Why would you go for a Windows computer for the hardware? You can get great hardware with Macs. If you want insane power, go look at the Mac Pros.
Sorry, but the Mac Pros use hardware from newegg that can be gotten at either half, or 1/3 the price. Xenons are nothing special.
It doesn't need to be a Windows computer, that is the POINT of building your own. YOU choose the OS it runs. BSD, Linux, Windows, Hackntosh, whatever you wish and YOU choose the hardware, getting it for extremely cheap.
All i gotta say is there is no Server version for OSX. Windows servers are amazingly easy to work with and get a basic network going with some simple knowledge. Ubuntu server is fun to work with too.
Like any well known pre-built seller, apple sells hardware for very high prices. When going for a high end video editing or graphic design, you want to get the best hardware possible for the price. This generally goes to getting it off sites like ibuypower, or buying parts and building your own, which is the cheapest.
I really don't want to start arguments here, but I'll provide some evidence. Take the very low end mac pro. Here are the specs:
One 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon “Nehalem”
3GB (3x1GB)
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s hard drive
ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB
One 18x SuperDrive
Case 1 x NZXT Phantom Full Tower Gaming Case-Black
Processor 1 x Intel® Core™ i7-2700K Processor (4x 3.50GHz/8MB L3 Cache)
Memory 32 GB [8 GB X4] DDR3-1333 Memory Module-Corsair or Major Brand
Video Card NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 - 1.5GB - EVGA Superclocked - Core: 797MHz-Single Card
Motherboard [SLI] ASUS P8Z68-V Pro -- 3x PCI-E 2.0 x16, On-Board Bluetooth, Lucid Virtu Technology
Power Supply 750 Watt -- Corsair CMPSU-750TXV2
Primary Hard Drive 1 TB HARD DRIVE -- 16M Cache, Power Saving, 3.0Gb/s-Single Drive
Optical Drive 24X Dual Format/Double Layer DVD±R/±RW + CD-R/RW Drive-Black
Subtotal $2,499.00
Sure it doesn't have an xeon, but it's got an i7 2700k, 32GB or RAM and a GX 580. One of the best editing systems you can get at the moment. Even costs exactly the same as the mac pro.
Yep, Apple even pricing stuff more than other pre-built manufacturers.
Like any well known pre-built seller, apple sells hardware for very high prices. When going for a high end video editing or graphic design, you want to get the best hardware possible for the price. This generally goes to getting it off sites like ibuypower, or buying parts and building your own, which is the cheapest.
I really don't want to start arguments here, but I'll provide some evidence. Take the very low end mac pro. Here are the specs:
One 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon “Nehalem”
3GB (3x1GB)
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s hard drive
ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB
One 18x SuperDrive
Case 1 x NZXT Phantom Full Tower Gaming Case-Black
Processor 1 x Intel® Core™ i7-2700K Processor (4x 3.50GHz/8MB L3 Cache)
Memory 32 GB [8 GB X4] DDR3-1333 Memory Module-Corsair or Major Brand
Video Card NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 - 1.5GB - EVGA Superclocked - Core: 797MHz-Single Card
Motherboard [SLI] ASUS P8Z68-V Pro -- 3x PCI-E 2.0 x16, On-Board Bluetooth, Lucid Virtu Technology
Power Supply 750 Watt -- Corsair CMPSU-750TXV2
Primary Hard Drive 1 TB HARD DRIVE -- 16M Cache, Power Saving, 3.0Gb/s-Single Drive
Optical Drive 24X Dual Format/Double Layer DVD±R/±RW + CD-R/RW Drive-Black
Subtotal $2,499.00
Sure it doesn't have an xeon, but it's got an i7 2700k, 32GB or RAM and a GX 580. One of the best editing systems you can get at the moment. Even costs exactly the same as the mac pro.
Even if you added the xenons and a dual CPU mobo it would come out to around the same, give or take a few hundred $.
The Mac equiv would likely be in the $3-4k range if not higher.
