PCs are better than Macs because you can upgrade PCs. WRONG. Total myth.

[sunilraman]

Yet another PC vs Mac bitching, one may say, but I have to express these thoughts this morning. Scorecard reads as PC:Mac below:

1. CPU upgrades. I was hella pissed off and inspired to write this thread. Hmm.. lets see, just over 1 year ago I bought an AMD64 Venice Athlon 3000+ Socket 939 single core. Considered mid-end, considered a solid option for gaming and general Windows task. Now, let's see, hmm... I want to buy a dualcore for my PC, let's say if they had a two 3000+ cores in Socket939, would be reasonable price right? WRONG. A Venice Athlon 3000+ is like $65 but a Socket939 dualcore is like over $300. WTF. Also, Socket 939 is on the outs majorly and Socket AM2 is all the rage now. Move to Intel Core2Duo you say? Cool, I say. But I'll have to get a new motherboard. Just only ONE YEAR after building my mid-end system. WTF. PC:Mac 0:0.

2. Graphics card upgrades. Hmm... let's see, I want the latest gaming card to play NeedForSpeed: Carbon. Macs suck for gaming, right? With a PC, I can just put another 6600GT in my PC for SLI and get 50% more GPU power - cheap and effective. WRONG. SLI is just an enthusiast blip on the radar. Go to http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html and look at some key charts. In some cases, SLI makes almost NO difference at all! PC:Mac 0:0

3. Hard Disk upgrades: Laptop: MacBook features a very easily swappable notebook HD. You can upgrade size, or speed up to 7200rpm, or down the line, both. Without violating your warranty, in general. Can't do that for most PC notebooks. MacBookPro - you can get a certified tech to do it without violating your warranty, ok, maybe you can get similar service for HP/Compaq/Acer but not really a Dell. PC:Mac 0:1

4. Hard Disk upgrades: Desktops: Mac Mini - possible if one is careful without violating warranty. Stackable external drives bus-powered FW400. iMac, okay, have to go external. PC tower: now let's say I want to add more drives for RAID 0. Yeah... cool, I have an 80gb hard disk, I'll get another 80gb. Okay, possible. Unless I want more storage in which case I have to buy two 120gb or so hard disks for RAID 0. PC:Mac 0:0

5. Which brings us to Mac Pro, which I will just place against PC workstation/ enthusiast desktop. PC:Mac 1:1

6. Price: The entry price of PCs is definitely much lower, but you get what you pay for and there are strong arguments against the "Apple Tax". I'm almost going to give the PC:Mac 1:0 but given the Apple extended 3 year warranty which you can buy anytime in the first 12 months of purchase, and my personal experience with 3 year warranties being generally decent, PC:Mac 1:1 in terms of pricing in the long term view of 2-3 years, not just 1 year.

7. RAM: No brainer on this one. You can buy non-Apple RAM for your Mac. PCs have a variety of RAM as well. Not relevant. PC:Mac 0:0.

8. Mac OS 10.4 Tiger vs Windows XP and Leopard vs Windows Vista. Easy. PC:Mac 0:1

9. Running all my "critical business apps" and Microsoft Office 2007 on Windows. Bootcamp and Parallels makes this argument much weaker. Adobe and Macromedia in Bootcamp or Parallels makes Rosetta/ "Macromedia snappiness on PC" issues less critical. PC:Mac 0:0

10. Display: Laptops. You can't make it bigger or have a higher resolution, PC or Mac, for the most part. You can plug it in to an external monitor. No difference here. Display: Desktops. Mac Mini and Mac Pro: No difference here. Now the biggest gripe about the iMac - "I'm stuck with the same display for 3 years..." ...Well guess what, so am I for my PC desktop. I got a Sony 17" 1280x1024 with full 3 year warranty. Would I be swapping it out anytime soon? Probably not. It's better to have another 17" side by side if I really need more screen real estate. With the iMac, since you don't have the junk of the PC Tower taking up space, actually it's easier and less clutter to just place another 17" or 20" display of any brand, non-Apple, next to the iMac. PC:Mac 0:0

11(a). Hmmm... Now let me see. Let's say I want to upgrade my AMD64 rig mid-end, after 1.5 years. Okay, new hard disks (let's assume for bigger storage RAID0 or even other RAIDs, better to have newer better hard disks which are the same models). New CPU. New graphics card. Oh, new motherboard. I want widescreen 1600x1200 gaming for my great new graphics card. New monitor. More RAM. Oh, wait, NEW RAM, because I'm changing my motherboard because I just want another core for my CPU. Doesn't have to be faster, just another core. Too bad. NEW RAM. Ah, check out all my sweet upgrades. Hmmm... wait a second, I could have just bought a brand new computer with a DVD burner.... all I would have kept is the casing and power supply! Oh wait, probably need a new power supply with the more demanding GPU and for motherboard and overall Windows stability, because a crappy power supply for a desktop PC can cause instability if you cut corners there. But I can run Vista now! Woooooooo. Frack off. OS 10.4 over 10.3 has shown general performance improvements on EXISTING Mac hardware. 10.5 over 10.4 should show similar if not a minor performance hit over EXISTING Mac hardware. Oh, and $129 for a new operating system is reasonable and on par with say a WinXP upgrade. Not so much so with a Win Vista upgrade, it's going to cost more.

11(b). So here I was, happy with my tinkering on the PC, and looking forward to a few simple upgrades I can do without buying a new one. WRONG. It's a myth. Don't get me wrong, I still generally understand PCs and Macs and enjoy having a PC around to say, add some RAM, or add in a 5.25" DVD burner, change some fans for aftermarket CPU and/or GPU heatsink-fans. But in reality, in the course of 2-3 years, a Mac "fixed/ trapped/ bullied/ zealot" computer is generally better in the course of things particularly at this stage with hardware requirements for an enjoyable Vista experience and the cost of upgrading to Vista. PC:Mac 0:1

12. Let's add things up: PC:Mac 2:5. Thanks for playing 8)

[sunilraman]

Of course, perspectives, ideas, arguments welcome :D ... I just had to get some thoughts down after yesterday researching a dualcore for my Socket939. :(

[turnwrite]

So basically what you are saying is that new technology comes out for PCs very often, as opposed to Macs which are upgraded precisely whenever Steve Jobs feels like it. When new PC tech comes out, you feel your setup is obsolete and you want to upgrade, which is hard because not every single piece of hardware in existence is compatible with every other one, because not everything is made by exactly the same company like with Macs.

So in order to upgrade a PC, you need to have a competent level of knowledge of what you are doing, and you may have to buy a few more components than you actually need, since they need to be compatible with each other. To upgrade a Mac, you need no knowledge, since you have to actually buy an entirely new computer.

This makes PCs bad how exactly?

[gregmightdothat]

So basically what you are saying is that new technology comes out for PCs very often, as opposed to Macs which are upgraded precisely whenever Steve Jobs feels like it. When new PC tech comes out, you feel your setup is obsolete and you want to upgrade, which is hard because not every single piece of hardware in existence is compatible with every other one, because not everything is made by exactly the same company like with Macs.

So in order to upgrade a PC, you need to have a competent level of knowledge of what you are doing, and you may have to buy a few more components than you actually need, since they need to be compatible with each other. To upgrade a Mac, you need no knowledge, since you have to actually buy an entirely new computer.

This makes PCs bad how exactly?
Well, his point was that upgrading PCs is a bitch, expensive, and voids your warranty.

[Gon]

I'll keep an environment/Sunil score just for kicks to see who is at fault.

So you can't get 939 Athlon 64 X2's at decent prices. You'd have no problem finding one in USA or Europe. It's your local market that is at fault and not PC tech in general. Granted, this is not something you can do much about. Did you try to buy used yet? 1-0

You bitch about possibly having to replace a newly bought power supply at upgrade. This means you are going very high end (high power consumption), or you didn't get a decent power supply to begin with. Either way the decision is/was yours. 1-1

You bitch about SLI not delivering great results on old graphics cards, when everybody knows SLI has never had a function outside the very high end. I told you that a while back on another thread, when you said you wanted SLI for sake of tinkering and hardware appreciation (or so I recall). Want affordable performance? Sell old card, buy new midrange card, problem solved. That's what everyone else does. 1-2

Adding hard drives: the PC tower squarely beats iMac/mini with no upside for the consumer Macs, yet you give them even score? What gives? 1-3

Display: you feel tied to your external display. You are not, you can sell it any time (incidentally, without throwing your computer out with it). Your iMac display argument is a strawman. The problem is not being stuck with a display for a certain time after purchase of computer, but that when you already possess a good/better display, you have no reason to purchase another (iMac's), and Apple offers no headless equivalent of the iMac. And maybe, just maybe, you don't have to keep that computer tower on the desk but put it on the floor out of sight and out of the way like everyone else does. 1-4

Your 11a argument is basically, "If I'm a maniac who has to upgrade everything all the time, I might as well get a new machine instead of upgrading everything." No shit, Sherlock. Most people who need to upgrade something only need one or two components at a time. 1-5

The way I see it, you're inventing all these problems because the easy, effortless ways to do things don't fit your sense of style or whatever. Or maybe you are trying to justify a Mac Pro purchase to yourself. :p

[Joe_the_dragon]

Yet another PC vs Mac bitching, one may say, but I have to express these thoughts this morning. Scorecard reads as PC:Mac below:

1. CPU upgrades. I was hella pissed off and inspired to write this thread. Hmm.. lets see, just over 1 year ago I bought an AMD64 Venice Athlon 3000+ Socket 939 single core. Considered mid-end, considered a solid option for gaming and general Windows task. Now, let's see, hmm... I want to buy a dualcore for my PC, let's say if they had a two 3000+ cores in Socket939, would be reasonable price right? WRONG. A Venice Athlon 3000+ is like $65 but a Socket939 dualcore is like over $300. WTF. Also, Socket 939 is on the outs majorly and Socket AM2 is all the rage now. Move to Intel Core2Duo you say? Cool, I say. But I'll have to get a new motherboard. Just only ONE YEAR after building my mid-end system. WTF. PC:Mac 0:0.

With macs and pc you can get cpus that will fit

2. Graphics card upgrades. Hmm... let's see, I want the latest gaming card to play NeedForSpeed: Carbon. Macs suck for gaming, right? With a PC, I can just put another 6600GT in my PC for SLI and get 50% more GPU power - cheap and effective. WRONG. SLI is just an enthusiast blip on the radar. Go to http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html and look at some key charts. In some cases, SLI makes almost NO difference at all! PC:Mac 0:0

With a pc you can put in a better video card with a mac the card must a have a mac rom and apple must have a driver for it also SLI helps at high res.
Also with apple you have to buy a $2000 laptop just to get a real video card most pc laptop have them in systems that cost about $1000 + other ones let you add one for $29-$100
PC +2 mac 0


3. Hard Disk upgrades: Laptop: MacBook features a very easily swappable notebook HD. You can upgrade size, or speed up to 7200rpm, or down the line, both. Without violating your warranty, in general. Can't do that for most PC notebooks. MacBookPro - you can get a certified tech to do it without violating your warranty, ok, maybe you can get similar service for HP/Compaq/Acer but not really a Dell. PC:Mac 0:1

Some HP's /Compaq's /Acer's and Dells make it easy to swap the hard drive.
Pc and mac the same.


4. Hard Disk upgrades: Desktops: Mac Mini - possible if one is careful without violating warranty. Stackable external drives bus-powered FW400. iMac, okay, have to go external. PC tower: now let's say I want to add more drives for RAID 0. Yeah... cool, I have an 80gb hard disk, I'll get another 80gb. Okay, possible. Unless I want more storage in which case I have to buy two 120gb or so hard disks for RAID 0. PC:Mac 0:0

Desktops with a laptop hard drive is not a good thing as well as a desktop that is harder then most desktop to get into.
Mac 0 pc +1


5. Which brings us to Mac Pro, which I will just place against PC workstation/ enthusiast desktop. PC:Mac 1:1

More workstation then enthusiast because of server ram and week video card for the price.


6. Price: The entry price of PCs is definitely much lower, but you get what you pay for and there are strong arguments against the "Apple Tax". I'm almost going to give the PC:Mac 1:0 but given the Apple extended 3 year warranty which you can buy anytime in the first 12 months of purchase, and my personal experience with 3 year warranties being generally decent, PC:Mac 1:1 in terms of pricing in the long term view of 2-3 years, not just 1 year.

less choice with apple makes pc's a better choice for cost. Aka
*apple you have to buy a $2000 laptop just to get a real video card most pc laptop have them in systems that cost about $1000
* Apple Desktop systems use laptop ram that costs more then desktop ram
* Only Good Apple Head less system uses high cost server parts.
Pc +1 Mac 0

7. RAM: No brainer on this one. You can buy non-Apple RAM for your Mac. PCs have a variety of RAM as well. Not relevant. PC:Mac 0:0.

