Is It Actualy FAIR to Compare the Two?
April 18th 2008 18:49
WHY? WHY? Can someone please tell me just WHY? Why do people prefer Macs over PCs? Why do people want to pay $700 more for a system that is effectively half as powerful as that of a competitors.
The cheapest Macbook Pro on Apple.com.au is being sold for a whopping $2700, what does it come with? Lets see, 2gb RAM, 200GB hard drive, 15 inch widescreen monitor, 2.4ghz core 2 duo, and the infamous 'super drive' (i.e. dvd burner).
Now Dell on the other hand, for just $2000, is offering an XPS laptop with 4gb RAM, 320GB hard drive, 15.4" widescreen monitor, and a 2.5ghz Core 2 Duo plus a one year warranty thrown in for good measure.
In every single point the DELL completely oblibetrates the Macbook Pro, side by side:
DELL 2.5ghz vs. Macbook Pro 2.4ghz
DELL 4gb RAM vs. Macbook Pro 2gb RAM
DELL 15.4" Screen vs. Macbook Pro 15" Screen
DELL 320GB hard drive vs. Macbook Pro 200gb hard drive.
*DELL, Macbook Pro
HELLO!? Does anyone else not see the friggin price differences? The best equivalent for the Macbook Pro DELL is offering is a $1900 system that has one gigabyte of extra RAM (3gb) and 320gb hard drive, matches the Macbook Pro on all other points.
The cheapest Macbook Pro on Apple.com.au is being sold for a whopping $2700, what does it come with? Lets see, 2gb RAM, 200GB hard drive, 15 inch widescreen monitor, 2.4ghz core 2 duo, and the infamous 'super drive' (i.e. dvd burner).
Now Dell on the other hand, for just $2000, is offering an XPS laptop with 4gb RAM, 320GB hard drive, 15.4" widescreen monitor, and a 2.5ghz Core 2 Duo plus a one year warranty thrown in for good measure.
In every single point the DELL completely oblibetrates the Macbook Pro, side by side:
DELL 2.5ghz vs. Macbook Pro 2.4ghz
DELL 4gb RAM vs. Macbook Pro 2gb RAM
DELL 15.4" Screen vs. Macbook Pro 15" Screen
DELL 320GB hard drive vs. Macbook Pro 200gb hard drive.
*DELL, Macbook Pro
HELLO!? Does anyone else not see the friggin price differences? The best equivalent for the Macbook Pro DELL is offering is a $1900 system that has one gigabyte of extra RAM (3gb) and 320gb hard drive, matches the Macbook Pro on all other points.
| 69 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Macs are heaps cooler.
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
Is this an anti MAC thing?
Comment by Ann 2
Canadiens Watch
Football Slate
Comment by Ahmed
techy.Bytes
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
Qwerk
Cinema Three
Damo, you should know by now, I'm definitely not pro-mac
Ann 2, Sadly that is the reason Apple will continue to thrive. They don't employ hardware engineers, they employ social engineers. It's ridiculous how much they're charging yet people continue to buy their Macs.
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Comment by Morgan Bell
Deep Pencil
Current Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
i think they are popular because of aesthetics, the white laptops look futuristic, kind of like judging a book by its cover . . .
hey question: are macs more compatible with ipods and othe "i" products? i dont really know, maybe thats a misconception, or maybe people like buying products all of the same branding?
Comment by Ahmed
techy.Bytes
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
Qwerk
Cinema Three
Comment by Anonymous
It doesnt matter how many gigabites you have if all you can do is run an accounting program or a half.
You need those extra gigabites just to install Vista, patch it every five minutes from the hacker attacks and keep your ram busy processing the program instead of working on your artwork.
Mac OSX is an infinitely superior operating system because these computers are designed for our multi media future, not for a world where a computer is an IBM adding machine
There are many religions on the planet...Mac is one of them.
signed
Mac Addict
Comment by Ahmed
techy.Bytes
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
Qwerk
Cinema Three
Vista uses RAM caching, while it can effectively run on a system with one gigabyte of RAM (like the two computers I owned before my current setup) it takes advantage of computers with more RAM by caching programs that are used more often, increases load times and whatnot.
