An apple display is $200?.. can you please post that link?..
An apple 19 inch widescreen (or close, i'd take 20 inch) is $200?..
Apple has never sold a monitor for $200 in the history of it's existence.
That is blasphemy, you should be ashamed of yourself.. which self respecting mac zealot would buy a monitor that cheap?.
Hope you weren't comparing a used mac monitor with a new monitor dell supplies with it's computers..
We are all waiting for this link to a $200 apple monitor. I have an old monitor i need replacing.. i am waiting with abated breath.
Sigh. People ask for the exact same specs to make the comparison. The Dell comes with a $200 Dell monitor. If you're giving the Mac Pro an Apple display, you have to give one to the Dell. Or buy a third party one for both.
But nice job steaming ahead there second guessing what I was referring to.
Double sigh for baselessly calling me a Mac zealot. You're just being an obtuse troll.
The big deal is that in comparing a dell with an apple, dell is supplying it's monitor so we should expect apple to do the same.. that free monitor?.. guess what?.. it's not free!!!.. it's included in the price of the computer. Maybe apple should include a 'Free Monitor'??.
You can't just throw in any monitor in the comparison.. to do so, one would have to compute how much this
"free monitor" is costing the consumer, take it out of the price of the dell and then add the same generic monitor in both comparisons (good luck finding out how much this "free monitor" actually cost). I guess you could use the retail price of the monitor (not accurate but close enough i guess).
You're right of course, it's a pain. But when I'm buying a hi performance machine, I don't buy a $200 monitor. Even if you're using the machine forspreedsheets, you'll want a bigger, better quality model just to better read the small characters.
So, it's quite possible that if the monitor can't be subtracted from Dell's price, and you have to buy a better one anyway, then you're actually going to pay more.
It's like the crappy printers given away for "free".
I'm looking to get a new professional-grade machine soon. Out of curiosity I've been pricing Mac Pro's against Dells. The Dells don't even seem to be in the same ballpark in price-- they're way, way higher. A vanilla $2800 2.8GHz 8 core Mac Pro equivalent, or anything close to it, costs at least $500 more at Dell's store. Am I doing something wrong? Everyone seems to claim Dells are cheaper but I don't see it.
Yes, you are. DELL has coupons all over the place, sometimes even $1500 off if yiu stack a few. You just gotta look on the right forums.
The big deal is that in comparing a dell with an apple, dell is supplying it's monitor so we should expect apple to do the same.. that free monitor?.. guess what?.. it's not free!!!.. it's included in the price of the computer. Maybe apple should include a 'Free Monitor'??.
You can't just throw in any monitor in the comparison.. to do so, one would have to compute how much this
"free monitor" is costing the consumer, take it out of the price of the dell and then add the same generic monitor in both comparisons (good luck finding out how much this "free monitor" actually cost). I guess you could use the retail price of the monitor (not accurate but close enough i guess).
I included a 20" ACD and the Mac Pro IS STILL CHEAPER.
Yes, you are. DELL has coupons all over the place, sometimes even $1500 off if yiu stack a few. You just gotta look on the right forums.
As far as the coupons go, it's a matter of pot luck.
Sometimes they may have a coupon for what you're looking for, but mostly not. And if they do, it's for a limited number, and, or, a limited time.
Basically, you have to be looking all of the time, and wait on your purchase to find the exact one you need. You may never find one, because not all of Dells stuff ever goes on coupon sale. It's mostly the cheaper stuff, but you really have to spend the time, and effort, to look.
When they are available, they usually get grabbed up by the people who do spend all their time on this, and network on some of the techie sites. When something desirable goes on sale they immediately post it, and in a day, all the coupons are gone. You have better luck with the less desirable stuff.
Have we all forgotten our computing history? The whole reason Microsoft became so successful was that they specifically allowed their OS to be used on multiple types of computers. Previous to that, the OS and hardware were almost always locked together (e.g., the original Macintosh). Also, Psystar would be aiding and abetting software piracy if they specifically marketed a machine for the purposes of allowing a purchaser to buy/install a copy of OSX in violation of the EULA.
Floccus, you have a point but Macs are collectables. They are not PCs. I ask Apple to let this run its course like a bad fever. As opposed to PC, cohesiveness between hardware and software is what makes the Mac and true blue Macies would not have it any other way. The Pystar is indeed flattering but this frankenstien will gain traction only with thieves not worth mentioning on this page. Macies are cut from a different cloth. Tatooing themselves the past 30 years says it all. Besides, add the cost of the OS and ports to the 400 and you will see what a rip off it is.
Floccus, you have a point but Macs are collectables. They are not PCs. I ask Apple to let this run its course like a bad fever. As opposed to PC, cohesiveness between hardware and software is what makes the Mac and true blue Macies would not have it any other way. The Pystar is indeed flattering but this frankenstien will gain traction only with thieves not worth mentioning on this page. Macies are cut from a different cloth. Tatooing themselves the past 30 years says it all. Besides, add the cost of the OS and ports to the 400 and you will see what a rip off it is.
Apple can't let it run its course. If this guy turns out to come up with a real product, which at this time is speculation only, and it is somewhat successful, then other bigger, more adept companies might try this. They could be much more successful. At some point Apple would have to shut it down (unless they really wanted it to work out, but that's very doubtful).
It's best to end it with a company that will cost little to close down, rather a big company that can afford the legal fees if they are serious.
This arguing is pointless. I am a Mac user (at work) and I love Mac. But I have not bought a Mac (for home) in at least 10 years. If there was a Mac, more powerful then the Mini, and without the built in screen (iMac) for less than $1k, I would buy it. There isn't so I won't be buying a Mac soon.
My next computer build is a home server built around an Intel q9300, Win XP, new hard drive, ram, moboard for about $500. The one after that is going to be a bluray, remote control, network browsing HTPC built around an Intel e8400, Win XP (Vista be damned), in a nice Omaura case, for under $800. If I could do either with a Mac for a REASONABLE price, I would be all over it.
All of you are missing the real point of this argument. Apple needs to sell us powerful Macs for less then $1k (and no, I don't mean $999 or things on sale for $899 or whatever). I mean, a TRUE mid-tower with 45nm, expandability, etc.
My hope is that this gives other 'companies,' legit or not, the impetus to offer OSX compatible PCs for $500 that blow away $1k+ Apple products until Apple LOSES sales and HAS to compete. As many of you have said over the years, competition is good for the consumer. In my opinion, Apple is not good for the consumer in ONE aspect. Price on the lower end market.
Rich snobs who are willing to drop $1k+ every year on a new Mac need not comment. Keep this in mind as the US economy continues to decline. Eventually, Apple will be recognized as the luxury it is and will be dropped.
This arguing is pointless. I am a Mac user (at work) and I love Mac. But I have not bought a Mac (for home) in at least 10 years. If there was a Mac, more powerful then the Mini, and without the built in screen (iMac) for less than $1k, I would buy it. There isn't so I won't be buying a Mac soon.
My next computer build is a home server built around an Intel q9300, Win XP, new hard drive, ram, moboard for about $500. The one after that is going to be a bluray, remote control, network browsing HTPC built around an Intel e8400, Win XP (Vista be damned), in a nice Omaura case, for under $800. If I could do either with a Mac for a REASONABLE price, I would be all over it.
All of you are missing the real point of this argument. Apple needs to sell us powerful Macs for less then $1k (and no, I don't mean $999 or things on sale for $899 or whatever). I mean, a TRUE mid-tower with 45nm, expandability, etc.
My hope is that this gives other 'companies,' legit or not, the impetus to offer OSX compatible PCs for $500 that blow away $1k+ Apple products until Apple LOSES sales and HAS to compete. As many of you have said over the years, competition is good for the consumer. In my opinion, Apple is not good for the consumer in ONE aspect. Price on the lower end market.
Rich snobs who are willing to drop $1k+ every year on a new Mac need not comment. Keep this in mind as the US economy continues to decline. Eventually, Apple will be recognized as the luxury it is and will be dropped.
What a waste of hardware. Of course it seems your fixated on gaming. I'd at worst partition by MBR with GRUB 2 and have Linux on those systems/FreeBSD 7 or OpenBSD and then a Windows block for gaming.
My next computer build is a home server built around an Intel q9300, Win XP, new hard drive, ram, moboard for about $500.
Mkay...why isn't the mini a decent home server? As a server even a desktop Unix is superior to WinXP.
Quote:
The one after that is going to be a bluray, remote control, network browsing HTPC built around an Intel e8400, Win XP (Vista be damned), in a nice Omaura case, for under $800. If I could do either with a Mac for a REASONABLE price, I would be all over it.
Another use that the mini is pretty good for since it's small, quiet and already has a remote. Get the base mini and attach an external BluRay FW drive. I don't think there's an internal drive that will fit yet. Maybe, I haven't looked.
Although, I'd likely just get a PS3 if I wanted BluRay right now. It seems unlikely that for under $800 you'll end up with HDMI output.
Quote:
All of you are missing the real point of this argument. Apple needs to sell us powerful Macs for less then $1k (and no, I don't mean $999 or things on sale for $899 or whatever).
They do. It's called a mini. It could use another update and a speed bump but it is a powerful Mac...great for the two uses you mention above.
Not a good gaming box though or for older PPC code under rosetta.
Quote:
Rich snobs who are willing to drop $1k+ every year on a new Mac need not comment. Keep this in mind as the US economy continues to decline. Eventually, Apple will be recognized as the luxury it is and will be dropped.
Most folks don't replace their Mac every year. I have the first rev MBP and it still is a fine machine because it's not bogged by the OS. There's a performance difference between when I have in Bootcamp/XP and OSX. XP with all the various IT required goop to keep it secure is very sluggish.
Eh...my buying strategy with Windows was to get a cheaper mid-grade tower every year. My strategy with Mac was to get the best I could reasonably afford and keep it longer.
I still use my G4 Quicksilver today. The same generation Dell (a 1.7 Ghz P4) is a lot less useful. TCO wise, about the same given that I upgraded more often on the PC side.
Now, with bootcamp, there's no reason to get a PC.
It's best to end it with a company that will cost little to close down, rather a big company that can afford the legal fees if they are serious.
Mel, point taken. I'll get views from my embarrassed friends who own iPod clones and come back to you. Several iPods were promptly replicated in my part of the world (Malaysia) but pricing of the real thing effectively sidelined the clones.
What is wrong with you? You're like a child defending your favorite color. I've been a pro video editor for 10 years. I switched to Final Cut in 2005. I use a Mac Pro at work. I don't need some lame ass lecture on what the Mac Pro is marketed for. My point was simple (for most) to understand. There is a market between the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro which Apple has chosen not to address, for whatever reason. This clone addresses that market. I didn't ask anyone's opinion as to whether or not Apple should or shouldn't be ignoring it. I simply stated that comparing a Dell with equal specs to a Mac Pro completely misses the point as to why someone would want a mid-range desktop OSX machine.
Well said. The gap in Apple's lineup is a lot bigger than some people are willing to admit.
Well said. The gap in Apple's lineup is a lot bigger than some people are willing to admit.
No one is denying the gap is real. But, it's a silly argument to make comparisons that make no sense in an attempt to prove something we all already agree on.
This is, for whatever reason, Apple's choice, and comparing to machines that can't properly be compared isn't going to change that.
That's what lifterus doesn't seem to understand. Calling me childish doesn't help his argument either, when he doesn't understand that I'm not disagreeing with his position, only the way he's making it.
Nice! Thanks Psystar! thanks to you Apple will consider revising their licensing terms and bring about the awful activation process that plagues Windows! Way to go!
Nice! Thanks Psystar! thanks to you Apple will consider revising their licensing terms and bring about the awful activation process that plagues Windows! Way to go!
I think you mean thanks to Apple for not bringing out the machines that people want. You could very well blame Napster for illegal music downloading but the truth of it is that they were just distributing music using a method people wanted. Apple eventually followed suit.
If the clone makers succeed, which I sincerely hope happens then I also hope that Apple follows suit and delivers the products that people want. If clone makers don't succeed then Apple can rest assured that they made the right decisions.
