Comments on: The Apple tax and the Mac v. PC argument (again)

By: Craig Grannell

Craig Grannell — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 23:55:30 +0000

Given that there are thousands of apps available for the Mac, I’d say there’s a vast choice. There are some limitations in very specific areas of business software and things like CAD, but in most areas you’ll find the Mac not only well catered for, but with a superior ‘indie’ developer scene. Enjoy your ‘reverse switch’ should you choose to do it.

By: Greg Ralph

Greg Ralph — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 21:41:26 +0000

I had my first Mac in 1984 and went through a few generations before reluctantly switching platforms because in work I was stuck with a PC. In retirement I am considering doing a reverse switch. Quality will out for me and I know that I can look forward to less trouble as a Macuser. My cars always have as many extras as I can justify in the purchase spec. As long as the PC is associated with MS and Windows it will always fair poorly in the JDPower stakes. In the past the main concern of the ‘journos’ has been the great divide between the choice of software for the PC and the apparent lack of it for the Mac. Photoshop began on the Mac and that platform also spawned the finest database in Filemaker, so my point would be – who needs vast choice when the programs that are available are superb. GjR

By: Craig Grannell

Craig Grannell — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:07:40 +0000

What Ian said regarding costs is the main issue, not the costs themselves: Apple has a limited range of models, and so there will almost certainly always be roughly equivalent Windows-based PCs that are cheaper.

However, on a like-for-like comparison (when you compare Apple and Dell laptop, for example, or an iMac with any one of the many iMac rip-offs), Macs are usually within shouting distance. It’s certainly not a comparison between £500 and £1600, unless you’re looking for something very specific.

By: blair

blair — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:42:14 +0000

You can get a good spec PC for around £500. A similar spec Mac might cost £1600 (not 100% on those prices). Thats more then double the price.

If I was to buy a car, I would like a few creature comforts, as the article mentions. However, I would not be willing to pay double the price for it.

I recently bought a toaster. I got a good model with some really nice features which was about 15% more then a basic model. Again, not double the price.

Another point is that a lot of people simply don’t like Macs. I use a Mac and a PC everyday and I much prefer the Windows PC. The Mac is nice to look at, but I actually find the PC much easier to use. Windows allows users to customise their environment much more than a Mac (unless you understand the command line, which not many people do). The big thing in favour of the Mac is that it is Unix based and therefore much more stable then Windows.

Anyway, I don’t want to turn this into a PC vs Mac argument. I just want to point at that value for money is important and a Mac does not represent value for money. I might be prepared to pay 10 to 20% more for a Mac, but not 100% more. Until Apple addresses that issue, I don’t see a Mac ever being mainstream.

By: Craig Grannell

Craig Grannell — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:20:34 +0000

Mm. I’m not being as argumentative as usual, nor as coherent. It’s Monday.

But I think the problem I have with Microsoft’s advertising and the usual “Macs are soooo expensive” drivel blurted out by the tech press is, as I was trying to get at, that they never mention the value prospect. And there really is still that mindset of people paying more than the bare minimum for TVs, mobile phones, cars and even toasters. But when you make the same arguments for computers, they seem to align them with hammers and sink plungers.