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

    • theguyrules on 21/11/2013 - 20:01

      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.

      I personally think this is just to do with the fact that most Apple computers have as small a form factor as possible, so to make it as small as possible some end-user upgrades aren't as easy to do.
      Like, you can get a Mac Pro and upgrade any part of that you want.
      Or you can get an iMac or Macbook and upgrade the RAM and HDD.

      • ozf1 on 21/11/2013 - 20:09

        You can not… unless you are good with a soldering iron, upgrade anything on the new MacBookPros, only on the still current 13" MBP. Thats why Macfixit has given it a 1 out 10 for user friendly upgrade rating. I don't know about the iMacs or mac minis.

        • theguyrules on 21/11/2013 - 20:16

          No, I mean on the non-Retinas.

      • p1 ama on 21/11/2013 - 20:49

        No, you can't anymore.

        You can't upgrade the HDD on new iMacs.

        Mac Pros are also not upgradable from this generation (one about to be released) onwards.

        Macbook Pro (non-retina) is also being phased out, they're probably just clearing inventory at the moment, but with MBAs and rMBPs, there's no upgradability and that's the way Apple is heading.

        • theguyrules on 21/11/2013 - 20:53

          Well.
          That legitimately sucks. Dammit Apple.
          I guess I'll have to hold onto my 2 yr old Macbook Pro for as long as I can.

        • ThadtheChad on 21/11/2013 - 21:02

          That legitimately sucks. Dammit Apple.

          That is a really horrendous direction to take. They are moving in the direction of completely sealed "appliances" that cannot be repaired. I read the ifixit article on this particular aspect of mbps.

          I'd never had bought a 13" MBP (non-retina) if it werent upgradeable. I spend approx $300ish to get a 256GB SSD and 16GB of RAM which wouldve cost me a fortune had I upgraded with Apple.

        • p1 ama on 21/11/2013 - 21:09
          +1

          Yeah, it's a terrible direction to take.

          But hey, for them it's an excellent business decision, now they make massive margins on upgrades. I completely agree though, the non-upgradability was the nail in the coffin for me with respect to Apple.

        • Janko on 22/11/2013 - 08:55

          Also they can control quality. If bad RAM causes crashes, the whole machine gets a bad name.

    • ozf1 on 21/11/2013 - 20:15

      paulsterio, would like to point out, you have to look at what RAM exactly he/she got with the upgrade, there are different levels of 8GB RAM sticks, and they range in price by quite a bit. Also, you can not compare a 1TB fusion drive, to a 120GB SSD that's ridiculous (no offence)., I believe (and I haven't looked it up), from memory the fusion drive may be a 'hybrid drive' like the seagate momentus XT which coincidentally I just bought (500GB for $88.00 at MSY), the 1TB I think is just under $150.00.

      • p1 ama on 21/11/2013 - 20:51
        -1

        1) I don't know what RAM sticks Apple uses for their updates, but I doubt it would be 2400MHz or anything crazy. It is almost certainly standard DDR3-1600 or 1333 MHz memory, which is $80 for pretty much all brands.

        2) It's not ridiculous, thank you very much, a 120GB SSD + 1TB HDD included is very much better than a Fusion Drive. If you want to compare it to a 1TB Momentus XT drive, OK, even better, take out the 1TB original hard drive, worth $67 or so and the upgrade is worth 150 - 67 = $83.

        • ozf1 on 21/11/2013 - 21:41

          1- Neither do i, that's why i said you/we need to know that first, but even 1600s differ in price according to branding etc (I say that b/c I recently upgraded my old MBP's 2GB to 4 GB and the recommended and well regarded OWC sticks were about 3 times what I ended up buying for my MBP, my pont of course they were not "Apple' RAM sticks, so we can't blame Apple for the price.
          2- "Adding a 120GB SSD, which is similar to a Fusion Drive will cost you $99." I still disagree with that statement, the way I read what you stated, you are still comparing an SSD or hybrid 1TB to 120GB, you are looking at 880GB of storage space, vs speed and alleged reliability (I state alleged as the SSDs are relatively new and in a few years they may also start failing, we don't know). Like I said it's the way I read it, I may be wrong, if so my apologies.

        • p1 ama on 21/11/2013 - 21:48

          1. Okay, I'll put the question out to the Mac owners here then, what RAM does your Mac have?

          2. Sorry, what I meant was ADDING an SSD to an existing 1TB drive, not REPLACING the 1TB drive with the SSD, hope that clears it up. I disagree with "alleged reliability" though, SSDs are more reliable than hard drives, there are studies with stimulated workloads to show this on sites like AnandTech.

        • ozf1 on 21/11/2013 - 22:08

          Yep, I forgot, but have also read them too, I am more coming from my own opinion, of 'you just never know or can not always rely on simulations', IMO nothing is designed to fail, but they do. Besides I could not justify the SSDs price tag for what I do, hence I took the somewhat middle ground option of the hybrid.

    • StopThatBus on 22/11/2013 - 00:51
      +1

      I spend most of my time on my desktop Mac for design purposes. Saving large files, rendering images and running filters are fast. I do make a few short films in final cut pro it all suits my needs it could always be super faster but at what price (NEW MACPRO 12 core $6000). We run a small sticker business and the cutter/plotter sticker maker runs on a PC running windows 7 so we have to use it for that purpose. 5/10 times it needs rebooting or programs close by them selves.. I find it a bit frustrating.. TBH I don't know my way round Windows as I do around Mac being a Mac user since 96.

      Mac has changed a lot in the last few years there OSX is moving more towards there mobile platform to me that's a backwards step.

      I'm not sure if I've missed a post where you've talked about what you mainly use your PC/Computer for there are so many options out there for different users. Tablet Surface Laptop or Mac product.
      I actually like android mainly due to it being open source which means you usually get it to do what you want set it up to your liking not to the makers limited options. I went an Android Acer Tablet for 12 months as well as a desktop.. I got to a point where I found Android a Little disjointed. Updates Forced closing apps. Started running quite slow and I missed not having full programs and only apps so when i bought my 13"MBP It was great but then I quickly found out I missed my quick Apps like weather, Twitter, and alike now I'm using browser based. So never satisfied.

      Few other notes..

      I do love SSD always amazed with it's speed.
      Mac Keyboards and mice/mouses Suck Thank god for Logitech (What still no right click)

      The only way to make a true judgement is to actually spend time with both Operating environments. It's really the only way you can decide.

      Last: It's good to see this conversation not degrade in to a name calling post as they normally end up being.

      • hangdog on 22/11/2013 - 10:17
        +2

        Mac Keyboards and mice/mouses Suck Thank god for Logitech (What still no right click)

        I don't disagree with most of what you wrote, but in my experience Apple's Magic Mouse is the best I've used because of its gesture-based functionality, although I know that plenty of people hate it. I used an ergonomic Logitech mouse for years and loved it, but to me, the Magic Mouse was such a revelation when it came out that I couldn't go back.

        Although Mac right-clicks used to be only through Control-click or through third-party extensions way back in the day, Apple's offered right-click in OS X for many years now. System Preferences —> Mouse —> Secondary click.

        Now, as for keyboards – I use Apple's chiclet extended keyboard because it takes up little desk space and is quiet (my home office is next to the baby's nursery). But I don't really like how I tend to miss or mistype letters with it. If anyone can recommend a not overly noisy wired mechanical keyboard that is relatively slimline (it can be tall, but I like my desk space) and has a numpad, I would love to check it out. Extra points if it's illuminated and has Mac-specific keys.

    • arislan on 26/11/2013 - 11:18

      In terms of upgradability, well that's just a preference thing isn't it? To some, their use case certainly does not require hardware upgrade for a good number of years.

      Apple do do software upgrades. I have a Dell laptop with 3Ghz CPU and Hyper threading with 2GB of RAM circa 2006 which still runs fine for me which I don't need any sort of hardware upgrade given my usage.

      I also have and MBA from 2 years ago. Upgraded to Maverick recently with no issues. My SSD did die last month and was out of warranty. Took it to the Apple store and replaced it for me even though it was out of warranty.

  • Manh on 21/11/2013 - 20:29
    +1

    I have always hated it when Apple (and Google) starts charging much more for storage upgrades. eg (Kogan pricing) 16GB iphone 5s($850) to 32GB iphone 5s ($1000) costs $150 more. You can buy 2 Sandisk ultra 64GB micro SD cards delivered via express courier to you for that. And then this morning I came across this article that says pretty much that:

    http://fudzilla.com/home/item/33185-apple-and-google-accused…

    • ozf1 on 21/11/2013 - 20:39

      I echo you also, hence why I will not buy an iPhone, I 'had' to buy an iPad because it just would not be the same for the Kids!, I would've rather a sony or samsung tablet.

