I still don't see many people really jumping on this SP PMac and those that do will wish they had bought an iMac or a dual PMac.
When you have a line of products, I think its wise to have an "entry" level model. "Entry" models always suck, and it's usually not a whole lot of money to go to the next level, and entry models are usually not designed to have the best bang for buck.
As great as the iMac is, the fact that the monitor is attached to the CPU really, I mean reeaalllly sucks. The monitor goes, and the whole thing goes back. And having a the option for a second hard drive isn't the "pro" option it used to be. I think the single will do well.
I think that this is more of a "let's see what happens" product for Apple. If the single shows to do well, they may end up filling the gap properly. They really have nothing to lose with this.
You forgot that many people want to drive more than one (high-quality) external monitor.
Or that they have a nice monitor already and don't want to spend the extra to get the one built into the iMac.
I think this is great for the increasingly advanced prosumer who's doing audio work in particular - PCI based audio like the M-Audio Delta series are great additions to Logic Express for the musician who's graduating from GarageBand.
Same goes for the prosumer video guy who wants to use Motion - which really needs a 9800 to 256MB RAM to work.
Don't think this will attract gamers at all - they'll stick with their overclocked PCs because games take too long to port.
What it does tell me is that the yields IBM has for 1,8GHz G5s is good. Good enough for them to populate them in a whole bunch of machines.
this is an awesome option for people in my situation because it offers almost unlimited upgradability at a good price. with the education discount, i can get the single 1.8 with 512 mb RAM and a 9600XT (cuz the 5200 sucks in comparison) for 1461. thats pretty freaking sweet for what this machine has to offer. because of the expandability, i can easily bump up ram and the video card in a few years when it starts to lag, and its also very easy to add a second hard drive if i need. with the addition of the cheap $300 19" Mitsubishi CRT, its a pretty cheap option, and may be the best chance for me to ever get a PM. i hope it all works, or else i may just go for the 1.8 imac... who knows...
This is a reasonable deal, to be honest. I was considering an iMac G5 for 2005, but this is impressive. As tens of people have said before me, this could be tweaked to perform its role better, in terms of graphics, RAM and price, but this is definitely a step in the right direction. Hopefully, they can keep it up.
Apple Australia is charging $2700. Good work, Apple. I can't see these being a very popular model at that price (the dual 1.8Ghz model is $3600, and a well-equipped AMD64 with a Radeon X800 is under $2000).
Apple Australia is charging $2700. Good work, Apple. I can't see these being a very popular model at that price (the dual 1.8Ghz model is $3600, and a well-equipped AMD64 with a Radeon X800 is under $2000).
The direct rate conversions shouldnt be used cause well it never works out rite.. taxes, freight blah blah, you should compare it to the price of the middle iMac here in OZ which is $2499.. in the US the 1.8 tower and the 1.8 17" iMac are US$1499.. compared to here $2499 and $2699.. so they are overpriced by $200..
The specs for the dual 1.8 are dumb as well, but it's 80% faster for many apps, and exists at a much higher price point, so the same (essential) upgrades cost less in relation to base price. More importantly, the dual 1.8 has very little competition. IMO the SP 1.8 is trounced by the iMac from one direction, old Powermacs from another, PC's from another. Applenut is right about the "correct" price and specs.
A question for you, Louzer - what do those "prosumers" do that makes the SP 1.8 a good choice, apart from making it a small office server?
'Prosumers' are the people I read all the time on these boards and MacNN complaining that apple didn't sell a machine (like a headless iMac) that let them expand/upgrade without having to buy a whole new machine, one that let you, yes you, select what monitor you wanted to use (what a concept!)
If you don't think this fits into any current market, I don't see how charging $200 less makes it so much more attractive.
All I know is I've been contemplating a new mid or high-end iMac or lowend power mac for purchase, unable to really justify the $2000 for the 1.8 DP ($2250+ once you upgrade it, but I have a nice monitor already), with a leaning toward the high-end iMac, but it would cost more than the low-end G5 ($2500, being concerned over the life of a all-integrated computer, I'd feel compelled to get applecare for it), or maybe going for the smaller screen because of the cost (not knowing whether the smaller screen would feel too cramped, I haven't checked out the new iMacs yet). Now I have another option (OMG, how DARE Apple give users another option, the bastards!). Of course, it then makes the pickings/choosings more complicated.
BTW, although a lot of you seem to be saying that it'll never sell (because of its price and what's available around it), I remember many, many people saying the same damn thing about the iPod mini ($250? WTF! No one will buy it, when you can get 4 times the space for only $50 more!). Turns out there was/is a market for the mini (people who actually didn't need/want 20 GB HD players and thought they could save the $50 and spend it on something else). Who knows, there may be a market for this computer ($500 is $500. Hell, you could get a cheap-o dell with integrated video and crappy processors for that kind of money. Or an iPod. Or a car payment. )
And I'll save comment and opinion on its performance until someone actually has a chance to use it/test it, rather than take everyone's word for it that its some slow-poke that's half the speed of the dual in most tasks (sorry, I don't believe the duals are twice as fast at 'normal' tasks, sure, some specialized/intensive stuff, but overall?)
I like this option / machine. Sure the FSB reflects poorly on Apple, but moving on...
How good is the ATI 9800xt with 256MB of RAM? It seems pricy. The recently announced ATI x800 should be a better deal and shouldn't hamper my expansion slots.
I put in the things I like and it turns out to be a 2600$ machine without a monitor.
1GB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 2x512
160GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
ATI Radeon 9800 XT w/25MB DDR SDRAM
AirPort Extreme Card
Bluetooth Module
56k V.92 modem.
8x Super Drive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
Bluetooth Module + Apple Wireless Keyboard & Mouse - U.S. English
Edit: Singapore price is S$ 5,308.86 for the configuration above. That works out to USD 3172 or 22% (572 USD) extra. Guess it isn't that bad given past history of pricing...
I like this option / machine. Sure the FSB reflects poorly on Apple, but moving on...
How good is the ATI 9800xt with 256MB of RAM? It seems pricy. The recently announced ATI x800 should be a better deal and shouldn't hamper my expansion slots.
IMO the 9800xt does not seem like a very good deal even if it is in the middle of the selection, traditionally the slot of the best price/performance. 9600 is the baseline, costs almost nothing extra, pretty reasonable. 6800GT, considering the performance difference, seems like a slightly better deal on OS X than the 9800XT. I have a feeling ATI is still lagging behind nVidia with OpenGL, but can't be sure if that applies to OS X drivers as well. Just look at Doom3 benchmarks of nVidia 6600 compared to anything ATI...
But he won't ever be doing loads of things like that, what games are multiplayer? does it make much difference?
Some of the recent games are multiprocessor aware. The example I have in mind is that of UT2004. Look here for some benchmarks (in the insights after the graphics with the fps).
What actually happens is that this game can send sound processing to the second processor, when it is present in the system. And depending on the settings, you can almost double the fps with this alone. I don't know for other games, perhaps UT2003 too would benefit from the second processor.
7. Don't ever want to run more than one monitor in spanning mode.
8. Don't need to choose your own preferred monitor, use one you already have, or need something larger than 20".
9. Don't play games were the GeForce 5200FX in the iMac is not near enough and luxuries like dual processors and PCI-X slots are overkill yet do not want to buy a PC as well.
10. Want option of buying a faster optical drive without paying twice as much for the external version.
10. Want option of buying a faster optical drive without paying twice as much for the external version.
buy the internal drive and a ~$25 fw or ~$40 fw800 enclosure, hook up the two wires, and screw the enclosure shut - problem solved.
But i certenly agree, the tower is definately better for a lower end hobbyest or college student than a peice of s**t iMac G5.
And upgradeability is a HUGE plus for this segment. It allows a college student to buy a reasonable system for a reasonable cost and upgrade little by little to keep up with their current software needs, some ram now, a hdd next year, and a video card as needed, maybe 2-3 years down the line a ~$500 cpu upgrade vs a ~$1600 new powermac
Plenty of people still use sp PMG4s that they have upgraded, and they do their work just fine, hell, some people still run on b&w g3s, when one buys a mac, one wants it to last ~4-5 years.
