many school districts have had their whole infrastructure set up with macs for decades, and only upgrade a portion of the computers at a time. new comps go in labs, old lab comps go in library, etc.
seems like they should really just be going for mac minis though, honestly... seems more convenient and price effective nomatter how you slice it
I was just thinking of writing about this but you were quicker :P
Anyway, I think $150 really counts. For schools, the amount of computers is more important than the speed since they will mostly be used for web browsing and document editing (i.e. nothing intensive). For example, instead of buying 10 higher specced iMacs, you can get 11 lower specced iMacs, and still save ~$500. Buy 5 more and you get 15 higher spec and 17 lower spec iMacs for the same money. At least in my school, there is never enough computers so every single one counts.
There are certainly circumstances in which $150 can count (see the use cases I mentioned at the end of the article, and those that some of the other commenters have pointed out), but what I'm driving at is what a terrible *value* these Macs are relative to the base model.
If you're, as some commenters have suggested, buying these or something like them to replace systems that are 5-6 years old, the cuts in specifications can have serious effects on these machines' ability to last for another 5-6 years, to say nothing of their resale value down the line (since schools often resell equipment once it has finally gotten old enough that no one wants it). Even though $150 counts, in the long run, it seems like one of those shortsighted decisions that some middle manager would make to save a few bucks without thinking all the way through it first.
I think the worst thing is that these machines, at $999, are what Apple is selling to increasingly cash-strapped educational institutions as some sort of bargain - if they were really interested in saving schools money, they could either price these machines better, spec them better, or both. The RAM situation seems stingy at best and exploitative at worst.
I didn't say iMacs or any Mac is the best option at all. I agree with you 100% that it's silly to buy iMacs for document editing.
However, like someone mentioned above, some schools have their infrastructure designed for Macs so switching from Mac to Windows/Linux might actually be more expensive than paying the premium for iMacs (you would most likely replace all equipment and possibly even server staff, although Windows can be installed on Macs). I would say that is the only reasonable reason to stick with Macs.
If you don't need what this thing is lacking, $150 saved is $150 saved. If you buy large numbers this soon adds up to real money. And putting in more RAM is very easy with the iMac, so you don't need to buy it from Apple. Small HD, no Thunderbolt and less video RAM is totally inconsequential in many such use cases anyway.
I wouldn't buy this iMac (the "normal" one is a quite nice machine) but having more options here can't be wrong.
These will most likely end up as lab systems, with the difference in cost applied to service contracts. That's where the choice comes into play.
They'll probably replacing 5-6 yr old systems, where the latest and greatest are not needed, as they haven't hit the mainstream-cost effectiveness pinnacle.
These machines won't be stressed out, seeing as though they'll be capable of 90% of the internet needs for a student, or just used to write code, letters, papers, etc.
At any rate, what budgets are the American public education going to have once spending cuts are imposed? They'll look pretty damned good, compared to nothing.
Let's imagine there was some sort of "institution" that wanted to by hundreds or even thousands of iMacs. Let's also say that this institution didn't need to have the fastest processor, the most RAM, the bestest video card, etc. If they spent an extra $150 per machine how much extra would they be pointlessly spending if if they bought 500, 2000, and 5000 iMacs?
Let's also imagine that Apple doesn't like to create new products that don't have a viable market. Let's also imagine that they we inundated with requests to get a lower-priced iMac for educational use which is why they created the Core i3 iMac.
I really don't understand most of the comments: "I think $150 really counts", "If you don't need what this thing is lacking, $150 saved is $150 saved" ...
If $150 matter to you, then you don't buy a Mac. For $950, you can get a laptop (with all the benefits over a desktop) with a much faster CPU, 4GB of RAM, 500GB of HD and double video memory. From Sony, which is not exactly known for low prices (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
A very quick look into all in one desktops: for $939 you can get this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8... Larger monitor, faster CPU, more memory ... and totally touch screen. And of course I would question the all-in-one solution for schools to begin with (in case of PCs that are going to be ab-used by ordes of students, I would think that a modular approach, that can be serviced/repaired more easily, with standard, off-the-shelves components, are a better solution).
If you don't need OSX and you want to save money, don't buy a Mac. If Apple was selling this PC at $700, one could argue that it was a good deal for school: an undoubtedly good tool for an attractive price for the goods of education. But at $1000 is just a slightly less overpriced Mac: taxpayers money are better spent elsewhere.
Well, you can purchase an 8GB kit for around $60-70 online, and then it's still $90 cheaper. For a not-so-well-off educational institution (I've worked at educational institutions for years now as a sysadmin), then saving $90 on between 300 and 600 computers ends up being at least $27000, which is a lot of computers. I did an overhaul of a school system. They bought 500 Pentium D PCs right after Core 2 Duo's came out, because they were $100 cheaper. Sure, any person would say that the $100 would be well worth it, but they couldn't afford that extra $50000 and to be honest, they were using Pentium II and III machines and the move to Pentium D was big enough anyways. It's not like smaller institutions are made of money. Sure, the big players will go for the newer $1149 model, but for student labs and for teachers, the $999 is much more economical.
