Reasons why not to go MacintoshGo to: Previous reason / Index / Next reason Reason 3 : "Macs are too expensive"
This issue of the cost of Apple's Macs as a separate platform, compared to the (Windows) PC platform, is probably the most commonly expressed reason why Macs are not chosen. But the accusation is somewhat of a broad brush, and as usual, is not that black and white... Compared to what? Which models? Could there be reasons? Lots of issues to consider: 1. How are you comparing? There's two very different ways of looking at Mac vs. PC price comparisons:
When you take the first approach, the Mac often comes out losing; usually quite badly! This is inevitable when you look at the tiny range of Macs compared to the huge combined ranges of every other PC manufacturer in the world that makes up the PC platform. There's bound to be a model of PC that fits your requirements exactly, with no costly superfluous bells & whistles. This is less likely on the Mac side, which invariably means the model that fits your criteria has costly extra bundled things you didn't specify as a requirement. You may subsequently find these extras invaluable if you had them, but on initial pricing up, the Mac comes out on the losing side. Say for instance your only criteria is a tower based form factor. Cheapest Mac to fit that requirement starts at well over $2000 for a Mac Pro, (see 'Which Mac?') whereas most PCs are of that form factor which start at less than $300. Therefore, despite the Mac Pro being stratospherically more powerful in every way over this 'equivalent' PC, from this simple stipulation, it's around ×7 more expensive. Or, like for like? A comparison using the second approach however – i.e. like for like – the Mac can often come out looking very competitively priced. They tend to be quite featureful and generously specified, including many things and specifications which other PC manufactures often only have as optional extras. But when you do add those optional extras, they often do bump up the price to beyond what the equivalent Mac costs. This highlights probably the biggest reason why this argument of Macs being overpriced refuses to go away. It simply depends on which way you look at it. 2. Brand vs. brand There are brands of PC seeming to offer a ostensible bigger 'bang for the buck' than Apple's. But while you will invariably find Apple somewhere near the top of the price scale, there are brands and models of PC that are just as 'premium'. It's simply those others don't make up a unique platform by themselves like the Macintosh does. They're just one small part of what makes up the overall PC platform, and hence, doesn't get singled out for similar criticism. For example, look at Sony PCs. Nice machines, but not cheap by any stretch of the imagination! Just like in any consumer goods, brand names are something some people don't concern themselves with – seeing it as nothing more than "brand snobbery" – whereas others like, and are prepared to pay for "the good stuff", of which a premium brand is a factor. There are those who drive Hyundais, and are happy to do so – gets you from A to B after all – but no-one is ever going to put a poster of one on their bedroom wall and one day aspire to own one of their very own. 3. Budget vs. premium As looked at above, Apple is one manufacturer, the single manufacturer making up the Macintosh platform, and their range is small. They do not have a model to match exactly every conceivable form factor, spec, and budget of competing model of PC. There are gaps in the range. The main relevant area Apple has chosen to steer clear of, is the meager profits of the budget, sparsely specified, beige box market that most other PC manufacturers – offering little to differentiate themselves from each other – have little choice but to cater for. Instead, Apple – offering a computing platform on their own – have the luxury of being able to angle themselves as premium brand or lifestyle product manufacturers; the lower volume yet profitable portion of the PC market. There's no technical reason why Apple couldn't build a cheap PC; remembering that 'cheap' isn't just a pricetag. Market share would inevitably be gained to an indeterminable degree, but there's no guarantee it wouldn't also be at the expense of cannibalising sales of existing higher margin products, which therefore does nothing beneficial to Apple's bottom line. As such, do not ever expect it to happen. See also reason 33: 'If the Mac was any good, it wouldn't have such a tiny market share' So, as it is, if you need something cheaper than the cheapest Mac, then maybe it's not that Macs are too expensive; it may just be that there isn't a model in the range which suits your needs, i.e. minimalist specifications, sparsely bundled, cheaply made, and/or low quality build and parts. Invariably, if something is cheap, it's usually cheap for a reason. 4. Pricing between updates There is however one other area of pricing Apple does differ from most other PC manufacturers which may colour how they compare. All PC manufacturers periodically update their range. Most of them will gradually lower the price of their models between updates the older they get and the closer they get to being superceded. Apple however, doesn't tend to do this. They will launch a new model which will initially be reasonable value for what it is, but then retain that price throughout its life. The downside of that is by the time this model is nearing the end of its product cycle, it could be starting to look extremely comparatively overpriced. To get the best value from a new Mac, it's usually best to get one when it's just been updated. 5. Software bundle When comparing prices, don't forget there's more to the deal than hardware; the stuff you can see and touch. Don't forget to factor in bundled software. Some PCs may appear cheaper, but what (if any) software will come with it? Is this software worth having, or is it of a quality you'd expect to be freely downloadable, or time limited free trials only, and hence, adds nothing to the value of the package? New Macs will come bundled with some third party business, creative, and/or games applications (depending on model), and some time limited trials (such as Microsoft Office). But of particular note is Apple's own iLife software suite, including applications for music (MP3) organising/CD burning, photo management/editing, video editing, DVD authoring, music creation/recording studio, and website creation. Plus there's the obligatory Internet software packages – Internet browser, e-mail – as well as on-line chat/video conferencing, DVD player, calendar, etc. All this of course may be invaluable to some, but to others, superfluous. But it does all have value that other brands of PC may not offer. 6. Resale value When you decide to replace your PC or Mac with a new one – when it becomes unviable to upgrade it any further – it will have inevitably depreciated in value. Any aspirations of selling it will of course depend on how much it's worth doing so. What history has shown is that used values of Macs are significantly higher than similar aged PCs. While you may still expect a healthy wad of cash in return for an old Mac, an old PC of a similar age will probably have to be virtually given away. Like a prestige brand of motorcar, Macs hold their values well, and hence, the price per annum cost can be highly competitive with PCs of a fraction of the initial purchase cost. 7. Build it yourself vs. pre built While Macs and PCs are technically very similar, one difference remains that only a PC built by Apple can run Mac OS X. If this means something to you, you have little choice but to buy a Macintosh. If this is not as important to you however, it is entirely possible to assemble your own parts and built a Windows or Linux compatible PC yourself. And while it won't run OS X, it will often be cheaper than a branded, pre assembled PC like a Mac. See the separate reason 19 – 'I can build a much better PC for peanuts' – for a closer look at this. 8. Differences Does the Macintosh range offer something that another brand of PC doesn't, that might be worth something? Nowadays, since Macs adopted Intel architecture, internally, Mac hardware has very much become not much different from the rest of the PC world. The most obvious difference to the naked eye, is that Macs tend to be somewhat more styled than a ubiquitous big beige box. For some, that's worth something; whereas critics may argue it's further evidence of 'style over substance'. You can't please everyone I guess. The biggest difference though, is that for all practical purposes, the Mac is the only PC that will enable you to run Mac OS; more often than not, the reason why Mac users are Mac users. Just like any PC, they can run Windows too, but only Macs gives you the choice of both! That's got to be worth something, surely? See 'Windows; Macintosh edition' for more details of this. So... ...above all, it comes down to simply this: If you want what a Mac and its unique OS offers, they cost what they cost. If the absolute rock bottom purchase price is your primary and overriding concern, then I guess you'll need a cheaper brand of PC, foibles and all. But as some might say, just because something is cheaper, that does not necessarily equate to being the best value. Go to: Previous reason / Index / Next reason
|
Significance:
