backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 213 comment(s) - last by Kougar.. on May 7 at 3:05 PM
Apple says it is offering the fastest graphics ever in its iMac systems

Most of the product rumors surrounding Apple in 2008 have been related to the expected 3G iPhone this summer. However, some rumors have been circulating over the last few weeks that Apple was updating its line of iMac computers.

Apple confirmed these rumors today when it announced an updated iMac model range. Pricing for the new iMac models starts at the same $1,199 entry level price the new iMac carried when it was introduced in August of 2007. For the same money today, the iMac line gets a batch of new Intel Core 2 Duo processors with even the low-end model getting a 6MB L2 cache and a faster 1066 MHz front side bus.

The first batch of new iMacs had a known issue with their ATI HD series video cards that caused a freeze requiring a reboot acknowledged by Apple in August of 2007. While that bug has been worked out of the iMac, Apple says that it is now offering the fastest graphics card ever available in an iMac -- and it’s not from ATI.

Customers can opt for an NVIDIA 8800 GS graphics card with 512MB of VRAM offering what Apple claims is up to twice the performance on graphics intense applications. NVIDIA graphics are only available on the 24-inch iMac. Other features include AirPort Extreme 802.11n Wi-Fi, Bluetooth 2.1+EDR, Gigabit Ethernet, iSight camera and five USB ports including the pair on the keyboard.

The base level 20-inch iMac has a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo CPU, 1GB of RAM, ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT graphics and a 250GB HDD. The system retails for $1,199. Another pre-config 20-inch iMac retails for $1,499 and has a 2.66 GHz Core 2 Duo CPU, 320GB HDD, Radeon HD 2600 Pro 256MB graphics and 2GB of RAM.

The pre-config 24-inch iMac retails for $1,799 and features a 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo processor, 2GB of RAM, HD 2600 Pro graphics and a 320GB HDD. To get 4GB of RAM, the 3.06 GHz CPU, or NVIDIA 8800 GS graphics requires a built-to-order system. A 1TB SATA hard drive is also a built-to-order option. All new models and options are available now.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Have to love the Mac business model
By Reclaimer77 on 4/28/2008 2:47:50 PM , Rating: 5
They make it such a pain to upgrade, with such a short list of expansion cards available, that you end up buying an entire new Mac when you could just change one thing if it were a Pc.

Brilliant.




RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By FITCamaro on 4/28/2008 2:53:04 PM , Rating: 4
Hence why I won't buy one. I want to be able to add or remove any part I choose. I want to be able to have more than one hard drive. My current file server has 5 drives with 2 more 500GB drives sitting on my desk.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Shadowself on 4/28/2008 3:04:33 PM , Rating: 3
The iMac is not intended as a server. To imply that you want it to be one shows you have no idea what Apple's intended customer base for this model is. A file server like you describe would most efficiently be built as a headless server -- which Apple's iMacs are certainly NOT.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By FITCamaro on 4/28/2008 3:07:17 PM , Rating: 5
Yes but my file server with its current config cost less than an iMac. That's my point. I get less for more with a Mac.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By FITCamaro on 4/28/2008 3:08:24 PM , Rating: 2
And its not like my file server is anything special. It's a base install of MCE2005. My video drives are just shared on the network.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Shadowself on 4/28/2008 3:24:29 PM , Rating: 3
I didn't mean to imply that your file server is anything special or that it isn't. It is simply that Apple's target market for the iMac is anything but as a file server (not the lack of eSATA -- and 800 Mbps 1394b [Firewire] is anything but a server interconnect).


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By omnicronx on 4/28/2008 4:22:55 PM , Rating: 5
So what you are saying is it is Mac's business plan to piggyback on MS, because they do not make a server OS?

Exactly what kind of hardware is this sold on?
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/

I don't see Apple marketing a server Mac, and it has to run on something.

I also find it funny that the first review on the Mac store for this product reads as such:
quote:
DO NOT BUY THIS VERSION! 10.5.2 is not stable!

Here is the one under it
quote:
You can't use the new features in a simple standard set-up.

and this..
quote:
10.5.2 is a huge disappointment. For all the efforts to make set up easier, this product makes it more difficult. Bells and whistles don't trump solid foundational reliability.

Makes me just want to run out and start using Macs as a business OS!


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By aliasfox on 4/28/2008 4:46:57 PM , Rating: 2
Apple actually makes a 1U server called the xServe.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By omnicronx on 4/28/2008 4:55:41 PM , Rating: 3
I am sure they do ;) I was just pointing out that there are probably people using non server Macs for their fileserver needs.


By robinthakur on 4/29/2008 12:09:35 PM , Rating: 2
Yer I'm sure lots of people look at an iMac and just think "Server". Come on, its a lifestyle ccomputer system, its painfully obvious looking at it! People buy them because they want a slick computer which looks pretty in one box, if you can't understand that then do us all a favour and register your displeasure silently by not buying one.

At the end of the day, most peopcle don't leave their computers on 24/7 these days, they put them to sleep, and this power profile doesn't exactly lend itself to a server role. To paraphrase Jurassic Park, "Just because you could, you didn't stop to think if you should..." JP ran on Unix, nuff said...


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By DEredita on 4/28/2008 8:01:02 PM , Rating: 4
As a Mac user, I can confirm that 10.5.2 sucks. It's horrible, upgraded my Macbook (2.16 GHz C2D w/ 2GB ram) to Leopard and as soon as 10.5.2 - it was even more trouble than Leopard originally was for me. I was getting Kernel panics at least twice a day, and had to hold the power button down for 7 seconds to get it to shut down so I could restart it. Software became buggy, start up took forever, etc...

My Leopard experience was so BAD, I completely have wrote off getting a new Mac as a desktop. I have since formatted my Macbook, and reinstalled it with Tiger (10.4.11).

Anyways, you can get a much more powerful system significantly cheaper on the Windows side. Considering a HP d4999t w/ the Intel Core 2 Duo Q9550, 4GB ram, nVidia GeForce 8800GT, Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer video card, Vista 64-bit, wireless card, 15-in-1 memory card reader, 750GB Hard drive, etc... for ~ $1470. That's a hell of a lot better than an iMac at that price. Add another $180, and I can upgrade it to 8GB of ram. Total is $1650. That would definitely hand Photoshop and Video editing far better than a top of the line iMac for $2400+.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By jlips6 on 4/28/2008 8:09:59 PM , Rating: 2
my experience with leopard was similarly horrible. Although I don't have a rant, it was buggy, incompatible, and they installed coverflow on it.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By DEredita on 4/28/2008 8:29:46 PM , Rating: 3
I work on a Mac all day long. I need stability, and that's why I loved my Macbook. I sacrificed some performance for rock solid stability by using the Macbook as my primary work/personal computer. When I had upgraded this computer to Leopard - I lost all the stability and it was much slower.

There were some nice bells and whistles, but I needed stability and Leopard was deeply disappointing, and exceptionally disappointing. Once Apple released the 10.5.2 update, it got far far worse - and my Macbook became significantly buggy and unstable.

I am back on Tiger (version 10.4.11) and it's all roses again. Only problem is, I am stuck. IF I want a faster machine - I have no options in terms of getting a better and faster Mac, because I would be forced to get one with Leopard.

So, I feel like the only choice I have is to go with Vista 64-bit, which I have tested extensively at work. I have tested 32-bit and 64-bit Vista Business on the same machine, and 64-bit Vista was faster and more stable. I've also worked with a computer lab manager, who deployed a few 64-bit Vista machines quietly in his Vista lab, and everyone who has used those machines preferred them because they were far quicker and more stable than the 32-bit version. This was the same thing I found on my Dell at work, that the 64-bit was faster and more stable.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By jlips6 on 4/28/2008 8:50:05 PM , Rating: 2
I use 32-bit on my laptop, and although it seems fine, I've been considering upgrading. Thanks for the review. :)


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By DEredita on 4/29/2008 12:44:50 AM , Rating: 2
Make sure you machine can support 64-bit Vista, make sure your machine has drivers for it, make sure the software you use can run, and make sure if you have any printers or devices - that there are drivers available.


By pxavierperez on 4/29/2008 7:02:03 AM , Rating: 3
Is there anything else i should make sure of?
Or should I get just get a Mac.
:D


By larson0699 on 5/2/2008 4:33:52 PM , Rating: 2
If anything sounded like cheap shots at Windows from a Mac fanboy, that did.

The fact is that your software will run on Windows as long as you're NOT running 128 megs of single-channel PC66 and trying to enhance the compatibility of your 16-bit apps.

I don't know where you come off with Vista x64 being faster and more stable, but (again, back to school) most of your apps are written in 32-bit, having to be sandboxed in a 64-bit OS becoming noticeably SLOWER; there are endless threads worldwide about--to put it nicely--substellar x64 driver support (mainly in Vista).

The point is that Windows et al. isn't the PC scare. Vista and especially its 64-bit half are. You probably don't even NEED x64 yet, just go on with that warm feeling like your apps are running "twice as fast".

