Apple brings back the PC jr keyboard to life (or the new iMac thread)

[Adrian Hon]

It's worth saying that a lot of people buy Macs precisely because of OS X - that's why I switched from Windows to Apple a few years ago, buying an admittedly slower and more expensive laptop in the process (it was the G4 days). Again, OS X is a matter of preference, just as expandability is.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

And the place that Aggie ALWAYS gets bogged down in is that he thinks that since Apple likes to throw in crap that most users don't use or need, that he should add those into Dells as well. Sorry, but just because Apple throws in all sorts of crap into OSX doesn't mean that Windows users require Vista Ultimate.

I did not say that.

I said, that if you are going to compare Apple on price, then you ought to compare the closest comparable machine with the closest comparable software. The closest analogue to OS X Tiger is Vista Ultimate (although you might be able to make a case for Vista Business).

Sure, you can buy a crappier computer with more limited software for a lot less, but I don't think I have ever disputed that.

It's just shameful that you have to resort to comparing Apple's computers with some non-comparable piece of crap in order to demonstrate that Apple is "really expensive". You did this last week, when you compared some underpowered piece of crap with Apple's high powered workstations. You should read that thread again, and watch how you and MZ came to grief because you wouldn't pay close attention to the actual products.

Here's some news: good quality computers from well-known manufacturers that include decent software bundles are expensive. They all work out to a similar price. Crappy computers with hobbled processors, poor quality components and bad software are cheaper. Ric Romero could have reported this.

[Kuciwalker]

You've taken Dell's cheapest and nastiest range of computer, which has the cheapest components (like the slower optical drive) and the worst form factor (see pic which is of a slightly better model).

You can upgrade an optical drive for under $50. So you're admitting with Apple, you're just paying for the exterior of the computer?

[Q Classic]

Originally posted by Agathon


Do you? I think they look like giant cheese graters.

I guess. I usually like keeping the side open so I can see the innards. I kinda don't really recall what the outside looks like.

[Kuciwalker]

I said, that if you are going to compare Apple on price, then you ought to compare the closest comparable machine with the closest comparable software. The closest analogue to OS X Tiger is Vista Ultimate

That's bull****. As someone who has Ultimate, the difference between it and Home Premium doesn't suddenly make only the former comparable to Tiger.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

You've taken Dell's cheapest and nastiest range of computer, which has the cheapest components (like the slower optical drive) and the worst form factor (see pic which is of a slightly better model).

You can upgrade an optical drive for under $50.

Not to a comparable drive on that model. I checked. Strangely, you can put in two drives, or a Blu ray drive, but not a drive comparable to the iMac. I wonder why that is (or I wonder if it is the same drive and just has been labelled differently).

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

I said, that if you are going to compare Apple on price, then you ought to compare the closest comparable machine with the closest comparable software. The closest analogue to OS X Tiger is Vista Ultimate

That's bull****. As someone who has Ultimate, the difference between it and Home Premium doesn't suddenly make only the former comparable to Tiger.

The Home versions of Windows are crippled in comparison to the Pro versions. Apple does not engage in this practice with its OS.

Oh, and I'm proud to have met one of the 24 people who actually use Windows Vista.

[Ramo]

I said, that if you are going to compare Apple on price, then you ought to compare the closest comparable machine with the closest comparable software. The closest analogue to OS X Tiger is Vista Ultimate (although you might be able to make a case for Vista Business).

Sure, you can buy a crappier computer with more limited software for a lot less, but I don't think I have ever disputed that.

Why should the vast majority of people give a **** about the difference between Vista Premium and Ultimate?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Agathon
I did not say that.

Yes, you did... and I'll show you:

I said, that if you are going to compare Apple on price, then you ought to compare the closest comparable machine with the closest comparable software. The closest analogue to OS X Tiger is Vista Ultimate (although you might be able to make a case for Vista Business).

See, you just did right there. I have Windows Vista Home Premium. Looking at what Vista Ultimate has that Home Premium doesn't (ie, features that Businesses would like), I don't need it!

So why would you want me to compare the price of OS X Tiger to Vista Ultimate, when Vista Home Premium does everything I want in an OS and the features in OS X Tiger that Vista Ultimate has but Vista Home Premium does not, I won't be using!

So you are basically saying, add in all this stuff that's useless to you so we can make a "fair comparison".

Sorry, but that's the great thing about PCs. We aren't locked into the vertical integration that Apple users are. I don't need a webcam for one.

It's just shameful that you have to resort to comparing Apple's computers with some non-comparable piece of crap in order to demonstrate that Apple is "really expensive". You did this last week, when you compared some underpowered piece of crap with Apple's high powered workstations. You should read that thread again, and watch how you and MZ came to grief because you wouldn't pay close attention to the actual products.

Like I said, PC users aren't locked into models like Apple users are. I don't need all the crap that Apple loads into their computers. So, yeah, it is overpriced and expensive because they are making me pay for a ton of stuff I don't want.

It's like saying a TV/DVD player isn't overpriced because it costs the same as both components separately even though all I wanted was a TV.

Basically, I can get a far better computer for me for $2000 (which is what I normally spend) from Velocity Micro or (if need be) Gateway or Dell than from Apple, where a good portion of my money will be going into crap I don't need.

For one, I don't need a monitor or speakers with a brand new computer... can you find me an Apple for $2000 that takes that into account and is a good gaming machine?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Agathon
The Home versions of Windows are crippled in comparison to the Pro versions.

That's absolutely absurd as applied to Premium and Ultimate.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
That's absolutely absurd as applied to Premium and Ultimate.

Yep... Aggie knows jack **** about Vista versions.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/editions/choose.mspx

[Imran Siddiqui]

For one, I don't need a monitor or speakers with a brand new computer... can you find me an Apple for $2000 that takes that into account and is a good gaming machine?

Btw, I did this with Velocity Micro (who makes my current computer) and I got this:

500 Watt power supply
2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo E6650
4 GM RAM
320 MB GeForce 8880 GTS (PCI-E) which is overclocked
Creative Labs Soundblaster X-Fi XtremeGamer
320 GB Hard Drive
20x DVD+/-RW/CD-RW
16x DVD/48x CD-RW
8-in-1 Floppy Drive Media Reader combo
10/100/1000 MBps Ethernet card
Vista Home Premium
MS Works 8.5

Oh, and I took out the mouse because I don't need that either (I have a Logitech 518, which is a great mouse for gaming).

That's all for... $1970.

So, your mission... find me a gaming Mac that has these specs, sans a monitor, speakers, or a mouse (cause I don't need any of them).

[Agathon]

See, you just did right there. I have Windows Vista Home Premium. Looking at what Vista Ultimate has that Home Premium doesn't (ie, features that Businesses would like), I don't need it!

How easy.

I said you should compare computer to computer, not computer to any particular user.

Thank you and come again.

If you want to bring user needs into it, then Apple wins hands down.

Most consumer grade users don't upgrade much more than RAM (if that). Thus, they have no need for some huge mofo of a tower. Most users don't need a huge barnlike edifice on or under their desk. They'd be better off with an iMac.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Agathon
How easy.

I said you should compare computer to computer, not computer to any particular user.

Thank you and come again.

Wow... what a moronic comment by you. Who do you think purchases computers? Yeah... users. We aren't all of the Apple hive mind and have our own different preferences. That's why all of the major PC manufactures (and almost all of the minor ones) allow massive customization. Try again.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Wow... what a moronic comment by you. Who do you think purchases computers? Yeah... users. We aren't all of the Apple hive mind and have our own different preferences. That's why all of the major PC manufactures (and almost all of the minor ones) allow massive customization. Try again.

Most consumers don't care. Most will buy the computer in their price range as long as it "burns" DVDs or "does photos".

Most people don't think too hard about the computer they buy. That's why it is better to sell computers that arent crippled. The only reason that doesn't happen is that companies like Dell are engaged in price wars at the low end. Thus they shave functionality from their products in order to satisfy the people who don't think about what they buy, and who will be disappointed later.