      • p1 ama on 21/11/2013 - 20:52
        +1

        Completely agree, it's sad to see that microSD expansion is going away, manufacturers know that they can rip customers off for storage upgrades and they will gladly do it.

        • scrimshaw on 21/11/2013 - 21:12
          +3

          This is a disturbing trend. I certainly wouldn't want Samsung, LG or Nokia following Apple's idea and getting rid of removable storage and making batteries non-replaceable, and screwing down the chassis with weird proprietary pentalobular screws.

          This crap shouldn't be happening with Macbooks either — I can take apart a Dell E6320 and put it together in less than 10 minutes, but I suspect you're going to need to become a Jedi to open a Macbook Pro.

          Apple is the king of Planned obsolescence and other companies seem to think it's a great idea. Well, for profit it is, but it just creates landfill.

        • Peter Pann on 22/11/2013 - 11:17

          When the retina macbook pro's came out people criticised many of the things that were omitted and that their super-compact form factor made them harder to repair or upgrade…now loads of companies make similar ultra-books with similar issues and that whole category is really popular.

          Regarding storage expansion in phones, we want the most powerful phone with the best battery life in the smallest size/volume. Something has got to give and I'd suggest that when it comes to expandable storage most people either don't bother or they buy an SD card when they get the phone and then don't upgrade it again from there which really negates the ability for that part of the device to be changed. You might as well get it built into the phone when you buy it.

          Did you know that when apple changed their laptops to "non-replaceable batteries" the cost of putting a new battery in a laptop stayed exactly the same? It just needs to be fitted by a tech now but that is included in the price of the part.

          Technology of this nature evolves faster than just about anything that's common place in our lives therefor I feel it stands out to people that things become obsolete. For example cars and audio gear very seldom become obsolete, if ever. I don't feel this is a fault of tech manufacturers, it's just human nature to see something that is inconsistent with other things we've seen and to assume foul play. I still regularly use a mac pro from '07 and an iPad 1, I would like to see apple continue with software updates for longer than they do but I disagree that they plan obsolescence. How does apple's high resale price fit together with a brand supposedly accelerating their products towards obsolescence? I don't believe any company does this as longevity its valuable to consumers and keeping a customer is more important than any 1 sale.

          Change is inevitable, as is humanity's tendency to gripe about it.

        • hangdog on 22/11/2013 - 18:39

          How does apple's high resale price fit together with a brand supposedly accelerating their products towards obsolescence?

          Especially note that 10.9 Mavericks increased battery life on MacBooks typically by around a quarter or more.

          As the owner of a 2010 C2D MacBook Air that suddenly has around 100 minutes extra battery life, this has made it much easier for me to postpone replacing it. Am I delighted with Apple for what's effectively a major freebie on a 3-generations-superseded product? Hell yes.

        • [Deactivated] on 23/11/2013 - 10:44

          You can still take apart a Dell ultrabook with a set of phillips screwdrivers. The worst you'll find with them is the odd model which uses torx 5 for the base cover to prevent noobs taking apart their system. However other than that it's always set out very logically.

    • Peter Pann on 22/11/2013 - 10:34

      Is this different from optional extras on cars or tvs or any number of things though? I dislike it too but singling out apple and google for this is a bit short sighted imho. A TV with the same panel but another 2 HDMI ports and slightly different speakers adds like $200? There's no way the changes cost that much.

  • GaryC on 21/11/2013 - 22:51
    +6

    Well, I have to disagree. You're comparing two completely different things. I would never get an iMac for my desktop needs (love watercooling and gaming too much) and I love my HTC One and Android for my mobile use. But when I needed a light laptop that's portable and has a long battery, the Macbook Air was the obvious choice. I made the decision from a completely objective standpoint without much OSX experience, and in the end, I love it! The trackpad is magical to use, the OS is refined and streamlined, and the build quality is, as usual, excellent.

    In the end, it's horses for courses, really.

  • ThadtheChad on 22/11/2013 - 01:08
    +1

    Wow.. I must say I'm impressed by everyone participating in this thread. This is probably the most civil and well-reasoned Mac Vs PC thread on the Internet. We have people from all sides of the fence(s) weighing in with some solid arguments/comments.

    Pat yourselves on the back. You deserve it. :) Who'd a thunk it eh? OzB being the epitomy of well reasoned civil debate on a topic as polarising as this (and extremely prone to turning into a flame war). :)

    • camelgrass on 22/11/2013 - 07:14

      Same here… I was very sceptical at the start. I was thinking what the hell, why is this guy starting yet another pointless pc vs mac discussion. Ended up being pretty informative.

    • Janko on 22/11/2013 - 08:57
      +2

      Actually it's something I've noticed about many discussions on OzB and why I no longer post on Whirlpool.

  • auna on 22/11/2013 - 01:31

    To me apple seem to be anti Bluray and anti GPU minded.

    • p1 ama on 22/11/2013 - 09:09

      Yeah, they're anti-bluray from the days of Steve Jobs, the guy hated Blu-Ray, but it's irrelevant now anyway since no Macs carry optical drives any more, apart from the Macbook Pro 13" which is going to be phased out.

      I don't think they're anti-GPU, they're more obsessed with decent graphics performance for low power. I think one of the reasons Intel ramped up their integrated graphics to Iris and Iris Pro is because of Apple's leverage. Apart from that Apple doesn't really make a machine which would use standard GPUs, the Mac Mini and iMac can only really use mobile chips and the Mac Pro is designed for FirePro or Quadro cards.

  • BuyoTheCat on 22/11/2013 - 10:06

    Generally, I think apple computer are a neater package. I am not fond of OSx, mainly because I am not used to it.
    I dislike people who say that mac are better at this or that. I work faster doing photoshop on a PC because I am used to it and photoshop and the PC version does a few little things differently, which helps he work a bit quicker.

    Looking at my table, I would pay for a mac to get rid of the mess of cables except that I am ANTI apple customer service.

  • Peter Pann on 22/11/2013 - 10:17

    In all the new mac's both SSD's and HDD's can be upgraded. There's a notable distinction between what they call 'user serviceable' and what is possible but I'm no tech and I could easily upgrade the SSD in any of apple's laptops. They do not use a conventional 2.5" drive so smaller production means costs are generally a bit higher but it's not impossible in any mac. RAM is a different story as it is soldered to the mobo unless 'user serviceable RAM' is indicated. Also worth noting that if you opt for the fusion drive things can get a LOT more complicated if you want to start messing with the drives. Since the OP mentions iMacs, the 21" models use a 2.5" HDD which can of course be upgraded and/or an SSD module which can be upgraded as described above. The current iMacs with no optical drive basically need a pizza-cutter to separate the glass from the body of the iMac and a replacement adhesive gasket (dunno real name for it) must be used to seal it back up again. Just wanted to clarify this as many people seem to feel something is impossible when in fact…it is not.

    The issue of upgradability overall is an interesting one. When the time came to try and squeeze some more performance out of the my last 2 pc's the CPU sockets had changed so new CPU meant new mobo and hence RAM and the GPU was to be changed also, pretty close to a complete rebuild. So the notion that getting a tower will mean you can upgrade whatever you like is a bit of an over-simplification.

    Apple have never pursued desktop gamers, if you want best bang for your buck you build a pc or buy a console and apple know this. Hence all the iMacs have XXXXm versions of graphics cards which are in the mobile family most commonly used in laptops. No recent iMac has a full powered GPU but what they have is adequate for everything other than gaming imho, plus they use less power. @auna, I think this is why apple may appear anti-GPU and the blu-ray thing…well…that would potentially take sales away from the iTunes store.

    For the smartphone and tablet loving folk I would suggest that although iOS devices do work with windows and android devices do have apple software available the cohesion between iOS and OSX and android and windows is quite a lot better. I've seen tons of people with issues syncing an iPhone with windows and when we've tried the same thing on a mac it's just worked.

    Regarding viruses, in 6 years of working for an apple reseller with a service department attached I've never seen a virus on a mac. The closest thing I've seen is that some fools have been prompted by a website to install something like mackeeper and they have chosen to download it and then entered their password to authenticate the installation. This is quite different from what's happened to me with windows which is that suddenly something foreign was on my system that's forced a scrub and re-install. Back in '07 people were saying that with the rise of the mac it was imminent that the virus issues seen with windows would soon be in OSX. While this does make sense my exposure to huge numbers of mac users and zero viruses tells me something.

    The windows/osx solution for me is to have a windows pc for gaming and everything else is apple. I like the cohesion across all my idevices and that the stock apps take care of the majority of my needs then osx and iOS app stores are great and safe sources to fill the gaps. For gaming windows will always have the most software available and a modular tower gives the best bang for buck performance. This is what works for me, people should make up their own minds and celebrate that there's at least some diversity in the market.

    • ozf1 on 22/11/2013 - 10:39
      +1

      "In all the new mac's both SSD's and HDD's can be upgraded."
      Im pretty sure yes they can be, BUT not for the faint hearted, in particular on the 'new' models..

    • p1 ama on 22/11/2013 - 11:18

      There's a notable distinction between what they call 'user serviceable' and what is possible but I'm no tech and I could easily upgrade the SSD in any of apple's laptops.

      No you can't - you could for the old Macbook Pro, but not with the MBA or the rMBP, they use proprietary devices and connectors that are very expensive and difficult to source. But at the end of the day, they are not easy to upgrade by any means. They require specialised tools and a bit of dexterity. Look at the iFixit guides.

      The current iMacs with no optical drive basically need a pizza-cutter to separate the glass from the body of the iMac and a replacement adhesive gasket (dunno real name for it) must be used to seal it back up again. Just wanted to clarify this as many people seem to feel something is impossible when in fact…it is not.

      Seriously, you can't possibly argue that this is an upgrade path. You'll void your warranty and take a huge risk of damaging your investment. It's not user-upgradable.

      So the notion that getting a tower will mean you can upgrade whatever you like is a bit of an over-simplification.

      Not really, adding an SSD or a bit more RAM tends to breathe a lot more life into an old system. My i7 860 (bought in 2009) which has since been given to another family member runs excellently after an SSD upgrade and more RAM.

      For the smartphone and tablet loving folk I would suggest that although iOS devices do work with windows and android devices do have apple software available the cohesion between iOS and OSX and android and windows is quite a lot better. I've seen tons of people with issues syncing an iPhone with windows and when we've tried the same thing on a mac it's just worked.

      I don't know, I use iTunes and have had iPods in the past and they have all synced fine with my PC. I don't get the whole cohesion thing. All you do with an iPhone/iPad/iPod…etc. is sync. With an Android phone, which I have, it's even simpler as you just copy stuff directly across. It's the same thing with Android and Mac.

      The windows/osx solution for me is to have a windows pc for gaming and everything else is apple.

      So you have a gaming PC and then an iMac or Apple computer? Not many people can afford to run two computers for personal use though, so while I understand that works for you, not everyone can afford that.

      • Peter Pann on 22/11/2013 - 12:10
        -5

        sigh

        http://www.macfixit.com.au/480gb-owc-aura-pro-6g-solid-state…

        Like I said I worked for a long time at an apple reseller and I've personally sold lots of 3rd party (non-apple) ssd replacements to people out of warranty or after an upgrade. The link is just an example but they certainly do exist and they're a lot cheaper than apple's options. Again, as I said before I'm no tech and consider this job pretty basic, I've done it myself.

        All I said about the iMac is that upgrades are not impossible which differs from what others have said in this thread. I never said it was easy or user serviceable.

        Twice I've been in a position that HD/SSD or RAM upgrades would not have let me passed the wall I was facing, I stand by what I said about towers not ensuring you can just upgrade whatever you like, whenever you like. In both of those instances for me they might as well have been like an iMac with few to no options.

        On cohesion, if professionally you've had to solve problems and you notice that in some places a lot more issues exist than others then using a mix of devices that presents the fewest issues has some merit.

        Mate…I specially said that this is what works for me and people should make up their own minds. I'm well aware this is not the solution for everyone.

        Where I was enjoying this discussion I now find your ignorance and hostility offensive, what a pathetic way to respond to someone who was trying to add some information to a question you put forward.

        • p1 ama on 22/11/2013 - 13:36
          +2

          Where I was enjoying this discussion I now find your ignorance and hostility offensive, what a pathetic way to respond to someone who was trying to add some information to a question you put forward.

          What ignorance? What hostility? I'm sorry if you've been offended by what I said, but at least tell me what you don't like. There's hardly anything to get so worked up about.

        • ozf1 on 22/11/2013 - 16:46
          +1

          paulsterio I'm glad YOU bothered to reply to his post, I was about to earlier but had things to do. Obviously I agree with just about all your points. I have recently swapped the HDD on my 07 MBP, not what I would call very easy (all the screws and removing the keyboard etc), in fact the just superseded MBPs are a lot easier (replaced one a couple of months ago for a friend), petterPann needs to update his info, and is about time he grew up! Can't be a man child for all his existence.

        • Peter Pann on 22/11/2013 - 19:15

          Somewhere your english teachers are weeping at your terrible powers of comprehension, both of you.

          "I could easily upgrade the SSD in any of apple's laptops. They do not use a conventional 2.5" drive so …"

          Does your '07 MBP come with a SSD? No. Does it have a conventional 2.5" drive? Yes. Yet you think I was saying that machine was easy to upgrade?

          You've both incorrectly put words in my mouth and judged me harshly for it.

          What other info do I need to update hmmm?

        • p1 ama on 22/11/2013 - 19:41
          +1

          Somewhere your english teachers are weeping at your terrible powers of comprehension, both of you.

          Why does it have to get personal?

          "I could easily upgrade the SSD in any of apple's laptops. They do not use a conventional 2.5" drive so …"

          I replied that non-conventional drives are expensive and pretty much impossible to source. Even in small-form factor systems, there is a standard for storage - i.e. mSATA - there is a reason why Apple chooses to not adhere to standards, it is so that they have a monopoly over upgrades.

          Does your '07 MBP come with a SSD? No. Does it have a conventional 2.5" drive? Yes. Yet you think I was saying that machine was easy to upgrade?

          I don't think you understood his post. What he was trying to say was that his 2007 MBP was difficult to upgrade despite using a 2.5" drive. Newer models would be even harder (almost impossible) to upgrade because they do not use the universal standards.

          I understand your point, you are saying that it is POSSIBLE to upgrade Apple computers. But I disagree with you, the fact that Apple has taken so many measures to stop you from doing it - non-standard screws, non-standard connectors and form factors, difficulty of replacing and installing components means that it's pretty much impossible for most users to upgrade.

          With the newer iMacs, you pretty much have to use a knife to get the screen off and glue it back together, again, if you're willing to do that then that's okay, but in my opinion, I wouldn't want to risk my computer's life doing that and I don't think many other people would either.

          Upgrades should be painless and easy, not a battle against the manufacturer.

        • hangdog on 22/11/2013 - 20:40

          I replied that non-conventional drives are expensive and pretty much impossible to source. Even in small-form factor systems, there is a standard for storage - i.e. mSATA - there is a reason why Apple chooses to not adhere to standards, it is so that they have a monopoly over upgrades.

          I don't think that's accurate. Apple has enough scale that they can, in many cases, choose weird custom shapes for parts like SSD storage and batteries, in order to serve the overall design of the product and squeeze into the available space (the MacBook Air's probably the most obvious example). Yet you can still source aftermarket upgrades and replacements for these things – it may not be as simple or as cheap as popping into MSY or whatever, but it's far from "impossible".

          I don't think you understood his post. What he was trying to say was that his 2007 MBP was difficult to upgrade despite using a 2.5" drive. Newer models would be even harder (almost impossible) to upgrade because they do not use the universal standards.

          Looking at the instructions that are available online: yes, it's harder than pulling a drive sled out of a Thinkpad. But it's not actually that difficult. If Macs were exactly the same to service as most PCs, they'd look and weigh the same as most PCs.

          I understand your point, you are saying that it is POSSIBLE to upgrade Apple computers. But I disagree with you, the fact that Apple has taken so many measures to stop you from doing it - non-standard screws, non-standard connectors and form factors, difficulty of replacing and installing components means that it's pretty much impossible for most users to upgrade.

          It does depend on the model and the component you're trying to upgrade. But for most Macs, it's not "impossible". Not even "pretty much impossible".

          Upgrades should be painless and easy, not a battle against the manufacturer.

          That's subjective. The vast majority of users never ever change computer parts. And a certain percentage of computer buyers clearly thinks that it's worthwhile trading some aspects of conventional computer design (such as easy access to drives, etc) for others (such as an all-in-one form factor or a thinner computer). I liked the ease of swapping drives in the old G5 Power Mac as much as anyone, but for noise, space and low power draw, I bought a Mac Mini as soon as it came out with dual monitor outputs. And I learned to pull it apart too.

        • ozf1 on 23/11/2013 - 13:48

          Thanks again paulsterio (brother in arms), the 2007 MBP was tricky, and the 2012 MBP was easy IMO, the 'new/just released models' although I have not done one, from the Macfixit are for the average user i agree are almost impossible to even consider.
          By the way the Hybrid is not a conventional size if you will, in that it is 7mm thick and not 9.5 as is the conventional size.
          Please forgive my grammatical errors.

  • biozet on 22/11/2013 - 11:03
    -2

    how about dem apples

  • biozet on 22/11/2013 - 11:03
    -2

    how about dem apples?

