Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Jolly Roger Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.freeware,alt.hacker,alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: "Unhackable" Apple Confirms Malware-Infected Apps Found And Removed From Its Chinese App Store Date: 5 Oct 2015 21:35:03 GMT Lines: 70 Message-ID: References: <86549329f10d815d2e5922dee68cf94a@anemone.mooo.com> <210920151816339085%nospam@nospam.invalid> <210920151849448520%nospam@nospam.invalid> <041020151828504734%nospam@nospam.invalid> <041020151852561506%nospam@nospam.invalid> <041020151911207774%nospam@nospam.invalid> <051020151258257526%nospam@nospam.invalid> <-qSdnR8tO4tlf4_LnZ2dnUU7-fednZ2d@supernews.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net zAGW2H7HLowM1qcqduQQFA/sESjCNKAhIW9U3nEq5utzh0PA5q Cancel-Lock: sha1:O309nFECNS/s0WOhB/SdHgufosY= sha1:3dUftIDSMUEMilxidATOnpXb8rw= User-Agent: NewsTap/5.0 (iPhone/iPod Touch) Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.mac.system:81640 alt.comp.freeware:244822 alt.hacker:8628 alt.privacy.anon-server:45790 comp.os.linux.advocacy:324606 nom de plume wrote: > On 2015-10-05, Jolly Roger wrote: >> On 2015-10-05, nom de plume wrote: >>> On 2015-10-05, nospam wrote: >>>> In article , A.M <.m@nsn.s> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> So an iMac, newest model, dual core i5 running 1.4 GHz and costing >>>>>> $1,099 is a good value then? I can't build a similar spec PC for less >>>>>> that will easily out-perform that then? That's your position? >>>>> >>>>> The _only_ advantage of an i5 runnin at 1.4GHz is that the computer >>>>> requires less power. However, the performance is awful and definitely >>>>> not worth the price. I believe that the quality of the screen makes up >>>>> for it though. >>>> >>>> the entry level imac is intended for volume buyers, such as schools, >>>> where price is more important than performance. it also appeals to >>>> casual users who do little more than use email and surf facebook. >>> >>> The fact remains, I can buy a Dell all in one for a little less with >>> twice the core count at twice the speed with a 3 year warranty. Facts >>> are facts buddy. >> >> That Dell all-in-one will no doubt have a lower resolution display, and >> there will be other discrepancies. Facts are facts, right buddy? I >> understand you want us to ignore some of those facts; but if you want to >> do a fair comparison, everything must be included. > > It is 1920 x 1080, with a touch screen. But since it is 23" vs 21.5", > technically the dpi is slightly lower. But you get the same real estate > and the added bonus of a touch screen, 4 cores instead of 2, and 2.9 GHz > vs 1.4 GHz. yeah, facts are facts. Without seeing the exact model and configuration, I'll just take your word for it. > Why not just admit it? That Mac isn't competitive. It's ok to admit > reality isn't it? What are there Mac cops in here that take away one of > you koolaid lapel pins if you admit the facts or something? Nope, if I take your word for it that this Dell you mention has those specs, then it sounds like it's more price competitive. But I also know you picked this particular model on purpose, and other models don't stack up nearly as much, it at all, in your favor. > 1.4 GHz for the Mac, vs 2.9 GHz for the PC > 2 cores for the Mac, vs 4 cores for the PC > 1 year warranty vs 3 for the PC > No touch display for the Mac, 23" touch display for the PC > 1920 x 1080 for the Mac, 1920 x 1080 for the PC For the lowest model iMac, not for all others. > You're Mac got its shiny metal ass handed to it. Not my Mac, no. I have a Mac Pro and it screams. I have a MacBook Pro as well - very nice machine. I don't personally own any iMacs. > If you want others to > be truthful with you, then you have to be truthful with others. How can > you possibly deny this Dell is the better value? How can you possibly claim this lowest model iMac is representative of all models? -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR