Spoiler :
Will it be necessary to actually go to any random well-known dealer or retailer's website and create the same power PC customized? Mac's prices are exorbitant. For little good reason than the logo.
Apple vs PC
- Thread starter Formaldehyde
- Start date
Will it be necessary to actually go to any random well-known dealer or retailer's website and create the same power PC customized? Mac's prices are exorbitant. For little good reason than the logo.
Thorgalaeg
Deity
At least some years ago Macs had a totally different architecture. There was place for discussion about which system was better as a whole. But nowadays macs are nothing but PCs. The only difference is price. It is amazing that people continues buying them.
Those computers aren't really comparable.
If you pick an all-in-one PC of comparable quality asides from raw specs, they'll be much closer in price.
It also depends which computers you're looking at. The Mac Pro is completely obscene in price. The Macbook Air is barely more expensive than equivalent Ultrabooks.
Your argument is nonsensical.
I asked for a Mac part that's going to be more reliable than any PC part, to point out that there's actually no counter-example you can give to "PCs are as reliable as Macs", which you seem to be disagreeing with.
There's no reason for me to try to provide a counter-example to your point "Macs perform at least all functions of a PC", as I never argued against that point.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring_(fallacy)
As I mentioned in this post, I've seen lots of broken computers. What parts do you think fail in PCs that fail less often in Macs?
Thorgalaeg
Deity
Raw specs are everything. "Quality" is irrelevant as it is all the same nowadays. It is about computers we are speaking about not cars. Normal PC component are not going to break down anytime sooner than an iMac (even the cheapest ones, i have a decade old low end PC running 24/7 since years ago and it keeps working). Dell components and the component prices i posted are all from quality components: Asus mobo, gskill RAM, Samsung LCD... Same o better quality like Apple components (which today are built with the same parts as any PC btw)
That's not really the case, higher quality power supplies, motherboards, cases, are all worth something, or they wouldn't be available in the market for a higher price.
edit:
I was going to post specs and prices from comparable all-in-one PCs, but I can't find any non-Apple all-in-ones with quad-core processors, so I don't really see any comparison there as valuable.
Thorgalaeg
Deity
It is. Excpeting power supplies where there is in fact a quality and functional diference beetwen a generic one and a good brand, all other components are about the same in quality, the only difference being specs. An ASUS or Gigabyte 60€ mobo (or even an ASROCK who is making very decent mobos lately) is of not worse quality that a A 150€ or 200€ model. The last one being more expensive because it has more specs, different chipset etc, not becuase more build quality.
Cases can be very expensive sure, but it is in the end a simple piece of plastic/metal what would make exactly the same function as the cheapest one.
BTW i forget the PSU, add for instance an OCZ or Corsair GPU at 50€-60€ to me 530€ PC and you will have a complete PC for many years coming.
Cases can be very expensive sure, but it is in the end a simple piece of plastic/metal what would make exactly the same function as the cheapest one.
BTW i forget the PSU, add for instance an OCZ or Corsair GPU at 50€-60€ to me 530€ PC and you will have a complete PC for many years coming.
I've seen a lot more ECS motherboards go tits-up than comparable Asus mobos.
There are really better places to slam Apple on prices than on imacs that don't have comparable PC equivalents. (Like I mentioned, Mac Pros are obscene all around, and Macbook Pros run about $800 more than a comparable PC if you want a quad-core model.)
There are really better places to slam Apple on prices than on imacs that don't have comparable PC equivalents. (Like I mentioned, Mac Pros are obscene all around, and Macbook Pros run about $800 more than a comparable PC if you want a quad-core model.)
Hmm... I have to disagree here regarding motherboards. I can definitely say that Zotac's recent crop of motherboards are prone to failure much more than any other right now. This is evident by reading just about any hardware forum discussing motherboards.
Also, there are a ton of different components made by various chip manufacturers that can go on a motherboard, and some are better than others. USB controllers, onboard audio controllers, etc. How mobo manufacturers integrate all these components makes a big difference. Or, some mobos are simply poorly designed, i.e. CPUs are oriented in such a manner that a large heatsink blocks and important component, or a plug is positioned in an awkward spot on the board, a component is cooled inadequately, etc.
There are a bunch of things in a mobo that a manufacturer can screw up, do inadequately, or do brilliantly.
Boundless
Deity
I, on a very basic level, use a mac at home and a pc at work. I tend to think in general a PC is far better for general usage, but if you want something more specialised, mac is the way to go. Plus in over 4 years with this mac I haven't had 1 virus, and it's only just started getting slow. And the battery still lasts 1hr30 which, although is not the 5 hours it used to have, is still pretty darn good for its age.