  • RocketSwitch on 22/11/2013 - 11:11
    +2

    I used to be bias towards Apple. I used MAC in Uni for design for 4 years, and I didn't mind it but preferred PC.

    So, I hated Apple.

    But after growing up, lol, I now see that I still prefer PC, but would also like to use MACs because I also like the general feel to it.

    With that said, I don't have any bias anymore, and I like to own both.

    So at the end of the day, it's up to what YOU want and buy accordingly.

    I like to have experience with all environments, so I like to own different technologies for that purpose and found all excel in different areas.

    But if I was low on funds, and had to pick one, I would opt for a PC because I'm a gamer and there's quite a few games in my Steam library that are not MAC compatible.

    That's about it. I prefer Android over iPhone, because I like to customise beyond what the iPhone wouldn't allow me to do without too much trouble.

    But, overall, any option you choose is a good one, unless you want total coverage for games.

  • p1 ama on 22/11/2013 - 11:31

    Just a bit more thought here, but I think that Apple, in some ways, has actually positively influenced the PC notebook market.

    One of the problems with the PC notebook market is that it such a saturated market with companies who don't stand out from one another, many consumers who don't understand computers, many of whom don't know what they want and no companies with the marketing muscle that Apple has. Imagine if Toshiba, HP, Lenovo…etc. brought a notebook with an ultra-high resolution to the market. People would not buy it because so few people understand the benefit of higher resolutions and hence, few would be willing to pay the extra cost. That is the intricate issue of the PC market.

    On the Apple side of things, because Apple has no competitors, it can bring out products and be more free to charge whatever it feels fit. Look at the rMBP, people would not buy a PC laptop for that price, because they can get much cheaper ones. What Apple is able to do is bring the concept of high resolution screens to the majority of people.

    Again, Apple will tell you that you need high resolution screens, and people listen to them. PC manufacturers follow suit and hence, everyone benefits. Maybe that's food for thought too, that Apple's status in the industry and its influence and marketing muscle allows it to bring new "concepts" to the market which pushes PC manufacturers.

  • sim36 on 22/11/2013 - 11:33

    Apple isn't a rip off - it's highly priced and offers a high quality product / service. buying in involves buy-in to the apple proprietary loop. Buy Apple and all it offers and it's hard to leave.

    Die Hard trying - http://gizmodo.com/5940045/bruce-willis-planning-legal-battl…

  • Thaal Sinestro on 22/11/2013 - 11:37
    -2

    When you purchase Apple, you are paying extra for the right to brag about how cool who are. How much is a superior sense of self worth actually worth monetarily? Apple understands consumer captialism and conspicuous consumption - purchasing premium prices items in order to get a 'high'. It's like city drivers purchasing a huge SUV for a family of 3, when a sedan would be fine. In our atheistic/materialistic age, our self worth is derived from our possessions. Throughout much of history, the vast mass of people have been extremely poor and have instead drawn strength and reassurance from mythology, heroic tales, and various forms of spirituality.

    • hangdog on 22/11/2013 - 12:59
      +3

      When you purchase Apple, you are paying extra for the right to brag about how cool who are.

      Perhaps some people do, but it's insulting and unfounded to suggest that all Apple owners do. Good design that addresses usability is worth paying for (and in the case of MacBook Air knockoff manufacturers, worth copying).

    • theguyrules on 22/11/2013 - 13:01
      +3

      How much is a superior sense of self worth actually worth monetarily?

      Are you serious? How is this different to Windows users having a superior sense of self worth because they think that Mac is crap?

    • Eivad on 22/11/2013 - 14:28
      +4

      To be honest, I think PC (and Android) users brag more about how 'non-Apple', 'non-conformist' and 'technically superior' their devices are.

  • Starcraftmazter on 22/11/2013 - 11:45

    Is this actually a real question?

    Of course it is.

  • mxyzptik on 22/11/2013 - 12:03

    In short I have found Apple to be markedly more expensive … but better (especially design-wise) over the last 5 years, but it seems the gap is narrowing (even if the prices aren't as close).

    Having had Windows based systems since the '80s & having acquired a client who had Apples in their offices I thought I'd join in the 'fun' with my own money - in 1993. That first - brief - foray into Apple was purchasing the disastrous, much touted at the time, "Newton" … it was SOOO bad … it was a "PDA" with handwriting recognition that didn't work. I ordered it in advance of release (BIG MISTAKE), it cost me a small fortune & simply didn't work! It was so bad it seems to have been erased from the memory of all Apple personnel. It cost Apple my business, apart from iPods for 15 years.

    Having been burnt in '93 I carried on with Windows, apart from purchasing ipods, until I bought the first Macbook Air when it came out about 2008. I bought it for my 8 year old but the whole family loved it - a beautiful thing. It was so good over the following 2 years I bought 2 iMacs, 2 iPads, a Macbook Pro, another Air & iPhones for the family (all beautifully designed, nice to use and UNLIKE WINDOWS at the time, less glitchy, virtually virus free too).

    I think that period 3-5 years ago was when Apple had its greatest lead over the competition, in beautiful machines (both to see, hold & use), and of course leading the field with iPhones, and - for a while - having the only iPad.

    Our family of four only had one account with Apple which meant that when buying an app for one iOS unit, you got it on all the others as well (if you wanted to) without paying any more. Similarly all the music & videos could be on all the machines too.

    There were 2 main reasons for being tempted over to the Macs … one was Microsoft had been stuffing up for years, with things like VISTA & their Office revamps they seemed to be getting WORSE! … and the other things was Apples machines were sometimes, literally, a few years ahead of the competition in terms of design.

    We have all been very happy with 'going Apple'.

    Having said all that my 14 year old prefers a windows notebook for his gaming.

    When the money runs out it might be back to Windows … by which time they hopefully will have caught up (is that time just around the corner?).

    It may be a coincidence, or it might have happened anyway, but to my eye Apple's lead over the competition has steadily been eroded since just before Steve Jobs passing. For some time I have been hoping they had something up their sleeve but it has failed to materialise (I know its not reflected in their share price but I suspect it will be).

    Oh, and finally, Apple IS a rip-off because a) they don't pay enough in taxes & b) there may be a few Chinese workers who are not too happy with them either.

    imho

    • p1 ama on 22/11/2013 - 12:15
      +1

      I completely agree with you, just take a walk down memory lane back to when Steve Jobs was forced out of Apple, their company was just as good as dead until they wanted him back. Apple was and always will be a company hinged on Steve Jobs, just look at his Keynotes vs. Tim Cook. Steve Jobs genuinely believed in what he was doing and in his keynote addresses, you could see that passion. Some say he's delusional…etc. but his vision along with the marketing department allowed Apple to get to where they are today.

      Under Steve Jobs, Apple created the products that rescued it from the dumps - the iPod, the iPhone and then the iPad. One of the reasons why Apple computers started gaining traction was because of the success of the other iDevices which led to people becoming interested in what Apple had to offer in the computer space.

      • mxyzptik on 22/11/2013 - 12:29

        Yep & that Newton story just further illustrates your very well-made point - its life from 'go' to 'woe' or 'gone' was 1987-98 & Jobs was away from Apple 1985-96! ie. Apple started development 2 years after Jobs was fired & Jobs officially killed it off 2 years after returning (although I'm sure it was dead long before).

  • annoynimous on 22/11/2013 - 15:01

    Apple belongs to Jobs

    W/O him around, that marketing prowess is slowly disappearing and competitors will start to stagnate again a few years later.

    I haven't bothered to watch a single TC presentation.

    This year's WWDC shows their upcoming problems, on one corner there's a quote by Jobs

    "I think if you do something and it turns out pretty good, then you should go do something else wonderful, not dwell on it for too long. Just figure out what’s next."

    and then they go on to announce iphone 5S and 5C…

  • jmoore626 on 22/11/2013 - 15:12

    I recently bought my first mac - a macbook pro retina.

    I stacked several discounts to get it down to a 'reasonable' price, still maybe $1-200 more than a corresponding windows based pc of similar 'spec'

    All I can say is wow. I have been completely blown away by the performance, build quality and what people refer to as the Apple "experience".

    My work pc is an i7 2600, 8gb ram, Quadro 600, 2tb spinning disk drive. I have optimised my startup preferences and boot sectors for minimal boot time, performed a few other tweaks in terms of wait to kill etc. I thought it was a pretty damn quick machine. Then I used my i5 macbook … the performance apple squeezes out of a lower spec setup is amazing … it blows my desktop out of the water!

    OSX is worth the premium price tag of apple products … it is both simple for regular users, but for power users such as myself all the additional configuration you might expect out of a PC is hidden just out of sight, but still there to be readily used.

    The whole thing is just so aesthetically pleasing … its not just a laptop any more so much as an example of excellent artistic design and engineering.