Let's see, its 25% cheaper then the dual 1.8, and the only difference is the FSB and the second chip. Hard for me to call that a 'little cheaper'.
That's mainly what I'm saying. 25% cheaper for only ~50% the computing power. Benchmarks will probably not tell the whole truth since they very rarely test in realistic situations. I'll guess that the dual 1.8 is at least twice as pleasant to use when the CPU(s) is hogged by some process.
At least for me, the dual 1.8 seems reasonably priced compared to the rest of the hardware Apple offers. The single 1.8, in the other hand, seems overpriced by a couple of hundred bucks.
buy the internal drive and a ~$25 fw or ~$40 fw800 enclosure, hook up the two wires, and screw the enclosure shut - problem solved.
But i certenly agree, the tower is definately better for a lower end hobbyest or college student than a peice of s**t iMac G5.
And upgradeability is a HUGE plus for this segment. It allows a college student to buy a reasonable system for a reasonable cost and upgrade little by little to keep up with their current software needs, some ram now, a hdd next year, and a video card as needed, maybe 2-3 years down the line a ~$500 cpu upgrade vs a ~$1600 new powermac
Plenty of people still use sp PMG4s that they have upgraded, and they do their work just fine, hell, some people still run on b&w g3s, when one buys a mac, one wants it to last ~4-5 years.
Yeah, I'm still using the first dual processor G4 system (DP500). It's been 4+ years now and it still manages pretty much everything I need except the latest action games. Had to get a couple new hard drives for it, and more RAM, and a hand-me-down graphics card from a friend, but it didn't cost more than $200 for all the upgrades I've put in it. Great machine.
That said, I'm ordering one of these new-fangled dual 2.5s within the week. This next month is going to be torture :P (backordered still...)
As for the single 1.8, I think it's a step in the right direction for Apple's PM lineup. Shouldn't matter if it yanks a few sales away from the iMac anyway, since aren't Apple's margins traditionally a bit higher on towers than the all-in-ones? 3 cheers for choices. I'm just not going to get one because I doubt it'd last me the 4 years I expect from a tower.
I like this option / machine. Sure the FSB reflects poorly on Apple, but moving on...
How good is the ATI 9800xt with 256MB of RAM? It seems pricy. The recently announced ATI x800 should be a better deal and shouldn't hamper my expansion slots.
I put in the things I like and it turns out to be a 2600$ machine without a monitor. 1GB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 2x512 160GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm ATI Radeon 9800 XT w/25MB DDR SDRAM AirPort Extreme Card Bluetooth Module 56k V.92 modem. 8x Super Drive (DVD-R/CD-RW) Bluetooth Module + Apple Wireless Keyboard & Mouse - U.S. English Mac OS X - U.S. English iSight Klipsch ProMedia GMX 5.1 Speakers & Monster 2-meter Cable
Edit: Singapore price is S$ 5,308.86 for the configuration above. That works out to USD 3172 or 22% (572 USD) extra. Guess it isn't that bad given past history of pricing...
1. Don't get the RAM from Apple. Even from a good dealer (like RamJet, Crucial, etc), RAM is still $50-$75 cheaper than from Apple.
2. Don't increase the hard drive from Apple. To go to 160 costs another $100. You can buy a $160 drive for $100-120 and install it as a second drive. So, for that $100, you can get 240GB rather than just 120GB.
3. When you order, DON'T order the bluetooth module AND the bluetooth keyboard/mouse. The keyboard/mouse option includes the module (I'm assuming the on-line store is smart enough not to charge you twice for the module, but it is apple...)
4. The Klipsch speakers would be cheaper from Amazon as well (at least $40, plus free shipping). [Odd thing, I went to Apple's site to price the speakers, and they didn't show up as an option for the SP machine.]
5. Unless your computer isn't sitting next to your router/modem, you shouldn't spend money on the airport card. The built-in networking will get you much faster speeds.