Specialized for what?
All the desktops/laptops I have I would categorize as "general usage", and have no real preference between Windows or Mac OS.
All the "specialized" computers I have are servers of some sort, I have some Solaris, Mac OS, Windows Server and Linux servers, and they all serve various purposes.
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
All of them? That's exaggerating a tad, but I've seen dozens of broken non-Macs in my time with everything ruined or burnt from motherboards to graphics cards to processors to hard drives.
Only Mac I have ever heard of, let alone used, that ever had a part break was a Macbook whose motherboard died, 9 years later.
This is what I mean when I say it matches up with my perception.
Furthermore, you didn't ask for examples: you asked for proof, or phrased it in such a way as to suggest that you expected me to "prove" it. Because it's meaningless to qualify personal anecdotes in that way, I provided the herring to put it into context, which you proceeded to take literally.
All of what? Sorry, I'm just not sure what your first line is referring to.
Obviously the perception is going to be that PCs break down more often if you're looking at all PCs, most of them are cheap crap, and the majority of expensive laptops sold are Apple-branded. I don't see any reason to compare non-equivalent PCs and Macs.
My assertion, which I made before you even posted in this thread, is that between PCs and Macs of comparable quality, the reliability is similar.
FWIW, I've currently got a 2-week old Mac Mini Server on my desk that crashes constantly due to faulty memory. Gotta get this replaced next week...
That's really got nothing to do with the Mac Mini though, RAM, graphics cards, hard drives, are all components that are exactly the same in Macs and PCs, and see similar failure rates. The only different parts you'll see are power supplies and motherboards, which have equivalent or higher quality parts available in PCs.
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
I've also seen expensive PCs fail more often than I've seen Mac computers of any kind fail. This is the crux of the discontinuity in our views.
Also, I was referring to "parts" with "all of them." To clarify: "What parts do you think fail in PCs that fail less often in Macs?" "All of them!"
I was being coy. I apologize. I'll attempt to be more straightforward.
Also, I was referring to "parts" with "all of them." To clarify: "What parts do you think fail in PCs that fail less often in Macs?" "All of them!"
I was being coy. I apologize. I'll attempt to be more straightforward.
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
I think the whole is more than the sum of its parts, and Macs are built more solidly with an eye on compatibility and being longer-lasting.
The individual parts may be equally good, it is the end product which is better.
The individual parts may be equally good, it is the end product which is better.
How so?
You can configure a Mac and a PC that are completely identical other than the motherboard and power supply.
Are you saying that Apple manufacturers higher quality motherboards and power supplies than any PC manufacturer is able to do? (Neverminding the fact that Apple's suppliers aren't exclusive to Apple.)
Or are you saying that Apple motherboard and power supplies are "more compatible" with standard PC components, resulting in fewer failures?
Loppan Torkel
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2004
- Messages
- 4,756
Thorgalaeg
Deity
Ẃell maybe some Zotac mobos are crap dont know. Have had like about 10 different mobos since i have PCs (almost 15 years yet) and never had a failure (well a asrock some years ago to say the truth). The point is that most brands have perfectly nice products which can last forever without a problem like the best iMac mobo, and cost the same as a crappy Zotac not 300 more.
About mobos design PCs have a lot of variety to choose. There is nothing strange about some mobos being not compatible with some large heatsinks. Try to put a Noctua D14 in a iMac ...
(it would be absurd anyway since iMacs are not overclockeable, apple locks down his systems so you have to pay for every MHZ)
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
Unless I specifically go to torrent sites and download shady stuff, my PC's don't give me a problem usually.
Ẃell maybe some Zotac mobos are crap dont know. Have had like about 10 different mobos since i have PCs (almost 15 years yet) and never had a failure (well a asrock some years ago to say the truth). The point is that most brands have perfectly nice products which can last forever without a problem like the best iMac mobo, and cost the same as a crappy Zotac not 300€ more.
About mobos design PCs have a lot of variety to choose. There is nothing strange about some mobos being not compatible with some large heatsinks. Try to put a Noctua D14 in a iMac ...
(it would be absurd anyway since iMacs are not overclockeable, apple locks down his systems so you have to pay for every MHZ)
IIRC Foxconn does Apple mobos.
I'm not saying this point is in favor of Apple, I am just saying that with variety and customization, there are risks and there are some purchases that are better than others. If you do your homework, you can put together a very stable, very reliable PC. Or you can pay an OEM to do it for you.
In this sense Apple is basically just a very very successful Dell, or HP, or other computer manufacturer, since these days the hardware differences we saw in previous generations of macs (e.g., using non-intel chips) are largely gone.
Similar threads