If stability is priority, then you have overpaid and underachieved with the Mac. Since you've wasted enough money already, but your needs still linger, get Linux. The beauty is that it'll run on anything and run forever, if you don't end up porting all your Mac apps. AND x64 is available.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By ToeCutter on 4/29/2008 7:08:16 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
When I had upgraded this computer to Leopard - I lost all the stability and it was much slower.


It's not Leopard!

It's the crap applications you're running! Apple can't control every app written for Leopard and there's tons of sloppy code EVERYWHERE !

(Whoops! I've been reading WAY too many Vista posts!)


By jlips6 on 4/29/2008 8:14:26 PM , Rating: 2
and which 3rd party applications did he say were giving him trouble? :)

I can't speak for him, but neither can you. You don't know if apple programed these bugs or not. In fact, you know nothing about this at all except that he said once he switched OS's (not downloaded a bunch of new 3rd party apps) that his computer got buggy.

...So... why are you posting unbacked inflammatory remarks that are most likely false?


By BruceLeet on 4/29/2008 4:04:16 PM , Rating: 2
Hey the only Mac user with some common sense, who woulda thunk that up.


By Crowbar77 on 4/28/2008 3:19:59 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Yes but my file server with its current config cost less than an iMac. That's my point. I get less for more with a Mac.


Well obviously, its Apple your going to pay extra for OS X and the "coolness factor". That plus the all in one form factor is a big bonus to a lot of people.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Doormat on 4/28/2008 4:09:38 PM , Rating: 3
You shouldn't be comparing your file server to a iMac is the point.

Its, pardon the pun, Apples vs Oranges. Apple doesn't really make a consumer file server (airport extreme + USB2 HDD is as close as you get, and its not really comparable since its not really a PC).

I agree that the iMac is definitely not for enthusiasts. I love my MacBook but I'll stick with a desktop PC because I can upgrade parts as needed. I just stuck a Q9450 in my desktop and overclocked it to 3.2 so I could encode videos with handbrake faster. But thats about all I do on my PC - the laptop is used for just about everything else (including writing iPhone software).


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Reclaimer77 on 4/28/2008 4:43:53 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
You shouldn't be comparing your file server to a iMac is the point.


His " server " is nothing more than a PC with a bunch of HDD's hooked up to it. Right ? I mean, your making it seem like this is something a Mac should never be able to do. Your proving my point.

I agree with him. The pathetically short list of external and internal devices to choose from on a Mac is exactly why I made this thread. I laughed myself silly reading this article and the way Apple words things. Nothing about this justifies a purchase of an entire new system just to get a hot video card that they FINALLY decided to support. You gotta buy a whole system for one or two upgrades !!?? Thats just nuts. I can't understand how someone could buy into that.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By psychobriggsy on 4/28/2008 4:56:00 PM , Rating: 1
I'd just buy a stack of Firewire hard drives - they can be daisy chained you know - and use that. It's unlikely that you'll be pulling 50MB/s off of any home file server.

Lots of people do this with Mac Minis.

Point is, the iMac is a home consumer desktop. It can do the file serving, but its design isn't meant for adding loads of internal drives. I think that is abundantly obvious if you look at it. To even suggest otherwise is to declare yourself cerebrally challenged.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By StevoLincolnite on 4/28/2008 5:59:17 PM , Rating: 3
Why bother Daisy chaining drives on a Mac, doesn't that defeat the purpose of the "Pretty looks less cluster on the desk"?

And I find it sad how PC's have been able to cope being a file server for over 15+ years since the dawn of Windows, Yet Apple cannot get such a simple thing sorted out.

I also found the article to be misleading, I thought that Apple were going to have "the" fastest GPU, thus the 9800 GX2, but alas it's the 8800GS which isn't really anything to write home about, as it has been shipping in PC OEM systems for some time now.

And Calling the Mac a "Home Desktop" isn't all that accurate , Home Desktops generally handle everything under the sun, regardless of hardware (Speed will vary)
But alas, the Mac's cannot handle the vast thousands of games available for the PC natively, nor can they be decent file servers.

If laptops can handle multiple Hard Disk Drives, why can't the mac?


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By 777 on 4/28/2008 6:22:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And I find it sad how PC's have been able to cope being a file server for over 15+ years since the dawn of Windows, Yet Apple cannot get such a simple thing sorted out.

This is not true. I worked at a major film studio over 10yrs ago doing audio work for DVDs, back then we used a 300mhz G3 mac tower for a server, then we eventually went to a G4, then a dual G4 and lastly we had the x-serve, which is made as a dedicated server. Back in 1997 we were running these things almost 24hrs a day 7days with very few problems other than limited bandwidth and slow read and write times, but hey that was 1997.

quote:
If laptops can handle multiple Hard Disk Drives, why can't the mac?

