I think you can confidently call them wankers if they do.Originally Posted by sanking
I think you can confidently call them wankers if they do.
Well, it wasn't me who brought the comparison into the thread either. All I did was respond to some obvious BS.
But madness? No, I don't think so. Is there really any point in posting somethng that's already done ("the computer/camera/car/whatever I just purchased...") other than to elicit inevitable comments/arguments/comparisons? And if that is indeed the point, then why not have a little pissing match that usually goes with threads like that?
It's fun to do, fun to watch and there is always a possibility somebody might even learn something new along the way.
And in that spirit,
Being a UI and production engineer myself these days, forcing a user to read the manual for an unfamiliar device using that very device does not make a lot of sense to me. I'd much rather read it on an office or home computer while playing with the device. Much better than having to close the manual in order to try what it says and then come back to it...
Other than that, they have been following their design philosophy very consistently and that is preciesly the reason why some of us love them and others hate them.
Well, I would say that the first thing you are missing is the last ten years or so since the last Mac was sold with a one-mouse button. The current ones have none - they use gestures.
The second most obviuous thing you are missing is the multi-monitor support - see below.
And since both of us have such respect for data, let's look at the data.
- There are only two models of Mac Mini - the desktop and the server version. The desktop version comes with one optical and one hard drive while the server version comes with two hard drives and a server eidtion of OSX. If you look at the Mac Mini page on Apple's site and bother to read the information there you will notice that EACH of them comes with:
- HDMI port (full 1.4 spec, full HD video, data and sound)
- Mini Display port (supports dual-head DVI)
- FireWire 800 port
- Four USB 2.0 ports
- SD card reader (supporting all three SD standards)
- Audio In/Audio Out
- Bluetooth
- Gigabit Ethernet
- WiFi
- OS and software
IKeyboard, mouse and monitor(s) are not included. The assumption being that the target audience would already have those at hand or could get them more affordably.
So, contrary to things said earlier in this thred, each MacMini - each Mac, actually, including the laptops and iMacs - supports at least two monitors and has user-upgreadable RAM. Each Mac except the MacBook (not Pro) has a full aluminum casing.
Now, as for the price comparison with your HP - since the monitors that come with it are essentially garbage, according to your own description, let's take them out of the equation. Looking at the same source - Costco - typical 23" monitors slightly better than those cost about $170-$200 bucks each. Let's say $200 x 2 = $400. Your special was priced at $1170 while it was available, so the net cost for the computer with 8GB of RAM and 1.5TB hard drive would be $730. That's including (presumably cheapest) keyboard and mouse.
Mac Mini in the above configuration clocks in at $699 at Apple or slightly less in places such as MacConnection or B&H (yes, they have great computer section with VERY competitive prices). Add to that:
- $50 to upgrade the drive to 500 GB
- $100 (approx.) to upgrade RAM through indie shop such as OWC
- $50 (approx.) for a comparable keyboard/mouse set at places like Fry's or Newegg.
You're free to use any DVI/HDMI-capable monitor you wish. Or two. Or maybe even three. Each of which could be calibrated independently and set with its own profile, background and resolution.
And the tag comes to about $900. That's a difference of about $170, plus a VERY useable software suite (iLife) on the Mac side and minus a boatload of bloatware/adware/spyware on the PC side.
I would not call that kind of difference significant under any circumstances, even without considering the OS that comes with it. The design itself is well worth it, IMO, to those who care about such things.
OR
You could keep both of those monitors and compare it to the cheapest iMac for $1200 including one monitor of the same resolution, slightly smaller (21.5") but of much better quality plus additional $50 for RAM upgrade and another $200 for the second (23") monitor. This one even comes with wireless keyboard and mouse. That's what? $250 difference? Not too big either. Well worth the OS differential, again IMO. Definitely not $2000...
Marko
P.S.
I do join Sandy in congratulating you on a successful upgrage despite our little pissing match... I hope you get the best of it rather than the other way around.
No. It was $999, as I have written several times. HP had a rebate (not an uncommon occurrence).
The monitors are not garbage, by the way. (That is a hyperbolic term.) They are just designed for a different set of requirements. The IPS panels used in Apple monitors, and best suited for our applications, have relatively slow response times in the 6-8ms range. The HP monitors are half that, making them quite good for gaming and watching movies. And they are fine for reading a two-up display in Word. The Dell is very similar to the 24" Cinema display, but it is quite a bit cheaper even at its retail price. It uses the same panel technology and fulfills our requirements nicely.
Of course, you could put that Dell monitor on a Mac Mini, too.
Apple is not overly forthcoming about support for multiple monitors. I got my info directly from their website. I assumed, reasonably I think, that one port means one monitor.