BTW, my above comments indicate the advantages of the SP over the iMac. It has 4 memory slots. So, if you got it with 512MB of memory today, and then decided to you wanted to go to 1GB or 2GB, you don't need to throw out your old RAM. When speccing out an iMac, I assumed I would get the one stick with 512, then go off and buy another one for $100 or so, and stick with 1GB and get the fastest memory (iMac memory needs to be paired to get best results). With the tower, I could get the 512, and then upgrade when I felt like it. Or get the 256 standard, and go buy a couple of 512 or 1GB sticks now.
And if you want more drive space, you can just pop in a second drive. You don't have to get it from Apple, or you don't have to buy an external case for the second drive (or the one you swap out).
That's mainly what I'm saying. 25% cheaper for only ~50% the computing power.
No way is it minus 50% computing power, no way in hell. Even if it was that high, which it definately is not, your talking 5 seconds slower for this, 10 seconds slower for that. A trade off the budget minded are willing to make.
Besides, for the dual to be faster than the single, you'll need to upgrade the ram substantially, just another cost.
No way is it minus 50% computing power, no way in hell. Even if it was that high, which it definately is not, your talking 5 seconds slower for this, 10 seconds slower for that. A trade off the budget minded are willing to make.
Besides, for the dual to be faster than the single, you'll need to upgrade the ram substantially, just another cost.
For a lot of purposes, the dual would be or feel twice as fast. That's what counts. The RAM point is moot because you'd (or I'd) upgrade the RAM substantially anyways.
Examples of things I can do fine with a dual that I'll have trouble with, with a single:
- Encode video while composing music in Reason.
- Play a new (or older) 3D game fluidly while playing music in the background together with 10 common idle/open apps (that suck CPU while idle)
- Watch a heavily compressed movie (like a DivX or DVD dumped to the harddrive) while encoding video or hosting a game server or files over the network
- Edit video and pictures in Photoshop while rendering 3D graphics in the background
For example. These are all situations I've been in frequently. I don't think it is that uncommon to do these things concurrently nowadays.
You see what I mean? You're an advanced user who would tap a dual for all it's worth. The ram is not moot, because there are people with budgets. The dual is out of range for a lot of people, and that's what the single is for.
Comments
Originally posted by DVD_Junkie
I still don't see many people really jumping on this SP PMac and those that do will wish they had bought an iMac or a dual PMac.
When you have a line of products, I think its wise to have an "entry" level model. "Entry" models always suck, and it's usually not a whole lot of money to go to the next level, and entry models are usually not designed to have the best bang for buck.
As great as the iMac is, the fact that the monitor is attached to the CPU really, I mean reeaalllly sucks. The monitor goes, and the whole thing goes back. And having a the option for a second hard drive isn't the "pro" option it used to be. I think the single will do well.
I think that this is more of a "let's see what happens" product for Apple. If the single shows to do well, they may end up filling the gap properly. They really have nothing to lose with this.
Originally posted by Placebo
You forgot that many people want to drive more than one (high-quality) external monitor.
Or that they have a nice monitor already and don't want to spend the extra to get the one built into the iMac.
I think this is great for the increasingly advanced prosumer who's doing audio work in particular - PCI based audio like the M-Audio Delta series are great additions to Logic Express for the musician who's graduating from GarageBand.
Same goes for the prosumer video guy who wants to use Motion - which really needs a 9800 to 256MB RAM to work.
Don't think this will attract gamers at all - they'll stick with their overclocked PCs because games take too long to port.
What it does tell me is that the yields IBM has for 1,8GHz G5s is good. Good enough for them to populate them in a whole bunch of machines.
Apple Australia is charging $2700. Good work, Apple. I can't see these being a very popular model at that price (the dual 1.8Ghz model is $3600, and a well-equipped AMD64 with a Radeon X800 is under $2000).
Originally posted by Squozen
Hrmm. US$1500 is about equivalent to AUD$2000.
