Mac vs. PC costs

[rlk-FrUbXkNCsVf2fBVCVOL8/A at public.gmane.org (Robert Krawitz)]

   Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 17:05:44 -0400
   From: Tom Metro <tmetro-blu-5a1Jt6qxUNc at public.gmane.org>

   Richard Pieri wrote:
   > Tom Metro wrote:
   >> Care to share some numbers?
   > 
   > A new 17" MBP, 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 500GB disk: about $2500.
   > 
   > A new Dell Precision M6400, 17", 2.93GHz Core 2 Duo (closest match),  
   > 320GB disk (largest available): about $2500.

   One of the things that makes the PC vs. Mac comparison less 
   apples-to-apples is that there is a limited selection of Macs, so if you 
   need the RAM, disk, and display, but don't have a justifications for a 
   2.93 GHz CPU (which is obviously way outside the "sweet spot" for cost 
   effective), then you may find the Mac comparatively overpriced.

   A search on NewEgg doesn't even show any models with a 2.93 GHz CPU, yet 
   they have two 2.66 GHz models that meet all the other specs you listed 
   for $1200 ~ $1300:

   http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2034940032+1039323203+103980232+1041010743+104062589+1039446175&QksAutoSuggestion=&Configurator=&Subcategory=32&description=&Ntk=&CFG=&SpeTabStoreType=&srchInDesc=

   If the other tangibles and intangibles that come with the Mac don't 
   matter to you, can you justify paying $1200 for a 0.27 GHz CPU increase? 
   (What else does that $1200 buy you that is of practical value to a 
   typical usr? Of course typical users don't pay over $1000 for laptops 
   these days, so you might need to replace "typical" with "power.")

Both of these are considerably lower resolution than WUXGA (one is
"WXGA+" and one is 1600x900 -- quite a bit less than 1920x1200).
However, this one hast *most* impressive specs for $1600:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834152112

Core 2 Quad 2GHz
4 GB RAM
320 GB 7200 RPM drive
BD combo optical
ATI Radeon HD4850 w/512 MB
17" WUXGA

   Dan Ritter wrote:
   > Of course, if you don't tie your life to your fragile laptop,
   > you may discover that a $400 one serves pretty well. After two
   > years...

   Somewhat off topic, but I agree. For the typical user, they're
   better off buying a desktop or laptop that falls within the "sweet
   spot" of the pricing range, and planning on replacing it every 2 to
   3 years. After about 3 years, they usually end up with a faster
   machine for the same or less money than the person who overbought
   at the high-end to start with.

   This is pretty much just a restatement of Moore's law:
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law

And that's why I like buying something where it's easy to replace
components, particularly the hard drive -- storage needs are always
increasing.

-- 
Robert Krawitz                                     <rlk-FrUbXkNCsVf2fBVCVOL8/A at public.gmane.org>

Tall Clubs International  --  http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail lpf-BtI67efEdsDk1uMJSBkQmQ at public.gmane.org
Project lead for Gutenprint   --    http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net

"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton