Desktop PC / iMac ADVICE needed!

asininity

Marty_J wrote: »

But as I've mentioned before, they're not the same.

I never said they were, under the bonnet yes but with different body work.

Cheap computers generally are not comparable to expensive computers, regardless of who makes them. Go compare a cheap Dell and an expensive Dell (which will probably cost more than the equivalent Mac).

In this discussion I'm talking mainly like for like hardware. PC's are cheaper in this respect. I never said anything about comparing a cheap computer to an expensive one, I might have mentioned cheaper/save some money but never said cheap.

To be fair I normally do go on about cheap computers, but it bears no relevance here.

I came across an article earlier about the iPhone Multitouch Patent Myth, and it contained this rather pertinent quote:

While I quite agree apple couldn't patent multi-touch the quote has no relavence to anything I've said about PCs/Macs. Unles your trying to say I'm a half brained unqualified blow hard???:eek:

I mean, a fishing rod only does one thing: fish. If you don't want to fish, you don't need the rod. A computer however, does lots of things. Just because someone buy sa computer that's really good for photographers for instance, and then later decides they don't like photographer, it doesn't render their computer useless or a waste of money. It will do lots of other things too.

I can see from this you dont do fishing, I mentioned fishing equipment the rods a small part. I also never said anything about the computer being useless if they didn't want to pursue photography. I said it would be an expensive internet machine.

Thanks for the link, I don't mind it but dont get it I thought they were advertising shoes until the end. Bit like to T-Mobile ads which this rightly takes the !!!! out of.

Marty_J

asininity wrote: »

IIn this discussion I'm talking mainly like for like hardware.

But the form factor is part of the hardware. Comparing a tower-based traditional computer with an all-in-one design is not comparing like-for-like.

As I said before, they're not for everyone, but they're also demonstrably not the same.

PC's are cheaper in this respect.

Dell's XPS all-in-one designs start at £1,279; Apple's at £949.

Comparing like-for-like means doing just that: comparing two similar products.

While I quite agree apple couldn't patent multi-touch the quote has no relavence to anything I've said about PCs/Macs. Unles your trying to say I'm a half brained unqualified blow hard???:eek:

Of course I'm not saying that. The quote was in reference to my comparison of computers to cars.

People treat computers like they treat no other product, and it seems very odd to me.

I look for the same qualities in every product I buy, and most people would agree with me until we get to computers, and then many drop their standards for some reason, and it all becomes about getting the cheapest one with the biggest hard drive.

I can see from this you dont do fishing, I mentioned fishing equipment the rods a small part. I also never said anything about the computer being useless if they didn't want to pursue photography. I said it would be an expensive internet machine.

I can browse the internet on a £150 iPod Touch.

Does that mean every computer that costs more than £150 is a waste of money?

Or is there some sort of utility to be gained from spending more?

Thanks for the link, I don't mind it but dont get it I thought they were advertising shoes until the end. Bit like to T-Mobile ads which this rightly takes the !!!! out of.

They made a whole series of them (and paid Jerry Seinfeld $10 million for the privilege), but they bombed half way through, and they ended up pulling the plug.

I liked that they were charmingly random, but viewers were confused as to what Microsoft were trying to say, and as it turns out, Microsoft were too.

asininity

Marty_J wrote: »

But the form factor is part of the hardware. Comparing a tower-based traditional computer with an all-in-one design is not comparing like-for-like.

Fair enough, I dont think I'd consider an all in one. I generally dont consider the casing when talking hardware. If I was going to buy a Mac for a desktop I'd buy one of their towers.

My desktop is for gaming and has some good hardware inside which sits in a good very cheap case old and battered as it is.

Of course I'm not saying that. The quote was in reference to my comparison of computers to cars.

Again fair enough I personally do think it fits, agree to disagree??

People treat computers like they treat no other product, and it seems very odd to me.

Doesn't to me, they're a product like no other product.

I look for the same qualities in every product I buy, and most people would agree with me until we get to computers, and then many drop their standards for some reason, and it all becomes about getting the cheapest one with the biggest hard drive.

I can assure you I'm quite cheap throughout my buying preferences.

I can browse the internet on a £150 iPod Touch.

Does that mean every computer that costs more than £150 is a waste of money?

Or is there some sort of utility to be gained from spending more?

Its all about personal preference. You're generalising. If you want to spend £1200 on a computer to browse the net thats entirely up to you, you might not think its a waste of money, I do. Much as you might not like it but I look at what I need to do and find the cheapest way I can get it done, personal preference also dictates a large-ish screen and a keyboard for internet browsing.