moved: New Apple vs. PC "Price Comparison"

Comments

• Reply 1 of 10

  stoo Posts: 1,490member

  February 19, 2003 6:58PM

  Where are the laptop comparisons?
• Reply 2 of 10

  ed m. Posts: 222member

  February 19, 2003 7:06PM

  Yep, you're right... Apparently that one is coming soon
  
  
  
  --
  
  Ed
• Reply 3 of 10

  fran441 Posts: 3,715member

  February 20, 2003 7:23AM

  The MacObserver? I remember that site. I stopped going there after they trashed our forums a while back. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
• Reply 4 of 10

  matsu Posts: 6,558member

  February 20, 2003 7:45AM

  I'm a laptop user myself, hehehe... Part of the fun of owning the baby-book is noone here can heretofore accuse me of crying about Apple product I'm never going to buy. So there, HA! Every knows what I want from a desktop. The second Apple sells it, there will be not one but two Macs in my home. Easy as pie: make what customers want, get sale. We want affordable expandable (you know what I mean) competitive desktops.
  
  
  
  I'll start with the iMacG3. It Loses outright for being a curved screen 15" CRT in the year 2003. That's enough to kill it right there as it makes it ergonomically inferior to every single machine presented in it's category.
  
  
  
  Speaking of categories, some of those are truly ridiculous. Apple makes nice software, but NO PC user in existance needs or wants to emulate anything from the mac softwware universe. Mac users OTOH will need to emulate at least one or two bits of windows software just as I do for Access (hardly something minor) and some of the library stuff we work with.
  
  
  
  I don't agree with PC slant, but I don't agree with mac slant either. I can't wait to see how bad the rest of that comparo is.
• Reply 5 of 10

  luca Posts: 3,833member

  February 20, 2003 8:10AM

  So many errors...
  
  
  
  1. 1 GHz iMac listed as using a 100 MHz system bus.
  
  2. 800 MHz iMac listed as using PC133 RAM.
  
  3. 1.8 GHz Athlon XP2200+ listed as being equivalent to a 1.0 GHz P4, and rated below two 2 GHz Celerons.
  
  4. SDRAM confused with SDR SDRAM... one system is listed as using "PC2100 SDRAM" as opposed to a "better" one that uses "PC2100 DDR." <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" /> such a common mistake.
  
  
  
  Well, I'm sure there are more, but I don't care to check.
• Reply 6 of 10

  matsu Posts: 6,558member

  February 20, 2003 8:19AM

  Yeah, that section was to cockeyed to even consider. Idiocy, bias, and inaccuracy, wonderful review
• Reply 7 of 10

  flounder Posts: 2,674member

  February 20, 2003 9:45AM

  Well, taking a quick looks at it, the minibook seems to be by far the best apple value going right now.
  
  There simply just isn't anything like it on the PC side.
• Reply 8 of 10

  hamfistedbunvendor Posts: 52member

  February 20, 2003 9:47AM

  Sheer Quality is immesurable.
  
  
  
  i.e there is no real comparison. Go and play with XP Lego edition and stop worrying what 5% of us think
  
  
  
  
  
  Thanks Apple.
• Reply 9 of 10

  bluedjinn Posts: 56member

  February 20, 2003 10:57AM

  [quote]Originally posted by Luca Rescigno:
  
  <strong>So many errors...
  
  
  
  Well, I'm sure there are more, but I don't care to check.</strong><hr></blockquote>
  
  
  
  Luca--
  
  
  
  I appreciate the alert to these errors; they (along with several others which people have found) have been corrected, although I'm sure there are a few more which will slip through from time to time. I do go through a tremendous amount of work to keep them accurate, but with up to 6 brands x 18 charts x over 70 different categories, I'm bound to make some errors.
  
  
  
  For what it's worth, your e-mail to me on these errors was a lot more courteous than your posting here in AI.
  
  
  
  --Charles
  
  aka BlueDjinn
  
  aka AAPLTalk System Shootouts editor
• Reply 10 of 10

  ghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member

  February 20, 2003 11:03AM

  This is Future Hardware discussion?
  
  
  
  Moving to Current Hardware.