Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yea, I figured that with the 50 'pound' reference.
And yea, I get that you can buy a keyboard and mouse. ANd you can find some dirt cheap. But really, Apple?
No PC manufacturer... NONE.... not one... at least in the US.... MAKES you buy a keyboard and mouse separately.
If they ARE so damn cheap, then why doesn't Apple include one.
I DO NOT GET THEM!
You are not paying for Quality, Archineer. You're paying a premium for a kitschy, "nichey" design.
Damnit, did I just get sucked into the Apple v PC debate. Argh. I so didn't mean to.
/out
I think I've said enough.
To the Original Poster... check out the Dell Inpsiron 660 line. That's some good stuff right there. A good all around computer.
You may think that good industrial design has nothing to do with quality, but it is a key part to a pleasurable user experience. As a designer I personally cannot bear half arsed shoddy design. The mini is more expensive because of its miniaturisation, and while you can get a cheaper PC desktop it's hardly expensive. You'd have to be seriously broke to consider £550 + a screen (or whatever it is in the US) expensive for a computer. The inspiron isn't available here but a cheap computer would go for £350 - £400, minus screen.
06-21-2012, 11:17 AM
i7pXFLbhE3gq
n/a posts
I do think it's rather unfortunate that Apple doesn't offer a real traditional consumer desktop, but I absolutely understand their reasoning. There's zero indication that it would do well and zero indication that even if it did, they'd be able to maintain decent enough margins to justify keeping it around.
For laptops, the design is absolutely part of the functionality. Sure, you can pick up a cheap laptop with decent specs, but it'll be a plastic piece of junk that falls apart and stops working (low quality hinges, plastic cases that let the motherboard flex, flimsy displays that result in dark spots over time (Apple was guilty of this on the non-unibody Macbook Pro), poor thermal design that results in premature failure, etc etc). Now, maybe that's fine for you (it probably is if your computer is just going to sit on a desk), and in that case Apple really isn't going after you. As soon as you start looking at laptops that aren't built to self-destruct, Apple becomes very competitive.
As for style vs substance, for me that's really just a ridiculous point. Personally, I'd love to have a Thinkpad that ran OS X flawlessly. I use OS X not because it runs on a fancy piece of hardware, but because it ships with all the standard *nix tools I use on a daily basis, in addition to being able to run things like Office.
Oh the urge to mock the mac-twits is irresistible, but I will refrain since I don't want to get flame-banned.
27in iMac base model going for $1,700 right now on apple.com.
For $1,800 I could build any of you a windoze 7 box with a top of the line ivy i7-3770, top of the line mobo, 16gb 1600mhz ddr3, 128gb ssd, 1tb data drive, gtx570, corsair h80, seasonic 750w psu, blu-ray burner, a 27in 1080p monitor, and a nice case. I'll even OC to 4.5ghz for no charge. Think that could beat an iMac performance wise?
Then for a nominal charge I could set you up with a Lion VM and you could safari, iphoto and final cut all you want.
Sure you wouldn't get 1440 resolution, that legendary apple support, and the smug satisfaction of owning an overpriced kid's toy, but do you really need it?
I do think it's rather unfortunate that Apple doesn't offer a real traditional consumer desktop, but I absolutely understand their reasoning. There's zero indication that it would do well and zero indication that even if it did, they'd be able to maintain decent enough margins to justify keeping it around.
For laptops, the design is absolutely part of the functionality. Sure, you can pick up a cheap laptop with decent specs, but it'll be a plastic piece of junk that falls apart and stops working (low quality hinges, plastic cases that let the motherboard flex, flimsy displays that result in dark spots over time (Apple was guilty of this on the non-unibody Macbook Pro), poor thermal design that results in premature failure, etc etc). Now, maybe that's fine for you (it probably is if your computer is just going to sit on a desk), and in that case Apple really isn't going after you. As soon as you start looking at laptops that aren't built to self-destruct, Apple becomes very competitive.
As for style vs substance, for me that's really just a ridiculous point. Personally, I'd love to have a Thinkpad that ran OS X flawlessly. I use OS X not because it runs on a fancy piece of hardware, but because it ships with all the standard *nix tools I use on a daily basis, in addition to being able to run things like Office.
The mac pro is dying for much the same reason. There's little call for traditional towers there days, even in the professional market. When we kitted out our office we only opted for two mac pros, and that was simply for the 8 core cpus (Maybe the quadro cards as well.) Aside from really high end tasks (ie rendering, video editing) the imac is more than capable. I'm wondering if Apple will keep it around for much longer.
Oh the urge to mock the mac-twits is irresistible, but I will refrain since I don't want to get flame-banned.
27in iMac base model going for $1,700 right now on apple.com.
For $1,800 I could build any of you a windoze 7 box with a top of the line ivy i7-3770, top of the line mobo, 16gb 1600mhz ddr3, 128gb ssd, 1tb data drive, gtx570, corsair h80, seasonic 750w psu, blu-ray burner, a 27in 1080p monitor, and a nice case. I'll even OC to 4.5ghz for no charge. Think that could beat an iMac performance wise?
Then for a nominal charge I could set you up with a Lion VM and you could safari, iphoto and final cut all you want.
Sure you wouldn't get 1440 resolution, that legendary apple support, and the smug satisfaction of owning an overpriced kid's toy, but do you really need it?
What would you need those slightly higher specs for though? And the only comparable screen is a dell u2711 - £950 in the UK, so basically the rest of the imac costs £450. (£1400 per imac, though we got ours for £1100 per unit.)
I know because we priced up all of the workstation options we had. The imac is due for a refresh anyway.
As much as it looks like I am anti-Apple... I am really not.
I really want to see Apple clean the floors with Microsoft. And to do that they need a $600 machine.
I would replace every Windows Desktop in my office with an Apple one if they could compete on price.
Instead, we will continue to live in Microsoft's World....
I don't hate Apple, really. I am just pissed at them for being content to be the niche provider.
As much as it looks like I am anti-Apple... I am really not.
I really want to see Apple clean the floors with Microsoft. And to do that they need a $600 machine.
I would replace every Windows Desktop in my office with an Apple one if they could compete on price.
Instead, we will continue to live in Microsoft's World....
I don't hate Apple, really. I am just pissed at them for being content to be the niche provider.
If they relaunched the old plastic macbook at the £500 - £600 mark they'd probably wipe the floor with the pc market. The ipad is doing so well because it's in the price range people will pay for such a device. £500 seems to be the magic cut off point with consumers. They'd have to cut corners with the machine though and it's something they will not do.
What would you need those slightly higher specs for though? And the only comparable screen is a dell u2711 - £950 in the UK, so basically the rest of the imac costs £450. (£1400 per imac, though we got ours for £1100 per unit.)
I know because we priced up all of the workstation options we had. The imac is due for a refresh anyway.
Those specs are a little bit better than "slightly higher".
I only use that build as an illustration of the glaring price discrepancy between a base model 27in iMac and a comparably equipped PC (i5, 4gb ram, 1tb drive only, inferior video card to gtx570, etc.).
I recognize the IPS panel difference, but personally I would get more use out of the extra horsepower in my build, vs. the added resolution of a 1440 IPS.
I suppose if you are a graphic designer that makes a living on high-res imagery you might see value in an iMac, but for your standard gamer (less gaming compatibility on mac btw) or MS office junkie, the cost of a mac isn't justified, in my most humble opinion.
You may have felt a disturbance in the Force yesterday. That was when the iCloud service was down. It was though a million hipsters cried out at once and were silenced.
You may have felt a disturbance in the Force yesterday. That was when the iCloud service was down. It was though a million hipsters cried out at once and were silenced.
They were down with the downed iCloud before being down with downed iClouds was cool.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
