Still way overpriced though. Yes it is tiny, but laptops face the same issues and you can buy a laptop with similar specs just about anywhere for the same prices Apple is getting for a mini. Seriously, go price a laptop with 1.5Ghz Mobile Pentium (about the same as the 'Core Solo') a puny (for a media center) 60G laptop hard drive, 512MB memory shared with a crap Intel integrated video and a DVD/CD-RW drive. Bet you don't have much trouble finding some for $599 and that gets you a head, while the mini is sold headless.
I don't think it's as overpriced as you say. You're comparing a previous-generation CPU and chipset (Pentium M and 915G) to the Mac mini's current-gen (Core Solo/Duo and 945G). The mini also includes features that are rarely (never?) seen in $600 notebooks like DVI connector, gigabit ethernet, digital audio out, and FireWire.
I'm not saying the mini's cheap (given the specs), but the design deserves a premium. I would also expect the mini to outlast some integrated notebook components like the LCD and keyboard.
I think Core Image support is a big deal to many Mac buyers, and GMA 950 supports it according to MacRumors. ATI Radeon 9200 doesn't support Core Image (needs at least Radeon 9500).
GMA 950 is an OpenGL 1.4 GPU. Radeon 9200 is an OpenGL 1.3 GPU.
* Intel GMA950 graphics processor with 64MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory.
Shared memory? Yuck! If you could only get a 128mb or a 256mb I'd get one.
Intel's last two integrated graphics solutions (GMA 900 and GMA 950) are a heck of a lot better than their previous versions (Extreme and Extreme 2). They even assist HD video acceleration (MPEG-2, not H.264). In fact, GMA 900 (slower version of GMA 950) seemed to work great in the Intel developer Macs. Source:
For a budget/mainstream computer, shared memory is not so horrid anymore since PCI Express (8 GB/s bandwidth) replaced AGP. Even NVIDIA and ATI have adopted shared memory for their low-end non-integrated PCI Express cards (TurboCache and HyperMemory).
Sure, GMA 950 is not a good solution for playing DOOM 3 or Halo 2, but Quake 3 and UT 2003 will fly. Sharky Extreme got over 100 fps in Q3/UT 2003 using GMA 950. But who the heck is going to buy the Mac mini for playing the latest 3D graphics-heavy games?
OptiPlex Desktops are designed to make deployment and management simple by taking the worry out of managing your computing environments. What makes OptiPlex the stable desktop choice?
Extended purchase availability and managed product transitions help minimize costs and headaches. Over the past 7 years, OptiPlex desktops have averaged a 15 month lifecycle.
Dell ImageWatchTM image management tool helps ensure system changes and updates will never be a surprise. You will be notified months before changes happen.
...
Dell's Stable Image Assurance Program is designed to lower ownership costs by taking away the worry and inconvenience associated with required hard drive image changes.
The same applies to Latitude notebooks vs. cheap consumer-oriented Inspirons. However, I think it would be nicer if Dell stopped offering Dimensions and Inspirons on their business web sites.
What you get from a brand name is the service. And considering the service of some brands *coughsonycough*, I'm better off with a "generic" brand. Breaks down just as fast, has exactly the same nonexistant service, but I pay about 2/3 of what that brand name gadget would've costed.
That's why I actually consider that annoying Best Buy "extended warranty" into the cost of the "generic" brand when comparison shopping against popular name brands. Especially for expensive, relatively new technology like LCD televisions, which the article gave as an example. Heck, LCDs haven't been around long enough for even name brands to have a long-term reliability track record in Consumer Reports.
Can't help feel that these are not going to offer the rock solid reliability that IBM's are/were known for.
Especially since the Intel desktops (J100) will use a SiS chipset (SiS 661) and the AMD desktops (J105) will use a VIA chipset (K8M800). The notebook chipset they're using (Intel 915GM) has a reputation for reliability, but notebook reliability depends on more factors outside the chipset.
Maybe I'm being unfair in my judgement of SiS and VIA, but since I value reliability, I would have liked to see desktop chipsets from Intel, NVIDIA, or ATI. Maybe SiS and VIA have gotten better since the days when people called their chipsets "cheapsets."
from the article: "PCs running the Premium edition will also be able to connect their machine to an Xbox 360 gaming console."
What for?
The article was lame and unclear. It's talking about the Xbox Media Center, which allows the Xbox to connect to a Media Center PC on the network (wired or wireless) and control and view the PC's Media Center functions (TV, PVR, music, photos, VOD) from the Xbox in another room.
The original Xbox needed a Media Center Extender to do this. The Xbox 360 doesn't need the Extender. Currently, Windows XP Media Center edition is required. When the article says "Premium edition," it means Vista Home Premium, which has the Media Center functions built in.
Daily Tech posted a preview of the AOpen MiniPC just today - it's their answer to the Mac Mini
Actually, that's the successor (Core Duo/945G chipset) to their current MiniPC that's been available for some time already. According to the specs, the current one seems to meet most of his requirements:
Since it uses an Intel chipset (915GM) and integrated graphics (GMA 900), he should have no problem getting Linux drivers from Intel.
The CPU (Pentium M or Celeron M) is cool, quiet, and better than the G4.
It has DVI, FireWire, and TV out (including component video).
The box itself is a little under $350, less if you already have mouse, keyboard, speakers etc.
It also has PCI-Express when many of the cheapest Dell and HPs I've seen don't have any way to upgrade the graphics.
That may be true for Dell (since they use Intel chipsets exclusively), but HP offers something close ($350 after $100 rebate) if you choose the right cheap model. The Pavilion a1330e has that all-important PCIe x16 slot that's missing from so many budget PCs. By default, it uses integrated Radeon graphics (ATI chipset), but it has a PCIe x16 slot.
Other differences at this price (good and bad):
price includes Windows XP Home (vs no OS)
Athlon 64 3200+ (instead of Sempron)
Socket 939 (instead of Socket 754)
40GB hard drive (80GB is $30 extra)
DVD-ROM or CD-burner (DVD-burner $50 extra)
Of course, I'd still choose to build my own and I'd rather not play the mail-in rebate game.
Re:yep, great benchmarks, but lacking in features.
on
MacBook Pro Benchmarks
·
· Score: 1
You're right -- it's the fact that no controller chipset from Intel supports FW800 that is the reason.
Does FireWire 800 (800Mbit/s) need to be integrated into the chipset when a 1394a/b controller chip (1 FireWire 800 + 2 FireWire 400 = 1600Mbit/s) can be added to the motherboard using a single PCIe x1 lane (250MByte/s = 2000Mbit/s) from the chipset?
Apple went with Intel-based systems, including the chipset. Intel, so far as I've been able to determine through their website, has FW400 support in their chipsets, but no FW800.
Not "in the chipset," but Intel did add FireWire 800 (1394b) to some of their "mainstream" desktop motherboards. Examples:
I'll assume Apple currently uses the 4-6 PCIe x1 lanes for AirPort, Gb ethernet, and ExpressCard (2 lanes). If Apple is using the 6-lane version, that should leave two extra x1 lanes for stuff like FireWire.
For PowerMac G5 users, no way. The intel is a 32-bit chip which would likely limit me to 2GB of ram.
Just a nitpick: Core Duo's 32-bitness doesn't limit you to 2GB of RAM. Without getting technical:
2^32 = 4,294,967,296
Intel's 945 chipset for Core Duo (which the MacBook Pro and iMac uses) supports up to 4GB.
The PowerMac will undoubtedly wait for the 64-bit Conroe desktop processors or Woodcrest workstation/server processors, which will arrive in July at the earliest.
Don't forget about the people who d/l it from kazaa or bittorrent?
Ars Technica actually has an interesting take on this (Enterprise Edition, Business Edition, and pirated versions).
Most Slashdot readers probably know about a pirated "corporate" version of Windows XP Pro that's widely available on peer-to-peer networks. This version's volume licensing (and no activation requirement) is what makes this pirated version easy to use by illegal downloaders.
For Vista, the only versions availabe through volume licensing (Business Edition and Enterprise Edition) are missing features that most pirates want (Media Center features and other goodies). The versions that pirates want (Home Premium and Ultimate) will require activation, so illegally downloaded copies of these versions will be a pain in the ass to use (in theory). Doesn't MS block "cracked" versions from downloading updates?
- Windows Starter 2007
- Windows Vista Home Basic
- Windows Vista Home Basic N
- Windows Vista Home Premium
- Windows Vista Business
- Windows Vista Business N
- Windows Vista Ultimate
- Windows Vista Enterprise
Windows Starter version will never be seen by 99% of people outside its intended market (developing nations). How many Slashdot readers have even seen Windows XP Starter Edition on a computer or in a store (including online stores)?
The 'N' versions of Windows (Europe-only) will be simply ignored by the vast majority of buyers and retailers. Some retailers (maybe most) will not even stock the 'N' versions. Source:
Vista Enterprise Edition will only be available through volume licensing, so retail buyers won't see this version either. The IT folks who can buy Enterprise Edition are knowledgable enough not to be confused.
So far, that leaves:
- Windows Vista Home Basic
- Windows Vista Home Premium
- Windows Vista Business
- Windows Vista Ultimate
Since Vista Ultimate Edition is probably only for the uber-geek, most retail buyers will probably only need to choose from three versions: (1) Home Basic, (2) Home Premium, and (3) Business. For buyers of Windows PCs, that choice is similar today: XP Home, XP Media Center Edition, and XP Pro.
At least I can try most of the various versions of Linux without having to pay $400 a pop.
I don't disagree with what I think is your main point (that "trying" different versions of Windows is expensive compared to free downloadable Linux distributions), but I don't think it's nearly as expensive as you claim.
Which versions of Windows cost $400 a pop? Prices for Vista haven't been released yet. Windows XP Home retail costs $200/$100 (full/upgrade) and XP Pro retail costs $300/$200 (MSRP). Of course, if you're knowledgable enough to download and install various Linux distributions, then you should easily find full OEM versions of XP Home, Media Center Edition, Pro, and Pro x64 edition that cost $94, $115, $140, and $143 at Newegg.
And, once I have a version I like. I don't have to fork out another $400 just because I decide to upgrade my motherboard.
This might be the case for the OEM licenses, which cannot be transferred to another computer and cost a lot less than $400. However, retail licenses (which still cost less than $400) can be transeferred to a new computer (reactivation) after being removed from the first computer.
I would have jumped all over the P M, except there was no desktop gear for it; unless I bought a notebook PC and did some expensive hacking...
If by "P M" you meant Pentium M, then there definitely are desktop motherboards, barebones, and complete desktop systems for this platform. The selection is small compared to the apparent selection of Socket 754/Turion solutions, but the Pentium M desktop gear is definitely there.
The selection of Core Duo/Pentium M/Celeron M desktop options should get much better soon when we see products using Intel's new 945GT desktop chipset.
Will they get XP if their system does not meet the requirements? Surely Dell will sell a low-end machine that might not have the hardware to run Vista? Or worse yet, they sell a machine that meets the minimal requirements, and performs like a dog.
That's an interesting point, since Dell's current bottom-of-the-barrel PCs (starting at $250 on sale) apparently use the 865GV chipset (integrated Extreme 2 graphics without an AGP port).
However, when Vista is finally sent to manufacturers for their Christmas shopping season PCs, I don't think this will be a problem. The current low-end chipset with integrated graphics, the 945GZ, will have no problem running Vista. However, even six months from now, this platform will undoubtedly be a little more expensive than what Dell pays today. So Dell PCs will probably start at $300-$350 instead of $250-$300.
Another cheap option for Dell (assuming they stick to Intel) is to use an old legacy AGP chipset without integrated graphics (like the 848P) and use a cheap Vista-capable AGP card like a GeForce FX5200 or Radeon 9500. I think this is less likely, even if it is cheaper, because of the added support costs of a platform without integrated graphics.
H.264 on standard DVD, with the upgrade path being ANY sort of higher capacity device.
Where is the popular content? (Trailers don't count) Are you sure popular content will be released in this format without the same kind of restrictions placed on HD-DVD and Blu-Ray?
That would be awsome, but will the popular content providers (controlled by MPAA and the like) release their content in hi-def H.264 without DRM restrictions that downgrade the resolution on non-HDCP outputs? If they do, will the studios allow set top DVD players to playback hi-def H.264 playback?
The current selection of popular titles in hi-def on DVD (to playback on computers, not set tops) is paltry and I don't see the selection expanding without software DRM (and OS requirements, like Vista) that restricts HD playback to HDCP devices. For example, since Terminator 2 Extreme Edition DVD with 1080p WMV HD was released in 2003, where are all the other popular titles? Now that Terminator 2's DRM has been cracked, I have a hard time believing the studios will trust any DRM that does not require HDCP and other restrictions built into the OS.
BTW, the output restrictions (requiring HDCP) built into Vista doesn't apply only to AACS (HD-DVD, Blu-Ray). It looks like it can be applied to any video content, including streaming downloads and H.264 on DVD. I predict popular content providers will restrict their hi-def content to OSs that have this DRM, like Vista and (I'm pretty sure) Tiger. I think the selection of HD on DVD content for legacy displays and OSs will be like today's selection of non-DRM legal music downloads.
It's hard to believe the major studios would not try to sell HD content to such a huge existing market. But with the Terminator 2 crack and the AACS fiasco (HD-DVD has been waiting for the spec to finalize), I think they probably are paranoid enough to require new hardware and software (including OS) for any HD content.
Good thing I didn't bet my balls. Mod me down fellas.
However, I still think my risky (dumb) assumptions (without looking, which I stated) were closer to the truth than the parent, who simply stated DSL costs $13-$15 per month and compared these rates to non-introductory dial-up rates. Don't dial-up ISPs have introductory rates? He mentioned nothing about $13-$15 being limited introductory rates or possible local phone requirements.
Yes, I use Comcast. Compared to DSL users, I know squat about DSL. I also have a friend who got stuck with an early termination fee from SBC/Yahoo DSL when she moved ten miles up the freeway to an area SBC/Yahoo didn't serve (Novato, CA). Because of situations like this, I think it's irresponsible to claim DSL costs $13-$15 without mentioning the other requirements.
I'm not trying to diss DSL in general. I'll probably switch, even at their regular rates, because they're more likely to offer lower rates for lower speeds. I don't need Comcast's freakin' 5M/384K up/down.
Price was an issue until just recently. SBC/ATT dropped to $13, and Verizon dropped to $15/mo. That's less than large ISPs (Earthlink, MSN, AOL) are charging for dial-up...
I haven't looked at those specific plans, but I'd bet my balls that those great looking deals from SBC/ATT and Verizon require you to have local landline phone service from them. Of course, if you're switching from dial-up, you probably already have local service from one of them. But some people want to ditch their landline.
I bet those rates also only last for one year (or the rest of the year) and require a one-year commitment to avoid "early cancellation fees." After this "introdutory price," it's probably around $40-$50 per month. So after the "introductory period," it costs significantly more than large dial-up ISPs (but broadband addiction will set in). That DSL modem probably ain't free and must be bought or rented for at least a buck per month.
Actually, I wouldn't bet my balls. But don't you think you should mention the very significant fine print attached to those deals? Saying it's only $13-$15 per month is a little misleading when the rate will probably double (at least) after a year. I haven't seen significant price cuts to "regular" broadband rates in the same way I've seen cuts to "introductory rates."
I purchased XP MCE today from a different vendor (Computer3G.com) and was not required to buy any hardware with it.
When the box arrives, check for very cheap hardware (like an audio cable). Seriously. Last time I checked, Newegg will bundle a $3 audio cable if you order WinXP MCE by itself, then give you an instant $3 rebate on that audio cable.
For OEM operating systems, MS is very lax on the "must be purchased with hardware" requirement. They are more strict with OEM versions of Office, which usually requires enough hardware to be a "complete system."
I thought their customer service was supposed to be better.
Their site's organization and categorization is great. I wouldn't be surprised if Newegg initially copied their design, as another replier claims. For browsing, I can't think of any other online tech store that can compare to Mwave and Newegg.
As for customer service, Newegg has better customer ratings at ResellerRatings.com and BizRate. Anyone know if these are reliable store rating sites? Here's links to Newegg's and Mwave's store rating pages and RR and BR:
Web site organization and categorization is great
on
A Look Inside Newegg
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I agree that prices are good, if not the best. They have a good reputation for speed and service, although anectodal evidence in this story's comments shows they might be going through growing pains.
But since its inception, what seperated Newegg from every other low-cost web retailer was the organization of their site. If you want to browse products, it's so freakin' easy pick a category/subcategory and narrow the choices down based on features you are looking for. I can't believe other sites haven't gotten this right yet (Mwave is okay).
For example, Buy.com has great prices for some items, especially when a heavy item qualifies for free shipping. But try browsing Buy.com's selection of 1GB DDR2 memory kits (2x512MB) or their selection of motherboards with socket 939, microATX form factor, nForce4 chipset, and 4 dimm slots. At Newegg, it's a snap.
The first time I browsed Newegg, the categorization of their inventory was as impressive to me as Yahoo's.
The interesting bit for me will be the upcoming iBook. I want to see how Core Solo stacks up against the G4 (seeing that Duo doesn't really clean out the house against the single G5).
I'd bet my backups that the next iBook and Mac mini will use the next version of the Celeron M, which will be based on Core Solo's architecture (the current Celeron M is based on Pentium M's architecture). Core Solo just doesn't fit the iBook's and Mac mini's price point. Celeron M does. I'm sure Core Solo will be reserved for the smaller and lower-priced MacBook Pro's.
Don't worry about the "Celeron" brand. The "Celeron M" (based on Pentium M) has been a very good performer and fantastic value since its introduction in January 2004. Two of the desktop versions of Celeron were crappier than crap, though: (1) the original Celeron (based on Pentium 2 but with no L2 cache) and (2) the first Pentium 4-based Celerons (128K L2 cache).
The key differences between Core Solo and the next versions of Celeron M (based on Core Solo):
Core Solo has 667MHz FSB, Celeron M will have 533MHz FSB
Core Solo has has 2MB on-die L2 cache, Celeron M will have 1MB
Core Solo will have more power-saving features than Celeron M
I predict the Celeron M-based iBooks and Mac minis will demolish the G4 in most of the apps used on these "non-professional" Macs. Since they're coming in April at the earliest, most of these apps will be further optimized for Intel (even Altivec/SSE3 apps).
Re:The retail boxes are technically upgrades
on
OSx86 Cracked Again
·
· Score: 1
I'm not disagreeing with you, but people are mixing "technical" semantics and "half-corrects" without telling all of the relevant facts. (Did that sentence make sense?) I'll try to list all of the relevant facts so people can understand why some people call boxed versions of OS X "upgrades" and why some people say "upgrade" versions Windows are just as "complete" as the "full" versions (and why "full" is a misnomer).
The only important "technical" difference between "upgrade" versions of Windows (reduced price) and "full" versions of Windows is that upgrade versions require proof of one of the two previous versions of Windows ("Home" or "Pro"). For example, the upgrade version of Windows XP Pro requires proof (not preinstallation) of one of the following products: Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows NT 4, or Windows 2000. (98 and ME were "home" versions, NT and 2000 were "pro" versions)
To use the upgrade version, the required previous version does not have to be installed on the PC. If necessary, the upgrade will ask you to briefly insert the previous version's CD to check if you qualify.
The upgrade version does not require you to perform an "upgrade installation." After checking for proof of a previous version, the upgrade version will allow you to format your hard drive and perform a clean, complete installation of Windows just like the full version.
Therefore, very few Windows buyers need the full retail version. For the vast majority, there is no significant technical difference between the full version and the upgrade version. Windows buyers with Windows 98, ME, NT 4, or 2000 can do a complete, clean install from the upgrade version of Windows XP Pro.
Slashdot readers who buy Windows usually ignore the boxed retail versions (full and upgrade) in favor of OEM versions, which are even cheaper than upgrade versions. No free technical support from MS, though. Also, some versions are (for now) OEM-only like Media Center Edition and x64 Edition.
In contrast to Windows's full, upgrade, and OEM versions, Mac OS X is offered in only one standalone version at one price. A previous version of OS X is not required, but this is redundant because you cannot buy a Mac without a version of Mac OS on it.
Some people say the standalone version of OS X is "technically" an upgrade version because any Mac you're installing it on has a previous version of Mac OS. You cannot buy a Mac without Mac OS.
I think calling standalone Mac OS X an "upgrade" is as misleading as calling upgrade versions of Windows "not full" or "not complete."
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not saying the mini's cheap (given the specs), but the design deserves a premium. I would also expect the mini to outlast some integrated notebook components like the LCD and keyboard.
GMA 950 is an OpenGL 1.4 GPU. Radeon 9200 is an OpenGL 1.3 GPU.
Sure, GMA 950 is not a good solution for playing DOOM 3 or Halo 2, but Quake 3 and UT 2003 will fly. Sharky Extreme got over 100 fps in Q3/UT 2003 using GMA 950. But who the heck is going to buy the Mac mini for playing the latest 3D graphics-heavy games?
Maybe I'm being unfair in my judgement of SiS and VIA, but since I value reliability, I would have liked to see desktop chipsets from Intel, NVIDIA, or ATI. Maybe SiS and VIA have gotten better since the days when people called their chipsets "cheapsets."
The original Xbox needed a Media Center Extender to do this. The Xbox 360 doesn't need the Extender. Currently, Windows XP Media Center edition is required. When the article says "Premium edition," it means Vista Home Premium, which has the Media Center functions built in.
Other differences at this price (good and bad):
Of course, I'd still choose to build my own and I'd rather not play the mail-in rebate game.
Here's a chipset system diagram for the chipset the MacBook Pro is apparently using:
I'll assume Apple currently uses the 4-6 PCIe x1 lanes for AirPort, Gb ethernet, and ExpressCard (2 lanes). If Apple is using the 6-lane version, that should leave two extra x1 lanes for stuff like FireWire.Just a nitpick: Core Duo's 32-bitness doesn't limit you to 2GB of RAM. Without getting technical:
Intel's 945 chipset for Core Duo (which the MacBook Pro and iMac uses) supports up to 4GB.The PowerMac will undoubtedly wait for the 64-bit Conroe desktop processors or Woodcrest workstation/server processors, which will arrive in July at the earliest.
Most Slashdot readers probably know about a pirated "corporate" version of Windows XP Pro that's widely available on peer-to-peer networks. This version's volume licensing (and no activation requirement) is what makes this pirated version easy to use by illegal downloaders.
For Vista, the only versions availabe through volume licensing (Business Edition and Enterprise Edition) are missing features that most pirates want (Media Center features and other goodies). The versions that pirates want (Home Premium and Ultimate) will require activation, so illegally downloaded copies of these versions will be a pain in the ass to use (in theory). Doesn't MS block "cracked" versions from downloading updates?
The 'N' versions of Windows (Europe-only) will be simply ignored by the vast majority of buyers and retailers. Some retailers (maybe most) will not even stock the 'N' versions. Source:
Vista Enterprise Edition will only be available through volume licensing, so retail buyers won't see this version either. The IT folks who can buy Enterprise Edition are knowledgable enough not to be confused.So far, that leaves:
Since Vista Ultimate Edition is probably only for the uber-geek, most retail buyers will probably only need to choose from three versions: (1) Home Basic, (2) Home Premium, and (3) Business. For buyers of Windows PCs, that choice is similar today: XP Home, XP Media Center Edition, and XP Pro.Which versions of Windows cost $400 a pop? Prices for Vista haven't been released yet. Windows XP Home retail costs $200/$100 (full/upgrade) and XP Pro retail costs $300/$200 (MSRP). Of course, if you're knowledgable enough to download and install various Linux distributions, then you should easily find full OEM versions of XP Home, Media Center Edition, Pro, and Pro x64 edition that cost $94, $115, $140, and $143 at Newegg.
This might be the case for the OEM licenses, which cannot be transferred to another computer and cost a lot less than $400. However, retail licenses (which still cost less than $400) can be transeferred to a new computer (reactivation) after being removed from the first computer.Examples:
Tom's Hardware has a June 2005 review on the AOpen I915Gmm-HFS motherboard:
The selection of Core Duo/Pentium M/Celeron M desktop options should get much better soon when we see products using Intel's new 945GT desktop chipset.However, when Vista is finally sent to manufacturers for their Christmas shopping season PCs, I don't think this will be a problem. The current low-end chipset with integrated graphics, the 945GZ, will have no problem running Vista. However, even six months from now, this platform will undoubtedly be a little more expensive than what Dell pays today. So Dell PCs will probably start at $300-$350 instead of $250-$300.
Another cheap option for Dell (assuming they stick to Intel) is to use an old legacy AGP chipset without integrated graphics (like the 848P) and use a cheap Vista-capable AGP card like a GeForce FX5200 or Radeon 9500. I think this is less likely, even if it is cheaper, because of the added support costs of a platform without integrated graphics.
That would be awsome, but will the popular content providers (controlled by MPAA and the like) release their content in hi-def H.264 without DRM restrictions that downgrade the resolution on non-HDCP outputs? If they do, will the studios allow set top DVD players to playback hi-def H.264 playback?
The current selection of popular titles in hi-def on DVD (to playback on computers, not set tops) is paltry and I don't see the selection expanding without software DRM (and OS requirements, like Vista) that restricts HD playback to HDCP devices. For example, since Terminator 2 Extreme Edition DVD with 1080p WMV HD was released in 2003, where are all the other popular titles? Now that Terminator 2's DRM has been cracked, I have a hard time believing the studios will trust any DRM that does not require HDCP and other restrictions built into the OS.
BTW, the output restrictions (requiring HDCP) built into Vista doesn't apply only to AACS (HD-DVD, Blu-Ray). It looks like it can be applied to any video content, including streaming downloads and H.264 on DVD. I predict popular content providers will restrict their hi-def content to OSs that have this DRM, like Vista and (I'm pretty sure) Tiger. I think the selection of HD on DVD content for legacy displays and OSs will be like today's selection of non-DRM legal music downloads.
It's hard to believe the major studios would not try to sell HD content to such a huge existing market. But with the Terminator 2 crack and the AACS fiasco (HD-DVD has been waiting for the spec to finalize), I think they probably are paranoid enough to require new hardware and software (including OS) for any HD content.
However, I still think my risky (dumb) assumptions (without looking, which I stated) were closer to the truth than the parent, who simply stated DSL costs $13-$15 per month and compared these rates to non-introductory dial-up rates. Don't dial-up ISPs have introductory rates? He mentioned nothing about $13-$15 being limited introductory rates or possible local phone requirements.
Yes, I use Comcast. Compared to DSL users, I know squat about DSL. I also have a friend who got stuck with an early termination fee from SBC/Yahoo DSL when she moved ten miles up the freeway to an area SBC/Yahoo didn't serve (Novato, CA). Because of situations like this, I think it's irresponsible to claim DSL costs $13-$15 without mentioning the other requirements.
I'm not trying to diss DSL in general. I'll probably switch, even at their regular rates, because they're more likely to offer lower rates for lower speeds. I don't need Comcast's freakin' 5M/384K up/down.
I bet those rates also only last for one year (or the rest of the year) and require a one-year commitment to avoid "early cancellation fees." After this "introdutory price," it's probably around $40-$50 per month. So after the "introductory period," it costs significantly more than large dial-up ISPs (but broadband addiction will set in). That DSL modem probably ain't free and must be bought or rented for at least a buck per month.
Actually, I wouldn't bet my balls. But don't you think you should mention the very significant fine print attached to those deals? Saying it's only $13-$15 per month is a little misleading when the rate will probably double (at least) after a year. I haven't seen significant price cuts to "regular" broadband rates in the same way I've seen cuts to "introductory rates."
When the box arrives, check for very cheap hardware (like an audio cable). Seriously. Last time I checked, Newegg will bundle a $3 audio cable if you order WinXP MCE by itself, then give you an instant $3 rebate on that audio cable.
For OEM operating systems, MS is very lax on the "must be purchased with hardware" requirement. They are more strict with OEM versions of Office, which usually requires enough hardware to be a "complete system."
As for customer service, Newegg has better customer ratings at ResellerRatings.com and BizRate. Anyone know if these are reliable store rating sites? Here's links to Newegg's and Mwave's store rating pages and RR and BR:
But since its inception, what seperated Newegg from every other low-cost web retailer was the organization of their site. If you want to browse products, it's so freakin' easy pick a category/subcategory and narrow the choices down based on features you are looking for. I can't believe other sites haven't gotten this right yet (Mwave is okay).
For example, Buy.com has great prices for some items, especially when a heavy item qualifies for free shipping. But try browsing Buy.com's selection of 1GB DDR2 memory kits (2x512MB) or their selection of motherboards with socket 939, microATX form factor, nForce4 chipset, and 4 dimm slots. At Newegg, it's a snap.
The first time I browsed Newegg, the categorization of their inventory was as impressive to me as Yahoo's.
Don't worry about the "Celeron" brand. The "Celeron M" (based on Pentium M) has been a very good performer and fantastic value since its introduction in January 2004. Two of the desktop versions of Celeron were crappier than crap, though: (1) the original Celeron (based on Pentium 2 but with no L2 cache) and (2) the first Pentium 4-based Celerons (128K L2 cache).
The key differences between Core Solo and the next versions of Celeron M (based on Core Solo):
I predict the Celeron M-based iBooks and Mac minis will demolish the G4 in most of the apps used on these "non-professional" Macs. Since they're coming in April at the earliest, most of these apps will be further optimized for Intel (even Altivec/SSE3 apps).
Source: