My experience was that Seagate drives just very rarely died, which is why I use them. I even ran an ST251 (on an RLL controller) with its lid off for a good while, before the constant activity caused by a busy BBS killed it (and many of its ST255 brothers). I'm pretty sure I have the first model number correct (40MB MFM drive), but I'm not sure on the second (should be a 20MB MFM drive). Formatted to something like ~60MB for the former and ~32MB for the latter.
Anyway, the only issues I've had with Maxtor are drive temperature and the horrible WHINE they'd develop (if they didn't have it out of the box).
I used WD for a while (shortly after I "outgrew" the MFM drives I had), but they tended to fail more often than Micropolis, Miniscribe, Seagate, well, everyone else. Plus, back then, they were considerably more expensive than drives from Connor (which I also liked). A few years ago (when I was working for a local computer company) we tried switching to WD (WD200, WD400, WD800) because they were literally a few dollars less than Seagate. Boy was *that* a mistake. Nearly every one of the dozens and dozens of each model had to be sent back. We had so many pissed off customers that we eventually switched back to Seagate.
I'm happy to see that the majority of the desktops we get from Dell (at my current place of employment) come with Seagate drives and I cringe on the very rare occasion that we have to send in a drive for replacement only to end up with a WD.
I buy Seagate, and nothing but Seagate. I've had too many issues with WD (I've posted about it on numerous occasions when an HDD article pops up on slashdot). My computers are filled with Seagates -- 80gb's, 160gb's, 320gb's, and just recently, a 1tb.
Everything has been perfect (so far -- crossing fingers, throwing salt over shoulder, knocking on wood, etc).
I laugh at people like you, especially when you don't do your homework:
D&D Online. Platinum rating?! HAHAHAHAHA!
"However, one major thing is simply not working, and it is not generating any errors. I can not send or receive guild chats or party chats, and my client also never joins voice chat." - Oct 2006
"I had the chat server drop and reconnect, and saw guild chat no prob, but party and voice didn't work. Anybody know if that's being worked on?" -- January 2008
"Party chat still does not work. I can recieve party chat most of the time (especially right after a disconnect-reconnect), but I can't actually send chat to the party." March 2008
Those are the newest posts for DDO. So, it obviously doesn't tale a whole lot to get a Platinum rating. If something simple like text based chat and voice chat aren't working (yes, voice chat seemed to be having issues as well, though I didn't put those quotes in there), what *else* isn't working?
AOE3 has even MORE issues than DDO does. I actually have to copy.dll's from a Windows installation into my WINE installation?! I have to manually add registry keys? I have to manually register.dll/.ax files? NO MP3 PLAYBACK (there go the majority of the games sounds)?! I have to turn off the 'pixelshader' in the Graphics options?! There are MANY MANY more steps that have to *manually* be done just to get AOE3 to work, let alone the expansions. Hell, there is even a post in it's "problems" thread that suggests it doesn't deserve its Platinum rating (WHAT?!?! It was rated PLATINUM?!!?!?), that instead it should be rated BRONZE! This was back in late November 2008! What's even more funny is that you listed it with a gold rating when, according to your own link, it's a silver!
So, Thank You!! You have proven beyond anything I could have said/done that WINE, while it may be a wonderful product for some things, it is NOT a good alternative to Windows (yet, especially for gaming), and you have proven beyond any doubt that the "Troll" rating I have received as a result of this line of dialog was completely undeserved. Again.. Thank you!
Blind leading the blind. Good luck with that.
Yes. Having listened to you would have fit this quote perfectly. Unfortunately for you, I can read.
I think the biggest problem with the AthlonXP/MP was the lack of a heat spreader, which caused lots of people (you paying attention Patric Norton?!) lots of headaches as they attempted to put the heatsink on without chipping the processor.
Another issue was not getting the heatsink quite flat on the chip, causing it to be rather ineffective in removing heat from the processor, leading to temperature shutdowns (either due to blown chips, or from the newer mainboards that had temperature sensors built in.
That said, I never managed to break one in that way, and I built quite a few machines based on those chips. I think I fared better than Patric because I put the heatsink on the chip while the board was sitting on my bench instead of trying to do so while the power supply was in my way...
What are you talking about? You know MS doesn't make the majority of the drivers in Windows, right? The OEM's submit them to MS for inclusion in Windows. Anything not there will have to be provided by the computer OEM or downloaded yourself (which is what I had to do with my laptop).
I have a feeling the "recovery CD/partition" is mostly an issue caused by the OEM's themselves. Buying/providing the CD cost money (however little). ANY pennies they can save helps them against their competition. The only reason I can see MS hoping for this is that they see it helping curb piracy (ignoring all the OEM/retail CD's that are int he wild, and that's *assuming* they're dumb enough to even believe discouraging OEM's from providing them would help at all, anyway).
You keep thinking that. I think I'll stick to the information I've received from the CGA club on campus, along with what I've experienced first hand from the local LUG/Math & CS department...
It's nice, and all, that you found a few games marked as "Gold" -- strange, however, that you decided not to mention any of the games I specifically named. You aren't helping your argument. I may as well harped on about X not working on a Dodge, to have you shoot back that thing Z works great on a Ford.
As to DX10 games working in WINE, but just maybe not in DX10 mode -- DDO doesn't *require* DX10, however, the graphics look one hell of a lot better with it (it's the ONLY reason I'm running Vista right now. Well, that, and I got it free)).
You couldn't have selected a worse example. That game was commissioned by our military. They have other things they need to direct their funds at than a game.
Yup. That took a whole lot of higher brain functions to think about...
Also, with the military selecting WINDOWS for their OS's installed upon warships (I can't possibly fathom what they were thinking there), isn't it just *slightly* possible that someone "higher up" decided this "linux thing" was just a fad and shit-canned the entire linux port project?
Your rant about how the "linux port would most likely lag behind the windows version" is a poorly constructed straw-man -- until one exists, and the company proves that they are going to update it less frequently, you really have no argument.
Case in point: America's Army used to have a linux port. It had more bugs and always lagged behind the windows version until they finally canned it.
Of the three desktops I currently have running in my house, none of them less than a year to year and a half old, not one of them has a piece of hardware that worked in XP, but not Vista. My laptop required some downloads from device vendors (because MSI only bundled drivers for Vista), but that wasn't difficult. I actually had more of an issue getting the webcam, bluetooth, and sound working in XP (again, the OEM didn't bundle XP drivers on the driver disk the system came with). I purchased a MSI barebones 17" laptop. Once I downloaded drivers for the three items I mentioned, the laptop has worked great ever since. Even worked great in linux (though I didn't try the web cam or bluetooth -- all the games I mentioned do not work in linux, so it ended up with XP).
I'd normally not respond to an AC, but in this case...
I'm fairly certain that a stack of stuff I have sitting in my spare bedroom (including a TV tuner and a few mainboards with built in hardware of various bits) would like to disagree with you.
Yes, hardware support has gotten *far* better for linux. I was quite correct in stating, specifically, web cams and printers for hardware. Most "host based" printers are, quite simply, not going to work in linux. Period. These printers are the cheap HP DJ3000 series (as one example) -- you know, the printers that cost less than the ink cartridges they (under)use.
The only reason you stated you weren't going to argue the "so called points" in my argument, instead belittling them, is because you simply didn't have anything to add (if you did, you certainly would not have posted as AC, now would you?).
There isn't any reason that software couldn't be written to standards that are already cross-platform (in this case, dealing specifically with games) to minimize any porting needed. I very much don't believe I deserved the Troll mod I received as software compatibility is very much a real issue, especially for business (I have to deal with such all the time in my job).
I care about a native client "so much" because, very often, emulation just doesn't work as well as running native code. Go ahead, try to dispute that. Yes, "calc" probably runs very well under WINE. I'm sure there are many pieces of software that run quite well under WINE. The majority of games (especially anything DX10, I'd bet) DON'T, or don't very well. Yes, there is a "hack" for DX10 for XP, but there is no telling how well it'd work in XP (for every game one might play, let alone the games I listed specifically). There's even less information about how well this would work in WINE.
Your rant about how the "linux port would most likely lag behind the windows version" is a poorly constructed straw-man -- until one exists, and the company proves that they are going to update it less frequently, you really have no argument.
Except, of course, for all the printers that wouldn't work, web cameras, and who knows what other hardware. Also, all the software people currently have/own also will not work (and a good majority of it does not have a linux equivalent). Games, of course, being the best software example.
When I can play DDO in a native linux client, I'll possibly switch. When I can play DDO, AOE3 (plus the two expansions), Rise of Legends, Universe at War, and a few others natively in Linux, I most certainly will switch.
If you were to go merely by looks, Windows 7 is now practically identical to KDE4 interface. In fact they are so frightfully similar, you'd get the impression that they have same GUI developers.
On the positive side, if they looked alike, people would have no problem transitioning to the *nix+KDE side
Along with daedae, I'd like to see any sort of proof on that also. Nearly every machine I have had over the last 6+ years has been an AMD of one form or another. In fact, the only two non-AMD machines I have are an MSI Wind (I wanted to tinker with an Atom based machine in Linux, OSX, and Windows, to see how it performed) and an C2D 2.4ghz machine I slapped together (well before I acquired my Wind PC) in order to play with OSX.
I can't recall one occasion in which I've had bug-ridden and/or chipset incompatibility issues.
...how many people are going to see this way down here, but I'll post anyway.
I don't understand why people are expecting any performance gains in "Windows 7". They took Vista and added more eye-candy (though, to be honest, some of it looks rather interesting to me). Unless they change some of the base of the code (to lean it up), it's going to perform exactly as Vista does (as has been shown in all of the "speed tests" that have been performed to date).
You just proved my point for me -- in this case, you are knowingly using parts designed to be out of spec. I happen to feel the manufacturers should be disallowed from doing such stupid things, but that's just me, and this still shouldn't be held as a negative against a "PC" (as this thread was originally about).
As for the BIOS update issue, I have a feeling (from 13 years of building computers as a profession, not just a hobby) that having to do so for such an error is rather rare. A quick google search did not turn up any hits about the specific issue you're talking about so I can't tell if it was limited to "bargain basement" type parts or something higher-end.
If you pick somewhat reputable vendors, outright defects are rare. In particular, the Kingston modules GP complains about have always worked fine for me. But having to update BIOSes and drivers to work around bugs is not unusual. Finally, there are cases where components are out of spec by design and you need to know about it. Consider overclocker DDR3 memory (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3448&p=7) for instance. If you use these components as advertised, you may end up with a fried CPU. In that case, I do think it is fault of the aftermarket parts producers unless they include a big fat warning about known problems (in this case, Intel CPUs that may not survive the higher memory voltage).
I guess I've never been in a situation where I *had* to update a BIOS (though I've done so to add new functionality, like with my XBX2 board -- had to update the BIOS to enable HPET support for OSX).
As to your specific example of "out of spec by design" components -- are you serious? I specifically made a statement about knowing what the hell your purchasing and you would deliberately purchase something out of spec? That only shows a person who would do so is INVITING problems.
When I purchase (almost exclusively from newegg) parts, I sort by lowest price first, then look to see which of those parts is at least 4 eggs with at *least* 10 reviews. Never let me down yet. I don't always buy those cheap parts, but I'd say I have 80% of the time, at the very least.
It's not hard to find cheap, but still quite reliable, parts. You just have to not do idiotic things (like purchasing deliberately out of spec RAM that will fry your CPU!) while you're doing so.
