| Quicksilver |
11-13-2006 03:30 PM |
Actually this cost debate was solved long before the intel deal. (Note the 2003 article link) Most of all the arguements boil down to what a person want's. I personally encourage people to visit a Mac Store and test drive the product. You could actually stay in the store for hours getting your questions answered so that you have enough information to make an informed decision. Then if you buy a PC at least you made the decision based on what you believe the facts are not what someone else says.
http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_id=22738
Performance and Cost
It is one of the great truths of computer ownership that base cost is just part of the total cost of ownership (TCO). Issues like long-term maintenance costs, security Relevant Products/Services and reliability also come into play.
Further complicating the issue is the "Cadillac vs. Mercedes Benz" analogy. A Cadillac is less expensive, but a Cadillac cannot go from 0 to 60 in 8.5 seconds. A similar computer platform may be cheaper, but does it really offer the same performance as its higher-priced competitor?
"Clearly, the price tags for PCs are lower -- at least at the low end," says Macworld editor-in-chief Jason Snell.
"However, we recently tested the speed of high-end Macs and PCs, and they're comparable -- for comparable prices -- in many areas. So, it's probably most realistic to say that while the cheapest PCs cost less than the cheapest Macs, the cheapest Macs are probably comparable with PCs that cost a similar amount," he told NewsFactor.
"In other words, as usual, you get what you pay for."
Quote:
Originally Posted by BMW X5
apple does cost more but you get a lot more for the money not on paper though. They are better in batterly life, in use and now since they are dual boot capable you get best of both worlds. price is the only draw back... but its my next computer.
|
|
