Want a Penryn processor crack open an apple!

WTF - i am speachless all i can say is WTF!

Intel sticks to everyone giving apples first crack at penryn!

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/37152/135/

"TGDaily goes on to explain:

Intel told us Monday afternoon that this new processor in fact is not the X9100, but rather a %u201Cspecial%u201D SKU of the 45 nm Penryn processor for the company%u2019s Santa Rosa platform. We can%u2019t imagine that HP and Dell are happy about the fact that Apple can officially ship a Core 2 Duo processor that matches most of the specifications of an unannounced Intel product - the only technical differentiator is the CPU%u2019s power thermal design power (TDP), which is 11 watts above the 44 watt X9100"

GoGo AMD! GoGo nvidia with! down with intel

wow I am offically not longer the #1 intel fanboy

AMD fanboy #1

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by dragonsprayer on 04-30-2008 at 03:52:56 AM

------------------------------

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h138/4rothrocks/WarpedSystemsAnimation-1.jpg

Register or log in to remove.

Huh??

------------------------------ e2160@3GHz: OCing my way to Ubuntuland!
Reply to Mondoman

announced that they will be available sometime in the future? or announced that you can buy one now?

there is a BIG difference

------------------------------ macgirlfriend:
"Hey I don't get you people, the people on insanely mac were so much nicer"
Reply to skittle

Looks like Apple is sending a little of that iPod/iPhone money Intel's way to get first crack at their newest CPU's. The other companies (HP, Dell, etc.) don't have to worry unless Apple becomes a viable gaming platform which isn't likely to happen. It's a good move on Apple's part because since the iPod's release young people more and more are looking to Apple for their computer purchases.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
-Aristotle
Reply to ausch30

ausch30 wrote :

Looks like Apple is sending a little of that iPod/iPhone money Intel's way to get first crack at their newest CPU's. The other companies (HP, Dell, etc.) don't have to worry unless Apple becomes a viable gaming platform which isn't likely to happen. It's a good move on Apple's part because since the iPod's release young people more and more are looking to Apple for their computer purchases.

Meh, iPod is overpriced and filled with low quality components to increase profit margin. If their gaming computers follow the same trend... :sarcastic:

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ Q6600@3.6ghz, GA-EX38-DS4 motherboard, 8gb 800mhz ddr2 4-3-3-12, 8800GTS(g92)@780mhz, 1TB + 1.5TB hdds, 850watt psu
Reply to dagger

dagger wrote :

Meh, iPod is overpriced and filled with low quality components to increase profit margin. If their gaming computers follow the same trend... :sarcastic:

Now think like the average consumer "oooooh shiny, I want one". Over priced, low quality components don't matter as long as it looks good. Apple has made a fortune selling average components for premium prices in a pretty box.

------------------------------
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
-Aristotle
Reply to ausch30

Meh, Intel is a large overweight man sitting on his couch sucking money up through a straw while **** on the floor, the floor being us.

I enjoy intel CPU's for their performance but the way they work is just fooked up. Not in my taste.

I really hope AMD comes back with a good CPU.

Message quoted 1 times

Reply to sacre

sacre wrote :

Meh, Intel is a large overweight man sitting on his couch sucking money up through a straw while **** on the floor, the floor being us.

I enjoy intel CPU's for their performance but the way they work is just fooked up. Not in my taste.

I really hope AMD comes back with a good CPU.

AMD is the thin guy Intel is setting on top of. It's going to be hard for him to get back up. :na:

------------------------------ Q6600@3.6ghz, GA-EX38-DS4 motherboard, 8gb 800mhz ddr2 4-3-3-12, 8800GTS(g92)@780mhz, 1TB + 1.5TB hdds, 850watt psu
Reply to dagger

The problem with AMD is they have great chipsets, decent GPU's and average CPU's, whereas Intel has great CPU's, decent chipsets and very sub par IGP. For some reason, Intel wins out all the time: with OEM's during the rebate program, with businesses during the "Dude you got a Dell" cycle, and with gamers and enthusiasts today.

