This PC will smoke a mac, and its price!

[MacAztec]

Wow, I found this deal on DealMac (well DealNews).

Here (http://www.overstock.com/cgi-bin/d2.cgi?cid=17436&PAGE=PRODUCT&PROD_ID=220336&fp=F&siteID=NKa3hZyYoHA-0RVbbbQDuzRTHKaeNoufNg#)

That thing is a great deal. Its 1100 dollars with a coupon code. Look at those friggin specs. And the tower actually looks really nice.

How do they offer such nice computers, with such nice specs, for such a low price?!?

I know, you are going to reply *it runs Windows*

But it can run unix or linux or whatever.

[janey]

:'( :'(
you were right. i'm starting to get pissed. this is a PC though!!!! nothing can beat a mac. :mad:
well it can run linux *thinking*
*shrug* it comes with windows though.

[King Cobra]

That site is dedicated to doing little or no business with Apple. This is the only computer they offer:

The original iMac 233MHz (http://www.overstock.com/cgi-bin/d2.cgi?PAGE=PROFRAME&PROD_ID=62652)

It's the same computer I am using to type this, though, the one from the link is selling for $470 and works quite well with OS 9.

As for that underpriced PC, again, the site is dedicated towards PC sales. If the people owning the site suddenly wake up and see the Apple-lit candles, they may offer a PowerMac at $1000. :rolleyes:

[scem0]

It is a great deal. If I had $1,500 for a computer right now, I
would get that.

[MacAztec]

Originally posted by King Cobra
That site is dedicated to doing little or no business with Apple. This is the only computer they offer:

The original iMac 233MHz (http://www.overstock.com/cgi-bin/d2.cgi?PAGE=PROFRAME&PROD_ID=62652)

It's the same computer I am using to type this, though, the one from the link is selling for $470 and works quite well with OS 9.

As for that underpriced PC, again, the site is dedicated towards PC sales. If the people owning the site suddenly wake up and see the Apple-lit candles, they may offer a PowerMac at $1000. :rolleyes:

I dont fully understand your last paragraph.

I know there was sarcasm there (i think), but nobody will ever sell a new PMac for that little because...well...apple is over priced. lol.

[MacAztec]

Originally posted by scem0
It is a great deal. If I had $1,500 for a computer right now, I
would get that.

you mean 1100? Shoot, that can still get you a 17" LCD and still be cheaper than the 17" iMac!

[janey]

Originally posted by MacAztec
you mean 1100? Shoot, that can still get you a 17" LCD and still be cheaper than the 17" iMac!
a 17" iMac with an ADC discount?

[MacAztec]

Originally posted by übergeek
a 17" iMac with an ADC discount?

Well, even then, there about the same price. But the sony is still triple the mhz, double the hd, double the RAM, etc.

[King Cobra]

>(MacAztec) I know there was sarcasm there (i think), but nobody will ever sell a new PMac for that little because...well...apple is over priced. lol.

The site lists so much crap at up to 80 percent off, mostly around 40 percent, though. And a lot of the equipment sold there is old. Given an older PowerMac at around $1800 on current prices it could be reduced and sold as $1000, +/-.

BTW: Is that your avatar, or are there infant worms on my screen? :p

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by MacAztec
Wow, I found this deal on DealMac (well DealNews).

Here (http://www.overstock.com/cgi-bin/d2.cgi?cid=17436&PAGE=PRODUCT&PROD_ID=220336&fp=F&siteID=NKa3hZyYoHA-0RVbbbQDuzRTHKaeNoufNg#)

That thing is a great deal. Its 1100 dollars with a coupon code. Look at those friggin specs. And the tower actually looks really nice.

How do they offer such nice computers, with such nice specs, for such a low price?!?

I know, you are going to reply *it runs Windows*

But it can run unix or linux or whatever.

it's not that it runs XP, it's that it runs XP home :rolleyes: . that said, apple is really "vain" about hardware, and a lot of it is overpriced. This is a good deal, sure. but it can't run OS X. i am not happy with just linux or unix (wouldn't suggest unix, it tends to cost more than windows). i love OS X. that's the price we pay. we put up with a company that puts up with motorola, and even less that would still charge a lot for its hardware. i think it's worth it. so whoever wants can jump on this thing that's 1200 without a monitor, and i'll be snuggling here with my tibook that cost 2.5x more, came with a monitor, is slower than a 2.8 GHz P4, and yet still transcends all the PCs i have ever used.

[peter2002]

This computer is used. Only a 90 day warranty.

[bertinman]

sony?

Those computers (this case design especially) are horrible. I get more calls to fix those damn things than any other system in my realm (over 300 computers + a few apples). An example at how stupid the case design is: you have to take the power supply out to take out the floppy drive. Someone called me in to change out the CD-ROM just last week after cutting himself a few times on the case trying to figure out how to get to the darn thing. Granted, most case designs seem simple AFTER you figure them out.

Anyway, I would rather make a homebuilt machine. Plus, there are faster ram options out there, like PC3700 and RD ram.

- bert

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by peter2002
This computer is used. Only a 90 day warranty.

aww, just seventy-six dollars for a "Two-Year Extended Protection Plan!"

funny how they suck you in.


anyone wanna add up the value of this software?
* Click To DVD(TM) DVD creation
* PictureGear Studio(TM) digital photo
* DVgate(TM) digital video
* MovieShaker(TM) digital video
* SonicStage(TM) for VAIO(R) PC
* Network Smart Capture video webcast
* VAIO Media(TM) network file sharing
* Corel WordPerfect(R) Office 2002
* Wordperfect (R) word processing
* Quattro Pro(R) spreadsheet
* Corel(R) Presentations(TM) slide-show creation
* CorelCENTRAL(TM) personal info manager
* Intuit Quicken(R) 2002
* Adobe(R) Premiere(R) LE
* Adobe(R) Photoshop(R) Elements trial-version
* Veritas(R) RecordNow(TM) DX
* Adobe(R) Acrobat(R) Reader(R)
* Apple QuickTime(R)
* Microsoft(R) Outlook(R) Express
* RealNetworks(R) RealOne (TM) player
* Trend Micro PC-Cillin(R) anti-virus

it's coming up a big $0 in my head. i can't believe they listed quicktime and acrobat reader.

also, it looks like it's refurbished, not used, do you know better, peter?

[MacAztec]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
it's not that it runs XP, it's that it runs XP home :rolleyes: . that said, apple is really "vain" about hardware, and a lot of it is overpriced. This is a good deal, sure. but it can't run OS X. i am not happy with just linux or unix (wouldn't suggest unix, it tends to cost more than windows). i love OS X. that's the price we pay. we put up with a company that puts up with motorola, and even less that would still charge a lot for its hardware. i think it's worth it. so whoever wants can jump on this thing that's 1200 without a monitor, and i'll be snuggling here with my tibook that cost 2.5x more, came with a monitor, is slower than a 2.8 GHz P4, and yet still transcends all the PCs i have ever used.

I know, I am just saying it IS faster than all macs at the moment. All of them im sure. And a better HARDWARE deal.

[MacAztec]

Homebuilt than. Its going to be a lil more trouble, but it will be less that 1100, and way faster than this machine.

I think its just sad that apple charges so much. Yes, they dropped their prices, but hell, its been like 3 years since my g4 400mhz has been out, and the new machines are about twice as fast. In three friggin years.

[MacAztec]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
aww, just seventy-six dollars for a "Two-Year Extended Protection Plan!"

funny how they suck you in.


anyone wanna add up the value of this software?


it's coming up a big $0 in my head. i can't believe they listed quicktime and acrobat reader.

also, it looks like it's refurbished, not used, do you know better, peter?


True about the software part. But if we are comparing this to a mac, they both have 0$ in software....

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by MacAztec
I know, I am just saying it IS faster than all macs at the moment. All of them im sure. And a better HARDWARE deal.

sure. you get a better hardware deal. no fight there. there's competition for it within its own market. sure, i wish that apple would sell competitive hardware at competitive prices. but they don't, and you can't run OS X on that hardware that is more competitive (and some would argue, cheaply and poorly made). so what's the point of complaining? wait, i take that back.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by MacAztec
True about the software part. But if we are comparing this to a mac, they both have 0$ in software....

well, yeah, but i was just thinking, iphoto & the other i's have finesse and such. these apps lookly the HIGHLY crappy and unintuitive, and is a general pain in the ass to use. i have never used any of it, but "trial edition of PS elements" and "premiere LE" look like the closest thing to decent, and it looks like they last a month or so. the other sony stuff is probably just what i said, really poor and barely functional. both add to $0, i guess, but Apple "free" is not Wintel "free." not by a long shot.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by MacAztec
Homebuilt than. Its going to be a lil more trouble, but it will be less that 1100, and way faster than this machine.

I think its just sad that apple charges so much. Yes, they dropped their prices, but hell, its been like 3 years since my g4 400mhz has been out, and the new machines are about twice as fast. In three friggin years.

you have to know a lot to be building a PC from scratch; apple doesn't value the small market of people that would do such a thing, and that also opens them up to piracy, i think, as it would then be so easy to NOT pay apple any money, get your system components elsewhere, and steal OS X. i'm sorry that you're hurt by this, but it's a utilitarian value--considering the practicality of the many.

what i said about complaining--i know you have a right to complain at all, and i don't want to curtail that at all, and i am still willing to argue with you (and lose on some points, sure!), but don't you think it gets a little old? i mean, stuff like this has always been around in the PC world--mac didn't clone, so other companies can't come around and sell cheapo stuff for you to put OS X on... though you can get good deals on refurbed apple systems if you look around--anyways, the point is, we've all heard this, and we all wish that apple would charge less for their hardware, and they have been, but why bring up the same old thing? you're beating a dog that's been battered so much that it's become dismembered, and its remains are all over this forum, among other places.

as i said, though, you have to compromise ;)

[MacPorter]

*Macporter reads post and another article about a PC that is faster than any Mac and so very inexpensive...

