They can have a targeted use and the system designer can use them the way they want. Usually it isn't necessarily advantageous in most cases to use them outside the targeted use, for reasons such as cost and speed.
Intel markets Xeons for use in servers and the higher end workstations, not just servers, and the Intel product page makes this pretty clear. If Apple used Xeon MP (7xxx series) in Mac Pro, then your point on that would be valid.
I'm not sure why you distinguish the 7xxx series. The 5xxx series is a server class chip as well. Again, any chip can be used wherever the manufacturer thinks it will benefit the design. If enough companies use it out of the area of original intent, it loses that original description.
Anyway, we are just picking hairs for the want of something interesting to talk about.
Clearly shows that Intel is marketing Xeon as a workstion processor too. Their marketing for the notebook and desktop chips is much clearer too.
It's premature to call the desktop / notebook distinction or terminology obsolete because the share of desktops that use "notebook" components are very tiny, so in the perspective of the general market, the lines are only the slightest bit fuzzy, not blurred. The reason is because it takes away many of the advantages people see in desktops, speed and cost. The market seems to agree when sales of Apple's desktop line is stagnant at best, I don't think it is the case with other companies that don't try to push crossover devices like that.
"Your" is a possessive pronoun and does not make sense in this context. I imagine you meant to use "you're", which is a contraction of you are.
The plural of car is cars. Car's is the possessive form of "car".
Likewise, the plural of Ford is Fords.
Next time you want to call someone an idiot, make sure you're not being one yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
If you are going to call someone an idiot, at least spell correctly, and put a comma where it belongs.
Dude,you're an idiot.
Ok A-Holes how about this...
Excuse me dear sir?
It looks as though are incorrect with your assessment of the comparison of the terms Mac?s and PC?s. An example of you error in terms is best demonstrated with the following example:
Cars are cars and Fords are Fords.
I hope this helps to clear up any further confusion.
Does this make all you speech Nazi?s happy.
The guy was making a smart-ass comment to an obvious point I was trying to make in the first place. I was a bit tired from lack of sleep and irritated by his comments so I responded a little to quickly but my point was still valid regardless of the grammar but no one commented on that aspect.
That's just one machine. Therer are desktop mobo's that are not laptop based. The iMac is not laptop based.
Yes, it's true that small form machines are designed for low power, low heat. They have to be. So what? They still aren't laptops, no matter what the spin.
Mr. H is calling the final result a "laptop", he's correctly stating that the components are parts originally designed for a notebook (e.g.: CPU, RAM, HDD, optical drive). You can't not argue that these components were not designed to function within the small form factor and low power consumption of a notebook computer.
It looks as though are incorrect with your assessment of the comparison of the terms Mac?s and PC?s. An example of you error in terms is best demonstrated with the following example:
Cars are cars and Fords are Fords.
I hope this helps to clear up any further confusion.
Does this make all you speech Nazi?s happy.
The guy was making a smart-ass comment to an obvious point I was trying to make in the first place. I was a bit tired from lack of sleep and irritated by his comments so I responded a little to quickly but my point was still valid regardless of the grammar but no one commented on that aspect.
Sometimes the approbation is correct, sometimes not.
You're quick on the trigger here as well, I see.
I get also upset at people. That's pretty well known.
But, I always give them a way out. I rarely call anyone an idiot, though I've come close.
I will tell them that what they've said is idiotic, which is different. If they catch that, fine. If they don't, and think I've called them an idiot, it proves that they aren't paying attention.
Mr. H is calling the final result a "laptop", he's correctly stating that the components are parts originally designed for a notebook (e.g.: CPU, RAM, HDD, optical drive). You can't not argue that these components were not designed to function within the small form factor and low power consumption of a notebook computer.
Some of the devices are designed for laptops. No argument. Certain machines use some laptop parts, no argument there either.
But the computers aren't laptops without screens. They are desktops.
If a company took a laptop design of theirs and removed the screen, but left a monitor jack on the back, it would be a desktop.
The internal parts don't determine what the machine is. The functionality determines that.
There are laptops out there that use desktop parts all around. They weigh 16, or more, pounds, and require a huge battery that gives a short life. But, functionality determines that these are not desktops. They may be too heavy, and hot, for a lap, but they certainly are portables, which was the original description of, uh, portables.
It's the Gestalt that matters, not the sum of the parts.
No, because you have still failed to learn that plurals do not have apostrophes. You also left out a few words, and used incorrect punctuation:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGNR8
Does this make all you speech Nazi's happy.
Should be: "Does this make all you speech Nazis happy?".
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGNR8
It looks as though are incorrect with your assessment of the comparison of the terms Mac?s and PC?s
Should be: "It looks as though you are incorrect with your assessment of the comparison of the terms Macs and PCs.".
