Speaking as the tech director for a school that actually uses Moodle, it is actually fairly *in*-appropriate because it is designed as a "Virtual Learning Environment", i.e. it focuses on the "learning environment", not the "record keeping". There are several major issues with using it as a grade-keeping, report-generating system. Grading is based on "enrollment" in a "course", unenrolling them makes their grades difficult to access, so it's hard to track student's actual status, e.g. is this student an active, enrolled student, a past student, etc. Long-term management of grading records is problematic at best, and unless work is actually being graded *in* the system, the process of entering grades into it is cumbersome and time-consuming. It is simply not designed for this. A "Student Information System" (SIS) is the real need here, but unfortunately I haven't found many particularly good open source options.
The Alamo Drafthouse theaters, mostly in Texas but slowly spreading out (1 in Colorado and one in Virginia now) are superb models of successful customer-friendly theater experiences. Good equipment and seating, first-run movies, a clear and well-enforced no talking/texting policy, and oh yeah, good (yes, actually pretty good) food and *beer*. Not to mention great local events, a variety of special showings and unusual feature runs, and no crappy ads for cars and stuff before the show (instead a series of usually topical shorts or Youtube vids, usually hilarious). They are awesome and I hope they continue to spread.
Surprised no one has mentioned the magnetic ball kits, they're "all the rage". I prefer Zen Magnets: http://www.zenmagnets.com/ (for the following reason: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7Tka4NUmUo). Of course they're probably a choking hazard, depending on age of the children. Maybe other Slashdotters have more sense than I...
Apple doesn't seem to care much about the hordes of people saying "iPhone sucks!" due to the poor quality of the AT&T network. Or... maybe it's not just AT&T's fault. I have two friends who both just recently got iPhones, both of whom had other phones on AT&T before this. Both of them now have constant call quality issues, call drops, etc. This is in San Francisco, hardly a backwater burb. Now their earlier experience with much cheaper cell phones on the same network in the same places might almost lead one to believe it's an iPhone hardware problem (incidentally one has a 3G and one a 3GS).
So if Apple cares so much about negative effects on their product perception from 3rd parties, it might be a good idea to get a different network partner. It might also be a good idea to design a cell phone antenna that works. But, as we all know, their current lock-in makes them a nice pile of cash, and iterative product upgrade cycles do too, so it's in their best interest to fix neither of these issues right away.
From this we can conclude: If there was money in having Flash on their platform, they would do it. Let's not dance around the issue here and pretend it's about "user experience" and "reputation", etc. This is about money, plain and simple.
Thanks for the link, I'd read it before though. A 15x *overall* increase in poly count is good (though Epic claims something on the order of 100x for U2, but I'd wager that's a bit trickier than Carmack's numbers) and as I said Doom 3 obviously has a higher poly count than say Quake 3. But an overall poly count increase multiplier says little about the character poly counts, which are particularly what I am talking about. I think a judicious 2x increase over what we've so far seen in the existing shots would benefit the visuals well. However I can't speak for performance hit, as we have no idea of the engine's current performance.
Ultimately I more than trust Carmack's judgement in balancing performance and visuals and as some have already said it is no doubt less noticeable in motion. Regardless, I know I'm greatly looking forward to a strong single player experience from iD again.
Quick aside: I'm curious whether any form of adaptive curve tesselation is present in Doom 3. If you look closely at the pipes in the background of one of the shots, there are evident angles/poly edges. I'm wondering if we'll be able to influence the smoothness of curve tesselation as we could with Quake 3. I believe I recall (though I don't know from where or when) Carmack saying something about the curves as used in Q3 not being the best solution and that he might not use them again, and though I don't know the details of the implimentation as far as performance cost and level design issues, I felt it added to the Quake 3 engine from a player's standpoint.
Sounds like Carmack's approach paid off for you. I suggest it is you that needs to look closer however and find out a bit more about what you're talking about in regards to Doom 3 and its approach to character rendering. Section 4.7 (subsection 7 of section 4) of the unnofical Doom 3 FAQ has some speculation and third hand info on the subject that might be of interest to you. Doom 3 FAQ: What sort of engine will Doom 3 use? I'll try to dig up Carmack's quotes on the subject as well. Suffice to say he has been careful to point out that Doom 3 makes heavy use of bump maps.
Take a look at the areas of the high rez screens I've conveniently circled for you here. Note the rather obvious poly edges. Note that the apparent frontal detail of characters does not generally show up on edges, indicating the geometry is not actually present on the in game model. You see what appears to be unbelievable detail on any camera facing surface, but on the edges of the model it is quite obvious it does not have that level of detail. If you don't see it now, you're beyond help.
Granted, much of the detail is actual in game geometry, but what's really selling the effect is the texture maps, bump maps, and lighting. I'd be willing to bet the models aren't any more high poly than Soldier of Fortune II, but they sure look better, eh? There's no denying there's a poly increase from previous iD games, but it takes a back seat to the lighting and shading technology. And while i don't expect a 10x increase in poly count, 2x would be nice given how good the rest of everything looks.
While there's no denying this looks stunning, particularly the environments, I can't help but notice the characters are all pretty low poly. They're hardly better than Quake 3 level it seems. At first, sure, they look pre-rendered almost, but you can see poly edges around the sihlouettes first, and then on closer inspection you can start to see sharp angles elsewhere within the models.
Carmack's trick of using high poly models for lighting and shading calculations and then projecting that onto lower poly models may make for some amazing visuals, great damage effects, and much better facial animation, but IMO the low poly in game models need to have maybe 2x the detail just to make a good base for the higher poly lighting/shading calculations. That or hope that all the next gen cards have N-patch support or some other form of HOS support *and* that it can be used with Doom 3. Otherwise it looks like it's going to be an incredible engine that will be let down a bit by low poly characters. No doubt the in game assets and performance are still being tweaked of course.
Who said anything about.NET server or Longhorn Embedded? Those product families have always had key differences from their mainstream counterparts (that's the entire point of their existence), and there's no reason to expect that practice to cease. If the Longhorn GUI doesn't work for those platforms/markets, it won't be used there. Period. That doesn't invalidate the coming demands of the Longhorn GUI in the consumer desktop space though.
Ph34r the coming of Longhorn, for it shall make you obsolete beyond your wildest nightmares!:-P
As for 3D acceleration in your Palm, I do believe PowerVR's MBX just might be your solution, or at least the beginning of the market. So it appears MS is not creating the "Xboy", PowerVR and ARM are. I mean really, who'd want increased power in a mobile computer anyways? Go figure.
Try Longhorn, the next major iteration of MS's super-fabouloso OS line. When your OS starts requiring a 3D accelerator, you know there's gonna be some major upgrading afoot.
I did the price comparison because people brought up the price issue yet again. This is in black and white and quantifies the issue so people can make judgements about it without having to do the research. You yourself make the very valid point that value is a perogative of the consumer to determine. I merely facilitate that determination with some amount of information, however miniscule. I think it's beter than nothing.
I also attempted to address the "user experience issue" to some degree. Ultimately it all comes down to opinion, but as far as these discussions go I think it's worth keeping each other honest. Doing a price break down in my humble opinion shows the factors in the issue in no uncertain terms.
The only variable is individual user experience and satisfaction. Unless you imagine that people pay for products that make them miserable (hmm, wait, maybe they do...), then there is surely a reason why Apple has less than a 10% market share, and unless the price point is conceded as being extremely relevant, then one cannot blame that factor either.
Using "a huge pile of beige crapola" to refer to your average PC shows your obvious bias and negates the usefulness of my replying to you. But for some odd reason I'm compelled to anyways. Go figure. As long as we're on about it though, I think the user experience from your average beige box big name PC is at least as good as your average 1st gen iMac. 2nd gen wins out for industrial design I must say, and this is an area Apple has always excelled in, no doubt about it. But then it also comes at the cost of upgradeability and price. And after you get over the nifty case and swing-arm monitor, it's all about the OS and the hardware driving it. For some OS X is the cat's meow, for others it's pure trash.
