When Apple releases well documented (and fair IMHO) benchmarks everybody screams that benchmarks don't mean anything. When a magazine called "PC"World runs benchmarks - people think it is the word of the Lord. Common people - use your brains. Both AMD and Apple have great processors. Both top-of-the-line systems cost about the same. That means that there is real competition in the marketplace - which is ALWAYS a good thing.
Actually when you hover over the bottons (or near them an "X" a "-" and a "+" appear.
Also if you haven't figured it out.
Red = stop (close the app) Yellow = caution (minimzise the app or halfway between green and red) Green = go (maximize)
They are relying on tried and true GUI design - knowledge in the head vs. knowledge in the system. Knowledge in the head is stuff you you know and can relate to without reading about it.
Apple implemented both unintrusive "knowledge in the world" and "knowledge in the head."
First of all, you don't need to buy an apple display any will work with the INCLUDED adapter cables. Second, OSX comes with more bundled software than ANY PC. Third, a comparable workstation (what the G5 is) cost just as much (or more) with the same amount of software and hardware and arguably a more limited OS. Windows vs. Unix.
Try this page. It references a bunch of TCOs. And that $100 price difference can easily be made up after you figure in the fact that you can get rid of a couple $35,000/year admins.
Troll or just ignorant? Office X for Mac is native... and perfectly compatible with Office XP.
Oh, and any TCO studies have shown that Macs are much cheaper than PCs in their lifetime. Not to mention that the top of the line mac is cheaper than the top of the line PC.
A Mac in a Linux office is a no-brainer. It works seamlessly. The only reason a Mac is harder to get working in a Windows Network is because Windows always messes up networks.
The idea of "lowest bidder is always better" has permiated so completely in our society that nobody ever even thinks to look at the value-add and long term costs.
Michigan should look at: 1. System administration costs (there are plenty of studies already out there) 2. Upgrade cycle 3. Life expectancy of the product
These three things will change how "affordable" each option is. I would argue that you get more laptop for the money with Apple - and on top of that you will get better ROI with Apple because of its substantially lower cost of administration, upgrade cycle is longer, and the longer life expectancy of the Mac.
The G5 are actually 25% cheaper to produce than the Moto G4s. The expense comes into manufacturing the mobos and the cooling systems and so the cost of the main components stays the same. The price point of the professional line of comptuers from Apple has not increased with the release of the G5.
Sure you have vents on the side - but you didn't answer my question. What happens when you set your Sager on your lap or something else soft? Does it melt? I saw a much slower Dell melt on the dock.
Well - the next version of the G5 is going to a 90nm process that will reduce heat and power consumption. Also, the Apple designed the entire system to be quiet by making the fans push more air at lower RPMs. Bash all you want - you have a 12lb monster with 3 fans in the bottom. I have a fast, efficient, small, quiet, cool, impressive laptop. What happens when you put that giant POS on your lap and those fans wont push any air?
The reason that the heatsink is so big on a G5 is so the system fans can be so slow moving in order to be quiet (35 decibles). The G5 puts out 45 watts. The P IV 3.2 Ghz with 800 Mhz system bus puts out 80-120 watts.
That is funny. If Apple wanted to impress the 1337 gamers out there they would have put a G5 in the Powerbook line - made it 2" thick and 12 lbs and it would have stomped the shit out of your Sager for batter life, heat, and speed.
Why is this "Insightful"? He didn't give a single price comparison nor did he point to a link that does.
I priced out a top-of-the-line Dell (which is slower than the mac) and a top-of-the-line Mac. Here are the results. Mac: $3395 Dell: $2917
Of course this doesn't include the fact that you get better case design (aluminum/super quiet) with the mac. Nor does it reflect the Unix based OS that you get with the Mac.
I had a friend who, in the middle of the night, got an idea for a song. All he had was a PowerBook, an acoustic guitar, and a copy of Audacity (free - opensource). He recorded his new song on the internal mic of the PB and FTP'd me the song in the morning. I was amazed at the clarity and the quality.
I've never built a kernel. I wasn't complaining either - I was asking a technical question and got a smart-ass answer from you. I wish I could mod you down... damn.
I have noticed that *nix boot times are noticibly longer than Windows XP boot times. I have never been able to figure out why this is - does anybody know?
I say let them charge wahtever they want because the market will decide what the price should be. When something is over-priced there will always be a competitor that is hungry enough to take a smaller profit margin. Of course this is null and void when there is a monopoly in the market.
Of course with Linux 90% of the user-base wouldn't be able to figure out how to install anything at all. Probably 50% would probably hate it because they can't use it for what they want like graphic design or MS Word.
Slashdot Mirror
Disk 1
Disk 2
and Disk 3
Here are the Bit Torrent Links:
Disk 1
Disk 2
and here
This is where I found them.
When Apple releases well documented (and fair IMHO) benchmarks everybody screams that benchmarks don't mean anything. When a magazine called "PC"World runs benchmarks - people think it is the word of the Lord. Common people - use your brains. Both AMD and Apple have great processors. Both top-of-the-line systems cost about the same. That means that there is real competition in the marketplace - which is ALWAYS a good thing.
Actually when you hover over the bottons (or near them an "X" a "-" and a "+" appear.
Also if you haven't figured it out.
Red = stop (close the app)
Yellow = caution (minimzise the app or halfway between green and red)
Green = go (maximize)
They are relying on tried and true GUI design - knowledge in the head vs. knowledge in the system. Knowledge in the head is stuff you you know and can relate to without reading about it.
Apple implemented both unintrusive "knowledge in the world" and "knowledge in the head."
First of all, you don't need to buy an apple display any will work with the INCLUDED adapter cables. Second, OSX comes with more bundled software than ANY PC. Third, a comparable workstation (what the G5 is) cost just as much (or more) with the same amount of software and hardware and arguably a more limited OS. Windows vs. Unix.
Oops... my html sucks... this link here.
Try this page. It references a bunch of TCOs. And that $100 price difference can easily be made up after you figure in the fact that you can get rid of a couple $35,000/year admins.
Do research and don't talk out of your ass.
Troll or just ignorant? Office X for Mac is native... and perfectly compatible with Office XP.
Oh, and any TCO studies have shown that Macs are much cheaper than PCs in their lifetime. Not to mention that the top of the line mac is cheaper than the top of the line PC.
A Mac in a Linux office is a no-brainer. It works seamlessly. The only reason a Mac is harder to get working in a Windows Network is because Windows always messes up networks.
I have an iBook and I don't know what that permanent "sleep" thing is. Could you explain?
The idea of "lowest bidder is always better" has permiated so completely in our society that nobody ever even thinks to look at the value-add and long term costs.
Michigan should look at:
1. System administration costs (there are plenty of studies already out there)
2. Upgrade cycle
3. Life expectancy of the product
These three things will change how "affordable" each option is. I would argue that you get more laptop for the money with Apple - and on top of that you will get better ROI with Apple because of its substantially lower cost of administration, upgrade cycle is longer, and the longer life expectancy of the Mac.
The G5 are actually 25% cheaper to produce than the Moto G4s. The expense comes into manufacturing the mobos and the cooling systems and so the cost of the main components stays the same. The price point of the professional line of comptuers from Apple has not increased with the release of the G5.
Sure you have vents on the side - but you didn't answer my question. What happens when you set your Sager on your lap or something else soft? Does it melt? I saw a much slower Dell melt on the dock.
Well - the next version of the G5 is going to a 90nm process that will reduce heat and power consumption. Also, the Apple designed the entire system to be quiet by making the fans push more air at lower RPMs. Bash all you want - you have a 12lb monster with 3 fans in the bottom. I have a fast, efficient, small, quiet, cool, impressive laptop. What happens when you put that giant POS on your lap and those fans wont push any air?
Sorry to reply to my own post - I was wrong. The G5 dissipates 95 watts of heat. The PIV dissipates between 85 and >100 watts
Um no.
The reason that the heatsink is so big on a G5 is so the system fans can be so slow moving in order to be quiet (35 decibles). The G5 puts out 45 watts. The P IV 3.2 Ghz with 800 Mhz system bus puts out 80-120 watts.
That is funny. If Apple wanted to impress the 1337 gamers out there they would have put a G5 in the Powerbook line - made it 2" thick and 12 lbs and it would have stomped the shit out of your Sager for batter life, heat, and speed.
The new G5 runs at 35 decibels. What does the Dell run at?
And I forgot one other thing. I was comparing a SINGLE 3 Ghz Dell to a daul 2 Ghz Mac.
Why is this "Insightful"? He didn't give a single price comparison nor did he point to a link that does.
I priced out a top-of-the-line Dell (which is slower than the mac) and a top-of-the-line Mac. Here are the results.
Mac: $3395
Dell: $2917
Of course this doesn't include the fact that you get better case design (aluminum/super quiet) with the mac. Nor does it reflect the Unix based OS that you get with the Mac.
I had a friend who, in the middle of the night, got an idea for a song. All he had was a PowerBook, an acoustic guitar, and a copy of Audacity (free - opensource). He recorded his new song on the internal mic of the PB and FTP'd me the song in the morning. I was amazed at the clarity and the quality.
I've never built a kernel. I wasn't complaining either - I was asking a technical question and got a smart-ass answer from you. I wish I could mod you down... damn.
Could Linux theoretically do this? If so - why doesn't it?
I have noticed that *nix boot times are noticibly longer than Windows XP boot times. I have never been able to figure out why this is - does anybody know?
Thanks
John
I say let them charge wahtever they want because the market will decide what the price should be. When something is over-priced there will always be a competitor that is hungry enough to take a smaller profit margin. Of course this is null and void when there is a monopoly in the market.
We all love Adam Smith - with some rules.
Of course with Linux 90% of the user-base wouldn't be able to figure out how to install anything at all. Probably 50% would probably hate it because they can't use it for what they want like graphic design or MS Word.
I think this switch makes sense.