AMD can't win for losing, which is why they need Deneb soon, but won't really have a chance until Bulldozer. Gamers might buy ATI over Nvidia, but they mostly want ATI on Intel chipsets with Intel CPU's. The mainstream doesn't care about graphics when they buy, but when they do, they can buypass the IGP with a discrete GPU.

I don't have enough hate for Apple (or love either, they aren't on my radar), so I don't care if they get Intel CPU's before enthusiasts. Money talks and no matter how much enthusiasts spend upgrading, it's not the amount that an OEM, or Apple, can direct Intel's way.

Message quoted 2 times

------------------------------ Phenom 8750, ASUS M3A78T
4 gigs Kingston DDR2 800 two 1T SAMSUNG HD103UI
Sapphire 4870x2, Sony BDU-X10S BD-ROM
Antec Neo 650 PSU Antec Nine Hundred, Acer H213H 1080p LCD
Reply to yipsl

I'll think I'll wait for Penryn myself.

Reply to runswindows95

yipsl wrote :

The problem with AMD is they have great chipsets, decent GPU's and average CPU's, whereas Intel has great CPU's, decent chipsets and very sub par IGP. For some reason, Intel wins out all the time: with OEM's during the rebate program, with businesses during the "Dude you got a Dell" cycle, and with gamers and enthusiasts today.

AMD can't win for losing, which is why they need Deneb soon, but won't really have a chance until Bulldozer. Gamers might buy ATI over Nvidia, but they mostly want ATI on Intel chipsets with Intel CPU's. The mainstream doesn't care about graphics when they buy, but when they do, they can buypass the IGP with a discrete GPU.

I don't have enough hate for Apple (or love either, they aren't on my radar), so I don't care if they get Intel CPU's before enthusiasts. Money talks and no matter how much enthusiasts spend upgrading, it's not the amount that an OEM, or Apple, can direct Intel's way.

The reason Intel wins out all the time is down to the fact that to 7 times out of 10 people do not know, or even care whats inside their machine appart from Intel.....

For some unknown reason for many Intel Integrated Graphics with Intel processors seems to float their boat..

Intel has been the main company in pcs for over 20 years... Now all OEM's sell more machines with IGP's than anyone else down to the fact of price... Dell being and example..

IGP is cheap, its part of the motherboard and doesnt need a noisy fan to keep it cool...

Intel although nothing outstanding untill Labaree can still play games such as Sims 2 and www.miniclip.com etc which in most cases is what fits peoples needs..

One of the reasons Sims 2 sold so many it didnt really need a powerfull pc to run it on.. Its sold over a 100 million i heard hasnt it... World of Warcraft dont need a decent graphic cards either.. This runs on a low-mid range video card...

Now its also down to stability and AMD Processors of late have not been known for that let alone slower speeds.
Now as its still new days on their 790fx chipset and we havent seen yet what the outcome is on the reliability factor...
It should but wether or not it is another thing......

There seem to some issues with Phenoms 9850s on 790s let alone all the other chipsets out there..

It seems that the 9850BE is unfortunally like the Prescott and can run really hot even without overclocking it but i did post a solution in another topic....

AMD need a processor miracle, Nintendos Wii if you like as I doubt even Nintendo suspected how popular the Wii would be...

Now I find it ironic the only computer that has defied having Intel processors by having Motorola and IBM Power pc Processors is now using them..

And to make things worst they are on top of the Intel Technical Tree... by having 8 core macs well before 8 core pcs..

Apple machines were great with SCSI and Motorola Processors and with joint co-op between IBM and Motorola the power PC processor was born.. Its apple talk is what made Apples, Apples. The reliability and speed back then were much faster as standard for disk access due to scsi for one.

And now their os runs on a linux core but thats no bad thing, is not backward compatible with old..

Apples now are basically a fancy looking pc with Asus motheroboards and a fancy locked bios... Apple being different is really no more...

Why dont Apple release Tiger for pc. I truly believe many pc owners would have double os on their computers if the price was right.

