This mirrors the bad old days when Apple had Centrus, and Quadra, and Performa, each with many nearly identical models. It was hard to tell what you were getting and if it was as good a deal as another, nearly identical model sold under one of the other banners. It wasn't a surprise when sales slowed. It was too hard to figure out.

The oft heard comment that Apples are too expensive is a result of Apple's business plan. When some people look at the price of a MacBook as comapred to a Dell laptop, they often quote the $699 price of the Dell as proof that Apples are too expensive. However, when a Dell laptop is optioned to the same specs as a MacBook, processor, RAM, software, etc, the prices are shockingly similar. Often the MacBook is cheaper! Buying a machine ready to go out of the box makes for very satisfied customers who will keep coming back. No set up hassles creates major customer satisfaction in my book.

I've done this experiment many, many times. Find a Macintosh, anywhere from an entry-level iMac all the way to the 8-core Mac Pro. Then go to Dell's website, and configure a Dell as close to the Mac as you can get it (this is a lot easier now that Apple and Dell use virtually the same processors, RAM, HD technologies, etc.). The Mac is almost always cheaper.

I did the above with the 8-core Mac Pro. I built a Dell configured as closely to the Mac Pro as I could (complicated by the fact that the Dell maxes out at 2.66 GHz, not the 3 GHz of the Mac). The Macintosh, as I configured it (a middle-of-the-road configuration) was just south of $5,000. The Dell was almost $7,000.

Math isn't my strong suit, but I'm pretty sure $5,000 is less than, rather than more than, $7,000.

It's true that the cheapest Dells are less expensive than the cheapest Macs. But as the dubious owner of one of Dell's cheapest, sub-$600 laptops (don't even ask), I can tell you the savings are hardly worth it when you add in the extra headaches.

I have an opinion on this.

Quote

Biff wrote:
I have an opinion on this.

Voice it Biff. I don't always agree with you, but I always read your posts.

My turn for a snarky remark

Quote

ericmurphy wrote:
It's true that the cheapest Dells are less expensive than the cheapest Macs. But as the dubious owner of one of Dell's cheapest, sub-$600 laptops (don't even ask), I can tell you the savings are hardly worth it when you add in the extra headaches.

Yes, but within a few hours Dell will come over and repair or replace that unit. Remark not against Eric's statement, but in regards to http://www.macobserver.com/article/2007/04/09.7.shtml

Quote

Sir Harry Flashman wrote:

My turn for a snarky remark

Quote

ericmurphy wrote:
It's true that the cheapest Dells are less expensive than the cheapest Macs. But as the dubious owner of one of Dell's cheapest, sub-$600 laptops (don't even ask), I can tell you the savings are hardly worth it when you add in the extra headaches.

Yes, but within a few hours Dell will come over and repair or replace that unit. Remark not against Eric's statement, but in regards to http://www.macobserver.com/article/2007/04/09.7.shtml

Of course, the Dell is much more likely to need it than the Apple. Both in terms of the companies' QC in general and especially w/r/t their "bottom-of-the-line" machines.

http://www.gadgetell.com/2006/02/8-vista-options-to-choose-from/

It does seem to be at odds with our basic nature, but limiting choices really can be the right thing to do.

Apple extends the philosophy of limited choice (actually not limited, but rather distinct, well defined choices) to the feature sets and operating systems of the elegant devices they produce. Thanks to their excellent approach to design, you can operate an iPod with one hand, navigating menus that make sense to a novice.

Likewise, I was able to unpack my first Mac, hook everything up, connect to a wireless network, and actually use it within 10 minutes of carrying it through my door. From my perspective, it seemed simple, but I'm sure Apple designers and engineers put a lot of work into making my experience simple.

Apple makes great stuff simple.

Quote

Sir Harry Flashman wrote:

Yes, but within a few hours Dell will come over and repair or replace that unit. l

This might be true for a large customer with Gold Service, but I'm a one man company and got Brown Service from Dell. A week of misery talking to someone in India who cared less about taking care of my problems with a Dell desktop (under an extended warranty) and I make the final, total move to Macs, including the joys of transferring a large amount of accounting data to new software.

While I believe that Apple is wise in limiting their ranges I do believe that there is a need for a mid-range headless mac with a single processor, even if it is a quad core. Too many Mac mini customers bought to see what the Mac world was like and would now like to upgrade, using their current display. The only option Apple provides is the Mac Pro which I feel is too big a jump dollar wise and size wise.

I use a 20' iMac at home and a PB at the office attached to a 23" display. Far prefer the 23" display without the chin and would move to a mid range headless for it, but not a huge tower, no matter how impressive it is.

Quote

Guest wrote:
It does seem to be at odds with our basic nature, but limiting choices really can be the right thing to do.

There is a concept in philosophy that while too many rules is a prison, no rules is also a prison. Without some structure the mind has no form with which to work. This was the ancient concept of Limbo a place with no form or structure which in it's own way was as frightening as medieval ideas of Hell. Jerry Pournel & Larry Niven modeled Limbo very well early in the book Inferno where the protagonist is trapped in a gold fog without shape or form, without body or feeling until someone pours him out. Similarly while there are those that rebel against the strict forms and standards for writing, some of the most sublime and moving work has come in the form of Haiku, one of the most restrictive forms.

Just as a kite cannot fly without its string, people need rules to give their world structure and form. Too many choices just serves to confuse while a more limited number of real options can empower.

OK that's it. I'm wiped. I guess I really need to crash now.

Reminds me of the coffee scene in Moscow on the Hudson. Robin Williams' character (a Soviet defector to the U.S.) has a nervous breakdown in the coffee aisle at the supermarket.

Apple offers Just enough choice for their customers. Dell used to have a large array of product lines that seemed redundant to me. Apple's line seems to make more sense, with prices between the steps small enough to temp buyers to pay the extra to move up the model line.

The rest of the success comes from the design and delivery of products that seem to work better than the comp and look a whole lot better while doing it.

On price, Apple still has the reputation of being more expensive than PC manufacturers. As discussed above, this is not in tune with reality.

Barry Schwartz, a professor at Swarthmore College, talks about the problem of too much choice in his talk at the TED (Technology Entertainment Design) conference, in articles, and in his books The Paradox of Choice and the earlier The Costs of Living. Watch the video for a quick introduction.

This was a very interesting TED talk - the speaker, can't remember which, was talking about selecting a pair of jeans and how easy and pleased he was when he chose between two as opposed to how disappointed he was choosing between the multitude of styles out there now.