And so, to save $50000 in the upgrading of 500 PCs, they went with power hungry Pentium D desktops that will negate the $100 savings within a year or two at most. Ugh.
Any price conscious student should be running Ubuntu. For $999, you can get a pretty impressive PC built. Just scale it down to $700 and you're still doing great.
Education should never buy all in one computers. More upgradeable and reparable PCs are a much better buy. It's a shame that some tax money will be wasted on this. Monitors do not need to be replaced as often as a computer. And most computer labs in colleges and universities already have the room for desktop tower anyways so space isn't an issue.
a) All-in-ones like the iMac are great for schools. Less cords and parts means much less of a tangled mess when you have 100 machines in a room.
b) Thunderbolt would be useless for the vast majority of them. The the Lan\Wlan is far more important in these situations.
c) The general stability and ease of administering macs and relative absence of major viral infections alone is worth it. From experience Macs are about 15% of the time and effort relative to the messes made on school Windows machines.
d) OS X / iOS is state-of-the-art and yet have Unix underpinnings for teaching the command line etc.
e) OS and application upgrades are generally painless, fast and CHEAP!
e) Macs have the best real-sale value bar none and tend to stay-viable-in-the-field almost twice as long as PCs.
I think they could bring the price down even further though. 899$ and they would sell in droves.
a) Except for the fact that you are forced into continually buying All-in-ones because the PC is built into the monitor.
b) True
c) Ease of administering Macs? Are you kidding? Apple has nothing as robust as the Group Policy for policy administration, SCCM for software deployments/imaging and ARD, while improving, is still a joke. The infection possibilities on Windows based machines decrease SIGNIFICANTLY with limited user permissions and diligent patching (which you have to do on Macs too).
d) State of the art when compared to what? What version of OS X? Windows and Linux are "state of the art" too.
e) OS X upgrades go about as well as Windows upgrades and it is just easier to wipe the system and start fresh.
e2) I agree on the resale value (shiny factor) but where is your source regarding the 2x viability?
Why would Apple bring down the price more? It would cut into their massive profit margin.
If any government funded institutions use tax payer money to buy these computers, they would simply be squandering public money. There are simply too many other good options out there.
Social criticism aside, this is still a terrible deal for any school. There are far cheaper alternatives if all they want is a bunch of web browsers, and far better alternatives if they actually want to get some work done. The only use for a set up like this is to show off the fancy new computer lab to incoming freshmen who havn't yet sat down or inspected the insides.
Overall, it fits pretty well with the whole Apple mantra of
"People are dumb, they don't know computers."
So ya, I guess I'm ending with my own social commentary too...
There is a difference. This is STILL better than the $1199 iMac from three months ago. Although not by much. And compared to the current $1199 iMac, it's definitely not worth the price decrease.
(I'd argue that it's a better deal than the $799 Mac Mini plus a $200 display though.)
As for me an educational with a Mac is more convenient than on other pcs - so I recommend working with mac and buying essays with the site https://au.papersowl.com/do-my-assignment that proposes to do an assignment for the student!
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
31 Comments
Back to Article
Lord 666 - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Buy some at the $999 rate and flip them on ebay.JarredWalton - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Because if you sell them on eBay, you'll find a bunch of idiots willing to pay $1000 for a crippled iMac that's worth $900!vision33r - Tuesday, August 9, 2011 - link
$999+sales tax. You won't make much profit after ebay/PP fees not including shipping cost which could easily cost $40-50 to ship the thing.DerekWallner - Friday, February 8, 2019 - link
<a href='www.youtube.com'>youtube</a> <link=www.youtube.com>youtube</link> youtube www.youtube.com [linked text](http://theurl.com)mianmian - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Why price-conscious schools would buy mac?It's like saying poor family to buy BMW.
SPianw - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
many school districts have had their whole infrastructure set up with macs for decades, and only upgrade a portion of the computers at a time. new comps go in labs, old lab comps go in library, etc.seems like they should really just be going for mac minis though, honestly... seems more convenient and price effective nomatter how you slice it
crimson117 - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Mac Mini's are easier to steal/lose, though.Kristian Vättö - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
I was just thinking of writing about this but you were quicker :PAnyway, I think $150 really counts. For schools, the amount of computers is more important than the speed since they will mostly be used for web browsing and document editing (i.e. nothing intensive). For example, instead of buying 10 higher specced iMacs, you can get 11 lower specced iMacs, and still save ~$500. Buy 5 more and you get 15 higher spec and 17 lower spec iMacs for the same money. At least in my school, there is never enough computers so every single one counts.
Andrew.a.cunningham - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Fine, I'll bite. :-)There are certainly circumstances in which $150 can count (see the use cases I mentioned at the end of the article, and those that some of the other commenters have pointed out), but what I'm driving at is what a terrible *value* these Macs are relative to the base model.
If you're, as some commenters have suggested, buying these or something like them to replace systems that are 5-6 years old, the cuts in specifications can have serious effects on these machines' ability to last for another 5-6 years, to say nothing of their resale value down the line (since schools often resell equipment once it has finally gotten old enough that no one wants it). Even though $150 counts, in the long run, it seems like one of those shortsighted decisions that some middle manager would make to save a few bucks without thinking all the way through it first.
I think the worst thing is that these machines, at $999, are what Apple is selling to increasingly cash-strapped educational institutions as some sort of bargain - if they were really interested in saving schools money, they could either price these machines better, spec them better, or both. The RAM situation seems stingy at best and exploitative at worst.
MScrip - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Why use Macs at all?For web browsing and document editing... you can get an all-in-one Dell for $599.
You can get 10 of those Dells for the price of 6 Macs. Or 20 vs 12... or 40 vs 24... etc
I always hear that Macs cost less to support overall.... but gosh... does it really cost $400 to support a Dell?
Kristian Vättö - Tuesday, August 9, 2011 - link
I didn't say iMacs or any Mac is the best option at all. I agree with you 100% that it's silly to buy iMacs for document editing.However, like someone mentioned above, some schools have their infrastructure designed for Macs so switching from Mac to Windows/Linux might actually be more expensive than paying the premium for iMacs (you would most likely replace all equipment and possibly even server staff, although Windows can be installed on Macs). I would say that is the only reasonable reason to stick with Macs.
uhuznaa - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
If you don't need what this thing is lacking, $150 saved is $150 saved. If you buy large numbers this soon adds up to real money. And putting in more RAM is very easy with the iMac, so you don't need to buy it from Apple. Small HD, no Thunderbolt and less video RAM is totally inconsequential in many such use cases anyway.I wouldn't buy this iMac (the "normal" one is a quite nice machine) but having more options here can't be wrong.
blueeyesm - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
These will most likely end up as lab systems, with the difference in cost applied to service contracts. That's where the choice comes into play.They'll probably replacing 5-6 yr old systems, where the latest and greatest are not needed, as they haven't hit the mainstream-cost effectiveness pinnacle.
These machines won't be stressed out, seeing as though they'll be capable of 90% of the internet needs for a student, or just used to write code, letters, papers, etc.
At any rate, what budgets are the American public education going to have once spending cuts are imposed? They'll look pretty damned good, compared to nothing.
solipsism - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Let's imagine there was some sort of "institution" that wanted to by hundreds or even thousands of iMacs. Let's also say that this institution didn't need to have the fastest processor, the most RAM, the bestest video card, etc. If they spent an extra $150 per machine how much extra would they be pointlessly spending if if they bought 500, 2000, and 5000 iMacs?Let's also imagine that Apple doesn't like to create new products that don't have a viable market. Let's also imagine that they we inundated with requests to get a lower-priced iMac for educational use which is why they created the Core i3 iMac.
darwinosx - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Andrew certainly doesn't understand the situation with school purchasing and funds. Save your recommendations for markets you understand.Also you can buy ram elsewhere for a much smaller amount than from Apple and then have a perfectly fine Mac.
Macs are more expensive than cut rate piece of junk PC's but they save that cost many times over in maintenance and support.
DigitalFreak - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
"Macs are more expensive than cut rate piece of junk PC's but they save that cost many times over in maintenance and support."LOL. Keep telling yourself that.
yankeeDDL - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
I really don't understand most of the comments: "I think $150 really counts", "If you don't need what this thing is lacking, $150 saved is $150 saved" ...If $150 matter to you, then you don't buy a Mac.
For $950, you can get a laptop (with all the benefits over a desktop) with a much faster CPU, 4GB of RAM, 500GB of HD and double video memory. From Sony, which is not exactly known for low prices (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
A very quick look into all in one desktops: for $939 you can get this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
Larger monitor, faster CPU, more memory ... and totally touch screen.
And of course I would question the all-in-one solution for schools to begin with (in case of PCs that are going to be ab-used by ordes of students, I would think that a modular approach, that can be serviced/repaired more easily, with standard, off-the-shelves components, are a better solution).
If you don't need OSX and you want to save money, don't buy a Mac.
If Apple was selling this PC at $700, one could argue that it was a good deal for school: an undoubtedly good tool for an attractive price for the goods of education. But at $1000 is just a slightly less overpriced Mac: taxpayers money are better spent elsewhere.
PCTC2 - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Well, you can purchase an 8GB kit for around $60-70 online, and then it's still $90 cheaper. For a not-so-well-off educational institution (I've worked at educational institutions for years now as a sysadmin), then saving $90 on between 300 and 600 computers ends up being at least $27000, which is a lot of computers. I did an overhaul of a school system. They bought 500 Pentium D PCs right after Core 2 Duo's came out, because they were $100 cheaper. Sure, any person would say that the $100 would be well worth it, but they couldn't afford that extra $50000 and to be honest, they were using Pentium II and III machines and the move to Pentium D was big enough anyways. It's not like smaller institutions are made of money. Sure, the big players will go for the newer $1149 model, but for student labs and for teachers, the $999 is much more economical.JarredWalton - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
And so, to save $50000 in the upgrading of 500 PCs, they went with power hungry Pentium D desktops that will negate the $100 savings within a year or two at most. Ugh.DanNeely - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Reuse your existing keyboard/mouse/monitor (or even buy cheapos new) and save even more.ATOmega - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Any price conscious student should be running Ubuntu. For $999, you can get a pretty impressive PC built. Just scale it down to $700 and you're still doing great.Oh yeah, and it will be faster running Linux.
zorxd - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
Education should never buy all in one computers. More upgradeable and reparable PCs are a much better buy. It's a shame that some tax money will be wasted on this. Monitors do not need to be replaced as often as a computer. And most computer labs in colleges and universities already have the room for desktop tower anyways so space isn't an issue.Wizzdo - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
a) All-in-ones like the iMac are great for schools. Less cords and parts means much less of a tangled mess when you have 100 machines in a room.b) Thunderbolt would be useless for the vast majority of them. The the Lan\Wlan is far more important in these situations.
c) The general stability and ease of administering macs and relative absence of major viral infections alone is worth it. From experience Macs are about 15% of the time and effort relative to the messes made on school Windows machines.
d) OS X / iOS is state-of-the-art and yet have Unix underpinnings for teaching the command line etc.
e) OS and application upgrades are generally painless, fast and CHEAP!
e) Macs have the best real-sale value bar none and tend to stay-viable-in-the-field almost twice as long as PCs.
I think they could bring the price down even further though. 899$ and they would sell in droves.
darklight0tr - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
a) Except for the fact that you are forced into continually buying All-in-ones because the PC is built into the monitor.b) True
c) Ease of administering Macs? Are you kidding? Apple has nothing as robust as the Group Policy for policy administration, SCCM for software deployments/imaging and ARD, while improving, is still a joke. The infection possibilities on Windows based machines decrease SIGNIFICANTLY with limited user permissions and diligent patching (which you have to do on Macs too).
d) State of the art when compared to what? What version of OS X? Windows and Linux are "state of the art" too.
e) OS X upgrades go about as well as Windows upgrades and it is just easier to wipe the system and start fresh.
e2) I agree on the resale value (shiny factor) but where is your source regarding the 2x viability?
Why would Apple bring down the price more? It would cut into their massive profit margin.
cjt- - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
The $150 discount is great if your school overindulges on computer hardware and buys over 500 of these things: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2620/4023780122_6fa...The best part is that they're only really being used to access some online resources.
anuban - Tuesday, August 9, 2011 - link
If any government funded institutions use tax payer money to buy these computers, they would simply be squandering public money. There are simply too many other good options out there.Camikazi - Tuesday, August 9, 2011 - link
Isn't squandering public money what government funded institutions do? I thought that was what they were the best at?fatlazyhomer - Tuesday, August 9, 2011 - link
Social criticism aside, this is still a terrible deal for any school. There are far cheaper alternatives if all they want is a bunch of web browsers, and far better alternatives if they actually want to get some work done. The only use for a set up like this is to show off the fancy new computer lab to incoming freshmen who havn't yet sat down or inspected the insides.Overall, it fits pretty well with the whole Apple mantra of
"People are dumb, they don't know computers."
So ya, I guess I'm ending with my own social commentary too...
piroroadkill - Tuesday, August 9, 2011 - link
2GB RAM is utterly pathetic in a machine costing $1000.CharonPDX - Tuesday, August 9, 2011 - link
There is a difference. This is STILL better than the $1199 iMac from three months ago. Although not by much. And compared to the current $1199 iMac, it's definitely not worth the price decrease.(I'd argue that it's a better deal than the $799 Mac Mini plus a $200 display though.)
FredWebsters - Thursday, December 6, 2018 - link
As for me an educational with a Mac is more convenient than on other pcs - so I recommend working with mac and buying essays with the site https://au.papersowl.com/do-my-assignment that proposes to do an assignment for the student!