<p>you need to get out more.</p>
<p>jamiedp - I think you may be right.</p>
<p>i'm trying to justify paying over $2000 for a laptop for my student when I can get her a pc laptop with the same capabilities (twice the ram, processor speed, discrete graphics card) for less than half that price. as a pc knowledgeable person, I have never had any reason to need tech support. i can replace parts if needed, and have never had a virus problem. so why should i spend the extra money (other than my child wants me to)???</p>
<p>Based simply on a cost/benefit analysis, PCs are better than Macs. Native Windows support for security (firewall, virus protection, etc.) is getting pretty good with Vista and when augmented with a $40 package, you can make the PC virtually impregnable. In all cases, the owner needs to exercise common sense and a modicum of caution (USC students should have no trouble with this).</p>
<p>The Mac has better marketing, I'll grant you that.</p>
<p>On a more practical note, most of the Tech Support staff at colleges, including the residence halls, tend to be Windows-savvy.</p>
<p>For slightly specialized work such as diagramming (Visio) or data analysis, PC software is more robust and less expensive. Don't mean to distract from academics, but games available for the PC are way more plentiful and sophisticated than those for Macs.</p>
<p>Finally, the available software (especially shareware which has the kinds of costs that thrifty students prefer) on the PC exceeds what is available for the Mac by orders of magnitude.</p>
<p>I find that nowadays, most of the common misconceptions/criticisms of Macs tend to be archaic.</p>
<p>I'll let amazon3001 explain if he really wants to, but I'd hardly say that Macs are just about "better marketing". I REALLY REALLY can't believe so many people find Windows to be superior to Mac OS X. I am dumbfounded. </p>
<p>My entire family was a devout Dell/PC unit until my counsin convinced me to switch. Now, after using countless times the iLife suite (iPhoto/iMovie/iDVD/SuperDrive), incredibly intuitive and out-of-this-world and easy-to-use Mac OS X, we have 5 Macs at home; my GRANDPARENTS have an iMac C2D. I mean seriously, if 85+ year olds can easily use the Mac, burn photos/movies, and VIDEO-CONFERENCE with us several times a day (through the free and standard iSight/PhotoBooth on each MB/MBP/iMac) it certainly says something.</p>
<p>I know a lot of people at my school and elsewhere have bad stereotypes of Macs after still using those old colorful and slow iMac G3s at school that constantly freeze. THOSE ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT than today's Macs, and they run Mac OS 9, not OS X. </p>
<p>Just go to your nearest Apple Store (please don't go to CompUSA), hang around and play with the different models, talk to the reps, and maybe you'll them, maybe you won't. But there's no way of finding out unless you really give them a chance, instead of just bashing them without any basis.</p>
<p>That's what I did, and now I'm typing on my PB G4, soon to be replaced by a gorgeous MacBook Pro this summer. And I've never regretted it. :)</p>
<p>Amazon3001- you are doing an incredible job here. This is the best thread ever. Good calm discussion.</p>
<p>a.parent and dashcart - I think dieheldun hit most of these points right on the nose. Part of what makes a Mac so great is the all around user experience and the remarkable ease of use. But from cost stanpoint, there's not as much of a discrpency as you may think.</p>
<p>Sure you can pick up a PC laptop for around $600 bucks, but it sure isn't going to be a good one. By the time you build a Dell with comparable specs, you're looking at about $1,100 for a macbook comparable to Apple's $1,199 model.
Then when you factor in the included software, which would easily costs a few hundred dollars on a PC, you've already got a cost advantage with the Mac. </p>
<p>Then you must figure in the cost of antivirus software. It's not a $40 one time fee. It's $40 per year. So if a laptop lasts you four years you've spent a minimum of $160 extra just to keep your laptop protected. </p>
<p>Also, the extended warranty is less expensive for a Mac if you're using the student discount. It beast Dell by about $50.</p>
<p>One must also take into account the extra features of a Mac not being factored in here, like the included remote control with every Mac, motion sensing hard drive protection, integrated video camera and mircophone, and magnetic power cord.</p>
<p>When comparing the cost of a Mac, the game completely changes on high end machines. For example, to build a Dell with specs rivaling Apples $2,599 Macbook Pro, you would spend $3,213.</p>
<p>Here is a component comparison.</p>
<p>DELL
Intel? Core? 2 Duo T7600 (2.33GHz, 4MB L2 Cache, 667 MHz FSB)
Genuine Windows Vista? Home Premium
2GB DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHZ, 2 DIMM
100GB 7200rpm SATA Hard Drive
8X CD/DVD Burner (DVD+/-RW) with double-layer DVD+R write capability
256MB NVIDIA? GeForce? Go 7900 GS
Integrated Audio
80 WHr 9-cell Lithium Ion Primary Battery
Intel Next-Gen Wireless-N</p>
<p>Apple
2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1680 x 1050 pixels
2GB memory
160GB 5,400 RPM hard drive (7200 RPM Optional)
8x double-layer SuperDrive
ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 graphics with 256MB SDRAM
802.11 a/b/g/n wireless</p>
<p>Overall these are extremely similar models, yet the Dell costs nearly $600 more. So for students needing a workhorse a Mac is especially a no-brainer.</p>
<p>It is also important to consider that a Mac to PC comparison is not always an oranges to oranges comparison. </p>
<p>A Mac can do much more performance wise than a PC with similar specs. A PC with 1 Gig of RAM can run 3-4 programs effiiently. A Mac with the same amount of memory and the same processor can run about 8 before a noticable slowdown is present, so that must also be taken into account when comparing performance. </p>
<p>But Apple is not a bargain basement brand and we do not strive to meet the Wal-Mart price point like so many other companies. If Apple cannot sell a quality machine then it will not sell one at all, and it is simly not possible to make a quality machine for the price points that some competitors offer. If you just need to type a paper and occsionally browse the internet, then a PC may be a viable option for you and may be able to save a few hundred bucks. But chances are if you're savvy enough to be able to self service your machine then you're probably going to be doing much more than that, and would definitely see a benefit both in performance, effiency, and ease of use by switching to a Mac.</p>
<p>In the end though, it comes down to preference. Some people prefer Macs, some prefer PCs. Many die-hard PC users however are loyal to the PC because they have not spent much time with a Mac, at least not a recent one, and still belive many of the old stereotypes about Apple. I have used both systems extensively for both low and high end tasks and I can say that the Mac stands heads above Windows. If you've never used a Mac, stop into your local Apple store the next time you're at the mall and play around. We don't work on comission and won't pester you to buy things you don't want. Check it out and see what you think. I promise you'll be intrigued.</p>
<p>Also I should be clear that by posting on this forum I am not in any way working in an official capacity for Apple, simply as an enthusist and a resource for those of you making your back to school computer purchases.</p>
<p>Thank you, we all appreciate it.</p>
<p>Amazon - The prices you have quoted for PCs are absurd & misleading. I realize that you have an agenda here, but this is a bit over the top.</p>
<p>Last summer, I bought a classic student machine Dell laptop for under $800. This is obviously a lesser configuration than the PC you carefully chose for your demonstration, but is absolutely adequate for anything but high-end video. The price has dropped by about 10-15% since then.</p>
<p>Intel? Core™ Duo Proc T2050 (1.60GHz/533MHz/2 X 1MB L2 Cache)
LCD Panel 15.4 inch Wide Screen XGA Display with TrueLife™
Memory 1GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz, 2 Dimm
Video Card Intel? Graphics Media Accelerator 950
Hard Drive 120GB 5400rpm SATA Hard Drive
Combo/DVD+RW Drives 8X CD/DVD Burner (DVD+/-RW) with double-layer DVD+R write capability
Wireless Networking Cards Intel PRO/Wireless 3945 Internal Wireless
Primary Battery 85 WHr 9-cell Lithium Ion Primary Battery
Subtotal: $798.00 </p>
<p>Another thing I forgot to mention relates to incompatibility. MS Office on Macs is always one down-rev from the PC. Think about this - it's late on Sunday - the paper's due tomorrow, and your professor sends you the assignment in Office 2007. At the very least you'll need a friend with a PC - hello John Hodgman 8-).</p>
<p>Amazon - the floor is yours now. This message comes to you from a Windows NT desktop circa 1998. Rock on.</p>
<p>Macs own.</p>
<p>Simple as.</p>
<p>dashcart - What I quoted was for a high end workhorse machine capable of doing video work, specifically effects redering and 3d modeling. The Intel GMA 950 is in no way capable of handling anything like Motion or After Effects smoothly. I know this because I have tried to run both of those programs on that exact graphics card. 64 mb of SHARED video memory just won't cut it. For students with that high end work in mind you'll need at least a 128 MB dedicated graphics card and you should really shoot for a 256 mb. </p>
<p>Even the low end $1,199 Macbook drastically beats the computer you listed in most specs that count, with the exception of the hard drive. The processor is WAY faster, a 2.0 ghz Core 2 Duo, not the Core Duo at a slow 1.6 Ghz, along with faster RAM at 667 mhz and twice the L2 Cach, along with the new 802.11 N wirelss, plus the afformentioned features like camera, magsafe adapter, etc. I'm guessing the FSB on this is also clocking at only 533 mhz as opposed to Apples 667.</p>
<p>Like I said, on a LOWER end machine, and this is definately a lower end machine by Apple standards, you can save a little money by buying a PC. Again though, factor in antivirus for four years and you're at about the same price as the Macbook and your computer has nowhere near the speed of the Mac that would cost you same price.</p>
<p>The comparison I offered above was for high end machines, which was clearly stated. There are many who need them. My specs weren't "carefully selected," only chosen to match the power that comes standard with the Macbook Pro, my point being that in the high end market Dell's moderate price advantage dissapears.</p>
<p>As far as Office for Mac, you say it's one down-rev from the PC. This is a matter of perspective. I say it's one up, as the Mac version of Office is always a year newer.</p>
<p>Office 2003 was released for Windows XP
Office 2004 was released a year later for Mac</p>
<p>Office 2007 was released this year for Windows
Office 2008 will be released later this year for Mac.</p>
<p>By the time the Mac version comes about about 8 months later, several new additions are usually present, such as the tremendously student-friendly Word notebook mode, which surprisingly has yet to find itself into the PC version of Office.</p>
<p>Also, the compatibility with Office 2007 wouldn't even be an issue if Microsoft hadn't decided to impose a new proprietary format standard(docx) on the world, but if you really need to access files created in office 2007 (for the few people who use it yet) before office 2008 is released on the Mac, then you have three options.</p>
<p>1)You can always take the easiest route and just use this free Docx converter if you run into this problem.</p>
<p>2) A Mac is also a PC now. You can always load office 2007 on Windows and easily run it through bootcamp or Parallels if you must</p>
<p>3) You can download Sun Microsystems freeware office suite NeoOffice for free. It's not as nice as Office but it will open docx format files fine.