Only head less system with a real video card uses high cost server ram
Apple Desktop systems use laptop ram
Pc +1 Mac 0

8. Mac OS 10.4 Tiger vs Windows XP and Leopard vs Windows Vista. Easy. PC:Mac 0:1

Mac os is a better os but a lot of software is windows only.



9. Running all my "critical business apps" and Microsoft Office 2007 on Windows. Bootcamp and Parallels makes this argument much weaker. Adobe and Macromedia in Bootcamp or Parallels makes Rosetta/ "Macromedia snappiness on PC" issues less critical. PC:Mac 0:0

With Bootcamp or Parallels you still have to deal with windows.


10. Display: Laptops. You can't make it bigger or have a higher resolution, PC or Mac, for the most part. You can plug it in to an external monitor. No difference here. Display: Desktops. Mac Mini and Mac Pro: No difference here. Now the biggest gripe about the iMac - "I'm stuck with the same display for 3 years..." ...Well guess what, so am I for my PC desktop. I got a Sony 17" 1280x1024 with full 3 year warranty. Would I be swapping it out anytime soon? Probably not. It's better to have another 17" side by side if I really need more screen real estate. With the iMac, since you don't have the junk of the PC Tower taking up space, actually it's easier and less clutter to just place another 17" or 20" display of any brand, non-Apple, next to the iMac. PC:Mac 0:0

With A desktop pc you do need to have the screen and the cpu right next each other.
Mac mini has a pos gam 950 that can't drive duel link dvi screens.
No min-end head less apple desktop
Pc +1 Mac 0



11(a). Hmmm... Now let me see. Let's say I want to upgrade my AMD64 rig mid-end, after 1.5 years. Okay, new hard disks (let's assume for bigger storage RAID0 or even other RAIDs, better to have newer better hard disks which are the same models). New CPU. New graphics card. Oh, new motherboard. I want widescreen 1600x1200 gaming for my great new graphics card. New monitor. More RAM. Oh, wait, NEW RAM, because I'm changing my motherboard because I just want another core for my CPU. Doesn't have to be faster, just another core. Too bad. NEW RAM. Ah, check out all my sweet upgrades. Hmmm... wait a second, I could have just bought a brand new computer with a DVD burner.... all I would have kept is the casing and power supply! Oh wait, probably need a new power supply with the more demanding GPU and for motherboard and overall Windows stability, because a crappy power supply for a desktop PC can cause instability if you cut corners there. But I can run Vista now! Woooooooo. Frack off. OS 10.4 over 10.3 has shown general performance improvements on EXISTING Mac hardware. 10.5 over 10.4 should show similar if not a minor performance hit over EXISTING Mac hardware. Oh, and $129 for a new operating system is reasonable and on par with say a WinXP upgrade. Not so much so with a Win Vista upgrade, it's going to cost more.

12. Let's add things up: PC:Mac 2:5. Thanks for playing 8)
With a pc you can put in a real raid card.

[Joe_the_dragon]

Remove DP

[sunilraman]

...So you can't get 939 Athlon 64 X2's at decent prices. You'd have no problem finding one in USA or Europe. It's your local market that is at fault and not PC tech in general. Granted, this is not something you can do much about. Did you try to buy used yet? 1-0...

I was actually basing my research of USA's newegg.com - Socket939 Athlon X2s are very expensive compared to Intel Core2Duos, and very rare (very few models). A used CPU would not have a warranty, so basically you're gambling a couple hundred bucks on a CPU that could die on you at any time.

[sunilraman]

....Your 11a argument is basically, "If I'm a maniac who has to upgrade everything all the time, I might as well get a new machine instead of upgrading everything." No shit, Sherlock. Most people who need to upgrade something only need one or two components at a time.... 1-5

Let's see, ideally, add one GPU (if SLI actually was worth anything), add one CPU (if getting dualcore was so easy), one more hard disk, one more 1gb. After 1 year and a half. I guess this makes me a maniac, huh? 8)

The way I see it, you're inventing all these problems because the easy, effortless ways to do things don't fit your sense of style or whatever. Or maybe you are trying to justify a Mac Pro purchase to yourself. :p

I'm just pissed off that there's all this fantastic Intel Core2Duo stuff that's cheap and super overclockable, and just a year and a half I'm sitting with my thumb up my a55 because my Socket939 AMD64 has fracking gone out of style. What *real* advantages does Socket AM2 really offer? DDR2 support? woooo Thanks AMD, way to make my CPU, RAM, and motherboard obsolete soo bloody fast.

[sunilraman]

...So in order to upgrade a PC, you need to have a competent level of knowledge of what you are doing, and you may have to buy a few more components than you actually need, since they need to be compatible with each other. To upgrade a Mac, you need no knowledge, since you have to actually buy an entirely new computer....

"You may have to buy a few more components than you actually need" -- As I pointed out, for my needs, which aren't "maniacal" as someone pointed out above :smokey: ...It translates to virtually buying a new computer. Which is almost the same as having to buy a Mac. To upgrade a MacBook's hard disk, you need some knowledge. To upgrade Mac memory, you need some knowledge. RAM and Hard disk can be upgraded for a lot of models without having to buy a whole new Mac.

This makes PCs bad how exactly?

Actually, I think I'm just somewhat devastated that 1.5 years ago AMD64 was the bomb, and now it bombed out on me. I should be able to just swap out the CPU for a dualcore 2ghz for US$150. Instead, just for *dualcore*, I'm looking at switching over to Intel Core2Duo, new CPU, new RAM, new Mobo, ok maybe not new power supply, but at least three big upgrades (CPU, RAM, Mobo). Just so I can add *one*, *just one more CPU* to my rig. :(

[sunilraman]

With a pc you can put in a real raid card.

