 |
|
November 16, 2007, 7:41 PM
|
 |
Administrator
|
|
Join Date: December 2002
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 36
Posts: 5,252
|
|
Originally Posted by Chris Britton
I run on 1248X1048 or something like that. I like me screen crisp and clear.
|
1280x1024.
|
November 17, 2007, 10:35 PM
|
 |
biggus dickus
|
|
Join Date: August 2006
Location: under the bridge
Age: 34
Posts: 1,613
|
|
Originally Posted by Danny Stewart
BeOS? OS/2?
|
Windows XP. 
Originally Posted by Danny Stewart
Yeah, post it, I wanna see.
|
I'll have a look.
Originally Posted by Chris Britton
I run on 1248X1048.
|
__________________
Not at all benevolent dictator and I don't need to sign my posts cause my name is up there at the top.
|
November 17, 2007, 10:50 PM
|
 |
Bang.
|
|
Join Date: August 2006
Location: Florida, USA
Age: 33
Posts: 895
|
|
Originally Posted by Recurring Villain
|
THE HORROR...
Oh yeah and I'm on 1024x768 right now. 
|
November 18, 2007, 7:21 AM
|
 |
"My turn."
|
|
Join Date: June 2004
Location: England
Age: 36
Posts: 2,966
|
|
I just love huge screens and small icons
__________________
Chris Britton
" As in, "RTD: Blargh" rather than "Blargh: RTD." Unless of course you're quoting Blargh about RTD." - Danny Stewart
|
November 18, 2007, 4:22 PM
|
|
Administrator
|
|
Join Date: December 2002
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 36
Posts: 5,252
|
|
Originally Posted by Recurring Villain
|
Well, at least they have some hardware sense, I suppose.
|
November 18, 2007, 11:01 PM
|
|
biggus dickus
|
|
Join Date: August 2006
Location: under the bridge
Age: 34
Posts: 1,613
|
|
Originally Posted by Danny Stewart
Well, at least they have some hardware sense, I suppose.
|
Not really...
__________________
Not at all benevolent dictator and I don't need to sign my posts cause my name is up there at the top.
|
November 19, 2007, 12:55 AM
|
|
Administrator
|
|
Join Date: December 2002
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 36
Posts: 5,252
|
|
Originally Posted by Recurring Villain
Not really...
|
Now you're just being bitter. Regardless of prices, when you buy a Mac, you're buying an extremely nice computer. You can't possibly argue with that.
|
November 19, 2007, 12:57 AM
|
|
Bang.
|
|
Join Date: August 2006
Location: Florida, USA
Age: 33
Posts: 895
|
|
And I'm doing just that tomorrow.
[/MAC DISCUSSION]
|
November 19, 2007, 2:27 AM
|
|
biggus dickus
|
|
Join Date: August 2006
Location: under the bridge
Age: 34
Posts: 1,613
|
|
Originally Posted by Danny Stewart
You can't possibly argue with that.
|
Well, I can, and I have extensively. But we've covered this territory before and neither of us is going to concede to the other, so I'm not going to go on about it.
One day one of us will probably go, "Oh, maybe Danny/RV was right."
__________________
Not at all benevolent dictator and I don't need to sign my posts cause my name is up there at the top.
|
November 19, 2007, 12:50 PM
|
|
Administrator
|
|
Join Date: December 2002
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 36
Posts: 5,252
|
|
|
How can you possible argue that the hardware is bad? That's just asinine. But I'll leave you alone and let you grasp at straws to use against Macs.
FYI, most of your arguments make really good sense. Price, hardware lock-in, etc. But nowhere in this realm of reality can you possibly argue that you're not buying a really good computer, because you are. Please go fight a battle you can win.
|
November 19, 2007, 1:33 PM
|
 |
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: August 2006
Location: England
Age: 31
Posts: 529
|
|
|
I run at 1440x900.
|
November 19, 2007, 2:45 PM
|
|
Bang.
|
|
Join Date: August 2006
Location: Florida, USA
Age: 33
Posts: 895
|
|
I'm not really sure what resolution I'm on right now.
|
November 19, 2007, 4:41 PM
|
|
Administrator
|
|
Join Date: December 2002
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 36
Posts: 5,252
|
|
Originally Posted by Dalek104
I run at 1440x900.
|
You're in good company -- that's what I run at. 
Originally Posted by Superkid11
I'm not really sure what resolution I'm on right now. |
You're running at 1680x1050.
|
November 19, 2007, 9:05 PM
|
|
biggus dickus
|
|
Join Date: August 2006
Location: under the bridge
Age: 34
Posts: 1,613
|
|
Originally Posted by Danny Stewart
But nowhere in this realm of reality can you possibly argue that you're not buying a really good computer, because you are.
|
I'm not disputing the quality of Apple's parts, as the parts they source are usually of a high standard.
Additionally, Mac hardware's uniformity is advantageous as the hardware is all seamlessly compatible (in most cases) with the Mac OS, hardware incompatibility is often the major cause of Windows' instability.
However purchasing a Mac with no intention of using Mac OS isn't the brightest idea, as you lose a lot if not most of the advantages of owning a Mac in the first place. In this case, it is better to source your own hardware and build your own computer, as you'll be able to build a computer with higher specs for a better price than Apple's equivalent*.
In my school's case, I believe they must have been gifted the computers and decided to use Windows on them instead for some strange reason.
