So it went live and it got read a few times. About a million times in two days to be exact, the Mac article has already gone down as one of the most popular articles in AT history. I got a lot of people telling me I was Mac-biased, a lot of people telling me I was PC-biased, but I got far more people telling me they liked the article, so I came away pleased.
The top three arguments I got against what I wrote were:
1) My price arguments were wrong.
2) You don't need more than two buttons on a mouse.
3) You didn't mention ________ (fill in the blank with Unix, security, iLife, etc...)
To which I respond:
1) No they're not.
2) Yes you do.
3) I know.
:)
Ok, now to be a little more serious. The price thing I still believe firmly on; while you can spec out a Dell system to easily hit $3000, take a look at our Buyer's Guides and see what type of a system you can get for just $1500. Granted you don't get warranty, an extremely quiet case, etc... but let's be honest, price matters, it matters a lot - that's why there are tons of sub-$1000 PCs out there. Lots of die-hard PC users already think Dell's prices are too high, they aren't going to embrace Apple's. But honestly this doesn't matter as much, as the article wasn't very cost-centric to begin with, I just reiterated an age-old argument which some agree with, some disagree with and others could care less about.
The mouse issue may just be a personal one and I'll leave it at that; most of the article was personal opinion so there's not much more to be said there.
Now the final point is an interesting one, because after all of the emails I got asking why I didn't touch on any number of aspects of OS X I found myself wanting to write a follow-up to the 11,000 word article. I honestly don't have the time to tackle that right now but it's something I may contemplate doing in the future, or maybe I'll just save it for a review of the next iteration of OS X due out next year.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed but it looks like NVIDIA may just come through with a 6800 Ultra DDL for my upcoming Mac GPU roundup. They're saying about a week, we'll see what happens there. I'm still planning a trip to visit ATI's Mac team, but I've yet to hammer out a date as to when, so I'll keep you posted on that as well.
Right now most that's on my plate is PC related, but I'll definitely post anything Mac related as soon as I get word.
I'm still using the G5 by the way, this was posted from it and that article was written on it.
The top three arguments I got against what I wrote were:
1) My price arguments were wrong.
2) You don't need more than two buttons on a mouse.
3) You didn't mention ________ (fill in the blank with Unix, security, iLife, etc...)
To which I respond:
1) No they're not.
2) Yes you do.
3) I know.
:)
Ok, now to be a little more serious. The price thing I still believe firmly on; while you can spec out a Dell system to easily hit $3000, take a look at our Buyer's Guides and see what type of a system you can get for just $1500. Granted you don't get warranty, an extremely quiet case, etc... but let's be honest, price matters, it matters a lot - that's why there are tons of sub-$1000 PCs out there. Lots of die-hard PC users already think Dell's prices are too high, they aren't going to embrace Apple's. But honestly this doesn't matter as much, as the article wasn't very cost-centric to begin with, I just reiterated an age-old argument which some agree with, some disagree with and others could care less about.
The mouse issue may just be a personal one and I'll leave it at that; most of the article was personal opinion so there's not much more to be said there.
Now the final point is an interesting one, because after all of the emails I got asking why I didn't touch on any number of aspects of OS X I found myself wanting to write a follow-up to the 11,000 word article. I honestly don't have the time to tackle that right now but it's something I may contemplate doing in the future, or maybe I'll just save it for a review of the next iteration of OS X due out next year.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed but it looks like NVIDIA may just come through with a 6800 Ultra DDL for my upcoming Mac GPU roundup. They're saying about a week, we'll see what happens there. I'm still planning a trip to visit ATI's Mac team, but I've yet to hammer out a date as to when, so I'll keep you posted on that as well.
Right now most that's on my plate is PC related, but I'll definitely post anything Mac related as soon as I get word.
I'm still using the G5 by the way, this was posted from it and that article was written on it.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
53 Comments
View All Comments
pompo - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link
So you still have the Mac.. HUH! :)))RS - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link
I agree with #31. I once bought and sold an iMac 9 months apart. Because it was still the newest variety when I sold it - nothing new came out - I litterally paid $10 a month to essentially rent the machine. I thought that was neat. One thing that needs to always be remembered is that there is a place for Macintosh in this world. There are people that just 'get it', and always think that it's the definition of a computer. I work with someone like this, and he's got the iPod, and uses all the extra software brick-a-brack that comes with the Mac. It's his thing, he loves it. You do 'pay' for that stuff in a way, but it does increase the value of the system to people that use it. To apple (and their customers) Mac's are systems, not parts. Solutions, not computers.SD - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link
#23/26 (maybe it'd be easier if I just said Doc?), but resale value doesn't matter to some people. I'll put that aside, though. Most of us don't collect computers like geeky pack rats. Don't look at me like that.Anyway, one can still raise the price argument quite easily based on their own habits (how long they plan to keep it, for example, and whether or not they buy high end); if X costs $500 new and Y costs $800 new, and after A years (yeah, so I'm being vague) X has depreciated to $250 and Y has depreciated to $450, X was still the better value overall, with an overall cost of $250 instead of $350. These numbers aren't being generous to the cheaper computer, either; it just happens that depreciation is weaker at the low end.