And this performance is much better than nVidia's RAID or Mac OSX's RAID? How much would I pay for this RAID card and why and more drivers and stuff to worry about? :???:

[sunilraman]

Thanks for the responses, I need to sort out my thinking on Macs and PCs and consoles and what I actually need to do/ use/ play/ tinker around with them for... And whether/ how in the future I might once again "use them professionally"... :\

[gwoodpecker]

Get a Mac (again) :lol:

Seriously. My brother is also the kind of "I need a fast PC because my 3D renderings are faster and the whole box is cheaper etc.". So 13 months ago he bought quite a high-end Intel system. OK, it wasn't that expensive, but my father's Athlon 64 3400+ that he bought a year earlier was still faster (same price!), which my brother didn't like at all.

So since a year, he's thinking about buying a new PC again. I had a long discussion a few days ago about the different 8-core and 4-core Workstation PCs vs. Mac Pro. Conclusion: every HP or Dell Workstation that has the same specs than the Mac Pro is significantly more expensive than the MacPro PLUS a copy of Windows XP 64bit. Graphics cards are about the same at that level, you can always get a better and more expensive one.

Plus: who wants to buy a one year old Dell vs. one year old Mac Pro? The Mac in general holds much more of its value over two to three years. But yeah, if you need the latest and greatest, go buy a PC for 1500 USD. Do that every year. OR get a decent game console for a lot less... ;)

[Gon]

Let's see, ideally, add one GPU (if SLI actually was worth anything), add one CPU (if getting dualcore was so easy), one more hard disk, one more 1gb. After 1 year and a half. I guess this makes me a maniac, huh? 8)Eh...
all I would have kept is the casing and power supply! Oh wait, probably need a new power supplyRe-read your first rant. You are blowing steam over absolutely nothing in graphics and HD upgrading, in both of those areas any average PC beats any consumer Mac. You're comparing the PC to a mythical super PC (with completely independently upgradable parts) which doesn't exist, deduce that the PC sucks, and declare the Mac the winner by default, when it actually compares worse in many things. Be consistent.I'm just pissed off that there's all this fantastic Intel Core2Duo stuff that's cheap and super overclockable, and just a year and a half I'm sitting with my thumb up my a55 because my Socket939 AMD64 has fracking gone out of style. What *real* advantages does Socket AM2 really offer? DDR2 support? woooo Thanks AMD, way to make my CPU, RAM, and motherboard obsolete soo bloody fast.You got a point there. AM2 doesn't seem much improved, and the criticism against AMD is valid.

I made a wrong assumption about the US market, namely, that everything is better available there than where I live. Here in Finland a low end Athlon 64 X2 is a little cheaper than low end Core 2 Duo, not as powerful of course but the X2 is only half the price of a Core 2 Duo and a motherboard, so it's obviously a good deal as an upgrade. No one in their right mind would buy it for a new box at this time.

Still, you can just drop the SLI and get a faster graphics card to replace it, try to get a X2 used or even stick with your Venice, it's not slow. Nothing is forcing you to do a complete upgrade to keep your box reasonably fast.

Personally, I'd very much like a gaming PC, and have been itching to play the latest computer games for the last five years, but have held off so far. I am going to have an OS X box anyway, so a Windows-only box would need to be "paid in full". So, I'd gladly pay $500 extra over a basic headless Mac I'm going to get anyway to get nice graphics, because that beats paying $1000 for a separate gaming PC. If only Apple offered something in that vein.

[Chucker]

This thread sucks. :)

[Splinemodel]

This thread sucks. :)
I was about to say the same. Err, wait, I just did. ;)

I'm looking into buying a cheap PC right now. I'm only getting it because I want some serial ports and perhaps a parallel port for running JTAG and kermit/minicom sessions to embedded hardware. Will run windows and linux. Primary software: text editors, compilers, assemblers, etc. I want it to be quiet and cool, but I'm kind of polarized against getting a Via machine, since I've not had much luck with them in the past. Right now I have a lab setup at work that is an Athlon 2000 with 512MB RAM and an ATI Radeon 9000. Anything as good or better than this should be fine.

So again, the basic list of requirements, in order, are:
1. All components have great linux support
2. Cheap
3. Quiet/Cool
4. Small Case (desktop or SFF)

I can live with a minitower if it means that it's going to be quiet. Graphics are a bonus -- decent integrated graphics should be fine, but I do want DVI. Please recommend some specs. Thanks.

[BenRoethig]

I think this thread is based off of a belief that people generally need about the same exact computer and do the same exact thing. They don't. Despite what Steve, the Mac elite, and Sammy Hagar believe there is more than one way to rock when it comes to computers.

[talksense101]

Buy a XBOX360 or a PS3 for games. They will last for a while and they are cheaper. Unlike the PC, they don't need upgrades every time a new title comes out.

[BenRoethig]

Buy a XBOX360 or a PS3 for games. They will last for a while and they are cheaper. Unlike the PC, they don't need upgrades every time a new title comes out.

PC gaming and console gaming are two different animals.

[BenRoethig]

The 20” iMac review from both sides of the coin.

Family Consumer:
The iMac has all the features a family computer needs and some extra you won’t find any package elsewhere. The package is extremely elegant, powerful, and is very full featured. Compared to Celeron based budget PCs, the iMac’s 2.16ghz Core 2 Duo is a real performer and the Radeon x1600 graphics card is more than competent for playing modern games. The integrated 20” screen is large and of very nice quality. The iLife creation software really sets this machine apart from its PC counter parts as does the very useable included webcam and the Front Row Media Center software. The iMac can even run windows as a second operation system. However it does have a few nicks in its armor. First and foremost is the price. $1500 is a lot to ask for a consumer oriented computer these days, granted it is much more powerful and better featured than entry to mid level family PCs. Second the is completely lack of any kind of word processing software. Consumers will no doubt be less than pleased when they learn they have to pay Apple another $80 just so junior can do his homework. Lastly, the optical drive is a slower mobile model. Of note, those with mini-DVD camcorders will not be able to use them due to the slot loading mechanism. Also of note is the lack of a card reader. Overall, the iMac has a mix of elegance, power, simplicity, and features that no other computer can match despite a few flaws. If you’re willing to pay Apple’s price that is.

