03-16-2010, 10:23 PM

Survey: Macs cost notably less to support than Windows PCs

Funny that I made those points to people every day as far as owning computers goes.

03-16-2010, 11:45 PM

Even though the article is short, it is still a good read and sort of puts me at ease. The comfort of knowing in the long run that my Mac will cost me less is music to my ears. The overall up front price of buying one, is negligible knowing that and only that is the the most ill be spending over the life time of my machine ....

03-16-2010, 11:54 PM

I've experienced it my whole life.

03-17-2010, 02:56 AM

Good article. I agree I know several people who are still using G4 macs for everyday use.Heck my Dad' uses his 700Mhz eMac till this day, The only thing it cost him was a Ram upgrade, Not too bad. I don't anyone who still uses a 700Mhz PC.

another example I just recently picked up a Powerbook 145B from 1993 and it still works perfectly.

I think the lesson here is you get what you pay for. buy a $499 Dell laptop and maybe get 2 years out of it. Buy a Mac and you could get a decade out of it or more.

03-17-2010, 03:15 AM

This just helps the facts that Apple overall arevery resonably priced computers. Even maybe a little cheaper if the PC support cost is high. Just information we all know already but it's nice to see the rest of the world is slowly comeing to accept this fact.

03-17-2010, 03:32 AM

Originally Posted by the8thark

This just helps the facts that Apple overall arevery resonably priced computers. Even maybe a little cheaper if the PC support cost is high. Just information we all know already but it's nice to see the rest of the world is slowly comeing to accept this fact.

If you look at it PC' are only cheaper because of all the bloatware that comes pre-installed on every PC you buy. You don't get that with a Mac.

03-17-2010, 06:30 AM

My wife has an iBook G4 (1.25GHz) from Feb 2005, and a Mac mini (Core Duo 1.83) from late 2006. For what she does, she can see absolutely no difference in these models (which is why I'm about to sell the mini).

The iBook is five years old now and does everything she wants it to do on the internet. There aren't a lot of PCs that can make that claim.

03-17-2010, 06:39 AM

Agreed. My mates white ibook G4 still surfs the net and plays music as well as the day it was new. And the same as my imac from 2006. I can play World of Warcraft on it (plus a heap of other modern games and apps) and get 60 fps on medium settings. Tell me any 2006 PC (with all 2006 parts) that can do that. I dunno of any.

I think it's just the useful life expectancy of a Mac is like 2-3x that of an equivelant PC. A five year old PC is a dead dinosaur. But five year old macs are still very useful machines.

03-17-2010, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by the8thark

Agreed. My mates white ibook G4 still surfs the net and plays music as well as the day it was new. And the same as my imac from 2006. I can play World of Warcraft on it (plus a heap of other modern games and apps) and get 60 fps on medium settings. Tell me any 2006 PC (with all 2006 parts) that can do that. I dunno of any.

I think it's just the useful life expectancy of a Mac is like 2-3x that of an equivelant PC. A five year old PC is a dead dinosaur. But five year old macs are still very useful machines.

I really think you guys need to stop exaggerating so much. I speak with friends every day whom are still using older Dells (5 years old) with only two gigs of RAM whom are doing everything they were doing before (surfing, office work, and even now processing photos in Lightroom).

It really depends on how well YOU maintain your machine. One of my friends actually wants to simply upgrade his RAM to 4 gigs for Lightroom, and use it until the machine ceases to work, period. He says he'll then get a Mac.

I tossed my PC years ago, but guarantee that given the way I take care of my computers, it would be rockin just fine. I always custom built my stuff, and once a year would reformat my HD and reinstall the OS just to start fresh.

I do feel that OS X is a lot more reliable than XP, but there's absolutely no reason an XP machine (or Win 7 at this point) should be obsolete if taken care of, after 5 or more years. Heck.. my wife's 10 year old Compaq laptop (which we gave away) is still chugging away, doing basic tasks.

Doug

03-17-2010, 10:41 AM

I agree with Doug here.

I know people who have Macs that last them only two years.

I also know people who still have computers running Windows 95 smoothly.

I also don't really agree with the article. What makes Windows more expensive than OSX? Neither of them come with an office suit for free. MS actually does better in the graphics department as they have Paint for free.

My HP Windows XP computer has not been upgraded and still runs like a charm...

Can someone please elaborate how Macs are cheaper than PCs in the long run?

03-17-2010, 11:02 AM

That's very funny! I noticed this with my mbp even though it is still only 11 months old! That says something! It still runs the same from the first day I got it! My mbp was my first new modern mac, and I was used to all the other pc's slowing down after just months…you shouldn't have to re-install an OS just to make it run from the first day.
Thank you apple, you make me happy!

03-17-2010, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by Doug b

I do feel that OS X is a lot more reliable than XP, but there's absolutely no reason an XP machine (or Win 7 at this point) should be obsolete if taken care of, after 5 or more years. Heck.. my wife's 10 year old Compaq laptop (which we gave away) is still chugging away, doing basic tasks.

