On 8 Aug 2006 at 8:35, dhbailey wrote: > So in that case, comparing the #1 maker of Mac Pros (also the only > maker of Mac Pros) with the #1 maker of PCs might make some sense, but > there is so much competition in the PC marketplace which is totally > lacking in the Mac marketplace that a fairer comparison would be to > find out the lowest price a machine could be purchased for which > matched the Mac specs, not necessarily the lowest price Dell would > offer.
Well, you have compare classes of machines. The machine Darcy posted about is a high-end workstation. This is blazingly obvious by it being based on TWO CPUs, to begin with (which is very uncommon on standard PC desktops, though it was pretty common on G5 Macs, if I'm not mistaken, to make up for the less-than-stellar performance of the PowerPC chips), but also because the chips are XEON chips. I have never seen anything but a server with Xeon chips in it. There, Xeon is quite common, but on the desktop, it's a small niche market. If you're going to pick a comparison for Apple for a high-end workstation, then I think Dell *is* the best choice, as they have the largest market share and are likely to be the cheapest on high-end workstations as they are with every other segment of their product line (because of volume). My bet is that you can't even find more than a handful of manufacturers offering Xeon-based workstations. -- 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