I actually don't see the EULA holding up on this one because for one thing Leopard comes preinstalled and they have to modify the Leopard installer to work. What if Psystar remove the EULA before installing? Perhaps there is an agreement on the purchase of Leopard to not modify it for installation.
Comments
An apple display is $200?.. can you please post that link?..
An apple 19 inch widescreen (or close, i'd take 20 inch) is $200?..
Apple has never sold a monitor for $200 in the history of it's existence.
That is blasphemy, you should be ashamed of yourself.. which self respecting mac zealot would buy a monitor that cheap?.
Hope you weren't comparing a used mac monitor with a new monitor dell supplies with it's computers..
We are all waiting for this link to a $200 apple monitor. I have an old monitor i need replacing.. i am waiting with abated breath.
Sigh. People ask for the exact same specs to make the comparison. The Dell comes with a $200 Dell monitor. If you're giving the Mac Pro an Apple display, you have to give one to the Dell. Or buy a third party one for both.
But nice job steaming ahead there second guessing what I was referring to.
Double sigh for baselessly calling me a Mac zealot. You're just being an obtuse troll.
The big deal is that in comparing a dell with an apple, dell is supplying it's monitor so we should expect apple to do the same.. that free monitor?.. guess what?.. it's not free!!!.. it's included in the price of the computer. Maybe apple should include a 'Free Monitor'??.
You can't just throw in any monitor in the comparison.. to do so, one would have to compute how much this
"free monitor" is costing the consumer, take it out of the price of the dell and then add the same generic monitor in both comparisons (good luck finding out how much this "free monitor" actually cost). I guess you could use the retail price of the monitor (not accurate but close enough i guess).
You're right of course, it's a pain. But when I'm buying a hi performance machine, I don't buy a $200 monitor. Even if you're using the machine forspreedsheets, you'll want a bigger, better quality model just to better read the small characters.
So, it's quite possible that if the monitor can't be subtracted from Dell's price, and you have to buy a better one anyway, then you're actually going to pay more.
It's like the crappy printers given away for "free".
I'm looking to get a new professional-grade machine soon. Out of curiosity I've been pricing Mac Pro's against Dells. The Dells don't even seem to be in the same ballpark in price-- they're way, way higher. A vanilla $2800 2.8GHz 8 core Mac Pro equivalent, or anything close to it, costs at least $500 more at Dell's store. Am I doing something wrong? Everyone seems to claim Dells are cheaper but I don't see it.
Yes, you are. DELL has coupons all over the place, sometimes even $1500 off if yiu stack a few. You just gotta look on the right forums.
The big deal is that in comparing a dell with an apple, dell is supplying it's monitor so we should expect apple to do the same.. that free monitor?.. guess what?.. it's not free!!!.. it's included in the price of the computer. Maybe apple should include a 'Free Monitor'??.
You can't just throw in any monitor in the comparison.. to do so, one would have to compute how much this
"free monitor" is costing the consumer, take it out of the price of the dell and then add the same generic monitor in both comparisons (good luck finding out how much this "free monitor" actually cost). I guess you could use the retail price of the monitor (not accurate but close enough i guess).
I included a 20" ACD and the Mac Pro IS STILL CHEAPER.
You're just whining without a clue.
Yes, you are. DELL has coupons all over the place, sometimes even $1500 off if yiu stack a few. You just gotta look on the right forums.
As far as the coupons go, it's a matter of pot luck.
Sometimes they may have a coupon for what you're looking for, but mostly not. And if they do, it's for a limited number, and, or, a limited time.
Basically, you have to be looking all of the time, and wait on your purchase to find the exact one you need. You may never find one, because not all of Dells stuff ever goes on coupon sale. It's mostly the cheaper stuff, but you really have to spend the time, and effort, to look.
When they are available, they usually get grabbed up by the people who do spend all their time on this, and network on some of the techie sites. When something desirable goes on sale they immediately post it, and in a day, all the coupons are gone. You have better luck with the less desirable stuff.
But, you might get lucky.
Have we all forgotten our computing history? The whole reason Microsoft became so successful was that they specifically allowed their OS to be used on multiple types of computers. Previous to that, the OS and hardware were almost always locked together (e.g., the original Macintosh). Also, Psystar would be aiding and abetting software piracy if they specifically marketed a machine for the purposes of allowing a purchaser to buy/install a copy of OSX in violation of the EULA.