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by Harry-Plopper on 04-30-2008 at 02:29:16 PM

Reply to Harry-Plopper

Not surprised at all.
45nm Core 2's have been in the MacBook and MacBook Pro for a few months now (laptop's, so the laptop version of the Wolfdale), they had 45nm quad-core Xeons before anyone else for the Mac Pro.
The iMac uses laptop CPU's as well, so the 45nm core in them is only the same as the CPU in the MacBook/MacBook Pro. Except in the iMac there is the option for the 3.06GHz clocked model

------------------------------ 6000+ Stock, GA M57SLi-S4, XFX 8800GTX's SLi Stock, 4Gb Corsair PC6400 DHX, CoolerMaster 850W, 36Gb Raptor boot drive, 2x150Gb Raptor's in RAID 0 - XFX RAID controller & 300Gb Seagate. PowerBook G4 12" 1.5GHz, Go5200 64mb, 768mb RAM, 80Gb HD, SuperDrive.
Reply to LukeBird

This conincides with Razer releasing a Mac version of the Deathadder. *devises conspiracy theory*

Reply to randomizer

Harry-Plopper wrote :

Why dont Apple release Tiger for pc. I truly believe many pc owners would have double os on their computers if the price was right.

You can't get away with nearly as much markup on just an OS, as you said, the price would have to be right.

They make a killing on the hardware, and the OS is the best way to get (some) people to buy the hardware.

Reply to mi1ez

the reason for intel killing amd is because everyone had intel computers and they all worked fine and were fast. now they go and buy a computer they see amd. (a company they never heard of). on cheaper pc's and people will think its worse because there on cheaper pc's

when the average pc user goes to the store all they think about is intel is the best and more expensive = better performance. so they go and buy there intel dual core computer with 7400 nvidia graphics instead of the phenonem and the 2600 ati card for $100 more

Message quoted 1 times

Reply to cal8949

As a fellow university student put it: "AMDs are cheap and nasty".

Reply to randomizer

cal8949 wrote :

the reason for intel killing amd is because everyone had intel computers and they all worked fine and were fast. now they go and buy a computer they see amd. (a company they never heard of). on cheaper pc's and people will think its worse because there on cheaper pc's

when the average pc user goes to the store all they think about is intel is the best and more expensive = better performance. so they go and buy there intel dual core computer with 7400 nvidia graphics instead of the phenonem and the 2600 ati card for $100 more

Did you read the thread title?? :sarcastic:

Just incase you didn't, it's (drum-roll, puuuuuurrrrlease....) Want a Penryn processor crack open an apple!

mi1ez, OS X retail is about £80 in the UK (no idea in the US, but i'd imagine $100-125) whereas a retail copy of Vista is what, double that ,easy!!

Message quoted 2 times

------------------------------ 6000+ Stock, GA M57SLi-S4, XFX 8800GTX's SLi Stock, 4Gb Corsair PC6400 DHX, CoolerMaster 850W, 36Gb Raptor boot drive, 2x150Gb Raptor's in RAID 0 - XFX RAID controller & 300Gb Seagate. PowerBook G4 12" 1.5GHz, Go5200 64mb, 768mb RAM, 80Gb HD, SuperDrive.
Reply to LukeBird

dragonsprayer wrote :

wow I am offically not longer the #1 intel fanboy

AMD fanboy #1

Reply to turboflame

^^ That's what I was thinking too.

Reply to randomizer

LukeBird wrote :

mi1ez, OS X retail is about £80 in the UK (no idea in the US, but i'd imagine $100-125) whereas a retail copy of Vista is what, double that ,easy!!

Once you've already paid far too much for the Apple hardware! They've had their major income, anything else is a bonus. If they were to release OS X to run on any PC, they'd sell nowhere near as much hardware and would make less profit overall I'd hazard.

Message quoted 1 times

Reply to mi1ez

mi1ez wrote :

Once you've already paid far too much for the Apple hardware! They've had their major income, anything else is a bonus. If they were to release OS X to run on any PC, they'd sell nowhere near as much hardware and would make less profit overall I'd hazard.

