Dell Inspiron 6000

[Spanky]

Dell is offering the following discounts for Inspiron notebook:
$250 off
$75 off for Notebook priced from $899 to $1499

The final price: $682.44 before shipping and tax - not bad!!! before 12/21/05

Inspiron 6000
Intel® Pentium® M Processor 740 (1.73GHz/2MB Cache/533MHz FSB), Genuine Windows® XP Media Center Edition 2005

[WilliamG]

Just last month, after 6 years on a windows based machine, bought a iMac G5 from Apple. It's wonderful! Not as inexpensive as the Del, but should keep our modest move into higher tech computing (movies, pictures, video phone, etc) going for the next several years....

[Danny]

Quote:

Originally Posted by WilliamG Just last month, after 6 years on a windows based machine, bought a iMac G5 from Apple. It's wonderful! Not as inexpensive as the Del, but should keep our modest move into higher tech computing (movies, pictures, video phone, etc) going for the next several years....

I've always been curious when I hear people talk about how wonderful Apple is compared to a PC.
What is it that makes it so?

[Spanky]

it's really a personal choice. PC handles more programs. Mac is easier to use and install programs and is targeted for graphic design and multimedia applications.

[Outtahere]

Actually with the new OS X a Mac is even more friendly to PC users and compatable with a lot more software. I have both a Mac and a PC at home here and alternate between the two, dh only uses the Mac, he won't even turn on the PC. My company is all Mac, if we were PC based I'd have to have a whole department just to keep up with viruses and hackers, no thanks, I'll keep the Macs.

[LOL!]

I write software for Macs, PCs and Linux boxes. I own all of them. The Mac is the worst of all of them as far as software goes, but only marginally worse. It does look great though. Macs are not easier to use. Windows XP has come a long way from when many Mac users last looked at a Windows OS. As for viruses, hackers, spyware ... these are pretty trivial to keep off your computer ... pretty much the same way you keep them off the Mac.

So what makes an Apple wonderful? I think it has to do with religion more than performance, ease of use, and price.

[yakers]

Although on PCs for some time now (first 8086 in the 80s, on the internet since 1986, & I did have an Apple IIe, showing my age) Work computers transitioned from 2000NT to XP. But we have Apples at home. My wife is a teacher and her school uses Apples. I even know all of a few UNIX commands. I am sure some folks have more computer time but probably only a few.
Anyway I would vote for Apples. They "just work". I keep my little network going at home and help out in my wife's school. But at work we keep 2 full time system administrators busy for 30 PCs. Remarkable keeping up with viruses and spam. Not an issue on the Apple side. The regular working folks have more problems with their PCs at home and are always going to the sysadmins for advice.

I have all the programs I want to run on the Apple side. Its easy to work with photos and video and my son records his music/noise to his laptop for editing and CD burning. You can do that on a PC but without any special training my teacher wife and teenage son could "just do it" so I think there is some ease of use involved. I don't see as many casual users on the PC side able to do what casual users can do on a Mac. Now when serious computing is required at work the UNIX boys come out and the programs are pretty powerful. If I can only remember the commands :P

[WilliamG]

"they just work" is probably the biggest thought on why I love the iMac and am so glad to be off "oops I've fallen again" Windows. In all fairness, my OS was corrupted over 6 years of use but it is wonderful how dependable Mac is without pop up screens, etc. I know most of what I like about Mac can be gotten for Windows, but I don't want to spend time checking out and getting extra software (including virus checkers).

[Robert the Red]

Generally, it is easier to configure OS X than Win XP. For example, my wife's XP-based laptop can drive an external monitor as a second display. When she moves it between work and home, where the external monitor configurations are different, the XP system becomes confused and cranky in unpredictably ways (sometimes won't show the second display, sometimes won't show the primary display, sometimes works fine). This never happens with my Mac PowerBook; it always detects the external hardware fine. And the interfaces for dealing with system config are pretty straightforward on the Mac -- as long as what you want has been pre-programmed in a GUI by Apple. If they haven't done this (e.g., NFS setup), then you have to drop down to command line and manual editing of config files. That's a very suddenly steep learning curve.