Apple Australia is charging $2700. Good work, Apple. I can't see these being a very popular model at that price (the dual 1.8Ghz model is $3600, and a well-equipped AMD64 with a Radeon X800 is under $2000).
The direct rate conversions shouldnt be used cause well it never works out rite.. taxes, freight blah blah, you should compare it to the price of the middle iMac here in OZ which is $2499.. in the US the 1.8 tower and the 1.8 17" iMac are US$1499.. compared to here $2499 and $2699.. so they are overpriced by $200..
Originally posted by Gon
The specs for the dual 1.8 are dumb as well, but it's 80% faster for many apps, and exists at a much higher price point, so the same (essential) upgrades cost less in relation to base price. More importantly, the dual 1.8 has very little competition. IMO the SP 1.8 is trounced by the iMac from one direction, old Powermacs from another, PC's from another. Applenut is right about the "correct" price and specs.
A question for you, Louzer - what do those "prosumers" do that makes the SP 1.8 a good choice, apart from making it a small office server?
'Prosumers' are the people I read all the time on these boards and MacNN complaining that apple didn't sell a machine (like a headless iMac) that let them expand/upgrade without having to buy a whole new machine, one that let you, yes you, select what monitor you wanted to use (what a concept!)
If you don't think this fits into any current market, I don't see how charging $200 less makes it so much more attractive.
All I know is I've been contemplating a new mid or high-end iMac or lowend power mac for purchase, unable to really justify the $2000 for the 1.8 DP ($2250+ once you upgrade it, but I have a nice monitor already), with a leaning toward the high-end iMac, but it would cost more than the low-end G5 ($2500, being concerned over the life of a all-integrated computer, I'd feel compelled to get applecare for it), or maybe going for the smaller screen because of the cost (not knowing whether the smaller screen would feel too cramped, I haven't checked out the new iMacs yet). Now I have another option (OMG, how DARE Apple give users another option, the bastards!). Of course, it then makes the pickings/choosings more complicated.
BTW, although a lot of you seem to be saying that it'll never sell (because of its price and what's available around it), I remember many, many people saying the same damn thing about the iPod mini ($250? WTF! No one will buy it, when you can get 4 times the space for only $50 more!). Turns out there was/is a market for the mini (people who actually didn't need/want 20 GB HD players and thought they could save the $50 and spend it on something else). Who knows, there may be a market for this computer ($500 is $500. Hell, you could get a cheap-o dell with integrated video and crappy processors for that kind of money. Or an iPod. Or a car payment. )
And I'll save comment and opinion on its performance until someone actually has a chance to use it/test it, rather than take everyone's word for it that its some slow-poke that's half the speed of the dual in most tasks (sorry, I don't believe the duals are twice as fast at 'normal' tasks, sure, some specialized/intensive stuff, but overall?)
How good is the ATI 9800xt with 256MB of RAM? It seems pricy. The recently announced ATI x800 should be a better deal and shouldn't hamper my expansion slots.
I put in the things I like and it turns out to be a 2600$ machine without a monitor.
- 1GB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 2x512
- 160GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
- ATI Radeon 9800 XT w/25MB DDR SDRAM
- AirPort Extreme Card
- Bluetooth Module
- 56k V.92 modem.
- 8x Super Drive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
- Bluetooth Module + Apple Wireless Keyboard & Mouse - U.S. English
- Mac OS X - U.S. English
- iSight
- Klipsch ProMedia GMX 5.1 Speakers & Monster 2-meter Cable
Edit: Singapore price is S$ 5,308.86 for the configuration above. That works out to USD 3172 or 22% (572 USD) extra. Guess it isn't that bad given past history of pricing...Originally posted by talksense101
I like this option / machine. Sure the FSB reflects poorly on Apple, but moving on...
How good is the ATI 9800xt with 256MB of RAM? It seems pricy. The recently announced ATI x800 should be a better deal and shouldn't hamper my expansion slots.