So macs do and have handled multiple hard drives just fine.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By jlips6 on 4/28/2008 9:19:30 PM , Rating: 1
I still like the G4 better. than the G5 (Not those globe ones with the attached screen, the tower model.)


By jlips6 on 4/28/2008 9:20:08 PM , Rating: 1
*sneaks in, erases period.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By 777 on 4/28/2008 9:45:08 PM , Rating: 2
I had a dual G5 at work, that ran smooth, as did my G4. I have 2000 G4 at home that still runs and is in use everyday. My quad G5 in the beginning had some issues that eventually got resolved.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Reclaimer77 on 4/29/2008 1:30:19 PM , Rating: 2
For five thousand dollars, and thats WITHOUT a monitor included, it damn well better " run smooth ".


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By 777 on 4/29/2008 5:37:41 PM , Rating: 2
When you make comments like this you are obviously a pretty ignorant fool who just likes to stir it up. Because you don't jack about the cost we paid for our mac's and it certainly wasn't even half of $5000. Don't know where you get your info but it isn't from the real world.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By jlips6 on 4/29/2008 5:53:46 PM , Rating: 2
? where did I say that?


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By 777 on 4/29/2008 6:20:27 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry! wasn't referring to you, I was referencing Reclaimer77's comments. My bad!


By jlips6 on 4/29/2008 6:33:51 PM , Rating: 2
No biggie
:)


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By aliasfox on 4/28/2008 9:57:02 PM , Rating: 2
... I guess you don't realize that the Mac had rudimentary file sharing built into the OS since the 1980s, along with networking based on phone cords and a printer port. So all legacy Macs this side of a Mac Plus can access documents on a separate computer *and* share printers with minimal extra equipment. Imagine that.

Oh yeah, my decade+ old Power Mac 7300 had two HDs in it, and my G4 tower has three in it.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By 777 on 4/29/2008 5:49:31 PM , Rating: 2
Back in '97 we ran a scsi raid of 32 9gb drives from a single G3 tower serving audio out to 7 editing rooms, and it worked great back then.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By StevoLincolnite on 4/30/2008 2:55:42 AM , Rating: 2
Your also forgetting the price premium of such a feature.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By 777 on 4/30/2008 3:22:06 AM , Rating: 2
Actually no I'm not, because for the price we paid the same setup running on pc's was not recommended. And it would not have been any cheaper for us to have purchased pc's to run our audio software and server with the same scsi bay for our editing rooms.


By afkrotch on 4/29/2008 11:47:36 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Point is, the iMac is a home consumer desktop. It can do the file serving, but its design isn't meant for adding loads of internal drives. I think that is abundantly obvious if you look at it. To even suggest otherwise is to declare yourself cerebrally challenged.


A lot of ppl are doing exactly what you mentioned. They have 4 or 5 externals connected up to it. Sure, it's not being used as an actual file server (aka serving files to other connected devices), but they are constantly adding more and more external storage.

This also happens with PCs, as a normal users doesn't know how to install an internal hard drive, so it's really a moot issue.

Anyone who wants to be building a home file server will not be buying an iMac. Instead, they will be building it using a large case using PC components.

Overall, I don't see what this arguement is even about. If Apple started building an iMac in a large case with 8 onboard SATA connections and a PCI-E 6 port SATA raid controller for like $1500, would those complaining buy a Mac? I'm placing my bets on no. They are just complaining to complain.

Just to let you know, I have a Win2k file server with 5 TB of storage space ( http://www.afkrotch.com/Random_Pics/Inside.JPG ). I know what I need and I know how to build it. Complaining about a product designed around other uses is stupid. If you want a file server using OSX, get a Mac Pro or Xserve. Mac Pro up to 4TB storage, Xserve up to 3TB. You can also connect up external arrays to them, if you feel like it.


By UNCjigga on 4/28/2008 5:48:21 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think this is intended as an "upgrade" for people who bought an iMac last year, but rather for folks who've got a 3 or 4 year-old Mac and are ready to upgrade, or folks looking to buy their first Mac.

Apple still makes the Mac Pro desktop with more expansion, and without a built-in monitor. That said, Mac Pros are ridiculously expensive (NOT "overpriced") and Apple needs to fill a HUGE whole in their desktop PC lineup (and I've said this for years!)

But to compare an all-in-one unit like the iMac with a tower-chassis PC is just dumb.