Yawn

*Macporter returns to enjoying frothy Victory Porter and working without a hitch on his expensive and slow Mac.:cool:

[MacAztec]

I wasn't really stressing a PCs cheapness until you guys started talkin about how macs are built by only apple and stuff. I was strictly talking about PCs.

I just think if anyone had 1200 for a computer right now, and wanted something fast and upgradable, get this. Its a good deal.

Its pretty much only for people who want a fast machine (someone here bought a PC for 600 bucks, and it was FAST), but doesnt have 2k to blow....

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by MacAztec
I wasn't really stressing a PCs cheapness until you guys started talkin about how macs are built by only apple and stuff. I was strictly talking about PCs.

I just think if anyone had 1200 for a computer right now, and wanted something fast and upgradable, get this. Its a good deal.

certainly. ok. sorry to move it to that, if it's my fault. it's just that usually when someone says this here, he is complaining about how PCs "really are better, just look how dirt cheap they are! i got myself one, and one for everyone in my heram!"--and then there was the title:
Mac Forums > Other... > Community Discussion > This PC will smoke a mac, and its price!
misleading, i guess ;).

nice job changing the subject, here, i'll change mine too. this really is like chatting, eh?

[MacPorter]

I'm thinking Powermac for 1499.

Cheers!

[FelixDerKater]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
anyone wanna add up the value of this software?

it's coming up a big $0 in my head. i can't believe they listed quicktime and acrobat reader.
[/edit]

They can't even include full Photoshop Elements? You only get a trial version. That is ridiculous.

[iJon]

unless your planning on playing games on this, i dont see why its so better than my mac. will these threads ever end.

iJon

[pmac933]

While Overstock does primarily hawk PC's, I have seen them sell more than just the original iMac. I've seen them sell the beige PowerMac G3 - 300MHz, the G4 Cube - 450MHz, and a PowerBook 3400. This was about 3 or 4 months ago. Not surprisingly, those computers sold out in less than a week!:D

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by pmac933
While Overstock does primarily hawk PC's, I have seen them sell more than just the original iMac. I've seen them sell the beige PowerMac G3 - 300MHz, the G4 Cube - 450MHz, and a PowerBook 3400. This was about 3 or 4 months ago. Not surprisingly, those computers sold out in less than a week!:D

still not exactly the latest and greatest of its type, like this thing. but hey, i'd have bought a cube SO FAST. i wish they would come out with new ones.

[janey]

apple needs to sell a cube with a 970 chip for UNDER $2k.
Also with a 120gb hard drive, good graphics card, 4x (min) superdrive, etc.
It will sell pretty quickly i bet.
A LOT of people on MR want one.
A LOT of windows users want one.
A LOT of mac users would switch to OS X because of it.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by übergeek
apple needs to sell a cube with a 970 chip for UNDER $2k.
Also with a 120gb hard drive, good graphics card, 4x (min) superdrive, etc.
It will sell pretty quickly i bet.

no kidding! i would be all over that in seconds flat. i'll have to save my ca$h working this summer :)

[ibookin']

Originally posted by Shadowfax
no kidding! i would be all over that in seconds flat. i'll have to save my ca$h working this summer :)

I totally agree. Cube with 970? Superdrive? Great stuff.

GeForce FX, please!

[janey]

Naw i want an Nvidia Quadro4 900XGL or something like that but i doubt it would even fit...

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by übergeek
Naw i want an Nvidia Quadro4 900XGL or something like that but i doubt it would even fit...

why? isn't that just for like überpro workstation apps? there's no reason for that to be in a midlevel consumer computer, and a cube is way too small to be putting the latest and greatest in.

[voicegy]

Best use of a Cube in my opinion....:p

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by voicegy
Best use of a Cube in my opinion....:p

hey, even that's pretty cool:p .

[MacFan25]

This PC sounds pretty nice, but I would rather have a new Mac instead.

[hvfsl]

I would rather have a new Mac on that hardware than a new Mac on current hardware. Anyway we all know Mac OS X is better than windows, it is just that the hardware is better on PCs (even though they do not look as good).

The problem is that I need a computer to do things, not just look good and if I can get a very fast PC for half the price of a Mac, then I have problems justifing the Mac. Since I do a lot of proccessor intensive work like video editing and 3D graphics and at the moment a $2000 PC is over twice as fast as a $2000 Mac at things like this.

