May 6, 2008 10:34 AM | 6 Comments

Alex Kidman has a challenge for anyone who thinks PCs are cheaper than Macs. Also, will Apple kill off the Mini?

Last week's feature on the relative value of Macs and PCs certainly raised a few eyebrows -- and more than a few comments regarding my sanity, or my explicit selection of units. And then, of course, Apple went and changed the numbers by updating the technology within the iMac, further escalating the arms race. Well, it would escalate the arms race, except that Apple isn't really competing with many companies in this space. As I stated, it's all rather easy to attack the Apple value equation by building your own cheap box, and if that's what you want to do, go ahead. I just have one little challenge for you.

Build something that looks like an iMac. I'm not talking Apple stickers here, or even the truly horrible Mighty Mouse; I'm talking an all-in-one-panel-based PC. Slot drive on the side, USB ports out the back, no thicker than an iMac and with rounded corners.

Not so easy to source the cheap parts now, is it? Heck, I'm sure that there's somebody out there who's actually bothered to source all the relevant parts and custom built themselves an iMac style case "just because", but I'd be willing to bet that once you added in all the custom parts AND the working hours, it would rapidly become uneconomical.

Ahem. That was meant to be the "short" reasoning behind why I chose a particular -- and similar -- Sony PC to put up against the iMac. I guess I had a little bit more to say on the subject, but to paraphrase "South Pacific", there really is nothing like an iMac.

Nothin' else was built the same,
Nothin' in the world
As the soft and wavy frame
Like the silhouette of a (cough) iMac.

Actually, horrible singing aside, I do have a little bit more to say about the iMac, and last week's refresh of the line. Apple does this kind of thing on a regular basis, unless you're a Mac Mini fan; I'm still waiting for Apple to either kill off the Mini, or merge it with the faltering Apple TV.

There's a few oddities in the new iMac line, most notably around the customisation changes you can throw into the higher-end 24" iMac but not the lower end 20" variants, like a 1TB hard drive or GeForce 8800 GS. Is this just Apple playing the premium game? I tend to think so. And this brings me nicely full circle, as we're back in the budget space again, which, despite the existence of the Mac Mini, is a department that Apple just doesn't really want to play in.

Sure, you can buy a nearly useless cheap iPod Shuffle, but there's no plain vanilla "Mac" to the "Mac Pro" model, and that's undoubtedly for a reason.

Apple wants “Mac” be a premium brand. Not only does it charge accordingly, it also makes sure it doesn't offer anything that could contradict that perception. The up-scaling of the iMac last week is just more proof of that concept.

• Where does all the space on the iPhone go?
• The next iPhone will be...
• App-itis: how many apps is your iPhone running?
• Mac Authority: Microsoft's Ads are clever, but why are they bothering?
• Macs: are you just buying the logo?

bbjai May 6, 2008 10:59 AM	You bring up some interesting points. I know that MAC is a premium brand and that notably the iMac is completed with Laptop parts. Personally I was very tempted to buy a iMac. Very tempted, especially after the updates. But I can't get around the lack of a video card unless like you said your buying the absolute premium product. Apple markets the iMac as a ultimate box for the house, just like all the other manufacturers. But it can't even play games..............which I suppose you can argue is not the market Apple is looking for. I think at the end of the day Im unhappy with the options that are available to add on the iMacs not the actual machines themselves. If Apple bothered to make them a little bit more customisable (like you said, why the 8800 GS on the top of the line only? Why still the 2600XT when its like up to 3870X2, Why does Ram still cost an arm and a leg when laptop ram cost nothing? Same with Hard disks?)They would sell alot more Macs and possibly capture a new market effectively.
geller May 6, 2008 11:42 AM	I think that once the Mums and Dads shift to Mac we'll start to see a market like this: Mac - Newbs, non-gamers PC - Gamers, business Linux - Developers, gluttons for punishment PS3/Apple TV/Foxtel IQ - home theatre, gaming
Pacman May 6, 2008 3:05 PM	"....and with rounded corners". Are you Serious? I just fell of my chair trying to place the logic of that sentence. Are you really having a computer discussion using asthetics as the basis of your insanely one sided argument? Does Steve Jobs pay your wage? I can build a rectangular pc for a third of the cost of your rounded premium overpriced piece of plastic Apple *cough*.... And for the form factor? Who cares! As long as my PC costs less and does more for the money, the market will always be bigger, stronger and better.
Alex Kidman May 6, 2008 3:45 PM	Well, at least I'm amusing someone. And yeah, I'm serious. I don't quite see how it's a "one-sided argument" when you're free to respond and everything, but to each their own. If you don't feel that the form factor has a role to play in your PC usage, then more power to you. I note, however, that your "rectangular" PC absolutely fails that particular challenge -- in fact , it doesn't even start to begin to answer it. If you honestly don't think that the costs of manufacturing add to the overall costs passed on to the consumer, then I'd love to talk to your accountant.
Anthony Caruana May 6, 2008 7:37 PM	Here's the thing. There's no competitive system to the iMac. An all in one desktop that looks good. Yeah, you can make a PC that delivers the same specs (or better) for less but you're not getting a premium/Tier 1 vendor's product with a single product warranty that covers the whole unit. If that's not important to you then more power to you. But, for most users (and perhaps the PCA demographic isn't representative of most users but of power users and gamers) they want a machine for getting email, web browsing, knocking up the odd word document, managing some digital photos and balancing the family cheque book. The Mac is, in my view, a better proposition. It costs more but there are fewer maintenance issues (I'm think viruses and spyware) and iLife is a signficant value add. Yeah - I'm a Mac user but I use Windows systems at least as much as my Mac. I've been running Windows since 3.0/DOS 5 and reckon i know my way around it pretty well. I've watched first time computer users sit in front of a Mac and in front of Windows systems and when it comes to which they prefer to use and find easier to get started with there's no competition - the Mac wins every time. That said, there are plenty of great Windows systems out there. It's a pity that Dell's XPS all-in-one isn't available (I couldn't spot it on the Dell web site) as it would give the iMac a run for its money in a like-for-like comparison.
bbjai May 6, 2008 10:51 PM	is that not the point of a Mac and its selling points? OSX and aesthetic. Cause really its a crap computer, it uses laptop parts, it can't do graphics and it is absolutly rubbish when it comes to its 20" LCD screen. The power bumps and all are still good, but its significantly more expensive then a normal box from Dell and HP with the same specs, but much nice looking. The mac will never capture a demographic and thats the big one, the middle market.