The iMac fits a particular market well and that's all it needs to do. But saying its initial or long term user experience is far superior to your average PC, end of disucussion, seems pretty arrogant and ignorant.
I imagine you probably didn't finish reading my post, either. Granted it does continue with some more of the price comparison drivel, but I think I end on a pretty fair "arms open" note. Different platforms for different folks and needs. Plain and simple.
I just don't think there's a fair way to say that Mac's or PC's are better and leave it at that. It makes much more sense to be aware of and acknowledge the plusses and minuses of each platform and choose based on that knowledge for your own needs. Of course that takes too much intelligence and patience for your average person, so I'll just shut the hell up now. Mac's rule, PC's suck, I'm sorry, I repent.
Yeah, dealing with a ton of online retailers can be a real pain in the ass. Of course there are excellent, low cost online retailers like newegg.com but lets ignore that too because the amount of people who are willing and able to build their own computers is small in comparison with the total computer market. And I guess if you make bad purchasing decisions or are bad at machine assembly and setup it could, maybe, take 10 hours to set the thing up. No comment on your silly "cost of lost client" point though.
To make a comparison fair we'll take the 2 most popular computer retailers in the PC world and pit them against the only source of Apple hardware currently available. Dell and Gateway vs. the Apple Store.
Apple Store: G4 800Mhz 256MB PC133 RAM 40GB Ultra ATA Hard Drive CD-RW Drive ATI Radeon 7500 dual monitor 56k Internal Modem Apple Pro Speakers Apple Keyboard Mac OS X 10.1.4 90 day tech support, 1 year hardware repair
Total: $1600
Oh but wait, you gotta be able to *see* what you're doing on your computer, right? So we'll add the smallest and cheapest monitor they carry. After all I wouldn't want to bother going to a third party retailer to get a monitor, especially if it didn't match my case and say Apple on it.
Total cost with "15 LCD monitor: $2257
Now we'll see what Dell has to offer.
First, we'll be using the double Mhz rule just for argument's sake. So we'll need at least a 1.6Ghz processor on the PC side to equal our G4, memory issues aside.
Dell Dimension 4400 Series: 1.9Ghz P4 256Mhz DDR SDRAM Geforce 3Ti 200 15" flat panel LCD 40GB Ultra ATA/100 HD 24x10x40 CD-RW with Easy CD Creator 56k Modem Harmon Kardon HK-206 Speakers Microsoft Works Suite with Money (includes Word, etc) Dell Picture Studio and Image Expert Standard (to match OS X built in tools presumably) Dell Keyboard and MS Intellimouse Windows XP Home Epson Stylus C80 Printer HP Photosmart 318 Digital Camera Standard Dell Move Studio Bundle (presumably competition for iMovie) HP Scanjet 5400 Scanner 3 free DVD movies or software titles 1 year limited warranty, 1 year at home service, 1 year phone support.
Total: $1,847
Ok so let me get this straight, I get everything the Apple comes with, *plus* a printer, scanner, digital camera, better support, a better mouse (regardless of the 1 vs. 2 button debate, this also has a scroll wheel and 2 extra programmable buttons), faster RAM, a better graphics card, more software, and 3 free movies or software titles, and all for $400 less than an "equivalent" Apple system? If I purchased today I even would have gotten free shipping. I'm trying to restrain my laughter here.
None of the above value judgements are, I believe, very subjective either. Feel free to argue if you disagree.
At the very least, even if I have more problems with this system than with the G4 (debatable, XP is from personal experience pretty stable), I'll certainly be enjoying my digital camera, scanner, and printer allot more than a $400 hole in my wallet and a few less crashes (conjecture, for argument's sake) and being able to use iMovie. Not to mention that those extras are precisely what I would need to properly enjoy one of the major purported uses of Apple products: graphic arts.
But hey, maybe Dell was having a fire sale the day I checked prices (uh, that was today btw). Lets try Gateway.
Gateway 500S: P4 1.8Ghz 256MB DDR SDRAM 40GB Ultra ATA/100 7200RPM HD 16X DVD-ROM *and* 24x10x40 CD-RW 64MB NVIDIA GeForce2 MX400 w/TV Out 15" Flat Panel LCD Display Sound Blaster Audigy w/Firewire Boston Acoustics BA745 Speakers 56k modem Integrated 10/100 Ethernet Windows XP Home Gateway Keyboard and Logitech Optical Wheel Mouse MS Works Suite (Includes Word and Encarta) 1 Year Limited Parts / Labor / Support Epson Stylus C80 Printer with USB Cable Hewlett-Packard ScanJet 5400C Scanner Fuji® FinePix(TM) A201 Digital Camera Nomad II MP3 player The Sims
Total: $2,055
Huh, whaddya know? They're also cheaper, and include even more extras. OK, I can no longer restrain my laughter. HAHAHAHA! But of course my case doesn't look pretty. I'm all sad inside now. And of course admittedly Gateway isn't the best manufacturer of computers. But then not all of Apple's components are top notch either (IMO). That's why I build my own computers. But from a consumer standpoint, arguing lower price is obviously ludicrous, and arguing a better user experience is seeming more and more suspect the more I write.
For argument's sake lets go visit a PC manufacturer that uses high quality components, caters to an elite crowd, and has pretty cases and hardware: Alienware. Now I suppose we'll finally see price equality, since surely if a PC manufacturer tried to include all the extras that Apple does, they could not undercut Apple in price. Lets see how Alienware does.
Hive-Mind: P4 1.8Ghz 256MB DDR RAM MS Keyboard and Intellimouse Explorer in choice of colors 40GB Ultra ATA/100 7200 RPM HD NEC 19" 95F Flat Screen CRT Monitor ATI Radeon 7500 dual monitor Sound Blaster Live 5.1 Plextor PlexWriter 24x10x40x CD-RW USR 56k modem Creative Inspire 5.1 5300 speakers Intel Pro 100S Network Card Microsoft Works Windows XP Home 1 year 24/7 onsite support
Total: $2078
Wow! It even comes in my choice of colors! I'm really sporting wood now! Unfortunately they don't carry LCD monitors smaller than 19" or something, so I've had to go with a 19" flat CRT. I don't think I'll really be complaining, but if I really want a lower refresh rate, smaller viewable area, and a fixed resolution I'm sure I could order a 15" LCD for $100 or so more than the 19" flat screen CRT, including shipping. An equivalent Athlon system is also comparable in price from Alienware.
So as you can see, the price difference is very real. While it is true that there are certain features - tangible and otherwise - that Apple offers in its computing experience that are difficult or impossible to match on the PC side (I mean who *doesn't* want a Superdrive?), whether they are worth a $400+ price premium is debatable, and this doesn't even take into account similar features on PC's difficult or impossible to match on a Macintosh (how about a good selection of modern games?).
Bottom line: There's nothing wrong with liking Macintoshes. There's nothing wrong with liking Apple's industrial design. There's nothing wrong with liking Mac OS, 9, X 10.x, or what have you. What is wrong is being a zealot about it. What is wrong is being narrow minded and stupid in your computer buying decisions. What is wrong is buying marketing hype and giving it away for free as your own "product", while the company you *bought* it from gets free advertising and makes yet more money off your stupidity.
Mac's and PC's share the computing world, and each seems to have maintained thier own respective niches for some time now. I don't see this changing. Both have plusses and minuses. Above all everyone owes it to themselves to be *informed* when they make computer purchasing decisions. If you don't know the truth behind the "Mhz Myth" then you shouldn't be arguing relative system performance. If all your buying decisions are based on performance in Apple's test of 5 filters in Photoshop, you shouldn't be talking about which platform is superior.
Slashdot Mirror
Speaking as the tech director for a school that actually uses Moodle, it is actually fairly *in*-appropriate because it is designed as a "Virtual Learning Environment", i.e. it focuses on the "learning environment", not the "record keeping". There are several major issues with using it as a grade-keeping, report-generating system. Grading is based on "enrollment" in a "course", unenrolling them makes their grades difficult to access, so it's hard to track student's actual status, e.g. is this student an active, enrolled student, a past student, etc. Long-term management of grading records is problematic at best, and unless work is actually being graded *in* the system, the process of entering grades into it is cumbersome and time-consuming. It is simply not designed for this. A "Student Information System" (SIS) is the real need here, but unfortunately I haven't found many particularly good open source options.
The Alamo Drafthouse theaters, mostly in Texas but slowly spreading out (1 in Colorado and one in Virginia now) are superb models of successful customer-friendly theater experiences. Good equipment and seating, first-run movies, a clear and well-enforced no talking/texting policy, and oh yeah, good (yes, actually pretty good) food and *beer*. Not to mention great local events, a variety of special showings and unusual feature runs, and no crappy ads for cars and stuff before the show (instead a series of usually topical shorts or Youtube vids, usually hilarious). They are awesome and I hope they continue to spread.
- Oshyan
Surprised no one has mentioned the magnetic ball kits, they're "all the rage". I prefer Zen Magnets: http://www.zenmagnets.com/ (for the following reason: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7Tka4NUmUo). Of course they're probably a choking hazard, depending on age of the children. Maybe other Slashdotters have more sense than I...
Apple doesn't seem to care much about the hordes of people saying "iPhone sucks!" due to the poor quality of the AT&T network. Or... maybe it's not just AT&T's fault. I have two friends who both just recently got iPhones, both of whom had other phones on AT&T before this. Both of them now have constant call quality issues, call drops, etc. This is in San Francisco, hardly a backwater burb. Now their earlier experience with much cheaper cell phones on the same network in the same places might almost lead one to believe it's an iPhone hardware problem (incidentally one has a 3G and one a 3GS).
So if Apple cares so much about negative effects on their product perception from 3rd parties, it might be a good idea to get a different network partner. It might also be a good idea to design a cell phone antenna that works. But, as we all know, their current lock-in makes them a nice pile of cash, and iterative product upgrade cycles do too, so it's in their best interest to fix neither of these issues right away.
From this we can conclude: If there was money in having Flash on their platform, they would do it. Let's not dance around the issue here and pretend it's about "user experience" and "reputation", etc. This is about money, plain and simple.
- Oshyan
Thanks for the link, I'd read it before though. A 15x *overall* increase in poly count is good (though Epic claims something on the order of 100x for U2, but I'd wager that's a bit trickier than Carmack's numbers) and as I said Doom 3 obviously has a higher poly count than say Quake 3. But an overall poly count increase multiplier says little about the character poly counts, which are particularly what I am talking about. I think a judicious 2x increase over what we've so far seen in the existing shots would benefit the visuals well. However I can't speak for performance hit, as we have no idea of the engine's current performance.
Ultimately I more than trust Carmack's judgement in balancing performance and visuals and as some have already said it is no doubt less noticeable in motion. Regardless, I know I'm greatly looking forward to a strong single player experience from iD again.
Quick aside: I'm curious whether any form of adaptive curve tesselation is present in Doom 3. If you look closely at the pipes in the background of one of the shots, there are evident angles/poly edges. I'm wondering if we'll be able to influence the smoothness of curve tesselation as we could with Quake 3. I believe I recall (though I don't know from where or when) Carmack saying something about the curves as used in Q3 not being the best solution and that he might not use them again, and though I don't know the details of the implimentation as far as performance cost and level design issues, I felt it added to the Quake 3 engine from a player's standpoint.
- JavaJones
Sounds like Carmack's approach paid off for you. I suggest it is you that needs to look closer however and find out a bit more about what you're talking about in regards to Doom 3 and its approach to character rendering. Section 4.7 (subsection 7 of section 4) of the unnofical Doom 3 FAQ has some speculation and third hand info on the subject that might be of interest to you. Doom 3 FAQ: What sort of engine will Doom 3 use? I'll try to dig up Carmack's quotes on the subject as well. Suffice to say he has been careful to point out that Doom 3 makes heavy use of bump maps.