    I used to be the most anti-apple person I knew. Heck, I still am anti-apple … but I have to admit they make a great bit of kit.

    • ozhunter on 22/11/2013 - 19:09

      I recently bought my first mac - a macbook pro retina.

      Me too(rMBP 13 inch, 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD)

      All I can say is wow. I have been completely blown away by the performance, build quality and what people refer to as the Apple "experience".

      Build quality is great, but performance is so so imo. My desktop is an i7 920, 6GB ram, 128GB SSD, AMD 7950. I don't do anything resource intensive, about after using the macbook for 20+ hours, it doesn't feel nearly as fast as my desktop(Windows 8)

      I used to be the most anti-apple person I knew. Heck, I still am anti-apple … but I have to admit they make a great bit of kit.

      Same. Though I agree build quality is great, it looks and feel great

    • p1 ama on 22/11/2013 - 19:42
      +2

      I reckon your work PC needs an SSD, the SSD is responsible for most of the "snapiness" and stuff you see with the rMBP.

      I've yet to try OSX, but maybe when I can set up an OSx86 build, I'll be tempted.

    • Mr Wowtrousers on 23/11/2013 - 17:42

      A lot of people find this. They are rabid anti-Mac, then they use one and they realise how enjoyable or pleasant it is. I have still yet to see any comparable laptop that has the build quality and design aesthetic of a Macbook Pro. Equivalently priced PC's still feel like plastic POS with crappy trackpads.

  • arislan on 22/11/2013 - 15:15

    As someone pointed out, the price for Apple products are not solely based on manufacturing and materials plus typical market standard profit margin. They are charging for the entire experience. I do agree part of it is the shallow "cool/hip/posh/stuck-up" factor, but hey to some it matters and that's well within their rights.

    I have friends that fall into that category with everything they have at home being an Apple product as much as possible and I respect their choice. They just think differently than me. I would only consider Apple a rip-off the day they start marketing the fact that they are the most economical penny for penny, which they haven't.

    I personally have a macbook air and a couple iPads, but most of my other PCs (x2) and other laptops/netbook/ultrabook (x3) are not. My anecdotal experience is Apple are worth the money. the SSD on my air died last month and was out of warranty, but Apple swapped a new one for me anyway for free. No way MSI would have done that had it been my netbook. Also I don't have to deal with the crap about, "Go RMA with the hard drive manufacturer"..

  • jabanico on 22/11/2013 - 15:18

    Unfortunately there's no matching Mac Mini with the same processor. The gap is smaller if going that route, spending for additional RAM.

    A$ 749.00
    2.5GHz dual-core Intel Core i5
    4GB memory
    500GB hard drive1
    Intel HD Graphics 4000
    OS X Mavericks

    I like variety and I have all 3 major desktop OSes (Ubuntu on the desktop and dual-boot MacBook) at home and 2 mobile OSes (Android tablet and iPhone).

    • serideth on 22/11/2013 - 16:45

      There is no matching, but you can beat it. http://i.imgur.com/5bpydlG.jpg

      If you already have a Windows licence you can save $130
      You can also remove the GPU for another $130 saving

    • ProspectiveDarkness on 23/11/2013 - 01:36
      +1

      The Mac Mini is unbeatable if your utmost priority is a small footprint, but I think a Mini ITX build is superior in most other regards given the greater ability to expand and value for money (speaking purely from a hardware point of view).

      Like serideth, I took the liberty of providing an example: Link

      $18 more, Mini ITX form factor, a 1TB SSHD (double the storage, and faster than the HDD in the Mac Mini) and double the RAM - with the option to throw in a graphics card later, should you feel the need. There's also the superior integrated graphics and processor, but since the Mac Mini hasn't been updated for Haswell, it's a bit unfair.

      Of course, the Mac Mini has better support from Apple, so there's a bit of give and take.

  • morpheu on 22/11/2013 - 19:36

    re Apple resale value, why is it higher than other pcs? people are saying "it's higher because they're better" but why? if 100 people said the same wrong thing about an item, it doesn't change the fact it's wrong, only the reputation(one possible reason?) so i'd like to break it down

    first a bit of background, i'm mainly a pc guy as i like to tinker under the hood(prefer open systems) i've had a couple of Mac products(mainly gifts/free!), initial impressions, neat, nifty, intuitive oh and pricey! no guessing here, i prefer buying based on maximum 'bang per buck' and not how thin/light/what colour the laptop is etc i bought an old education Mac desktop for my old man years ago, but only because it was literally 5 bucks!
    also, please feel free to comment, but if you're going to neg, at least have the decency to give a good reason why!

    so, why the higher resale value? possible reasons
    -scarcity, although there is a Mac store in every suburb Mac pcs are low in supply in the general population overall compared to IBM pcs, there's probably like 30 to 40 pc shops for every 1 Mac shop so it's logical to say there are less Macs in use than PCs, the old "supply and demand rule" dictates simply because there are less Macs (even for an older model) the price is higher, as an example, go on Gumtree and most secondhand Macbooks seem to be Core2Duo from like 2006-2010 with 2gb RAM, 160/320gb hdd etc but they still have asking prices of like $400-$650, with that kind of dosh you could buy a nice modern Windows pc laptop with warranty!

    -price/quality, two sides of the same coin, as spending more $ usually means higher quality, so a higher RRP should mean a higher resale value, but better(different?) design is also a part

    -marketing, Apple are masters on how to push peoples emotional buttons, bypassing the price/spec aspect almost completely, go on a Mac online store and you see lots of photos of happy smiling ethnically diverse average(but still good looking!) people, they don't talk about specs upfront or use technical jargon, they just tell you why Mac is good, the specs are on a separate link in the online shop and the prices are never really the main selling point, almost relegating the purchase price to an 'incidental' charge like the shipping fee, pure genius i tell ya! being in the sales game for many years, this is what all salesmen try to achieve, you don't focus on the price(once you do it will always be about the price), always focus why it will save you time, or money, or frustration etc you plant the seed of desire then step back and nature takes it's course…

    -reputation, if your friends are using Mac computers and you were looking for a new laptop, in your mind you are probably thinking Mac products are higher quality or better to use as the apparent(perceived?) value would be higher in your mind, given your second hand experience through your friends' usage, although this would work the other way, if your friend bought a Mac which failed they might steer clear of Macs, even if the aftersales support was exellent

    • p1 ama on 22/11/2013 - 19:54

      I disagree with you here. I think the reason why Macs retain their price well is because you can only buy a Mac with a certain amount of money.

      Let's take an example. In 2009, I buy a PC, with a Core i7 860 for $1300 and I buy a Mac with an i7 860 for $2000. That seems like a pretty reasonable rough estimate.

      Now in 2013, I want to upgrade. I think that in those years, technology would have depreciated by around 40% (just a number, it can be any number really). Thus, my PC will be worth $780 and my Mac will be worth $1200.

      A person wanting to buy a PC will not buy my PC because he can put together a system for the price of $780, so he won't look second hand. It might not perform as well as my old i7 860, but most people like to buy new.

      On the Mac side, though, a person shopping for a Mac with $1200 CANNOT buy a new Mac, so they have to buy second hand. With Apple, there is no option to spend a little less, hence, they must buy a second hand computer.

      • morpheu on 22/11/2013 - 20:29

        ahhh! yet another possible reason for higher resale values(and i think crafty Apple is well aware of this!) keep the prices of new Mac equipment high so that people on limited budgets have no choice but buy secondhand! but i must say, this is NOT something to be proud of, is it tantamount to 'price fixing'…?!
        ps speaking on prices, have you noticed how Apple seldom reduces prices on new models despite reducing manufacturing costs? just a quick example, one year the ipad is $499, next years it's still $499 but it's a little faster/lighter/comes in a different colour/extra software etc few other manufacturers do this, and personally i would like to see more options at lower price points so more people can afford to buy the product

      • hangdog on 22/11/2013 - 21:20

        Sorry, not meaning to stalk you here! :)

        One thing that you might have missed is that in general, PCs depreciate a lot faster than Macs, so it's probably not accurate to factor in the same percentage drop over the same period (hey, it does tend to bolster your used pricing case…).

        Example: Thinkpad X200 vs mid-2009 MacBook Air. Both hit the market around $3K at a similar time. Both were examples of really solid design that served the mobile market. 4 years on, you can buy the X200 used, in good shape, for chump change. Now I'm probably more chump than not, and that's what I did! I bought mine 7 months ago, used and in excellent condition, apart from an almost-cactus battery, for ~$150 (and I'd sold a good-but-not-pristine 2008 MBA 6 months before that, for $550). Right now you would still be able to get ~$400 for a good used MBA of the same vintage as the X200.