[scem0]

Originally posted by MacAztec
you mean 1100? Shoot, that can still get you a 17" LCD and still be cheaper than the 17" iMac!

I was thinking of buying a new monitor or something. Or just
keeping the extra $400 and using my current monitor.

[wdlove]

Computers: Best thing since sliced bread!

[FelixDerKater]

Originally posted by wdlove
Computers: Best thing since sliced bread!

And we though Aqua was lickable... Edible computers. How long would it last? When your computers pisses you off, just eat it.

[cubist]

Cool pic on the sliced bread!

MacAztec, there's something wrong with your tar.

Given that the machine is used/refurbished, I think the price is a little high. It is a nice combination of hardware features. However, the software collection is terrible. If I was given this machine, I'd reformat immediately. XP Home is a liability, not an asset.

I think I could build a PC with a DVD-RW, 2.8GHz, 512MB, 533 bus for around $900, maybe less. It would be a generic ATX, so upgrades would be possible. I'd get one of those neon-blue-lit cases.

But why would I want to do that? Just because its CPU is faster than a Mac, I'm going to switch over to a crappier OS and crappier applications?!

How many people have gotten rid of their cars and bought motorcycles because motorcycles accelerate faster? A few, sure. So what do they do when they buy plywood at Home Depot?

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by FelixDerKater
When your computers pisses you off, just eat it.

I can see this being really popular in the Windows world :)

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by cubist
XP Home is a liability, not an asset.


OMG that is the greatest comment. i am so putting that in my sig. do you mind? well, i'll take it out if you do.

great analogy with the motorcycles, i haven't heard that one. but i'll stick with my sporty volvo TiBook too ;)

[King Cobra]

>(Felix) And we though Aqua was lickable... Edible computers.

Sick...That's just wrong, dude. :p

>How long would it last? When your computers pisses you off, just eat it.

I'm not too sure how many people would enjoy eating a CPU...but I have heard of one person, who has eaten thousands of dollars of metal, including mechanical computer equipment.

To keep it on topic, I think it was a used/cheap PC. :p

[spazum64]

People keep judging by price alone...

In addition to the fact that while Macs are sometimes more expensive but have a much better long-term value, there's also the fact that it doesn't matter how much stuff a computer does as long as it does what you need it to do.

In fact...

"Click To DVD" DVD creation? You get iDVD on DVD-burning Macs.
"PictureGear Studio" digital photo? iPhoto.
"DVgate" digital video? iMovie.
"MovieShaker" digital video? Do you really need 2 digital video programs?
"SonicStage"? If I could figure out what that was, I could tell what program on the Mac easily replaces it. From what I can tell with a really quick google: iTunes.
"Network Smart Capture" video webcast? Unless this machine comes with a compatible digital camera, you'd still need to buy one. Most cameras that do this sort of thing come with their own software.
"VAIO Media" network file sharing? From what I can tell, this is for sharing media within a LAN. Rendezvous and AFP work well to implement those things on Macs...
"Corel WordPerfect Office 2002"? Yay, an office suite. AppleWorks and Keynote, combined, make a very nice office suite, and many Macs still have the "Office Party" M$ Office:Mac promotion.
(skipping the individual Corel Office apps)
"Intuit Quicken 2002"? You can get Quicken 2003 for Mac for a mere $49.
"Adobe Premiere LE"? iMovie or Final Cut Express.
"Adobe Photoshop Elements trial-version"? If you want the trial version on the Mac, go ahead and download it. "Wow, yuo get the trial version for free!"
"Veritas RecordNow DX"? OS X has great CD (and DVD, when a DVD burner is available) authoring support built-in. If you need something a little more advanced, get Toast or Jam.
"Adobe Acrobat Reader"? OMG! A free program for free! Great value!
"Apple QuickTime"? :sigh: I wish you could get this on the Mac...
"Microsoft Outlook Express"? There are plenty of nice email programs for OS X. My favorite is Mail- it does everything I need in a mail program, and the spam filter rox0rs.
"RealNetworks RealOne player"? Mac version freely downloadable...
"Trend Micro PC-Cillin anti-virus"? Uh-oh, Macs don't come with any free anti-virus programs, so all of our Macs are going to get virii!!! Oh, wait, in the many years I've used Macs, I've never gotten a virus.

Oh, and read macvspc.info about why Macs usually have a better value. The price issue is specifically addressed here (http://forgetcomputers.com/~jdroz/03.html) for people who are interested.

[spinner]

I am kind of surprised that no one has pointed out that it only has an integrated graphics card with "64MB of SHARED memory" and only a 5400RPM hard drive.

These items help to make it a good deal alright. :rolleyes:

[janey]

Originally posted by spinner
I am kind of surprised that no one has pointed out that it only has an integrated graphics card with "64MB of SHARED memory" and only a 5400RPM hard drive.