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGNR8
An example of you error in terms is best demonstrated with the following example:
Should be: "An example of your error in terms is best demonstrated with the following example:".
Finally, moving on to the actual point you are making:
The meaning of the terms "Mac" and "PC" have been commonly accepted for almost two decades now. Whilst "PC" did originally mean "Personal Computer" and therefore included Macs, it has become the de-facto term used to refer to computers that run Microsoft Windows and cannot run Mac OS.
Of course I understand that the Mac Mini and the iMac are desktop machines. But I really hope that those who are arguing with referring to the Merom as a "laptop" CPU understand what I am talking about.
The point is, that Merom was designed primarily with the laptop in mind. Laptops need to be portable and provide decent battery life, so when you come to design the processor, you make some compromises in the design to tradeoff perfomance against power consumption. Lowering power consumption will improve both portability (due to lower heat-dissipation requirements) and battery life of portable systems.
Of course, once this CPU has been designed and built, a manufacturer is free to use it in whichever design he wishes. Apple (and some others) put it into small-form-factor desktop PCs. This does not stop the original design aim of the Merom being a laptop CPU.
The point being made when someone refers to a Mac Mini or iMac really being a "laptop" is this:
Consider choosing between a desktop and laptop; what are the primary reasons one might traditionally choose a desktop over a laptop?
1.) Higher CPU performance
2.) Higher RAM capacity
3.) Higher RAM performance
4.) Higher optical drive performance
5.) Higher GPU performance
6.) Higher HDD performance
7.) Higher HDD capacity
8.) Lower price
9.) Bigger screen
The Mac Mini removes all advantages 1.) through 7.), the iMac advantages 1.) through 4.) In fact, since the MacBook can drive any screen that the Mac Mini can drive, the only advantage a Mac Mini has over a MacBook is price.
In other words, referring to Mac Minis and iMacs as "laptops" is to make the point that they make many compromises in performance that desktop machines normally do not make.
No, because you have still failed to learn that plurals do not have apostrophes. You also left out a few words, and used incorrect punctuation:
Should be: "Does this make all you speech Nazis happy?".
Should be: "It looks as though you are incorrect with your assessment of the comparison of the terms Macs and PCs.".
Should be: "An example of your error in terms is best demonstrated with the following example:".
Finally, moving on to the actual point you are making:
The meaning of the terms "Mac" and "PC" have been commonly accepted for almost two decades now. Whilst "PC" did originally mean "Personal Computer" and therefore included Macs, it has become the de-facto term used to refer to computers that run Microsoft Windows and cannot run Mac OS.
So how does feel up there all by yourself looking down on every one else prick.
Some of the devices are designed for laptops. No argument. Certain machines use some laptop parts, no argument there either.
But the computers aren't laptops without screens. They are desktops.
If a company took a laptop design of theirs and removed the screen, but left a monitor jack on the back, it would be a desktop.
The internal parts don't determine what the machine is. The functionality determines that.
There are laptops out there that use desktop parts all around. They weigh 16, or more, pounds, and require a huge battery that gives a short life. But, functionality determines that these are not desktops. They may be too heavy, and hot, for a lap, but they certainly are portables, which was the original description of, uh, portables.
It's the Gestalt that matters, not the sum of the parts.
I'm guessing one of us misread Mr. H's original post as I agree with you 100%. I read his post as a an analogical comparative, not a definitive label to be applied as a whole to computers that contain these succinct parts.
I've used Mr. H's analogy many times when I've heard people complain about the Mac Mini's $700 price point which includes no peripherals (except for a remote) and is easily half as fast as a PC with a lower price point. These naysayers fail to realize that the small form factor requires a completely different type of hardware... one typically found in notebook computers.
So how does feel up there all by yourself looking down on every one else prick.
I'm not looking down on everyone else. Just you
You really need to chill out. The reason I'm picking on you is that you came in here just to call someone else an idiot, and then proceeded to be idiotic yourself.
Of course I understand that the Mac Mini and the iMac are desktop machines. But I really hope that those who are arguing with referring to the Merom as a "laptop" CPU understand what I am talking about.
The point is, that Merom was designed primarily with the laptop in mind. Laptops need to be portable and provide decent battery life, so when you come to design the processor, you make some compromises in the design to tradeoff perfomance against power consumption. Lowering power consumption will improve both portability (due to lower heat-dissipation requirements) and battery life of portable systems.
Of course, once this CPU has been designed and built, a manufacturer is free to use it in whichever design he wishes. Apple (and some others) put it into small-form-factor desktop PCs. This does not stop the original design aim of the Merom being a laptop CPU.
The point being made when someone refers to a Mac Mini or iMac really being a "laptop" is this:
Consider choosing between a desktop and laptop; what are the primary reasons one might traditionally choose a desktop over a laptop?
