There are some good reasons not to choose a Mac when you buy your next computer, though in the last few years one of those most often given for sticking with a PC – that Macs are simply too expensive – has been rather inaccurate.
Historically, of course, it was true that they were disproportionately expensive, but more recently the entire Mac lineup – in particular the portables and iMac lines – has come to represent at least 'good' value for money.
When folks looked to Apple's US pricing and cried "rip-off Britain", they usually forgot two things. First, the dollar prices quoted on Apple's American site didn't include any tax – in the US, tax is applied at the checkout, and varies from state to state – and second, the exchange rates you find on internet sites such as www.xe.com never actually represent the kind of currency ratios that the man on the street would get.
True, Apple remained one of the very few mainstream brands not to have a cheap, around £250, option at the bottom of its range, either as a budget choice for cash-strapped consumers or rather as a starting point for retailers – or, indeed, customers themselves – to upsell from.
But then Apple CEO, Steve Jobs, has hinted (and sometimes flat-out stated) that the company isn't interested in producing cheap machines. As he put it, "We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk, and our DNA won't let us ship that." (Reason to suspect, incidentally, that while Apple may indeed soon make a netbook in all but name, it's unlikely to have that most netbookian trait – a small price tag).
Out of step
And yet, with the latest round of upgrades to its consumer desktop machines, Apple seems to have been doing the tech equivalent of stuffing its fingers in its ears and loudly singing "la-la-la-la". It's not that they're bad machines: the Mac mini is just as cute as it ever was and packs a much bigger graphics punch than its ageing predecessor, while the iMac remains a remarkably beautiful, powerful all-in-one desktop. But the prices seem a little out of step with the rest of the market.
HIGH PRICE: Can the iMac's good looks still seduce in these difficult economic times?
We're sure that there are smart people at Apple who have done the sums to demonstrate that the market will support these prices – and indeed the jump in UK pricing specifically looks, at least on the surface, to be simply a case of harmonising prices with America in the face of the weakening pound – but again, they seem steep.
The entry-level Mac mini, for example, costs a not-extortionate £499, but you don't really get that much for your money. The processor's a 2GHz Core 2 Duo and it has a 120GB hard disk and a paltry gigabyte of RAM. While the current version of Mac OS X will run reasonably well with this spec – though you'll definitely start to feel the pinch of that RAM allocation if you want to run lots of apps at the same time – it looks like poor value next to bulkier, less charming boxes from, say, Dell. You could buy one of its Studio models for the same money with a 2.33GHz quad-core processor, 500GB hard disk and 3GB RAM.
MAC MINI: The smallest Mac on offer still comes with a big price tag
You could even purchase Dell's dinky Studio Hybrid model and, for £499, you'd get a slightly faster Core 2 Duo, another 40GB of hard disk space, double the RAM and an HDMI port to make it a genuine little Media Center PC. Never mind the fact that the Mac operating system doesn't integrate any TV tuners into its 10ft UI, Front Row, with anything like the grace of Media Center. Moreover, where the Dell's got an impressive 18.5in display, the Mac mini doesn't even come with a keyboard or mouse.
The iMac too no longer seems like the value for money that it once was. Even compared to the alternative all-in-one offering from Sony – a company hardly famed for producing underpriced hardware – it fares badly. The VGC-JS2E/S – available for around £900 – has the same size screen, a faster processor, more RAM and a bigger hard disk than the £949 entry-level iMac. The differences aren't huge, but they're there, and in a computer from a company rocking a similar boutique vibe to Apple.
Your comments (20) Click to add a new comment
colt201
May 11th 2010
20. I think Pcs are better. If you want a great computer, both can satisfy your needs. The question is are you willing to take another couple hundred out of your pocket.
Alert a moderator
mrt731
July 11th 2009
19. kent909 the Mac you are referring too has only a 2.66 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor. The Dell has an Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 processor. The Dell is a more powerful PC.
Alert a moderator
kent909
June 26th 2009
18. B.S. A 24" iMac costs $1499 and a 24" Dell XPS All-in-One costs $1499.
Alert a moderator
mbb
June 26th 2009
17. I take the previous poster's point about being able to put together a higher-spec machine than the iMac for less money, but it's not really comparable.
Even ignoring the OS, I suspect lth's computer does not include an IPS panel display covered by glass and an all-in-one design created from a single, machine cut piece of aluminium.
Do you care/think this is significant? Perhaps not. Does it raise costs? Oh, you betcha.
Alert a moderator
lth
June 25th 2009
16. Having been forced to use a Mac at work, I don't really think that they are all that they are cracked up to be in terms of user interface. I think it's largely just what you're used to.
£950 for what you get is pretty steep considering that I've just put together the bits for a PC that absolutely spanks the cheapest iMac spec for a touch under £600.
As others say, it's a brand and a "lifestyle choice" but as with so many designer brands, you are mostly paying for the label, not the components or quality levels.
Alert a moderator
gandharva81
June 24th 2009
15. Since because Mac Operating System is not user friendly but attractive in shape only.
So this is much more expensive in place of Windows, Windows is user friendly and easy to operate.
Thanx
Alert a moderator
g24
June 23rd 2009
14. I have been using Windows PCs AND Apple Macs consistently for many years and when it comes to spending my own money and trusting my own data, it has to be a Mac.
Beneath the dubious eye candy and steamroller marketing, Windows is a *terrible* OS - it is stuffed with legacy code along with support for an almost infinite combination of hardware permutations, most of which it will never see. This makes for bloat, bugs and that persistent blight of security vulnerabilities.
Apple's OS X by comparison enjoys solid and secure Unix underpinnings with a slick and usable UI. The hardware is mostly very well designed and engineered, and OS X is actually designed for the hardware - this *does* make a difference. Somehow Macs manage to deliver a more productive and enjoyable user experience too.
By comparison, my slightly cheaper Windows notebooks either fall to bits or grind to a halt after about two years - I recently binned a failing 2.5yr old Acer and switched back to a MacBook - way, way better, in a different league. Macs seem to have a much longer and more useful life, another factor which should be taken into account when making price comparisons.
You do get what you pay for and all things considered, Macs are pretty good value for money when you take everything into account and disregard the pointless specs list. Cheap PCs, particularly notebooks, are just that, cheap and very nasty. Apple just doesn't operate in that market - for cheap and nasty, look elsewhere.
I don't get all this cynical ill-informed Apple-bashing bile. Of course there's an element of brand halo and marketing pixiedust which I actually dislike, but I'm afraid the products do pretty much live up to the hype. For most users who aren't interested in specs and just want something fast, solid, secure, good looking and great to use Macs are a pretty smart choice, on merit, not just hype.
Alert a moderator
duskrider
June 22nd 2009
13. Sadly Agentcool, I too thought the same things as you did about Macs limitations up until a very short while ago. Now I know better. I can do at least everything I used to do on my PC and quite a few things that I couldn't readily do too. The Mac has taken many things to the next level for me due to how well thought out the end-to-end experience has been. Even simple things like sharing your calendars is so much easier and more straight-forward on a Mac.
You complain about its limitations yet I don't see that. There is way less software for the Mac, true, but there is way less **** and way more high-quality software. I haven't hit a wall yet and have come to enjoy Mac versions of most software way, way more than the PC equivalent because of the integration into your Mac that most of this stuff adds.
I auto-sync contacts, address books and email with my Gmail account, with my G1 phone and with my iPhone all hands-off, all without 3rd party software. I install any 3rd party video or photo apps and reuse my iPhoto or iMovie creations or efforts. I'm investing in my system every day.
I use iDisk or Skydrive in lieu of FTP nowadays, both work just fine from both the Mac or a Windows server or workstation.
My Garmin Edge 705 data sync's with the Garmin Mac client no problem, just like in Windows.
There is, quite literally, nothing that I need to go back to my Windows machine for except one piece of encryption software that I need for my work. I use Parallels and a VM for that and that is it.
Plex on a Mac mini is one very sweet media center. Combine that with iTunes on a Mac and you can get virtually any kind of content you want. Mix in an Apple TV and you really can get any kind of content being created today.
Sorry Agentcool, your lack of knowledge is limiting you, not Apple. I was there a short time ago too, but not I'm way, way past that.
Alert a moderator
jameskatt
June 22nd 2009
12. This article is bogus.
Macs are high-end products competing against other high-end products. Compare Macs to similar NAME-BRAND products such as HP and Dell and Sony. They will be about the same in price. The Mac may actually be less expensive.
No other computer runs Mac OS X. Keep that in mind.
There are NO VIRUSES for Mac OS X. Not only do virus writers not write them for Mac OS X, they don't exist. Period.
A Mac is like a Mercedes Benz, Lexus, or BMW. They are luxury brands.
You can compare them to lesser brands, such as a Yugo or Chevy. But they are not in the same league. Thus the comparison is only valid for those who are poor and can't afford them...
The writer obviously is poor and needs a second job by making such a comparison.
Alert a moderator
sachin143
June 22nd 2009
11. There is a very good linux os is released.It is based on ubuntu.It's aim is to give linux a mac osX look.It is named as "Lin-X" .It is available as bootable live dvd of 970mb.The site is at http://lin-x.info/
This is the review
http://143sachin.blogspot.com/2009/06/lin-xa-linux-os-with-mac-os-x-look.html
screenshots are here at http://143sachin.tumblr.com/
Alert a moderator
david1225
June 22nd 2009
10. Macs offer an unprecedented degree of integration between hardware and software, such that the experience for the average user is far superior to that of the Windows or any flavor of Linux. They run an extraordinarily stable operating system. They include a suite of extraordinarily designed "digital life" applications that all ordinary people to do amazingly creative things in ways that are both intuitive and delightful. Couple that with attractive form, fit, and design and you can afford to charge a premium. There are other arguments as well, but pick up one of the new MacBook Pro 13" laptops for $1199 and you'll realize that, for what you get, nothing sold by serious PC makers comes close at that price point.
Alert a moderator
agentcool
June 22nd 2009
9. A lot of anti-PC rubbish being spewed on here. For a start, Macs aren't immune to viruses, trojans and malware. In fact, they are just as vunerable - if not more so - as PCs, the only difference being that fewer viruses are written for OS X. The more Macs are sold, the more viruses will be written to attack them. Whoever said virus protection for PCs is expensive doesn't know what they're talking about either. AVG Free is, of course, free and, even so, in almost 15 years and tens of thousands of hours of online PC usage, I have never once had a machine become infected with a virus.
Also, the idea that Macs use 'better quality components' is pure tosh. These days, they usually use the exact same chipsets as PCs only sold at twice the price. Crucially, however, Macs have far, far less software available for them than PCs making them a poor choice for even a moderately demanding user.
I like some Apple products like the well-priced iPod Touch but I could never live with a Mac - it's limitation computing at its most pretentious and expensive.
Alert a moderator
watcherzero
June 22nd 2009
8. I visited the Apple Store in Manchester last year and all the macs were £300-£400 more expensive than an identical spec PC, i.e. selling for £1200 what a PC buyer could get for £800-£900.
Alert a moderator
jbelkin
June 22nd 2009
7. Bottom line is sales growth. The market is an accurate barometer. Last year, sales were up 35% versus PC manufacturers growth of around 5% - clearly Macs were appropriately priced. This year, Mac sales are/were off 3% and perhaps a smidgen more in this quarter but clearly the cost-value ratio is only off by 3% (or slightly more) in its most crudest measuring stick while most PC manufacturer sales are off up to 18% ... so again, clearly in this2009 market environment, Mac prices could use a 10% adjustment to register growth - which Apple seems to have done - or more closely about 20% drop in price. So, when numbrrs are announced this quarter - if sales continues to drop - clearly, more discounting is needed but if sales are stable or grwoing in this economy - clearly not costing "too much."