Take a look at the areas of the high rez screens I've conveniently circled for you here. Note the rather obvious poly edges. Note that the apparent frontal detail of characters does not generally show up on edges, indicating the geometry is not actually present on the in game model. You see what appears to be unbelievable detail on any camera facing surface, but on the edges of the model it is quite obvious it does not have that level of detail. If you don't see it now, you're beyond help.
Granted, much of the detail is actual in game geometry, but what's really selling the effect is the texture maps, bump maps, and lighting. I'd be willing to bet the models aren't any more high poly than Soldier of Fortune II, but they sure look better, eh? There's no denying there's a poly increase from previous iD games, but it takes a back seat to the lighting and shading technology. And while i don't expect a 10x increase in poly count, 2x would be nice given how good the rest of everything looks.
- JavaJones
While there's no denying this looks stunning, particularly the environments, I can't help but notice the characters are all pretty low poly. They're hardly better than Quake 3 level it seems. At first, sure, they look pre-rendered almost, but you can see poly edges around the sihlouettes first, and then on closer inspection you can start to see sharp angles elsewhere within the models.
Carmack's trick of using high poly models for lighting and shading calculations and then projecting that onto lower poly models may make for some amazing visuals, great damage effects, and much better facial animation, but IMO the low poly in game models need to have maybe 2x the detail just to make a good base for the higher poly lighting/shading calculations. That or hope that all the next gen cards have N-patch support or some other form of HOS support *and* that it can be used with Doom 3. Otherwise it looks like it's going to be an incredible engine that will be let down a bit by low poly characters. No doubt the in game assets and performance are still being tweaked of course.
- JavaJones
Who said anything about .NET server or Longhorn Embedded? Those product families have always had key differences from their mainstream counterparts (that's the entire point of their existence), and there's no reason to expect that practice to cease. If the Longhorn GUI doesn't work for those platforms/markets, it won't be used there. Period. That doesn't invalidate the coming demands of the Longhorn GUI in the consumer desktop space though.
:-P
See this thread for further discussion 3DLabs Launching New GPU and these articles linked from it Tom's Hardware on 3D Labs Announcement and Anandtech on 3D Labs Announcement
Ph34r the coming of Longhorn, for it shall make you obsolete beyond your wildest nightmares!
As for 3D acceleration in your Palm, I do believe PowerVR's MBX just might be your solution, or at least the beginning of the market. So it appears MS is not creating the "Xboy", PowerVR and ARM are. I mean really, who'd want increased power in a mobile computer anyways? Go figure.
- JavaJones
Try Longhorn, the next major iteration of MS's super-fabouloso OS line. When your OS starts requiring a 3D accelerator, you know there's gonna be some major upgrading afoot.
- JavaJones
I did the price comparison because people brought up the price issue yet again. This is in black and white and quantifies the issue so people can make judgements about it without having to do the research. You yourself make the very valid point that value is a perogative of the consumer to determine. I merely facilitate that determination with some amount of information, however miniscule. I think it's beter than nothing.
:p
I also attempted to address the "user experience issue" to some degree. Ultimately it all comes down to opinion, but as far as these discussions go I think it's worth keeping each other honest. Doing a price break down in my humble opinion shows the factors in the issue in no uncertain terms.
The only variable is individual user experience and satisfaction. Unless you imagine that people pay for products that make them miserable (hmm, wait, maybe they do...), then there is surely a reason why Apple has less than a 10% market share, and unless the price point is conceded as being extremely relevant, then one cannot blame that factor either.
Using "a huge pile of beige crapola" to refer to your average PC shows your obvious bias and negates the usefulness of my replying to you. But for some odd reason I'm compelled to anyways. Go figure. As long as we're on about it though, I think the user experience from your average beige box big name PC is at least as good as your average 1st gen iMac. 2nd gen wins out for industrial design I must say, and this is an area Apple has always excelled in, no doubt about it. But then it also comes at the cost of upgradeability and price. And after you get over the nifty case and swing-arm monitor, it's all about the OS and the hardware driving it. For some OS X is the cat's meow, for others it's pure trash.