1.) Higher CPU performance
2.) Higher RAM capacity
3.) Higher RAM performance
4.) Higher optical drive performance
5.) Higher GPU performance
6.) Higher HDD performance
7.) Higher HDD capacity
8.) Lower price
9.) Bigger screen
The Mac Mini removes all advantages 1.) through 7.), the iMac advantages 1.) through 4.) In fact, since the MacBook can drive any screen that the Mac Mini can drive, the only advantage a Mac Mini has over a MacBook is price.
In other words, referring to Mac Minis and iMacs as "laptops" is to make the point that they make many compromises in performance that desktop machines normally do not make.
As I don't really want to get into an unnecessary argument that is just about semantics, I will concede that I understand that the Merom was designed for mobile use. Actually, I never said otherwise.
But, you must concede that it really doesn't matter.
The Mini is a fine performer, and except for the lack of separate GPU, has no problem doing anything it was designd for. I won't agree that it is a poorer performer than it should be, because the one or two PC's that have the same form factor don't perform any better, for less money. There is a reason for that. Small means expensive, it always has. That's why laptops perform poorly when compared to the same priced desktops. It can't be avoided. It's why the iMac performs better.
I'm guessing one of us misread Mr. H's original post as I agree with you 100%. I read his post as a an analogical comparative, not a definitive label to be applied as a whole to computers that contain these succinct parts.
I've used Mr. H's analogy many times when I've heard people complain about the Mac Mini's $700 price point which includes no peripherals (except for a remote) and is easily half as fast as a PC with a lower price point. These naysayers fail to realize that the small form factor requires a completely different type of hardware... one typically found in notebook computers.
Yes, of course. I really don't have much against what he's saying. I'm just not comfortable with a rigid reading of the technology.
Consider choosing between a desktop and laptop; what are the primary reasons one might traditionally choose a desktop over a laptop?
1.) Higher CPU performance
2.) Higher RAM capacity
3.) Higher RAM performance
4.) Higher optical drive performance
Let's look at some of the primary reasons one would choose a desktop with laptop parts over traditional desktop parts.
1.) Lower power usage
2.) Lower heat
3.) Dramatically lower noise
4.) Smaller form factor for efficient space usage
5.) More aesthetic form factor
Considering that most of your iMac-related points are moot (what consumer uses over 3GB RAM, or even cares what their optical drive speed is), I think the win for 99.9% of people is in the current set up.
I realize that you're in that .1%, and that's fine, most of us here are. But laptop versus desktop parts are a trade off of features, and for the iMac, laptop parts benefit far more people than would desktop parts.
Let's look at some of the primary reasons one would choose a desktop with laptop parts over traditional desktop parts.
1.) Lower power usage
2.) Lower heat
3.) Dramatically lower noise
4.) Smaller form factor for efficient space usage
5.) More aesthetic form factor
Considering that most of your iMac-related points are moot (what consumer uses over 3GB RAM, or even cares what their optical drive speed is), I think the win for 99.9% of people is in the current set up.
I realize that you're in that .1%, and that's fine, most of us here are. But laptop versus desktop parts are a trade off of features, and for the iMac, laptop parts benefit far more people than would desktop parts.
The part I don't get is, why not just get a notebook?
The power differential is generally not significant enough to pay for the difference in the price of the parts, even if it was always left on for the life of the device. The noise difference is just a matter of the market, most people really don't seem to care. As such, the iMac and mini doesn't seem to be serving the desires of many buyers, they seem to be switching to the notebooks instead.
The part I don't get is, why not just get a notebook?
The power differential is generally not significant enough to pay for the difference in the price of the parts, even if it was always left on for the life of the device. The noise difference is just a matter of the market, most people really don't seem to care. As such, the iMac and mini doesn't seem to be serving the desires of many buyers, they seem to be switching to the notebooks instead.
I have two instances where I purchased a Mac Mini instead of a notebook.
My parents were in desperate need of a new desktop computer. They are the ones that first introduced to Macs (God bless their soles) but then moved to PCs when they became real estate agents as the required MLS software required Windows.
Several years ago the MLS became web-based. Apparently, this needed IE to function properly. I never found out if it ran under IE on OS X.
Last year, Macs got Intel chips and Parallels allowed Windows programs to run at near native speeds; and sometimes faster than native speeds, according to AnandTech. This allowed me an opportunity to replace my parents exceptionally slow 366MHz PC that has been running the same version of WinXP Pro for the last 5 years.
My parents thought their PC was fine despite the fact that their high-speed broadband cable connection seemed like dial-up speeds due to the machine running so slow. Remember, they haven't reinstalled the OS in 5 years. They would barely let me run updates and defrags on the things despite my highly knowledgeable and extenstive background in fixing broke-ass Windows PCs.
Though stuck in their ways, my parents were in desperate need of a new computer. They had read that the MLS' web interface won't work on Macs. I expressed how this was a blatant fallacy and in the simpliest terms I could muster (or so I thought) explained how and why any new Mac could do what Windows does. They didn't understand a word I said and subsequently believed the realty magazine over their own son.
I had to set them straight and get them into the 21st century. But how do I do it?
My parents are not mobile users so a MacBook is out of the question, plus the screen is too small.
My parents are not power users so a Mac Pro is out of the question.
My parents are not willing to completely forgo their functional, yet dilapidated, PC so replacing with an iMac is out of the question as this would double the devices on their desk.
Change scares them while Technology confuses them.
I know what you're thinking, I could have used Parallels to transfer their old OS to an iMac. Well, I did transfer their OS, but they wouldn't have wanted a new alien monitor, keyboard and mouse.
Plus, my parents are not very technical. If they don't see their old dreadnought of a PC then to them it doesn't exist anymore. Panic would ensue and I may be written out of the will.
My only option was to get a Mac Mini and use a switch for the peripherals . I upgraded the monitor to something a little bigger, newer and brighter, while letting them use their old keyboard and mouse. I then setup their old and busted system on the Mac using parallels, setup their MLS to open in Coherence mode, and did the best I could to mimic their Windows setup with the Mac equivalent.
The switch turned out to be useless as my parents have yet to go back to their "old and busted" PC since using "the new hotness".
I even got to setup a little used but exceptionally cool feature of OS X: faxs. They now get a copy of the file as a PDF in a special folder as well as a physical copy from their printer. They can now send faxs to clients from their email without first having to print out the form from first. And I've also shown them how to use Spotlight to quickly find any info on a client.
Despite my incessant preachings about OS X over so many years they still say "I didn't know that was possible with computers" when I show them something new to expedite their work. I also get the "if we knew "an Apple" could do all this we would have switched a long time ago", which makes me a bit irritated and makes me want to kick puppies.
This is all thanks to the Mac Mini.
I wanted a Media Center PC for my living room. As of next month this may become a moot point as ApppleTV will be released. This all depends on it's ability to read my AVIs.
[*]I wanted a Media Center PC for my living room. As of next month this may become a moot point as ApppleTV will be released. This all depends on it's ability to read my AVIs.[/list]
They are very nice for that. I couldn't justify it though, I stuck with a dual 2.0 G5 that I bought for $450. I really needed it for the dual video outputs, I set both to mirroring and output one to a small screen and one to a projector.
The part I don't get is, why not just get a notebook?
The power differential is generally not significant enough to pay for the difference in the price of the parts, even if it was always left on for the life of the device. The noise difference is just a matter of the market, most people really don't seem to care. As such, the iMac and mini doesn't seem to be serving the desires of many buyers, they seem to be switching to the notebooks instead.
To save a few hundred dollars?
I agree about the notebook part. Since getting my MacBook Pro, my slightly faster Power Mac G5 has done nothing but gather dust.
The Mini is a fine performer, and except for the lack of separate GPU, has no problem doing anything it was designd for. I won't agree that it is a poorer performer than it should be, because the one or two PC's that have the same form factor don't perform any better, for less money. There is a reason for that. Small means expensive, it always has. That's why laptops perform poorly when compared to the same priced desktops. It can't be avoided. It's why the iMac performs better.
The problem is that the mini is a novelty form factor in which everything else about the unit is compromised to make that form factor work. I think restricting the discussion to only that general form factor is an unnecessary restraint because it's mostly an unnecessary form factor other than for niche uses.
The problem is that the mini is a novelty form factor in which everything else about the unit is compromised to make that form factor work. I think restricting the discussion to only that general form factor is an unnecessary restraint because it's mostly an unnecessary form factor other than for niche uses.
You brought up several points. Check one for brevity in doing it.
It might have been a novelty. But it is one that is catching on in both the Windows, and Linux worlds. There are now at least two Windows models, and Linux users are using those as well.
We're back to the question of what one needs. Most home users need no more than what is in that box, or can be added to it. The fact is that few home users play graphically intensive computer games. Other than for that, the machine is must fine. I use one by my audio/video equipment to digitize my lp's. It's perfect for that.
This is not intended for uses where a more powerful machine is really needed. I know a couple of people who stick the machine into their backpack, and bring it to where they are going to need it.
I don't know who restricted the discussion to that form factor. As if anyone here could possibly hope to wield that kind of power here.
As you know very well by now, I'm not one who thinks Apple's lineup is complete.
But, my thoughts often expressed here about Apple's licensing the OS ,seems to be coming closer each and every day.