  • hangdog on 22/11/2013 - 20:57

    Let's not get too carried away with the "Apple was only great when Steve Jobs was alive" meme, irreplaceable as Jobs was. Remember that Tim Cook has been there as its operational mastermind since its resurgence in 1998. If you read or listen to any of his longer interviews and compare the clarity of expression and relative lack of management-speak with, say, his counterparts from MS or Blackberry (who admittedly didn't set a high bar in those departments), you might hold a different view of him.

    • ProspectiveDarkness on 23/11/2013 - 01:14

      I do hate this line of discussion, because it seldom recognises all the other cogs in the Apple machine - the engineers, the designers, the developers - who also had an important part to play in Apple's success.

      • p1 ama on 23/11/2013 - 10:46

        The thing with Tim Cook is that he's an operations guy, I don't think that he has the imaginations that Steve Jobs did. What Jobs was able to do from his return to Apple to his resignation was look at emerging and stagnant markets and bring out devices that brought those markets to the masses.

        Back when the iPod was released, of course there were MP3 players…etc. around, but they were geeky items, Jobs brought along the iPod, made it fashionable and appealing to the general public and made Apple a lot of money.

        A similar thing happened with the iPhone - touch screen phones were already on the market, but Jobs had the imagination to make a unique and attractive UI and market the phone to the general consumer.

        What Jobs was good at doing was taking geeky items which were usually reserved for business and made them appealing to everyone. Tim Cook is a great operations guy, no doubt, but I'm not sure he has the inspiration that Jobs did.

        On top of that, there have been quite a few debacles since Cook took the stage, including the Apple Maps fiasco (yes, it was actually that bad), the recent Mavericks fiasco as well as the iPhone 5S/5C fiasco (what is the point of the 5C?). This is along with the release of the original iPad Mini which honestly couldn't compete with the Nexus 7 (it should have launched with the Retina display).

        • hangdog on 23/11/2013 - 17:33
          +1

          the recent Mavericks fiasco as well as the

          What Mavericks fiasco? To me, a free OS upgrade that increases laptop battery life by ≥25% seems like the opposite of a fiasco.

          iPhone 5S/5C fiasco (what is the point of the 5C?).

          What iPhone 5s/5c fiasco? If the word has to have meaning, it's better to make its use proportionate. This was the biggest, most successful smartphone launch ever. The point of the 5c is crystal clear — it does the same thing as the usual "last year's model at a lower price point", albeit in a new skin.

          This is along with the release of the original iPad Mini which honestly couldn't compete with the Nexus 7 (it should have launched with the Retina display).

          They aren't directly comparable, given the significantly bigger display of the Mini and the different ecosystems, not to mention how Apple and Google make their money (hardware sales to willing users, versus selling willing users to advertisers). In terms of sales, the Mini pretty much squashed everything else out there, so it must have competed reasonably well despite being 1-year-old technology.

          If it was possible for Apple to get the LCD yields necessary for large-scale manufacture, and to have the processor efficiency and speed in the original Mini to get a Retina Mini out in the right form factor, with 10-hour battery life, at a price that made sense >1 year ago ago, that's what would have happened. But it wasn't possible a year ago. Among other things, it took the A7 to make it possible.

          As for Maps – yeah, it wasn't great, although I think you'd find that it worked well for a lot of people, me included, once you stripped away the usual media hysteria. But G maps ain't perfect either, and Apple had very good reasons to go ahead without Google: http://daringfireball.net/2012/09/timing_of_apples_map_switc…
          "Sticking with that deal through its expiration date would have left Maps in iOS 6 exactly where they stood in iOS 5: no turn-by-turn directions or vector map tiles for Apple, no additional Google branding or Latitude/Google Plus integration (and, thus, user location data collection) for Google."

        • ozhunter on 23/11/2013 - 18:00

          In terms of sales, the Mini pretty much squashed everything else out there, so it must have competed reasonably well despite being 1-year-old technology.

          That's because Apple doesn't let anyone use iOS, which does have quite a few benefits.

          If Microsoft didn't license out Windows and only made 1 computer a year, they'd sell a lot more(since it's the only pc you could buy with Windows)

          What Mavericks fiasco?

          Wifi is bit finicky
          Bluetooth won't connect
          Bootcamp is PIA at the moment

          Well those are my problems at the moment :)

        • p1 ama on 23/11/2013 - 18:07
          -1

          What Mavericks fiasco? To me, a free OS upgrade that increases laptop battery life by ≥25% seems like the opposite of a fiasco.

          Google Mavericks instability and Mavericks kernel panic and people everywhere on the web and forums will be talking about the issue they have had with Mavericks. Mavericks is hardly up to the standard of the previous few OSX releases.

          What iPhone 5s/5c fiasco? If the word has to have meaning, it's better to make its use proportionate. This was the biggest, most successful smartphone launch ever. The point of the 5c is crystal clear — it does the same thing as the usual "last year's model at a lower price point", albeit in a new skin.

          http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/10/19/the-mysterious-fai…

          Biggest and most successful by what measure? Every smartphone launch, whether it be from Apple, Samsung, Google or whatever seems to always have that "most successful" and "biggest" moniker.

          I disagree here. If you read anywhere on the internet, there are reports that the iPhone 5c is simply not selling and it's pretty clear why. With just a $130 price difference between itself and the 5s, why would anybody want to buy the 5c? It's worse than the iPhone 5 because albeit having the same internals, it has a cheaper plastic shell, bad colours and it weighs more.

          I would say that the fall in share prices after the announcement says a lot though.

          They aren't directly comparable, given the significantly bigger display of the Mini and the different ecosystems, not to mention how Apple and Google make their money (hardware sales to willing users, versus selling willing users to advertisers). In terms of sales, the Mini pretty much squashed everything else out there, so it must have competed reasonably well despite being 1-year-old technology.

          Well yes and no. Maybe they aren't directly comparable, but given how adamant Jobs was against a smaller form factor tablet, it seems that Apple only released the iPad mini to curb the increasingly strong sales from 7" tablets such as the Kindle Fire and the Nexus 7.

          It didn't squash everything out there in terms of sales, the Nexus 7 sold far, far better than the iPad mini. I'll have to dig up the report if you want though.

          As for Maps – yeah, it wasn't great, although I think you'd find that it worked well for a lot of people, me included, once you stripped away the usual media hysteria.

          Maps was okay, I had an iPad at the time and it worked, like it wasn't terrible, but there were definitely areas where it was wrong and it was by no means as good as Google maps. I found that Apple maps was also quite buggy. Yes, the media was hysterical about it, but let's face it, it was bad and for that short period of time, it really put people off Apple.

        • hangdog on 23/11/2013 - 19:14

          Google Mavericks instability and Mavericks kernel panic and people everywhere on the web and forums will be talking about the issue they have had with Mavericks. Mavericks is hardly up to the standard of the previous few OSX releases.

          You're always going to have issues with new OS releases, and some people have it really bad, but the overall evidence isn't there to label Mavericks a "fiasco", not even close. The vast majority of upgraders don't seem to be having more than minor software compatibility issues. I didn't like 10.7 at all. 10.8 and 10.9 have been great.

          Biggest and most successful by what measure? Every smartphone launch, whether it be from Apple, Samsung, Google or whatever seems to always have that "most successful" and "biggest" moniker.

          Not really, 9 million sold in the first 3 days is unambiguous. http://www.redmondpie.com/iphone-5s5c-launch-day-sales-troun…

          I disagree here. If you read anywhere on the internet, there are reports that the iPhone 5c is simply not selling and it's pretty clear why. With just a $130 price difference between itself and the 5s, why would anybody want to buy the 5c? It's worse than the iPhone 5 because albeit having the same internals, it has a cheaper plastic shell, bad colours and it weighs more.

          Without an actual breakdown of sales vs forecasts by Apple, this is unsupported speculation. Certainly not enough evidence to justify describing it as a "fiasco".

          I would say that the fall in share prices after the announcement says a lot though.

          Actually, Apple product announcements are usually met with falls in the share price, so it doesn't say that much: http://daringfireball.net/2013/10/apples_stock_price_product…

          given how adamant Jobs was against a smaller form factor tablet, it seems that Apple only released the iPad mini to curb the increasingly strong sales from 7" tablets such as the Kindle Fire and the Nexus 7.

          Very likely. Note that Jobs was specifically critical of the 7" tablets available at the time of iPad's release in 2010. Moving to 7.9" and changing the aspect ratio made a lot of sense.

          It didn't squash everything out there in terms of sales, the Nexus 7 sold far, far better than the iPad mini. I'll have to dig up the report if you want though.

          I understand that neither Apple nor Google is particularly transparent about sales of specific models, but if you can find me some credible analysis to support this, I'd be interested to see it. There was a report late last year where Asus was quoted as saying N7 sales were getting up to 1M per month, or double the rate at launch (and could well be far higher now). Impressive numbers, but a year ago, before the Mini came out, Apple was up to about 60 million iPads per year.