By robinthakur on 4/29/2008 12:40:08 PM , Rating: 2
Reclaimer77, you're a troll who seems to show up on any thread with the word "Apple" in it aren't you? How surprising to see you here. If you seriously think the Mac crowd will repurchase their beloved mac just to get a new videocard you're frankly insane, its purely a nice minor bonus for new purchasers, of which there are many. Mac fans are not stuck on the upgrade treadmill as you would be if you maintained your own pc for games. I say 'maintain' because upgrading is a frequent occurence. Most people will upgrade only the RAM on their PC's throughout its entire life and this is emminently possible on any mac and no more expensive than doing it on a pc. You can hook usb hard disks up to an Imac and use it as a sort of server, but in all reality, why would you want to? Its an all in one desktop using a laptop chipset in a smart case, nothing more, nothing less, and those that purchase them seem happy enough, so who are you to judge their priorities. Price is clearly important to you. Its not the deciding factor for everybody.


By larson0699 on 5/2/2008 4:52:47 PM , Rating: 2
Well, not understanding it doesn't prevent it.

Welcome to fanboyism. 'Apple or bust!'

What irks me is that in some circles, Apple leads, but in others, they sell themselves short. They really got me with that miniature C2D chip in the Air. I believe they're still the only ones using it. But the HD 2000 series GPUs are atrocious in performance, power draw, and HEAT issues. They even fessed up to its bugs and made a workaround! So WHY would they continue to use these chips when more economical solutions are clear as day?

You wanna tell me that the 8800GS solves their woes? I respect its presence in the market (and its lead over Apple's other choice), but to be frank, it's an 8800GT with one testicle. Memory bus and shader procs out the window, now call it a cheaper card. God how I wish it was still as easy as unlocking pipes via BIOS flash. And this GPU is only an option on their premium model.

That, along with the lack of expandability others noted, leaves them without a dollar of mine. Maybe, if they weren't so obsessed with fashion, they could build a real computer.


By Misty Dingos on 4/28/2008 3:09:02 PM , Rating: 5
But if you don't buy one you just aren't as hip and cool as Rush Limbaugh, Conan O'Brien, Clint Eastwood, or Jerry Seinfeld. How will you live with yourself? Being hip, cool and pretentious is where it is at! /snaps fingers/


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Crowbar77 on 4/28/2008 3:09:32 PM , Rating: 2
Well you don't really fit in the criteria for Apple's imac target audience. It's just supposed to work out of the box and is for regular people who don't have much computer knowledge. The Mac Pro's are more for the professional market, with a lot more options when it comes to upgrading.

btw you could use externals.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By FITCamaro on 4/28/2008 4:04:05 PM , Rating: 1
Even Mac Pros are extremely limited. And the last Mac Pro case I saw only had 2 hard drive slots. Hardly enough for a true professional.


By andreschmidt on 4/28/2008 4:10:15 PM , Rating: 2
The Mac Pro have always had 4 hard drive bays.

If you mean the PowerMac, that is an entirely different story.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By borismkv on 4/28/08, Rating: 0
By borismkv on 4/28/2008 4:12:19 PM , Rating: 2
Okay, so MS Home Server is the world's worst...but OSX Server is the worst that's marketed for business use.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Pirks on 4/28/2008 5:03:35 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
you have to place a special order to get one without OS X Server
That's just another stupid fanatical lie from an Apple basher who has his brain surgically removed in Redmond.

In fact, if anyone cares, you can check apple.com site and find out the truth - Mac Pro has to be explicitly ordered with OS X Server. If you don't do it by yourself - OS X Server is not going to be installed on it, they'll install a standard client version of OS X 10.5 for you.

Please do not downrate me before checking this by yourself and finding out the truth. Thank you.

If you really care about quality of this forum - you should downrate borismkv instead of me. Just say no to fanatical lies!


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By borismkv on 4/28/2008 6:18:32 PM , Rating: 1
Oh, sorry. I read their "None" comment in the "OS X SERVER" section of their ordering page as "No upgrade to OS X Server"...maybe they should make their web page a little more specific by saying, "OSX Desktop" or something instead of "None". Dude, you're insane. Go take some Lithium or something.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Pirks on 4/28/2008 6:55:39 PM , Rating: 1
Dude, it's you who's either insane or can't read web pages.

In the apple.com's "Tech Specs" page for Mac Pro (http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html) they explicitly state that Mac Pro comes with client version of OS X 10.5

Go take some potassium cyanide or something.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By borismkv on 4/28/08, Rating: 0
RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By borismkv on 4/28/08, Rating: 0
By Pirks on 4/28/2008 8:59:42 PM , Rating: 1
RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By jlips6 on 4/28/2008 8:30:00 PM , Rating: 2
page not found isn't as explicit as it could be...