Laptops? No. Their tower systems, yes. In fact, I have a G3 and a G4 in my home now (though neither are currently doing anything for the time being). At work I've messed with a couple G5's and the newer Intel systems that basically use the same case as the G5's, though it's been a while. The towers are quite nice as far as access to components is concerned.
While Apple's case designs are *much* better than most third party cases that are available
Ever tried to work on one when things go wrong? I work for a computer repair shop, stripping down laptops for screen/inverter/keyboard/power conenctor replacements every day. Macs are by far the worst to work on, and like other Apple products (iPhone/iPod) seem designed to be impossible to get into without leaving a mark.
Good quality laptops are held together with screws. Cheap ones use plastic clips that snap easily. Apple use the latter.
Yes. I doubt that the CPU or GPU are of differing quality. Except, of course, that the Mac has a much faster CPU than the eMachine, which is also where some of that cost comes in.
Uhh. NO. While Apple's case designs are *much* better than most third party cases that are available, they still use Seagate/Maxtor HDD's (just going by some G3/G4/G5's I've had my hands into), and standard off the shelf RAM, even off the shelf CD-ROM's.
Continuing...
I built my own PCs for a long time, but finally got fed up with low quality, buggy components. I don't have spare RAM, mobos, and PSUs lying around to troubleshoot crappy hardware to figure out which piece is bad or incompatible with some other random cheap crappy piece. I still buy PC desktops, but my last several computers have been barebones kits from Dell and Shuttle. When I buy RAM it's always from a reputable company, as I've had as many unusable sticks of Kingston and the like as have actually worked.
It is not the "PC's" fault that you purchased bottom-barrel crap components. Know what Apple uses for motherboards? Slightly modified Intel parts (again, going from what I've seen in some newer machines that went to surplus at my place of work because of how expensive they'd have been to repair). I've never purchased motherboards (even some bottom-barrel priced boards), memory sticks from various companies (though I've settled on G.Skill lately), or other parts that were "buggy". Yes, I've had an occasional DOA part, but that's what warranties are for. Just going by your own words, I'd say you are one of those "Yea, I can be a PC-Tech here for (insert company), because I built my own machine at home!" people I see all over the place. The kind of person that knows *just* enough to assemble a machine, but not enough to make sure all the parts your ordering/spec'ing for a machine will actually work together. This isn't the fault of the aftermarket parts producers -- it's yours.
And to suggest that they're the "same thing" as an $200-$400 eMachines or Dell is a complete farce.
Actually, they *are* basically the same thing. Like I said, you get an awesome Apple designed case, but the parts inside are basically off the shelf PC parts. Hell, I bought an Intel 975xbx2 mainboard that, with pcefi, worked perfectly under OSX 10.4 and 10.5 with vanilla kernel/kexts/etc (of course I did have to keep the couple modifications needed to bypass checks for the silly Apple ROM's, etc).
Having re-read what I typed, it sounds an awful lot like I'm harping on YOU instead of your argument, however, that's not my intention. I'm just really tired of seeing "Nu-uh! Apple uses much higher quality parts than you'll find in a PC, that's why they're better/more expensive!" arguments. If there were any truth to it, I'd be quiet on the subject (or even blast the "pc makers" for the same), however, it's just not true. Now, maybe when you get to the $200 Bargain Basement E-Machine, maybe (though even still, many of the parts *are* the same).
I think the major bits making Apple machines as expensive as they can be are the case designs and the modifications made to the mainboards (it doesn't help that Apple charges ridiculous prices for RAM/HDD upgrades). If Apple pushed the kinds of volume that, say, HP or Dell did, they might get some better volume discounts on the custom parts...
Slashdot Mirror
Errr.. I already did. That's why I suggested putting the price to $50 before I'd even think about buying one. ;)
$380 excludes the ram OUCH!
(read the conclusions page)
Get the device down to about $50 and I'll think about buying one. I don't see any reason a device like this is $380. That's just crazy.
The DTV tuners on a USB stick won't be as nearly free as the converter boxes would be my first guess... ;)
My experience was that Seagate drives just very rarely died, which is why I use them. I even ran an ST251 (on an RLL controller) with its lid off for a good while, before the constant activity caused by a busy BBS killed it (and many of its ST255 brothers). I'm pretty sure I have the first model number correct (40MB MFM drive), but I'm not sure on the second (should be a 20MB MFM drive). Formatted to something like ~60MB for the former and ~32MB for the latter.
Anyway, the only issues I've had with Maxtor are drive temperature and the horrible WHINE they'd develop (if they didn't have it out of the box).
I used WD for a while (shortly after I "outgrew" the MFM drives I had), but they tended to fail more often than Micropolis, Miniscribe, Seagate, well, everyone else. Plus, back then, they were considerably more expensive than drives from Connor (which I also liked). A few years ago (when I was working for a local computer company) we tried switching to WD (WD200, WD400, WD800) because they were literally a few dollars less than Seagate. Boy was *that* a mistake. Nearly every one of the dozens and dozens of each model had to be sent back. We had so many pissed off customers that we eventually switched back to Seagate.
I'm happy to see that the majority of the desktops we get from Dell (at my current place of employment) come with Seagate drives and I cringe on the very rare occasion that we have to send in a drive for replacement only to end up with a WD.
I buy Seagate, and nothing but Seagate. I've had too many issues with WD (I've posted about it on numerous occasions when an HDD article pops up on slashdot). My computers are filled with Seagates -- 80gb's, 160gb's, 320gb's, and just recently, a 1tb.
Everything has been perfect (so far -- crossing fingers, throwing salt over shoulder, knocking on wood, etc).
Well, Hulu *is* using Fox content for their coverage (having just checked it out myself). I'd find it boring, too!
Isn't there also supposed to be a tachyon beam in there somewhere?
You know, you didn't need to arrange for a crack-head to rob you just to get an excuse to move. You are free to roam about the country, you know.. ;)
I laugh at people like you, especially when you don't do your homework:
D&D Online. Platinum rating?! HAHAHAHAHA!
"However, one major thing is simply not working, and it is not generating any errors. I can not send or receive guild chats or party chats, and my client also never joins voice chat." - Oct 2006
"I had the chat server drop and reconnect, and saw guild chat no prob, but party and voice didn't work. Anybody know if that's being worked on?" -- January 2008
"Party chat still does not work. I can recieve party chat most of the time (especially right after a disconnect-reconnect), but I can't actually send chat to the party." March 2008
Those are the newest posts for DDO. So, it obviously doesn't tale a whole lot to get a Platinum rating. If something simple like text based chat and voice chat aren't working (yes, voice chat seemed to be having issues as well, though I didn't put those quotes in there), what *else* isn't working?
AOE3 has even MORE issues than DDO does. I actually have to copy .dll's from a Windows installation into my WINE installation?! I have to manually add registry keys? I have to manually register .dll/.ax files? NO MP3 PLAYBACK (there go the majority of the games sounds)?! I have to turn off the 'pixelshader' in the Graphics options?! There are MANY MANY more steps that have to *manually* be done just to get AOE3 to work, let alone the expansions. Hell, there is even a post in it's "problems" thread that suggests it doesn't deserve its Platinum rating (WHAT?!?! It was rated PLATINUM?!!?!?), that instead it should be rated BRONZE! This was back in late November 2008! What's even more funny is that you listed it with a gold rating when, according to your own link, it's a silver!
So, Thank You!! You have proven beyond anything I could have said/done that WINE, while it may be a wonderful product for some things, it is NOT a good alternative to Windows (yet, especially for gaming), and you have proven beyond any doubt that the "Troll" rating I have received as a result of this line of dialog was completely undeserved. Again.. Thank you!
Blind leading the blind. Good luck with that.
Yes. Having listened to you would have fit this quote perfectly. Unfortunately for you, I can read.
I think the biggest problem with the AthlonXP/MP was the lack of a heat spreader, which caused lots of people (you paying attention Patric Norton?!) lots of headaches as they attempted to put the heatsink on without chipping the processor.
Another issue was not getting the heatsink quite flat on the chip, causing it to be rather ineffective in removing heat from the processor, leading to temperature shutdowns (either due to blown chips, or from the newer mainboards that had temperature sensors built in.
That said, I never managed to break one in that way, and I built quite a few machines based on those chips. I think I fared better than Patric because I put the heatsink on the chip while the board was sitting on my bench instead of trying to do so while the power supply was in my way...
Am I the only one who had a Gravis Ultrasound card (in my case, the MAX)?
o/~ Meeeemmmmoooorrriiieesssss....... o/~
What are you talking about? You know MS doesn't make the majority of the drivers in Windows, right? The OEM's submit them to MS for inclusion in Windows. Anything not there will have to be provided by the computer OEM or downloaded yourself (which is what I had to do with my laptop).
I have a feeling the "recovery CD/partition" is mostly an issue caused by the OEM's themselves. Buying/providing the CD cost money (however little). ANY pennies they can save helps them against their competition. The only reason I can see MS hoping for this is that they see it helping curb piracy (ignoring all the OEM/retail CD's that are int he wild, and that's *assuming* they're dumb enough to even believe discouraging OEM's from providing them would help at all, anyway).
You keep thinking that. I think I'll stick to the information I've received from the CGA club on campus, along with what I've experienced first hand from the local LUG/Math & CS department...
It's nice, and all, that you found a few games marked as "Gold" -- strange, however, that you decided not to mention any of the games I specifically named. You aren't helping your argument. I may as well harped on about X not working on a Dodge, to have you shoot back that thing Z works great on a Ford.
As to DX10 games working in WINE, but just maybe not in DX10 mode -- DDO doesn't *require* DX10, however, the graphics look one hell of a lot better with it (it's the ONLY reason I'm running Vista right now. Well, that, and I got it free)).
You couldn't have selected a worse example. That game was commissioned by our military. They have other things they need to direct their funds at than a game.
Yup. That took a whole lot of higher brain functions to think about...
Also, with the military selecting WINDOWS for their OS's installed upon warships (I can't possibly fathom what they were thinking there), isn't it just *slightly* possible that someone "higher up" decided this "linux thing" was just a fad and shit-canned the entire linux port project?
Case in point: America's Army used to have a linux port. It had more bugs and always lagged behind the windows version until they finally canned it.
Ummmm... What?
Of the three desktops I currently have running in my house, none of them less than a year to year and a half old, not one of them has a piece of hardware that worked in XP, but not Vista. My laptop required some downloads from device vendors (because MSI only bundled drivers for Vista), but that wasn't difficult. I actually had more of an issue getting the webcam, bluetooth, and sound working in XP (again, the OEM didn't bundle XP drivers on the driver disk the system came with). I purchased a MSI barebones 17" laptop. Once I downloaded drivers for the three items I mentioned, the laptop has worked great ever since. Even worked great in linux (though I didn't try the web cam or bluetooth -- all the games I mentioned do not work in linux, so it ended up with XP).
I'd normally not respond to an AC, but in this case...
I'm fairly certain that a stack of stuff I have sitting in my spare bedroom (including a TV tuner and a few mainboards with built in hardware of various bits) would like to disagree with you.
Yes, hardware support has gotten *far* better for linux. I was quite correct in stating, specifically, web cams and printers for hardware. Most "host based" printers are, quite simply, not going to work in linux. Period. These printers are the cheap HP DJ3000 series (as one example) -- you know, the printers that cost less than the ink cartridges they (under)use.
The only reason you stated you weren't going to argue the "so called points" in my argument, instead belittling them, is because you simply didn't have anything to add (if you did, you certainly would not have posted as AC, now would you?).