These items help to make it a good deal alright. :rolleyes:
Well what do you expect in a reeally bad PC?

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by spinner
I am kind of surprised that no one has pointed out that it only has an integrated graphics card with "64MB of SHARED memory" and only a 5400RPM hard drive.

what exactly does "shared" mean? is it using the system RAM?

[scem0]

Originally posted by übergeek
Well what do you expect in a reeally bad PC?

I know, really


That computer is anything but bad.

[spinner]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
what exactly does "shared" mean? is it using the system RAM?

Yep, that is exactly what it means. Vid cards that are integrated onto the mobo really suck, not only do they take up system RAM but sometimes (depends on the system and manufacturer) they don't even bother putting an AGP slot on the board so you are stuck with add in PCI cards if you want to upgrade.

[shadowfax]

thanks, spinner. just making sure. man, this is looking like a pretty bad deal now, even if you forget about XP home for a minute--which doesn't seem possible.

well, i guess we blew the top off another lame PC-Better-Than-Mac argument. good work, team!

;) :D :cool: :rolleyes:

lol

[scem0]

Originally posted by MacAztec
I wasn't really stressing a PCs cheapness until you guys started talkin about how macs are built by only apple and stuff. I was strictly talking about PCs.

I just think if anyone had 1200 for a computer right now, and wanted something fast and upgradable, get this. Its a good deal.

Its pretty much only for people who want a fast machine (someone here bought a PC for 600 bucks, and it was FAST), but doesnt have 2k to blow....

That was me, but it was really $700 after shipping etc.

2.4 GHz, 512 megs 333 MHz DDR, 40 gig HD, 40x10x40x burner.

And I got it because I only had $700 to spend (that value was
determined by my parents ;)) and compared to the macs I could
have gotten for the same price, the PC was Soooooooo much
better. I still like mac better, but u just gotta be able to pay for
them... :rolleyes: ;)

And by no means have y'all proven that this PC is worse than a
mac, especially a mac that is semilarly priced. Yes, the graphics
card isn't the best, and yes the operating system isn't perfect,
but it is fast as hell.

Many people at these forums seem to think that there aren't
any advantages with a PC, and they are dreadfully wrong. There
are soooo many. One main one, which is important for me is
Kazaa. Mac p2p progs SUCK ANUS - compared to kazaa that is.

Just don't skew your thinking with zealotism.

[janey]

Ummmmm okay...haven't you heard of some programs called Neo, Limewire, Carracho and iSwipe? :rolleyes:

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by scem0
That was me, but it was really $700 after shipping etc.

2.4 GHz, 512 megs 333 MHz DDR, 40 gig HD, 40x10x40x burner.

And I got it because I only had $700 to spend (that value was
determined by my parents ;)) and compared to the macs I could
have gotten for the same price, the PC was Soooooooo much
better. I still like mac better, but u just gotta be able to pay for
them... :rolleyes: ;)

And by no means have y'all proven that this PC is worse than a
mac, especially a mac that is semilarly priced. Yes, the graphics
card isn't the best, and yes the operating system isn't perfect,
but it is fast as hell.

Many people at these forums seem to think that there aren't
any advantages with a PC, and they are dreadfully wrong. There
are soooo many. One main one, which is important for me is
Kazaa. Mac p2p progs SUCK ANUS - compared to kazaa that is.

Just don't skew your thinking with zealotism.

kazaa sucks just as much as limewire or acquisition; if you really want to make us feel bad, you'll cite soulseek.

i'd bring up everything we mentioned in this thread already, but i wouldn't want to insult your intelligence. sure, this computer has a fast processor, but there is nothing legal on it you can do that compares to what you can do with OS X out of the box and for free, legally. it doesn't even come with any developer tools.

from my experience, that integrated gfx is REALLY going to hurt you on games &c, and as far as i can see, games, soulseek, and raw speed to do very little of anything worthwhile are the only advantages to PC that i have seen that seem credible. OK, you win then :)

[MacAztec]

I dont see why you just quoted ScemO.

But anyways, Kazaa does not suck. Man, there was like 50,000,000,000 Gigabytes of files being shared last time i checked. Thats uhh like 50 xetabytes. On any mac p2p program, you find maybe....about a few terrabytes.

Oh, and I dont see what you mean by legal pc. Everyone is downloading stuff. Nobody cares what a mac can do out of the box, because people usually buy them to run software, not standard stuff.

[janey]

Originally posted by MacAztec
Man, there was like 50,000,000,000 Gigabytes of files being shared last time i checked. Thats uhh like 50 xetabytes.
Actually I think it was 50 terabytes, not 50,000,000,000 gigs.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by MacAztec
I dont see why you just quoted ScemO.