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Pirks on 4/28/2008 9:06:53 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By jlips6 on 4/28/2008 9:15:46 PM , Rating: 2
lol pirks you know that I know Mac Pro has 4 bays. I'm just making fun of you. Surely you remember our argument back in February? You didn't have to post that link twice.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Pirks on 4/28/2008 9:47:16 PM , Rating: 2
Last thing I remember from that old thread about Mac Pro clone was me laughing hard looking at your attempts to fit non-buffered DDR2 sticks in your Mac Pro clone built on top of Intel 5000X mobo. I wonder if you got any smarter since then or not. Tell me :)


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By jlips6 on 4/29/2008 4:51:36 PM , Rating: 2
I stopped checking that thread for a response about 2 weeks after you stopped responding. I know you were laughing, the spittle and foam was practically coming out of the screen. you sounded like a maniac.

You didn't even know what FB-RAM was, and you touted it anyways. FB-RAM uses less pins, and buffers with other FB-RAM to create a higher FSB. Unfortunatly, while it sounds nice, it stops working after 2 sticks because in reality it's reliant on the FSB of the processors and Board. and the implant only costed an extra seventy bucks which meant it was still cheaper than your base mac pro, which you refused to upgrade because that would blow all your advantages out of the water.

I recall how you were desperatly trying to bring the cost of my computer up by saying that I needed inferior, more expensive parts, like hard drives and power sources, and for some reason, a new chassis. I wonder if you have any more half-assed arguments since then, you tell me. :)


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Pirks on 4/30/2008 7:34:33 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
You didn't even know what FB-RAM was, and you touted it anyways
Come back when you learn about what type of memory goes into Intel server chipsets (5000 and 5400) 'cause I'm too tired to teach you obvious things about hardware. I'll keep making fun of you as long as you keep babbling BS about the non-buffered DDR2 RAM that you pretend you can stick in your Mac Pro clone.
quote:
you were desperatly trying to bring the cost of my computer up
Yeah, I just wanted to replace your shitty parts with some decent parts that would be on par with Mac Pro quality, but it makes no sense because you don't even have knowledge about basics - like what kind of RAM you can stick in Intel server chipsets. Arguing about little tiny details with a guy who doesn't understand BASICS makes no sense, now does it?

http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/5000X/index... <- this is a good place to start - see those "FB DIMM" letters? That's a lead for ya :P Here's another one with more detailed specs for the supported RAM: http://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/datashts...

We'll talk again once you learn basics. Read up on modern Intel Xeon server motherboards and what kind of memory goes in there. Good luck, son.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By jlips6 on 5/1/2008 11:56:36 AM , Rating: 1
apparently you stopped reading after the words FB-DIMM ram. I explained it's benefits, and it's low cost to replace, and you are skipping over it. as usual. As far as "replacing my shitty parts" goes, the parts I chose have good reviews, and have specs equal to or greater than those of the mac pro, so if you are saying those are shitty, then I wonder what that says about the parts they use in the mac pro.

Your opinion about their functionality is erroneous, and can not be stated as though it really matters since it is in the same category of opinion as saying: "you're a doody-head!" In fact, it literally is saying that, except to parts instead of people.

Let's take this argument past the fifth grade here please. :)


By Pirks on 5/1/2008 3:17:59 PM , Rating: 2
You don't realize that the only memory you can stick in Intel Xeon server board is FB-DIMM memory, do you?


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Doormat on 4/28/2008 4:13:24 PM , Rating: 2
Thats a load of BS. The Mac Pro has never had less than 4 HDD bays. From when it was unveiled at WWDC in August 2006, to the latest iteration.


By FITCamaro on 4/28/2008 11:21:35 PM , Rating: 2
Perhaps it was a Power Mac. It was a dual G5 box with 8GB of RAM, a paltry 500GB hard drive, and I forget what video card. The cost was a whopping $4000 or more. This was from the fall of 2005. My boss was a Mac fan.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By gramboh on 4/29/2008 3:40:44 AM , Rating: 2
In a dev environment you'd likely be using network mounted drives in a NAS or real file server, why would you put everything internal? If you needed speed for capping you'd have RAID0 2x 15k SAS drives and then network for scratch.


By afkrotch on 4/29/2008 12:02:30 PM , Rating: 2
Try producing an HD movie that requires a large amount of fast storage. My friend makes HD home movies that will take up almost 2 TB of space during the creation, editing, etc. It's simply much faster to have that storage in your local machine, than trying to access it via the network.

