TCO has been touted by MAC for many years. Alas, it is easy to slant
numbers to promote an argument for either platform. Whenever a truely
independent researcher looks at the numbers, it seems that the validity of
the TCO argument evaporates into a dead heat.
What is often overlooked is that "average" numbers don't tell the whole
story. My studio isn't populated with examples of "average" workstations.
I carefully research the hardware & software choices I make. I pay a
(usually) small premium upfront for the parts that are considered reliable.
The result of being an educated consumer is that I greatly reduce the odds
of having to fill anything in on that "support personel" line. I have
stayed with PC this last round of upgrades because this equation has
allowed me to buy a more powerful machine (over the then current top of the
line MAC)... for less money.... which has remained reliable.... and (most
importantly!) was significantly more up-gradable than the Apple offering.
This last point has weighed quite strongly in my choices over the last
Buying a PC is no different than buying a car. If you simply go with the
pop offering, you get middle of the road performance and you better buy
into that extended warranty.
> Often Macs have a higher initial purchase price, though this has
>become less of an issue over the last several years, especially on the high
>end. In fact many times these days Mac portables and PowerMacs actually
>have a lower cost than equivalent PCs. (Equivalent being the key word here.
>A PowerMac G5 can not be compared to a bargain consumer PC) However, all
>the studies I've seen (and no, they weren't all paid for by Apple) show
>that Macs are significantly less expensive when you look at the total cost
>of ownership over the life of the computer, and that ultimately Macs give
>you a higher return on investment. Jeremy Stoller
>Senior Graphic Artist
>California Science Center
>[log in to unmask]
>From: SciArt-L Discussion List-for Natural Science Illustration- on behalf
>of William Smith
>Reply To: [log in to unmask]
>Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 4:46 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Mac or PC? What about costs? In Australia any
>peripheral or accessory seems to cost
>more for a mac as well as initial outlay and upgrade costs? >
>> From: SciArt-L Discussion List-for Natural Science Illustration-
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Britt Griswold
>> Sent: Monday, 17 May 2004 11:51 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Mac or PC?
>>>Yes, I would like to work on location in a studio of
>>> so that are all mac?
>>>But, as jeremy said, I dont want to buy photoshop for
>>>both the systems though and I never got to grips with
>>> Macs seem to be good for graphical
>>>software, but its my perception that the PC is a
>>>better all round computer.
>>> Looks like its leaning towards me keeping the mac
>>>now (which is dissapointing, I was looking forward to
>>>going on a spending spree in PC world!)
>> PC can be bad or good. Macs can be bad or good. It all depends on
>> what you want to do, who you will use for tech support (if anyone).
>> You will find 3 programs that will do a job badly for every one you
>> will find on a mac. IE there are a lot of programs available for the
>> PC that have nothing to do with the Graphics industry. You will find
>> most mainstream software available on both platforms. You will find
>> more viruses on a PC. You will find more specialized scientific
>> software on a Unix or Lunix box. A Mac will run this as well. If all
>> depends on what you are comfortable with. These days you will find
>> many shops using both. The Mac is doing very well in certain market
>> segments, but you can always find someone using a PC anywhere.
>> Britt Griswold/WMAP Project
>> Infonetic/Maslow Media Group
>> NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center
>> Code 685 Bldg. 21 Rm 063
>> Greenbelt, MD 20771-0001
>> (301) 286-3381
>> (301) 286-1617 FAX
>> (301) 286-7230 FAX
>> [log in to unmask]
>Disclaimer If you have received this message in error, you are asked to
>inform the sender as quickly as possible and delete this message and any
>copies of this message from your computer system network. Unless
>otherwise stated, this e-mail, including attachments represents the views
>of the sender and not the views of the Environmental Protection Agency.
>Any use of this e-mail could harm your computer system.