But anyways, Kazaa does not suck. Man, there was like 50,000,000,000 Gigabytes of files being shared last time i checked. Thats uhh like 50 xetabytes. On any mac p2p program, you find maybe....about a few terrabytes.

Oh, and I dont see what you mean by legal pc. Everyone is downloading stuff. Nobody cares what a mac can do out of the box, because people usually buy them to run software, not standard stuff.

OK! :). i'd be willing to bet that 95% of that kazaa interchange is expressly illegal--you do know that most bands preclude aquiring their music without actually paying, right? i don't have a problem with such activity, really, but, hey, it seems like a petty reason to call a MAIN reason that PCs are better than macs--because you can do illegal P2P DLing. and i mean, sure, you can say it's all legal... scem0, what do you download off Kazaa? my sister's on it and getting stuff like shania twain, michelle branch... meh.

[King Cobra]

First off, there ARE a variety of Kazaa-like programs for the Mac, which can effectively achieve a few petabytes (yes, 1000+ terabytes, 1 X 10^6 gigabytes). Check out XNap for a freebee, as you suggested, Aztek.

I also recall someone suggesting Drumbeat drumbeat.info
It's $30, but you get receive over 4 petabytes in a few minutes, effortlessly.

Second off, I think Shadow quoted scem because he wanted to make reference to scem's opinion on P2P apps. Quite frankly, I disagree with scem, as well. If a version of Kazaa was imported to the Mac, would the same still be said about Mac P2P apps?

Third, not only can you not prove that Macs are better, but you cannot prove PCs are better. PCs depend on rapid fire speed for the basic user with expereince behind the wheel, as well as extreme, hardcore gaming. This is why the PC will never die. You could have Windows 95 on a PC, but as long as the OS can still function and can still play games, the PC will not die.

Also, for PC users complaining about crashes, when was the last time you refreshed your computer? You start with a solid OS, but the more crap you put on it, the more you ****** with it and cause problems. Almost all the time there is a crash, it's YOUR responsibility to fix it because YOU were the one causing the crash. Whatever program you have that caused the program or the OS to crash is most likely not Microsoft, unless it has been publically address. It is a third party candidate's. This is also how conflicts on the Mac occur, but the software encoding on a PC is more complex than on a Mac. Improper coding is a critical factor to consider when installing third party software.

Macintosh is dedicated to high end graphics and applying visual mechanics, as well as performing complex operations. Don't be fooled by various statistics about Mac vs. PCs, because most of the time, they tell you nothing. Many public facilities and businesses incorporate Macs into their environment because of both the ability to perform these complex operations and the ability to easily program software more so than PCs. And this is why the Mac will never die.

I feel that anyone disagreeing with any positives about either the PC as a whole or the Mac as a whole is part of this so-called "zealotism", as scem puts it. The greatest evil among computers is NOT Microsoft and NOT Apple, but thinking that the world is better off with only one of either model.

Until there is a simple and effective way to combine PCs and Macs, neither the PC nor the Mac will EVER die. And this is the Mac vs. PC war we have been faced with since the birth of both Macs and PCs. Those, who fail to respect the Mac vs. PC war, will become zealots of either side of the computational spectrum.

Although, with the possible iPod update, more Macs and iPods may sell. :cool:

[MacAztec]

xNap really sucks. Everyone says they cant get ONE thing to download (happens here too)

I think drumbeat had a name change to phex, which also does not work :rolleyes:

[spinner]

Originally posted by scem0
Just don't skew your thinking with zealotism.

I don't think we are being unrealist in any way. Yes it has a fast proc, 512MB DDR, a big but slow HD, and DVD burner. But correct me if I am wrong, one of the biggest things that PCs has over Mac is games. Well, that integrated vid card and slow ass hard drive are going to make the games suck, period. You have to judge the system on all of its qualities not just the proc and ram. We can all agree that system speed is based on more than that. Otherwise you are guilty of intel zealotism and following the bigger is better regardless of what else is in the system.

[MacAztec]

Originally posted by spinner
I don't think we are being unrealist in any way. Yes it has a fast proc, 512MB DDR, a big but slow HD, and DVD burner. But correct me if I am wrong, one of the biggest things that PCs has over Mac is games. Well, that integrated vid card and slow ass hard drive are going to make the games suck, period. You have to judge the system on all of its qualities not just the proc and ram. We can all agree that system speed is based on more than that. Otherwise you are guilty of intel zealotism and following the bigger is better regardless of what else is in the system.

im DYING to know why the hell you think that hardrive is slow...

is it because of 5400 RPM? That doesnt make the hard drive noticably slower, in anything. The data rate (ata speed), and buffer does.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by King Cobra

I feel that anyone disagreeing with any positives about either the PC as a whole or the Mac as a whole is part of this so-called "zealotism", as scem puts it. The greatest evil among computers is NOT Microsoft and NOT Apple, but thinking that the world is better off with only one of either model.

