Originally posted by iH8Quark
*resists urge to harshly disagree...unable to*
okay. You're nuts. Have you used a Dual 1GHz? They're rediculously slow. It isn't the chip, either. Everything runs through the bus simultaneously. RAM, HD, IO. And if it isn't fast, it's going to crap out when put under a heavy workload. I dare you to put the fastest chip on the planet into a mac with a 133MHz bus speed. Then come back and tell me that bus speeds don't matter on a mac. That's the most rediculous comment i've ever read on these forums. 
That was my point.
W and Gopher must have missed the part where I thought the iMac was cool, and said that you get a lot for your $$$. My point was that they should implement better (re:current) technology.
The Porche analogy doesn't work here. You get a cool looking computer that's slower and uses older specs, but it's rock solid, versus something faster that looks terrible, is buggy, and much cheaper. Don't start on the whole Apples to M$ oranges thing, but as you have never owned a PC (I have) they've got their good points and bad. Are you suggesting we're just paying for style? I know the OS is better, that's my point. What, you think PCs don't use Hard Drives, RAM, etc? Macs should be more because you should get more. And better.
How many Porches do you know that have slower engines than Hondas, or break down less, and get better gas mileage?
I think you have it backwards.
And before you complain that I'm a troll, I love the new iMacs. I hate my PC (yes I have one, it sux, I hate it, but I have to have it for some stuff... and no, not games).
I just want my next Apple to be able to use a 200 GB Hard Drive. Is that too much to ask? I'll be getting a Tower even if it doesn't have ATA/133 (OWC has cards for $80), but that iMac would have been cool if it was just a little better.
If they want $2000+ they can at least use TODAY''s TECHNOLOGY. I don't think I'm asking for too much.
And yes Windows sucks, P4s suck, and Wintels in general suck. AMD on the other hand, are pretty cool. They crash much faster
and, unlike the P4, very rarely light fires.
The dual G4's are cool too, but pretty limited. ATA/66? PC133? In a $3000+ machine? Are you kidding? How much more could ATA/133 and DDR-RAM cost? Even on a 1.2 GHz it could really speed things up. I do Digital Video, every second counts. But SCSI is too expensive for the performance difference. And FireWires pretty limited, too.
If they want me to pay that much for a computer, I want better specs. I could buy a top notch AMD with all that stuff, but, in case I haven't mentioned it before, WINDOWS SUX. People can compare, they will compare, Apple vs. Wintel. They're both computers that do similar things using the same types of technology. Look at what is going on in the PC world. Leaps and bounds in the technology area. Apples - nicer but MUCH slower, Wintel - 0 to Crash in 10 seconds.
And don't just tell me to buy a PC if I'm not happy with what Apple has to offer. Cuz that's just what people do, and it just proves my point.
Thank you, good night, I'll be here 'til Thursday. End of rant.