Overall, I used Linux for 10+ years, but now have switched to Mac almost exclusively because of the ease of setup (as I age, my brain can't hold all the details about all the config files). I avoid touching Windows machines, except when my wife bleats out an expletive.

[JB]

This looks like a great deal. I am looking for a laptop for my mother. I asked her if she wants a Mac -- she prefers a PC because she exchanges files/progs with other PCs and works in an environment where they only use windows based PCs.

First I considered a Acer Aspire for around $700 with a Celeron-M. The Dell Inspriron is a little more expensive but uses a faster Pentium-M and has a better battery.

I wasn't completely satisfied w/ my last purchase from Dell. My Insiron-4000 overheats (I actually installed a slower cpu which helps). It also freezes fairly regularly. Others have had a good experience. My old Latitude was fine, and I've had good experiences with their desktop PCs.

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Yep, religion and marketing spin make the mac appealing to many. My wife had an imac until recently, and i've had experience with both apple and intel based products since the first shipped chips and products.

Until XP, i'd have agreed that OSX was superior to a windows offering. I honestly dont see anything in OSX that makes it easier to use, more intuitive or a 'better' product. Granted there are some sillies to XP like clicking on 'start' to stop the machine. Music, movies, photos and so forth work pretty well on XP, and thats the stuff that caused us to buy the imac in the first place.

When I first opened the imac to "look around" the materials, I was surprised to find fairly pedestrian components. A soft modem, plain old maxtor 5400rpm hard drive, nothing really exotic or exciting. Considering we paid $1200 for the imac when a similarly powered and featured PC could be had for half that, I felt a little bit gyped.

The wife did like it, it sure was pretty and she got to buy color matching mice, printers and other such items and that pleased her.

Is OSX more stable than XP? Not in my experience. I found that I installed more crap on XP, and the more junk I put on it, the worse it got. The junk was often simply not available to run on the mac. Any OS analysis I ever saw showed deteriorating stability as you add drivers and applications. Any analysis of installed product on OSX vs a windows machine showed fewer drivers (and often apple branded) and fewer apps (also apple branded). Sort of makes sense that there would be a preponderance of anecdotal evidence that the mac was more stable and had fewer problems.

When I did have problems with the imac, it turned out to be a challenge to figure out what was causing the problem as a lot of the inner workings are hidden. As Jerry Pournelle once said, things with a mac either work immediately and easily, or you're in for a long night.

I put a bunch of software on the mac. It crashed and froze as often as the XP machine we have. The maxtor drive started whining badly after a year and a half due to the passive ventilation in the imac not keeping the disk cool enough. After replacing the maxtor with a quieter seagate, it too started whining about 18 months later. The modem connect speeds werent as good as the hardware modem we used on the PC.

I think the real answer is this: if you like styling and are willing to pay a premium for it, you and your friends/coworkers/etc predominately use macs, and all the apps you want to use work on a mac, thats a good way to go. If you are considering a mac because you think the hardware is 'better' or because the operating system is more robust, or because the apps are easier to use...you'll be disappointed.

[MRGALT2U]

Quote:

Originally Posted by () Yep, religion and marketing spin make the mac appealing to many.* My wife had an imac until recently, and i've had experience with both apple and intel based products since the first shipped chips and products. Until XP, i'd have agreed that OSX was superior to a windows offering.* *I honestly dont see anything in OSX that makes it easier to use, more intuitive or a 'better' product.* Granted there are some sillies to XP like clicking on 'start' to stop the machine.* Music, movies, photos and so forth work pretty well on XP, and thats the stuff that caused us to buy the imac in the first place. When I first opened the imac to "look around" the materials, I was surprised to find fairly pedestrian components.* A soft modem, plain old maxtor 5400rpm hard drive, nothing really exotic or exciting.* Considering we paid $1200 for the imac when a similarly powered and featured PC could be had for half that, I felt a little bit gyped. The wife did like it, it sure was pretty and she got to buy color matching mice, printers and other such items and that pleased her. Is OSX more stable than XP?* *Not in my experience.* I found that I installed more crap on XP, and the more junk I put on it, the worse it got.* The junk was often simply not available to run on the mac.* Any OS analysis I ever saw showed deteriorating stability as you add drivers and applications.* Any analysis of installed product on OSX vs a windows machine showed fewer drivers (and often apple branded) and fewer apps (also apple branded).* Sort of makes sense that there would be a preponderance of anecdotal evidence that the mac was more stable and had fewer problems. When I did have problems with the imac, it turned out to be a challenge to figure out what was causing the problem as a lot of the inner workings are hidden.* As Jerry Pournelle once said, things with a mac either work immediately and easily, or you're in for a long night. I put a bunch of software on the mac.* It crashed and froze as often as the XP machine we have.* The maxtor drive started whining badly after a year and a half due to the passive ventilation in the imac not keeping the disk cool enough.* After replacing the maxtor with a quieter seagate, it too started whining about 18 months later.* The modem connect speeds werent as good as the hardware modem we used on the PC. I think the real answer is this: if you like styling and are willing to pay a premium for it, you and your friends/coworkers/etc predominately use macs, and all the apps you want to use work on a mac, thats a good way to go.* If you are considering a mac because you think the hardware is 'better' or because the operating system is more robust, or because the apps are easier to use...you'll be disappointed.

I am technologically challenged. Bought a MAC once and was
disappointed. That's just me. I am sure some folks would be
more than satisfied.

JG

[JB]

I've found Macs to be more stable and reliable. I assume that this is because the core hardware and software are designed and tested together. With PCs there's much more competition which leads to superior price/performance but an extremely difficult design challege. If the price was the same I'd get a PowerMac instead of the PC. But they just ain't worth worth 2x the price.

The Macs and PC worlds are converging now. Both have fixed their main deficiencies and are adopting the best features of the others' platform. They have a lot more in common than they are different.

[Spanky]

I vote for notebooks based on X86 because of price and software availability.

[SonnyJim]

Next year MAC noteboooks will be X86 as well.* There will be Intel at the core of new Apples*

I also use PCs at work, but only purchase MACs for home.* Why You may be asking yourself.* I'm glad you asked.* Because I can't resist shiny things and MACs are pure, unadulterated, eye-candy.* From where I am sitting, (my living room) I can see a G-5 iMac, G-4 QuickSilver tower, Lime G-3 iMac, and a new G-4 Powerbook and they are all used on a daily basis.* Was I smart enough to buy their stock at $6??* Nope, I blew it on computers.

[Spanky]

It's too bad that Apple is switching to the X86 architecture - another defeat for RISC. I am not sure how Apple is planning to claim hardware superiority over other PC manuafacturers. May be they will say that their OS is more robust than Windows.

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Last I heard, apple put some boot time stuff into OSX-86 to prevent it from working on any x86 platforms that they didnt approve. So while there should be a broader set of hardware offerings to run it on, I wouldnt count on them being cheaper. At least not at first.

[SonnyJim]

(), The new X86 Macs are already out there (for development purposes) and some clever folks have "acquired" the new OS X that runs on the X86 machines and are running Mac OS X on their..... 'GASP' .... PCs. Life can never be the same now.

[BigMoneyJim]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spanky I am not sure how Apple is planning to claim hardware superiority over other PC manuafacturers. May be they will say that their OS is more robust than Windows.

Sony still demands a premium, and they have the same doggone hardware, architecture and software as Dell et al. Apple will have the pretty hardware platform with a reputation for reliability plus a probable OS monopoly. (I'm sure some will get OSX to run on commodity PCs, but I expect them to make it difficult for the average user to do so.) I suspect Apple's architecture will be slightly different in that it may not be trivial to load Windows on an Apple x86 box. (I'm thinking OpenFirmware at least as opposed to PC 16-bit-boot BIOS.)

As for why Apple has appeal, look at the iPod. It wasn't the first mp3 player, but it's one of the more expensive ones and everybody wants one. It does more or less the same thing but looks and feels really neat and works slightly differently "better". Similar deal with the Mac. They're prettier and neater and cost more. I want one, but every time I get semi-serious about it I can't justify going for a Mac over upgrading my PC. (I build my own, so "upgrade" could mean as much as replace everything but the shell and drives.)

[cute fuzzy bunny]

BMJ - You're discovered good marketing!