Today has seen a fairly major hardware refresh from Apple, including upgraded Mac mini’s, Mac Pro’s and iMacs.
It’s a well known fact that I’m well entrenched in the Apple camp, and as such I get infuriated at the plethora of unfounded arguments levied at Apple and their systems. One of the most popular of which, is the notion of an ‘Apple Tax’, upon which Apple apparently levies it’s customers for the mere privileged of allowing them to don the fabled Apple insignia.
So in light of today’s update, I thought I’d do a quick comparison of the iMac 24 vs the Dell XPS One 24, Dell’s rival machine.
- 2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Quad-Core (More recent CPU, but Windows applications barely know what to do with 4 cores)
- 2GB 800MHz Memory (Slower memory, and half as much)
- 512MB NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT (Older video card in this class)
- 500GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (Half the size)
- Slot Load Blu Ray Rom and 16x DVD+/-RW (bonus but I would never use)
- Analog/Digital TV Tuner and Remote Control (bonus but I would never use)
Total cost: £1,799.00
- 3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo (Technically not as good for apps written for quad core architecture, but a much fast clock speed)
- 4GB 1066MHz DDR3 (Faster memory, and twice as much)
- 512MB NVIDIA GeForce GT 130 (Latest video card in this class)
- 1.0TB Serial ATA Drive (Twice the size)
Total cost: £1,799.00
For exactly the same cash, an iMac gives you a CPU with a faster clock speed (quad core is meaningless without applications that can make use of the architecture), twice as much and much higher spec speed RAM (DDR3 vs DDR2), a better and more recent video card and double the storage capacity (500Gb’s to 1Tb). It is true that you lose the Blu Ray and TV tuner, but big deal. I watch films on the sofa in front of an even bigger screen, not at my desk, and the BBC iPlayer keeps me entertained on the TV side of things.
Ignoring the fact that the iMac 24 is, in my opinion, a much nicer looking piece of kit than the Dell XPS One 24, or that it runs a substationally better and faster operating system and instead rationally comparing the specs, for me, it’s really a no brainer, but for die hard Microsoft zealot’s I’m sure I’ll be seen to be a brainwashed, evangelicalised member of some weird cultish religion.
The conclusion? Swallow your pride and buy a Mac!
nice post Dom.. i’ll put the sawdust down!
Bring it on!
Why did someone have an accident already?
So, the eternal debate has moved onto the blog.
Well, I’ve noticed Dell and Apple working in perfect harmony side by side – where you might ask? Why the completely factual world of 24 of course! (can’t find any images but if you watch Season 6 they are in there!).
I’m going to totally disregard Dom’s careful spec comparison and say the Apple looks much nicer
Wait wait wait – found a semi connected discussion of the Dell/Mac use on 24:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=593249&page=3
Mmmmm…. I think the comparison is fair, and unfair at the same time.
Yes, you can compare the machine’s operating systems, and use throw-away comments like “or that it runs a substationally better and faster operating system” – just stick Linux on the PC, or Mac OSX for that matter! – or simply admit that Windows (although not as stable – but then that’s another argument about Mac only having to build an operating system for their own hardware since they took all the licenses back) is more widely used, and will ALWAYS have a place.
It has to be said that Apple have been doing this for a fair while too, so their costs are bound to have been reduced. Since Dell are only really “the new kids”, it should be expected that their system is slightly lower spec’d I’d thought. Plus, you mention that you don’t need blu-ray, and you watch movies infront of your TV – why exactly do you need a 1tb hard-drive? Plus, you can’t play that many new games on a Mac, so why do you need the cutting edge graphics card (unless you’re using WIINE, and that negates your argument about a better OS).
Also the comment that “(quad core is meaningless without applications that can make use of the architecture)” can be levied against the Mac with Dual Core also.
.
Hi Douglas,
I have to argue that I included a ‘throw away’ comment that ‘OSX runs substantially better and faster’ since I did link to an impartial website which has gone to great lengths to compare OSX and Windows, with Windows coming off much worse. You do admit that Windows is not as as stable as OSX, and as as a power user I find that one point alone of great benefit, regardless of whether it runs on any ‘Frankenstein’ machine or not.
I need a 1Tb drive as I have a lot of data, including DVD’s and music (which I stream wirelessly downstairs to the HiFi and flat screen) and a lot of work related stuff. Admittedly, Blu Ray would be a nice feature, but it’s not a show stopper for me, nor is a TV tuner.
Games-wise, well thanks for introducing another reason to get a Mac. Bootcamp; native Windows on the Mac is available should I ever feel the need. Or then again I can virtualise Windows inside VMMare as a second option. Running OSX on the Dell in any form, is nigh on impossible and not nearly as stable.
In terms of quad-core, most of Apple’s Pro apps actually do make use of quad core’s. But that was not really my point. The point is that the Dell ships with a chip that is barely supported within the Window’s framework and as such you are getting something that you’ll never make use of, and that doesn’t even look likely to change with Windows 7.
To be fair, this:
http://www.parallels.com/uk/products/desktop/
Looks like a safer option than the other way around. And all the other technical stuff sure
As a power user, surely you’d be on Linux by now, since OSX is based on Unix after all!
Also, with regard to running OSX on a PC…. http://www.osx86project.org/ if you’re at all interested (legal issues aside).
Vista happily supports multiple cores (http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=130) however, as you mention, it is always down to the software you run on it as to whether the CPUs are actually taken advantage of. Much of the software famed for being great on a Mac (eg. Photoshop) work equally as well with dual core CPUs on both types of machines.
You have managed to compare two similarly priced machines, but with completely different specifications (which is possibly the point you are trying to make), but you could easily find 20 different PCs, all for the same price with different specifications.
Linux is not the same operating system as Unix, and even it were I wouldn’t jump ship to it by proxy, purely because of the fact it is based on the same kernel (which it isn’t). To me, Linux seems more like a hobbyist OS, for people that enjoy tinkering. I’ve no problem with that, and I certainly have a lot more respect for it than I will ever have for Windows! But, with a Mac it does pretty much everything I want it to do out-of the-box, and that box actually looks nice.
I’m aware Mac/Win apps work well with dual core CPU’s, but that is not the same for quad core, hence my argument that the quad core is not very well utilised in the XPS.
“You have managed to compare two similarly priced machines, but with completely different specifications (which is possibly the point you are trying to make), but you could easily find 20 different PCs, all for the same price with different specifications.”
Well no my point is that they are not ‘different’ specs. My point is the iMac has much ‘better’ specs for everything that is important to me, and any sane person
One of the things we PC “Zealots” have in our favour, is that we can buy our platform from a great many different manufacturers. Although Dell are a popular choice, we have other options. Lenovo, Sony and HP are all making some very swish looking All In One PCs. So as a third option, I give you :
HP TouchSmart IQ820
This has a comparable spec to the above systems and is £400 cheaper!
With that £400 you can buy yourself a very compentent Windows laptop or spash out on a PS3 and still have cash left over for a few games.
What the third option also brings to the deal is a 25.5″ Touch Screen. This is going to be a very exciting bit of technology when Windows 7 arrives. Until then, HP bundle it with their own touch interface.
If you go to the “Tier 2″ manufacturers, then you can really snap up a bargain check out the Zoostorm ONE. Now this doesn’t compare very closely to the specs above, but it’s still a competent machine and comes in a whole £1000 cheaper than the first two examples. With that extra £1000 you could buy three entry level Windows laptops or an aboloute kick ass Dell XPS system for some serious power! (or one entry level Mac Laptop)