let's call it "bigotry," just to piss of some of the staunch mac users.

i still think that macs are better, but i admit that's my opinion, driven by my perspective, which, as i get older (god i can't believe i am saying that already), values performance less so and aesthetics and functionality much much moreso, enough to sacrifice more $ and some compatibility for.

and a note about MS being evil: i think they really are, which, as a capitalist, i expect, but hey, come on, economically speaking, that's much too much power for an evil company to have. i think MS has a monopoly, and that they abuse it, and that is why i hate them. I dislike intel mostly for its hardware DRM support... which i think is evil as it facilitates huge curtailments of a lot of rights i believe americans hold. but, as the pixar example holds out, intel has its place.

i think these discussions really start out economically, which is more or less ok, and necessarily devolve into stupid discussions about PC v. Mac. i'm sorry to say i don't have the answer for ending this crap. at all.

[janey]

nobody has the answer to end these pc vs. mac discussions.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by MacAztec
im DYING to know why the hell you think that hardrive is slow...

is it because of 5400 RPM? That doesnt make the hard drive noticably slower, in anything. The data rate (ata speed), and buffer does.

where did you hear that? there's no way a 5400 OR 7200 RPM drive can saturate even ATA 66 with just one drive on a bus, and this one is probably 100. they top out at burst rates in the 50 MB/s, always, and, barring the info density, 7200 rpm drives always render much higher sustained data transfer rates. i think it averages at like 37 MB/sec on a good IBM 7200, though i haven't been in the HDD market in awhile. 5400 rpm drives DO slow you down, unless you up the data density intensely. and yes, buffers help, but they are pretty standard 8 MB on most drives, with nice ones having 16 MB. even with the added buffer, you'll still see performance drops on a 5400 when it really count's, inputting raw DV onto your drive in real-time.

[scem0]

for mac limewire is the best. For PC kazaa is the best.

How many tera/peta/giga/whatever-bites of files available really
has much less to do with the overall good-ness of the software.

All I knwo is that I downloaded 50 different kung fu movies on
Kazaa and you wouldnt even dream of getting it off of some other
p2p program. Not to mention I got them quickly. Most files d/l
very quickly, and 99% download at all, which you can't say about
limewire, xnap, and other p2p clients.

Ummmmm okay...haven't you heard of some programs called Neo, Limewire, Carracho and iSwipe?

Ummmmmm yeah, and I've wasted my time trying to download
files with them too.

Neo - worthless. Can't download ANYTHING but mainstream
music and files that are in high demand, generally speaking.

Limewire - it is good, except there isn't a very good selection of
kung fu movies, and wierd things like that. THings download
slowly, but at least they download. Best mac p2p client but not
near as good as Kazaa.

Carracho - AHHHHHHHHHHH I have wasted so many hours trying
to get access to a decent server with decent files.

iSwipe - ughhhhhh, I'm glad they made an attempt to add the
fasttrack network (which Kazaa uses), but it sucks. 3 out of 50
BRITNEY SPEARS songs downloaded.

If only 3 out of 50 songs of one of the (or the most) popular pop
artists download, then I know that the software won't download
much non-mainstream stuff that I am interested in (ie kung fu
movies).

Oh, and another reason why LimeWire is bad is because you have
to wait a million years for it to connect to a decent amount of
users. With Kazaa, as soon as you open kazaa, it is connected to
THOUSANDS of users.

he greatest evil among computers is NOT Microsoft and NOT Apple, but thinking that the world is better off with only one of either model.

I totally agree. I love both macs and PCs, but it annoys me when
people don't look at all the facts, and put down PCs when they
either don't know what they are talking about, are being biased,
or just look at the bad in PCs and just look at the good in Macs.
There are pro's and con's of both, and the pro's and con's of both
platforms should be taken into concideration before making
proclimations about which one is better.

THe whole argument is pointless in the 1st place, because it is all
just opinion. You can change someone's opinion.... sometimes, but
even so, you can never argue over who's opinion is better. Opinions
are seperate, and can be compared, but not proven whether right
or wrong.

So basically, I think macs have their advantages, and PCs have
their advantages. They are both good platforms for various
reasons. Whether you like one or the other doesn't make it
'better', that is just your opinion. And my opinion says that that
computer is a great deal despite its vid card, which isn't THAT bad
in the 1st place. :rolleyes: ;)

[MacAztec]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
where did you hear that? there's no way a 5400 OR 7200 RPM drive can saturate even ATA 66 with just one drive on a bus, and this one is probably 100. they top out at burst rates in the 50 MB/s, always, and, barring the info density, 7200 rpm drives always render much higher sustained data transfer rates. i think it averages at like 37 MB/sec on a good IBM 7200, though i haven't been in the HDD market in awhile. 5400 rpm drives DO slow you down, unless you up the data density intensely. and yes, buffers help, but they are pretty standard 8 MB on most drives, with nice ones having 16 MB. even with the added buffer, you'll still see performance drops on a 5400 when it really count's, inputting raw DV onto your drive in real-time.