I thought you guys were bragging about the full integration of Macs, and instead of taking my HP which all came in one box, you're sending me to chip shops to buy bits and pieces mailorder to assemble myself (there is no Fry's on this end of the country).Mac Mini in the above configuration clocks in at $699 at Apple or slightly less in places such as MacConnection or B&H (yes, they have great computer section with VERY competitive prices). Add to that:
- $50 to upgrade the drive to 500 GB
- $100 (approx.) to upgrade RAM through indie shop such as OWC
- $50 (approx.) for a comparable keyboard/mouse set at places like Fry's or Newegg.
But I went back to the Apple Store online. Yup, the Mac Minis were updated today or at least the choices seemed different than yesterday. I think there were more choices yesterday and I took the cheapest one. I did so again today. Buying an integrated system with 8 gigs, a keyboard, a mouse, a 500 GB hard disk, and no monitor, the total is $1098. If I could buy pieces and parts at Fry's, I could do cheaper than the HP, too. Let's compare app... no, I won't go there.You're free to use any DVI/HDMI-capable monitor you wish. Or two. Or maybe even three. Each of which could be calibrated independently and set with its own profile, background and resolution.
And the tag comes to about $900. That's a difference of about $170, plus a VERY useable software suite (iLife) on the Mac side and minus a boatload of bloatware/adware/spyware on the PC side.
With the cheapie Costco monitors, that would be $1500, or 50% more than what I bought. And I'll still have to buy another terabyte of hard disk storage to match specs. I'm happy to assume that MacOS is so efficient that it will perform as well with that Core2Duo as the four-core Phenom on the HP.
That price did not, by the way, include iMac Life, which is $79 extra when pre-installed.
The bloatware on the HP was over-described in the reviews as it turned out and pretty trivial to clean off or disable. But, yeah, I wish it didn't have it.
Of course, I could install Open Office, Image3, Firefox, and Thunderbird on the PC, all for free. That's a pretty usable package for those not already fully integrated into the MS Office borg.
Do you notice the irony? The stated advantage to an Apple has been its comprehensive integration, but in order for you to undermine my argument that what I got was a lot cheaper, you have to send me to four different sources for pieces and parts to put together, rather than one integrated box with a big Apple on the side. When I buy as much of an integrated package as is possible (excepting the additional required hard disks), the price is still quite a bit higher.
Frankly, I don't care what the box looks like. It sits in a cabinet. Only the monitors are visible when the cabinet is closed up. But the HP mid-tower looks like...a computer. Not ugly; not beautiful. Just what it is. It is all metal, too. (That's required in order to meet FCC requirements for containing RF emissions.) I will grant that some PC enclosures are garish and offensive.
If I want to lovingly admire a well-made machine, I'll save that for a camera. I do have my priorities in order, after all. Computers are to me a commodity item, not artwork.
By the way, the keyboard that came with the HP is rather decent--much better than the no-name USB cheapies at Fry's.
Rick "thanks for trying" Denney
Resistance is futile.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
I use my Mac Mini with my Apple Cinema Display @ 2500x1600 monitor resolution, no issue at all, my Mac Mini has Firewire 800 port, my wife's PC laptop doesn't have that one, not even Firewire 400, even my Mac Mini doesn't have that 400 port too, but transferring big files from big cards taking me just few minutes like 2-4 minutes over PC, i know talking about Mac vs. PC will never end as discussions about Canon vs. Nikon or even between MF vs. LF and so.
Well, i am not that experience guy as you, but i started to use PC since 1995 and every year i get my PC computers exhausting me more and more and i was always upgrading and trying to have less issues and so, since i got my Mac in 2008 i never look back and i never thinking i want to replace it or go back to PC, i think if i started with Mac from the beginning i may never think about going to PC, i have almost all or most of my friends converted from PC to Mac even we all are able to get the best PC out there, but that didn't or will never happen again, and funny that most of them using Windows on their Mac computers, i use my Windows in Mac too, i was having a nightmare to installed Mac OSX on PC, i did it but then i really didn't like the performance, so i still use Mac computer for everything and using Windows on it, i may use the real PC computer if there is something i can't use on my Mac even with Windows on it.
Ah, I stand corrected then. Both for the price and for the monitors, even though it is still a far cry from the two grand you mentioned and even though you said: "The monitors suck, by the way. (As expected.)"
But I can see the difference between sucking and being garbage. One is (rhetorical) hyperbole and the other a (rhetorical) parable.
Which one port did you think meant one monitor? The MiniDisplay port or the HDMI port? I can see the confusion there as well, they are right next to each other on that image showing the back of the Mac Mini and all those ports there.
