Mac vs. PC costs
Robert Krawitz
rlk-FrUbXkNCsVf2fBVCVOL8/A at public.gmane.org
Sat Jun 20 18:24:13 EDT 2009
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
More information about the Discuss
mailing list