IMO the 9800xt does not seem like a very good deal even if it is in the middle of the selection, traditionally the slot of the best price/performance. 9600 is the baseline, costs almost nothing extra, pretty reasonable. 6800GT, considering the performance difference, seems like a slightly better deal on OS X than the 9800XT. I have a feeling ATI is still lagging behind nVidia with OpenGL, but can't be sure if that applies to OS X drivers as well. Just look at Doom3 benchmarks of nVidia 6600 compared to anything ATI...
Originally posted by Chopper3
But he won't ever be doing loads of things like that, what games are multiplayer? does it make much difference?
Some of the recent games are multiprocessor aware. The example I have in mind is that of UT2004. Look here for some benchmarks (in the insights after the graphics with the fps).
What actually happens is that this game can send sound processing to the second processor, when it is present in the system. And depending on the settings, you can almost double the fps with this alone. I don't know for other games, perhaps UT2003 too would benefit from the second processor.
Originally posted by tonton
7. Don't ever want to run more than one monitor in spanning mode.
8. Don't need to choose your own preferred monitor, use one you already have, or need something larger than 20".
9. Don't play games were the GeForce 5200FX in the iMac is not near enough and luxuries like dual processors and PCI-X slots are overkill yet do not want to buy a PC as well.
10. Want option of buying a faster optical drive without paying twice as much for the external version.
Originally posted by BenRoethig
10. Want option of buying a faster optical drive without paying twice as much for the external version.
buy the internal drive and a ~$25 fw or ~$40 fw800 enclosure, hook up the two wires, and screw the enclosure shut - problem solved.
But i certenly agree, the tower is definately better for a lower end hobbyest or college student than a peice of s**t iMac G5.
And upgradeability is a HUGE plus for this segment. It allows a college student to buy a reasonable system for a reasonable cost and upgrade little by little to keep up with their current software needs, some ram now, a hdd next year, and a video card as needed, maybe 2-3 years down the line a ~$500 cpu upgrade vs a ~$1600 new powermac
Plenty of people still use sp PMG4s that they have upgraded, and they do their work just fine, hell, some people still run on b&w g3s, when one buys a mac, one wants it to last ~4-5 years.
THANK U APPLE
Originally posted by Louzer
Let's see, its 25% cheaper then the dual 1.8, and the only difference is the FSB and the second chip. Hard for me to call that a 'little cheaper'.
That's mainly what I'm saying. 25% cheaper for only ~50% the computing power. Benchmarks will probably not tell the whole truth since they very rarely test in realistic situations. I'll guess that the dual 1.8 is at least twice as pleasant to use when the CPU(s) is hogged by some process.
At least for me, the dual 1.8 seems reasonably priced compared to the rest of the hardware Apple offers. The single 1.8, in the other hand, seems overpriced by a couple of hundred bucks.
Originally posted by a_greer
buy the internal drive and a ~$25 fw or ~$40 fw800 enclosure, hook up the two wires, and screw the enclosure shut - problem solved.
But i certenly agree, the tower is definately better for a lower end hobbyest or college student than a peice of s**t iMac G5.
And upgradeability is a HUGE plus for this segment. It allows a college student to buy a reasonable system for a reasonable cost and upgrade little by little to keep up with their current software needs, some ram now, a hdd next year, and a video card as needed, maybe 2-3 years down the line a ~$500 cpu upgrade vs a ~$1600 new powermac
Plenty of people still use sp PMG4s that they have upgraded, and they do their work just fine, hell, some people still run on b&w g3s, when one buys a mac, one wants it to last ~4-5 years.
Yeah, I'm still using the first dual processor G4 system (DP500). It's been 4+ years now and it still manages pretty much everything I need except the latest action games. Had to get a couple new hard drives for it, and more RAM, and a hand-me-down graphics card from a friend, but it didn't cost more than $200 for all the upgrades I've put in it. Great machine.
That said, I'm ordering one of these new-fangled dual 2.5s within the week.
As for the single 1.8, I think it's a step in the right direction for Apple's PM lineup. Shouldn't matter if it yanks a few sales away from the iMac anyway, since aren't Apple's margins traditionally a bit higher on towers than the all-in-ones? 3 cheers for choices. I'm just not going to get one because I doubt it'd last me the 4 years I expect from a tower.
