Comments on: Are Macs More Expensive? Round Four: The Skinny on the Mini

By: Henry

Henry — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 00:14:31 +0000

Sorry for the double posts. My post was rejected and I thought it had to do with length rather than the included URLs. Likewise I posted in the mini article, because I thought the iMac one wasn’t working when I was rejected.

Woops.

The part list:
Western Digital Caviar SE WD3200AAJS 320GB 7200 RPM 8MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive – OEM

Intel Core 2 Duo E7200 Wolfdale 2.53GHz 3MB L2 Cache LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor – Retail

Acer X203Wbd Black 20″ 5ms Widescreen LCD Monitor 300 cd/m2 2500:1 ACM – Retail

A-DATA 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory – Retail

Silver Steel MicroATX Mid Tower Computer Case 350W Power Supply – Retail

Anyware GV-IR01WT Windows Vista Infrared MCE White Learning Remote Control

SeaSonic SS-300ES 300W ATX12V Ver.2.2 80 PLUS Certified Active PFC Power Supply – OEM

LITE-ON Black 16X DVD-ROM 52X CD-R 32X CD-RW 52X CD-ROM SATA Combo – OEM (Better, but actually cheaper than 8x)

Hercules Deluxe Optical Glass 640 x 480 30 fps USB Interface WebCam – Retail

OS
Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 64-bit English 1pk DSP OEI DVD for System Builders – OEM

APPLE Mac OS X v10.5.4 Leopard (New version) – Retail

By: Henry

Henry — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 00:11:07 +0000

I realize that it doesn’t have the form factor of the others, but consider building a box for your next editions. I was able to get _identical_ stats to the iMac on newegg.com for $793. If you, like me, have a closet full of mice, keyboards and speakers you save $49. If you choose to run Linux (an OS superior to both Vista and Mac OS 10.5 IMO), you can save an additional $165. (Alternatively you can build a hackintosh with Mac OS 10.5 [it should work with these parts] and save $55.) If you trust the power supply that comes with the case then you can save another $36. With these considerations it comes down to only $543 ($644 as Hackintosh)!

By: cielo

cielo — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 11:40:48 +0000

Nice breakdown. I am a mac-mini owner, and I love it. I admit to finding the Dell Hybrid sexy and appealing, but the thought of using windows as my main OS makes me want to vomit. A couple hundred bucks to avoid the Microsoft chain is worth every penny. Shoot, I’d pay a couple grand extra.

BTW, in the “Bundled Productivity Software” category you introduce the iMac, and fail to mention the mini. I assume this was just a typo.

Thanks, it was an interesting read.

By: win32forth

win32forth — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 14:52:00 +0000

Interesting article, and relatively unbiased. Being a Mac use, I am not that unbiased. The most disturbing thing to me, was the attempt to bring all the computers up to your definition of parity, which to me seemed pretty unbalanced. OSX will run reasonably well in 1GB, it might be a bit slow, but for most home users it will still be faster than anything they happen to be upgrading from. Vista will run in 1GB as well, perhaps a bit slowly, but again it should be usable.

Perhaps the biggest problem I have is that you almost totally ignored the excellent software that the mini comes with, except for the photo editing software you tried to make parity. In my view, none of the PCs (as you configured them) is even remotely configured for parity in the software area. The standard Apple software package including the ability to play DVDs, and music, create and edit music, create web sites, edit and manage photos, maintain your calendar, email client, address book, chat client, CD/DVD burning software, movie and DVD creation software (you need a DVD burner obviously), automatic backup software. yada, yada, yada… Ok, I will stop now.

By: iMe

iMe — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 13:57:15 +0000

Dave S., what’s the point of comparing the prices of the retail boxed editions of Vista and Leopard? If you’re shopping for a PC with low price or convenience of purchase and set up as one your criteria, you’ll get a PC with Vista pre-installed. If you want to build your own PC or get a manufactured PC without Windows so you can install the OS the way you like, you can’t do the same with OS X (at least not legally or easily).

If you’re going to install Leopard on a Mac, you’ve already paid for an earlier version of OS X on that Mac.

By: rufwork

rufwork — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 19:46:06 +0000

Fwiw, the Mini will take 3 gigs… actually it’ll take 4, but like every other computer with a non-64 bit processor or a non-64 bit OS, it’ll read less than that.

Here’s a link to a reputable Mac RAM makin’ company saying the Mini will, in practice, take 3, np:

http://transintl.com/store/category.cfm?Category=2720&CFID=1065547&CFTOKEN=21002369&RequestTimeOut=500

Enjoy.

By: Gui

Gui — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 14:31:11 +0000

If you did the comparison about a year ago, certainly the Mini would look a lot better. I bought mine about a year ago, and it looked a fairly good choice, compared to the few alternatives I had.

Really, if Apple really wants the Mini to succeed, they should treat it on equal footing with their other offers. Since the last iteration of the mini was released, the MacBook was updated 3 times, the iMac was updated twice and both the MacBook Pro and the Mac Pro were updated once, not to mention they introduced the new MacBook Air and there are already rumours of a revision. Giving a newer hard drive, slightly faster processor, more RAM and a DVD burner across the line shouldn’t change their price point these days, given their low-end MacBook is barely over a grand.

By: Technogeekanerd » Blog Archive » The Geekinator Podcast Episode #0019

Technogeekanerd » Blog Archive » The Geekinator Podcast Episode #0019 — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 06:51:35 +0000

[...] Are Macs More Expensive? Round Four: The Skinny on the Mini [...]

By: Dave S.

Dave S. — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:12:47 +0000

Great and very thorough review. I agree that the question is ridiculous and most of the debates I get into run straight into fanboy territory, i.e. something like this

“You just like the Mac because you’re a pompous cool hipster.”
“Oh yeah, well you use Windows cause you’re slave to Gates, man.”

Or something equally ridiculous. Overall, I think Mac has done a great thing with their OS, but truthfully they’re hardware costs are way too much for what you get. However, everyone seems to neglect the cost of buying Vista *alone*. For example, Vista Home Premium costs somewhere near $200. Leopard is just $129. And there’s no tiering of features for Apple. This is the kind of simple offering (just like their UI themes) that *keeps* Mac owners loyal. And that’s really what the debate is about, I think. Niche marketing to your fans or making the choice to try to be everything for everybody, which Microsoft will learn the hard way that such a task is impossible.

By: Al

Al — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:11:22 +0000

Hardware comparisons really aren’t all that useful when every vendor uses mostly the same parts. Cameras, for example, can have equivalent features but vastly different lens glass quality and user input software and controls. The finished product, the actual photo, is the ultimate comparator.

What makes computer brands different is not the hardware bang for the buck but the user experience. In game consoles, for another example, The Wii, for the most part, has inferior hardware but outsells all others. User experience is paramount there. What good is a hardware rich PS3 with no cool games?

Hardware comparisons are used only by peddlers of products with poorer user experiences. All iPhone and iPod Killers use hardware comparisons.

You aren’t trying to make Vista PC’s look more desirable, are you? Accept or decline.