Personally I doubt the latter, but that's my opinion
I don't think the "Mac's are expensive" argument holds any water anymore(yes they're more expensive than an equivalent PC, but much less than they used to be), but each to their own.

------------------------------ 6000+ Stock, GA M57SLi-S4, XFX 8800GTX's SLi Stock, 4Gb Corsair PC6400 DHX, CoolerMaster 850W, 36Gb Raptor boot drive, 2x150Gb Raptor's in RAID 0 - XFX RAID controller & 300Gb Seagate. PowerBook G4 12" 1.5GHz, Go5200 64mb, 768mb RAM, 80Gb HD, SuperDrive.
Reply to LukeBird

amdfangirl wrote :

^^ then again linux is free

then again waht the point of spending money on PC compoents and not being able to play games or use Industry Standard Programs (ie Photoshop).

Damn i hate apple, overpriced under spec.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------

http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/sigs/sigimage.php?u=233016&bg=1&c1=FFFFFF&c2=000000&c3=000000&c4=0000CC&c5=FFFFFF

Reply to dobby

apple anoys me that in many ways, firstly that there advertising is around Windows is crap, not why there product superior (which it isnt.
2). it's cult following of high horsed morons.
3). form over function.
4). i could go on...

Message quoted 2 times

Reply to dobby

amdfangirl wrote :

One word "Wine"
Besides I like GNOME soduku

True, but I bought (not really mine tho) a macbook because Apple Stores in Australia stocked replacement batteries for as far back as the ibook G3 (g1) and I liked the magsafe connector and the PSU. If it weren't for this I'd have a 12" touchscreen HP notebook (Turion 64 X2)

you kniw as fully as me that you cant get the same level of Frame rate that you can when a game is played natively. this is comparative to getting 8400 FPS, from a 8800. so you actually end up paying.

BTW i dont hate linux, but it doesnt really have a place on gaming sysyem, i have a Linux system - ubuntu FF - , which (until recently) was a game server, now it browses the internet and play music, none of which require power Compoents.

Message quoted 1 times

Reply to dobby

<<Taking bets that the author of the article doesn't know the difference between a Penryn and a Harpertown>>

------------------------------ Being requested to remove my siggy implying some people here would receive greater personal benefit from a local Prostitute than from a new GPU in no way, shape, or form changes the aforementioned opinion.
Reply to Scotteq

Macs have terminal, that's a +++ over a DOS prompt. Not sure what else I like about them.

Message quoted 1 times

Reply to randomizer

amdfangirl wrote :

^^ linux was never meant for heavy gaming, soduku is fine for it (FPS is pretty hard to measure tho...)

I doubt you'd get into too much trouble if your frame rate dropped as low as 1FPS.
It's not like 7 and 9 are gonna team up and frag you while you try to turn around!

Reply to mi1ez

^ No, and that's just my point...

Reply to mi1ez

dobby wrote :

apple anoys me that in many ways, firstly that there advertising is around Windows is crap, not why there product superior (which it isnt.
2). it's cult following of high horsed morons.
3). form over function.
4). i could go on...

Just the sort of anti-Apple goodness I love... :sarcastic:
Ironically you're the narrow-minded hate boy (or girl) who is no better than the people you're insulting...
OS X is most certainly not form over function (there are things it does vastly better than Windows and vice versa) and yes there are plenty of "cult following high horsed morons", and there aren't with Windows?!? :sarcastic:
There are several Mac using people on here, you really feel the need to insult them (and me)?

ETA Did you really need to post the message I quoted? It was a pointless flaming comment...

Message edited by LukeBird on 04-30-2008 at 03:33:31 PM

------------------------------ 6000+ Stock, GA M57SLi-S4, XFX 8800GTX's SLi Stock, 4Gb Corsair PC6400 DHX, CoolerMaster 850W, 36Gb Raptor boot drive, 2x150Gb Raptor's in RAID 0 - XFX RAID controller & 300Gb Seagate. PowerBook G4 12" 1.5GHz, Go5200 64mb, 768mb RAM, 80Gb HD, SuperDrive.
Reply to LukeBird

dobby wrote :

then again waht the point of spending money on PC compoents and not being able to play games or use Industry Standard Programs (ie Photoshop).

