On another note, for the price of a MacBook Pro, I can get a gaming laptop from Sager with a quad core, 4GB RAM, and 9800M GTX.
"Very high performance graphics engine"? Not really. Apple hardware is way overpriced, I don't see how you can reach any other conclusion.
Alright, let's look at one example, I'll compare a 17" Dell Inspiron to the 17" default MacBook Pro on Apple's site:
On the Inspiron:
Intel Core 2 Duo T9300 (2.5GHz/800Mhz FSB/6MB cache)
High Resolution, glossy widescreen 17.0 inch display (1920 x 1200)
256MB NVIDIA® GeForce® 8600M GT
3GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 at 667MHz
Size: 320GB SATA Hard Drive (5400RPM)
I even got the glossy 1920x1200 screen, total price: $1,499
Now let's look at the specs on the default 17" MacBook Pro config, no additional things added:
2.5 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB
250GB Serial ATA @ 5400 rpm
MacBook Pro 17-inch Widescreen Display
NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT with 512MB
How much is this? $2,799
I'm paying an additional $1,300 for less RAM, a smaller hard drive, similar if not identical processor, same size display. Oh, but the video card has 512MB instead of 256MB.
I'm not saying Apple's products are bad, but how can you possibly say that Apple hardware is CHEAPER than other manufacturers' offerings?
Loans, jobs, cell phone service, Newegg, and TigerDirect have a legitimate need to confirm your identity, for obvious reasons.
On the other hand, does MySpace really have a need to verify your identity? Fake names have not really been regarded as a big deal where a verified identity is not absolutely essential, and I'd like to see things stay that way.
I'd rather not chisel away the foundations of internet freedom just to punish a pathetic woman.
While what she did was pretty morally reprehensible, this "solution" would have a far greater impact on society than anything she did.
Now, you can produce music with ZERO MONEY (provided you got a PC). With GNU / Linux and a decent Audio editor and recorder (Ok, Audacity isn't the cream of the crop, but at least it gets the job done), and some music editor (forgot the names, but there are), you can produce your own album, and then burn the CD with k3b or another CD recording tool.
But let's get back a little in time, and that zero money became a couple thousand dollars: First you needed Microsoft Windows, and then an audio and music editor like Cakewalk Studio. The difference from zero to 2 thousand dollars is enough to keep amateurs out of the business. That's the power that Microsoft, Apple, Adobe and the rest keep over you. They keep for themselves, the tools that YOU NEED to succeed.
Given that Microsoft, Apple, etc. wrote that software, isn't it well within their rights to "keep it to themselves"? They're not obligated to give you the software they wrote for no charge.
I think it's a great thing that you now have some free alternatives, but I find your statements absolutely ridiculous. No one's stopping you from writing your own music production software. If you can't, or it would take too much time, then why do you expect other people to do it for you for free?
And the more money you give to them, the more powerful they become to keep improving their product AND CHARGING MORE FOR IT. Or have you see software prices decrease over time? Well, actually, they have. According to this page and Amazon, Photoshop has decreased in price. $1000 - $999.00 = One dollar:)
So Photoshop has improved itself over the years, but costs roughly the same? What's the problem?
Now let's go to Microsoft Windows. In the 80's, MS-DOS costed around $40. The price for Windows Vista Ultimate is $319.95. Eight times more. Connect the dots, and guess how much Microsoft Windows 7 will cost when it's out.
$40 in the 1980's is worth more than $40 today, you know. It's not an eightfold increase in price.
Slashdot Mirror
here you go, 17" inspiron
http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&oc=DNDWMA3&s=dhs
the laptop comes with a camera.
if I throw in 802.11n, Bluetooth, and the fancy ExpressCard sound card with optical out, it comes to $1,619.
DVD-RW DL is included, didn't mention it because it seems pretty standard across laptops now.
Not sure about Firewire.
On another note, for the price of a MacBook Pro, I can get a gaming laptop from Sager with a quad core, 4GB RAM, and 9800M GTX. "Very high performance graphics engine"? Not really. Apple hardware is way overpriced, I don't see how you can reach any other conclusion.
Alright, let's look at one example, I'll compare a 17" Dell Inspiron to the 17" default MacBook Pro on Apple's site:
On the Inspiron:
Intel Core 2 Duo T9300 (2.5GHz/800Mhz FSB/6MB cache)
High Resolution, glossy widescreen 17.0 inch display (1920 x 1200)
256MB NVIDIA® GeForce® 8600M GT
3GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 at 667MHz Size: 320GB SATA Hard Drive (5400RPM)
I even got the glossy 1920x1200 screen, total price: $1,499
Now let's look at the specs on the default 17" MacBook Pro config, no additional things added:
2.5 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB
250GB Serial ATA @ 5400 rpm
MacBook Pro 17-inch Widescreen Display
NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT with 512MB
How much is this? $2,799
I'm paying an additional $1,300 for less RAM, a smaller hard drive, similar if not identical processor, same size display. Oh, but the video card has 512MB instead of 256MB.
I'm not saying Apple's products are bad, but how can you possibly say that Apple hardware is CHEAPER than other manufacturers' offerings?
Loans, jobs, cell phone service, Newegg, and TigerDirect have a legitimate need to confirm your identity, for obvious reasons.
On the other hand, does MySpace really have a need to verify your identity? Fake names have not really been regarded as a big deal where a verified identity is not absolutely essential, and I'd like to see things stay that way.
I'd rather not chisel away the foundations of internet freedom just to punish a pathetic woman. While what she did was pretty morally reprehensible, this "solution" would have a far greater impact on society than anything she did.
Now, you can produce music with ZERO MONEY (provided you got a PC). With GNU / Linux and a decent Audio editor and recorder (Ok, Audacity isn't the cream of the crop, but at least it gets the job done), and some music editor (forgot the names, but there are), you can produce your own album, and then burn the CD with k3b or another CD recording tool.
But let's get back a little in time, and that zero money became a couple thousand dollars: First you needed Microsoft Windows, and then an audio and music editor like Cakewalk Studio. The difference from zero to 2 thousand dollars is enough to keep amateurs out of the business. That's the power that Microsoft, Apple, Adobe and the rest keep over you. They keep for themselves, the tools that YOU NEED to succeed.
Given that Microsoft, Apple, etc. wrote that software, isn't it well within their rights to "keep it to themselves"? They're not obligated to give you the software they wrote for no charge. I think it's a great thing that you now have some free alternatives, but I find your statements absolutely ridiculous. No one's stopping you from writing your own music production software. If you can't, or it would take too much time, then why do you expect other people to do it for you for free?
And the more money you give to them, the more powerful they become to keep improving their product AND CHARGING MORE FOR IT. Or have you see software prices decrease over time? Well, actually, they have. According to this page and Amazon, Photoshop has decreased in price. $1000 - $999.00 = One dollar :)
So Photoshop has improved itself over the years, but costs roughly the same? What's the problem?
Now let's go to Microsoft Windows. In the 80's, MS-DOS costed around $40. The price for Windows Vista Ultimate is $319.95. Eight times more. Connect the dots, and guess how much Microsoft Windows 7 will cost when it's out.
$40 in the 1980's is worth more than $40 today, you know. It's not an eightfold increase in price.