Cost of 64 bit PC from HP:

$719.99

http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/sh...on+PCs&wlBcPat
=/shopping/generic_store/generic_compare_category.do&wlBcLevel=1

Cost of 64 bit Mac from Apple:

$1799.00

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPL....3.1.1.0?43,11

Money saved by buying the PC instead of the Mac: $1,079.01.

Cuss and discuss.

Edwin

Edwin wrote:
not only is that the ugliest post i've seen in a long time (a little quoting
of features and a tinyurl or two would very much improve things), you can
actually do better than that on the HP:

"HP Shopping has the new HP a450e Series Pavilion PC with Athlon 64
Processor. Athlon 64 3200+ Free 512MB DDR PC3200/80GB CD, Geforce4MX, MS
Works/Money, XP Home $642 after rebate"

http://www.techbargains.com/news_displayItem.cfm/28745

"Edwin" <thorne25@juno.com> wrote in
ebdd0e2e.0403040948.408acc2@posting.google.com on 3/4/04 10:48 AM:

What point are you trying to make? You compare *one* aspect of the
machines, the fact that they have 64 bit processors. You mention nothing
else. Well, I suppose it is fair then for me just to look at GHz.

Your HP: 2 GHz for $719.99
Comparison Machine: 5.8 GHz $144.99

http://tinyurl.com/yqqzr

The system I found has over 2x the GHz for under half the price.

The HP is grossly overpriced. What other conclusion is possible?

In article <HIWdnQGsnOZR8drdRVn-sQ@adelphia.com>, lefty
<lefty@oldpc.invalid> wrote:


So basically a stripped down box is being compared to a fairly full
featured one and the stripped down comes in cheaper. Now why in hell
would that be? <G>

Lloyd Parsons wrote:
i don't think "Athlon 64 3200+, Free 512MB DDR PC3200, 80GB, Geforce4MX" is
stripped too far.

(if i didn't already have 3 cd-rws in the house i might add that)

In article <ebdd0e2e.0403040948.408acc2@posting.google.com> ,
thorne25@juno.com (Edwin) wrote:

The link's busted but let me guess...XP Home eh? Not only do yo uneed
need massive Ghz to turn the x86 instruction set into XP Home but now
you need twice the bits.
--
SD
"...merely a preponderance of evidence."

In article <HIWdnQGsnOZR8drdRVn-sQ@adelphia.com>,
"lefty" <lefty@oldpc.invalid> wrote:

Yep, XP Home <laffin>
--
SD
"...merely a preponderance of evidence."

In article <3NydnSRX3cYL7drdRVn-jg@adelphia.com>, lefty
<lefty@oldpc.invalid> wrote:


Think of this, you get a cpu up the food chain, then put XPHome on it?
With a weak graphic card?

I would think that the person that would have a real use for this box
would want some thing much better than that to be there wouldn't you?

For me, if I were to be in the market for a wintel/amd box, it would be
way down at the bottom of the chain because I only would be using it as
a terminal services client over my cable modem.

Currently, VPC -- slow as it is does fine in this role.

Lloyd

StormDrain wrote:

Funny that the amd64 runs legacy 32-bit mode programs... which XP is for
the current release. I don't really know what HP is thinking by putting
XP on a 64-bit machine. They should've put Suses' 64-bit Linux on instead.

Lloyd Parsons wrote:
i didn't actually try to follow edwin's ugly links. i was only commenting
that he could do better than his HP price.

for me, yes. let's leave aside the comparison. i'd see this as a deal for
the tech-bargain type person (who probably has >1 pcs already) to get a
cheap start on 64 bit computing. i'd hope that such a user is going to put
linux of freebsd on it anyway. (for that role i think that graphics card
would be fine)

for the windows market, they might as well wait for a 64 bit os.

or, if they are buying it for game speed, then yes upgrade the graphics
card.

if they are a gamer of something, sure.

doesn't sound like a new pc is needed at all for that.

In article <ebdd0e2e.0403040948.408acc2@posting.google.com> ,
thorne25@juno.com (Edwin) wrote:

Value of not having to use Windows - priceless.

--
George Graves
------------------
My Three Favorite Words WRT Women, Wine, food, cars and motorcycles:
"Made in Italy"

In article <0qOdnStCGd1z6Nrd4p2dnA@adelphia.com>, lefty
<lefty@oldpc.invalid> wrote:

have new toys to twink with, so I guess this could fill the bill.

Why not go for a 3Ghz or so Intel?

connect as needed to the terminal services box. Doesn't seem to impact
overall performance of my other apps.

Strangely, I tried to run via remote web services (?) using IE and it
puked right away, with Safari, it got quite away into the login
procedure before it quit. All under OSX itself. It would be nice to
be able to do this native instead of VPC, but I'm not gonna lose sleep
over it.

Lloyd

Lloyd Parsons wrote:
i think the amd-64 actually (maybe i should emphasise "currently") wins on
price/performance over 32 bit intel. fwiw, i tripped over this high
performance game system yesterday. they chose the Athlon 64 3400+.

http://www.anandtech.com/guides/showdoc.html?i=1984

(i'll say high-end ... with a $415 graphics card)

In article <UyK1c.691$Wc4.1247@bcandid.telisphere.com>,
GreyCloud <mist@Cumulus.com> wrote:

They still don't offer consumers a choice in OSs setup out of the box.
Maybe support for windows is easier (they have years of experience)
still it'd be nice to see preinstalled Linux from the major vendors on
their consumer models.
--
SD
"...merely a preponderance of evidence."

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 10:10:14 -0800, StormDrain wrote:

Umm, do you know the difference between XP home and PRO? The only
differences are some networking, multi-processor support, administration,
and remote desktop options. The kernel and the rest of the OS is identical.

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 18:19:14 +0000, Lloyd Parsons wrote:

Geforce4 MX440 speed difference from the latest crop of Nvidia cards like
the FX5200 is marginal at best.

In article <pan.2004.03.04.19.17.21.812000@hotmail.com>,
Steve Mackay <steve_mackay@hotmail.com> wrote:

I'm being sarcastic. The PRO "features" do not justify the price
difference. "PRO" has no developer tools, no databaase tools, nothing
that a windows pro would need except for the repairman type MSCS pro,
that just fixes PCs and network connections.

In the windows family there is NO comparison to the features found in OS
X, Linux or most other systems. I will continue to scoff at this great
x86 hardware that comes with XP Home...OK??
--
SD
"...merely a preponderance of evidence."

"StormDrain" <Liberty@MS-Free.com> wrote in
Liberty-9FF916.11241204032004@cnews.newsguy.com on 3/4/04 12:24 PM:

OS features do not matter. Only speed of the CPU matters. If we hear that
enough, maybe we will believe it.

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 11:24:12 -0800, StormDrain wrote:

But the Developer tools(such as GCC, MySQL, etc..) is an easy, and free
download.

In article <ebdd0e2e.0403040948.408acc2@posting.google.com> ,
thorne25@juno.com (Edwin) wrote:


And folks think I was nuts for suggesting that TinyUrl be used.

--
Jim Polaski
"The measure of a man is what he will do
knowing he will get nothing in return."