Comments on: New Mac Minis: Still too expensive

The entry-level Mac Mini still costs $599--and that's still too pricey a proposition for some folks. Why won't Apple do a $399 Mac Mini? The market is begging for one at that price--or at least editor David Carnoy is.

[Tedders85]

I think they are too expensive as well. I also think that maybe $399 is a little to low. I think $499 would be the sweetspot for the mini. Yes, $399 would be awesome, but thats just too low. If it were $499 maybe $449, I would probably replace my existing iMac.

[Jackspenn]

You can get a decent netbook for $399, so it seems reasonable that when the mini doesn't have the battery or screen costs, that Apple should be able to meet the $399 price point.

[seven7dust]

@jackspenn
this is a MAc not a PC
stop comparing Apples to oranges !

BTW macs r known to last long and have good resale value
something the netbook most definetely won't have
check ebay for older mac mini's they still sell for modest prices
can you show me similar PCs that retain their value over time ?

[RaceToTheBottom]

I"m not a big fan of the mini. But don't forget that it ships with iLife which you would pay $99 for. Does your el cheapo laptop come with a copy of Windows Vista and Office 7?

'Course you probably get Linux and OpenOffice, but there's no reason you can't put both on your mini, along with XP or Vista if you own the license.

I have four that have been running 24/7 for nearly a year. Reboot only for updates. One failed recently and had the MLB replaced under warranty.

You can do what you want to, but neither Windows nor Linux has the quality of Mac OX. And I work with all of them. Solaris competes well with Mac OS, but the hardware is too expensive.

[kylebuttermore]

comparing macs to pc's is not like apples and oranges, they are the same thing with a different design and OS... but they both use the same components.

[HamiltonDL]

He's not comparing apples to oranges. Apple's hardware has always been overpriced, especially compared to industry standards.

Now I'm as guilty as everyone else; I have a $400 iPod Touch sitting right next to me, but let's be honest with ourselves. We're paying for a brand name. Granted, we get the functionality and superb product design that traditionally comes with that brand name, but more hardware can be had elsewhere for far less. Period.

[bioadam]

The Mac mini is what it is: a small computer good for many roles. Considering that few computers can match its size to power ratio and most of the ones that do are are just as expensive (I'm looking at you Dell Studio Hybrid), the Mac mini's price is not out of line. A lot of consumers want Apple to dial down the specs or increase the size of the mini to bring down its price, but then it wouldn't quite be a Mac.

[seven7dust]

here's a fact whether Apple's hardware is slower than a PC
or not doesn't matter
the fact is on the same hardware
OSX {especially tiger} multi-tasks much better than Vista can
and it makes even XP look bloated
plus the OSX UI makes life much easier to work with
and requires little to zero maintenance work and has rock solid stability
plus iLife is a wonderful suite of lifestyle applications
which enhances your multi-media experience 10 fold !

So if you go just by hardware specs thats good for you
but some people care more bout the software shipping with the system
and for 600$ you can't find better value IMO

what a mac mini is good for is being a reliable computer that can please
most people's needs ! hardware specs meant little in real world use

[ManjyomeThunder]

@seven7dust

A PC is a personal computer, Macs are a brand of PCs. Comparing Macs to other PCs is perfectly fine. Now, if you had said Windows PC you'd be correct.

And Macs only maintain their value because of Apple's ridiculous markups to begin with, nobody can afford new products so they buy used ones slightly cheaper.

[tychay--2008]

Netbooks don't have nearly the CPU/GPU power as a mini or Macbook so that?s not a fair comparison. Having said that, I agree with the article thesis that the Mac mini has high margins and it?d be nice to see apple reduce them.

[Nataku4ca]

just a comment on this
"Does your el cheapo laptop come with a copy of Windows Vista and Office 7?"

microsoft would be sued for that... o im not sure but isn't iLife something completely different from office?

[Faran23]

I agree, the mac mini should be cheaper. I was at best buy the other day and saw Centrino based laptops for as low as $349. You'd expect an entry level mac to be around the $400-$450 mark as the alternative is much cheaper.

[pentest]

The alternative is an inferior machine.

[mmagliaro]

Another big thing not to overlook... the USED market. Why would I spend $600 on this thing, when I can buy a pretty darn nice G4 mac notebook computer for half that on eBay. Sure, it's slow compared to a Core 2 Duo, but frankly, for 99% of what people use a Mac for, who cares? It can still handle web, email, photo editing, music, and Office apps... with plenty of speed. The only place it might really show its age is in video editing or gaming (but this is a Mac... what gaming???)

No way... I still happily plunk along on an old 800 MHz G3 iBook I got for 200 bucks, and it has served me well for years. For $600, they have to offer more.

[Tedders85]

The problem is that before too long, things wont run on the old architecture. Its going to become obsolete pretty quick I believe.

[Sporlo]

For some reason, Leopard made our 2005 iMac G5 way slow. When we first got it, it was plenty fast for all the uses that you mentioned, but as soon as you start upgrading software, it really bogs down the machine (iPhoto is now crazy slow. Usable and not yet frustrating, but still really slow).

[Fherghaile]

Yeah I'd like a new BMW for 3K to but it won't happen. Go buy your cheap PC and see how long it last.
[CNET editors' note: Prohibited content deleted.]

[halogenrepublic]

But the Mac Mini uses the same cheap components as the cheap PC does.

[ZetaZeta_]

If you think the Mac Mini is the BMW of computers, you're kidding yourself.

[Notoapplefanbois]

You do realise you that where I live here in the UK it is £430 ish ex vat, for that you can build a decent AM3 X3 or intel quad core based gaming pc or buy the same pc for £550 which is still less than the next model, and you could just about buy a pre-built I7 gaming PC for the price of a top end mini.

[celticbrewer]

Well, if it lasts as long as the Mac Mini my sister bought... about 60 days.

[tcr071]

The only special thing about the Mac Mini is the aluminum enclosure. If Apple sold the aluminum enclosure I could actually build myself a Mac Mini with the exact same parts bought from newegg. There is nothing special about it. $600 for a slow notebook that isn't portable and doesn't have a screen is a ripoff.

There are deals to be had with Apple. I bought a late-2008 MacBook Pro 2.5Ghz for $1400 w/ tax BRAND NEW from my school. I don't feel I overpaid in the slightest. Had I purchased this when it was brand new it would have ran me $2,000+ and there is no way I could justify doing that!

[kaylus]

Getting a 40-45% knockdown wouldn't be like getting a BMW for 3k, it would be like getting a BMW for 16k, which you can get in the used market. Regardless of that flaw, I would like to add that my "Cheap PC" computers last quite long and can be repaired with off the shelf components. Let's see -- 6 years, $375 -- 1 memory stick replaced for $35 and one hard drive upgrade for $75. So $490 for six years of computing -- how much was your Mac?

Anyone else, go get a nice cheap Dell Inspiron, buy a copy of MacOSX and build your Hackintosh that way. Same looks and performance as your BMW, for 50% less.

[viper396]

Your comparison doesn't hold up since a PC uses the exact same components the Mac does. That just makes it a cheap PC with an expensive Apple Logo.

[zizzybaloobah]

I agree also. What's the point when you can get more tricked-out laptops for the same or less. I've used Macs before -- its just not worth the extra $ IMHO.

[jordanfb]

no you haven't

[Mystigo]

Walking into BestBuy and throwing all the icons into the trash can doesn't count.

[jordanfb]

399 would be sweet! would totally buy one, but i think 499 is more realistic and would still be a bargain for the best computers ever made!

[tcr071]

Computer = base line MacBook - Ram - hard drive - screen + apple logo

[thyDrewishere]

You also all have forgotten to add in the costs associated with the increased bus speeds and the new DDR3 ram that they have added. While the speed bumps are minor and you could actually find maybe cheaper and better laptops for around 599, you will not find one with a 1066GHz bus and using DDR3 ram, which is really powerful stuff. So I actually think the Mac Mini is well suped for what it costs and it has been priced well.

[ZetaZeta_]

We also have to figure in the cost of the Apple logo.

[tcr071]

I can get 2GB of DDR3 notebook ram, which is what the mini uses, for $28 SHIPPED. There is no added costs from the ram. Ram is cheap as hell and has been for a very long time.

[BigGuns149]

@tcr071:

So I can put DDR3 into a board that doesn't support DDR3? I didn't think so.

There is more added cost to DDR3 than merely the memory, which even by your own admission adds some cost even if only ~$10. Chipsets that support DDR3 and have a 1066FSB DO cost more. If they didn't than where are all the $600-800 laptops with DDR3 if it just added $10 to the cost of the computer like you imply? There would be an obvious competitive advantage to having faster memory than the compeition if it just added $10 to the cost of the computer. So why don't you see cheap laptops using it? It is because the chipset is considerably more expensive and you are ignoring those costs. You generally don't see laptops with DDR3 and 1066 FSB until you hit ~$1000 because the chipsets do add so much cost.

Furthermore, compared to the Dell Hybrid Studio, which is clearly designed to compete with the Mac Mini the Mac Mini utterly blows the Dell Hybrid Studio away.

[DrtyDogg]

@BigGuns: Actually you can rund DDR3 and a FSB up to 1600 on an intel P45 chipset. But many people would argue that it is kind of silly to that memory and a board with a 1066mhz FSB with a processor that runs at 800mhz FSB.

The DDR3 most likely has to do with it's lower power consuption and lower heat generation as much if not more than it's speed. Remember these are the "greenest computers ever."

[mikefarren]

Definitely too expensive. I was recently in the market for a small computer, and what I ended up with was an Acer Aspire L5100. 3G RAM, 320G hard drive, 2.2GHz dual-core Athlon, Radeon X1250 graphics. It's a nice, small (a little bigger then the Mini, but still) and a price of $319. I've since upgraded it to a 1TB hard drive, 4G RAM, and 2.9GHz Athlon for about $200 more. If the Mac Mini were within $100 of that price, I'd have gotten it in a shot. As it is, well, sorry, Apple. I'm more than happy with my iPod Touch, but sure do wish the Mini made sense.

[supergoodnachos]

I agree, I was hoping the refresh would include lower prices. For me $500 is the max I would pay, I don't think $399 for the lower end model is too cheap, or wouldn't make Apple enough profit.

[BigGuns149]

They could have easily sold the old Mac Mini for $400 since some of the parts that it uses are clearence parts that they could buy cheap, but there is no way that they could have profitably sold the new $600 Mac Mini at $400. I would be surprised if you can buy all the parts wholesale nevermind provide support AND make a profit for <$400.

I would like to see them sell a lower end Mac Mini for ~$450, but I don't realistically see them doing that. If one is really interested in a cheap Mac Mini you are better off looking at buying one of the last generation Mac Minis for $400-$500.

[pkt1190]

I wish they had a base model that was cheaper. I just want a nice Mac computer to hook up to my HD Tv for general web surfing, streaming video from the Netflix or the full episodes posted on channel websites, etc. Nothing too intensive.

[Markus2008]

Buy a used one on Ebay, I use a G4 mac mini upgraded to 1gig ram, works great for what you're looking for...

[Tedders85]

There must be something wrong with my G4 mac mini then, because it hangs a lot and sounds like it is going to take off when watching flash stuff. The Radeon 9000 video card in that thing is a joke.

[dpaanlka]

The Mac mini actually was $499 when it was first introduced.

http://web.archive.org/web/20050113070621/www.apple.com/macmini/

[gglockner]

If you want a bargain Mac Mini, why not pickup one of the just-discontinued models? Starting at $499 at store.apple.com.

[BigGuns149]

The refurbs go down to ~$400 and if you look carefully you might be able to pick up a Mac Mini through one of the Apple resellers for even less. I know I picked up a clearance Mac Mini for $200 at Fry's a couple years back. I think the new features are a great improvement over the old model, but I realize especially in the current economy that there are a lot of people who would have preferred buying a lower end Mac Mini for less than a beefier Mac Mini for the same $600.

[cantheman]

It's not too expensive. What laptops are you talking about? Are they PC's? I'm not even going to go there, but you know what I'd say....

If you're comparing Macs to Macs (apples to apples, if you will), yes you can get a macbook for 999. Even if thats a few hundred more, at those price levels, a "few hundred" represents a 40% cheaper price for the mac mini. Some people just want a desktop.... An elegantly designed, quiet, and reliable desktop that runs leopard.

[BigGuns149]

Even compared against other similar form factor machines the Mac Mini is pretty well priced. Compared to the Dell Hybrid studios the new Mac Mini has great specs for the price particularly on the $600 model.

Let's face it the Mac Mini is designed for a niche market: the very small form factor PC AKA the ITX form factor. Compared to other similar form factor machines it does well, but compared to standard ATX form factor machines it is pretty expensive. Anyone who isn't comparing against similar form factor machines honestly shouldn't be writing for CNET, but I guess competence isn't a criterion for writing for CNET.