High end consumer/ low to medium end profession aka prosumer.
While a very competitive machine for the family, saying that the iMac is less than ideal might be somewhat understated. It has a good processor, a decent video card, and a top quality monitor in the low end. The problem is you pretty got what you got as long as you own this computer. Upgrade and expansion options are pretty limited. The CPU stops at 2.33ghz because of the use of the merom, the mobile flavor of the Core 2 Duo range. Conroe based desktops have options of 2.4, 2.67, and 2.93ghz. Memory upgrades as equally as limited. The CPU is theoretically upgradeable but is very difficult to access. The iMac only has two SO-DIMM slots and those are run in a dual channel configuration and the memory is hardware limited to a maximum of 3GB. This equates to a lot of expense for very small amount of gain. The hard drive is large, but replacing it requires much more skill and disassembly than your average PC to a point where it is not practical to do so. The lone optical drive is a dual layer 8x model while far from a bad drive in most cases, it is roughly half as fast than full size burners found in tower PCs and close to three times slower in the dual layer arena. While a hindrance for consumers, taking a half an hour or more longer to do the same job on DVDs adds up. The drive is also unable to write DVD-R dual layer discs and cannot be used with 3.5” mini CDs or DVDs. The stock 128mb Radeon x1600 is a decent video card choice, but unfortunately the only option you have is to upgrade the video memory to 256mb unless you want to pay the $500 upcharge for the 24”. Even then you’re limited to a GeForce 7600GT. It should be noted that since the Radeon x1600 is soldered onto the motherboard you have no option to ever upgrade to something more powerful. The 24” model has the CPU on a MXM card that while technically replaceable offers little chance of ever seeing upgrades on the market. The displays are of very good quality, but are built into the machine. If the computer or display should fail, you’re forced to replace both. Expansion slots are non existent, not even a notebook express card slot. Any expansion requires use of external devices through USB or firewire ports, the former isn’t exactly in plentiful supply either. E-SATA ports are not present and because of the said complete lack of any expansion slots will not be able to be added in the future. Should that standard replace USB and firewire as the preferred external drive interface you will be out of luck. For those photographers who would want a card reader, you will have to use one of the three USB 2.0 ports. In summary, the iMac makes a very good machine for the home. For the home office or office it comes up lacking. For those who want expansion and a faster CPU while keeping the Mac OS, the workstation-class MacPro and its nearly $2200 starting price is the only option.

[turnwrite]

I like PC gaming better because RTS games work way better on a PC, and also PCs can be upgraded to increase the performance, whereas consoles you are pretty much stuck with the graphics that technology gives you when the console came out, which is obsolete rather quickly.

[sunilraman]

This thread sucks. :)

:( ...It has stimulated some discussion though :D

[sunilraman]

Eh... Re-read your first rant. You are blowing steam over absolutely nothing in graphics and HD upgrading, in both of those areas any average PC beats any consumer Mac. You're comparing the PC to a mythical super PC (with completely independently upgradable parts) which doesn't exist, deduce that the PC sucks, and declare the Mac the winner by default, when it actually compares worse in many things. Be consistent...

Yeah actually my main thrust was dualcore CPU, because I want to have several Bittorrent threads running while also being able to play the latest PC games. If I focus on just the games, then GPU is alright, the 6600GT 128mb VRAM 1280x1024 with custom heatsinkfan and overclocked 500mhz to 560mhz, is actually reasonable for 16xAF and 2xAA, it does give mostly smooth gameplay on "medium" settings of most games. I just need 1GB of RAM to bring things to 2GB to give WinXP2pro and the games enough "headroom", $100, and just another 80GB 7200rpm HD, $50, to bring it to RAID0, the performance improvements in loading windows and particularly loading game/ game maps/ textures is pretty decent using the motherboard's nVidia RAID (no need for a separate RAID card). So, total of USD $150. Very workable.

In actual fact, let's say I get a Mac Mini (hopefully soon they'll bring the USD $800 model up to 2.0ghz Core2Duo (mobile) and 1GB RAM standard...) that's a more power-wise and multitasking-wise option for running Torrents and I'll have my own Mac. Much more worth the $800 than throwing that at a new dualcore Intel CPU, new motherboard, new RAM, new graphics card, some new heatsinkfans.....

Personally, I'd very much like a gaming PC, and have been itching to play the latest computer games for the last five years, but have held off so far...

Wow, now that's some real willpower. :wow: ...After a 3 year break I tried out some gaming 2004-2006. Some titles are engaging and have a nice aesthetic to the graphics and resonate with me personally, while some titles are just... meh... like Matrix:Path of Neo, KingKong and TombRaider: Legend has a bad case of "console-itis" -- namely predictable levels with the boss at the end, and a lot of button (keyboard/mouse) mashing for Matrix:Path of Neo and KingKong.

[sunilraman]

Yeah.... USD$150 for new RAM, one more HD, existing graphics card, "medium smooth playable" settings of latest PC games, that's alright on the singlecore AMD64 Venice OC'ed at 2.15ghz. WinXP2pro. Scanning and printing off the PC (mainly tons of old/new important documents of the family scanned and copied etc.)

USD$800 for Mac Mini IntelCore2Duo [mobile] -- dualcore(!!) 1gb RAM, 100gb 5400rpm HD, running Torrents and beautiful iLife and Mac OS 10.4 Tiger and maybe in 6 months USD$129 for Leopard 10.5.x

I can have my cake, eat it, smear it all over my face, and lick the icing off my finger tips. YEAHHHHHHHH. That's it. Best of both worlds - dedicated GPU and games [PC], silent dualcore Torrent/ Web/ iLife/ Creative-ish/ Encoding/ Parallels/ Linux [Mac]... YEAHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...

And I get to use both on my Sony 17" 1280x1024. One VGA [PC] and one DVI input [Mac] -- although I probably need a KVM DVI+PS2+USB switcher, just one button on the KVM to flick between PC and Mac.

[sunilraman]

Only thing is that I won't be mobile and have an international warranty on the Mac. A MacBook is a bit of a cash blowout for me at this stage, sadly, and I played around with it, the resolution and size of the glossy display, brightness and colours, something ain't jiving with me. The MacBookPro is tooooo expensive and a bit heavy.

Well, thanks for helping me work through these confusing times. :( :lol:

[sunilraman]

I like PC gaming better because RTS games work way better on a PC, and also PCs can be upgraded to increase the performance, whereas consoles you are pretty much stuck with the graphics that technology gives you when the console came out, which is obsolete rather quickly.

Yeah, RTS and First person/ Third person action, I'd prefer PCs. I just don't *get* consoles. Also I'm a graphics whore, I think. :\ ...I swear my 6600GT 128mb VRAM is as good as current XBOX360 games, as coded. Sure as developers get better with the platform they'll churn out some super-looking graphics that are on par with the latest PC GPUs, but then again, the few games I tried on a demo XBOX360, I wasn't super impressed with the graphics.

[a_greer]

Yet another PC vs Mac bitching, one may say, but I have to express these thoughts this morning. Scorecard reads as PC:Mac below:

1. CPU upgrades. I was hella pissed off and inspired to write this thread. Hmm.. lets see, just over 1 year ago I bought an AMD64 Venice Athlon 3000+ Socket 939 single core. Considered mid-end, considered a solid option for gaming and general Windows task. Now, let's see, hmm... I want to buy a dualcore for my PC, let's say if they had a two 3000+ cores in Socket939, would be reasonable price right? WRONG. A Venice Athlon 3000+ is like $65 but a Socket939 dualcore is like over $300. WTF. Also, Socket 939 is on the outs majorly and Socket AM2 is all the rage now. Move to Intel Core2Duo you say? Cool, I say. But I'll have to get a new motherboard. Just only ONE YEAR after building my mid-end system. WTF. PC:Mac 0:0.

2. Graphics card upgrades. Hmm... let's see, I want the latest gaming card to play NeedForSpeed: Carbon. Macs suck for gaming, right? With a PC, I can just put another 6600GT in my PC for SLI and get 50% more GPU power - cheap and effective. WRONG. SLI is just an enthusiast blip on the radar. Go to http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html and look at some key charts. In some cases, SLI makes almost NO difference at all! PC:Mac 0:0

3. Hard Disk upgrades: Laptop: MacBook features a very easily swappable notebook HD. You can upgrade size, or speed up to 7200rpm, or down the line, both. Without violating your warranty, in general. Can't do that for most PC notebooks. MacBookPro - you can get a certified tech to do it without violating your warranty, ok, maybe you can get similar service for HP/Compaq/Acer but not really a Dell. PC:Mac 0:1

4. Hard Disk upgrades: Desktops: Mac Mini - possible if one is careful without violating warranty. Stackable external drives bus-powered FW400. iMac, okay, have to go external. PC tower: now let's say I want to add more drives for RAID 0. Yeah... cool, I have an 80gb hard disk, I'll get another 80gb. Okay, possible. Unless I want more storage in which case I have to buy two 120gb or so hard disks for RAID 0. PC:Mac 0:0

5. Which brings us to Mac Pro, which I will just place against PC workstation/ enthusiast desktop. PC:Mac 1:1

6. Price: The entry price of PCs is definitely much lower, but you get what you pay for and there are strong arguments against the "Apple Tax". I'm almost going to give the PC:Mac 1:0 but given the Apple extended 3 year warranty which you can buy anytime in the first 12 months of purchase, and my personal experience with 3 year warranties being generally decent, PC:Mac 1:1 in terms of pricing in the long term view of 2-3 years, not just 1 year.

7. RAM: No brainer on this one. You can buy non-Apple RAM for your Mac. PCs have a variety of RAM as well. Not relevant. PC:Mac 0:0.

8. Mac OS 10.4 Tiger vs Windows XP and Leopard vs Windows Vista. Easy. PC:Mac 0:1

9. Running all my "critical business apps" and Microsoft Office 2007 on Windows. Bootcamp and Parallels makes this argument much weaker. Adobe and Macromedia in Bootcamp or Parallels makes Rosetta/ "Macromedia snappiness on PC" issues less critical. PC:Mac 0:0

10. Display: Laptops. You can't make it bigger or have a higher resolution, PC or Mac, for the most part. You can plug it in to an external monitor. No difference here. Display: Desktops. Mac Mini and Mac Pro: No difference here. Now the biggest gripe about the iMac - "I'm stuck with the same display for 3 years..." ...Well guess what, so am I for my PC desktop. I got a Sony 17" 1280x1024 with full 3 year warranty. Would I be swapping it out anytime soon? Probably not. It's better to have another 17" side by side if I really need more screen real estate. With the iMac, since you don't have the junk of the PC Tower taking up space, actually it's easier and less clutter to just place another 17" or 20" display of any brand, non-Apple, next to the iMac. PC:Mac 0:0

11(a). Hmmm... Now let me see. Let's say I want to upgrade my AMD64 rig mid-end, after 1.5 years. Okay, new hard disks (let's assume for bigger storage RAID0 or even other RAIDs, better to have newer better hard disks which are the same models). New CPU. New graphics card. Oh, new motherboard. I want widescreen 1600x1200 gaming for my great new graphics card. New monitor. More RAM. Oh, wait, NEW RAM, because I'm changing my motherboard because I just want another core for my CPU. Doesn't have to be faster, just another core. Too bad. NEW RAM. Ah, check out all my sweet upgrades. Hmmm... wait a second, I could have just bought a brand new computer with a DVD burner.... all I would have kept is the casing and power supply! Oh wait, probably need a new power supply with the more demanding GPU and for motherboard and overall Windows stability, because a crappy power supply for a desktop PC can cause instability if you cut corners there. But I can run Vista now! Woooooooo. Frack off. OS 10.4 over 10.3 has shown general performance improvements on EXISTING Mac hardware. 10.5 over 10.4 should show similar if not a minor performance hit over EXISTING Mac hardware. Oh, and $129 for a new operating system is reasonable and on par with say a WinXP upgrade. Not so much so with a Win Vista upgrade, it's going to cost more.

11(b). So here I was, happy with my tinkering on the PC, and looking forward to a few simple upgrades I can do without buying a new one. WRONG. It's a myth. Don't get me wrong, I still generally understand PCs and Macs and enjoy having a PC around to say, add some RAM, or add in a 5.25" DVD burner, change some fans for aftermarket CPU and/or GPU heatsink-fans. But in reality, in the course of 2-3 years, a Mac "fixed/ trapped/ bullied/ zealot" computer is generally better in the course of things particularly at this stage with hardware requirements for an enjoyable Vista experience and the cost of upgrading to Vista. PC:Mac 0:1

12. Let's add things up: PC:Mac 2:5. Thanks for playing 8)
<tries to jam 2GB RAM in my 1.75 year old Mac Mini> NO LUCK!
<Does same to 3 year old PC> _ Success

<Tries to add NV6k-series (fine for the limited gaming I do) to the Mini> Nope!
<same PC> DONE!

Rince and repeate for a DVD burner, sound card, FW card, 2nd third and fourth hard disks and more...


My PC is a low end Presario, ~300 new and it does a lot upgrade-wise...and everyone knows you should only upgrade procs when you change MOBOs and get the matching generation of each for maximum preformance (fastest available buses, I/O and so on)

[Splinemodel]

Buy a XBOX360 or a PS3 for games. They will last for a while and they are cheaper. Unlike the PC, they don't need upgrades every time a new title comes out.
Plus linux is officially supported on the PS3, which makes it a damn impressive media server as well.

[skatman]

Okay, new hard disks (let's assume for bigger storage RAID0 or even other RAIDs, better to have newer better hard disks which are the same models). New CPU. New graphics card. Oh, new motherboard. I want widescreen 1600x1200 gaming for my great new graphics card. New monitor. More RAM. Oh, wait, NEW RAM, because I'm changing my motherboard because I just want another core for my CPU. Doesn't have to be faster, just another core.



I still don't understand what does that fact that you realized that you need to spend $300 on a new CPU have to do with PCs being more or less upgradable than Macs?
Have your priced out a comparable upgrade to the Mac?
Have you priced out a Mac that will give you a comparable performance to your PC wth the new CPU?

Have you decided what is it that you want? Another core on the CPU? A new computer system?

Perhaps if you could answer these questions, we can help you actually solve your problem rather than deal with abstract philosophical problems.

[skatman]

Buy a XBOX360 or a PS3 for games. They will last for a while and they are cheaper. Unlike the PC, they don't need upgrades every time a new title comes out.

If you like to play games designed for outdated hardware (as is the case for the game consoles), you don't need to upgrade the PC either.
State-of-the-art is a moving target and if that is what you like, you need to upgrade often.

[Gon]

Yeah actually my main thrust was dualcore CPU, because I want to have several Bittorrent threads running while also being able to play the latest PC games. If I focus on just the games, then GPU is alright, the 6600GT 128mb VRAM 1280x1024 with custom heatsinkfan and overclocked 500mhz to 560mhz, is actually reasonable for 16xAF and 2xAA, it does give mostly smooth gameplay on "medium" settings of most games. I just need 1GB of RAM to bring things to 2GB to give WinXP2pro and the games enough "headroom", $100, and just another 80GB 7200rpm HD, $50, to bring it to RAID0, the performance improvements in loading windows and particularly loading game/ game maps/ textures is pretty decent using the motherboard's nVidia RAID (no need for a separate RAID card). So, total of USD $150. Very workable.

In actual fact, let's say I get a Mac Mini (hopefully soon they'll bring the USD $800 model up to 2.0ghz Core2Duo (mobile) and 1GB RAM standard...) that's a more power-wise and multitasking-wise option for running Torrents and I'll have my own Mac. Much more worth the $800 than throwing that at a new dualcore Intel CPU, new motherboard, new RAM, new graphics card, some new heatsinkfans........ now you're solving the problem. Great!Wow, now that's some real willpower. :wow: Nah, it was mostly environment and lack of funds, and it was not a total lack of gaming. First I moved on Macs (PB, later on sold that and got iBook+big external display) so couldn't afford a new PC. I got a PS2 so I could do the console kind of gaming. I played a bit of WoW on iBook, as painful as it was. I actually quit playing because I saw the whole point was playing vs other players and the iB couldn't handle that. The last year I've been in the Army with no time for gaming. I go home in January and would very much like to play all sorts of strategy games, RPG's, FEAR, SupCom, WoW:BC, new multiplayer FPS games, and other nice things published during my "time off". But I'm so fed up with Windows.. I thought I could tolerate it, but even a little contact at work is abrasive. I will need to have an OS X box no matter what - and upgrade time is coming up - so a PC on top of that would be expensive. :( An xMac coming out before Leopard would be perfect.

[sunilraman]

I still don't understand what does that fact that you realized that you need to spend $300 on a new CPU have to do with PCs being more or less upgradable than Macs?
Have your priced out a comparable upgrade to the Mac?
Have you priced out a Mac that will give you a comparable performance to your PC wth the new CPU?
Have you decided what is it that you want? Another core on the CPU? A new computer system?

Perhaps if you could answer these questions, we can help you actually solve your problem rather than deal with abstract philosophical problems.

Yes, I have come to a few conclusions and de-abstracted some of the philosophical questions:: I had it in a recent post above:

Yeah.... USD$150 for new RAM, one more HD, existing graphics card, "medium smooth playable" settings of latest PC games, that's alright on the singlecore AMD64 Venice OC'ed at 2.15ghz. WinXP2pro. Scanning and printing off the PC (mainly tons of old/new important documents of the family scanned and copied etc.)

USD$800 for Mac Mini IntelCore2Duo [mobile] -- dualcore(!!) 1gb RAM, 100gb 5400rpm HD, running Torrents and beautiful iLife and Mac OS 10.4 Tiger and maybe in 6 months USD$129 for Leopard 10.5.x

I can have my cake, eat it, smear it all over my face, and lick the icing off my finger tips. YEAHHHHHHHH. That's it. Best of both worlds - dedicated GPU and games [PC], silent dualcore Torrent/ Web/ iLife/ Creative-ish/ Encoding/ Parallels/ Linux [Mac]... YEAHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...

And I get to use both on my Sony 17" 1280x1024. One VGA [PC] and one DVI input [Mac] -- although I probably need a KVM DVI+PS2+USB switcher, just one button on the KVM to flick between PC and Mac.

[sunilraman]

... now you're solving the problem. Great!...

Thanks to all of the comments here. 8) The key is I thought I needed dualcore to run a game and torrents at the same time. Adding the upgrades up for new CPU = new CPU + new motherboard + new RAM, and the ridiculous (I'm still pissed at AMD) cost for an Athlon X2 dualcore, even low-end, I realised that money could go towards a (OMFG dualcore) Mac Mini - and it's much better leaving the Mac Mini on all the time, rather than the PC tower noisy + energygobbling.

So - Mac Mini for overall tasks. PC becomes mainly a gaming machine, because, I've tolerated Windows as much as I can but would prefer the PC ONLY FOR GAMING, not anything else. So just another 1GB RAM to bring it to 2GB, and another HD for RAID0 2x80gb for fast loading of games/ textures/ levels/ etc.

Upgrading PC GPUs are a bit of a zero-sum game, your graphics are always *not* as pretty as it really could be. If I look and feel and think carefully, the 6600GT gives a decent enough visual experience to enjoy the "meat" and "cinematic experience" of the game, as I have played through HL2, HL2:Episode1 with HDR, FEAR, and BattleforMiddleEarth:2. Command&Conquer3 should be pretty cool at my "medium" settings. Ditto for NeedForSpeed:Carbon. Quality overall better than PS2 and Wii and Xbox, about as good as current or slightly older Xbox360. PS3 is just ridiculously priced at this stage for most intents and purposes.

[sunilraman]

If you like to play games designed for outdated hardware (as is the case for the game consoles), you don't need to upgrade the PC either.
State-of-the-art is a moving target and if that is what you like, you need to upgrade often.

Yes, good point, see above, I "searched my soul" and came to the conclusion:

Upgrading PC GPUs are a bit of a zero-sum game, your graphics are always *not* as pretty as it really could be. If I look and feel and think carefully, the 6600GT gives a decent enough visual experience to enjoy the "meat" and "cinematic experience" of the game, as I have played through HL2, HL2:Episode1 with HDR, FEAR, and BattleforMiddleEarth:2. Command&Conquer3 should be pretty cool at my "medium" settings. Ditto for NeedForSpeed:Carbon. Quality overall better than PS2 and Wii and Xbox, about as good as current or slightly older Xbox360. PS3 is just ridiculously priced at this stage for most intents and purposes.

[sunilraman]

<tries to jam 2GB RAM in my 1.75 year old Mac Mini> NO LUCK!
<Does same to 3 year old PC> _ Success

<Tries to add NV6k-series (fine for the limited gaming I do) to the Mini> Nope!
<same PC> DONE!

Rince and repeate for a DVD burner, sound card, FW card, 2nd third and fourth hard disks and more...

My PC is a low end Presario, ~300 new and it does a lot upgrade-wise...and everyone knows you should only upgrade procs when you change MOBOs and get the matching generation of each for maximum preformance (fastest available buses, I/O and so on)

:lol: Nice try. Top marks for using the underscore in _Success -- that's such a Windows habit, no? :D

I have to say though, your low-end Presario, what is it? Pentium3? Pentium4? Shithouse CPU, mate. Your 3 year old CPU can take 2GB RAM, a RAID HD setup, and nVidia 6k-series, Creative 7.1 surround but because of your crappy CPU those upgrades aren't worth the money. You'd honestly be better off buying a recent Dell. I'm open to discussing this point further. A 3-year old PC can take such upgrades you mentioned. But in terms of multitasking and making the most of those upgrades, you will be facing *severe* CPU-limitations in running the programs/ games you want which the upgrades were supposed to enable.

This was my main thrust in my original post. Comparing to Macs complicates the issue. So let's take the Macs out of the equations. I would say within 2 years upgrade options for PCs are worthwhile. 3+ years, one is better off eBaying the old PC for residual value, and getting a new Dell or HP.

[a_greer]

:lol: Nice try. Top marks for using the underscore in _Success -- that's such a Windows habit, no? :D

I have to say though, your low-end Presario, what is it? Pentium3? Pentium4? Shithouse CPU, mate. Your 3 year old CPU can take 2GB RAM, a RAID HD setup, and nVidia 6k-series, Creative 7.1 surround but because of your crappy CPU those upgrades aren't worth the money. You'd honestly be better off buying a recent Dell. I'm open to discussing this point further. A 3-year old PC can take such upgrades you mentioned. But in terms of multitasking and making the most of those upgrades, you will be facing *severe* CPU-limitations in running the programs/ games you want which the upgrades were supposed to enable.

This was my main thrust in my original post. Comparing to Macs complicates the issue. So let's take the Macs out of the equations. I would say within 2 years upgrade options for PCs are worthwhile. 3+ years, one is better off eBaying the old PC for residual value, and getting a new Dell or HP.
As a matter of fact, I have an AMD 1800, good for when I got it, it has an N-Force 2 mainboard, and it happens that I have not bought a part for this unit retail...people give me their old boxen when I was a student, saying "it is broke, I replaced it, if you can use it as a whole or for parts do it" I got a gig of ram that way, I got an extra HDD that way, I bought the vid card off a bud who upgraded to a PCI-E setup and had no use for the AGP card as he had given the MoBo to someone else...I offered him $20 for it and he accepted...

I was a college student...I was driving a crappy car held together because a bud happens to be a mechanic who could help with it, I was scrimping...I did what it took to get decent hardware...and for the record, I am planning to buy a nice system complete with big display in the spring of '07, after I pay off debts and can buy it cash on the barrel.

[sunilraman]

Look, I apologise if I offended you. I too have had phases where I was very cash-strapped. I did not mean to insult you. All I was trying to say with a bit of humour, and maybe too brusquely, was that if one was to bring a 3+ year old CPU up to a current state, the upgrade money might as well be spent on a new PC. If one was upgrading certain bits that you get at a good low price, that's cool.

Two years ago I racked up $5000 in credit card debts buying the latest Macs (obsessive behaviour now "medically" attributed to my bipolar manic phases). After some tax refunds I got my AMD64 rig in mid-2005, and from mid-2005-mid-2006, it was something worthwhile to tinker around with while the other times I would be clinically depressed and completely dependent on my parents.

I have just started to get some "allowance" money (disability social security) so I am looking at options down the line as I perhaps start to get back to work, or look at things that would help my mental state. Upgrading PC for gaming is not as frivolous as it may be, it helps de-stress, and getting a Mac can be very useful in sorting out day-to-day affairs, not be bogged down by the negative aspects of Windows, and hopefully staying in touch with Tech may lead to a Mac/PC -related job/ some work/ volunteering down the line, whether I continue to be on some disability payments or not. I have interviewed in the past two years for various web design/ interactive media tutoring/ pc component business/ mac reseller shop jobs...

I have never owned a car and have taken public/school bus transport most of my life since high school... Recently borrowing my parents' car and aunt's car where needed, still very dependent financially on my parents.

I have been for the past four months mainly using a Pentium-4-laptop 2ghz that my cousin has lent me, 1024x768 screen, and no games whatsoever for about 4 months now... At least I have a computer and broadband luckily as long as I need while I am in Australia, thanks to my aunt and cousin. I use my parents' iBook G4 when needed to back up their stuff, upgrade software, and just enjoy a bit of OSX now and then.

I empathise with your situation....Ok, take care, alright?