I LOVE how an 18x dvd drive is considered a "superdrive". Really now?
edit: I'm confused as to why they are offering server processors in the first place in the Macs......
I never said Macs were cheaper, or cost the same. It's like this:
1 Mac lasts a minimum of 7 years (this is from my entire family experience with all our Macs)
1 PC lasts a minimum of 3 years. I'll be nice that way. You'll probably end up having to buy 2 over the course of 7 years.
My dad used to work for a highschool, and his classroom had 25 Macs and 25 PCs. All the PCs had to be replaced every year, after being repaired multiple times. None of the Macs had problems or had to be replaced until they were three years old. This is what happens even when highschoolers who don't really give a crap about the computers use the Macs/PCs. The same kids did not use the same computer every time. They all used both the Macs and PCs. He worked there 6 years, and the same results every time.
Just so you know, I'm not this kid who knows exactly how good every processor/graphics card/ harddrive is. I just know from experience Macs work better, and can actually run video. I mean seriously, my PC couldn't even when it was brand new. "Ironically", my Mac, older than the PC, runs video just fine.
You guys are all coming from a gaming perspective, that's what's making you think Macs are horrible. Come out of your shell and realize what other things computers can actually do.Um, fm87, is your signature talking about your computer?
They're made with the same parts as PCs, but Apple takes a ton more time making them look better, and just put them together better. This can't be proven except by experience. PCs do have more bang for your buck, but they don't last as long, but that's also only proven by experience.
Fact: My family has yet to own a Mac to last under 7 years.
Fact: My family has yet to own a PC to last 7 years. I'm not sure, but I'm not even sure one has reached 3 years before.
You are a ****ing idiot. I have a HP Pavilion Elite from 1995. Gtfo this forum.
Fact: 56 of the macs in my school have gone bad, either from dropping, errors, or kids fooling around.
Fact: Nothing has ever happened to any of the pcs with windows xp on them.
I never said Macs were cheaper, or cost the same. It's like this:
1 Mac lasts a minimum of 7 years (this is from my entire family experience with all our Macs)
1 PC lasts a minimum of 3 years. I'll be nice that way. You'll probably end up having to buy 2 over the course of 7 years.
Your problem is you can't look past your own examples.
Think of this, what if YOU are the reason your PCs don't last very long? I've been doing tech support, building PCs, and fixing PCs for almost 5 years now, had my own business AND done interning. I can tell you, for absolute fact, that the ONLY reason a PC would last such a short time is from the end user either not taking care of it, or not knowing how to use it.
I'm not being biased, I am not being a hater, I am giving you a cold hard fact that ANY OTHER person who does tech support will tell you.
My dad used to work for a highschool, and his classroom had 25 Macs and 25 PCs. All the PCs had to be replaced every year, after being repaired multiple times. None of the Macs had problems or had to be replaced until they were three years old. This is what happens even when highschoolers who don't really give a crap about the computers use the Macs/PCs. The same kids did not use the same computer every time. They all used both the Macs and PCs. He worked there 6 years, and the same results every time.
Yes, the PCs had to be replaced in a high school because high school kids are idiots. They load whatever kind of crap they can get their hands on to the school PCs because they can. This is not something new. You're essentially saying "we gave a monkey a banana and he ate it every time, thus, monkeys hate bananas".
Just so you know, I'm not this kid who knows exactly how good every processor/graphics card/ harddrive is. I just know from experience Macs work better, and can actually run video. I mean seriously, my PC couldn't even when it was brand new. "Ironically", my Mac, older than the PC, runs video just fine.
If you "know" from experience, then you know nothing. If your PC would not do this when it was new, then that is YOUR problem, not the computer itself.
I have a computer from 2006 and it can run HD 1080p video with no problems even at high bitrates, 3D render times are decent, video render times are decent, and the overall health of the PC is still like new--save for the PSU I had to replace because it didn't give off enough power for my new [at the time] graphics card.
You guys are all coming from a gaming perspective, that's what's making you think Macs are horrible. Come out of your shell and realize what other things computers can actually do.
Except we're not.
I have built servers, a small render farm, a PC for someone who did heavy video editing for commercials, some general use PCs and a handful of gaming PCs.
A PC will be cheaper and do the job better with the SAME components as a mac for number crunching [although a linux rig with the same hardware would be better for numbers], rendering, video editing/rendering, gaming and general tasks. This is not a bias, this is not hating, this is a cold hard fact. ANY research you do on the topic will come to the same conclusion.
Um, fm87, is your signature talking about your computer?
Yes. See above. It has cost a fraction of the mac equivalent of the time.
Let me ask you this, have you worked in the real world? Have you gone to workplaces?
NO ONE USES A MAC. NO ONE.
Servers? Nope, BSD, linux or windows.
Desktops? Nope, usually windows.
Laptops? Nope, usually windows or linux.
Rendering machines/AutoCAD machines? Nope, windows, Solaris or linux.
Industry machines running specific manufacturing software? Nope, windows and linux [about even].
Science and technology? Nope, BSD, linux, Solaris or windows (The LHC runs on windows and linux for instance)
When I go to troubleshoot a PC for my job, I look at the error and fix it.
When I go to troubleshoot a Mac for my job, there is no error code or error. The only option is to either reformat or send it to be replaced. THEY ARE NOT EASILY FIXABLE IN THE LEAST WHEN SOMETHING GOES WRONG.
I will not knack you for using or liking Macs. BUT I will if you try and spout ignorance and flat out lies and try to pass them off as fact.
Your problem is you can't look past your own examples.
Think of this, what if YOU are the reason your PCs don't last very long? I've been doing tech support, building PCs, and fixing PCs for almost 5 years now, had my own business AND done interning. I can tell you, for absolute fact, that the ONLY reason a PC would last such a short time is from the end user either not taking care of it, or not knowing how to use it.
I'm not being biased, I am not being a hater, I am giving you a cold hard fact that ANY OTHER person who does tech support will tell you.
Yes, the PCs had to be replaced in a high school because high school kids are idiots. They load whatever kind of crap they can get their hands on to the school PCs because they can. This is not something new. You're essentially saying "we gave a monkey a banana and he ate it every time, thus, monkeys hate bananas".
If you "know" from experience, then you know nothing. If your PC would not do this when it was new, then that is YOUR problem, not the computer itself.
I have a computer from 2006 and it can run HD 1080p video with no problems even at high bitrates, 3D render times are decent, video render times are decent, and the overall health of the PC is still like new--save for the PSU I had to replace because it didn't give off enough power for my new [at the time] graphics card.
Except we're not.
I have built servers, a small render farm, a PC for someone who did heavy video editing for commercials, some general use PCs and a handful of gaming PCs.
A PC will be cheaper and do the job better with the SAME components as a mac for number crunching [although a linux rig with the same hardware would be better for numbers], rendering, video editing/rendering, gaming and general tasks. This is not a bias, this is not hating, this is a cold hard fact. ANY research you do on the topic will come to the same conclusion.
Yes. See above. It has cost a fraction of the mac equivalent of the time.
Let me ask you this, have you worked in the real world? Have you gone to workplaces?
NO ONE USES A MAC. NO ONE.
Servers? Nope, BSD, linux or windows.
Desktops? Nope, usually windows.
Laptops? Nope, usually windows or linux.
Rendering machines/AutoCAD machines? Nope, windows, Solaris or linux.
Industry machines running specific manufacturing software? Nope, windows and linux [about even].
Science and technology? Nope, BSD, linux, Solaris or windows (The LHC runs on windows and linux for instance)
When I go to troubleshoot a PC for my job, I look at the error and fix it.
When I go to troubleshoot a Mac for my job, there is no error code or error. The only option is to either reformat or send it to be replaced. THEY ARE NOT EASILY FIXABLE IN THE LEAST WHEN SOMETHING GOES WRONG.
I will not knack you for using or liking Macs. BUT I will if you try and spout ignorance and flat out lies and try to pass them off as fact.
I must be no one then, and also my family, and a lot of people I know.
Nice computer, about the same as mine.
I never said Macs were cheaper, or cost the same. It's like this:
1 Mac lasts a minimum of 7 years (this is from my entire family experience with all our Macs)
1 PC lasts a minimum of 3 years. I'll be nice that way. You'll probably end up having to buy 2 over the course of 7 years.
My dad used to work for a highschool, and his classroom had 25 Macs and 25 PCs. All the PCs had to be replaced every year, after being repaired multiple times. None of the Macs had problems or had to be replaced until they were three years old. This is what happens even when highschoolers who don't really give a crap about the computers use the Macs/PCs. The same kids did not use the same computer every time. They all used both the Macs and PCs. He worked there 6 years, and the same results every time.
Just so you know, I'm not this kid who knows exactly how good every processor/graphics card/ harddrive is. I just know from experience Macs work better, and can actually run video. I mean seriously, my PC couldn't even when it was brand new. "Ironically", my Mac, older than the PC, runs video just fine.
You guys are all coming from a gaming perspective, that's what's making you think Macs are horrible. Come out of your shell and realize what other things computers can actually do.
Um, fm87, is your signature talking about your computer?
No, Macs last at the most 3 years, the hardware used in them is very low end, and is of horrible quality. Just because it comes in a case with a copyrighted name, doesn't make it of good quality, high performance, or long lasting.
What exactly can a 1200 dollar mac do that a 400 dollar pc cant?
I must be no one then, and also my family, and a lot of people I know.
Nice computer, about the same as mine.
Macs are less than 5% of the computer market in the real world. Businesses don't use them, they aren't used for servers, autocad, etc. They are used by kids who think that looks are everything, and by adults who think they are "fast, etc.".
No, Macs last at the most 3 years, the hardware used in them is very low end, and is of horrible quality. Just because it comes in a case with a copyrighted name, doesn't make it of good quality, high performance, or long lasting.
What exactly can a 1200 dollar mac do that a 400 dollar pc cant?
How do Macs at the most 3 years? Mine's 4 years old. How is it bad quality? Only thing bad on mine is just the fact the graphics card is low end, I'm not going to defend Apple for doing that, they should've put a better one in :sad.gif:. I have a 2007 MacBook, so if something's bad on it, tell me, and based on why you say it's bad I may or may not believe you that it's low end and bad quality:
My Macintosh Specifications:
2007 MacBook - OS X Lion
Processor - 2.2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Memory - 4 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
Graphics - Intel GMA X3100 144 MB (I already know this isn't a good one)
Harddrive - 500 GB SATA Disk
Display - 13.3-inch (1280 x 800)
A $1,200 Mac can do more that a $400 PC just as much as a higher end PC could do, other then the OS you get on Mac. And based on your opinion, the Mac would be worse because of low quality.
I must be no one then, and also my family, and a lot of people I know.
Nice computer, about the same as mine.
It's NOT a nice computer.
It is from 2006 and the parts are from 2005 (save for the video card which is from 2008), it is old and outdated, so is yours. Why do you not understand this?
Your family and a lot of people you know are cult members. This series from the BBC is a good documentary on how Apple is essentially a cult. There are 6 or 7 parts to the video.
Macs are less than 5% of the computer market in the real world. Businesses don't use them, they aren't used for servers, autocad, etc. They are used by kids who think that looks are everything, and by adults who think they are "fast, etc.".
Fine with me if they're 5%, I still like them, and I don't care if I'm part of the 5%, because I like Macs. My mom is a graphic designer and has a 2009 MacBook Pro (I think it's 2009). She thinks it's fast, but wants faster, lol. It is fast, but I kinda don't like it. I don't know, I kind of am turned off to even Macs depending on how they're customized.
How do Macs at the most 3 years? Mine's 4 years old. How is it bad quality? Only thing bad on mine is just the fact the graphics card is low end, I'm not going to defend Apple for doing that, they should've put a better one in :sad.gif:. I have a 2007 MacBook, so if something's bad on it, tell me, and based on why you say it's bad I may or may not believe you that it's low end and bad quality:
My Macintosh Specifications:
2007 MacBook - OS X Lion
Processor - 2.2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Memory - 4 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
Graphics - Intel GMA X3100 144 MB (I already know this isn't a good one)
Harddrive - 500 GB SATA Disk
Display - 13.3-inch (1280 x 800)
A $1,200 Mac can do more that a $400 PC just as much as a higher end PC could do, other then the OS you get on Mac. And based on your opinion, the Mac would be worse because of low quality.
Well, for starters lets talk about your display. Just about how much did your computer cost you? My Lenovo t60p cost 500$, and has a 4:3, which is superior to widescreen, at 1600x1200, with a Radeon Mobility Firegl v5200, which is a high end cad card. I also have a core 2 duo t2600 at 2.2. The laptop is from 2005.
Fine with me if they're 5%, I still like them, and I don't care if I'm part of the 5%, because I like Macs. My mom is a graphic designer and has a 2009 MacBook Pro (I think it's 2009). She thinks it's fast, but wants faster, lol. It is fast, but I kinda don't like it. I don't know, I kind of am turned off to even Macs depending on how they're customized.
If she is doing graphic design there is no reason to get a faster computer, CS is not very demanding software in the least. The performance increase would be negligible for the price, even talking PC wise.
My Macintosh Specifications:
2007 MacBook - OS X Lion
Processor - 2.2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Memory - 4 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
Graphics - Intel GMA X3100 144 MB (I already know this isn't a good one)
Harddrive - 500 GB SATA Disk
Display - 13.3-inch (1280 x 800)
A $1,200 Mac can do more that a $400 PC just as much as a higher end PC could do, other then the OS you get on Mac. And based on your opinion, the Mac would be worse because of low quality.
............................................ How old is that thing?
My computer has better specs (signature link) and it was only $600 IN 2006 WHEN I BOUGHT IT. (Adding onto upgrades, that comes to a total of $720, which is STILL miles less than your mac).
Well, for starters lets talk about your display. Just about how much did your computer cost you? My Lenovo t60p cost 500$, and has a 4:3, which is superior to widescreen, at 1600x1200, with a Radeon Mobility Firegl v5200, which is a high end cad card. I also have a core 2 duo t2600 at 2.2. The laptop is from 2005.
How is 4:3 format superior to a 16:9 format or a 16:10 format?
How is 4:3 format superior to a 16:9 format or a 16:10 format?
Our eyes scan textual information vertically much more efficiently. That's why books are not formatted in 16:10. In fact, they are even narrower than 4:3. Or look at newspaper columns. They're very long and narrow, because it's easiest to read information quickly in that format. So for all of the things that people normally do on computers, i.e. wordprocessing, programming, surfing the internet, email, IM, for all these things 4:3 is better. You want as many lines of information as possible, not as long lines as possible.
Our eyes scan textual information vertically much more efficiently. That's why books are not formatted in 16:10. In fact, they are even narrower than 4:3. Or look at newspaper columns. They're very long and narrow, because it's easiest to read information quickly in that format. So for all of the things that people normally do on computers, i.e. wordprocessing, programming, surfing the internet, email, IM, for all these things 4:3 is better. You want as many lines of information as possible, not as long lines as possible.
This is one reason I want to mount my second monitor to 16:10 vertically (alas, too poor for a mounting bracket). :sad.gif:
Sorry, but the Mac Pros use hardware from newegg that can be gotten at either half, or 1/3 the price. Xenons are nothing special.
It doesn't need to be a Windows computer, that is the POINT of building your own. YOU choose the OS it runs. BSD, Linux, Windows, Hackntosh, whatever you wish and YOU choose the hardware, getting it for extremely cheap.