There isn't any reason that software couldn't be written to standards that are already cross-platform (in this case, dealing specifically with games) to minimize any porting needed. I very much don't believe I deserved the Troll mod I received as software compatibility is very much a real issue, especially for business (I have to deal with such all the time in my job).
I care about a native client "so much" because, very often, emulation just doesn't work as well as running native code. Go ahead, try to dispute that. Yes, "calc" probably runs very well under WINE. I'm sure there are many pieces of software that run quite well under WINE. The majority of games (especially anything DX10, I'd bet) DON'T, or don't very well. Yes, there is a "hack" for DX10 for XP, but there is no telling how well it'd work in XP (for every game one might play, let alone the games I listed specifically). There's even less information about how well this would work in WINE.
Your rant about how the "linux port would most likely lag behind the windows version" is a poorly constructed straw-man -- until one exists, and the company proves that they are going to update it less frequently, you really have no argument.
Except, of course, for all the printers that wouldn't work, web cameras, and who knows what other hardware. Also, all the software people currently have/own also will not work (and a good majority of it does not have a linux equivalent). Games, of course, being the best software example.
When I can play DDO in a native linux client, I'll possibly switch. When I can play DDO, AOE3 (plus the two expansions), Rise of Legends, Universe at War, and a few others natively in Linux, I most certainly will switch.
If you were to go merely by looks, Windows 7 is now practically identical to KDE4 interface. In fact they are so frightfully similar, you'd get the impression that they have same GUI developers.
On the positive side, if they looked alike, people would have no problem transitioning to the *nix+KDE side
...how something like a CVT would work for a wind turbine.
Along with daedae, I'd like to see any sort of proof on that also. Nearly every machine I have had over the last 6+ years has been an AMD of one form or another. In fact, the only two non-AMD machines I have are an MSI Wind (I wanted to tinker with an Atom based machine in Linux, OSX, and Windows, to see how it performed) and an C2D 2.4ghz machine I slapped together (well before I acquired my Wind PC) in order to play with OSX.
I can't recall one occasion in which I've had bug-ridden and/or chipset incompatibility issues.
...how many people are going to see this way down here, but I'll post anyway.
I don't understand why people are expecting any performance gains in "Windows 7". They took Vista and added more eye-candy (though, to be honest, some of it looks rather interesting to me). Unless they change some of the base of the code (to lean it up), it's going to perform exactly as Vista does (as has been shown in all of the "speed tests" that have been performed to date).
You just proved my point for me -- in this case, you are knowingly using parts designed to be out of spec. I happen to feel the manufacturers should be disallowed from doing such stupid things, but that's just me, and this still shouldn't be held as a negative against a "PC" (as this thread was originally about).
As for the BIOS update issue, I have a feeling (from 13 years of building computers as a profession, not just a hobby) that having to do so for such an error is rather rare. A quick google search did not turn up any hits about the specific issue you're talking about so I can't tell if it was limited to "bargain basement" type parts or something higher-end.
If you pick somewhat reputable vendors, outright defects are rare. In particular, the Kingston modules GP complains about have always worked fine for me. But having to update BIOSes and drivers to work around bugs is not unusual.
Finally, there are cases where components are out of spec by design and you need to know about it. Consider overclocker DDR3 memory (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3448&p=7) for instance. If you use these components as advertised, you may end up with a fried CPU. In that case, I do think it is fault of the aftermarket parts producers unless they include a big fat warning about known problems (in this case, Intel CPUs that may not survive the higher memory voltage).
I guess I've never been in a situation where I *had* to update a BIOS (though I've done so to add new functionality, like with my XBX2 board -- had to update the BIOS to enable HPET support for OSX).
As to your specific example of "out of spec by design" components -- are you serious? I specifically made a statement about knowing what the hell your purchasing and you would deliberately purchase something out of spec? That only shows a person who would do so is INVITING problems.