Damn i hate apple, overpriced under spec.

Hey, that's only because Apple needs money to make them really good and fast

dobby wrote :

apple anoys me that in many ways, firstly that there advertising is around Windows is crap, not why there product superior (which it isnt.
2). it's cult following of high horsed morons.
3). form over function.
4). i could go on...

Oh really? Shouldn't it be the other way around. 1) Mac get no viruses 2) Macs can run anything 3) Macs have cool ads 4) They crash less 5) Cooler interface and command keys 6) Multi-touch on new Macbooks 7) Macs can run iwork

randomizer wrote :

Macs have terminal, that's a +++ over a DOS prompt. Not sure what else I like about them.

Whatever that means, its an improvement

Message quoted 3 times

Reply to macgirlfriend

yipsl wrote :

The problem with AMD is they have great chipsets, decent GPU's and average CPU's, whereas Intel has great CPU's, decent chipsets and very sub par IGP. For some reason, Intel wins out all the time: with OEM's during the rebate program, with businesses during the "Dude you got a Dell" cycle, and with gamers and enthusiasts today.

AMD can't win for losing, which is why they need Deneb soon, but won't really have a chance until Bulldozer. Gamers might buy ATI over Nvidia, but they mostly want ATI on Intel chipsets with Intel CPU's. The mainstream doesn't care about graphics when they buy, but when they do, they can buypass the IGP with a discrete GPU.

I don't have enough hate for Apple (or love either, they aren't on my radar), so I don't care if they get Intel CPU's before enthusiasts. Money talks and no matter how much enthusiasts spend upgrading, it's not the amount that an OEM, or Apple, can direct Intel's way.

I would say the 780G is decent but the rest are normal. Intels chipsets seem to have an upper hand on nVidia chipsets minus the SLI but not everyone wants dual GPUs or needs SLI right? Intels IGPs are not for gaming and thats just known. They are mainly for business machines as they are cheap and plentyfull, where as AMD just now has their own IGPs to make. Thats why Intels IGPs and CPUs do better in the business/OEM market. Its cheaper and easier.

Dude back in 2003-2006 AMD had the enthusiast market. Everyone I knew, apart from a friend who worked at Intel and got the best Intel chip for free, was buying AMD for their gaming rigs. I didn't cuz I had no money back then. But AMD didn't have the supply lines to feed OEMs with what they needed for OEMs to be able to fully adopt AMD.

I bought ATI over nVidia b/c I prefer ATI. Nothing to do with AMD. Since ATI is still a seperate division people will still see it as ATI vs nVidia and whichever performs better gets the sales.

------------------------------

http://www.steamcalculator.com/76561197970703804/camo_sig.png

Reply to jimmysmitty

amdfangirl wrote :

Not all mac users are uber-biased towards macs. They are alright (I have 2) but my XP system is still my main rig.........

No, I didn't say they were I have both and I like both for different reasons.
I have my PB that I use for web-browsing light CS3 use and a few other bits and pieces.
Means my PC can be just for gaming.

------------------------------ 6000+ Stock, GA M57SLi-S4, XFX 8800GTX's SLi Stock, 4Gb Corsair PC6400 DHX, CoolerMaster 850W, 36Gb Raptor boot drive, 2x150Gb Raptor's in RAID 0 - XFX RAID controller & 300Gb Seagate. PowerBook G4 12" 1.5GHz, Go5200 64mb, 768mb RAM, 80Gb HD, SuperDrive.
Reply to LukeBird

amdfangirl wrote :

What's multi-touch?

'Gestures' that you can do on the touchpad, a bit like using keyboard shortcuts.
If you move your fingers in a certain way on the pad you can zoom the page, scroll pages etc.

------------------------------ 6000+ Stock, GA M57SLi-S4, XFX 8800GTX's SLi Stock, 4Gb Corsair PC6400 DHX, CoolerMaster 850W, 36Gb Raptor boot drive, 2x150Gb Raptor's in RAID 0 - XFX RAID controller & 300Gb Seagate. PowerBook G4 12" 1.5GHz, Go5200 64mb, 768mb RAM, 80Gb HD, SuperDrive.
Reply to LukeBird

LukeBird wrote :

mi1ez, OS X retail is about £80 in the UK (no idea in the US, but i'd imagine $100-125) whereas a retail copy of Vista is what, double that ,easy!!

Wrong. I paid $140 for my copy of Vista Home Premium. And Ultimate is just $150. Thats the OEM copies yes but still its not as bad as people make it out to be. Plus OSX is Apple and well Apple sucks.

Message quoted 2 times

------------------------------

Reply to jimmysmitty

jimmysmitty wrote :

Wrong. I paid $140 for my copy of Vista Home Premium. And Ultimate is just $150. Thats the OEM copies yes but still its not as bad as people make it out to be. Plus OSX is Apple and well Apple sucks.

How can you say that when a copy of Mac OSX is free when you buy a Mac. I mean like its not like that happens with Windows.

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by macgirlfriend on 04-30-2008 at 03:49:29 PM

Reply to macgirlfriend

macgirlfriend wrote :

3) Macs have cool ads [...] Cooler interface and command keys

I might have let the "cooler interface" comment slide, but after "cool ads"... *sigh* That really isn't a reason for an Apple to be better, only a reason they sell so many!

Ideally, I'd have a Mac, a Windows PC, and a Linux PC. They're all good at what the designers strive for, be it compatiblity, efficiency, gaming(ish), productivity, A/V. I could go on. To each their own. However, since this is a hardware forum on a hardware website, you can expect the closed box Apples to get a bashing every time they're mentioned.

Thank you and good morning/afternoon/evening/night (circle relevant answer and return to form teacher no later than Friday 2nd)

Message quoted 1 times

Reply to mi1ez

macgirlfriend wrote :

How can you say that when a copy of Mac OSX is free when you buy a Mac. I mean like its not like that happens with Windows.

Well lets see. First MAC attacks PC's all together. Stating they are slow and bad and so on. Then they start using PC components. So now they attack Vista only. Funny really. MAC was supposed to be better than PC but now its a PC that runs OSX. I kind of find that ironic in the end.

Perrsonally I have no want to use a MAC. People can have them if they want them. Yes OSX comes with a MAC but the price you pay for that MAC is not worth it. I could build a much nicer computer with that amount of cash.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------

Reply to jimmysmitty

jimmysmitty wrote :

Wrong. I paid $140 for my copy of Vista Home Premium. And Ultimate is just $150. Thats the OEM copies yes but still its not as bad as people make it out to be. Plus OSX is Apple and well Apple sucks.

Not wrong.
I said RETAIL. An OEM licence is a specific type of licence. As is retail.
I have to admit jimmysmitty, your last comment made me lose rather a large amount of respect for you... :sarcastic:

mi1ez wrote :

Ideally, I'd have a Mac, a Windows PC, and a Linux PC. They're all good at what the designers strive for, be it compatiblity, efficiency, gaming(ish), productivity, A/V. I could go on. To each their own.

Completely agree.
Hence I have my Mac for web use etc. and my PC for gaming. I do have an old PC knocking around - Athlon64 Skt754 3700+, 6800GS 256mb currently with no RAM or optical drive, that I'm tempted to put Linux on

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ 6000+ Stock, GA M57SLi-S4, XFX 8800GTX's SLi Stock, 4Gb Corsair PC6400 DHX, CoolerMaster 850W, 36Gb Raptor boot drive, 2x150Gb Raptor's in RAID 0 - XFX RAID controller & 300Gb Seagate. PowerBook G4 12" 1.5GHz, Go5200 64mb, 768mb RAM, 80Gb HD, SuperDrive.
Reply to LukeBird

amdfangirl wrote :

Same here, only that my Windows and linux computers are the same computer

I just like the idea of having three of them lined up on my desk! :na:

Reply to mi1ez

jimmysmitty wrote :

Well lets see. First MAC attacks PC's all together. Stating they are slow and bad and so on. Then they start using PC components. So now they attack Vista only. Funny really. MAC was supposed to be better than PC but now its a PC that runs OSX. I kind of find that ironic in the end.