In a dev environment, they'd have a cluster farm for heavy workloads and fiber channel arrays. Not something majority of home users can afford.


By Alexstarfire on 4/29/2008 8:53:17 AM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. I can agree that an iMac is much simpler than any other computer to set up, but to say that Macs in general are easier to set up than any other type of computer is just wrong. With every computer I've had it's been little more than color coded wires and just plugging things in where they fit. If you're telling me that the average Joe can't do that....... then I have no hope for humanity what-so-ever.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By sprockkets on 4/28/2008 4:31:53 PM , Rating: 2
It is very stupid, the imac, that and anyone else that uses the form factor. Your computer broke, so that means you have to ditch the 24" monitor you bought too.

This form factor is nothing more than a laptop folded as a tablet. Waste of money for anyone that buys it.


By daftrok on 4/29/2008 2:24:20 AM , Rating: 2
That was what kept me away from All in Ones. All they are is a laptop with a screen in the place of the keyboard. The least they could have done was make the back panel removable so we can upgrade the HDD, video card, wireless, and DVD drive but noooooo. They had to seal it up and only let us upgrade the RAM. Fun. And on top of that the price is a total rip off. You can buy a CPU tower (even the slim ones HP and Dell sell) with the same specs and all you'll have is a couple extra wires hanging out the back. Big whoop! IIS IN THE BACK SO WHO CARES IF ITS THERE?! If you really don't want wires, GET A LAPTOP!


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By spluurfg on 4/28/2008 4:28:42 PM , Rating: 2
I think you're being pretty unfair on the iMac, which has limited expandability due to the fact that it has an extremely small form factor. It's a trade-off for people who want a computer that takes up little space. It's like complaining that you can't upgrade the monitor...


By Alexstarfire on 4/29/2008 8:57:40 AM , Rating: 2
It sounds like he is, but he's really encompassing all Macs into his statement.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By psychobriggsy on 4/28/2008 4:51:31 PM , Rating: 1
I used to think like this, then realised that every time I built my dream PC, the only thing I ever upgraded was the memory and the hard drive. Since you can do that with the iMac anyway ...

Now I don't like having the screen built-in, but that's an issue with any All-in-one system. The iMac is great value in this marketplace. Sadly there are no Macs in the enthusiast performance value marketplace, so it will always get dissed on techy websites.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By glitchc on 4/28/2008 5:08:18 PM , Rating: 2
That doesn't make any sense. How can you upgrade to any kind of next-gen memory without upgrading the mobo and consequently the processor as well?

Mobo, proc, mem, HD. Throw in a discrete vid card if you moved from PCI to AGP or from AGP to PCI-E. Heck, you can even stick with the integrated one and you've essentially "upgraded" your vid card. Can't even count the NIC if you transfer it over since they are now embedded on-board.

Sounds like a completely new PC to me.


By afkrotch on 4/29/2008 12:11:41 PM , Rating: 2
I think what he means is he went to Dell, HP, Gateway, etc to "build" his dream pc. From then, all he did was add more memory or a larger hard drive for his upgrades.

My move to PCI-E had me replacing mobo, proc, vidcard, memory, and PSU.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Dug on 4/28/08, Rating: -1
By Pirks on 4/28/2008 7:09:04 PM , Rating: 3
Posting comments like that is the quickest way to get -1 rating on DT forums, so be careful. Apple bashers usually get the rating of 5 here, so if you wanna repair your low rating - just start bashing Apple and you'll get your rating close to 5 in no time.


By jlips6 on 4/28/2008 8:45:50 PM , Rating: 2
You've probably never used vista. You rant about it and none of the stuff you say makes sense, because all that junk you talk about you don't have to do with the exception of malware protection. And what do you have against people who want to be able to play computer games without having 2 OS's on their computer? I personally enjoy playing (and modding.) Counter-Strike, and Halo 2 occasionally. And if what you say about the requirements of building a computer is true, then you truly suck at building computers. Truly. You take up an entire fail boat and sink in to the depths of failure beyond failure.

The point of building a machine is to customize it the way you want. You spend too much time on Apple's My first OS (thank you to whoever first posted that.) and not enough time thinking: "if I don't want this, why should I pay extra money for it?" Or: "If I suck at building computers, and this one was loud and clunky and big, does that mean a computer built by a competent person who reads part reviews on noise levels will be the same?" or "If I plan to upgrade sometime in my computers life-span, should I get a power source that can handle a little extra?"

You make me sad.


By rdeegvainl on 4/29/2008 8:10:13 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
And soon I'll be able to upgade it. But wait the new video card requires a new power supply, and a new motherboard.


LOL, at least it doesn't require a whole new computer.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By androticus on 4/28/2008 11:19:28 PM , Rating: 1
Nonsense. These days, there is very little to anything a typical user will need to upgrade in the machine itself for its lifetime. Everything fun plugs in now via USB. And the two things you might want to upgrade, memory or disk, are upgradeable on a Mac. I upgraded the disk in my Macbook without too much fuss. (It was far easier than it would have been trying to do with a Windows box.)

Having a simple product line with minimal expansion capability is a FEATURE not a negative.


By afkrotch on 4/29/2008 1:52:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And the two things you might want to upgrade, memory or disk, are upgradeable on a Mac.


Ya right. Only things I hear ppl wanting to upgrade is cpu or gpu. Memory or hard drive isn't enough a thought, as they use externals and don't seem to even care what amount of memory they have.

Did they finally make enough room to fit a memory stick (with heatspreaders) into the slot?

quote:
Having a simple product line with minimal expansion capability is a FEATURE not a negative.


LOL!!!!!!!

Might as well give the iMac a slower processor, less memory, slower hard drive with less storage, onboard graphics, and a 3 inch screen and say it's best feature is that runs cool, uses 40 watts of power at full load, and fits in your buttcrack.

That's the dumbest feature I have ever heard. Maybe cause it's not one and it is a negative.


Camry Demographic
By aliasfox on 4/28/2008 4:02:07 PM , Rating: 4
I guess nobody on dailtytech thinks that there's even a *small* part of the market that buys a computer, uses it as-is for 2-5 years, and then gets another one? Nobody thinks that market exists?

And nobody on dailytech thinks that most of the computer market's kind of like most of the cell phone market?

I'm betting that if the same demographic went and bought a Dell XPS box, they'd never put another HDD in. Or a faster GPU.

People who post on dailytech are like people who drive modded Mustangs (or Camaros) - they know what goes into the computer, and they're fairly certain of what results should come out, and they're willing to deal with tinkering with the car to get the best performance out of it. People who buy iMacs are people who buy Camrys - they don't give a crap what happens under the hood, and they don't care that they could get signficantly better performance for the price - to them the lack of hassle and the reputation of "plug and play" (for both brands) outweigh the extra cost and the lower overall performance per dollar.

Not to mention the iMac takes less space, less power, and much quieter.




RE: Camry Demographic
By FITCamaro on 4/28/2008 4:07:44 PM , Rating: 1
Because its far better to be ignorant and spend more, than be informed and spend less. At least thats what our society is teaching these days. Don't learn anything for yourself. Let someone else do it.


RE: Camry Demographic
By Doormat on 4/28/2008 4:25:33 PM , Rating: 5
Because everyone has the time to learn, in-depth, how computers work, down to the silicon? Why don't we require electrical engineering classes before people can own one? Or a mechanical engineering (the vehicle) and civil engineering (roads/traffic) degree to drive a car?

Look, people just want to check email and surf the web. Just like some people want to get in a car, turn the key and go somewhere. They don't need to be an encyclopedia of knowledge about the product to use it. Its a tool. I don't need to know how a hammer is made to put a nail into a wall.


RE: Camry Demographic
By TomZ on 4/28/2008 4:45:35 PM , Rating: 1
Your analogy overstates what it takes to upgrade computers today. Most upgrades are accessable to anyone with working knowledge of a screwdriver and few minutes of time. People might lack confidence, but the actual skills required are well within most people's reach.

In fact, my six-year-old son does some of my upgrades now. He doesn't really know what he's doing, but since he lacks any fear of messing up, it's no problem for him to swap out memory, change a video card, etc.


RE: Camry Demographic
By AlphaVirus on 4/28/2008 5:29:27 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Most upgrades are accessable to anyone with working knowledge of a screwdriver

Heck, most computers dont have a single screw in them (except for the motherboard) nowadays, everything is clips, buttons, and hand-capable screws.

Honestly, ANYONE can upgrade a PC, its easier than teaching ABC's and 123's. Its comparible to putting the colored shapes in their corresponding shape.

Blue square goes in the blue square, it wont fit in the triangle or circle.
Ram will not fit in a PCI, PCIe, or AGP slot.
A CPU chip is the only part that is squared, so thats simple enough.

Need hookups in the back, everything is colorcoded, simple enough aye?

The ease of upgrading is as simple as wanting to upgrade.


RE: Camry Demographic
By Baov on