          At the N7 (2013) launch mid-year, Google announced that the N7 was the most popular tablet in Japan. But this wasn't based on accurate numbers: http://www.idownloadblog.com/2013/07/30/google-caught-using-… "As it turns out, BCN didn’t include any of Apple’s 7 Japan retail stores in the study, nor did it include Apple’s online store or the stores of its Japan carrier partners. While the total number of tablet sales from these outlets is unknown, it would’ve definitely had a huge impact on the numbers."

        • p1 ama on 24/11/2013 - 09:37
          -1

          You're always going to have issues with new OS releases, and some people have it really bad, but the overall evidence isn't there to label Mavericks a "fiasco", not even close. The vast majority of upgraders don't seem to be having more than minor software compatibility issues. I didn't like 10.7 at all. 10.8 and 10.9 have been great.

          Yes there is, when something is renowned for being bad, it usually is bad. You never hear about people having problems upgrading to Lion or Mountain Lion, but suddenly there's reports of problems with Mavericks, that means something, especially for Apple which only has like less than 20 hardware configurations it needs to test.

          Without an actual breakdown of sales vs forecasts by Apple, this is unsupported speculation. Certainly not enough evidence to justify describing it as a "fiasco".

          Yes, but the 5C is being discounted everywhere in the US and I have a lot of friends who are Apple fans. Nobody is interested in the 5C, if they're on the 5, the general consensus is that there's no point upgrading to a 5S. If they're on a 4 or 4S, they're upgrading to the 5S. But you're right, it's all anecdotal. Also, yes, announcements are usually met with a reduction in share price, but the larger than average decrease was something unusual.

          Very likely. Note that Jobs was specifically critical of the 7" tablets available at the time of iPad's release in 2010. Moving to 7.9" and changing the aspect ratio made a lot of sense.

          Yes, the 4:3 aspect ratio definitely made a lot of sense, but I think the iPad mini was a generation behind the times. I don't know if Apple had the technology to release a retina version at that stage, but it's not unlike Apple to release a first version that is light on features.

          Remember the first iPhone that had no 3G despite most other "smartphones" at the time having 3G? And then there was the first iPad that had no cameras, everyone knew that Apple was going to include cameras on the second iPad…etc. Maybe it's just a part of how things work at Apple to release a solid, feature-light device before upgrading.

          understand that neither Apple nor Google is particularly transparent about sales of specific models, but if you can find me some credible analysis to support this, I'd be interested to see it. There was a report late last year where Asus was quoted as saying N7 sales were getting up to 1M per month, or double the rate at launch (and could well be far higher now). Impressive numbers, but a year ago, before the Mini came out, Apple was up to about 60 million iPads per year.

          Apple will always beat Google on sales after launch because Google don't have large, high profile launches with people lining up outside stores the way Apple does. Often Google launches with pretty modest stock, sells out within hours and more stock comes later. So maybe we need to look at total sales, but I don't think either company releases sales numbers.

        • hangdog on 24/11/2013 - 20:38
          +1

          Yes there is, when something is renowned for being bad, it usually is bad. You never hear about people having problems upgrading to Lion or Mountain Lion, but suddenly there's reports of problems with Mavericks, that means something, especially for Apple which only has like less than 20 hardware configurations it needs to test.

          Sorry, I don't buy that. Every major release of every OS has some problems – Lion & Mountain Lion were no exceptions. I think you're drawing a long bow to call 10.9 a "fiasco". Also, 10.9 support goes back to models from circa 2007. That's a lot more than 20 hardware configurations (and 20 is considerably less than even all permutations of their current lineup). Even though Windows has to cater to a lot more variations, the hardware and software permutations that OS X has to accommodate is still a very large number.

          Yes, but the 5C is being discounted everywhere in the US and I have a lot of friends who are Apple fans. Nobody is interested in the 5C, if they're on the 5, the general consensus is that there's no point upgrading to a 5S. If they're on a 4 or 4S, they're upgrading to the 5S. But you're right, it's all anecdotal. Also, yes, announcements are usually met with a reduction in share price, but the larger than average decrease was something unusual.

          I'm still not seeing a "fiasco" in this 5C sales anecdote – if most people are choosing the more expensive model – and we don't actually know yet how what proportion of buyers are choosing the S and what proportion Apple expected to choose it – this hardly counts as a negative for Apple. It would count as a negative if Apple was overall losing 5C sales to the now entry-level 4S instead of to the 5S.

          Remember the first iPhone that had no 3G despite most other "smartphones" at the time having 3G? And then there was the first iPad that had no cameras, everyone knew that Apple was going to include cameras on the second iPad…etc. Maybe it's just a part of how things work at Apple to release a solid, feature-light device before upgrading.

          I agree with this. At the time of release, their exclusive carrier, AT&T, hadn't built out enough 3G capacity, and 3G battery life was a major concern. Also, the original iPad, although long-rumoured (and as an unimpressed Windows Tablet PC owner since ~2006, I was as keen as anyone else to see if the rumours were true), was very much a risk for Apple.

          Apple will always beat Google on sales after launch because Google don't have large, high profile launches with people lining up outside stores the way Apple does. Often Google launches with pretty modest stock, sells out within hours and more stock comes later. So maybe we need to look at total sales, but I don't think either company releases sales numbers.

          Apple releases overall sales numbers for product categories, but generally analysts have to make educated guesses about how those sales are broken down into specific models. Samsung's about the only smartphone maker besides Apple to be making money, though. http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/11/14/apple-samsung-take…

  • sludo on 23/11/2013 - 01:21

    Build Quality, Brand Recognition and resale value is what the extra $300 is for, not to mention warranty is far easier to negotiate through an individual company rather than 5 or more separate ones .
    p.s I am not a massive apple fan.

    • ProspectiveDarkness on 23/11/2013 - 01:40

      Why should the end user care about brand recognition? Just thought that was an odd inclusion, is all…

      And FWIW, if your PC ends up having a fault, it's highly unlikely you'll need to RMA '5 or more' of the components, unless the PSU failed spectacularly. So at the most you'd be dealing with one company - either the manufacturer, if you RMA it yourself, or the computer store you bought it from (or take it to for a diagnosis), who usually deal with the RMA themselves.

      Though unless you're knowledgeable about such things, of course, the Apple route will be easier (and possible cheaper) for a replacement.

      Edit: don't take that as overly attacking, as it might come off - I'm merely conversing.

      • ThadtheChad on 23/11/2013 - 14:05

        So at the most you'd be dealing with one company - either the manufacturer, if you RMA it yourself, or the computer store you bought it from (or take it to for a diagnosis), who usually deal with the RMA themselves.

        The thing is, if my MBP gets screwed, I don't have to wait for the manufacturer or vendor to go through the motions and wait a week (or more) for a replacement. I head to the Apple store and get it replaced.

        On a side note, my Gigabyte mobo has a malfunctioning RAM slot; I'd get it replaced by I really can't afford to have my Desktop "unavailable" for an indeterminate period of time.

        • p1 ama on 23/11/2013 - 14:19

          On that note too, you only get one year of warranty, and you have to shell out a hefty price for two more years with AppleCare. And you don't simply just "get it swapped" at the Apple Store, they sometimes take it in as well.

          With PC components, if you know what you're doing, you can buy components which have up to a five year warranty with pretty much a very little price premium. E.g. Certain ASUS boards.

          If it is a major fault, the manufacturer will usually replace it. They might not right off the bat, but if you push and haggle and be nice to them, they usually do. I've had a processor swapped around 6 months after purchase at MSY.

        • ThadtheChad on 23/11/2013 - 16:58

          I haven't had an opportunity to test out the Apple warranty on my MBP. However, I have tried it with my iPhone 4s (back in 2011 when I smashed the screen); even though it was accidental damage, they swapped it out for a new one (although I did have to pay a fair bit).

          If it is a major fault, the manufacturer will usually replace it. They might not right off the bat, but if you push and haggle and be nice to them, they usually do. I've had a processor swapped around 6 months after purchase at MSY.

          You don't need to be nice or scratch their back. They are obligated to honour their warranty. If they don't it's time to kick up a fuss and as a last resort, get ACCC involved.

          Anecdotal evidence suggests that dealing with MSY for after-sales support is as pleasurable and pointless as jamming a rusty fork in your eyeball.

          What it boils down to, is the level of support you get post-sales. My time during business hours is worth way more than the price differential. I could hop across to the Apple store during lunchtime and get something sorted out; rather than exchanging a billion emails back and forth with the manufacturer/retailer. I know, some manufacturers have brilliant after-sales, I'm thinking Asus and Dell (surprisingly), so obviously YMMV.

        • p1 ama on 23/11/2013 - 18:12

          even though it was accidental damage, they swapped it out for a new one (although I did have to pay a fair bit).