[stamboman]

OK - so we are mixing apples and oranges here. You cannot compare the cost of a Macintosh to the price of a laptop equipped with Windows XP or Vista. As most Macintosh owners know when you buy a Macintosh you are getting 3 computers for the price of one:
1) A Macintosh which means you get access to most of the commercially available software that you can get with a Windows based PC
2) An operating system built upon Berkeley's Free BSD which means you have access to the world of unix based woftware
3) The ability to easily dual boot the machine with Windows if you choose to.

So ... $600 plus the price of monitor/keyboard is not too bad. Of course, a Macintosh laptop is better but that is another story.

[Polysorbate82]

This is made possible by Microsoft. Apple won't allow it's OS X off of it's branded computers, as we've seen OS X will run on a PC... even though Apple tries it's hardest not to allow it.

[pjhenry1216]

You people always forget that the hardware is the same hardware in a lot of PCs. That extra cost is just to be allowed to run that software, nothing actually tangible.

[riegler.d]

Polysorbate82, this is NOT made possible my Microsoft. Boot Camp is a utility that allows another OS to run on an Apple machine, which Apple is letting users download for FREE. You can run Windows Vista or XP on a Mac and not take much of a performance hit. Oh, but one thing... Microsoft is gonna make you pay for the OS you use on your Mac, which I suppose is free enterprise.

[Markus2008]

The software itself is tangible, but if you need convincing of that, then there's nothing more I can say...

[schemp98]

I'm pretty sure the point that Polysorbate82 was making is that Apple won't allow ANY non-Apple computer to run it's OS (it's in the TOS). While Microsoft does not have this stipulation... Google Psystar for more infomation :)

[rapier1]

Actually, the argument can be made that microsoft is responsible for being able to run all of those operating systems on a single hardware platform. It *used* to be that operating systems were inexorably intertwined with the hardware platform. If you had an Amiga you ran AmigaOS, Commodore ran the commodore OS, Apples ran Apple software etc etc etc. IBM adopted a relatively open hardware architecture which drove components into the commodity price range. Microsoft never bound themselves to a single vendor but instead to an open architecture. Prices and adoption rates would have been respectively high and low if they had taken a more traditional approach. I'm not trying to be a booster for MS here - just trying to point out that the history of computing could have been a lot different - probably worse - if MS or IBM had gone with tight vertical integration from the outset.

[Polysorbate82]

I agree... way over priced. As is nearly everything Apple branded. Apple must be kidding with its pricing, and the Mac-Addicts who pay these prices to remain a member of a not so exclusive cult are insane.

Don't get me wrong I am a Mac user myself, but am less of one today then I was in 2005, 2001, or even 1992. Apple's monopoly on OS X has been ignored because no one really was buying its products until the iPod and now iPhone became trendy to own.

Even the cute and cuddly Blueberry iMac and iBook were relegated to the Mac faithful and schools. Apple's computer are now well designed Intel machines sporting the same components as PCs. No longer can apple argue it's hardware is superior therefore costs more.

Sure Apple has many great designs that you will pay a price for, but when they are only refreshed every 18 months, and as minimally as possible why buy one? Buy a Power Mac G4 from 5 years ago or a Macbook Pro from last year and they are virtually the same. The design has slightly evolved recently, but where is the innovation Apple claims to be all about. I haven't seen any real innovation from Apple in 5+ years when it comes to it's computers.

You can buy a PC (please calm down Mac users...) with WAY more power and technology, even laptops for the same price as a Mini.

Eventually as with all trends things will come to an end. Apple needs to get real with it's pricing and make it's "moderate" to "high end" computers within reach. Nobody who knows anything about computers would be satisfied with a Mac Mini. Adding 4gb of RAM to you're iMac cost $1000, really Apple? Is that 4gb of RAM made out of platinum or gold? What a joke, and anyone who buys it deserves the price to drop in a month much like the original iPhone.

:)

[seven7dust]

600$ is affordable for a desktop system
Stop comparing the hardware it makes no sense
it's a apples to oranges comparison
the same hardware can perform better with a different O.S
the mini is still one of the smallest computers I know off
Similar Pcs will cost you about the same !

custom built PCs have their advantages and disadvantages
but this is a OEM so compare it to a similar OEM product like dell etc.

Lol!
no innovation for the past 5 years ?
how about OSX,panther,tiger ,leopard and all the ilife suites etc.
all their pro level software is still considered as some of the best !
and yet their software is still easy to use
on the hardware side unibody construction, pioneered aluminum use
longer lasting custom batteries, magsafe connectors,
isight camera with mic, slimmer laptops etc.
and their designs as you said r iconic !

also the biggest innovation of them all
is the fact that their computers don't break
and have very many problems !

So can you tell me of some on the PC side !
both design wise or technology wise !
all I see from PC makers is more and more apple design
look at Dell's Adamo ,Vaio Cr from Sony both r macbook rip-offs !
MSI recently unveiled a Macbook air lookalike !
and MSft is always borrowing ideas from Apple with zero originality
if it wasn't for Apple we'd be stuck with Xp UI for the rest of our lives

[Polysorbate82]

Actually Seven, if you'd stop drinking the APPLE-AID you'd read I said when it comes to its COMPUTERS, as in HARDWARE, Not its software. But OS X has been out since 2001 and hasn't changed much. The technology is the same, has it advanced? Yes. Has Apple somehow been innovative with it's OS since OS X 10.0 debuted in 2001, NOT SO MUCH. They have just tacked on new features and re-skinned it. I'm not saying OS X isn't good, but it's NO longer innovative.

I don't think anyone including myself disputes Apple has always been a leader in design, but maybe they could burden themselves to redesign something quicker then every 10 years.

AND everyone arguing APPLES and ORANGES is dumb, Mac's use older PC tech and charge a premium. Where are the CORE i7 CPUs in the Mac Pro? 4gb of RAM, isn't sufficient when you're a power user. No blu-ray? Check out Macworld's sites, especially UKs... PEOPLE are furious at Apple.

[ferretboy88]

None of my custom made pcs have any disadvantages. They work and have longer parts service plans in stead of the crap 1 year. Nothing is better then building your own stuff. Steve Jobs talks about style all the time. My computers are built to my sense of style. Beautiful watercooling setups and custom made cases are full of style.

[mrbofus]

Even Apple's upgrade from the $599 to the $799 is ridiculously overpriced. To wit: As of this writing, a 2GB kit of two 1GB DDR3 PC-8500 1066MHz SODIMMs is $37.99 from Crucial. And a 320GB 5400 rpm notebook hard drive is about $70-80 after tax from various online retailers.

For the $200, you could get a 4GB RAM kit from Crucial for $65.99 and a 500GB 5400 rpm hard drive for $110 and still come out with some extra money.

And Apple charges $150 to go to 4GB of RAM and $175 to go to a 320GB drive.

I know, I know, all manufacturers charge a premium for upgrades done from the factory, but to charge nearly double seems a bit ludicrous.

[JonnySpeed1971]

buy your own parts and follow the instructions on apple.com = its not like they hide how to do it.

[ghaff]

The thing I find the Mac mini potentially interesting for is to hook up to a TV. I've got a Shuttle there right now running XP but a mini would be nice. But I can't really justify a mini at its price tag for that. (The Mac mini specs are probably way overkill for that application to be sure, but I like the form factor.)

[heulenwolf]

That's what I did. I had a shuttle xpc running XP (built ~2003) and plugged into my HDTV. I got frustrated with the problems it had doing all the things I thought it was spec'd to do: record HDTV through ATI's HDTV Wonder Card, handle the odd 720p+ screen resolution of my TV, and work quietly. I finally gave up futzing with it and got the mini at $600 when the Core Duo model came out. I didn't expect it to be able to do everything, I just wanted it to work reliably. I feel I've gotten my money's worth and then some. Sure, its had its issues that required some pain to work out, but nowhere near the constant pain that my XPC was. For example, over the last several weeks, the power has gone out 2-3 times per week in my apt. I normally leave my system on all the time. I haven't experienced any instability or unnecessary yet mandatory disk checks as a result. Another example is that I've only ever opened the case to add RAM myself (instead of paying Apple's premium). I've never felt the need to open it to figure out some problem like I was doing every month or so with the Shuttle XPC.

[TornadoRed]

David Carnoy says he would buy a $399 Mac Mini, but not one at $599. Com on now, David, you don't want or need either one, you;re not in the target customer group.

This is like the Car&Driver or Road&Track writer who owns and drives his own Porsche, but reviews a Toyota Yaris and tells you he'd buy one if only it had X and Y.

[oblivion4evr]

I agree $399 would be much better. I am a Mac guy, have been my whole life. Now on the down side, the mini is a very bad computer. I have one that I am working on right now. It over heats and when it does, it will crash. Its very slow but then again this is an older one. Its has the 1.66 processor with 2GB and its incredibly slow! In my opinion its great to get a Mac but this one leaves much to desired the only good point is that its small.