-Ender
Originally posted by talksense101
I like this option / machine. Sure the FSB reflects poorly on Apple, but moving on...
How good is the ATI 9800xt with 256MB of RAM? It seems pricy. The recently announced ATI x800 should be a better deal and shouldn't hamper my expansion slots.
I put in the things I like and it turns out to be a 2600$ machine without a monitor. 1GB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 2x512
160GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
ATI Radeon 9800 XT w/25MB DDR SDRAM
AirPort Extreme Card
Bluetooth Module
56k V.92 modem.
8x Super Drive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
Bluetooth Module + Apple Wireless Keyboard & Mouse - U.S. English
Mac OS X - U.S. English
iSight
Klipsch ProMedia GMX 5.1 Speakers & Monster 2-meter Cable
Edit: Singapore price is S$ 5,308.86 for the configuration above. That works out to USD 3172 or 22% (572 USD) extra. Guess it isn't that bad given past history of pricing...
1. Don't get the RAM from Apple. Even from a good dealer (like RamJet, Crucial, etc), RAM is still $50-$75 cheaper than from Apple.
2. Don't increase the hard drive from Apple. To go to 160 costs another $100. You can buy a $160 drive for $100-120 and install it as a second drive. So, for that $100, you can get 240GB rather than just 120GB.
3. When you order, DON'T order the bluetooth module AND the bluetooth keyboard/mouse. The keyboard/mouse option includes the module (I'm assuming the on-line store is smart enough not to charge you twice for the module, but it is apple...)
4. The Klipsch speakers would be cheaper from Amazon as well (at least $40, plus free shipping). [Odd thing, I went to Apple's site to price the speakers, and they didn't show up as an option for the SP machine.]
5. Unless your computer isn't sitting next to your router/modem, you shouldn't spend money on the airport card. The built-in networking will get you much faster speeds.
BTW, my above comments indicate the advantages of the SP over the iMac. It has 4 memory slots. So, if you got it with 512MB of memory today, and then decided to you wanted to go to 1GB or 2GB, you don't need to throw out your old RAM. When speccing out an iMac, I assumed I would get the one stick with 512, then go off and buy another one for $100 or so, and stick with 1GB and get the fastest memory (iMac memory needs to be paired to get best results). With the tower, I could get the 512, and then upgrade when I felt like it. Or get the 256 standard, and go buy a couple of 512 or 1GB sticks now.
And if you want more drive space, you can just pop in a second drive. You don't have to get it from Apple, or you don't have to buy an external case for the second drive (or the one you swap out).
You have, of all things, options!
Originally posted by Zapchud
That's mainly what I'm saying. 25% cheaper for only ~50% the computing power.
No way is it minus 50% computing power, no way in hell. Even if it was that high, which it definately is not, your talking 5 seconds slower for this, 10 seconds slower for that. A trade off the budget minded are willing to make.
Besides, for the dual to be faster than the single, you'll need to upgrade the ram substantially, just another cost.
Originally posted by the cool gut
No way is it minus 50% computing power, no way in hell. Even if it was that high, which it definately is not, your talking 5 seconds slower for this, 10 seconds slower for that. A trade off the budget minded are willing to make.
Besides, for the dual to be faster than the single, you'll need to upgrade the ram substantially, just another cost.
For a lot of purposes, the dual would be or feel twice as fast. That's what counts. The RAM point is moot because you'd (or I'd) upgrade the RAM substantially anyways.
Examples of things I can do fine with a dual that I'll have trouble with, with a single:
- Encode video while composing music in Reason.
- Play a new (or older) 3D game fluidly while playing music in the background together with 10 common idle/open apps (that suck CPU while idle)
- Watch a heavily compressed movie (like a DivX or DVD dumped to the harddrive) while encoding video or hosting a game server or files over the network
- Edit video and pictures in Photoshop while rendering 3D graphics in the background
For example. These are all situations I've been in frequently. I don't think it is that uncommon to do these things concurrently nowadays.