Windows 7: More disapointing as the days go on

[FanIn80]

XPS One™ 24 with Windows 7
24" inch widescreen display
Core 2 Quad Q8200 @ 2.33GHz
4GB SDRAM @ 800Mhz
320GB HD
Integrated Intel® GMA X4500HD Graphics
OPTICAL DRIVE 8X Slot load CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW)
FLOPPY DRIVE & MEDIA READER 8-in-1 Media Reader Included
KEYBOARD XPS One® Wireless Keyboard including trackpad and media
MOUSE XPS One ® Wireless Mouse
SPEAKERS Premium JBL speakers with integrated subwoofer (25W total)
Integrated Gigabit Ethernet (10/100/1000 Base-T)
Internal Bluetooth 2.0 included
Internal 802.11 a/b/g/n wireless network card included

Price: $2399

27" iMac
27" (viewable) LED-backlit widescreen TFT active-matrix LCD display with IPS technology and 2560 by 1440 pixel resolution
Core 2 Quad i5 @ 2.66GHz (dynamically boostable to 3.2GHz)
4GB DDR3 @ 1066Mhz
1TB (1000GB) HD
ATI Radeon HD 4850 graphics processor with 512MB of GDDR3 memory
Slot-loading 8x SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Built-in iSight Camera
Built-in mic
One FireWire 800 port; 7 watts
Four USB 2.0 ports
SD card slot
Built-in AirPort Extreme 802.11n Wi-Fi wireless networking
Built-in Bluetooth 2.1 + EDR
Built-in 10/100/1000BASE-T Gigabit Ethernet
Built-in stereo speakers
Two internal 17-watt high-efficiency amplifiers
Headphone/optical digital audio output (minijack)
Audio line in/optical digital audio input (minijack)
Apple Magic Mouse with Multi-Touch technology
Apple Wireless Keyboard

Price: $2099

I dunno... seems like a pretty simple decision to me, but what do I know?

Also, before you guys start going on about build-it-yourself towers and monitors... do you really think you're going to get a 27" LED panel running 2560 by 1440 native resolution for under $1000?

By the way, the same iMac I detailed above is also on sale for only $1799 with a 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo instead of the Quad Core. Also the 22" iMacs start at $1299.


Edit: I know this is off-topic, and I apologize to the OP for that; however, with the numerous responses in this thread claiming that the iMac is over-priced, I thought it a good time to start stomping out these ancient myths that stopped being facts years ago. This won't be a very long sidetrack, since I've made my point and I'm quite certain it's incontestable.

[FlamingInfinity]

Originally Posted by TheU

Few examples of some small thing that drive me crazy about 7
The side bar is now just stuff you attach to your desktop. great, but, I can't even choose to have it stay on top of everything. Only way to see is it is to minimize to the desk top. They didn't even give the option of bringing up a 'dashboard' style view that they have on mac. Losing functionality... breathtaking.

The taskbar/quicklaunch has been melded into one big mess, and I can't even choose to use the old style taskbar. Visit a website that blocks your usual buttons and you have to use the start menu to open a new window or right click the quick launch, totally defeating the purpose of the quick launch area. Why are we losing options and functionality as we move forward?

The only improvements I like so far is when you open "libraries" it's a really smart way to sort folders and files. Otherwise this is windows vista with some back end fixes, loss of options and customization, and a further move towards mac style that just isn't working with the typical windows environment.

As for the dashboard thing which I think you're referring to, try this... www.rocketdock.com

It looks and has the same sort of functionality as the Mac ones. Should work on 7 methinks.

I have yet to get my Windows 7 disc, but should be here in a week or two. Now that my living situation is figured out.

[TheU]

Cal guy I know how to minimize all windows. I don't want to have to do taht everytime I want to see the sidebar. I have an widescreen monitor, there's no reason I shouldn't be able to have the sidebar showing at all times if i want

[TheU]

ill def try out rocket dock when they have the 64 bit system ready

[3 Justin 3]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

I dunno... seems like a pretty simple decision to me, but what do I know?

Also, before you guys start going on about build-it-yourself towers and monitors... do you really think you're going to get a 27" LED panel running 2560 by 1440 native resolution for under $1000?

By the way, the same iMac I detailed above is also on sale for only $1799 with a 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo instead of the Quad Core. Also the 22" iMacs start at $1299.


Edit: I know this is off-topic, and I apologize to the OP for that; however, with the numerous responses in this thread claiming that the iMac is over-priced, I thought it a good time to start stomping out these ancient myths that stopped being facts years ago. This won't be a very long sidetrack, since I've made my point and I'm quite certain it's incontestable.

If we aren't talking about elitist computers (ones with quad cores, etc.), where can I buy a new iMac for under $400? Honest question, because all the computers I see in flyers are under $800 (not top models, but decent), while the Mac's are all over a grand for basically the exact same spec's.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by 3 Justin 3

If we aren't talking about elitist computers (ones with quad cores, etc.), where can I buy a new iMac for under $400? Honest question, because all the computers I see in flyers are under $800 (not top models, but decent), while the Mac's are all over a grand for basically the exact same spec's.

No they aren't. Show me one Mac computer that is currently for sale at any price that shares the exact same specs as a $400 PC.

Seriously people, enough with the myths. It's one thing to say that you won't pay $1200 for a computer, that's an entirely understandable point. I won't argue against that, but stop with the "$400 PCs are exactly the same as $1200 Macs" stuff. It just simply isn't true.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

I dunno... seems like a pretty simple decision to me, but what do I know?

Also, before you guys start going on about build-it-yourself towers and monitors... do you really think you're going to get a 27" LED panel running 2560 by 1440 native resolution for under $1000?

By the way, the same iMac I detailed above is also on sale for only $1799 with a 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo instead of the Quad Core. Also the 22" iMacs start at $1299.


Edit: I know this is off-topic, and I apologize to the OP for that; however, with the numerous responses in this thread claiming that the iMac is over-priced, I thought it a good time to start stomping out these ancient myths that stopped being facts years ago. This won't be a very long sidetrack, since I've made my point and I'm quite certain it's incontestable.

Wow I just noticed something. I knew there was no way this could be right. And I was right and wrong at the same time. In the US the iMac above is $1999 and the Dell is only $1399. I don't know why Dell hates you guys so much to add $1000 to the price in Canada.

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by Deegee

I like being able to buy parts for my PC from different suppliers for the absolute most bang for my buck.

Are you able to buy a bunch of different parts for the Mac from different retails and build your own yet? I honestly don't know and that's why I have never gotten a Mac.

I bought hard drives and a CPU for my Mac Mini on ebay! Upgraded from a Core Solo 1.5ghz to a dual core Core2 running at 2ghz

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by schteve_d

My only real Apple experience is using iTunes for my iPhone and the clunkiness of that program has stopped me from becoming any more serious about a Mac.

Are you using Windows?

I've heard that iTunes runs a lot better on the Mac OS than it does on Windows. But I don't have a Mac so I'm not sure. But I hear what you are saying, my computer is pretty beefy and iTunes is still pretty clunky for my liking.

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

No they aren't. Show me one Mac computer that is currently for sale at any price that shares the exact same specs as a $400 PC.

Seriously people, enough with the myths. It's one thing to say that you won't pay $1200 for a computer, that's an entirely understandable point. I won't argue against that, but stop with the "$400 PCs are exactly the same as $1200 Macs" stuff. It just simply isn't true.

Well, I figured I'd have an honest look at this to see what truth there was these days to that... We could pull up a mammoth list of every last detail but the most important ones are probably going to be processor, RAM and hard drive.

Futureshop.ca has a Macbook 13" for $1099.99:
Core 2 Duo
2GB RAM
250 GB Hard drive

Dell.ca has an Inspiron 15 for $469:
Intel Celeron
2GB RAM
160GB HD
This should be enough computer for just about everyone but its not really the challenge you laid out. So lets customize it!

That same Inspiron can be upgraded to:
Core 2 Duo
2GB RAM
250 GB Hard drive
For a grand total of $629.

Sure, its not $400 but its still about half the cost of the mac. This just happened to be the first two computers I grabbed, I wouldn't be surprised to see that someone could find a steeper increase. Still, that's too much markup for my taste for a shiny apple sticker.




edit: I'm not trying to sway anyone - just put the actual facts out there. When it comes to computers: to each their own.

[wooohooo]

I'm going to be installing windows 7 tomorrow so I'll let you know what I think then.

But to FanIn80, I do not think it's merely a myth that Mac products are more costly than PC's. Every time I shopped for a computer (including discounts) I have gotten it for over 40% less. Although I do agree the macbooks are great computers... just some people prefer windows, some the mac os.

I was stuck in the summer using the Mac OS at work... I just hated it. Guess I'm a windows boy!

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Phaneuf3

Well, I figured I'd have an honest look at this to see what truth there was these days to that... We could pull up a mammoth list of every last detail but the most important ones are probably going to be processor, RAM and hard drive.

Futureshop.ca has a Macbook 13" for $1099.99:
Core 2 Duo
2GB RAM
250 GB Hard drive

Dell.ca has an Inspiron 15 for $469:
Intel Celeron
2GB RAM
160GB HD
This should be enough computer for just about everyone but its not really the challenge you laid out. So lets customize it!

That same Inspiron can be upgraded to:
Core 2 Duo
2GB RAM
250 GB Hard drive
For a grand total of $629.

Sure, its not $400 but its still about half the cost of the mac. This just happened to be the first two computers I grabbed, I wouldn't be surprised to see that someone could find a steeper increase. Still, that's too much markup for my taste for a shiny apple sticker.




edit: I'm not trying to sway anyone - just put the actual facts out there. When it comes to computers: to each their own.

When it comes to laptops, every single spec is important. Does it have a 7 hour battery? N wireless? 2.1 Bluetooth or just 2.0? Also comparing a "Celeron" processor to a 2.53 GHz Core 2 Duo isn't even close to being the same thing. Also, that $1099 MacBook has an LED backlit, high-res display panel which the other one doesn't.

Sure, we're talking about a difference of $400, but you get a lot of things that are very important for that price. Some people are quite happy with a slow processor, unreliable Bluetooth, a low quality display and only 2 hours of battery life... While other people are more than happy with paying a little bit more for better than that.

Again, I didn't say that PCs aren't cheaper. I said that this myth that you can get a $400 PC with the same specs as a $1200 Mac is a lie. I also challenged people to build me a PC with exactly the same specs as the $1700 iMac (including the screen size and quality) for less.

Like I said earlier, you can tell me that you don't want to spend more than $400 for a computer. That's a valid thing to say and I'll accept that, but you have to stop telling yourself that your $400 PC is just as good (or exactly the same) as a $1200 Mac, because it just isn't true.

I think it's important to note that Macs have come down in price (while going up in specs) quite a lot lately. This isn't 2 years ago anymore.

[bomber317]

I've been running Windows 7 for a few months now and like it a lot.

But I grew up using Windows, and I find the apples hard to use (just not my preference). I can see how some people will love how the apple OS works and how some people don't. Just a matter of preference.

In terms of the hardware, the monitor comment has been answered. I managed to snap a Dell 24" IPS monitor for $450 a few months ago. A really nice monitor, blows those TN monitors out of the water.

Comparing hardware directly between an Apple and a PC, the PC will be cheaper.

Thinking about it, I used to think it should be the other way around, since all the hardware for Apple is standardized and they should get volume discounts from the manufacturer, but I guess the "free market" of the PC drives the costs of the mobo/vid card/sound card/ram/etc. down.

[bomber317]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

When it comes to laptops, every single spec is important. Does it have a 7 hour battery? N wireless? 2.1 Bluetooth or just 2.0? Also comparing a "Celeron" processor to a 2.53 GHz Core 2 Duo isn't even close to being the same thing. Also, that $1099 MacBook has an LED backlit, high-res display panel which the other one doesn't.

Was about to make a similar comment, but he did upgrade the processor from Celeron to Core 2 Duo.

The other points are valid though, but I still believe I could price out a cheaper PC then a same-spec Apple. Not sure how wide the gap will be, I'd imagine you are correct the gap is much smaller now then before.

I'm talking about desktops though. Don't know enough about laptops to make the same comment.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by bomber317

Comparing hardware directly between an Apple and a PC, the PC will be cheaper.

Give me exact, matching specs with prices. Blanket statements are worth nothing.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by bomber317

Was about to make a similar comment, but he did upgrade the processor from Celeron to Core 2 Duo.

The other points are valid though, but I still believe I could price out a cheaper PC then a same-spec Apple. Not sure how wide the gap will be, I'd imagine you are correct the gap is much smaller now then before.

Uhh... he updated it to a "Core 2 Duo." What speed? What's the bus? It could be a 1.6GHz Core 2 Duo with 333MHz bus. How is that even close to a 2.2GHz with a 1066MHz bus?

[WindomURL]

Stop with the g.d. hijack already, will ya?

[Pastiche]

Apple: Designer Brand Computers at Designer Brand Prices

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Do a search for aliens from other planets living and working among us. It is not uncommon.

As far as I'm concerned Snow Leopard has been a disaster for me. My main computer at work is a MacBook and it became virtually unusable with all the "pausing" and waiting I had to do because of some hard-drive stalling issue. I applied the patch that Apple provided, but I'm still seeing a really sluggish operating system.

My iMac isn't much better. It's performance trying to open a webpage makes me want to throw it across the room. I've used PCs for years and I've expected that kind of behaviour after a while and a fresh go of things always clears it up, but I didn't expect such terrible performance from my Macs.

If you want to talk about something that Apple has done wonders with, it's the multi-touch trackpad. Mice are for suckers.

[MickMcGeough]

Originally Posted by TheU

After using a friends mac and screwing around with iMacs at future shop, I have to admit I'm really disappointed with windows 7. At 1st some of the obvious mistakes and cosmetic touch ups were nice, the new hot links on the my computer window, for instance (great addition). Yet as the days go on I run into frustrating issues, like the confusing and complicated ownership commands (to try and rename windows sidebar... the vista side bar had more options, if you can believe) the taskbar/quick launch also has a funny quirk; when you click a link on yoru task bar it often expands as the active window. problem is if your in a site that wont let you start a new window, liek a java chatroom, you have to open the start menu as clicking the firefox link only switches to the chat room (unless you right click, then hit new.. a seemingly small gripe but it completely mitigates the function of a quick launch bar)

Windows 7 is what Vista should have been, and Mac continues to march and improve their hardware and OS. Very disappointing.

How's everyone else on 7 so far?

I could hardly understand this post, but it looks to me like you have all of one complaint on the new Windows OS. Shouldn't you be happy?