*I just did a little research and found something interesting; My younger brothers' new computer has a Core 2 quad clocked at 2.6ghz, 8600GS, 4gb of DDR2 RAM. It cost $1400 AUD. The closest equivalent Quad-core Mac Pro costs (quoted directly from their site after using the configuration options) A$ 5,168.00, with only a single 7300GT. There was no option for a better graphics card (for example, a 7600GT like I have which is a mid range last-gen card. However you could double up on graphics cards, which I did not do. If I did, the price would be even higher.)
Previously I had taken your word on that research you did on comparing Mac parts to PC parts, where you said that the end result was remarkably similar. Unless Australia is being charged 4 times more for their Macs, however, I think you either need to recalculate or we must be getting hardware from completely different planets.
__________________
Not at all benevolent dictator and I don't need to sign my posts cause my name is up there at the top.
|
November 19, 2007, 9:45 PM
|
|
Administrator
|
|
Join Date: December 2002
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 36
Posts: 5,252
|
|
Originally Posted by Recurring Villain
I'm not disputing the quality of Apple's parts, as the parts they source are usually of a high standard.
Additionally, Mac hardware's uniformity is advantageous as the hardware is all seamlessly compatible (in most cases) with the Mac OS, hardware incompatibility is often the major cause of Windows' instability.
However purchasing a Mac with no intention of using Mac OS isn't the brightest idea, as you lose a lot if not most of the advantages of owning a Mac in the first place. In this case, it is better to source your own hardware and build your own computer, as you'll be able to build a computer with higher specs for a better price than Apple's equivalent*.
|
Agreed x 3.
Originally Posted by Recurring Villain
*I just did a little research and found something interesting; My younger brother
|
Holy crap, RV has a younger brother.
Originally Posted by Recurring Villain
s' new computer has a Core 2 quad clocked at 2.6ghz, 8600GS, 4gb of DDR2 RAM. It cost $1400 AUD. The closest equivalent Quad-core Mac Pro costs (quoted directly from their site after using the configuration options) A$ 5,168.00, with only a single 7300GT. There was no option for a better graphics card (for example, a 7600GT like I have which is a mid range last-gen card. However you could double up on graphics cards, which I did not do. If I did, the price would be even higher.)
Previously I had taken your word on that research you did on comparing Mac parts to PC parts, where you said that the end result was remarkably similar. Unless Australia is being charged 4 times more for their Macs, however, I think you either need to recalculate or we must be getting hardware from completely different planets.
|
Your mistake was in the customization. Apple rips you off big time if you do any of the build-to-order options -- I don't deny that. ($750 to upgrade from 2 GB of memory to 4 GB?) I was comparing their base model iMac and Mac Pro to a PC outfitted with the same parts (or as close as I could find).
|
November 19, 2007, 10:11 PM
|
|
biggus dickus
|
|
Join Date: August 2006
Location: under the bridge
Age: 34
Posts: 1,613
|
|
Originally Posted by Danny Stewart
Your mistake was in the customization. Apple rips you off big time if you do any of the build-to-order options -- I don't deny that. ($750 to upgrade from 2 GB of memory to 4 GB?) I was comparing their base model iMac and Mac Pro to a PC outfitted with the same parts (or as close as I could find).
|
So how would I ever find a Mac computer equivalent to my brother's? The base model still costs $3999.00 AUD without the customization! Plus, I can't find an iMac that has similar specs to those I outlined above, and in buying an iMac I would additionally lose the ability to upgrade anything other than RAM and the HDD.
Edit: Let's not make this into another argument. Instead:
Say I have $1500AU and want to buy a new computer, convince me why I should get an Mac instead of a PC with vastly higher specs.
__________________
Not at all benevolent dictator and I don't need to sign my posts cause my name is up there at the top.
Last edited by Recurring Villain; November 19, 2007 at 10:17 PM
|
November 19, 2007, 10:20 PM
|
|
Administrator
|
|
Join Date: December 2002
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 36
Posts: 5,252
|
|
Originally Posted by Recurring Villain
So how would I ever find a Mac computer equivalent to my brother's?
|
Depends on your needs. You pick the model that's right for you based on what you need it to do. If you want to upgrade it, buy the base Mac Pro and stick your own video card in there.
Originally Posted by Recurring Villain
The base model still costs $3999.00 AUD without the customization!
|
Here it costs $2499.
Originally Posted by Recurring Villain
Plus, I can't find an iMac that has similar specs to those I outlined above, and in buying an iMac I would additionally lose the ability to upgrade anything other than RAM and the HDD.
|
That's because you're not the intended audience for the iMac.
Originally Posted by Recurring Villain
So why would I want a Mac if I can build a computer leagues better than their $5000+ model for $3500 less? I could even turn it into a Hackintosh if I was so inclined.
|
Why would you want a Mac if you can build a computer leagues better than their $5000+ model for $3500 less?
You wouldn't.
Why do others? Good hardware, good support, and a stellar operating system.
And FYI, Hackintoshes (for the most part) are about as stable as Windows Me Beta 1. If you really want the OS, buy the computer. Or find a torrent for Windows Me Beta 1.
|
November 20, 2007, 3:57 AM
|
|
"My turn."
|
|
Join Date: June 2004
Location: England
Age: 36
Posts: 2,966
|
|
Man. now i remember the days when 800X600 was actually considered big
__________________
Chris Britton
" As in, "RTD: Blargh" rather than "Blargh: RTD." Unless of course you're quoting Blargh about RTD." - Danny Stewart
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:16 PM.
|
 |
Similar Threads