Of course, margins are another measurement but again, we won't know if component costs due the slowing economy means apple is able to reduce costs by MORE than 20% - if so, then the price "decrease" is simply a pass along while margins are about the same ...
And also note, if Apple products were priced "too high," the best selling product in the line would be the its lowest price offering but in all the liines, it is CLEAR that the Mini, the MacBook and the shuffle are not the best selling product in each of the Apple lines - hence we know that they are there for budget buyers but most apple product buyers WILLINGLY choose a hogher priced product (ie growth in sales y to y) ... the iphone data of the $99 versus the $199 is still early to tell.
Alert a moderator
kent909
June 21st 2009
6. This argument is bogus because it like all the others presents the information in the way that supports the argument. I can provide an example of this not being the case. A 24" iMac is $1499 and a 24" Dell XPS All-in One is $1499. Go to both websites and take a look for yourself.
Alert a moderator
hss1
June 21st 2009
5. The reason why Mac are expensive is because they are supposed to be a premium product/ brand like Gucci orMercedes-Benz.
For Apple to make cheap computers this would damage this brand image.
Alert a moderator
paulwilliamsmith
June 21st 2009
4. People seem to be assuming that a computer not running OS X is a Windows computer. This is not the case and you can buy PC's much cheaper without windows, and then install a Linux OS for free. This means you get a better machine for cheaper, without all the viruses and malware that come with Windows, and you have a very strong community support on the internet. (& twice yearly updates to improve the OS)
(& also 'kirasaw', nowadays, with the large amount of open-sorce, free software available, you don't need to spend $200 on virus protection software. I use Avast, which is free and is very good.)
Alert a moderator
kirasaw
June 21st 2009
3. Yes the price looks higher for a Mac when compared to a similarly speced PC but looks can be deceiving. First look at the software you get with a Mac compared to a PC, and the lack of crapware-adware preinstalled. Next look at the cost of Virus protection. While it is available for the Mac it is mandatory on a PC. I know my GF paid $200 for a 3 year subscription for her virus protection so add that to the price of a PC. You also have to look at the quality of the product itself, IMHO the design, build and parts used in Macs tend to be better than comparably spec'ed PC's. Apple customer service is always rated at the top compare that to dell's. Now look at Mac OSX compared to Windows - I know talk is Windows 7 will be an improvement on XP and without a doubt better than Vista but it is still Vaperware till it actually comes out and is proven. Mac OSX is a solid proven OS with regular updates over the years and again IMHO easier and more elegant to use.
So take a look at total cost of ownership including life of the machine - which favors Macs. Also the value if knowing YOU have a quality built machine with great customer satisfaction and service. With a Mac many parts of the total experience are hard to put prices on such as the smooth integration of iPods and the iPhone, the ability of going to an Apple Store and the Genius Bar, and the ability to leave your computer running 24/7 with out worry of crashes and way less concern of hackers and becoming part of a bot-net.
Alert a moderator
krisjones
June 21st 2009
2. The difficulty is that Apple appear to build a machine for a particular price point in the US market. They then appear to take the appropriate currency conversion at the time of release and price it for overseas markets accordingly. Hence, the entry-level iMac went from £799 at the beginning of this year to £949 for the upgraded model. Indeed, Apple UK initially issued the same press release as the US, describing the iMac as "the best value ever". That phrase was quickly excised from the re-issued release. Similarly, while the suggested Mac Pro configuration went down $100 in the US, the price increased here. It's unusual as other US-based manufacturers haven't seen fit to adjust their prices in the same way. I assume others are better at currency hedging and taking account of what prices local markets will bear.
Alert a moderator
Tell us what you think
You need to Log in or register to post comments