Jump to content


Just priced a fully loaded MacPro...


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   Marsden11

Marsden11

    Posting Prodigy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,078 posts

Posted 10 August 2006 - 10:09 AM

Two 3GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon8GB (4 x 2GB)500GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s500GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s500GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s500GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/sNVIDIA Quadro FX 4500 512MB, Stereo 3D (2 x dual-link DVI)Apple Cinema HD Display (30" flat panel)Apple Cinema HD Display (30" flat panel)2 x SuperDrivesBoth Bluetooth 2.0+EDR and AirPort ExtremeFibre Channel CardApple Keyboard and Mighty Mouse - U.S. EnglishMac OS X - U.S. EnglishMac OS X Server (Unlimited-Client)With tax... $16,000 +That is a pretty heavy premium for Intel hardware.

#2 OFFLINE   bjf123

bjf123

    Thread Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted 10 August 2006 - 10:33 AM

I tried to configure a similar Dell.  I couldn't get 8MB of RAM, two 30" Apple Cinema displays, Bluetooth, a second optical drive, or an unlimited client copy of Windows Server 2003.  This came in about $11,000.  Looking at Dell's server options, each 25 client user license for Windows Server 2003 adds about $2,500.  Add any real quantity of users and it would quickly take the price over $16,000.
Golf is a relatively simple game, played by reasonably intelligent people, stupidly.

#3 OFFLINE   Temmu

Temmu

    The Assimilator

  • Forum MVP
  • 12,543 posts

Posted 10 August 2006 - 05:40 PM

amazing.  i could buy 8 pc's and do distributed computing for that...  of course, wouldn't cover the cost of the large screens...
Posted Image

#4 OFFLINE   Marsden11

Marsden11

    Posting Prodigy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,078 posts

Posted 10 August 2006 - 06:31 PM

I'm looking right now at HP and Linux flavors seem to cost more than Windows. ExampleRHEL 4 AS STD with Media; 3 YR RHN Subscription, 9X5 Unlimited tele support, Not Installed, $4,047.00Novell SLES 9, Value Pack with Media, 3 YR SUSE portal; 9X5 25 incidents 1 YR support; Not installed $7,573.00Windows 2003 Server R2 Standard X64 Edition 25 Cals, Not installed $3,199.00What HP offers that Apple doesn't is hardware that blows the MacPro out of the water.If money was no object, how about a Quad 885 Opteron with dual cores running at 2.6GHZ per core with up to 64GB of memory?

#5 OFFLINE   Neil P

Neil P

    Resident Pyromaniac

  • Forum Moderators
  • 2,254 posts

Posted 10 August 2006 - 06:38 PM

What does it cost if you remove the two 30" Cinema HD displays?

#6 OFFLINE   Marsden11

Marsden11

    Posting Prodigy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,078 posts

Posted 10 August 2006 - 07:05 PM

$6K

#7 OFFLINE   Marsden11

Marsden11

    Posting Prodigy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,078 posts

Posted 11 August 2006 - 12:51 AM

I'll make one last point here and move on...Apple is asking $400 per 500GB SATA HD.The other day on C|Net they were adversising 300GB SATA HDs for under $100 ea.For $400 I could have 1.2TG of storage without the Apple "tax."