Nope.
Yep, Apple even pricing stuff more than other pre-built manufacturers.
Typical.
Even if you added the xenons and a dual CPU mobo it would come out to around the same, give or take a few hundred $.
The Mac equiv would likely be in the $3-4k range if not higher.
I LOVE how an 18x dvd drive is considered a "superdrive". Really now?
edit: I'm confused as to why they are offering server processors in the first place in the Macs......
1 Mac lasts a minimum of 7 years (this is from my entire family experience with all our Macs)
1 PC lasts a minimum of 3 years. I'll be nice that way. You'll probably end up having to buy 2 over the course of 7 years.
My dad used to work for a highschool, and his classroom had 25 Macs and 25 PCs. All the PCs had to be replaced every year, after being repaired multiple times. None of the Macs had problems or had to be replaced until they were three years old. This is what happens even when highschoolers who don't really give a crap about the computers use the Macs/PCs. The same kids did not use the same computer every time. They all used both the Macs and PCs. He worked there 6 years, and the same results every time.
Just so you know, I'm not this kid who knows exactly how good every processor/graphics card/ harddrive is. I just know from experience Macs work better, and can actually run video. I mean seriously, my PC couldn't even when it was brand new. "Ironically", my Mac, older than the PC, runs video just fine.
You guys are all coming from a gaming perspective, that's what's making you think Macs are horrible. Come out of your shell and realize what other things computers can actually do.Um, fm87, is your signature talking about your computer?
You are a ****ing idiot. I have a HP Pavilion Elite from 1995. Gtfo this forum.
Fact: 56 of the macs in my school have gone bad, either from dropping, errors, or kids fooling around.
Fact: Nothing has ever happened to any of the pcs with windows xp on them.
Then you have every reason to use a PC. Now please tone down on the language.
How bout this: We shut up about Macs/PCs and talk about hardware/computers in general. Idc exactly what, just lets stop arguing.
Think of this, what if YOU are the reason your PCs don't last very long? I've been doing tech support, building PCs, and fixing PCs for almost 5 years now, had my own business AND done interning. I can tell you, for absolute fact, that the ONLY reason a PC would last such a short time is from the end user either not taking care of it, or not knowing how to use it.
I'm not being biased, I am not being a hater, I am giving you a cold hard fact that ANY OTHER person who does tech support will tell you.
Yes, the PCs had to be replaced in a high school because high school kids are idiots. They load whatever kind of crap they can get their hands on to the school PCs because they can. This is not something new. You're essentially saying "we gave a monkey a banana and he ate it every time, thus, monkeys hate bananas".
If you "know" from experience, then you know nothing. If your PC would not do this when it was new, then that is YOUR problem, not the computer itself.
I have a computer from 2006 and it can run HD 1080p video with no problems even at high bitrates, 3D render times are decent, video render times are decent, and the overall health of the PC is still like new--save for the PSU I had to replace because it didn't give off enough power for my new [at the time] graphics card.
Except we're not.
I have built servers, a small render farm, a PC for someone who did heavy video editing for commercials, some general use PCs and a handful of gaming PCs.
A PC will be cheaper and do the job better with the SAME components as a mac for number crunching [although a linux rig with the same hardware would be better for numbers], rendering, video editing/rendering, gaming and general tasks. This is not a bias, this is not hating, this is a cold hard fact. ANY research you do on the topic will come to the same conclusion.
Yes. See above. It has cost a fraction of the mac equivalent of the time.
Let me ask you this, have you worked in the real world? Have you gone to workplaces?
NO ONE USES A MAC. NO ONE.
Servers? Nope, BSD, linux or windows.
Desktops? Nope, usually windows.
Laptops? Nope, usually windows or linux.
Rendering machines/AutoCAD machines? Nope, windows, Solaris or linux.
Industry machines running specific manufacturing software? Nope, windows and linux [about even].