Comments
They can have a targeted use and the system designer can use them the way they want. Usually it isn't necessarily advantageous in most cases to use them outside the targeted use, for reasons such as cost and speed.
Intel markets Xeons for use in servers and the higher end workstations, not just servers, and the Intel product page makes this pretty clear. If Apple used Xeon MP (7xxx series) in Mac Pro, then your point on that would be valid.
I'm not sure why you distinguish the 7xxx series. The 5xxx series is a server class chip as well. Again, any chip can be used wherever the manufacturer thinks it will benefit the design. If enough companies use it out of the area of original intent, it loses that original description.
Anyway, we are just picking hairs for the want of something interesting to talk about.
http://www.intel.com/products/server...serv_body+proc
Clearly shows that Intel is marketing Xeon as a workstion processor too. Their marketing for the notebook and desktop chips is much clearer too.
It's premature to call the desktop / notebook distinction or terminology obsolete because the share of desktops that use "notebook" components are very tiny, so in the perspective of the general market, the lines are only the slightest bit fuzzy, not blurred. The reason is because it takes away many of the advantages people see in desktops, speed and cost. The market seems to agree when sales of Apple's desktop line is stagnant at best, I don't think it is the case with other companies that don't try to push crossover devices like that.
No, I think it is you who is the idiot:
"Your" is a possessive pronoun and does not make sense in this context. I imagine you meant to use "you're", which is a contraction of you are.
The plural of car is cars. Car's is the possessive form of "car".
Likewise, the plural of Ford is Fords.
Next time you want to call someone an idiot, make sure you're not being one yourself.
If you are going to call someone an idiot, at least spell correctly, and put a comma where it belongs.
Dude, you're an idiot.
Ok A-Holes how about this...
Excuse me dear sir?
It looks as though are incorrect with your assessment of the comparison of the terms Mac?s and PC?s. An example of you error in terms is best demonstrated with the following example:
Cars are cars and Fords are Fords.
I hope this helps to clear up any further confusion.
Does this make all you speech Nazi?s happy.
The guy was making a smart-ass comment to an obvious point I was trying to make in the first place. I was a bit tired from lack of sleep and irritated by his comments so I responded a little to quickly but my point was still valid regardless of the grammar but no one commented on that aspect.
That's just one machine. Therer are desktop mobo's that are not laptop based. The iMac is not laptop based.
Yes, it's true that small form machines are designed for low power, low heat. They have to be. So what? They still aren't laptops, no matter what the spin.
Mr. H is calling the final result a "laptop", he's correctly stating that the components are parts originally designed for a notebook (e.g.: CPU, RAM, HDD, optical drive). You can't not argue that these components were not designed to function within the small form factor and low power consumption of a notebook computer.
Ok A-Holes how about this...
Excuse me dear sir?
It looks as though are incorrect with your assessment of the comparison of the terms Mac?s and PC?s. An example of you error in terms is best demonstrated with the following example:
Cars are cars and Fords are Fords.
I hope this helps to clear up any further confusion.
Does this make all you speech Nazi?s happy.
The guy was making a smart-ass comment to an obvious point I was trying to make in the first place. I was a bit tired from lack of sleep and irritated by his comments so I responded a little to quickly but my point was still valid regardless of the grammar but no one commented on that aspect.
Sometimes the approbation is correct, sometimes not.
You're quick on the trigger here as well, I see.
I get also upset at people. That's pretty well known.
But, I always give them a way out. I rarely call anyone an idiot, though I've come close.
I will tell them that what they've said is idiotic, which is different. If they catch that, fine. If they don't, and think I've called them an idiot, it proves that they aren't paying attention.
Mr. H is calling the final result a "laptop", he's correctly stating that the components are parts originally designed for a notebook (e.g.: CPU, RAM, HDD, optical drive). You can't not argue that these components were not designed to function within the small form factor and low power consumption of a notebook computer.
Some of the devices are designed for laptops. No argument. Certain machines use some laptop parts, no argument there either.
But the computers aren't laptops without screens. They are desktops.
If a company took a laptop design of theirs and removed the screen, but left a monitor jack on the back, it would be a desktop.
The internal parts don't determine what the machine is. The functionality determines that.
There are laptops out there that use desktop parts all around. They weigh 16, or more, pounds, and require a huge battery that gives a short life. But, functionality determines that these are not desktops. They may be too heavy, and hot, for a lap, but they certainly are portables, which was the original description of, uh, portables.
It's the Gestalt that matters, not the sum of the parts.
Does this make all you speech Nazi?s happy.
No, because you have still failed to learn that plurals do not have apostrophes. You also left out a few words, and used incorrect punctuation:
Does this make all you speech Nazi's happy.
Should be: "Does this make all you speech Nazis happy?".