There is an interesting phenomenon with Mac depreciation I'd like to mention while I'm rambling like an idiot: depreciation is very low until your hardware is suddenly last-generation (I mean last-generation in a major sense; ex. G3 vs. G4). It then takes a very large dive. PC depreciation is relatively steady, though... probably because generation gaps are smaller and more frequent with PCs. At any rate, this means that depreciation for Macs will usual cause them to be a worse buy at first, but over time draw even and possibly (depending on comparison) become better buys-- until you reach the generation gap. Then the process repeats.
What about versus high-end PCs instead of just low-end or midrange ones, though? Well, high-end PCs just have suicidal depreciation. Anyone trying to defend the long-term price:performance of a high-end machine is being defensive or stupid. The same would apply to Macs if it weren't for that wonderful generation gap thing: depreciation is very slow until you hit that. (after that, yes, it still applies.)
Last thing to note: the PC will fare much better if it's a home-built model, because home-built models cost much less to build but depreciate to about the same prices as more expensive equivalent OEM models. It's very hard to defend buying an OEM PC for personal usage (assuming at least semi-normal circumstances) if you're reading AnandTech. This is irrelevant to the "what's better for the average person" thing, but then I doubt that debate can be very difficult to resolve. (Note on note: OEM PCs at the low end fare about as well as home-builts. This is because low-end OEM PCs cost about as much. They're generally built with crappier parts, but plenty of people who buy used PCs don't know that.)
Executive summary: Maybe, maybe not. It depends. (God, don't you hate hearing that?)
Big_Ed_Mustafa - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link
#26 (Doc) - on depreciation:Consider the following:
$498 for Compaq Celeron 325 D system
$799 for Apple eMac
Value of both computers after 36 months = $0.00
Depreciation is not a big concern...
#27 - I'm not sure that Mac owners are all that entertainment deprived. A quick look at Amazon.com's Mac video game section reveals a lot of great titles at reasonable prices:
$33.99 - Warcraft III Battle Chest
$29.99 - Diablo II Battle Chest
$39.99 - Railroad Tycoon 3
Halo, Call of Duty: United Front, Unreal Tournament 2k4, Neverwinter Nights, EverQuest, Shadowbane, Medal of Honor Deluxe Edition, XIII, Return to Wolfenstein, No One Lives Forever and NOLF 2, Dungeon Siege, Homerworld 2, Age of Mythology, Fallout 1 & 2, Freedom Force, Dues Ex, The Sims, Tony Hawk Skating 2,3, and 4, Tiger Woods Golf, Links Golf Championship Edition, F1 Championship Season, and Nascar Racing are all available for Mac gamers.
If you own a Mac and you're bored, you're just not trying very hard.
Anonymous - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link
Apple has been successful in maintaining the Mac's superiority as a niche product. You have a group of rabid followers that "hoot and holler" everytime Steve Jobs farts.A Poor Person - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link
Anand, your Mac costs more than my car.Mac Gamer - Monday, October 11, 2004 - link
Good article, though I would add that there is a bit more to the games aspect.The selection of games for the Mac is actually pretty good, and getting better - most of the A list games are out for Mac due to a profitable licencing model for Mac porting houses. There are certainly more than I have time to play.
That being said, I am seriously considering buying a PC for games (which is why I am reading Anandtech these days). The reason is that the combination of slow CPUs, expensive GPUs and speed reductions due to ported software mean that PCs are much better value for playing games. For example, Battlefield 1942 minimum specs are a 500 Mhz P3 or an 867 Mhz G4; the former came out in 1999, the latter in 2001.
That being said, I intend to use the PC only for games; I will continue to use my Mac for everything else, which it will handle just fine for years to come.
Doc - Monday, October 11, 2004 - link
For those who feel depreciation isn't an issue - which car is cheaper:Ford Focus 1.4 LX 5d - £12302 - 3 year depreciation to £6625 - cost £5677
VW Golf 1.6 16V S 5d - £12815 - 3 year depreciation to £7420 - cost £5395
Clearly, what one wants in a new purchase is an item of quality which depreciates slowly. When buying second hand one wants an item of quality that depreciated quickly initially.
Rolex watches are cheaper to buy new than Ebel because though they cost more initially they hold their value better... in the UK. Nissan Micras are reliable small cars which suffer from high initial depreciation - perhaps due to styling. Thus, they are poor value new but great value nearly new.
It is facile to say Macs are more expensive than PCs as new purchases. Do the Maths.
Anonymous - Monday, October 11, 2004 - link
good point #6.T Money - Monday, October 11, 2004 - link
RE: #22 post about miceThe theory behind it isn't to have a two handed interface, it's to FORCE developers to put all options accessable from a single button. That's part of the idea behind the action button in the finder.