<a href="http://mac.softpedia.com/get/Dashboard-Widgets/Calculate-Convert/Docx-Converter.shtml%5B/url%5D">http://mac.softpedia.com/get/Dashboard-Widgets/Calculate-Convert/Docx-Converter.shtml</a></p>
<p>Let me reiterate that the only Office compatibility issue between Macs and PCs exists only between Office 2007 for PC and ALL OTHER VERSIONS OF OFFICE, even those on the PC, not JUST the Mac as you make it seem. Bascially if you're not running Office 2007, your out of luck. This problem exists because Microsoft has changed their document format for their new office documents and the issue will be completely eliminated when Office 2008 is released later this year. </p>
<p>Again, I have no desire for this to degenerate into a flame wall. I'm off the clock and am not getting paid for any of this. I'm simply trying to help fellow students make an educated decision about their computer purchase next year. I have no reason or motivation to push any sort of agenda.</p>
<p>I am extremely thankful for the information you provided, and appreciate all the input from all.</p>
<p>Good argument.</p>
<p>Jonathan-not to be disrespectful or anything, but if you really want to argue that Macs are cheaper than PCs, you're really going to lose out on that. </p>
<p>You can't really use the Dell prices currently because the prices vary--(check slickdeals.net on this one) Sometimes they have 25% off coupons (but there have been 30% and even 40% off in the past) and student rates and the such, which can drastically reduce prices off their already reduced prices (IE holiday savings) </p>
<p>When it comes to cost vs. performance, Dell wins hands down.</p>
<p>The only way I can think of that a Mac can be cheaper is if one buys a Dell with all the software at the time. and the person gets some sort of Mac discount. Even then, one should wait for the free after rebate virus software to go on slickdeals :) </p>
<p>But I like the "running XP on a Mac" idea, so I may consider getting a used Macbook for cheap.</p>
<p>Again, you have to look at the bigger picture. The base sticker price on a Mac WILL be higher than a PC on most models (however this IS different on the high end models), but you must consider long term costs.</p>
<p>Dell does have great prices though, no arguments there. You're just stuck with Windows.</p>
<p>But also keep in mind that a Mac and Dell w/the same specs are not equal. Again, Macs can do far more with the same resources in terms of speed and performance.</p>
<p>But overall you will pay a slight premium for most Macs.</p>
<p>In the past, running windows emulators on a mac would bog the system down terribly. Now that Intel chips are used, what is the impact of a dual-boot system in terms of performance? Specifically, what if one wanted to run Adobe or Avid's video editing software rather than Final Cut? Also, can linux be run on a Mac? thanks for your time....</p>
<p>If you run Parallels, which uses emulation, you get pretty good performance, no major slowdown in everyday performance as long as you've got at least a gig of ram. However, Parallels does not support DirectX, and your resources will be split between each OS, (ie 512 mb of ram to both windows and os x). This makes parallels idea for basic tasks, but if you want heavy duty performance, go with Boot Camp.</p>
<p>Booth Camp is a free download from Apple that allows to partition your hard drive and install either Windows XP w/SP 2 or Windows Vista (any version). Once installed, you will be able to choose between Windows and OS X each time you boot up. When you run windows in this mode, it is 100% native, and is every bit as much a PC as a Dell would be, so this is ideal for your demanding apps and for gaming. Keep in mind that this option does open you up to the virus risks of a PC, but if you stay off the internet with Windows and restrict your surfing and downloading to OS X you should be fine without it. </p>
<p>But through boot camp, Avid and Adobe Premiere will run beautifully.</p>
<p>thanks. Boot Camp might be an option then. I have not ever had virus issues with a pc so that doesn't concern me. I know what to do to protect myself online. And it's free :-) will discuss this option with my student and weigh the costs (definitely more for the Mac) versus the simplicity. thanks again.</p>
<p>Is linux an option?? in dual boot mode?</p>
<p>Linux is an option through parallels, though not through Boot Camp. Because Linux requires far less system resources than either Windows or OS X, it should run pretty smoothly through Parallels, even for most higher end applications. If you will be using parallels on a regular basis, especially for design apps, you should definintely consider 2 GB of ram.</p>