Wait...where did i hear WHAT? What the hell did i hear wrong?

So an ATA/100, and an ATA/133 drive are the exact same speeds (if they have the same specs). I really dont think so.

7200 RPM drives are faster, but run a lot hotter. that is why laptop drives are 5400 RPM

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by MacAztec
Wait...where did i hear WHAT? What the hell did i hear wrong?

So an ATA/100, and an ATA/133 drive are the exact same speeds (if they have the same specs). I really dont think so.

7200 RPM drives are faster, but run a lot hotter. that is why laptop drives are 5400 RPM

heat has nothing to do wiith speed, if the heat doesn't hinder speed, and on desktop drives like this with cooling systems, it won't.

a single 7200 rpm drive rated at ATA 133 WILL NOT be helped by being put on an ATA 133 bus over an ATA 100 bus. this is why serial ATA is useless right now. our drives won't saturate the buses bandwidth, so it's useless to increase the bus bandwidth, unless you are daisychaining drives on a single bus, which often happens, but is not the case here, which is the point that was made about this 5400 rpm drive. it will come even less close to saturating an ATA 100 bus than a 7200 rpm drive, and it will leave a lot of empty bandwidth on that drive.

[janey]

shadowfax do you make it your business to prove people wrong? you did it to everyone in this whole freaking forum!

[scem0]

He isn't trying to prove everyone wrong, he is trying to help them
see the truth. ;)

[janey]

Originally posted by scem0
He isn't trying to prove everyone wrong, he is trying to help them
see the truth. ;)
well in a way you are right...:rolleyes:

[MacAztec]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
heat has nothing to do wiith speed, if the heat doesn't hinder speed, and on desktop drives like this with cooling systems, it won't.

a single 7200 rpm drive rated at ATA 133 WILL NOT be helped by being put on an ATA 133 bus over an ATA 100 bus. this is why serial ATA is useless right now. our drives won't saturate the buses bandwidth, so it's useless to increase the bus bandwidth, unless you are daisychaining drives on a single bus, which often happens, but is not the case here, which is the point that was made about this 5400 rpm drive. it will come even less close to saturating an ATA 100 bus than a 7200 rpm drive, and it will leave a lot of empty bandwidth on that drive.

Damn, well xlr8yourmac speed tests are different i believe.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by MacAztec
Damn, well xlr8yourmac speed tests are different i believe.
can you show me the tests? i went to the site and i don't see them.

[MacAztec]

Not the exact tests I wanted but here is one, im gettin more hold on...

http://www.barefeats.com/hard23.html

Edit:

Another link in another language...

here (http://www.price.ro/sections.php?op=viewarticle&artid=294)

[MacAztec]

I found others, but there weren't any real benchmarks, just people saying that it seems ata 133 seems faster than ata 100 for doing their video stuff.

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by MacAztec
Not the exact tests I wanted but here is one, im gettin more hold on...

http://www.barefeats.com/hard23.html

Edit:

Another link in another language...

here (http://www.price.ro/sections.php?op=viewarticle&artid=294)

Well, this certainly disproves my point about ATA 66; it's been finally beaten into the ground, i guess. but this site recommends either ATA 100 or ATA 133, as they performed pretty comparably. looks like ATA 100 performed better on one of the tests, which is an indicator as to how reliable these tests are... 100 and 133, i believe, are neck and neck with a single drive per bus, because they are both more than enough for one drive. i was out in left field on the ATA 66, but right on, i think, with my 133/100 comment.

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by Shadowfax
Well, this certainly disproves my point about ATA 66; it's been finally beaten into the ground, i guess. but this site recommends either ATA 100 or ATA 133, as they performed pretty comparably. looks like ATA 100 performed better on one of the tests, which is an indicator as to how reliable these tests are... 100 and 133, i believe, are neck and neck with a single drive per bus, because they are both more than enough for one drive. i was out in left field on the ATA 66, but right on, i think, with my 133/100 comment.

This link shows ATA100 and 133 neck and neck (w/100 actually winning some). Here (http://www.tweakers.com.au/articles/storage/ata133/page1.asp)


Lethal

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by LethalWolfe
This link shows ATA100 and 133 neck and neck (w/100 actually winning some). Here (http://www.tweakers.com.au/articles/storage/ata133/page1.asp)


Lethal

why do you think 100 wins (sometimes)? i mean, i would have guessed it to really not matter, but i figured if anything came out like slightly ahead, it would be 133. could it just be the quality of the different controllers?

[janey]

it's no big deal if one's faster than the other.
Sometimes the older technology wins.