other notebook/laptops out there, so it was clear she couldn't handle it, so she came up with that dribble… sad really.

  • p1 ama on 21/11/2013 - 19:52
    -1

    There are a few things that I want to reply to, but a lot of the same points have been brought up again and again, so I'll aggregate here.

    I'm not an Apple hater by any means. Even though I don't own any Apple products at the moment, I have owned iPods, iPads and was considering getting a Macbook Pro. I would say that I judge a product on its merits. Back when I bought my iPod, it was priced very competitively with other competing products from iRiver and Creative. When I bought my iPad, iOS was the only mature OS for tablets. Android Honeycomb, at the time, was still not mature enough of a platform.

    I also considered getting a Macbook Pro, I valued its upgradability, I was going to upgrade the RAM and the HDD to an SSD and I was also going to install Windows via Boot Camp (I need Windows), but after realising that it was just too expensive compared to getting a good quality Windows notebook, Lenovo T420, which I still have now, I decided to not go the Apple route.

    Also, to reiterate again, I'm personally against calling anybody iSheep, stupid or anything like that. The truth is Apple computers are more expensive than a PC that can do the same thing, so what I wanted to discuss is what benefits an Apple computer brings to you that makes it worth the extra amount in your eyes? For some people, it's worth the extra amount, for others, like myself, it might not be - this doesn't mean that any camp is superior to the other.

    What I am against though, is Apple's non-upgradability and it charging exorbitant upgrade costs. There was a post above where someone said that they upgraded their iMac to 32GB of RAM and a fusion drive. According to Apple, this upgrade costs $720.01 (for RAM) and $240.00 (for 1TB HDD to 1TB fusion drive). Like, I don't know about you, but you paid a crazy amount for the privilege. On the PC side, 8GB sticks of RAM cost $80, so getting 3 more sticks to add to your initial 8GB will cost $240. Adding a 120GB SSD, which is similar to a Fusion Drive will cost you $99. Like, you've been overcharged by a massive magnitude. That sort of price-gouging from Apple is not okay to me, but you can't do much because Apple forces you into using their upgrades because their machines aren't user serviceable. This, to me, is the problem with Apple products.

    I appreciate that there are people who just want a computer to work like their toaster, fridge or microwave does, that's fine to me. But I can't help but feel that every day, Apple is locking down its computers more and more so that they can charge extreme prices for upgrades and get away with it. Back in the day, Macbooks used to have user replaceable batteries, HDDs, ODDs and RAM. These days, MBA and rMBP are not serviceable at all.

    Also, to someone who said iMacs use PCIe SSDs, they don't they use SATA SSDs.

    Anyway, there have been a fair share of Apple/OSX issues recently, especially with the Mavericks Kernel Panic issues. Same goes for viruses…etc. Safe browsing habits will keep you safe. Also, with increasing use of OSX, viruses will begin targeting that platform more.

    At the end of the day, I admit that there are benefits to owning an Apple computer. Some things I think are silly, such as the "buying experience" and packaging. But I agree that some people like to have a computer that they can just take out of the box and just have it work and come preinstalled with the software they need to use on a daily basis. I agree that there are people out there who never intend to upgrade their PC and I know that there are people, for whatever reason, who are tied to OSX (in the same way I am tied to Windows). I have bought a lot of software for Windows, it would be impossible for me to rebuy all that software for OSX, for example.

    Last thing, what exactly do Macs offer "creative professionals" that make them more attracted to Apple? I'm not a creative professional, but I edit pics in Photoshop and I edit video in After Effects and Premiere and I'm pretty certain that the Mac and Windows versions of these software are the same. I would imagine that professionals use Adobe or Avid…etc. all of which are available on both platforms.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join