When I purchase (almost exclusively from newegg) parts, I sort by lowest price first, then look to see which of those parts is at least 4 eggs with at *least* 10 reviews. Never let me down yet. I don't always buy those cheap parts, but I'd say I have 80% of the time, at the very least.
It's not hard to find cheap, but still quite reliable, parts. You just have to not do idiotic things (like purchasing deliberately out of spec RAM that will fry your CPU!) while you're doing so.
Laptops? No. Their tower systems, yes. In fact, I have a G3 and a G4 in my home now (though neither are currently doing anything for the time being). At work I've messed with a couple G5's and the newer Intel systems that basically use the same case as the G5's, though it's been a while. The towers are quite nice as far as access to components is concerned.
Ever tried to work on one when things go wrong? I work for a computer repair shop, stripping down laptops for screen/inverter/keyboard/power conenctor replacements every day. Macs are by far the worst to work on, and like other Apple products (iPhone/iPod) seem designed to be impossible to get into without leaving a mark.
Good quality laptops are held together with screws. Cheap ones use plastic clips that snap easily. Apple use the latter.
Yes. I doubt that the CPU or GPU are of differing quality. Except, of course, that the Mac has a much faster CPU than the eMachine, which is also where some of that cost comes in.
Uhh. NO. While Apple's case designs are *much* better than most third party cases that are available, they still use Seagate/Maxtor HDD's (just going by some G3/G4/G5's I've had my hands into), and standard off the shelf RAM, even off the shelf CD-ROM's.
Continuing...
I built my own PCs for a long time, but finally got fed up with low quality, buggy components. I don't have spare RAM, mobos, and PSUs lying around to troubleshoot crappy hardware to figure out which piece is bad or incompatible with some other random cheap crappy piece. I still buy PC desktops, but my last several computers have been barebones kits from Dell and Shuttle. When I buy RAM it's always from a reputable company, as I've had as many unusable sticks of Kingston and the like as have actually worked.
It is not the "PC's" fault that you purchased bottom-barrel crap components. Know what Apple uses for motherboards? Slightly modified Intel parts (again, going from what I've seen in some newer machines that went to surplus at my place of work because of how expensive they'd have been to repair). I've never purchased motherboards (even some bottom-barrel priced boards), memory sticks from various companies (though I've settled on G.Skill lately), or other parts that were "buggy". Yes, I've had an occasional DOA part, but that's what warranties are for. Just going by your own words, I'd say you are one of those "Yea, I can be a PC-Tech here for (insert company), because I built my own machine at home!" people I see all over the place. The kind of person that knows *just* enough to assemble a machine, but not enough to make sure all the parts your ordering/spec'ing for a machine will actually work together. This isn't the fault of the aftermarket parts producers -- it's yours.
And to suggest that they're the "same thing" as an $200-$400 eMachines or Dell is a complete farce.
Actually, they *are* basically the same thing. Like I said, you get an awesome Apple designed case, but the parts inside are basically off the shelf PC parts. Hell, I bought an Intel 975xbx2 mainboard that, with pcefi, worked perfectly under OSX 10.4 and 10.5 with vanilla kernel/kexts/etc (of course I did have to keep the couple modifications needed to bypass checks for the silly Apple ROM's, etc).
Having re-read what I typed, it sounds an awful lot like I'm harping on YOU instead of your argument, however, that's not my intention. I'm just really tired of seeing "Nu-uh! Apple uses much higher quality parts than you'll find in a PC, that's why they're better/more expensive!" arguments. If there were any truth to it, I'd be quiet on the subject (or even blast the "pc makers" for the same), however, it's just not true. Now, maybe when you get to the $200 Bargain Basement E-Machine, maybe (though even still, many of the parts *are* the same).
I think the major bits making Apple machines as expensive as they can be are the case designs and the modifications made to the mainboards (it doesn't help that Apple charges ridiculous prices for RAM/HDD upgrades). If Apple pushed the kinds of volume that, say, HP or Dell did, they might get some better volume discounts on the custom parts...