Basic tasks, on a 10 year old machine? That's nothing. My grandma juat spent 6 years writing her manuscript for her first book. And she did it on a Colour Classic Macintosh. And she had an old Apple stylewriter printer to print it out too. And it worked perfectly. She just finished the book this year. So the computer was 14 years old when she started and 20 years old when it's finished. And mind you this is an elderly person who had little knowledge of looking after computers.

So my point is 10 years is nothing for basic tasks. Can the 10 year old computer still use the latest OS and software?

Originally Posted by alexsd123

Can someone please elaborate how Macs are cheaper than PCs in the long run?

Ok here are some articles on the subject. And I'll comment on them after each one.

Macs vs. PCs: Which is cheaper to run? - Feature - Techworld.com
This article on it's surface looks rather unbiased. But if you read it they really are comparing the cost of runing a PC only network to the running cost of Macs in a mixed PC and Mac network. Which is not the same really. And secondly they are claiming Apple techs want more salary then PC techs. Which is wrong.

More good articles which support the Macs are cheaper in the long run.
PCs Are Cheaper?
MacKiDo/Myths/cost
Apple Macs really really are cheaper than Windows machines - MAC.BLORGE
Distorted-Loop.com Blog Archive Macs cheaper, easier, than PC’s for business use – report
Powered by Google Docs
IT pros: Macs cost less to manage than PCs
Salon: Macs indeed cheaper than PCs | MacNN

And apart from the articles it takes people a lot longer to install new OS's to PC's then it does Apple computers. PC's have to worry about defragging, maleware, viruses, yearly or mothly OS reinstalls (for those who care about thair PCs), and backing up data is not as seamless as Time Machine or carbon copy cloner. And all of this takes up a lot of time. And time equals money in business. A computer that just works and does it's job on it's own with less mantainence to keep it running in ship shape in the end costs lesss to run.

Yes some people can really look after their PC's and they can last for a while. But they have to put a lot of effort into that maintainence. And for my Mac at least I'm lucky if I do 2 hours maintinance work on my imac a month. And most of that would be time machine backups while I'm sleeping.

So my side of the arguement is time spent making sure PC's in a large network or at home take more time to keep running at ship shape than Macs would. And that time spent is money or productivity lost.

03-17-2010, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by the8thark

Basic tasks, on a 10 year old machine? That's nothing. My grandma juat spent 6 years writing her manuscript for her first book. And she did it on a Colour Classic Macintosh. And she had an old Apple stylewriter printer to print it out too. And it worked perfectly. She just finished the book this year. So the computer was 14 years old when she started and 20 years old when it's finished. And mind you this is an elderly person who had little knowledge of looking after computers.

So my point is 10 years is nothing for basic tasks. Can the 10 year old computer still use the latest OS and software?

No, and 10 year old Macs won't run Snow Leopard either, so what's your point ? Way to be "Mr literal", by the way. When I say "basic" tasks, I mean such things as play movies, music, browse the net, office tasks and use competently coded audio programs that aren't resource hogs. It can still use some audio editing programs too.

And apart from the articles it takes people a lot longer to install new OS's to PC's then it does Apple computers. PC's have to worry about defragging, maleware, viruses, yearly or mothly OS reinstalls (for those who care about thair PCs), and backing up data is not as seamless as Time Machine or carbon copy cloner. And all of this takes up a lot of time. And time equals money in business. A computer that just works and does it's job on it's own with less mantainence to keep it running in ship shape in the end costs lesss to run.

I think the real problem here is the type of person who uses a PC and their level of tech education. In all the years I ran Windows, I never had one virus and can recall only one trojan variation, which was extremely well known and spread. I think you got it simply for not having a specific service turned off. As for the rest, I can't disagree with you. It was tedious having to do constant anti spyware and malware scripts, defragging etc..

I switched because I loathed Vista, and with my switch I gained a lot more than what I thought I'd be getting out of the experience. But this whole argument wasn't about anything we've said. You've totally lost track of the original point, which is that a PC can and will last as long as any Mac depending on the user, and a little bit of luck.

Doug

03-17-2010, 11:54 AM

1. Yes I was taking what you said literally. My point was just everyone's idea of a basic task is different. And therefore that's a different age of machine that can do everyone's differing idea of what a "basic task" is. You're not wrong with what you said and neither am I. We just have differing opinions on the subject .

2. I agree totally. It is possible as you have had, to have virus and issue free PCs. It's not that hard to do it if you know what you're doing as you most certainly do. But a lot of people don't. And the rest of that you said there I totally agree with too.

An above poster just wanted someone to give their opinion on the subject and back it up with sme facts and I tried to do that .

Mind you I will say some of the newer PCs with W7 are slowly becoming a lot less maintanence heavy. Heck even a few of them just work right out of the box and have for a year or so trouble free (so far) with little time spent on maintanence. I think W7 is really catching up with OS X on this issue.

03-17-2010, 12:08 PM

Can I say it? I haven't seen it yet!

Apple Tax my PURPLE BUNNY SLIPPERS!