Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Is the Dell XPS One Better than the Apple iMac?

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the dell-box-better-than-an-osx-one dept.

Desktops (Apple) 627

An anonymous reader writes "The Apple iMac is probably the standard all-in-one desktop computer. Great operating system, built-in software and design around solid, but pretty normal, hardware guts. According to Walter Mossberg, there's a new kid in town that not only matches it but is 'sightly ahead': the Dell XPS One. His latest review is already causing the usual suspects to weigh in. Mossberg says it is a better machine, but Vista and its built-in software make it inferior than Apple iMac's Leopard and iLife suite. Would you choose the better hardware of the Dell XPS One -which is more expensive- or the elegant design and software of the Apple iMac?"

cancel ×

627 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

My Choice (2, Interesting)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 6 years ago | (#21832960)

"Would you choose the better hardware of the Dell XPS One -which is more expensive- or the elegant design and software of the Apple iMac?"
 
Personally, I'm still choosing neither. Why? Because I can't afford them and I don't spend enough time using a desktop machine to justify it if I could. I put money into my laptops, because that's where I live and work. For my desktop, I want a big case that I can dig around and play in. And for the most part it's all cheap stuff. Would an imac be nice? Sure. Just like a Mercedes would be a lot nicer than my '95 Taurus. But the Taurus and my gateway case with a motherboard I got on special at Frys do the job - and that is enough.
 
When family our friends are looking for a new home pc - if they are looking for something in the price range of the imac - I encourage them to go that route without hesitation.

Re:My Choice (3, Funny)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833164)

Mercedes? The iMac is a Toyota Camry. Maybe you're thinking of the G5?

Personally? (4, Insightful)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 6 years ago | (#21832972)

If I could only choose between the 2 of them, I'd go with the cheaper one. If I could choose anything else, I'd never get an all-in-one computer. I just hate having to part with a good LCD monitor every time I want to upgrade or switch computers.

Re:Personally? (1)

JavaLord (680960) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833370)

If I could only choose between the 2 of them, I'd go with the cheaper one. If I could choose anything else, I'd never get an all-in-one computer. I just hate having to part with a good LCD monitor every time I want to upgrade or switch computers.

How long does a computer last you? I typically find myself looking for a new monitor when I want a new computer too (which is about every 4 years).

As for the iMac vs the Dell One, I'd go with the iMac. The iMac runs OS X and Windows XP out of the box, The Dell would probably require some hacking around to get OS X running.

Re:Personally? (4, Insightful)

orclevegam (940336) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833424)

It's funny, I find myself in the exact opposite situation. My monitors tend to last a rather long time, but I need to upgrade my PC fairly regularly. Of course I also spend a load of money to get a really nice monitor when I do replace it (usually close to or more then the cost of my current computer).

Re:Personally? (2, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833550)

I probably upgrade my computers far more often than my monitor, but then again, when I'm ready for a new monitor (like when I went form CRT to LCD, or 17" LCD to 19" LCD, or normal LCD to widescreen), I'm often not looking to replace my computer either. They are essentially 2 entirely different impulse purchases. That's why I peronsally hate any computer that combines the monitor and main system unit, ESPECIALLY in the case of the iMac where it's so obvious that they could have split them for almost no additional cost. The iMac specs are really what most of the computing world is after, but I (like I'm sure many more) don't want a monitor tied to it. The Mac Mini is underpowered and the Mac Pro is overpowered.

I know it's almost hopeless but I still continue to wish for a regular little tower from Apple with a decent (and upgradeable) graphics card, a single Core 2 Duo processor, and a decent sized SATA drive (500gb?), with no monitor duct taped on. Put those out for around $899 and I'll be ready to jump on the Apple (hardware - I already run OS X on a homebuilt machine) bandwagon.

Re:Personally? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21833460)

Yup. I chose an iMac 24" 1 year ago. Now, I have Leopard, maxed the memory at 3GB. Trying to give it a fair shake. I'm now in hindsight wishing I had gotten the separate display and built a new PC. OSX is kind of cool, I don't use iLife, don't care about that crap. The differences in BSD to linux are enough to really annoy me sometimes. I saw stuff working on FreeBSD that didn't work on Mac's version of BSD. I couldn't switch to bootcamp and just use windows cause the power management won't put the display to sleep (I can't just hit the power button on the display like I used to). I looked on the net for answers, only saw other people with the same problem, but no solution.

I miss it when I had linux as my main server/desktop and another PC running windows for everything else. The style of the Mac is nice, but it's skin deep. In the end I see it usually getting in my way and me trying to think of how to work around the problem since I just spent so much money trying to immerse myself in this great mac experience. For proprietary software, there's nothing on the Mac that I use that isn't also on Windows. I know Windows suffers malware trouble, but realistically it is possible and actually pretty easy to run a clean Windows machine.

So at least from my experience (and BTW did I mention I hate finder and iTunes too?)... Skip the Mac. If you're a techie nerd, skip the all-in-one, or consider carefully before you jump on it. If it breaks, the whole unit has to go back, if you upgrade you lose the display too, and at least in the case of the iMac, there are no additional inputs for the display. Normal monitors now come with 2 DVI, HDMI, composite, and other inputs. That means you can plug in 2 computers, PS3, or TV and stuff into the display and use it for more than just your desktop. I think for as much as I spent on my Mac I should be happy with it. Sucks to be me since I'm not. I'm not saying it's horrible either, but some of the Apple ways of doing things just don't do it for me and I often times don't have an option or a convenient option as a work around. There's just enough minor things that don't quite work as expected it makes me dream about the kind of PC(s) I could have been running if I had gone the other route. I'll never buy a Mac again. Big $3000 or maybe a bit more w/ software and addons OOOOOPS... :(

Hmm... (5, Informative)

pwnies (1034518) | more than 6 years ago | (#21832982)

I don't quite understand why they rate the XPS one higher than the iMac.
First off, let's compare tech specs.

iMac (Low-end) $1199
20" wsxga+ screen
1GB Ram
250GB HDD
Dual Layer DVD burner
ATI Radeon HD 2400XT (128MB)
802.11n Wireless

XPS ONE (Low-End) $1399
20" wsxga+ screen
2GB Ram
250GB HDD
DVD burner Integrated Video
"WiFi" (doesn't say which)

Now notice that the only thing the dell beats the mac in is memory. However, for $150 you can upgrade to the same amount when you order an iMac (or get a stick on newegg for half that), and have a machine that still is $50 LESS (and with a real video card, a dual layer burner, and guaranteed 802.11n). Gizmodo also already agreed that Leopard was the better operating system (see the link in the article below the video). So this begs me to ask, why do they consider the more expensive, less equipped, and weaker operating system computer better than the other?

Re:Hmm... (4, Funny)

pwnies (1034518) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833026)

On a side note, I can't believe I just made an argument that a Mac was cheaper from a hardware standpoint.
*head asplode*

Re:Hmm... (-1, Flamebait)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833224)

I can't believe that you conceded the point that Leopard is better than Vista. Even the all-out vomitfest that is Vista blows mac out of the water.

Re:Hmm... (1)

smilindog2000 (907665) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833388)

I think the article is only arguing that the Dell hardware is nicer, not cheaper, nor a better overall computer. I can believe it. The iMacs look to me like they could use a face-lift soon. They seem a bit clunky for an Apple product. Dell simply has them beat on style. I think the brains at Apple have been off designing phones and iPods lately, not iMacs.

Re:Hmm... (1)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833480)

I think the article is only arguing that the Dell hardware is nicer, not cheaper, nor a better overall computer.

By "nicer" you mean less powerful but in a prettier case? I wonder if the reviewers took into account hardware reliability, as Apple was the top rated vendor on consumer reports last survey, while Dell desktops came in about middle of the road, at best.

Re:Hmm... (2, Informative)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833556)

Just looking at it I don't see where you get "clunky"...They both just look like bloated monitors to me. The only difference is, one's black, and the other one is white.

Surface appearances aside, it's time to talk about the quality of the internal hardware...Apple hardware vs Dell hardware.

Tossing all OS considerations, I think that Apple's hardware is traditionally much more robust and reliable than Dell's has been. I'm working in a shop that always buys Dell PCs and Apple iMacs. We have more problems with the Dells, hands down, than we do with the Apples. All other things being equal, I'd take an Apple.

I doubt I'll ever be in a position to try out a side by side comparison, because we're not buying Dell anymore, and (as one of the above posters mentioned) we don't like tossing a good monitor whenever the computer goes south, so we've been buying Mac Mini's since they came out as an option.

Still, if I was offered one or the other, I'd take the Apple.

Re:Hmm... (0)

PowerEdge (648673) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833046)

Because most people can't and won't use Leopard for their day to day work and amusement. When XP first came out everyone exclaimed how much better OSX was, look where we are at today.

They are saying the same thing about Vista, but time will show Vista, post SP1, will be adopted widely.

I, myself, am looking forward to an Ubuntu powered XPS One.

Re:Hmm... (3, Insightful)

jdray (645332) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833060)

I didn't think (from reading the article) that Mossberg thought the Dell was better, just that there was a reasonable all-in-one option for someone who wants to run Windows. He neglected to mention that such people could just buy a copy of Vista (or its XP upgrade) and load it on their Mac hardware. The cost differential with the Dell probably isn't that different.

Re:Hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21833360)

so.. even with a copy of vista... and with the same amount of ram... its still cheaper, plus the dell xps looks like shit compared to the imac this is a no brainer...

Re:Hmm... (2, Informative)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833064)

The XPS One come in four basic configurations: The Essential One, The Music One, The Performance One, The Entertainment One. I'm unsure which one you compared to, but depending on which one you get, you also get various hardware over that of the iMac, as far as I can tell. For example, The Entertainment One comes with a Blu-ray drive. The Music One comes with wireless headphones, etc. All configurations come with a TV tuner and remote control.

Re:Hmm... (3, Informative)

pwnies (1034518) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833120)

I compared both of the low end models (thus the parenthesized "low-end" after each of the titles).

Re:Hmm... (5, Informative)

Fear the Clam (230933) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833078)

So this begs me to ask, why do they consider the more expensive, less equipped, and weaker operating system computer better than the other?

The Dell comes with a TV tuner. People who like Dells also like American Idol and Fox news.

Re:Hmm... (2, Informative)

pwnies (1034518) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833166)

Ahh I see. Didn't notice the TV tuner in the spec sheets.
For those with mod points, mod Fear the Clam's comment up. It's a vital point I overlooked.

Re:Hmm... (1)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833344)

Not sure why they modded you troll, unless it's possible to mod: "Funny, Troll"

Re:Hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21833520)

"So this begs me to ask, why do they consider the more expensive, less equipped, and weaker operating system computer better than the other?

The Dell comes with a TV tuner. People who like Dells also like American Idol and Fox news."

Does that mean the Mac comes with lube?

Re:Hmm... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21833254)

So this begs me to ask, why do they consider the more expensive, less equipped, and weaker operating system computer better than the other?
So they can tweak Mac fanboys and drive page hits?

Re:Hmm... (5, Informative)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833314)

From TFA:

I still recommend the iMac over the XPS One for several reasons other than hardware design.
Funny how a misleading slashdot summary can make everyone in the thread think that Walt Mossberg is saying the XPS is better than an iMac.

Re:Hmm... (1)

strikeleader (937501) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833334)

guaranteed 802.11n

Is 802.11n ratified?

Re:Hmm... (1)

pwnies (1034518) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833432)

Not yet no. The 802.11n here is most likely based off of the draft 2.0 revisions. The official version still hasn't been agreed upon yet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11#802.11n

Re:Hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21833342)

he's comparing the hardware design, not the specs. but i guess you didn't watch the video.

Do some homework (2, Informative)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833412)

Before you jump on the specs, find out what actually comes in the box. The Dell has a faster CPU; 2.2GHz vs 2.0 in the Mac, as well as a tv tuner, more RAM, and A/B/G/N wireless. The video card? The 2400XT 128MB is something of a joke card and not really worth bringing into this argument. Integrated video will stand up just fine comparatively. The rest of the specs are the same, and yet you are here insisting the Mac has better hardware? Try again.

Re:Hmm... (2, Interesting)

jo42 (227475) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833504)

The one thing that sucks goatse's backside on the 20" iMac is that the LCD is 6-bit (256K colors). They use a form of dithering to fake more colors. Is the XPS LCD 6-bit or 8-bit (16M colors)?

Re:Hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21833534)

So this begs me to ask, why do they consider the more expensive, less equipped, and weaker operating system computer better than the other?

This begs me to ask, why did you not read the article, which stated:

In fact, the Dell XPS One is the first Windows all-in-one desktop I've tested that I believe matches or exceeds the iMac in hardware design. That's no small feat, especially coming from Dell.

Unlike the Apple, for example, the Dell has a built-in slot for camera memory cards. It comes standard with a wireless keyboard and mouse, which cost extra on the iMac. Its screen can be turned off with the touch of a button without turning off the computer itself. Its USB and headphone ports are arrayed conveniently on the side, instead of mainly at the rear, as on the iMac.

And, when you wave your hand in front of the black border to the right of the screen on the XPS One, a set of blue, back-lit touch controls magically appear for controlling the playback of music or video. They go away after a few seconds. The Dell also comes with a free year of 10 gigabytes of online backup.


You could also have read his recommendation:

I still recommend the iMac over the XPS One for several reasons other than hardware design.


Which was followed by an explanation of 1. he believes that Leopard is better than Vista and iLife is better than the Dell-ware 2. Leopard is more secure and 3. the iMac costs less.

So let's not pretend that the content of the article begged you to ask anything. It didn't.

Linux support? (0, Offtopic)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#21832988)

I wonder how well this system's hardware is supported in a typical desktop-oriented Linux distro?

Especially more bleeding edge stuff like the Blu-ray drive, but also other things, like the TV tuner.

Because if it's pretty much OK there, then I know which OS could be a nice alternative if you dislike Windows.

Re:Linux support? (1)

CarAnalogy (1191053) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833450)

As much as I prefer linux myself, it has nothing to do with this article. It's about the systems as they are out of the box, without any additional techie work.

The same goes for those who commented you could run Vista on the mac.

Dell XPS One (3, Funny)

bzudo (1151979) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833000)

I choose the Dell XPS One. If I'm going to have to throw the whole thing out once it becomes obsolete, I'm going to buy the one that's going to last the longest.

is hell better than caring about/for each other? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21833016)

some would believe there is a valid choice. time will tell.

we're intending for the corepirate nazis to give up/fail even further, in attempting to control the 'weather', & a # of other things/events.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=video+cloud+spraying [google.com]

the creators will prevail. as it has always been.

corepirate nazi execrable costs outweigh benefits
(Score:-)mynuts won, the king is a fink)
by ourselves on everyday 24/7

as there are no benefits, just more&more death/debt & disruption.

fortunately there's an 'army' of light bringers, coming yOUR way.

the little ones/innocents must/will be protected.

after the big flash, ALL of yOUR imaginary 'borders' may blur a bit?

for each of the creators' innocents harmed in any way, there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/us, as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile, will not be available after the big flash.

vote with (what's left in) yOUR wallet. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi glowbull warmongering execrable.

some of US should consider ourselves very fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate.

it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc....

as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis.

concern about the course of events that will occur should the life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order.

'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking nazi felon greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

meanwhile, the life0cidal philistines continue on their path of death, debt, & disruption for most of US;

gov. bush denies health care for the little ones

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/03/bush.veto/index.html [cnn.com]

whilst demanding/extorting billions to paint more targets on the bigger kids

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/12/bush.war.funding/index.html [cnn.com]

& pretending that it isn't happening here

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3086937.ece [timesonline.co.uk]

all is not lost/forgotten/forgiven.

(yOUR elected) president al gore (deciding not to wait for the much anticipated 'lonesome al answers yOUR questions' interview here on /.) continues to attempt to shed some light on yOUR foibles;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3046116.ece [timesonline.co.uk]

"Standard all-in-one desktop computer?" (1, Troll)

Malevolent Tester (1201209) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833032)

What's Apple's market share again? 3.1416 % or something like that?
That's like calling wind power the standard energy generation method.

Re:"Standard all-in-one desktop computer?" (0)

Ffakr (468921) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833218)

Bwahaha, that's pretty funny.
No really, it is.

Just a tip though, Apple's market share is 6.8% or 8.1% U.S. share and apparently growing faster than any other vendor. Hmn, they're apparently a top 5 World PC manufacturer and a top 3 U.S. manufacturer.
Must suck when you irrationally hate something you've probably never tried only to find out it's succeeding, in fact doing just swimmingly.

ffakr.

Re:"Standard all-in-one desktop computer?" (0, Troll)

Malevolent Tester (1201209) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833302)

So 8.1% market share makes something the standard then? Any other Kool-Aid inspired insights to share with us? Perhaps you have the date when the iMothership will appear?

Re:"Standard all-in-one desktop computer?" (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21833416)

That may be 3.1416% for Apple's share of the entire market. But the iMac has got something like 90% of the all-in-one market.

Re:"Standard all-in-one desktop computer?" (4, Insightful)

orclevegam (940336) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833514)

That may be 3.1416% for Apple's share of the entire market. But the iMac has got something like 90% of the all-in-one market.
Yep, nothing like lies, damn lies, and statistics to prop up arguments one way or another. Until fairly recent Apple had 100% of the all-in-one market, because they created it (the market that is, not the concept). It's only just now that some of the others (Dell, Sony, etc.) are starting to put out credible all-in-one systems to compete with the iMac.

Re:"Standard all-in-one desktop computer?" (1)

Cro Magnon (467622) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833470)

I'm sure Apple has a bigger piece of the pi, er I mean pie, than that.

Hmm (0)

TENxOXR (1044052) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833042)

My personal choice would fall with the Dell, in that it presents more options than the Mac does *for what I use a computer for*.

I am not saying that the Mac doesn't have its own usefulness, that it is in some way lesser than the Dell, simply that it can't fulfil all the things that I need to accomplish when I use a computer. For that, I'm willing to pay that little bit more.

Re:Hmm (3, Insightful)

varmittang (849469) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833190)

You know you can take that money you save and buy Windows XP and install it on the Mac. You know you can do that now, right? So why not have the best of both worlds, or even, run Windows programs in the Mac OS using VMware or Parallel software. You can also find software for the Mac to do what you want to do by going to sites like www.versiontracker.com and finding and alternative, or even the same Company makes a Mac version. The quote "for what I use a computer for" doesn't apply anymore.

Re:Hmm (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833488)

You know it's a pain to have multiple OSes on a computer. You know you either have to partition the hard drive for each one, thereby making space management more of a headache, or have it run in a virtual environment and therefore slower and possibly again the terms of the license. Overall, it's more of a pain than I'm willing to put up with to have multiple operating systems on the same computer. I've done it before, it was a good solution at the time, but I don't think I'd go back if I don't absolutely have to.

Re:Hmm (1)

phoebusQ (539940) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833294)

What do you do that the Dell can accomplish better than the Mac? Certainly not gaming, as the Dell has integrated video while the Mac has a discrete graphics solution (and can run Windows if necessary). Certainly not systems administration, or programming, or internet activities...so what exactly?

Neither! (1)

xjimhb (234034) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833052)

Why spend all that money? Buy the "Rebate Special" at Office Depot or wherever, then install Linux - Fedora, Ubuntu, whatever - good chance you'll match the performance of the other two, and at a MUCH LOWER price.

Re:Neither! (2, Informative)

lakeland (218447) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833214)

The imac was not designed for price, it was designed for all-in-one ergonomics, fitting into a lounge setting and all of that. As in, if it isn't all-in-one it really isn't in the running.

Buy a Mac. (5, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833082)

I hate to say it but I think that the Mac is a better solution for most people.
I just told my father to get a Mac.
He is tired of the security problems with his PCs. He has 3 PCs right now. One at his home here, one at his place in North Georgia, and a Laptop.
All he uses his computer for is Email, digital pictures, and paying bills on line.
I could set him up with Ubuntu but where would he find support for it when I am not around? I don't know how good Dell is at Ubuntu support and frankly he isn't the most technical person on the planet.
Apple has figured out what most people want to do with a PC at home and produce a nice bundle that just works.