The iMac fits a particular market well and that's all it needs to do. But saying its initial or long term user experience is far superior to your average PC, end of disucussion, seems pretty arrogant and ignorant.
I imagine you probably didn't finish reading my post, either. Granted it does continue with some more of the price comparison drivel, but I think I end on a pretty fair "arms open" note. Different platforms for different folks and needs. Plain and simple.
I just don't think there's a fair way to say that Mac's or PC's are better and leave it at that. It makes much more sense to be aware of and acknowledge the plusses and minuses of each platform and choose based on that knowledge for your own needs. Of course that takes too much intelligence and patience for your average person, so I'll just shut the hell up now. Mac's rule, PC's suck, I'm sorry, I repent.
Oh and don't call me son.
- JavaJones
Yeah, dealing with a ton of online retailers can be a real pain in the ass. Of course there are excellent, low cost online retailers like newegg.com but lets ignore that too because the amount of people who are willing and able to build their own computers is small in comparison with the total computer market. And I guess if you make bad purchasing decisions or are bad at machine assembly and setup it could, maybe, take 10 hours to set the thing up. No comment on your silly "cost of lost client" point though.
To make a comparison fair we'll take the 2 most popular computer retailers in the PC world and pit them against the only source of Apple hardware currently available. Dell and Gateway vs. the Apple Store.
Apple Store:
G4 800Mhz
256MB PC133 RAM
40GB Ultra ATA Hard Drive
CD-RW Drive
ATI Radeon 7500 dual monitor
56k Internal Modem
Apple Pro Speakers
Apple Keyboard
Mac OS X 10.1.4
90 day tech support, 1 year hardware repair
Total: $1600
Oh but wait, you gotta be able to *see* what you're doing on your computer, right? So we'll add the smallest and cheapest monitor they carry. After all I wouldn't want to bother going to a third party retailer to get a monitor, especially if it didn't match my case and say Apple on it.
Total cost with "15 LCD monitor: $2257
Now we'll see what Dell has to offer.
First, we'll be using the double Mhz rule just for argument's sake. So we'll need at least a 1.6Ghz processor on the PC side to equal our G4, memory issues aside.
Dell Dimension 4400 Series:
1.9Ghz P4
256Mhz DDR SDRAM
Geforce 3Ti 200
15" flat panel LCD
40GB Ultra ATA/100 HD
24x10x40 CD-RW with Easy CD Creator
56k Modem
Harmon Kardon HK-206 Speakers
Microsoft Works Suite with Money (includes Word, etc)
Dell Picture Studio and Image Expert Standard (to match OS X built in tools presumably)
Dell Keyboard and MS Intellimouse
Windows XP Home
Epson Stylus C80 Printer
HP Photosmart 318 Digital Camera
Standard Dell Move Studio Bundle (presumably competition for iMovie)
HP Scanjet 5400 Scanner
3 free DVD movies or software titles
1 year limited warranty, 1 year at home service, 1 year phone support.
Total: $1,847
Ok so let me get this straight, I get everything the Apple comes with, *plus* a printer, scanner, digital camera, better support, a better mouse (regardless of the 1 vs. 2 button debate, this also has a scroll wheel and 2 extra programmable buttons), faster RAM, a better graphics card, more software, and 3 free movies or software titles, and all for $400 less than an "equivalent" Apple system? If I purchased today I even would have gotten free shipping. I'm trying to restrain my laughter here.
None of the above value judgements are, I believe, very subjective either. Feel free to argue if you disagree.
At the very least, even if I have more problems with this system than with the G4 (debatable, XP is from personal experience pretty stable), I'll certainly be enjoying my digital camera, scanner, and printer allot more than a $400 hole in my wallet and a few less crashes (conjecture, for argument's sake) and being able to use iMovie. Not to mention that those extras are precisely what I would need to properly enjoy one of the major purported uses of Apple products: graphic arts.
