In article
XnsA7841A9453C1AHT1@z2EEd70JefktzJb64TMQebUU311gP 5hrG.npCmT206Xn5lh.90b
6e2Gl51, Diesel wrote:
Too complicated for you to understand, I get it. That's
probably why you feel right at home on a Mac. They are good
baby sitters for those who don't know, or want to learn, how
the machine in front of them works. Apple prides itself on
dumbing technology down and charging you out the ass for it.
nonsense.
Do you have any reputable sites which dispute what I wrote?
reputable sites don't refer to mac users as idiots who need
babysitters. only apple-bashers do that.
So you have no sites to offer?
all of them.
not a single reputable site will insult users.
See below if you want to get an idea of how much you're being ****ed
over. Btw, the Acer below is considerably more upgradable if you
wanted to do so. The all in one mac, due to it's very
design/case/etc, isn't.
who cares. what matters is getting actual work done, not opening up the
box and poking around inside.
Other than swapping out the HD and adding more ram, that is. With
the Acer, I can add another hard drive, internally; no swap
required. As well as the ram, the video card, the sound card, etc
etc etc. I can't changeout the sound card or video card on the mac.
I'm stuck with what it has. Thanks so much Apple. I can't add an
additional video card to the apple for quad display or coin mining,
either. I can with the Acer. And, if I wanted to mine coins,
I'd want more GPUS and the better CPU working together for faster
coin mining results. The apple won't lemme do that.
there's much more to life than mining bitcoins.
the prices of apple products are competitive for similar specs,
often *less* expensive.
We're discussing Apple computers, specifically. Do you have any
reputable sites that state an Apple computer costs about the same as
an equivalent PC? If so, please provide url(s)...
there are plenty of comparisons and more every day.
for instance, the retina imac 5k costs about the same as a dell 5k
display, which is just a display, no computer. you have to add the
cost of the computer, which makes it quite a bit more expensive
than the imac.
You aren't making a fair comparison, here.
oh yes i am.
And the retina imac 5k had/still has? issues with backlighting and
it's not exactly the speediest machine available, either. They took
an older machine and gave it a new video panel, essentially.
http://www.alphr.com/apple/apple-imac-1
nonsense.
apple did *much* more than give it a new video panel.
But, as I said, this isn't a fair comparison. Especially when you
consider that it's an all in one, and not just a display that can be
connected to other computers...Unlike the Dell you picked for price
comparison purposes..Which is a bit pricey, considering other
options...
it doesn't matter whether it's an all in one or not.
what matters is having comparable specs.
https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/imac
I'm assuming you picked the Dell because of it's high price, and,
made no effort to see what other companies were offering theirs for.
i picked the dell because both the dell and the 5k imac used the *same*
lcd panel internally.
the only difference was the external enclosure and that apple included
a computer and dell did not.
dell originally announced their 5k display for $2500, before it
actually shipped:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2467511,00.asp
And with the UltraSharp 27 Ultra HD 5K monitor expected to retail for
a cool $2,500, you may just need Santa to foot the bill for any
add-ons.
except that a few months later, apple announced the 5k imac for $2500,
so dell *had* to cut their price to $2000.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/28447...tor-price-afte
r-apple-launches-new-imac.html
...Dell, which has announced but not yet shipped its UltraSharp 5K
monitor, says it will cut its price, in the wake of Applešs latest
27-inch iMac hitting the market.
....
For $2,499.99, Apple is throwing an entire computing platform into
its 27-inch iMac with Retina 5K Display. Dellšs UltraSharp 27 is only
a monitor and the company may have had to drop its price to attract
buyers, Colegrove said.
So, I did it for you:
https://www.amazon.com/HP-J3G14A8-AB.../dp/B00VO85RY6
Thats a commercial grade one, too.
no it isn't. 'commercial grade' is meaningless and that's not in the
same class as what's in an imac, which is a dci-p3 wide gamut display
that's also nearly twice as bright.
lesser specs cost less. no surprise there.
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...28&ignorebbr=1
i7 (all retina imacs are i5)
absolutely wrong.
the top of the line imac is currently a 4.2 ghz i7 w/turbo boost to 4.5
ghz.
when the imac pro ships later this year, the top of the line imac will
be an 18 core xeon.
CPU, twice the ram, twice the HD
space...If compared to the prior two Apple Imacs with 5k retina
otherwise, HD space is the same, ram isn't, and cpu is lacking on
the Apple. The apple is using an i5. The acer is using an i7 with a
higher clock frequency before 'turbo boost'
again wrong.
that acer has a 3.6 ghz i7, while the imac tops out wtih a 4.2 ghz i7.
you're also ignoring numerous other features that the imac has, such as
thunderbolt 3, a wide gamut display, *extremely* fast ssd and *much*
more.
tl;dr the acer has lesser specs so it costs less.
the samsung galaxy s8 costs *more* than a similar iphone, as did
the galaxy note 7 before it was recalled.
Again, you aren't making a fair comparison here, either.
oh yes i am.
two flagship phones with similar features for a similar price.
if you want to see charging out the ass, look no further than
microsoft.
the price of the microsoft surface studio is about *double* the
price of a similar apple imac, with the only tangible difference
being that the surface studio display pivots and supports touch.
Well, you claimed that about the retina display, and, I've proven
you wrong already. so unless you're willing to provide specs on what
you think an equ imac is for fact checking I'm not going to take
what you've written at face value.
you haven't proven anything wrong.
all you've done is show how grossly uninformed you are.