[Filo]

The article presents a stupid argument. Most folks don’t sell their PCs every year. Purchase price is the only real gauge of what you’re paying and the Mac will set you back at least 50% more than the comparably equipped PC.

Aside from the logo you really don’t get that much more for your money.

Worse, if you become a “Mac person” you’ll end up virtually computer illiterate and unable to use real PCs in the real world.

Most PC folks can at least get by on a Mac. The reverse is, in my experience, rarely true.

I have both Macs and PCs scattered around the house. Macs are nice, but not worth the price.

Unfortunately I’m just about to shell out 3K+ for a Mac tower because my wife can’t seem to do her job on the PC that we just bought for 1/3 of that. . .

[The_Reader_David]

. . .if you become a “Mac person” you’ll end up virtually computer Windows illiterate and unable to use real Windows-based PCs in the real world environments with insular IT departments.

Computer illiterate? Except for those of us who can write code, or maybe only code in some dialect of C, we're all bloody computer illiterate.

Basically if you use a Mac you don't learn to navigate the ghastly counter-intuitive structure of Windows where all the defaults assume the user is stupid, and the ways to change them are burried (a problem with all MS products, including Office, which even us Mac users have to suffer with), unless you're forced to use a machine with one of the wretched OS on it.

That's a bit like sneering that one is 'tax code illiterate' if one has had the good fortune to only have to fill out Pennsylvania state income tax forms, rather than California state income tax forms.

[Yossarian]

Unfortunately I’m just about to shell out 3K+ for a Mac tower because my wife can’t seem to do her job on the PC that we just bought for 1/3 of that. . .

If I were you, I'd wait a few weeks before springing for the Mac Pro tower - the current models are out of date, and they are due to get upgrades to Intel's Penryn chip very soon.

[Mr. Blonde]

Purchase price is the only real gauge of what you’re paying

I would say total cost of ownership is the real guage of what you are paying. Apple wins that. They are useful for longer and you don't have to worry about messing with viruses and malware.

Worse, if you become a “Mac person” you’ll end up virtually computer illiterate and unable to use real PCs in the real world.

It can be hard going from an enjoyable user experience to a painful one like you get on Windows. However, most Mac users can in fact get by on a Windows machine. Chances are they have had to use them at some point extensively and that is why they are now on Mac.

[Mr. Jeeves]

Worse, if you become a “Mac person” you’ll end up virtually computer illiterate and unable to use real PCs in the real world.

You might become "Windows illiterate", but Windows literacy consists largely of memorizing hundreds of hacks and workarounds specific to remediating the endemic flaws of the operating system. A Mac user would have no particular problem switching to a Linux PC. ;)

[HAL9000]

Worse, if you become a “Mac person” you’ll end up virtually computer illiterate and unable to use real PCs in the real world.

I strongly disagree. In my experience, the average Mac user has better computer literacy than the average Windows user. I frequently work with Windows users, and they are generally ignorant about the workings of computers. When something goes wrong and their in-house "experts" can't figure it out, they contact me - a guy who knows very little about Windows, but still gets their problems solved. Ironically, they wouldn't be having the problem in the first place if they used a Mac.

[antiRepublicrat]

the Mac will set you back at least 50% more than the comparably equipped PC.

Just to start off, let's shop for a small, slim notebook. It's Dell XPS M1330 vs. Apple MacBook.

Let's get the mid-range Dell to keep the graphics equal, upgrade the processor to 2.2 GHz, add Windows Ultimate (you are going against Leopard), Bluetooth, not even get the slimmer display (to get it closer to the MacBook's size), even remove the antivirus, and you pay $1,823.

Now we'll go with the 2.2 GHz MacBook, upgrade the memory and hard drive to match the Dell, and it costs $1,524.

Just shy of $300 cheaper for the MacBook. Am I missing something here?