But hey, maybe Dell was having a fire sale the day I checked prices (uh, that was today btw). Lets try Gateway.
Gateway 500S:
P4 1.8Ghz
256MB DDR SDRAM
40GB Ultra ATA/100 7200RPM HD
16X DVD-ROM *and* 24x10x40 CD-RW
64MB NVIDIA GeForce2 MX400 w/TV Out
15" Flat Panel LCD Display
Sound Blaster Audigy w/Firewire
Boston Acoustics BA745 Speakers
56k modem
Integrated 10/100 Ethernet
Windows XP Home
Gateway Keyboard and Logitech Optical Wheel Mouse
MS Works Suite (Includes Word and Encarta)
1 Year Limited Parts / Labor / Support
Epson Stylus C80 Printer with USB Cable
Hewlett-Packard ScanJet 5400C Scanner
Fuji® FinePix(TM) A201 Digital Camera
Nomad II MP3 player
The Sims
Total: $2,055
Huh, whaddya know? They're also cheaper, and include even more extras. OK, I can no longer restrain my laughter. HAHAHAHA! But of course my case doesn't look pretty. I'm all sad inside now. And of course admittedly Gateway isn't the best manufacturer of computers. But then not all of Apple's components are top notch either (IMO). That's why I build my own computers. But from a consumer standpoint, arguing lower price is obviously ludicrous, and arguing a better user experience is seeming more and more suspect the more I write.
For argument's sake lets go visit a PC manufacturer that uses high quality components, caters to an elite crowd, and has pretty cases and hardware: Alienware. Now I suppose we'll finally see price equality, since surely if a PC manufacturer tried to include all the extras that Apple does, they could not undercut Apple in price. Lets see how Alienware does.
Hive-Mind:
P4 1.8Ghz
256MB DDR RAM
MS Keyboard and Intellimouse Explorer in choice of colors
40GB Ultra ATA/100 7200 RPM HD
NEC 19" 95F Flat Screen CRT Monitor
ATI Radeon 7500 dual monitor
Sound Blaster Live 5.1
Plextor PlexWriter 24x10x40x CD-RW
USR 56k modem
Creative Inspire 5.1 5300 speakers
Intel Pro 100S Network Card
Microsoft Works
Windows XP Home
1 year 24/7 onsite support
Total: $2078
Wow! It even comes in my choice of colors! I'm really sporting wood now! Unfortunately they don't carry LCD monitors smaller than 19" or something, so I've had to go with a 19" flat CRT. I don't think I'll really be complaining, but if I really want a lower refresh rate, smaller viewable area, and a fixed resolution I'm sure I could order a 15" LCD for $100 or so more than the 19" flat screen CRT, including shipping. An equivalent Athlon system is also comparable in price from Alienware.
So as you can see, the price difference is very real. While it is true that there are certain features - tangible and otherwise - that Apple offers in its computing experience that are difficult or impossible to match on the PC side (I mean who *doesn't* want a Superdrive?), whether they are worth a $400+ price premium is debatable, and this doesn't even take into account similar features on PC's difficult or impossible to match on a Macintosh (how about a good selection of modern games?).
Bottom line: There's nothing wrong with liking Macintoshes. There's nothing wrong with liking Apple's industrial design. There's nothing wrong with liking Mac OS, 9, X 10.x, or what have you. What is wrong is being a zealot about it. What is wrong is being narrow minded and stupid in your computer buying decisions. What is wrong is buying marketing hype and giving it away for free as your own "product", while the company you *bought* it from gets free advertising and makes yet more money off your stupidity.
Mac's and PC's share the computing world, and each seems to have maintained thier own respective niches for some time now. I don't see this changing. Both have plusses and minuses. Above all everyone owes it to themselves to be *informed* when they make computer purchasing decisions. If you don't know the truth behind the "Mhz Myth" then you shouldn't be arguing relative system performance. If all your buying decisions are based on performance in Apple's test of 5 filters in Photoshop, you shouldn't be talking about which platform is superior.
- JavaJones