"What are the Mac vs. PC System Shootouts?"
Several years ago, when Apple first introduced the $799 entry-level iMac G3, I was curious about just how well it stacked up against the competition, in terms of both hardware, software and other total "user experience" areas such as mobility, bulk, and so on. Eventually, I expanded this into other price points from low to high, as well as laptops. More recently, the Shootouts were expanded to also include some specialized, non-price-based comparisons, and finally evolved into the website you're looking at right now.
"What are the criteria for configuring the systems?"
Every few months, I spend a few hours going through the online stores of several major home-PC manufacturers, configuring the best complete system I can for anywhere from $500 - $5,300, depending on the chart.
"Why start at $500? I can get an el Cheapo Wal-Mart Linspire box for as little as $200!"
Because, frankly, that's where Apple starts their pricing for new systems at, and it wouldn't very well be the "Mac vs. PC" Shootouts if I didn't include Macs in the comparisons! It is a valid point, however, to note that Apple doesn't compete in the "bare bones" category.
"You're a rabid Mac-head! You're totally biased! Why should I believe your comparisons?"
Yes, I'm a Mac user and advocate, and some of the "best of" ratings in the Shootouts may reflect that. However, the actual data is completely unbiased. In other words, the hardware specs and bundled software included with a given system is factually correct, but there may be a dispute over whether a particular piece of software should be given the nod over its' competitor. Even if you disagree with the "best of" ratings, feel free to ignore them and just look at the actual specs, then decide for yourself which system you're more comfortable with (or choose a different one entirely!)
"You have a hidden agenda! You're on Apple's payroll! You're trying to jack up their stock price! You're trying to beef up your click-thru ads!"
My "hidden agenda" is to encourage people to look at the entire computer-purchasing/utilizing experience instead of just the raw hardware specs. In truth, a Mac is not always the best solution for the job at hand (though I believe that it is in most instances). I have never been on Apple's payroll, though I did act as a part-time Apple representative through a third-party marketing firm for some time (however, I left this position in December 2003). I do not own any Apple stock at this time, and I hardly think that this site would have any effect on it in any event. As for the click-thru ads, sure, I'd love to increase the number of clicks, but the ads themselves are for both Apple and its competitors' products, and if I'm very lucky, I might make enough to cover--barely--the hosting of the site itself. In other words, I'm not exactly getting rich off of the Shootouts; it's a labor of love.
"How come you don't make the systems cheaper by buying the extra RAM from Bob's Memory Hut for 1/3 of the price?"
To keep these comparisons relevant and fair, all hardware & software has to be configurable right on the manufacturers' own online store. Plus, since Macs use the same type of RAM as Windows PCs, it would kind of defeat the point.
"You claim that it's a "$1,000 Shootout" but one system rings up at $987 and the other one comes in at $1,017. What gives?"
Since it's often impossible to get the total exactly dead-on, I've given myself a +/- $25 range.
"How about refurbs?"
All systems must be current, brand-new (as of the date of the comparison) systems--ie, no refurbished or otherwise used systems allowed.
"How about shipping, rebates, taxes and other such things?"
Grand total prices must include standard ground shipping charges, if any, since this can dramatically affect the total cost (some are free, others charge up to $100 for shipping desktop systems!). In addition, the final price also includes any direct instant or mail-in rebates which would be valid if the system was purchased as configured on the given date. I admit to not being entirely satisfied with doing so (I've heard horror stories about people trying to redeem rebates from all of the manufacturers listed). Sales tax, however, is not included in any comparisons since this can vary widely from state to state.
"How come you also have requirements such as "Must include DVD burner" or "Must include 17" LCD" on the Shootouts? I thought that price was the key point of comparison!"
Whenever possible, I try to keep the major specs roughly even--ie, if one system has a 17" LCD or a DVD burner, all systems compared should, since these have such a major effect on the total cost. This is not always possible, especially in the laptop shootouts (some laptop manufacturers may not offer 17" screens, etc.).
"How come the tower-style systems have to include a monitor? Why not price out just the CPU?"
As noted above, the point of these comparisons is to configure the best complete system possible, which in my mind includes the computer itself (CPU with hard drive, RAM, optical drive etc.), a display, keyboard, mouse, and speakers. I've decided to make other peripherals optional (printer, scanner, etc.).
"Hey, I just specced out the exact same system from Dell today for $50 less than the one you list--you're making your numbers up!"
ALL system configurations and prices were taken DIRECTLY off the respective company's Web sites on the specific dates listed on the given chart. Given the crazy PC market, any number of the bundles, add-ons, promotions, etc. could have changed by the time you read this. I CANNOT STRESS THIS ENOUGH, ESPECIALLY IN THE CASE OF DELL, WHICH CHANGES ITS PROMOTIONAL OFFERINGS ON A DAILY BASIS!!
"How come you don't include "white boxes"? I can put together my own killer PC system for half the cost of any of these brands by purchasing my CPU, motherboard, case, etc. directly!"
These comparisons are of BRAND-NAME boxmakers. I am well aware that those who prefer to build their own PCs from scratch can do so for much less than ANY of the listed brands, but again, that's hardly the point. I could change my own oil for a lot less than Jiffy Lube charges, but that doesn't make it wrong to compare them against Pennzoil. If you're a BIY (build-it-yourself) type, build your own killer box from scratch, enjoy and be well.
"Where are the Quake 3 FPS, Floating Point, SPEC and other such geeky benchmark results?"
Not here, that's for sure; I utilized some of the following sites to come up with my ham-handed Processor Performance Equivalency Chart, but if you want the detailed numbers, feel free to visit them yourself: Tom's Hardware, The Tech Report, Ars Technica, Bare Feats, and so on.
"Where do you get off claiming that an X.X GHz PowerPC processor is (faster/slower) than an X.X GHz Intel/AMD processor?"
Check the Processor Performance Equivalency Chart page for a full explanation of/rationale for these ratings. In summary, I've basically stirred together a mix of manufacturer's claims, real-world application testing, and benchmarking sites' raw-number-crunching tests and come up with what I feel are some reasonable (if far from perfect) ballpark rules of thumb.
"Speaking of AMD, what have you got against them? For that matter, all I see is Apple and Dell--where's HP, Sony, Toshiba etc. on the latest shootouts?"
Due to time constraints, space constraints, as well as the fact that several of the PC brands' systems have become either indistinguishable from each other or nearly irrelevant to the market as a whole (ie, Gateway), I recently decided after much thought to, at least temporarily, limit the general shootouts to Apple and Dell. Yes, I'm aware that HP, Sony, IBM, Toshiba, etc. make some fine machines, but Dell is pretty well established as "the brand to beat," in the mind of Joe Consumer, at least in terms of raw price/performance ratios. I may re-introduce additional brands in future updates depending on the success of the new incarnation of the Shootouts website.
As a by-product of the above decision, I'm afraid that I've also had to, at least temporarily, abandon AMD processors (since Dell doesn't see fit to use them in their systems at the moment). Again, this will hopefully change in the future if I'm able to expand the brands compared (or if Dell starts selling AMD systems).
"How can you justify giving a "best of" credit to a larger laptop display over a smaller one? Some people prefer the smaller screen!"
Technically, wrong: people generally prefer a larger screen; however, they also prefer a lighter, more-compact laptop. In cases where a 12" laptop is compared with a 14" one (or whatever), note that I give credit to the 12" laptop for being lighter, thinner, and/or less-bulky (assuming it is)...but I also give credit to the larger laptop for having a roomier and/or higher-resolution display. In other words, this is a matter of personal preference--if you have poor eyesight, the larger display might take precedence; if sheer mobility is key, the smaller model will get the nod...for your situation. The ideal laptop, of course, would have a 20" LCD while weighing half an ounce and fitting in your pocket...but since this would break the laws of physics, I don't see it happening any time soon. :)
"The only reason why there aren't any viruses for OS X is 'cus no one wants to bother writing viruses for Macs!"
There's been tons of silliness written about this topic lately, with people arguing about whether OS X remains virus-free due to inherently better security or simply due to its low profile in the marketplace. Personally, I believe that the answer is some of both, but that's not important; the bottom line remains this: In the end, it doesn't matter--the fact remains that, at this time, for WHATEVER reason, there are currently no viruses which directly affect OS X, period; and, while this was a minor selling point a few years back, virus-succeptibility and other security issues have shot up to the top of the priority list in many purchasers' minds, making this a MAJOR selling point for Mac systems today. If and when this situation changes measurably, I'll be certain to update the Shootouts to reflect the new reality.
"How can you possibly claim that iXXX for the Mac is a better piece of software than MSYYY for the PC? Aren't software comparisons subjective?"
All of the DATA listed is, to the best of my knowledge, completely objective and accurate. The sole exception to this are the Processor Performance "equivalency" numbers; read the Processor Notes page for a detailed explanation. However, in a few instances, I was unable to find the correct information even after calling the company directly. These are noted with ???'s.
The WINNERS (bold-faced) in some areas are common-sense in many cases (a 60 GB hard drive is obviously better than a 40 GB hard drive for capacity, though it may lose in the speed field if it's 5400 RPM vs. 7200). However, in other cases--especially the software fields--the "winners" are debatable and MAY BE A MATTER OF OPINION.
The above restated: If you don't agree with my calls on these comparisons, feel free to highlight your own. YOUR MILEAGE MAY VARY.
"I shelled out $X,XXX on YYY computer based on your recommendation, and (I hate it)/(the specs are different)! Will you reimburse me?"
Nope. I have done my best to configure the various systems compared as accurately as possible, but it is possible that some data may be inaccurate, or (more likely) has changed since the time the comparison was done. In addition, while I feel I've done a reasonably good job of giving credit where due in each field, the "best of" ratings are STRICTLY MY OWN OPINION. I take NO responsibility for ANY purchase decision made based on these comparisons. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. MAKE YOUR OWN DECISIONS.
"I see that you've generated handy printable PDF-format versions of some of the shootouts. Can I use these to convince my family/friends/co-workers/boss to change their minds about what computer to purchase?"
Certainly, that's what they're there for! Feel free to print out the PDFs (or, for that matter, the HTML-only versions) of the shootouts to use for your own purposes. HOWEVER, it must be stressed that 1) the company logos & system photos are copyrighted to the respective companies; and 2) again, I am NOT an official representative of any of the manufacturers represented, and should not be considered an official source of information.
"I have a legitimate bone to pick, a factual error to correct, a legitimate question to ask (which hasn't been covered here), a useful suggestion for fields to add/delete, or just want to speak my mind in a rational, pleasant manner. What should I do?"
Fantastic; I love this kind of feedback, even if it's critical. Feel free to leave a comment, or you can e-mail me directly if you'd prefer to keep it private.
"I have nothing useful to contribute, but I'd prefer to insult you personally, rant illegibly, and/or have completely ignored everything written above. What should I do?"
I'll give you three guesses, and the first two don't count. :)