Perrsonally I have no want to use a MAC. People can have them if they want them. Yes OSX comes with a MAC but the price you pay for that MAC is not worth it. I could build a much nicer computer with that amount of cash.

Hey, but what happens when it breaks? If its a Mac and you bought AppleCare it can be fixed, if not your computer's going to die. Without warranties computers die and can't be used.

Message quoted 2 times

Reply to macgirlfriend

dobby wrote :

you kniw as fully as me that you cant get the same level of Frame rate that you can when a game is played natively. this is comparative to getting 8400 FPS, from a 8800. so you actually end up paying.

Sorry but thats not true, running an app through wine (assuming it works of course) is just as fast as if it were natively run on windows. The problem is that not everything works nicely with wine... specifically newer games... .net... office 2007 (ouch i really like office 2007)

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------ macgirlfriend:
"Hey I don't get you people, the people on insanely mac were so much nicer"
Reply to skittle

macgirlfriend wrote :

Hey, but what happens when it breaks? If its a Mac and you bought AppleCare it can be fixed, if not your computer's going to die. Without warranties computers die and can't be used.

Unless you bought it at a shop that offers support.

Mmmm... Scan White Cobra...
http://3xs.scan.co.uk/ShowSystem.asp?SystemID=744

Reply to mi1ez

amdfangirl wrote :

I have a really hard time with one, so how can I fit 3?

Get a triple SLI desk!

Reply to mi1ez

macgirlfriend wrote :

Hey, but what happens when it breaks? If its a Mac and you bought AppleCare it can be fixed, if not your computer's going to die. Without warranties computers die and can't be used.

Thats the beauty building my own machine, I can fix it my self.

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by skittle on 04-30-2008 at 04:18:55 PM

------------------------------ macgirlfriend:
"Hey I don't get you people, the people on insanely mac were so much nicer"
Reply to skittle

LukeBird wrote :

Not wrong.
I said RETAIL. An OEM licence is a specific type of licence. As is retail.
I have to admit jimmysmitty, your last comment made me lose rather a large amount of respect for you... :sarcastic:

Completely agree.
Hence I have my Mac for web use etc. and my PC for gaming. I do have an old PC knocking around - Athlon64 Skt754 3700+, 6800GS 256mb currently with no RAM or optical drive, that I'm tempted to put Linux on

Sorry. My computer dyslexia has been kicking in a lot recently. I miss words or read the backwards...it gets annoying. But you are right. Only problem is that not every older MAC will support OSX. It does take some of the newer hardware. But still the OEM versions should count as they are plentyfull and easily accessable from a online retailer.

Either way MACS are overrated. They are just PCs now that have hardware that can specifically run OSX and thats it.

Message quoted 2 times

------------------------------

Reply to jimmysmitty

skittle wrote :

Thats the beauty of building my own machine, I can fix it my self.

BINGO!!!!!!!!! This is THG. Most posters here build their own hence no need to worry about warranties from an OEM. Also when building it yourself you tend to buy higher quality parts thus ensuring it will last longer than most OEM PCs. And even if a part comes DOA or dies you have RMA and the warranty from the hardware manu.

I guess she is saying that if you have no AppleCare you are screwed and have to pay up the wazoo (Geek Squad like wazzo pay) to get it fixed.

Message edited by jimmysmitty on 04-30-2008 at 04:15:41 PM

------------------------------

Reply to jimmysmitty

@jimmysmitty
I would argue that the vista OEM lisncese is comparable to the OSX "retail" liscense...

"2. Permitted License Uses and Restrictions.
A. This License allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time. This License does not allow the Apple Software to exist on more than one computer at a time,and you may not make the Apple Software available over a network where it could be used by multiple computers at the same time. You may make one copy of the Apple Software (excluding the Boot ROM code) in machine-readable form for backup purposes only; provide"

The apple license even sounds a little more restrictive than a microsoft OEM license.