Re:Buy a Mac. (2, Informative)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833418)

Sounds to me like both you and your dad need to spend five minutes downloading some free programs. With AVG, ZoneAlarm, Spybot, and Firefox, I haven't gotten a single virus or piece of spyware in over three years...except for hardware and software updates, haven't needed to reboot in nearly 8 months, either.

It's extremely easy to secure (and keep secure) a Windows box... While I agree that you shouldn't NEED to, it's still very easy to do...and the best part is, none of the software will cost you a penny. Legally.

Re:Buy a Mac. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21833482)

I would like to get a MAC, but some of the websites I have to use for work and online banking require Internet Explorer. Is there a work around?

Re:Buy a Mac. (1)

phoebusQ (539940) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833516)

Are you sure they require Internet Explorer? Many sites may say Internet Explorer, but don't really require it. I'd investigate.
In the end, you can use a product like VMWare or Parallels to run Windows programs side-by-side with Mac software.
Frankly, I wouldn't use a bank that was dumb enough to use ActiveX.

Re:Buy a Mac. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21833538)

If he's complaining about security issues and all he uses is e-mail, paying bills, and digital pictures...I'm pretty sure he's getting those digital pictures from somewhere you don't want to think about ;)

It's One Better! (3, Funny)

scribblej (195445) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833100)

It goes to eleven.

Hardware? (5, Insightful)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833106)

No one buys a computer just for the hardware. Hardware is pretty useless without software. If someone is only choosing the Dell over a Mac because the hardware is slightly better, then they deserve Vista.

Choose the best tool for the job. If you'll be more productive with OS X, and you're only choosing between these two systems, then obviously choose the iMac.

If you're not buying hardware... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21833310)

If a user is not intelligent enough to load whatever software they want on the hardware they purchased then they deserve everything they get.

I pitty those who feel they have to use what comes in the box. In the meantime I'll be buying the best hardware for my dollar when I'm buying hardware and still use whatever software I choose.

Re:Hardware? (1)

josh82 (894884) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833318)

"No one buys a computer just for the hardware. Hardware is pretty useless without software. If someone is only choosing the Dell over a Mac because the hardware is slightly better, then they deserve Vista.

Choose the best tool for the job. If you'll be more productive with OS X, and you're only choosing between these two systems, then obviously choose the iMac."


Gee, I wonder if any linux distribution could possibly run on the Dell. I know it's a long shot, but if such a tremendous feat were possible, then that would seem to entirely undermine any point you claim to have, would it not? [/sarcasm]

Re:Hardware? (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833366)

Hardware is useless without software?

Software is useless unless you have something to run it on. Guess what my copies of windows are useless as I don't currently have hardware which can they can currently run. That means all of my windows only software is also useless.

Yet my hardware can run far more than windows. I can run OS X, Linux, BSD, BeOS, GNUHurd if i am feeling adventerous, and even windows with special adaptors.

Software doesn't do anything by itself, it only ties the pieces of hardware together. Hardware though can be useful for a door stop if every thing else fails.

iMac. (1)

iMachias (1160301) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833110)

I'd go with the iMac because of the Unix under the hood. I realise I could do the same with the Dell and a flavor of Linux (and could manage that quite happily), but I find OS X to be the friendliest when it comes to GUI.

iLife? (1)

Lost Engineer (459920) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833112)

From TFA:

includes a group of Adobe multimedia programs that are less well integrated and more complex.
So you got Photoshop and you're whining that you want iLife back? That's like being given a table saw and complaining that it's not a dremel tool -- fine if you're going to complete your uber case mod, but it's going to suck trying to a build a fence with it.

Re:iLife? (2, Informative)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833200)

Yes but if you don't build fences, houses, or furniture but you do do case modes, build models, or other small craft style jobs then the Dremel tool is a better tool for you!
It probably includes Photoshop Elements and not full Photoshop.
My wife is really into digital scrapbooking. She has both Photoshop Elements and Gimp. She actually likes Gimp more than Elements.

From what I have seen iLife is a good tool for the average user.

Re:iLife? (1)

Lost Engineer (459920) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833486)

Actually I Picasa for casuals photo takers.

The article just states without proof that iLife is better than (admittedly pared down versions of) Adobe's tools, some of which are the most powerful around, because they're "complex." It's worth mentioning here that elements in particular has a freaking wizard for everything. If somebody wants to compare iLife and Adobe intro stuff side by side, I'd like to see it, but when it's on the short list of reasons why iMac is better, I need more than one sentence.

I'd probably take back the analogy if I could (although it was a great deal of fun thinking it up), but I still believe that this point was just pulled out of the author's rear orifice.

And another gripe: he also seems to assume that Vista is vulnerable to all the malware that XP is. Fact is, that is one area where Vista has made huge progress over XP. Combine Windows Defender with what I like to call "user mode Internet Explorer" and the probable malware intrusion vectors are things like Bonzi Buddy. In as much as the normal AIM client is malware, it works on mac too.

Re:iLife? (1)

XaXXon (202882) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833240)

Yeah. The machine comes with photoshop. Standard. You're paying $400 for hardware and $999 for photoshop (or whatever it costs these days).