          That's what all phone companies do though, same thing happened with my last Samsung phone.

          You don't need to be nice or scratch their back. They are obligated to honour their warranty. If they don't it's time to kick up a fuss and as a last resort, get ACCC involved.

          I would rather just scratch their backs and be nice and get what I want rather than kick up a fuss and potentially having to get the ACCC involved and wasting a whole heap of my time. I just think it's nicer for everyone (especially me) to just be diplomatic to start off with.

          Anecdotal evidence suggests that dealing with MSY for after-sales support is as pleasurable and pointless as jamming a rusty fork in your eyeball.

          MSY have actually upped their game since they got busted for doing dodgy warranties and stuff a while back, so now they're obviously not wanting to get in trouble again and are pretty well behaved when it comes to this.

          I've gotten a CPU replaced after 6 months or so and I've had another product RMA'd because they didn't have that in stock. Nothing too difficult with their service.

        • ThadtheChad on 23/11/2013 - 23:55

          MSY have actually upped their game since they got busted for doing dodgy warranties and stuff a while back, so now they're obviously not wanting to get in trouble again and are pretty well behaved when it comes to this.

          w00t! Things really have changed eh? Maybe I'll give them a go when I get my next "scheduled" desktop upgrade. :)

  • Mr Wowtrousers on 23/11/2013 - 17:38

    Look, let me break it down as someone who has been using computers since around the Commodore Vic 20 days and has used everything in between, including fully pimped out workstations with 2x30" monitors for film visual fx work.

    Are you ready … let's begin:

    OS X is nicer to user than Windows and Apple computers look amazing.

    That's it. It's a total benefit that my computer 100% also runs as a Win7 box with Bootcamp, so you are effectively getting two computers for the price of a copy of Win 7.

    However, if you are going to break it down into components, then yeah, Apple "loses". The fact is (for me and apparently a lot of other people), the experience of using Apple products is just more pleasant. I have also yet to see a PC that looks as good as Apple products. Feel free to link me to some very sleek minimalist boxes because I am looking at building a gaming PC early next year.

    So, while it sounds wanky, yeah, you are paying for the "experience", however you define that. Support has also been amazing.

    As for why Apple is so expensive or is never on sale, I will tell you what I told people when I worked at the ACCC and they rang up to complain "Are you going to buy it if the store doesn't discount it? Yes? Then why would they discount it if you will still buy it at the higher price". For whatever reason, people are willing to pay a premium for Apple products. As soon as they aren't, Apple will have to look at discounting. Hasn't happened in the last 13 years though …

    • p1 ama on 23/11/2013 - 18:16
      +1

      Depends on what size you're looking at

      Fractal Design Define R4 for an mid-tower ATX sized build

      If you're wanting to go mATX, the new BitFenix Phenom M looks pretty good to me.

      • Mr Wowtrousers on 24/11/2013 - 11:01

        The Define R4 looks pretty sweet. Any ideas on an aluminium case?

  • Kamsi on 23/11/2013 - 21:06

    I'm glad this forum allows you to discuss things like this unlike whirlpool which is heavily modded.

  • AlexD on 24/11/2013 - 08:42
    -1

    You're comparing an iMac to a desktop PC - a lot of people want the All-in-one design, which is significantly different to a PC, with the volume of the case at least 50% smaller.
    Granted, there is almost no way you can build a custom All-in-one, but the iMac is typically priced at a lower point than equivalent (albeit touch screen) units from manufacturers such as HP and Acer.
    What you are forgetting is that the iMac is a branded computer, the price you are looking at would be better compared to Dell, HP or Acer's offerings anyway, as a custom PC is made of typically grey market parts with questionable warranties, while Apple provides international support for their products in Apple stores and certified service centres.
    I work in IT sales, and I see a lot of customers purchase Apple products from us for their reliability, simplicity and ease of repair. This is also why a lot of SMBs use iMacs as their POS computer.
    The price is inconsequential - consumers purchase for the support, the service & sometimes the aesthetics, it is typically the augmented value of the product that is considered.

    • p1 ama on 24/11/2013 - 09:24
      +3

      a custom PC is made of typically grey market parts with questionable warranties

      Grey market parts - How are PC parts grey market?

      Questionable warranty? How are warranties questionable, ASUS warranties on motherboards are excellent, as is Intel's warranty on their CPUs and eVGA's warranty on their graphics cards.

      In fact, some computer parts actually have 5 year warranties, which is pretty much for a life of a computer whilst you are expected to pay extra for Applecare.

      Whilst I agree that Apple has good support and service, I disagree with the "grey market parts" and "questionable warranties" of PC components. What exactly do you mean by "grey market" and where have you seen "questionable warranties"?

    • Mr Wowtrousers on 24/11/2013 - 11:06
      +2

      I am upvoting for half of your post, AlexD ;) The "grey market" parts and warranties, not so much, but the part about being a "brand PC" is absolute 100% correct.

      If you spec up a Dell or HP computer with the same parts as an iMac or Macbook Pro, you will usually find that the price difference is negligible and it won't be able to dual boot into OS X and it won't look as good. (I personally don't rate Acer et al when comparing to Mac due to, in my opinion, being low build quality. Feel free to downvote that, but it's my opinion/experience)

      Of course you can build your own PC cheaper than an Apple. You can also build your own computer cheaper than an HP.

      • ThadtheChad on 24/11/2013 - 13:21
        +1

        I personally don't rate Acer et al when comparing to Mac due to, in my opinion, being low build quality.

        Abso-fking-lutely concur with you on this point. I used to fix laptops (for free; sigh) for my friends and their friends, back when I was in uni… and I saw some of the shonkiest build-quality I've ever seen since while disassembling them.

      • p1 ama on 24/11/2013 - 15:00

        Hmm, I disagree.

        http://shopap.lenovo.com/au/en/desktops/thinkcentre/all-in-o…

        $1149 for the base spec, with 21.5" screen and i5 processor. I agree that it doesn't have Iris Pro graphics, but step up to the next spec for $1349 and its nVidia graphics will destroy Iris Pro. Add $40 for 4GB of RAM and you have an all-in-one more powerful than the iMac for $200 or so cheaper. If you're happy with 4600 graphics (not that much worse than Iris Pro), you'll be like $400 less than the iMac.

        • Mr Wowtrousers on 26/11/2013 - 19:32
          -1

          Yeah, but that thing looks like yet another ugly black plasticky computer. Again, for many people, this is an important part of the product. Maybe not for everyone but for a lot of people. Do you want a sleek aluminium and white hyperthin product sitting in your living room or a lump of plastic with cables everywhere? It's a question that obviously divides people and those who do pay extra and those who don't, don't! It's not right or wrong but for others to call people sheeple of lazy or stupid/uninformed because they want their electronics to look good is silly.

      • ProspectiveDarkness on 24/11/2013 - 15:35

        but the part about being a "brand PC" is absolute 100% correct.

        You (generally) can't build custom OSX computers that are equal to, or better than, the actual 'brand' name products (Apple's) - but you can with Windows. You say yourself that some brand names don't offer a comparable experience (Acer build quality) - therefore, quality is not necessarily a hallmark of a brand name, so why arbitrarily compare to them at all?

        Custom PC's are generally the best option for the ordinary consumer in terms of quality hardware for money - so why even consider anything else? All you're really getting with a Windows OEM desktop is regular (often inferior) components for too much money, with a different name slapped on the box.

        In terms of the Apple vs PC comparison, yes it is a bit silly to call it an 'Apple tax', since a lot of OEM's have higher pricing and the title of this post doesn't reflect that, but it leads to an interesting discussion for value versus 'experience'

  • ethereal88 on 24/11/2013 - 09:54

    The workstation I'm currently building:

    • i5 4670

    • 8GB Patriot S

    • Gigabyte H87-D3H

    • Samsung EVO 500GB x 2

    • Noctua UH14S

    • Windows 8.1

    All attached to a pretty Dell U2412M monitor. Easily upgradeable, all quality parts, would slaughter any iMac in terms of value/upgradeability. Unless you go for the pretty shiny thin factor. Nothing grey market, all quality.

    • p1 ama on 24/11/2013 - 10:40

      Why no 4670k?

    • Mr Wowtrousers on 24/11/2013 - 11:07
      -1

      What kind of work are you doing? If it's 3D, buy more RAM.

      • ethereal88 on 24/11/2013 - 12:09

        Basic, nothing fancy, only occasional, if that hence no i7 or 16GB RAM. And I don't OC anymore. The gaming box has a 4770 non K, this one a 4670 non K.

    • ThadtheChad on 24/11/2013 - 13:24

      Windows 8.1

      Meh! :P

      All other stuff is good. I still can't bring myself to "upgrade" from Win 7.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join