Science and technology? Nope, BSD, linux, Solaris or windows (The LHC runs on windows and linux for instance)
When I go to troubleshoot a PC for my job, I look at the error and fix it.
When I go to troubleshoot a Mac for my job, there is no error code or error. The only option is to either reformat or send it to be replaced. THEY ARE NOT EASILY FIXABLE IN THE LEAST WHEN SOMETHING GOES WRONG.
I will not knack you for using or liking Macs. BUT I will if you try and spout ignorance and flat out lies and try to pass them off as fact.
I must be no one then, and also my family, and a lot of people I know.
Nice computer, about the same as mine.
No, Macs last at the most 3 years, the hardware used in them is very low end, and is of horrible quality. Just because it comes in a case with a copyrighted name, doesn't make it of good quality, high performance, or long lasting.
What exactly can a 1200 dollar mac do that a 400 dollar pc cant?
Macs are less than 5% of the computer market in the real world. Businesses don't use them, they aren't used for servers, autocad, etc. They are used by kids who think that looks are everything, and by adults who think they are "fast, etc.".
How do Macs at the most 3 years? Mine's 4 years old. How is it bad quality? Only thing bad on mine is just the fact the graphics card is low end, I'm not going to defend Apple for doing that, they should've put a better one in :sad.gif:. I have a 2007 MacBook, so if something's bad on it, tell me, and based on why you say it's bad I may or may not believe you that it's low end and bad quality:
My Macintosh Specifications:
2007 MacBook - OS X Lion
Processor - 2.2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Memory - 4 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
Graphics - Intel GMA X3100 144 MB (I already know this isn't a good one)
Harddrive - 500 GB SATA Disk
Display - 13.3-inch (1280 x 800)
A $1,200 Mac can do more that a $400 PC just as much as a higher end PC could do, other then the OS you get on Mac. And based on your opinion, the Mac would be worse because of low quality.
It's NOT a nice computer.
It is from 2006 and the parts are from 2005 (save for the video card which is from 2008), it is old and outdated, so is yours. Why do you not understand this?
Your family and a lot of people you know are cult members. This series from the BBC is a good documentary on how Apple is essentially a cult. There are 6 or 7 parts to the video.
Fine with me if they're 5%, I still like them, and I don't care if I'm part of the 5%, because I like Macs. My mom is a graphic designer and has a 2009 MacBook Pro (I think it's 2009). She thinks it's fast, but wants faster, lol. It is fast, but I kinda don't like it. I don't know, I kind of am turned off to even Macs depending on how they're customized.
I'm tired of this...
Well, for starters lets talk about your display. Just about how much did your computer cost you? My Lenovo t60p cost 500$, and has a 4:3, which is superior to widescreen, at 1600x1200, with a Radeon Mobility Firegl v5200, which is a high end cad card. I also have a core 2 duo t2600 at 2.2. The laptop is from 2005.
If she is doing graphic design there is no reason to get a faster computer, CS is not very demanding software in the least. The performance increase would be negligible for the price, even talking PC wise.
............................................ How old is that thing?
My computer has better specs (signature link) and it was only $600 IN 2006 WHEN I BOUGHT IT. (Adding onto upgrades, that comes to a total of $720, which is STILL miles less than your mac).
You are delusional, plain and simple.
How is 4:3 format superior to a 16:9 format or a 16:10 format?
"No, you're wrong!"
"No! You are wrong!"
That's pretty much what this thread amounts to.
Our eyes scan textual information vertically much more efficiently. That's why books are not formatted in 16:10. In fact, they are even narrower than 4:3. Or look at newspaper columns. They're very long and narrow, because it's easiest to read information quickly in that format. So for all of the things that people normally do on computers, i.e. wordprocessing, programming, surfing the internet, email, IM, for all these things 4:3 is better. You want as many lines of information as possible, not as long lines as possible.
This is one reason I want to mount my second monitor to 16:10 vertically (alas, too poor for a mounting bracket). :sad.gif: