EPT[D] Apple discussion - NOT A FLAMEFEST - Page 2
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
KookyMonster
United States311 Posts
| ||
|
Snackysnacks
United States411 Posts
Did you, oh god, im not sure what exactly to say... DID YOU JUST CALL RAM SPEED?!?!? Please, post your "MAC" specs, since im not sure exactly what computer (note, everything is a PC) you are currently referring too... | ||
|
marttorn
Norway5211 Posts
| ||
|
Charger
United States2405 Posts
This isn't a hard concept to understand, nor is it slanted or fictitious. If the ease of use is worth the extra money to you then no one should tell you otherwise. I'm not going to tell people who 'trick out' their cars it's a waste of money just because I think it is. | ||
|
exnomendei
Netherlands122 Posts
On February 04 2012 02:16 Saryph wrote: I might be wrong, but in the OP the pictures listed as skyrim run on a pc and run on a mac are the exact same file. I understand why you are doing it, but it'd still be nice if it was a little more honest. Yeah, I know. That was the point. If you want, I can make a screenshot of Skyrim running on my Mac... Kind of boring. On February 04 2012 02:16 bonifaceviii wrote: Somehow I'm thinking that the OP wasn't serious when he said this thread isn't a flame fest... You're right. I'll try to tone it down. By the way, I am serious - I do think this is the case. I didn't mean to attack anyone personally with it. On February 04 2012 02:16 Excludos wrote: And you prove your point by comparing it to alienware, which is notorious for being expensive as hell. You see where this is already falling apart, don't you? Alienware isn't sold in the Netherlands afaik, so I didn't know this. Find me a, say, 1000-dollar computer (prebuilt) with an HD6870 in it, though? On February 04 2012 02:18 Crisium wrote: Building PCs is so fun though. It's too bad that you once built PCs and then stopped doing so because you didn't like to do it, but that doesn't mean Alienware is the only choice for PCs. I enjoyed the prospect of building computers a lot. I didn't like dealing with the issues. The Mac Pro I got is sort of both - I installed Bluetooth on it myself, I'm going to install two new processors when I get around to it, and the graphics card was fun too. The first HD6870 I got wasn't compatible, so I went to a store (and took my 45-pound computer with me, sigh) to test a different one. Worked first try in Windows and OS X. That was fun (although a pain as well, and not something I want to deal with very often). On February 04 2012 02:22 Corvi wrote: i fail to understand your post. what kind of mac do you even have and since when is there a mac version of skyrim? >_< I boot into Windows for games. I can actually run the game in a virtual machine in OS X, but I'd have to tone the graphics down all the way to medium, so I'll just reboot. Yes, Macs run Windows. Really well too - no bloatware but you still get ALL the drivers (insert picture here) in one installation. Pretty well done. I hated it, from the horrible mouse and keyboard design (only LOOKS good, but horrible usability) to the oh my god so awkward iOS interface. One year trying to understand what Apple fanboys like so much about it, never got it. The mice suck. Loads. The trackpad is a lot better, but I use my Razer Imperator (yes, I know, bad sensor, but I liked the shape!) most of all. The keyboard is a different matter. If you like notebook-style keyboards (I have several Logitechs to prove I do) it's really awesome, but if you don't, well, it sucks. I hated having a different feel to my desktop keyboard and my notebook keyboard, so before I even got a Mac desktop, I got one of their keyboards. I won't get into iOS now - a bit too much of a deviation from this thread. To summarize: I like it, but I wish webOS was more successful. On February 04 2012 02:33 Snackysnacks wrote: Oh god, that alienware is nowhere worth that 850 Euro pricetag Did you, oh god, im not sure what exactly to say... DID YOU JUST CALL RAM SPEED?!?!? Please, post your "MAC" specs, since im not sure exactly what computer (note, everything is a PC) you are currently referring too... Read a bit more carefully. I did not make that. RAM is indeed not speed. I don't agree with that silly picture.  Specifications: Mac Pro. 2007. Two Xeon 5100 series processors (two cores each, 2,66 GHz model). 9 GB's of FB-DDR2 at some slow speed. Bottleneck of the machine. HD6870 by Sapphire. Obviously not from 2007, but 2012 instead (well, 2011 model...) The rest I'm not really bothering with unless you want to know anything specific? | ||
|
Kuskinator
United Kingdom43 Posts
...Or I can get a customised pre-built PC (with windows) with a 3.3GHz processor, double the RAM (8Gig), 2GB version of the same graphics card (Radeon HD 6970M) for £1060, add in a 27" monitor makes that £1560 with £10 delivery. Only downside is I have to buy my own kb+mouse (oh noes). It took me longer to type this out than to find something cheaper. Macs are pretty good, eh runs smooth and doesn't afraid of anything. I'm just personally more used to windows and find a lot more freedom with them. I also own an iPhone a dislike the lack of customisation available on it, I will probably try an Android based system next. Seriously though, Apple products are really good - but they are not worth the extra price just because of their name (£25 for a battery charger, come the f*ck on). | ||
|
betaV1.25
425 Posts
| ||
|
Turquoise
Turkey145 Posts
| ||
|
TheKefka
Croatia11752 Posts
On February 04 2012 02:04 exnomendei wrote: 9 GB's of FB-DDR (You probably don't know what that is  )Are you shitting me lol? | ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
On February 04 2012 02:33 Snackysnacks wrote: Oh god, that alienware is nowhere worth that 850 Euro pricetag Did you, oh god, im not sure what exactly to say... DID YOU JUST CALL RAM SPEED?!?!? Please, post your "MAC" specs, since im not sure exactly what computer (note, everything is a PC) you are currently referring too... From what I understand from his bad OP is that he has a 2006 Mac Pro. He added in more memory and upgraded to a 6870. Just note, I have a MBP and will purchase another one when necessary so I'm no Apple hater. But the OP's post is stupid. He's talking about server configurations that hardly anyone cares about. OP doesn't really know what he's talking about if you can tell. There was no 2007 Mac Pro and 6870 is not used in the 2011 model. Comparing a server configuration to a consumer configuration is pretty stupid. | ||
|
exnomendei
Netherlands122 Posts
On February 04 2012 02:35 Kuskinator wrote: Just looking for about 10 minutes, I can either get a 27" 3.1GHz quad iMac for £1650 (free delivery!). ...Or I can get a customised pre-built PC (with windows) with a 3.3GHz processor, double the RAM (8Gig), 2GB version of the same graphics card (Radeon HD 6970M) for £1060, add in a 27" monitor makes that £1560 with £10 delivery. Only downside is I have to buy my own kb+mouse (oh noes). It took me longer to type this out than to find something cheaper. Seriously though, Apple products are really good - but they are not worth the extra price just because of their name (£25 for a battery charger, come the f*ck on). Hey, thanks! That supports my argument that Macs aren't thrice as expensive. In fact, if you include keyboard and mouse that's pretty close, although the machine you mentioned is indeed faster. Mind you, the 2GB of RAM is pretty much moot, but whatever. Oh, and the iMac is an all-in-one. It's three inches thick. The Dell (I presume you chose the U2711H, great screen) is the same size as a computer with a similar screen. I'd say that's pretty good - a bit more performance for the non-all-in-one and a much smaller profile for the iMac. Don't you agree that the differences are therefore subtle and not favored for either one? I'm not trying to enforce some sort of Macintosh-supremacy here. (About the RAM: Just buy 8GB and slot it in, bit stupid to buy from Apple, who overcharge like madmen for it! Yes I agree there, I know.) Oh and the battery charger does come with 6 Eneloop (Apple-branded) batteries. Not that bad a deal. Yeah, I was reminded that I was a bit hot headed. I tried to tone it down. But FB-DIMMs are not exactly common knowledge anyway, which I so badly phrased there. (not that they're exceptionally fast or anything, stupid things being the bottleneck now) | ||
|
Corporal Fortier
Canada7 Posts
On February 04 2012 02:10 Catch]22 wrote: People are just trolling you. Similar hardware = similar performance. This, pretty much. Other than that, it comes down to the looks and the OS. Pretty much any machine can run any OS these days anyway. As for stability and stuff, I've seen people screw up badly on both OS too, but Windows PCs are/were a much bigger target for viruses and malware since they represented a huge share of the market. This is probably changing as we speak. Also, this might be a typo, but 9GB of RAM? Edit: nvm that! I don't know how you can expect a clean and civil discussion about such topic though. Even your OP doesn't strike me as a tiny bit objective. | ||
|
Kuskinator
United Kingdom43 Posts
On February 04 2012 02:35 Kuskinator wrote: Just looking for about 10 minutes, I can either get a 27" 3.1GHz quad iMac for £1650 (free delivery!). ...Or I can get a customised pre-built PC (with windows) with a 3.3GHz processor, double the RAM (8Gig), 2GB version of the same graphics card (Radeon HD 6970M) for £1060, add in a 27" monitor makes that £1560 with £10 delivery. Only downside is I have to buy my own kb+mouse (oh noes). It took me longer to type this out than to find something cheaper. Macs are pretty good, eh runs smooth and doesn't afraid of anything. I'm just personally more used to windows and find a lot more freedom with them. I also own an iPhone a dislike the lack of customisation available on it, I will probably try an Android based system next. Seriously though, Apple products are really good - but they are not worth the extra price just because of their name (£25 for a battery charger, come the f*ck on). For what it's worth: http://overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-015-HO (the monitor I'm referring to, or http://overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-011-HO for the 8-bit version (I don't have a clue what visible differences there are however) which saves another £80 bringing the total to £1480). The PC: http://www.overclockers.co.uk/syscon_int.php?prodid=FS-282-OK play about with that, overclockers isn't even the cheapest vendor available for those components but are still considerably less than the Apple store. | ||
|
Snackysnacks
United States411 Posts
Oh god, why in lords name would you consider it ram.. How much did you pay for that machine and how recent? Why is it like server configured Edit: oh, understand now, thanks skyR | ||
|
exnomendei
Netherlands122 Posts
On February 04 2012 02:43 Corporal Fortier wrote: This, pretty much. Other than that, it comes down to the looks and the OS. Pretty much any machine can run any OS these days anyway. As for stability and stuff, I've seen people screw up badly on both OS too, but Windows PCs are/were a much bigger target for viruses and malware since they represented a huge share of the market. This is probably changing as we speak. Also, this might be a typo, but 9GB of RAM? I don't know how you can expect a clean and civil discussion about such topic though. Even your OP doesn't strike me as a tiny bit objective. Yeah, I wasn't trying to defend or attack operating systems. Mac OS tends to be rather... messy to run outside of Apple's hardware though, not intended for someone who just performed their first install of Ubuntu  .9 GB of RAM. The owner before my had 1 GB of RAM at first (2007...) and then threw in 8 GB's. He didn't bother removing the two 512 MB banks. I'm thinking of removing them since FB-DIMMs get a higher access latency when you add more physical banks. Well, we're mostly doing alright I'd say... I tried to tone down a bit. I'm not trying to be objective in my OP either, no, I'm trying to get a discussion going. Seems to be doing alright... | ||
|
NonFactor
Sweden698 Posts
On February 04 2012 02:14 exnomendei wrote: Read it again. I can build my own. I did. I chose not to because I was annoyed by the issues of it, at least this time. Tell me, what are the specifications of your computer? I'd prefer to also get the cost of each component. (I've no doubt the CPU and memory are faster, by the way, it's a 2007 computer. My notebook's memory is faster (although it has 4 GB of it).) I'm also willing to bet I know more about computers than 90% of TL. Not sure what you mean by looking at prices, but that's not your point. Yes, people can build a faster computer for less money themselves. If you build your own car from components, it costs less money than an equivalent one as well. There's also the time factor involved. (and in the car's example, skill too, but that's moot with computers.) The thing is, this should surprise no-one: Labor costs money. Testing configurations costs money. Warranties cost money. Of course you can higher performance-per-dollar from a self-built computer than from a Mac! I'm not going to say you can't. Figures like thrice-the-price are bullshit, though. I'd explain it, but I tried and it was a bad, ugly rant. I did that before and it was a lot of back-and-forth about processors clocking lower at idle and I don't want to get into that. Anyway, point is: Yes, Macs are more expensive than building yourself, but there's nothing wrong with that. Can you explain what issues you had with building the PC yourself? When I wanted a new PC, my little brother, 16 at the time, told me he could build me one NP. I ordered all the parts needed, took them to his room, went out and when I came back there was a fully built PC waiting for me. Never had a problem with it either. Saved a lot of money too. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
Sure one distributor might charge you $200 more, but if you actually look at the price breakdown, it may be that $200 is entirely spent on a warranty/accidental damage/etc.. You can't know that without linking the full price breakdown. | ||
|
clusen
Germany8702 Posts
On February 04 2012 02:04 exnomendei wrote: I'd have to settle for a plastic case that's either too hot or too loud and so on This is just wrong. Otherwise I kinda agree, I don't get the hate for macs. If someone likes the OS and the advantages macs offer why shouldn't they purchase them? People have different priorities when it comes to such things and not everybody cares about maximum performance/dollar. | ||
|
Doomblaze
United States1292 Posts
You claim to show skyrim running on a mac, but you don't, so your pictures don't prove anything except that 2 pictures are indeed exactly the same. Then you compare macs to alienwares, which is a lot like comparing macs to macs, or the 2 pictures that are exactly the same you have up there, since alienwares are made fun of just as often as macs are, if not more because people that run PCs are supposed to be tech literate (obviously you are too, but the majority of mac users are not). Of course skyrim will run on a mac the same as it will run on a PC if they're both being played on windows 7, thats a given, but if you're using windows to play skyrim, why not just buy a PC instead for half the price? I gave my spare dota 2 keys to my two best friends. One of them has a PC from '07 and it can run it fine. The other one has a mac, so he can't play it. Macs can't run a lot of modern games unless you bootcamp, in which case you're using a windows anyway. At some point the mac version of dota 2 will come out, but that will be at the very end of the beta, because porting stuff to macs screws up everything. Remember the random bugfixes in sc2 the first few patches, where it said "fixed bug where clicking one of 10 buttons could cause macs to crash" ?. Apple products are robust and their support is better than most, but they can't do nearly as much as what windows can, and thats the point of the funny picture. | ||
|
Ziktomini
United Kingdom377 Posts
| ||
| ||
