David,
On 05 Mar 2006, at 2:20 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
I was thinking about desktops, not laptops, as Dell laptops have
always been problematic, in my opinion. Also, laptops are less
configurable than desktops, which makes a straight comparison harder.
Direct comparisons of desktop products are difficult at this point,
as few (if any?) WinTel desktop computers are using the Intel Core
Solo and Core Duo processors Apple has adopted.
To me, the larger screen is worth a lot more than the price
difference.
Depends on the quality and resolution of the LCD. Dell laptops
include the option to upgrade to an "UltraSharp" "TrueLife" display
for $149, which makes me suspect the stock Dell laptop display isn't
that great, especially compared to the quality LCD's Apple uses in
their notebook machines. Also, I couldn't find the Dell's resolution
listed anywhere... ?
But you describe the corresponding Mac as the low end of
the MacPro laptop line.
Well, yes, the MacBook Pros come only in two versions -- dual core
1.83 GHz, and dual-core 2.0 GHz. The MacIntel version of the iBook
hasn't been released yet, but obviously that line will be
considerably less expensive.
- Darcy
-----
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://secretsociety.typepad.com
Brooklyn, NY
On 4 Mar 2006 at 17:35, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 04 Mar 2006, at 2:15 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 4 Mar 2006 at 3:19, Darcy James Argue wrote:
If you match the hardware
feature-for-feature, Macs are actually competitive with similar
WinTel hardware.
I'd actually be interested in someone offering proof of that (i.e.,
making up quotes for a Mac and a corresponding Dell PC).
Well, for instance, the Dell Inspirion 9400 notebook uses the same
Intel Core Duo processor as the Mac Book Pro.
When configured to match specs as closely as possible to the low-end
MacBook Pro (1.83 GHz, real video card and not "integrated graphics,"
Bluetooth, etc), the Dell costs $2198 -- $99 *more* than a MacBook
Pro 1.83 GHz. (I added a 100 GB HD to the MacBook Pro to match what
Dell offers, which raises the price of the low-end MacBook to $2099).
It's true that the Dell has a larger screen -- 17" vs 15.4" (although
my impression is that the Apple notebooks have much better quality
LCD's than the Dells). And it's true that once you add a video card
to the Dell, it's a better video card, with twice the VRAM of the one
that comes with the MacBook Pro.
To me, the larger screen is worth a lot more than the price
difference. Seems to me that you're getting quite a lot on the Dell
for that extra $99.
Also, keep in mind that if Dell designed that laptop's motherboard to
incorporate the better graphics card, it would probably cost less
than the Mac.
Now, in terms of Dell's laptop lines, the $2,198 machine is not the
top of the line, but its far from the cheapest laptop you can get
from them. But you describe the corresponding Mac as the low end of
the MacPro laptop line. So, this tends to support my point that the
lower-end Macs are more like the middle of the PC market in terms of
specs and price. If all you do is compare the lowest-price Mac to the
lowest-price PC, you're going to think a Mac is far, far more
expensive. But if you compare it to a comparably equipped PC, it's
not going to be as much of a difference.
--
David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com
David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