It looks as though are incorrect with your assessment of the comparison of the terms Mac?s and PC?s
Should be: "It looks as though you are incorrect with your assessment of the comparison of the terms Macs and PCs.".
An example of you error in terms is best demonstrated with the following example:
Should be: "An example of your error in terms is best demonstrated with the following example:".
Finally, moving on to the actual point you are making:
The meaning of the terms "Mac" and "PC" have been commonly accepted for almost two decades now. Whilst "PC" did originally mean "Personal Computer" and therefore included Macs, it has become the de-facto term used to refer to computers that run Microsoft Windows and cannot run Mac OS.
The point is, that Merom was designed primarily with the laptop in mind. Laptops need to be portable and provide decent battery life, so when you come to design the processor, you make some compromises in the design to tradeoff perfomance against power consumption. Lowering power consumption will improve both portability (due to lower heat-dissipation requirements) and battery life of portable systems.
Of course, once this CPU has been designed and built, a manufacturer is free to use it in whichever design he wishes. Apple (and some others) put it into small-form-factor desktop PCs. This does not stop the original design aim of the Merom being a laptop CPU.
The point being made when someone refers to a Mac Mini or iMac really being a "laptop" is this:
Consider choosing between a desktop and laptop; what are the primary reasons one might traditionally choose a desktop over a laptop?
1.) Higher CPU performance
2.) Higher RAM capacity
3.) Higher RAM performance
4.) Higher optical drive performance
5.) Higher GPU performance
6.) Higher HDD performance
7.) Higher HDD capacity
8.) Lower price
9.) Bigger screen
The Mac Mini removes all advantages 1.) through 7.), the iMac advantages 1.) through 4.) In fact, since the MacBook can drive any screen that the Mac Mini can drive, the only advantage a Mac Mini has over a MacBook is price.
In other words, referring to Mac Minis and iMacs as "laptops" is to make the point that they make many compromises in performance that desktop machines normally do not make.
No, because you have still failed to learn that plurals do not have apostrophes. You also left out a few words, and used incorrect punctuation:
Should be: "Does this make all you speech Nazis happy?".
Should be: "It looks as though you are incorrect with your assessment of the comparison of the terms Macs and PCs.".
Should be: "An example of your error in terms is best demonstrated with the following example:".
Finally, moving on to the actual point you are making:
The meaning of the terms "Mac" and "PC" have been commonly accepted for almost two decades now. Whilst "PC" did originally mean "Personal Computer" and therefore included Macs, it has become the de-facto term used to refer to computers that run Microsoft Windows and cannot run Mac OS.
So how does feel up there all by yourself looking down on every one else prick.
Some of the devices are designed for laptops. No argument. Certain machines use some laptop parts, no argument there either.
But the computers aren't laptops without screens. They are desktops.
If a company took a laptop design of theirs and removed the screen, but left a monitor jack on the back, it would be a desktop.
The internal parts don't determine what the machine is. The functionality determines that.
There are laptops out there that use desktop parts all around. They weigh 16, or more, pounds, and require a huge battery that gives a short life. But, functionality determines that these are not desktops. They may be too heavy, and hot, for a lap, but they certainly are portables, which was the original description of, uh, portables.
It's the Gestalt that matters, not the sum of the parts.
I'm guessing one of us misread Mr. H's original post as I agree with you 100%. I read his post as a an analogical comparative, not a definitive label to be applied as a whole to computers that contain these succinct parts.
I've used Mr. H's analogy many times when I've heard people complain about the Mac Mini's $700 price point which includes no peripherals (except for a remote) and is easily half as fast as a PC with a lower price point. These naysayers fail to realize that the small form factor requires a completely different type of hardware... one typically found in notebook computers.
So how does feel up there all by yourself looking down on every one else prick.
I'm not looking down on everyone else. Just you
You really need to chill out. The reason I'm picking on you is that you came in here just to call someone else an idiot, and then proceeded to be idiotic yourself.
Of course I understand that the Mac Mini and the iMac are desktop machines. But I really hope that those who are arguing with referring to the Merom as a "laptop" CPU understand what I am talking about.
The point is, that Merom was designed primarily with the laptop in mind. Laptops need to be portable and provide decent battery life, so when you come to design the processor, you make some compromises in the design to tradeoff perfomance against power consumption. Lowering power consumption will improve both portability (due to lower heat-dissipation requirements) and battery life of portable systems.
Of course, once this CPU has been designed and built, a manufacturer is free to use it in whichever design he wishes. Apple (and some others) put it into small-form-factor desktop PCs. This does not stop the original design aim of the Merom being a laptop CPU.
The point being made when someone refers to a Mac Mini or iMac really being a "laptop" is this:
Consider choosing between a desktop and laptop; what are the primary reasons one might traditionally choose a desktop over a laptop?
1.) Higher CPU performance
2.) Higher RAM capacity
3.) Higher RAM performance
4.) Higher optical drive performance
5.) Higher GPU performance
6.) Higher HDD performance
7.) Higher HDD capacity
8.) Lower price
9.) Bigger screen
The Mac Mini removes all advantages 1.) through 7.), the iMac advantages 1.) through 4.) In fact, since the MacBook can drive any screen that the Mac Mini can drive, the only advantage a Mac Mini has over a MacBook is price.
In other words, referring to Mac Minis and iMacs as "laptops" is to make the point that they make many compromises in performance that desktop machines normally do not make.
As I don't really want to get into an unnecessary argument that is just about semantics, I will concede that I understand that the Merom was designed for mobile use. Actually, I never said otherwise.
But, you must concede that it really doesn't matter.
The Mini is a fine performer, and except for the lack of separate GPU, has no problem doing anything it was designd for. I won't agree that it is a poorer performer than it should be, because the one or two PC's that have the same form factor don't perform any better, for less money. There is a reason for that. Small means expensive, it always has. That's why laptops perform poorly when compared to the same priced desktops. It can't be avoided. It's why the iMac performs better.
I'm guessing one of us misread Mr. H's original post as I agree with you 100%. I read his post as a an analogical comparative, not a definitive label to be applied as a whole to computers that contain these succinct parts.
I've used Mr. H's analogy many times when I've heard people complain about the Mac Mini's $700 price point which includes no peripherals (except for a remote) and is easily half as fast as a PC with a lower price point. These naysayers fail to realize that the small form factor requires a completely different type of hardware... one typically found in notebook computers.
Yes, of course. I really don't have much against what he's saying. I'm just not comfortable with a rigid reading of the technology.
Consider choosing between a desktop and laptop; what are the primary reasons one might traditionally choose a desktop over a laptop?
1.) Higher CPU performance
2.) Higher RAM capacity
3.) Higher RAM performance
4.) Higher optical drive performance
Let's look at some of the primary reasons one would choose a desktop with laptop parts over traditional desktop parts.
1.) Lower power usage
2.) Lower heat
3.) Dramatically lower noise
4.) Smaller form factor for efficient space usage
5.) More aesthetic form factor
Considering that most of your iMac-related points are moot (what consumer uses over 3GB RAM, or even cares what their optical drive speed is), I think the win for 99.9% of people is in the current set up.
I realize that you're in that .1%, and that's fine, most of us here are. But laptop versus desktop parts are a trade off of features, and for the iMac, laptop parts benefit far more people than would desktop parts.
Let's look at some of the primary reasons one would choose a desktop with laptop parts over traditional desktop parts.
1.) Lower power usage
2.) Lower heat
3.) Dramatically lower noise
4.) Smaller form factor for efficient space usage
5.) More aesthetic form factor
Considering that most of your iMac-related points are moot (what consumer uses over 3GB RAM, or even cares what their optical drive speed is), I think the win for 99.9% of people is in the current set up.
I realize that you're in that .1%, and that's fine, most of us here are. But laptop versus desktop parts are a trade off of features, and for the iMac, laptop parts benefit far more people than would desktop parts.
The part I don't get is, why not just get a notebook?
The power differential is generally not significant enough to pay for the difference in the price of the parts, even if it was always left on for the life of the device. The noise difference is just a matter of the market, most people really don't seem to care. As such, the iMac and mini doesn't seem to be serving the desires of many buyers, they seem to be switching to the notebooks instead.
The part I don't get is, why not just get a notebook?
The power differential is generally not significant enough to pay for the difference in the price of the parts, even if it was always left on for the life of the device. The noise difference is just a matter of the market, most people really don't seem to care. As such, the iMac and mini doesn't seem to be serving the desires of many buyers, they seem to be switching to the notebooks instead.
I have two instances where I purchased a Mac Mini instead of a notebook.
- My parents were in desperate need of a new desktop computer. They are the ones that first introduced to Macs (God bless their soles) but then moved to PCs when they became real estate agents as the required MLS software required Windows.
- I wanted a Media Center PC for my living room. As of next month this may become a moot point as ApppleTV will be released. This all depends on it's ability to read my AVIs.
It has its uses. :-)Several years ago the MLS became web-based. Apparently, this needed IE to function properly. I never found out if it ran under IE on OS X.
Last year, Macs got Intel chips and Parallels allowed Windows programs to run at near native speeds; and sometimes faster than native speeds, according to AnandTech. This allowed me an opportunity to replace my parents exceptionally slow 366MHz PC that has been running the same version of WinXP Pro for the last 5 years.