I dunno how dumb you can be, but clearly you are about as dumb as they get, accounting software? Have you actually used a windows based machine? You can do a tonne more on Windows than OS X, OS X, what can it do? Run a few fancy pants video editing software which probably already exists for windows (granted you're not forced to buy it like with OS X), what else? Oh, nothing really. YOu want to play the latest computer games?
But yeah, I'll give you that, you can use accounting software on windows, and play games, and well, yeah do everything you do on OS X.
Did I mention you can actually play some pretty fun and awesome games on windows but can't on OS X?
I would like to see you back up this claim with facts: "Mac OSX is an infinitely superior operating system because these computers are designed for our multi media future, not for a world where a computer is an IBM adding machine" That's just a load of bullshit, unless you can prove it, oh wait, you can't, why? Because you're repeating apple marketting lines again. Oh how proud you must feel.
And yes, many people are dumb enough to call their computers a religion, I think Apple really hit it big, having a legion of idiots such as yourself buying their overpriced hardware =)
Comment by Anonymous
Really Long Link
The conclusion from the testing...
The Verdict: Apple
Mac: In both the laptop and desktop showdowns, Apple’s computers were the winners. Oddly, the big difference didn’t come in our user ratings, where we expected the famously friendly Mac interface to shine. Our respondents liked the look and feel of both operating systems but had a slight preference toward OS X. In our speed trials, however, Leopard OS trounced Vista in all-important tasks such as boot-up, shutdown and program-launch times. We even tested Vista on the Macs using Apple’s platform-switching Boot Camp software—and found that both Apple computers ran Vista faster than our PCs did.
PC: Simply put, Vista proved to be a more sluggish operating system than Leopard. Our PCs installed some software faster, but in general they were slower in our time trials. Plus, both PCs showed weaker performance on third-party benchmarks than the Macs. Our biggest surprise, however, was that PCs were not the relative bargains we expected them to be. The Asus M51sr costs the same as a MacBook, while the Gateway One actually costs $300 more than an iMac. That means for the price of the Gateway you could buy an iMac, boost its hard drive to match the Gateway’s, purchase a copy of Vista to boot—and still save $100.
Detailed Benchmark Scores: Desktops
Benchmark Test iMac 20-in screen; 2.2 GHz Core 2 Duo; 1GB DDR2 Gateway One 2.0GHz Core 2 Duo; 3GB DDR2
Geekbench
Overall 3180 (2651) 1903
Integer 2766 (3398) 2324
Floating Point 4460 (2675) 1713
Memory 2299 (1720) 1597
Stream 1916 (1819) 1707
Cinebench
1 CPU 2619 (2429) 1979
2 CPUs 4840 (4641) 3739
Graphics 4819 (3834) 2913
*Scores in parentheses are for Macs running Vista in Boot Camp.
Detailed Benchmark Scores: Laptops
Benchmark Test MacBook 2.2 GHz Core 2 Duo; 1GB DDR2 (Out of production) MacBook 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo (Penryn); 3GB DDR2 Asus M51 2.2 GHz Core 2 Duo; 2GB DDR2
Geekbench
Overall 2885 (2465) 3156 (2657) 2445
Integer 2536 (3099) 2734 (3421) 3102
Floating Point 3959 (2429) 4395 (2660) 2444
Memory 2156 (1730) 2378 (1785) 1636
Stream 1809 (1850) 1853 (1717) 1772
Cinebench
1 CPU 2409 2741 (2561) 2214
2 CPUs 4468 5216 (4838) 4198
Graphics 2027 2040 (835) 2495
*Scores in parentheses are for Macs running Vista in Boot Camp.
Comment by Ahmed
techy.Bytes
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
Qwerk
Cinema Three
The PCs had more powerful GPUs than the Macs though ALL the tests simply tested the CPU, in which the macs had an edge.
It's a shame people are so desperate to put Mac over PCs to the point they don't even benchmark them both fairly.
Comment by Anonymous