Not to mention that when comparing the cost of OSX to vista... you have to consider the constant "major updates" apple charges you for. These "updates" are VERY comparable to windows service packs... except that apple makes you practically bleed your wallet to get them... PLUS they would rather you just buy a new machine with it preinstalled.

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by skittle on 04-30-2008 at 04:17:49 PM

------------------------------ macgirlfriend:
"Hey I don't get you people, the people on insanely mac were so much nicer"
Reply to skittle

Ouch I never saw that..... I know the one downside to the OEM Vista is its just the one version unlike the retail that includes all the versions and you only pay the difference to upgrad from say Premium to Ultimate.

Message quoted 1 times

------------------------------

Reply to jimmysmitty

jimmysmitty wrote :

Sorry. My computer dyslexia has been kicking in a lot recently. I miss words or read the backwards...it gets annoying. But you are right. Only problem is that not every older MAC will support OSX. It does take some of the newer hardware. But still the OEM versions should count as they are plentyfull and easily accessable from a online retailer.

Either way MACS are overrated. They are just PCs now that have hardware that can specifically run OSX and thats it.

No problem
I do to a certain extent agree with you on your last point.
As I'm sure most people have no idea what sort of Mac I have from my sig, it is a Power PC based Mac. It is plenty quick enough for what I use it for and certainly quicker than you'd imagine for a 1.5GHz single core from 4years ago!

skittle wrote :

Licensing stuff...

Not to mention that when comparing the cost of OSX to vista... you have to consider the constant "major updates" apple charges you for. These "updates" are VERY comparable to windows service packs... except that apple makes you practically bleed your wallet to get them... PLUS they would rather you just buy a new machine with it preinstalled.

With regard to the licensing info, I didn't realise the licence was quite that tight, so I stand corrected!
Certainly don't agree with you on the Service Packs though...
The newest OS, 10.5 (Leopard) is sufficently different from 10.4 (Tiger) to carry a cost between them. 10.5 wasn't a service pack up from 10.4, it was essentially a new OS. OS X gets updated like Windows does and it doesn't cost me anything...

------------------------------ 6000+ Stock, GA M57SLi-S4, XFX 8800GTX's SLi Stock, 4Gb Corsair PC6400 DHX, CoolerMaster 850W, 36Gb Raptor boot drive, 2x150Gb Raptor's in RAID 0 - XFX RAID controller & 300Gb Seagate. PowerBook G4 12" 1.5GHz, Go5200 64mb, 768mb RAM, 80Gb HD, SuperDrive.
Reply to LukeBird

I implied this pretty strongly earlier... But the Apple/PC argument seems to have center stage at the moment.

(1) Intel do not, will not, and as far as I know can not, sell AMD products.

(2) Therefore for AMD products to be used, Apple would have to drop Intel and pick up AMD as a supplier. This has not happened.

(3) The article clearly states that Intel is the supplier.

(4) The article also gives a X9** part number for this 'special' processor. This is an Intel part number. Not AMD.

(5) The article also says an Intel motherboard is being used. To my knowledge, AMD processors do not physically fit into current Intel sockets, nor are they compatible with Intel Chipsets.

(6) The article makes no mention of AMD at all, with the sole exception of the code name 'Penryn' used in one sentence.

THEREFORE IT IS LOGICAL TO PRESUME THAT THE WRITER OF THE ARTICLE DOESN'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PENRYN AND A HARPERTOWN, and so this thread owes it's very existence to a typo.

This has been a public service announcement. We now return you to your PC/Apple Flame War.

Message edited by Scotteq on 04-30-2008 at 04:32:18 PM

------------------------------ Being requested to remove my siggy implying some people here would receive greater personal benefit from a local Prostitute than from a new GPU in no way, shape, or form changes the aforementioned opinion.
Reply to Scotteq

Forum CPU & Components : CPUs - Want a Penryn processor crack open an apple!