My parents thought their PC was fine despite the fact that their high-speed broadband cable connection seemed like dial-up speeds due to the machine running so slow. Remember, they haven't reinstalled the OS in 5 years. They would barely let me run updates and defrags on the things despite my highly knowledgeable and extenstive background in fixing broke-ass Windows PCs.
Though stuck in their ways, my parents were in desperate need of a new computer. They had read that the MLS' web interface won't work on Macs. I expressed how this was a blatant fallacy and in the simpliest terms I could muster (or so I thought) explained how and why any new Mac could do what Windows does. They didn't understand a word I said and subsequently believed the realty magazine over their own son.
I had to set them straight and get them into the 21st century. But how do I do it?
- My parents are not mobile users so a MacBook is out of the question, plus the screen is too small.
- My parents are not power users so a Mac Pro is out of the question.
- My parents are not willing to completely forgo their functional, yet dilapidated, PC so replacing with an iMac is out of the question as this would double the devices on their desk.
- Change scares them while Technology confuses them.
I know what you're thinking, I could have used Parallels to transfer their old OS to an iMac. Well, I did transfer their OS, but they wouldn't have wanted a new alien monitor, keyboard and mouse.Plus, my parents are not very technical. If they don't see their old dreadnought of a PC then to them it doesn't exist anymore. Panic would ensue and I may be written out of the will.
My only option was to get a Mac Mini and use a switch for the peripherals . I upgraded the monitor to something a little bigger, newer and brighter, while letting them use their old keyboard and mouse. I then setup their old and busted system on the Mac using parallels, setup their MLS to open in Coherence mode, and did the best I could to mimic their Windows setup with the Mac equivalent.
The switch turned out to be useless as my parents have yet to go back to their "old and busted" PC since using "the new hotness".
I even got to setup a little used but exceptionally cool feature of OS X: faxs. They now get a copy of the file as a PDF in a special folder as well as a physical copy from their printer. They can now send faxs to clients from their email without first having to print out the form from first. And I've also shown them how to use Spotlight to quickly find any info on a client.
Despite my incessant preachings about OS X over so many years they still say "I didn't know that was possible with computers" when I show them something new to expedite their work. I also get the "if we knew "an Apple" could do all this we would have switched a long time ago", which makes me a bit irritated and makes me want to kick puppies.
This is all thanks to the Mac Mini.
[*]I wanted a Media Center PC for my living room. As of next month this may become a moot point as ApppleTV will be released. This all depends on it's ability to read my AVIs.[/list]
They are very nice for that. I couldn't justify it though, I stuck with a dual 2.0 G5 that I bought for $450. I really needed it for the dual video outputs, I set both to mirroring and output one to a small screen and one to a projector.
The part I don't get is, why not just get a notebook?
The power differential is generally not significant enough to pay for the difference in the price of the parts, even if it was always left on for the life of the device. The noise difference is just a matter of the market, most people really don't seem to care. As such, the iMac and mini doesn't seem to be serving the desires of many buyers, they seem to be switching to the notebooks instead.
To save a few hundred dollars?
I agree about the notebook part. Since getting my MacBook Pro, my slightly faster Power Mac G5 has done nothing but gather dust.
The Mini is a fine performer, and except for the lack of separate GPU, has no problem doing anything it was designd for. I won't agree that it is a poorer performer than it should be, because the one or two PC's that have the same form factor don't perform any better, for less money. There is a reason for that. Small means expensive, it always has. That's why laptops perform poorly when compared to the same priced desktops. It can't be avoided. It's why the iMac performs better.
The problem is that the mini is a novelty form factor in which everything else about the unit is compromised to make that form factor work. I think restricting the discussion to only that general form factor is an unnecessary restraint because it's mostly an unnecessary form factor other than for niche uses.
The problem is that the mini is a novelty form factor in which everything else about the unit is compromised to make that form factor work. I think restricting the discussion to only that general form factor is an unnecessary restraint because it's mostly an unnecessary form factor other than for niche uses.
You brought up several points. Check one for brevity in doing it.
It might have been a novelty. But it is one that is catching on in both the Windows, and Linux worlds. There are now at least two Windows models, and Linux users are using those as well.
We're back to the question of what one needs. Most home users need no more than what is in that box, or can be added to it. The fact is that few home users play graphically intensive computer games. Other than for that, the machine is must fine. I use one by my audio/video equipment to digitize my lp's. It's perfect for that.
This is not intended for uses where a more powerful machine is really needed. I know a couple of people who stick the machine into their backpack, and bring it to where they are going to need it.
I don't know who restricted the discussion to that form factor. As if anyone here could possibly hope to wield that kind of power here.
As you know very well by now, I'm not one who thinks Apple's lineup is complete.
But, my thoughts often expressed here about Apple's licensing the OS ,seems to be coming closer each and every day.