#8 OFFLINE   Temmu

Temmu

    The Assimilator

  • Forum MVP
  • 12,543 posts

Posted 11 August 2006 - 02:15 AM

no one implied apple was inexpesive! :)
Posted Image

#9 OFFLINE   Scot

Scot

    Administrator

  • Forum Admins
  • 2,019 posts

Posted 11 August 2006 - 09:47 PM

Actually the press *has* implied that this new MacPro has more value, and I think the press is right. There's no way to comparably compare this. But I think the MacPro offers more value for the $$$ in this high-end workstation/server segment than any Windows or Linux box. I agree it isn't an out and out slam dunk -- depending on what you want. But I believe, for example, that you can add non-Apple hard drives to this system, for example -- or you will be able to in six months.To me, Apple's moves are very interesting to me right now. I'm a whole lot more interested in the end-user hardware with the perfect ability with Parallels (or soon, also, VMware) virtualization to run Windows stuff. I'm a Windows guy. And I know a lot about Vista. I've been testing it for three years now. Vista is a good OS. But I have a feeling that in an all-other-things-being-equal-world comparison, ie assuming that Macs were the same price as Windows hardware and they could run all the same apps as Windows, Mac OS X 10.5 will be clearly superior to Vista.But those other two catches are a killer for Apple: they're pricey (especially their notebooks) and they have a limited software set.Even so, i see myself getting more and more involved with Macs in the years to come.-- Scot
Scot Finnie, Business & Technology Writer, Editor (that's me in the upper left corner)

#10 OFFLINE   bjf123

bjf123

    Thread Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted 12 August 2006 - 03:45 PM

View PostScot, on Aug 11 2006, 09:47 PM, said:

But those other two catches are a killer for Apple: they're pricey (especially their notebooks) and they have a limited software set.
I'm not sure if either of those statements are completely accurate.  The perception is certainly there that Macs are more expensive and that there's no software.  One of the problems is the adds you see for a Dell or HP laptop for $799, while the low end Mac laptop is over $1,000.  However, if you configure a Dell or HP with the same options as the Mac, the price difference gets much smaller, or even disappears.  As for software, I have, in multiple forums, asked this same question.  For the average home user, what programs are available for Windows that are not available for the Mac?  I'll concede that there are more games and business apps available for Windows.  I'm talking strictly the average home user.  Maybe I'm being overly simplistic, but to me, the average home user does e-mail, surfs the 'Net, does music, digital photos, home finances and taxes, etc.
Golf is a relatively simple game, played by reasonably intelligent people, stupidly.

#11 OFFLINE   teacher

teacher

    Acute Mac

  • Honorary Moderators
  • 13,854 posts

Posted 12 August 2006 - 06:10 PM

As a first time, Mac user meaning someone that is for the first time using it for everything and not just playing with one, I have found the software that comes with it is very complete for the average user.  I compare the amount of software as to be the same as a good Linux distro - something of everything.  I have found a couple of holes - mainly do to som especific tasks:1.  Garage band is great for recording podcasts but it saves as a .band or an .m4a format.  I want either .ogg or .mp3.  I can use the same program I use in Linux and Windows - Audacity.  It is there.2.  I installed NeoOffice to use for word processing and the like.  I have OfficeMac but have not been able to bring myself to actually install it on my Mac.  As far as I am aware, this Mac is 100% Microsoft free.3.  I am not 100% satisfied with Safari.  Someone posted on my blog a hint that I try SafariStand.  I have installed it according to directions but have not found how to use it yet.  I have installed Firefox which I love ot use wtih all the extensions to tailor it to my specific needs.4.  Mail has a small quirk in displaying plain text emails.  My notifications from my ISP about possibly spam must be converted in format to be viewable.  I must convert it to Alternate Plain Text which I am not sure how it is different.5.  The iChat program covers the basics but does not seem to do IRC.  Thus I have installed XChat Aqua which does everything for me that XChat or KSirc did in Linux6.  Eventually I will have to insall Quicken and my tax programs but I am delaying on Quicken until the bundle deals come out with TurboTax.  Why pay the stand alone price now?  I can run it on my tower or hubby's shuttle in Windows until then.That is about all I ahve found missing at this point.  It really is very complete.  When you figure out that you do not need to buy additional software it does come out to about the same price.  B)
Teacher
Beach Bum Extraordinaire

#12 OFFLINE   Temmu

Temmu

    The Assimilator

  • Forum MVP
  • 12,543 posts

Posted 12 August 2006 - 10:18 PM

i've done work for small publishing houses & they all uniformly use mac's (text/graphics).  also noted macs are superior for generating movies.  i think a windows pc would smoke to death trying to keep up with macs for that.
Posted Image

#13 OFFLINE   bjf123

bjf123

    Thread Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted 14 August 2006 - 08:35 AM

View Postteacher, on Aug 12 2006, 06:10 PM, said:

3.  I am not 100% satisfied with Safari.  Someone posted on my blog a hint that I try SafariStand.  I have installed it according to directions but have not found how to use it yet.  I have installed Firefox which I love ot use wtih all the extensions to tailor it to my specific needs.
When Safari first came out, there were a number of websites I visit that didn't display or function properly, so I installed Firefox, too.  They keep improving Safari, so I find I'm using Firefox less and less.
Golf is a relatively simple game, played by reasonably intelligent people, stupidly.

#14 OFFLINE   Scot

Scot

    Administrator

  • Forum Admins
  • 2,019 posts

Posted 15 August 2006 - 08:54 PM

I have to come back on you and reiterate that Macs do cost more upfront, and the available library of software is much, much smaller. This is not a perception thing -- at all. It's a reality.And if y'all want, I'll take on that argument and we can prove it on a point by point basis. Price out virtually any dual-core Intel machine comparable to a MacBook Pro, and I think you'll see what I mean. What's more, the Macs are low resolution by comparison. I've purchased MBP 15.4", a Dell Inspiron E1505 dualcore 15.4", and Lenovo ThinkPad T60 dualcore 15" this year. The MBP (which has since come down a bit in price) was by far and away the most expensive, by almost $500 -- and that's with a very limited warranty (I didn't get AppleCare). Both the Dell and Lenovo came with three-year warranty. Apple charges more for comparable hardware.About the resolution, the MBP 15" is 1440x900, while the Dell is 1680x1050 and the ThinkPad T60 is 1450x1050. Remember, higher-res LCDs cost more than lower-res ones (of the same physical size). Apple clearly has the highest margins of any end-user PC maker (well, except, perhaps, for some of those high-end Windows gaming boxes). For me, the MBP 15"'s resolution is too small. I'll be moving up to the 17" MBP whenever I can scrape together $2,800 (which isn't likely to be soon). And note that, Apple delivers 1680x1050 on their 17" display, while most Windows notebook makers offer it on a less expensive 15.4" LCD. I'm not saying it isn't worth it, by the way. But I think we have to face the facts.I also agree with Julia that, while the available library of software is much smaller for the Mac, the quality of the software is very high, and the overall selection for the Mac is better now than it was the last time I owned several Macs (in the late 90s). And the software that comes with most Mac systems is a better bundle than what Microsoft delivers. That's a big reason why Microosft is upping the ante in Vista with its onboard software bundle.Finally, back to the original point of this thread, when I price out a Mac Pro dual-core 2.66GHz machine not as a server but as a high-end single user machine, it comes in at about $2,900 including AppleCare (but not including sales tax). I don't think you'll find a dual-core Xeon Wintel box for a whole lot less than that. I didn't snag that many options, just networking and 2GB of RAM. But the way its configured by default is plenty enough for most people. It is a bargain -- especially in Mac Land.-- Scot
Scot Finnie, Business & Technology Writer, Editor (that's me in the upper left corner)

#15 OFFLINE   teacher

teacher

    Acute Mac

  • Honorary Moderators
  • 13,854 posts

Posted 15 August 2006 - 09:34 PM

Apple wanted an extra $300 for that extra stick of RAM.  Compusa has it on sale for $99 this week.  I plan on ordering my second stick.  I stopped by a store while in VA last weekend an tried to pick one up but that store was out.  Yes it is a big hardware investment pricewise.  However, software can be a completely different matter depending upon whether or not you go with open source or proprietary software.
Teacher
Beach Bum Extraordinaire

#16 OFFLINE   bjf123

bjf123

    Thread Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 08:43 AM

View PostScot, on Aug 15 2006, 08:54 PM, said:

I have to come back on you and reiterate that Macs do cost more upfront, and the available library of software is much, much smaller. This is not a perception thing -- at all. It's a reality.
I'll agree that Macs are more expensive, in general.  However, the price difference is not as large for similarly configured systems from Dell, HP, etc, as the Mac-haters would have you believe.  At the same time, and this is slightly off topic, Windows (especially XP) doesn't crash multiple times every day like the Win-haters claim.  I'd have to do some digging, but I remember seeing a price comparison analysis that showed the Mac to be within $100 when you get the specs about the same.  As for software, I'll agree the library for Windows is larger, especially if you count games, business, and niche markets.  However, I stand by my statement that for the average home user, there's nothing available for Windows that isn't available for the Mac.  There is clearly a difference in the number of options available.  I'm making these next numbers up for illustrative purposes.  Maybe there are 20 photo editing programs for Windows and only 5 for the Mac, or 15 chat options versus 6 for the Mac.  My point is that the programs are there.  Of course, there are hundreds of anti virus, anti trojan, anti spyware titles available for Windows and only a handful for the Mac.   :'( As for Julia's pointing out how much Apple wants for a memory stick, I agree completely.  Never buy memory from Apple.  You'll pay in insane premium.
Golf is a relatively simple game, played by reasonably intelligent people, stupidly.

#17 OFFLINE   ross549

ross549

    I live here.

  • Forum MVP
  • 9,185 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 01:58 PM

Most computer manufacturers will charge an arm and a leg for memory that fits their systems.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy it.
Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

#18 OFFLINE   Marsden11

Marsden11

    Posting Prodigy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,078 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 05:28 PM

But I can do something a Mac user can't do... I can build my own system and undercut the the name brands with their "taxes" tacked on to everyday parts. At that point the Mac can't touch a home built system...

#19 OFFLINE   Neil P

Neil P

    Resident Pyromaniac

  • Forum Moderators
  • 2,254 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 05:35 PM

Can it run OS X?

#20 OFFLINE   teacher

teacher

    Acute Mac

  • Honorary Moderators
  • 13,854 posts

Posted 16 August 2006 - 08:57 PM

I bet not.  Then again, we do know it could run Linux.  :)
Teacher
Beach Bum Extraordinaire

#21 OFFLINE   bjf123

bjf123

    Thread Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted 17 August 2006 - 08:32 AM

View PostMarsden11, on Aug 16 2006, 05:28 PM, said:

But I can do something a Mac user can't do... I can build my own system and undercut the the name brands with their "taxes" tacked on to everyday parts. At that point the Mac can't touch a home built system...
You'll get no argument from me on that one.  People who want to build their own system and constantly upgrade, tweak, modify, and have the latest and greatest component in, their system, will always do better with a Windows / Linux system.
Golf is a relatively simple game, played by reasonably intelligent people, stupidly.

#22 OFFLINE   Scot

Scot

    Administrator

  • Forum Admins
  • 2,019 posts

Posted 17 August 2006 - 11:07 PM

bjf123,So it sounds like we're not so far apart. I agree with all your statements (esp. never buy Apple memory! I don't either. Check out DMS).The one thing I still don't agree with you about is the delta on price. Again, having just purchased two Wintel notebooks which I purposely speced out as close to the new MacBook Pros as possible, the price delta is a lot more than $100. When you include the three-year warranty, the price delta between my MBP 15 (with a much cheaper screen) was about $750 over my Dell Inspiron E1505. [Note: That delta is comparing with today's cost of the MBP 15; I actually paid $200 more when I bought it in April. I bought the Dell only a few weeks later.] Same exact CPU, RAM, hard drive, and the video is nearly identical, with the same amount of video RAM. The Dell's price (nearly $1900 delivered with tax and 2GB of RAM) came with media center hardware and software. The ThinkPad I bought had a smaller delta, almost $500.Now, when you get into desktops, the delta is smaller. But even there, when you factor in the $250 AppleCare, it's more than $100. This is a lot tougher to quantify. I can't reliably debate this price point. It's complicated. But it's my feelilng that the delta is smaller. And, I agree, a lot of people argue this point without really doing their homework.-- Scot
Scot Finnie, Business & Technology Writer, Editor (that's me in the upper left corner)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users