“Compare Apple’s dual G5 to the top of the line Dell dual Xeon Precision workstation and the PC has most of the features but costs a thousand bucks more than the Mac. The two lines are closer to even in the midrange, where the Apple 15-inch PowerBook is only about US$180 cheaper than the nearest comparable Dell 15-inch Inspiron,” Paul Murphy reports for LinuxInsider.
“The first enterprise-class commercial database that can take you from pilot to deployment for zero dollars and zero risk. About two months ago, I looked at the cost of the Macintosh relative to Dell PCs and discovered that not only are Macs cheaper than PCs once you upgrade the PCs to rough comparability, but the PC line is narrower than Apple’s, with Dell offering nothing to compare to the 17-inch Apple powerbook, the X-serve/RAID combination, or Apple’s cinema displays,” Murphy reports.
“What seems to happen on pricing is that Apple’s inclusion of multimedia capabilities generally missing from the PC skews its price advantage toward the high end,” Murphy reports. “Compare Apple’s dual G5 to the top of the line Dell dual Xeon Precision workstation and the PC has most of the features but costs a thousand bucks more than the Mac. The two lines are closer to even in the midrange, where the Apple 15-inch PowerBook is only about US$180 cheaper than the nearest comparable Dell 15-inch Inspiron.”
Murphy reports, “At the low end you get the opposite effect: the stripped Dell 2400 is $350 less than an eMac — but the Dell is a Windows/98 class machine that lacks the processor power and memory needed to run Windows/XP effectively and ends up significantly more expensive than the eMac if you upgrade it to match the Mac on a feature basis. Last month I looked at the performance issue to find something almost equally surprising: if you strip away the effects of software and market differences by looking at “whole box” usage in GRID style super computers, desktop Macs turn out to outperform Dell’s best dual CPU servers by 30 percent while the X-serve blows them away by 50 percent.”
“Microsoft is selling the PC community an interim solution, or ‘hack,’ it knows Mac users would never accept. ‘Live Meeting’ on the PC, for example, is rightly considered very cool in that environment, but looks utterly hokey when put against iChat. Similarly the Mac community is sufficiently knowledgeable about SGML and related document processing issues that Microsoft’s attempt to use XML as a Web programming language would most likely arouse only derision and disbelief if marketed to Mac users,” Murphy reports. “Nevertheless, there are clear ‘holes’ in the Macintosh software market — areas where there is significantly more software variety and therefore functionality on the Wintel side of the ledger.”
Full article here.