Floccus, you have a point but Macs are collectables. They are not PCs. I ask Apple to let this run its course like a bad fever. As opposed to PC, cohesiveness between hardware and software is what makes the Mac and true blue Macies would not have it any other way. The Pystar is indeed flattering but this frankenstien will gain traction only with thieves not worth mentioning on this page. Macies are cut from a different cloth. Tatooing themselves the past 30 years says it all. Besides, add the cost of the OS and ports to the 400 and you will see what a rip off it is.
Floccus, you have a point but Macs are collectables. They are not PCs. I ask Apple to let this run its course like a bad fever. As opposed to PC, cohesiveness between hardware and software is what makes the Mac and true blue Macies would not have it any other way. The Pystar is indeed flattering but this frankenstien will gain traction only with thieves not worth mentioning on this page. Macies are cut from a different cloth. Tatooing themselves the past 30 years says it all. Besides, add the cost of the OS and ports to the 400 and you will see what a rip off it is.
Apple can't let it run its course. If this guy turns out to come up with a real product, which at this time is speculation only, and it is somewhat successful, then other bigger, more adept companies might try this. They could be much more successful. At some point Apple would have to shut it down (unless they really wanted it to work out, but that's very doubtful).
It's best to end it with a company that will cost little to close down, rather a big company that can afford the legal fees if they are serious.
My next computer build is a home server built around an Intel q9300, Win XP, new hard drive, ram, moboard for about $500. The one after that is going to be a bluray, remote control, network browsing HTPC built around an Intel e8400, Win XP (Vista be damned), in a nice Omaura case, for under $800. If I could do either with a Mac for a REASONABLE price, I would be all over it.
All of you are missing the real point of this argument. Apple needs to sell us powerful Macs for less then $1k (and no, I don't mean $999 or things on sale for $899 or whatever). I mean, a TRUE mid-tower with 45nm, expandability, etc.
My hope is that this gives other 'companies,' legit or not, the impetus to offer OSX compatible PCs for $500 that blow away $1k+ Apple products until Apple LOSES sales and HAS to compete. As many of you have said over the years, competition is good for the consumer. In my opinion, Apple is not good for the consumer in ONE aspect. Price on the lower end market.
Rich snobs who are willing to drop $1k+ every year on a new Mac need not comment. Keep this in mind as the US economy continues to decline. Eventually, Apple will be recognized as the luxury it is and will be dropped.
This arguing is pointless. I am a Mac user (at work) and I love Mac. But I have not bought a Mac (for home) in at least 10 years. If there was a Mac, more powerful then the Mini, and without the built in screen (iMac) for less than $1k, I would buy it. There isn't so I won't be buying a Mac soon.
My next computer build is a home server built around an Intel q9300, Win XP, new hard drive, ram, moboard for about $500. The one after that is going to be a bluray, remote control, network browsing HTPC built around an Intel e8400, Win XP (Vista be damned), in a nice Omaura case, for under $800. If I could do either with a Mac for a REASONABLE price, I would be all over it.
All of you are missing the real point of this argument. Apple needs to sell us powerful Macs for less then $1k (and no, I don't mean $999 or things on sale for $899 or whatever). I mean, a TRUE mid-tower with 45nm, expandability, etc.
My hope is that this gives other 'companies,' legit or not, the impetus to offer OSX compatible PCs for $500 that blow away $1k+ Apple products until Apple LOSES sales and HAS to compete. As many of you have said over the years, competition is good for the consumer. In my opinion, Apple is not good for the consumer in ONE aspect. Price on the lower end market.
Rich snobs who are willing to drop $1k+ every year on a new Mac need not comment. Keep this in mind as the US economy continues to decline. Eventually, Apple will be recognized as the luxury it is and will be dropped.
What a waste of hardware. Of course it seems your fixated on gaming. I'd at worst partition by MBR with GRUB 2 and have Linux on those systems/FreeBSD 7 or OpenBSD and then a Windows block for gaming.
I don't game so I'd pass on Windows, period.
My next computer build is a home server built around an Intel q9300, Win XP, new hard drive, ram, moboard for about $500.
Mkay...why isn't the mini a decent home server? As a server even a desktop Unix is superior to WinXP.
The one after that is going to be a bluray, remote control, network browsing HTPC built around an Intel e8400, Win XP (Vista be damned), in a nice Omaura case, for under $800. If I could do either with a Mac for a REASONABLE price, I would be all over it.
Another use that the mini is pretty good for since it's small, quiet and already has a remote. Get the base mini and attach an external BluRay FW drive. I don't think there's an internal drive that will fit yet. Maybe, I haven't looked.
Although, I'd likely just get a PS3 if I wanted BluRay right now. It seems unlikely that for under $800 you'll end up with HDMI output.
All of you are missing the real point of this argument. Apple needs to sell us powerful Macs for less then $1k (and no, I don't mean $999 or things on sale for $899 or whatever).
They do. It's called a mini. It could use another update and a speed bump but it is a powerful Mac...great for the two uses you mention above.
Not a good gaming box though or for older PPC code under rosetta.
Rich snobs who are willing to drop $1k+ every year on a new Mac need not comment. Keep this in mind as the US economy continues to decline. Eventually, Apple will be recognized as the luxury it is and will be dropped.
Most folks don't replace their Mac every year. I have the first rev MBP and it still is a fine machine because it's not bogged by the OS. There's a performance difference between when I have in Bootcamp/XP and OSX. XP with all the various IT required goop to keep it secure is very sluggish.
Eh...my buying strategy with Windows was to get a cheaper mid-grade tower every year. My strategy with Mac was to get the best I could reasonably afford and keep it longer.
I still use my G4 Quicksilver today. The same generation Dell (a 1.7 Ghz P4) is a lot less useful. TCO wise, about the same given that I upgraded more often on the PC side.
Now, with bootcamp, there's no reason to get a PC.
It's best to end it with a company that will cost little to close down, rather a big company that can afford the legal fees if they are serious.
Mel, point taken. I'll get views from my embarrassed friends who own iPod clones and come back to you. Several iPods were promptly replicated in my part of the world (Malaysia) but pricing of the real thing effectively sidelined the clones.
What is wrong with you? You're like a child defending your favorite color. I've been a pro video editor for 10 years. I switched to Final Cut in 2005. I use a Mac Pro at work. I don't need some lame ass lecture on what the Mac Pro is marketed for. My point was simple (for most) to understand. There is a market between the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro which Apple has chosen not to address, for whatever reason. This clone addresses that market. I didn't ask anyone's opinion as to whether or not Apple should or shouldn't be ignoring it. I simply stated that comparing a Dell with equal specs to a Mac Pro completely misses the point as to why someone would want a mid-range desktop OSX machine.
Well said. The gap in Apple's lineup is a lot bigger than some people are willing to admit.
Well said. The gap in Apple's lineup is a lot bigger than some people are willing to admit.
No one is denying the gap is real. But, it's a silly argument to make comparisons that make no sense in an attempt to prove something we all already agree on.
This is, for whatever reason, Apple's choice, and comparing to machines that can't properly be compared isn't going to change that.
That's what lifterus doesn't seem to understand. Calling me childish doesn't help his argument either, when he doesn't understand that I'm not disagreeing with his position, only the way he's making it.
Nice! Thanks Psystar! thanks to you Apple will consider revising their licensing terms and bring about the awful activation process that plagues Windows! Way to go!
I think you mean thanks to Apple for not bringing out the machines that people want. You could very well blame Napster for illegal music downloading but the truth of it is that they were just distributing music using a method people wanted. Apple eventually followed suit.
If the clone makers succeed, which I sincerely hope happens then I also hope that Apple follows suit and delivers the products that people want. If clone makers don't succeed then Apple can rest assured that they made the right decisions.
I actually don't see the EULA holding up on this one because for one thing Leopard comes preinstalled and they have to modify the Leopard installer to work. What if Psystar remove the EULA before installing? Perhaps there is an agreement on the purchase of Leopard to not modify it for installation.