quad core xeons might be pretty good for gaming actually. Got 2x dual core opteron in my server, may try and benchmark it against a friends phenom.
quad core xeons might be pretty good for gaming actually. Got 2x dual core opteron in my server, may try and benchmark it against a friends phenom.
today the standard on mac pro is 8 core
Man I must sound like a broken record. Does your $450 laptop have an LED LCD screen? No it doesn't. Does it have SMS sensor, bluetooth 2.0 EDR, ABGN wireless, media remote, USB, Firewire, DVI video out (HDMI compliant), digital audio out, built in web camera, Gigabit Ethernet, mag safe ac adapter, and a multi touch track pad?
Granted, I am not trying to say your laptop sucks, and I don't care if you like Mac or PC or what you spend your money on. It is your money and your choice to buy whatever you want. I am just pointing out it isn't over priced because you are getting a ton of standard features that sub $1,000 laptops don't have. In fact most PC laptops don't have these features, and LED back lit screens are more expensive than cold cathode ones, and they are also more environment friendly since they don't contain any mercury in them.
If every system were simply judged on processor, RAM, video card, and storage capacity then people wouldn't care about software and other features.
So there is really no way to compare a $450 PC laptop to a Macbook. You must remember that they only use high end parts, while I am sure your $450 laptop was the lowest bid components on your printed circuit boards which make up your hardware. Apple also designs everything from the ground up. Their engineers create the hardware configurations instead of just sending specs to a manufacturing plant and letting them make it as cheap as possible while maintaining your desired specs.
Screen realestate also counts for a lot, and you can't compare a laptop that runs the same resolution as an iMac because it is just resolution. What happens when you need to run 6 desktops and have like 12 active windows on each desktop? The 24" screen is way nicer in that scenario and a laptop screen can't compare. So you can't really compare the two, they are just different things all together.
I would much rather have a higher performance computer than one with a million bells and whistles that I never use.
Don't need SMS sensor - I don't drop my laptop
don't need bluetooth - my cell phone doesnt even have BT
I have at least ABG wireless
I have a media remote for my desktop, where its practical
Ummm USB? seriosuly? thats a Mac only feature? wow...
Firewire - doesn't account for exaggerated price
webcam - doesnt account for the exaggerated price
every feature you mentioned is trivial aside from the LED LCD
its all standard stuff that comes with any sub-$1000 laptop (other than the SMS, which i seriously hope u dont need)
I would rather keep my $450 with an LCD screen than a $1500 with an LED LCD.
Your screen real estate = your resolution
I would rather have a 20" Computer monitor over a 50" 720P LCD TV
Specifically talking about resolution though, a 24" monitor is better than a 17" monitor of the same res but it doesn't excuse the fact that they still have the same res and thus the same capacity for workspace.
Also, just because they are higher "quality" doesn't mean they don't break. My friend has a macbook pro that is less than 1 year old that just intermittently shuts down for no reason.
Also, since "quality" is an opinion, it is an added price for no reason.
But that's how computers ARE judged. What do you think almost every person on this forum puts in their sig?
CPU, RAM, Vid Card, and storage space.
I'm not a PC fanboy, I just state what I see and Macs are overpriced, I'm not saying they are bad, they are great computers, I would get one if I had nothing else to spend the money on, because they are.......overpriced.
When did I say Dells weren't overpriced? I will go and check it out though. I can build a "Hackintosh" for under $1000 that would kill the $2000 iMac.Ok, but stop skewing the price, that comes with the $1099 price tag, not the $1500. Firewire is a constant speed and much more reliable than USB, which is burst speed. ABGN wireless allows to connect to all radios. We run 802.11 A exclusively on my work network because we don't want tons of rogue connections. So, there is a security plus in that and we aren't the only networks that do this. If you just have B/G then you have to buy a third party card. BT and the webcam are super handy. I transfer files from cell phone and blackberry to my Macbook Pro all the time back and forth. It is a feature I use, does not apply to you apparently. SMS isn't just for when you drop your laptop, there are many applications for it. iAlertU is a prime and excellent example of how the SMS is used for application and how the remote is more than just a media remote, and it shows how the camera is more than just a thing to take pictures with. To say that there is no application for it is ignorant and short sighted. There are plenty and iAlertU just happens to be the best example of how the camera, the SMS sensor, and the remote can all function as additional features in third party application.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4ojR_qrMy0&feature=related
http://ialertu.en.softonic.com/mac
No not really, 17 inches versus 24 inches is night and day difference, and that was the point I was making when you were trying to compare the 24" iMac to a PC laptop.
Who says they didn't? where did I say that they don't break? Hell, Porsche's break down all the time, as well as BMW and every other expensive car you can buy. I had a German sports car a few years ago and it was freaking awesome, but it cost me an arm and a leg every time it broke down and it broke down probably almost at the same frequency as my piece of crap American Jeep that always ran like crap. The difference was, my German car ran like a champ when it ran, while my Jeep just always ran like crap and was way cheaper and easier to fix when things broke.
I will have to disagree. Products and technology in general are judged on Price, quality, features and benefits. Obviously you have no need for BT, ABGN wireless, web cam, etc. So, those will not benefit you, so you ignore them. Someone who wants those features and will benefit from them will look at something that has them standard, so they can use it as is out of the box with out having to install a bunch of extra crap or carry around extra hardware with their laptops. People put their specs in their sig to show off and brag, it is more of a status thing than anything else.
Over priced compared to what? Build a Dell laptop spec for spec versus a Macbook and a Macbook pro, and you will see that the Mac is cheaper sometimes. Go build a dual quad-core Xeon Dell desktop, Apple's Mac Pros are generally $200 cheaper than those. You can't compare a Macbook to your $450 laptop, because a Macbook is in a different league of laptops.
When did I say Dells weren't overpriced? I will go and check it out though. I can build a "Hackintosh" for under $1000 that would kill the $2000 iMac.
Also I said $1500 because thats an estimate about what it would cost to have a macbook with the same performance specs as my laptop but with the LED LCD and other things.
I will go to newegg, dell, and apple websites and find out what I can get (performance-wise because I like speed) for a budget of $2500, software and extras stuff like mice and KBs included. I'm not going to do it now because this argument really isn't a big issue for me but I think it will be fun.
I wouldn't call it an argument, more of a debate. Either way, you aren't going to be able to build one spec for spec and make it cheaper. Trust me I have tried many times. They are typically all around the same price give or take, and if you are lucky and get lots of rebates then they are cheaper.
The only and cheapest LCD LED back lit monitor I saw on newegg is like $500 and it is only for a 22". Just to give you an idea.
lol, i would call a debate pretty much an intellectual argument.
I said spec for performance as well as obvious feature (LED LCD is not an obvious feature that everyone would actually care about or even know it existed) and also, it wont be spec-for-spec, it will be what I get for the price (i set it at $2500 because that is a huge price and will guarantee high end). An LED LCD is just as good as a high-quality normal LCD when it comes to what matters most (refresh rate and color accuracy). Also, their LCDs aren't uber great, the iMacs in my college lab have slight bad colors from any angle except directly in front (blues turn more and more green as you look at it from an angle.)
Any monitor you look at from an angle will have an effect
Any monitor you look at from an angle will have an effect
lol, i would call a debate pretty much an intellectual argument.
I said spec for performance as well as obvious feature (LED LCD is not an obvious feature that everyone would actually care about or even know it existed) and also, it wont be spec-for-spec, it will be what I get for the price (i set it at $2500 because that is a huge price and will guarantee high end). An LED LCD is just as good as a high-quality normal LCD when it comes to what matters most (refresh rate and color accuracy). Also, their LCDs aren't uber great, the iMacs in my college lab have slight bad colors from any angle except directly in front (blues turn more and more green as you look at it from an angle.)
How can you compare it then with out building it spec for spec? It is obviously not a comparison at all. LED back lit monitors are catching on and they are even using them in TVs now. It may as well soon be a standard. They use up less power, look brilliant, and of course there is no mercury in them.
You aren't comparing them you are just creating a shopping list of computer parts. Comparing them would be trying to build or buy an iMac or all-in-one PC and then comparing the features and benefits versus the price.
All the new Macs also come with Firewire 800, blue tooth 2.0 EDR, built in ABGN wireless (yes the iMac has built in wireless), HDMI video out. Plus it is like 1" thick and takes up very little space. These are features consumers want. Consumers don't want to build a computer they want to buy a computer.
Your comparison at best is just a way to spend money and no where near comparing how to get a PC just like an iMac for the same price.
You missed the point of what I did, It is not the price you get for the machine, it is the machine you get for the price. Aesthetics aside, a Mac is pretty overpriced. Who cares about mercury, an LED backlight looks good but its not a showstopper EIZO only just released a monitor with an LED backlight and their main reason was more for power consumption than light conformity, Firewire isn't an absolute necessity (neither is it all that expensive, HDMI is extremely easy to get with any computer now, either with a DVI-HDMI adapter or a computer that supports HDMI natively, Bluetooth is an inexpensive feature, size is only a feature for those that want it to be, Gigabit ethernet is nice but many new NICs have it so its not Mac-specific, as far as i could tell the Remote is an additional part that doesnt necessarily come with it. It's the things you can't easily add or change that make a computer worth the initial price you pay for it. A CPU is not just something you go to walmart and buy for $10 and plug it in, a CPU is one of the most important things in a computer. If I were a video editor I'd rather have a computer that doesn't have built in firewire but a fast CPU than a slower CPU but built-in firewire.