And I thought you bought your HP at Costco instead of the HP store. I thought you guys were under the impression that Macs are sold only in Apple stores...
Don't be ridiculous, you can do better than this, I've seen you do it.
Different folks, different strokes as the saying goes. Some people fondle Ebonies and buy no-name computers, others admire American computers and are content with Chinese cameras. Kinda zero-sum game overall, and you are right - it all depends on one's priorities.
Me, I earn my money using my computers and I spend it on my cameras. I can't afford cheap computers and expensive cameras. YMMV.
I build all my computers, as well as for family members and for friends, and can easily say the PC / Mac computer market is just as bad as the mobile or DSLR market - in terms of the constant yearly (or bi-yearly as is the case with graphics cards) marketing push / hype / frenzy for upgrades.
As much as I am acutely aware of this, I do find myself wanting a new graphics card. Experience has taught me to skip at least a generation or two between purchases - and never to buy bleeding edge technology or the highest-spec model - but the one just sitting below it - and then overclock that to shit!
A well-built and well-maintained PC with high quality components should last 10 years - provided you aren't doing 3D design and constant software upgrades. I have a Cyrix 5x86 running DOS 6.2 and Windows 3.11 which is still running somewhere. Probably in a cupboard though.
I love building and maintaining PCs, but they can be a pain in the ass. I build them for other people, I have a gaming / media rig at home and in my office I only use Macs - which are also a pain in the ass - just in different ways. It's really up to which set of pain-in-the-ass is less painful to you.
Like others have said, each to their own. One day when I can afford it, I'll buy another 27" iMac to go alongside my gaming / media rig, simply because OSX is that much more pleasant to work on than Windows - for me, at least.
One aside ... for those who like building their own PCs, you can also build a Mac. It just takes a bit of additional tinkering, and a willingness to ignore Apple's OSX licensing agreement. There are whole websites for people who do this.
Well, of course I meant "suck for our purpose." And I wasn't being accused of not doing as well as I usually do or spreading hyperbole.
The $2000 figure came from a plain reading of Apple's own website, in pricing computers with approximately similar features. And in my previous response to you, I got it up to $1500 without the external hard drives, etc. If Apple had a store I could drive to without navigating through 90 minutes of Washington DC traffic, I might have looked at their item in a store. I don't see Apples at any of the places I normally look (Best Buy, Costco, and the like, though the bigger Best Buy that's 30 miles away does have MacBooks and maybe more than that, with a bunch of 17-year-old girls and their parents standing around the booth. And yes, that's hyperbole. But true.) Buying from an online discounter versus buying at Costco where there is a no-questions-asked 90-day return policy even for computers? Is that a fair comparison?
Apple really does want you to come into their store, the same way Bose wants you in their store (and Bose went to school on Apple). It reminds me of Bang and Olufsen stereo equipment back several decades ago, which was sold in special stores with special salespeople who were so earnest in their belief in Scandinavian style. Those sorts of people sell Macs at the Apple Store now. While B&O's stuff was undoubtedly decent stuff, it was first and foremost a fashion statement. But I'm more a sort-of form-follows-function guy. And, now, my old Technics turntable is fashionable again, while I don't see much B&O stuff left. I guess form followed function after all. (I still secretly lust for a Linn turntable, though. Good solid British stuff.)
I didn't study the pictures of the box, by the way. I read the words. Nothing in those words about multiple monitors. The "dual-port" cable doesn't say anything about dual monitors, and the picture of it doesn't explain it. Nothing in their pictures shows two monitors. They have one display port. And it would not have upset Apple's reputation of old to have one display port that requires an expensive, proprietary Apple cable to convert to whatever other standard connector is needed by a non-Apple monitor. Remember Appletalk? And they are now doing it again by combining USB 3.0 with the display port proprietary plug. Much money to be made on those custom cords.
The computers I use to earn money are required to be PC's. Those requirements are based on what my employer will allow on the network, and what the engineering software I use is written for.
Which American computers would those be? Are there any left? Certainly none of the computers we've been discussing. But my large-format cameras are also not made in America--at least the cameras that are less than 50 years old. One is Swiss and the other is Dutch. But a computer will become obsolete long before it stops working, so I treat them like commodities. This forum is about people who mostly refuse to allow requirements for cameras to shift with the times, but it's difficult to enjoy that luxury with computers--our imagination in how we use them keeps driving us towards newer software that demands newer hardware.Different folks, different strokes as the saying goes. Some people fondle Ebonies and buy no-name computers, others admire American computers and are content with Chinese cameras. Kinda zero-sum game overall, and you are right - it all depends on one's priorities.
Rick "whose last all-American computer was probably the Kaypro II'" Denney
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks