First of all, I'm not a PC fan boy. In fact, I'm in the market for a new machine and am considering a Mac for the first time since the early 80's when I owned an Apple][C (technically not a mac but it's still an apple). I am also willing to concede that Macs are better machines. Most importantly, you can get more done with less machine because of Mac's efficiency compared with DOS and Windows.

That having been said, I still don't buy the cheaper argument.

1) The computers compared are not on par with each other. For example, 512k versus 2 gigs of memory is not comparable (though I concede that processor speed was on par).

2) While Macs definitely maintain their value more than PCs (here the foreign car versus American car paradigm might be more accurate), the computer resale market is just not that attractive to the average consumer; the same group that is least likely to pay the premium for the Mac.

3) Your article doesn't take into account compatability issues. If we were all studio engineers, we'd all own Macs. But, most of us don't deal in complex audio visual stuff. The kind of home movie editing and garage recording that the average consumer does is PC acceptable. While Mac's may have better software, it's more expensive and the difference is becoming less dramatic between platforms as these applications become mainstream. Now, if you are a gamer or use some other less than mainstream computer application, you might not be able to run it on a Mac.

I'm not saying Macs aren't worth the price. I'll even go so far as to say Macs are significantly better machines, all things being equal. The thing is, all things are never equal. And, the factors that you cited that create value in the Mac platform aren't what appeal to the average consumer. To the budget conscious purchaser, PCs are still the better deal. Though, that may not last long.

This article did nothing but demonstrate the ludicrous lengths Mac owners will go to in order to justify their purchase.

Lisa.

You should buy nothing but PCs from Costco and return them for a full refund every 90 days.

Not withstanding that the number of people who retain their computers vastly outweighs the number of people who sell them... using resale value as a descriptor for 'cheaper' is a copout.

The initial purchase is higher for a Mac than it is for a PC, especially to get similar quality computers. I love your example stated above, because the 'similarly priced' mac is vastly inferior to the PC.

Processor: Core Duo (Mac) vs. Core 2 Duo (PC)

The PC shown uses newer architecture, as well as higher clock speeds.

Memory: 512 MB (Mac) vs. 2 GB (PC)

4 times the RAM for the PC. Granted, the Mac has slightly faster clock speed, but that isn't compensation enough for only using 512 MB

HDD: 80 GB (Mac) vs. 250 GB (PC)

Size rules. Mac loses out.

Expansion slots: 0 (Mac) vs. Extra Memory slots, 2x PCI slots, 1x PCI Express (x16) slot (PC)

The PC is easily upgraded to be future proof, while the Mac isn't even current-gen proof.

In short.. sure, you can sell your junky, low-end Mac for a bit more..but you'll get much more use out of your PC, in the long run.

this article made me angry. you are just spouting off every mac myth out there. i've had both macs and pc's. i've never had a virus on my pc. my mac crashed all the time. mac's are marketed better, this gives them the higher resale value. plus there's a much bigger supply of used pc's. the best thing about pc's is that you can upgrade them. when you want to upgrade a mac they force you to buy a new one. this article misinforms people.

Some of the comments here are quite comical. One guy disagrees with the assessment that Macs are cheaper because he's a broke college student and cannot figure out how to come up with a little extra cash. Another guy thinks it's all just marketing and slick logos and thinks if you cannot deal with viruses, spyware and a substandard OS, you must be stupid. These are very laughable and typical of people who simply hate Mac, but really have not ever spent much time using one.

I've used both Windows and Mac for over 16 years and the current Mac and OS offers better value for the average user... period. OS X, especially Leopard, is a solid OS that is well-organized, feature-rich, secure and easy-to-use. The iLife suite that comes with every Mac adds to the value and provides an easy and fun way to work with video, photos, music, blogs and more.

Vista, I would say, is Microsoft's best OS to date IF you don't have to worry about any older peripherals, applications, networks or machines. Unfortunately, many PC users don't care much for Vista and are (for now) sticking with XP. The fight with viruses and spyware and frequent visits to tech support seem less of a hassle than upgrading hardware and software. This I don't get, but it's still the case.

I could on detailing Mac value over Windows machines, but let me just list a few points to wrap it up:

* Most people who say Mac's suck or don't have good value, have never used one or have not spent much time using one with OS X.

* If you value your time (put a price per hour on it), you'll find Windows cost you way more dealing with various problems (inconsistent application organization; incompatible software, hardware, fonts & drivers; viruses & spyware; repairs. - Mac users rarely deal with any of these.)

Farhad and many others are right - Macs are cheaper than PCs in the long run and they definitely offer better value.

I don't. All I care about is ease of use and the amount of time it takes to maintain and manage it. Macs generally win that battle. PC's on the other hand make 'operating' your PC a task and virtue unto themselves. If you're the kind of person who enjoys having your equipment get in your way, then buy a PC and have at it.

XP will be the last turn of Redmond crank here. And when it's time to junk everything it will be replaced with Macs (BSD based OsX) of some kind or Ubuntu or Linspire.