[Swordmaker]

The article presents a stupid argument. Most folks don’t sell their PCs every year. Purchase price is the only real gauge of what you’re paying and the Mac will set you back at least 50% more than the comparably equipped PC.

But the point was to establish a per month or per year cost of ownership... Purchase price minus cost recovery at resale divided by months or years of ownership. The cost per time period comes out lower for the Mac.

Aside from the logo you really don’t get that much more for your money.

For your money you get a complete suite of software designed to interact with each other... and you get a rock solid OS ... as well as top of the line engineering.

Worse, if you become a “Mac person” you’ll end up virtually computer illiterate and unable to use real PCs in the real world.

Now you are just being insulting... My experience is just exactly the opposite. Most Mac users are also Windows users at their place of work... and have chosen to buy a Mac for their home use. They are actually computer bi-lingual, so to speak. Most Windows users have never even touched a Mac, much less know how to use one.

Unfortunately I’m just about to shell out 3K+ for a Mac tower because my wife can’t seem to do her job on the PC that we just bought for 1/3 of that. . .

If you have Macs scattered about your house, why are you buying a new one? One of the others could probably do the job.

[Swordmaker]

Tradition said:

Let’s see...I’ve got a 3.2 gigahertz Intel processor, 2 gigs RAM, LITE-ON DVDRW SHW-160P6S [CD-ROM drive] TSSTcorp CD-R/RW TS-H292C [CD-ROM drive], 160 gigabytes of HD, Creative Sound Blaster 5.1, HP vs 19” monitor with XP Pro with less than $400.00 invested. Apple can’t beat that.

and Filo said:

Purchase price is the only real gauge of what you’re paying and the Mac will set you back at least 50% more than the comparably equipped PC.

Tradition, Apple does not compete in the low-end market... they do compete in the mid-high range market.

Filo... "Apples 50% more..." Not true. Let's do the comparison... actually I did it yesterday in a reply to another freeper:

---

To Blue Highway

Only if you compare Mercedes to Yugos... both will get you there but one is definitely better... and it ain't the cheaper Yugo.

The facts are that when you compare Apples to "apples," i.e. similar quality and capacity components, the Apple offering is often cheaper. For, example, a $3047 Mac Pro workstation (add 1GB RAM @ Apple price - you can upgrade cheaper with 3rd party RAM, plus 3yrs. Apple Care) was cheaper than the equivalent Dell by $942 when I duplicated the Dell workstation (Retail price: $3989) with the same processors (add/select: Core 2 Duo Xeon 5150 Woodcrest, same HD size and capacity, same memory, similar capacity video card, same 1000W p/s wattage).

Apple Mac Pro build on 11/06/2007, as described above:

Here is the price for an equivalent Dell desktop, build on 11/06/2007, as described above:

Which is less expensive, Blue?

And that is without the comparable PC prices to match the bundled software that comes free with the Mac!

Yes, you could buy a PC for $500 but it did not have Xeon processors, Buffered Error Correcting DRAM, dual 1.33GHz frontside buses, a 1000 watt power supply to drive eight 30 inch monitors and space for two terabytes of hard drive space inside the case. The $500 PC is no way comparable... and is considerably slower than the Mac Pro.

Dell's Workstation price is getting better... when first compared same month last year, the Dell was over $1300 more expensive!

[blu]

Worse, if you become a “Mac person” you’ll end up virtually computer illiterate and unable to use real PCs in the real world.

Wel, thets jis rong! I git along reel nic in a Peec wirld@

[aruanan]

Worse, if you become a “Mac person” you’ll end up virtually computer illiterate and unable to use real PCs in the real world.

That is one of the most dumb-ass things I have ever heard. I've used both Macs and PCs in the scientific/research world for over a decade and the opposite is true. It is the Mac user who is more easily able to manage his machine than the PC user. This is why universities have huge IT departments dedicated almost exclusively to the upkeep and de-weirding of PCs because those users of the "real PCs" are A. unable to do it and B. those Windows-running machines need so much babying.