[Markus2008]

Something is wrong with yours. I have a G4 hooked up to my tv, upgraded to 1gig of ram. It runs everything fine. I have hundreds of ripped movies in iTunes, I watch hulu on it, etc. Its only purpose is entertainment and it knocks it out of the park. The machine never turns off unless it is being updated and needs a restart and my wife has left movies playing on it all night on more than one occasion, and it has never overheated.

My sister has the old one. It is VERY slow but doesn't overheat or cause problems. How much faster is this new one?

[streamline35]

We have an old 1.25ghz g4 mac mini at work - I hate using that thing. It's only running osx 10.4, and I can barely open 3 tabs in firefox (with nothing else running) before it gets really slow and frustrating to use.

[st430]

The only reason for buying a mac is mac OS.
Nothing more.
The hardware parts for all computer makers are all from the same factories.
There is no reason for one computer makers can sell you a laptop for 499 while mac mini with no lcd screen and battery cost more. If you had work in dell, hp, apple before...you know the parts are all the same...just design difference. The same intel cpu , nvidia chip set, samsung memory or motherboard
won't cost more for dell,hp vs apple.
The only reason price is not lower is that apple is more greedy and it figure you have to buy their
hardware to run their O/S...which a lot of people love.

[Polysorbate82]

Exactly... Apple is pushing away it's core user, it's faithful, for Greed and to be an accessory to trend ******.

While I agree with you in terms of parts sourcing, the HUGE difference between Apple and the others is its use of both industrial and engineering design mixed with fresh thinking about how things should work. R&D and Design need good margins to prosper. All Mac users are showing their willingness to see Apple innovation and leadership keep moving forward. Let's face it, in this day and age there is are two classes of digital citizens, those using Mac OS and, left in the dusk, everyone else.

[JonnySpeed1971]

>Apple is pushing away it's core user, it's faithful, for Greed and to be an accessory to trend

You think so? I am not sure how. $600 is nothing for a computer that will get $300 resell in two years time, will work perfectly when you want it too, has high quality parts, is very well designed in terms of software and casing... The Apple faithful and a whole new audience seem to be staying with Apple - that's why their margins and market share are healthy while every other PC manufactuere is slashing costs and selling at tiny margins just to be able to get a sale. Apple now accounts for >10% of all Intel sales = their largest customer. Doesn't sound like they are pushing anybody away. Perhaps you have no money for a new machine and suddently your angry and think Apple are greedy? They have just brought their prices down or significantly increased the spec for the same $

I think this machine will continue to sell in great numbers just as every other Mac Mini has. Relative to other OEMs Apple is a very strong company with a happy user base. Can that be said of Dell, HP, Sony or any of the smaller box shifters that sell on low price and no support.

[gsw01]

I have no idea what polysorbate82 is talking about? Apple is way behind times. It does not support blue ray, no icore cpus, no raid on notebooks, build in batteries, no stereo streaming on iphone, no support for games, thinks 8800gt is high end in 2009( you should check out ati 4870x2, gt260 and newer cards on market). Over 50 percent of mac users end up installing windows because os 10 cannot run everything. No for using micro usb on iphones, because standards hurt there margins. You should also check out how dusk looks in 1080p bluerays made on my dell xps.( almost 2 year old) I hope you alteast have a blue ray player so you can see before you make a judgment call. Also find out when apple will support new icore cpus for desktop. Please do not bring mac pro because dell, hp, ibm workstations have even greater performance lead.

[seven7dust]

Apple isn't overcharging n e body !
First of their hardware is top notch
their build quality is by far the best
and Macs last long and hence their Resale value is high
So the TCO of a Mac is not high infact many times it's lower than Most Pcs
the software Apple ships is written in house
which requires money,time and resources !
so they obviously need bigger profit margins than say Dell or Hp
and the O.S and software available r much better than the competition !
and it's the reason why Apple's computers sell !
also
the other software{iLife} that ships with any Mac is useful and adds value !

So tell me again why Apple is ripping n e body off or being greedy ?

@Polysorbate82 -
I'm sorry you feel that way
but if Apple's core users r that blind they aren't really core users
they can look elsewhere
but I'm pretty sure they'll be disappointed !
Macs offer more value than n e other computer at least in my book
and a lot of others feel the same way too