It surely comes equipped with some crappy 'starter' software.

Re:iLife? (1)

Lost Engineer (459920) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833364)

It comes with Elements, which may as well be Photoshop unless you're planning on doing professional print work. Perhaps I should have noted in my analogy that you are building your own fence, not someone else's.

I'll Take the iMac (3, Insightful)

d3xt3r (527989) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833122)

Why? Because the iMac comes with Leopard and the Dell comes with Vista. I have been recommending Macs to everyone now that they contain Intel chips. You can buy a Mac and if you hate OS X, you can just install Windows or Linux. You can't install OS X after you realized Windows Vista sucks on your brand new Dell.

With Boot Camp - although I prefer VMware for my legacy windows needs - you are guaranteed a machine with excellent Windows driver support. Apple provides all the drivers you need right on the Leopard DVD.

Want to try something new and have a perfect fallback plan if you hate your new OS? You get the iMac. If you buy the Dell and hate Vista you're out of luck unless you find a Linux distro the suits your needs. Unfortunately, as a Linux user since the mid-90's, I still can't recommend it as a viable home desktop alternative for most people I know.

After Vista (1)

bahwi (43111) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833132)

I'm a Mac fan now. It has it's quirks, so does XP(which have become quite tolerable) but Vista is really getting on my nerves. Unless I'm building a Linux or BSD machine, then it would be that XPS. It would make one nice looking *nix machine. But it's a personal choice, it took me awhile to learn to deal with XP's quirks, KDE's were easy to deal with though(actually refreshing) and recent advances only make it more-so. So I can see people choosing Vista over Mac, but personally I've dealt with my last Vista machine.

add up all the components and it falls behind (1)

SgtChaireBourne (457691) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833150)

Let's just focus on the hardware for the sake of argument. Go through the customization and make sure you are comparing similar components on similar systems. The iMac comes out cheaper. Then add in VAT, and the iMac comes out much cheaper.

Furthermore, rummaging around on the Dell site shows no XPS that is an all-in-one unit. The description says all-in-one, but the pictures clearly show a separate box.

OS X is still an advantage. You can order the Dell with XP, so Vista won't be wasting your resources. Ordering with linux preinstalled, should be possible, but obviously not something Dell intends to make easy.

The right choice (1)

maclizard (1029814) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833158)

The Dell XPS One only looks more expensive. If you customize it and remove Vista (a must anyway) the price isn't as bad. Then you can install your flavor of Linux and look at all the power.

My experience (1)

vmxeo (173325) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833162)

(I have to keep this short 'cause I'm suppose to be listening in a classroom right now, not posting to Slashdot.. :)

..but having looked at both the Macbook Pro and the Dell XPS m1330(yes, I know the article is about desktops, but...), I ended up with the Dell. It was a very tough call, and for a while it seemed as if I would be purchasing a Mac, however, the Dell edged out on:

1) Size. I really like small laptops. While the 15" MacBook pro was sleek and light, I like the carry-around feel of the Dell better.

2) Price. For the specs I needed, the prices were about the same, until I found Dell's refurb site. I bought a scratch 'n dent special with the exact features I needed for far less than a refurbished Mac. (The laptop has already recieved a few more scratches anyway, so it's not like I cared)

3) OS. Yes, you heard that right. Vista got dumped the first day for Ubuntu 7.10, which runs near-flawlessly on thi slaptop. Even stuff like the media access key on top and webcam worked out of box. The only thing that doesn't is the built-in mic, which is slightly annoying. Bluetooth could be better. But after configuring compiz fusion, even my Mac friends are envious of my desktop environment....

Overall, I'm very happy with my purchase. However, I'm still recommending Mac laptops for my friends. Mostly because they won't be calling me as much for help...

Re:My experience (2, Insightful)

maclizard (1029814) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833232)

I wish I had recommended mac to my family, they use linux now, and I HATE fixing there problems. I like fixing things, but not more than once, and they aren't young enough to learn new tricks

Why are we discussing this? (1)

FredFredrickson (1177871) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833198)

Why are we arguing between two different retail computers? Am I the only one who considers computers to be nothing more than components? I'd save the money, and build it myself.

Re:Why are we discussing this? (1)

aardwolf64 (160070) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833384)

Good luck building an iMac...

Re:Why are we discussing this? (1)

solevita (967690) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833396)

Because you'd find it hard to build something like the iMac or XPS one with off the shelf components? Some people don't want a computer that looks like a beige box (or even worse, a box with clear panels in the side) and don't mind paying a little bit extra for a complete computer, rather than some components to assemble.

Re:Why are we discussing this? (1)

jombeewoof (1107009) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833468)

Why are we arguing between two different retail computers? Am I the only one who considers computers to be nothing more than components? I'd save the money, and build it myself.
I have noticed that for the last couple of years, it is getting a lot harder to build a decent system with commodity parts any cheaper than it would be to purchase one off the shelf.
Using sites like tiger and pricewatch, I rarely am able to beat the price. And if you consider the labor to put it together and install whatever OS it gets even more expensive.
10 years ago, I would have agreed with you totally, now, not so much.

Of course, build it yourself boxes alway seem to be better than their off the shelf counterparts. So, there is something to be said of DIY.

As always, YMMV

The hardware only needs to be fast enough... (2, Insightful)

QuietLagoon (813062) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833208)

It is the software that you have to live with, and Leopard is hands-down better than Vista could ever hope to be.

Media Card reader? For Reals??? (1)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833212)

I'd take a computer running OSX without a built-in media card reader anyday over a computer running Vista with all the media card readers in the world built-in.

Why anyone would actually pay $100 more for a Dell than a roughly equivalent iMac is also mysterious. I thought Dell's strong point was their ability to undercut their own Mothers.

Re:Media Card reader? For Reals??? (1)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833262)

No wait. Let me expand that. I just reread. No dedicated video card on the Dell???? Mooohahahahhah.

Re:Media Card reader? For Reals??? (1)

MBCook (132727) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833276)

I like Macs. My family owns quite a few. I'm typing on a MacBook Pro that is only about 6 months old. But I still don't see why Apple doesn't put a media reader (of any kind) on their computers. They don't have to put 7 kinds, they could put even just one (like SD), but no. For all their "this is a Mac, this is easy" you still need to connect the camera with a cable or get a card reader. PCs have been doing this for so many years, this is one thing I can't quite figure out.

I'm an Apple Fanatic (2, Interesting)

Apple Acolyte (517892) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833216)

and yet I have to concede that the Dell XPS One is an impressive looking AIO. I dare say its industrial design appears to be superior to the iMac's. It also bests the iMac with its TV tuner and Blu-ray option. I also have to admit that I'm typing on my office machine - an Inspiron - that I bought because Apple no longer offered a low-end laptop with dedicated graphics; consequently I have grown to appreciate Dell hardware. However, Dells will never run OS X (without hax0ring), and OS X is far superior to Windows. I am so much more productive on my G5 than on my Dell, but until I can justify purchasing a MacBook Pro for the office I'll be on my Inspiron. Even though Dell hardware may be nice for what it is, and even though I was justified in getting a Dell over a Mac for my business, I'd still opt for and recommend a Mac if at all possible.

It's difficult (2, Funny)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833234)

Apples are usually red, and have a bitter sweet flavor and usually crunchy texture, while Oranges are generally orange (hence their name), generally juicier, with a sweeter yet more acidic flavor.

I don't know I'll have to do some more research, can anyone point me to some sort of website where idiots post their opinions about things they dont really understand?

False economy (0, Troll)

abigsmurf (919188) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833260)

Isn't it a false economy to say that the iMac is cheaper? A PC will last you about 2-3 years before it starts to creak but a monitor should theoretically last you much longer, most people only buy new monitors because they're switching from CRTs or what something bigger. With the imac you lose the monitor when you upgrade and have to factor the cost of it in when buying the next system. With a Dell you could save yourself $300 off and reuse the monitor. Dells also are much easier to incrementally upgrade than imacs.

Re:False economy (1)

L4m3rthanyou (1015323) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833338)

Er, they're comparing the iMac to Dell's XPS One, which is an all-in-one system like the iMac. with most PCs, yes, you'd have a valid point, but in this particular case they both have the built-in monitor issue, upgrade limitations, etc. The comparison is fair.

Re:False economy (0, Troll)

abigsmurf (919188) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833560)

You mean apple's adverts lied to me? Dells are supposed to be wrapped in hundreds of metres of wires and stuff!

Re:False economy (1)

phoebusQ (539940) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833354)

The Dell XPSOne is also an all-in-one design like the iMac.

Buy from me (1)

maclizard (1029814) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833280)

For the price your going to pay for either, I could build something better, add a 20% markup, and still save you money.

Waste of money either way (1)

L4m3rthanyou (1015323) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833290)

Why even bother discussing something so silly? I cringed when I first saw the commerical for the XPS one... it's another bad idea from Apple that's now spreading around the market. With the obvious exception of laptops/tablets, all-in-one computers are garbage. they're hard to upgrade, hard to repair (if necessary) and a complete waste of a monitor.

I mean, honestly, who's going to buy a piece of proprietary Dell crap? Only Apple can trick people into paying a premium for that.

As far as I'm concerned, the XPS one has no market. Anyone hunting for a desktop PC is going to want a standard box for half the price, and be able to re-use major components (like the monitor) later. If someone wants to pay for an all-in-one setup, they're just going to get the Mac, since they probably have more money than sense anyway.

Whoever came up with the XPS One at Dell really didn't think it through that well.

Re:Waste of money either way (1)

phoebusQ (539940) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833558)

Your entire analysis makes the mistake of assuming that the entire market is made up of customers just like you.

The answer is in the summary (1)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833304)

Mossberg says it is a better machine, but Vista and its built-in software make it inferior than Apple iMac's Leopard and iLife suite.

Who cares what's inside the box? It could be a box full of wet sand and duct tape for all I care. If it runs your software faster and provides a better user experience, that's the winner.

Re:The answer is in the summary (1)

maclizard (1029814) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833340)

duct tape and sand won't run vista any worse than a top-end PC

strange conclusion (1)

rollthelosindice (635783) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833320)

I'm really confused. The dell is more expensive, has an intergrated graphics chip, which on a desktop is really ridiculous, and yet its ahead of the iMac? If you read the article you see that Mossberg is giving the edge to the Dell based on a side headphone jack and USB port, and a separate button to put just the display to sleep. These are valid points, but I don't see how you draw the conclusion that its ahead based on this whole equation.

Paper Specs Mean Nothing (1)

mathletics (1033070) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833324)

Who cares which one looks better on paper. Which one will still be working 6 months after you buy it?

Re:Paper Specs Mean Nothing (1)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833508)

Which one will still be working 6 months after you buy it?

Apple was the highest rated vendor for hardware reliability of both desktops and laptops as of a few months ago when Consumer Reports issued their latest review. Dell actually did fairly well for laptops (way better than in 2006) but were still about middle of the road or worse for desktops.

Environmental concerns (1)

athloi (1075845) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833336)

I will buy neither, for Green reasons.

A whitebox PC can be upgraded piece by piece without throwing the whole thing out, and is going to last a heck of a lot longer than those tiny things with all those parts crammed in close together, generating heat and vibration.

My advice is to build your own machine, and buy parts that will last five years, then recycle responsibly. One way to do this is to use a friend's box from a Dell XPS one to ship your parts back to Dell for recycling.

I haven't been impressed by the reliability of Macintosh hardware, nor has Dell really blown me away. A well-planned white box computer can last upward of a decade although you'll have to replace the hard drive at the five year mark.

Re:Environmental concerns (1)

phoebusQ (539940) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833378)

It would be even greener if you would just stop using computers.

No sense. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21833348)

Of the two, the Mac is cheaper, and you can upgrade to equivilant RAM and buy an OEM copy of Windows for it, for the price of the XPS, and still end up with a better graphics card. Unless you're just some anti-mac fanatic, or the XPS matches your particular desired aesthetics, you'd be stupid to not choose to Mac.

Also, I think the disc indicator on the XPS is horrid. A glowing light beside your screen whenever a disc is inserted? Annoying.

position of USB ports (1)

glennrrr (592457) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833368)

Mossberg brings up the position of the USB ports. He prefers their placement on the side of the Dell, versus the back of the iMac. I have a Dell widescreen monitor with side mounted USB ports, and plugging cables into them is messy, asymmetric and ugly. If I were to spend the extra money for the show piece Dell, I would not want to ruin the lines, or create clutter by using those ports.

If it ran Linux... (1)

Howitzer86 (964585) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833436)

Then I bet you people would want the XPS. For such an enlightened open source crowd, I don't see how you could stand Apple. If you do so much as find a bug or link to an online manual you get sued. You people scream about he vendor lock in Microsoft puts on you... just try getting those shiny apple programs you fell in love with to run on Linux.

Personally I like the all in one design, but not enough to get one for myself. Give me a black or beige box that I can upgrade for as long as the ATX standard exists.

Re:If it ran Linux... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21833554)

Just think how wonderful it would be if Apples ran Unix!

But that day will never come.

I'm sorry but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21833448)

...a Dell do not have any sex appeal at all.

OS X (1)

mini me (132455) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833490)

I'll take the one that runs OS X. Who really cares about the hardware?

This is a silly argument. (1)

argent (18001) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833544)

Apple's hardware has never been price-competitive with generic equivalents purely on a hardware basis. Apple's margins are significantly higher than Dell's, and since they don't have any magic margin fairy that just means they're charging more for the same components, or shipping lower performance hardware for the same money. And Apple's designs are often wildly overrated... I'd happily have paid more for a Thinkpad running OS X than my Macbook Pro with its fragile design, insecure power connector, insecure lid latch, lousy keyboard, lousy single-button trackpad, poor user interface (no, a slowly throbing light is a crappy sleep indicator: I want to know if the thing's sleeping at a glance), connectors on the side where they get in the way (the only connectors I want on the sides or front are a USB port and the earphone jack), sealed-in hard drive, no docking station (at least once a week I forget to plug in something when I move my laptop to my desk) and so on...

On the iMac: connectors on the back: good. ALL connectors on the back, so you have to feel around for them: bad. Keyboard: may be the worst ever. All on one design: great if you need it, unacceptable if you need an external monitor.

You don't get a Mac because you're looking for the best computer you can get, you get a Mac because of the software, and put up with it. I guess if you're lucky you'll get a case of Stockholm Syndrome and flame me for pointing out what you've been repressing all these years.

Apple ALWAYS loses in my house (1)

Reality Master 101 (179095) | more than 6 years ago | (#21833548)

It really doesn't matter how good Apple's computer is. In my and a lot of people's opinions, the lock-in factor instantly dooms it. If I stick with Dell and Windows, then in a couple of years, I don't have to return to Dell if I don't want to, and I can still keep my software investment. With Apple, you have to throw away EVERYTHING to get away from Apple.

If I could (legally) buy OS/X for standard hardware, I would seriously consider it. Until that day, Apple computers will never darken my door. (And spare me the B.S. that Apple wouldn't make money that way. It's wrong and stupid, and I don't feel like debating it yet again.)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>