A bit of a computery question re: Choosing Desktops...

[LordoftheTeapot]

I'll wait. Thank you early 'warning' domtyler, I'm sure it will be worth it.

 

[Jaded]

Apple's share of the market is growing fast. It must be really galling that all these fashion victims are buying Macs!

 

[davidwalton]

[1] So Linux isn't suitable for you due to your reliance on one software suite. You can't then use this as an argument to say that it is not an option for other people.

[2] You get a lot of updates as Linux package managers don't just update the OS itself but every piece of software on the system. With Windows it updates only the OS. You have to manually update each application you use. Furthermore certain Linux distrubutions not only update the software and OS but also upgrade it, for instance my distribution will evolve overtime into new releases so no waiting for new releases and no faffing about with install disks once new releases arrive. As soon as something new has been invented and tested thoroughly it'll be installed with minimal fuss.

In summary you can't just dismiss it as an option especially when your knowledge of it is limited.

I only dismissed Linux for me, or so I thought. I am not sure what other software I wouldn't be able to run with Linux though, so I would be more hesitant recommending it to anyone without suggesting they check that it WILL run EVERYTHING they require, and is supported by the software companies.

My reliance So I am meant to throw away £600 plus worth of software just to run a OS that may still not suit. No way.

If or when Linux becomes a real option, I will consider it. Until then, and for many who are not willing to take chance on Linux, OSX is where it is.

 

[rich p]

I had a quick look and I can't find it (post it up here if you can). But those are fairly reasonable specs to be thinking about. Probably worth comparing with equivalent offerings from Dell and so on.
a .

No, it's not online apparently.

The product code is 2412 and I saw it in the Hove store yesterday.

This is what my wife wrote down:
Packard Bell 2412
Intel core 2 duo
2.2 GHz
2MB cache
2048 MB memory
250GB hard drive

£499

 

[ajevans]

...
If or when Linux becomes a real option, I will consider it. Until then, and for many who are not willing to take chance on Linux, OSX is where it is.

The thing is Linux is a real option for many. OSX isn't.

The reason is that it is free to try and will work on almost any hardware. It's also secure and stable, which is why it is used by the likes of the IBM, Google, and the National Security Agency.

I'd heartily recommend OSX for people who are clueless with computers as they'll struggle to break it. But OSX. as for Linux and Windows is not for everybody.

 

[davidwalton]

The thing is Linux is a real option for many. OSX isn't.

The reason is that it is free to try and will work on almost any hardware. It's also secure and stable, which is why it is used by the likes of the IBM, Google, and the National Security Agency.

I'd heartily recommend OSX for people who are clueless with computers as they'll struggle to break it. But OSX. as for Linux and Windows is not for everybody.

I stress the fact that software must support the OS. Adobe does not support Linux, and not just Photoshop as I have just tried to buy from Adobe DreamWeaver for Linux. No such thing.

There is a large number of software packages that are written for Linux, but not the same as that which almost everyone is used to on Windows or OSX. It SEEMS that Linux is not supported by the software houses that sell for OSX and Windows????

 

[ajevans]

.... It SEEMS that Linux is not supported by the software houses that sell for OSX and Windows????

It is also true that OSX is not supported by most of the software houses that sell for Windows.

However in both cases there are plenty of alternatives available that (with the exception for certain specialist uses which are not required for most consumers) aptly fit the bill.

OSX like Linux like Windows is not the solution to everybodies needs.

 

[davidwalton]

It is also true that OSX is not supported by most of the software houses that sell for Windows.

However in both cases there are plenty of alternatives available that (with the exception for certain specialist uses which are not required for most consumers) aptly fit the bill.

OSX like Linux like Windows is not the solution to everybodies needs.

Even MS support OSX as an OS, along with most other major Software houses. Not so with Linux though, it seems? Different software altogether.

Linux will go nowhere until the software people use daily is available, and supported on it. I would still be bound to Windows if the applications I needed to run were only available in Windows. Very few will accept using one package at work and another at home, as compatibility with files saved will always be an issue.

This is the same problem that kept Apple from expanding as a general computer manufacturer for years. People will want to use the same programs, no matter the OS.

 

[davidwalton]

You seem to be arguing with someone else. I never suggested this.

You'll note that I've also only talked about your majority, average user. And asked why they should spend any more. Seeing as your answer doesn't relate to the question, I can conclude that you can offer no reason why they should.

Again, I have never said that I would buy, or recommend buying, a bike that cost £80.

Though second hand of course is a different matter.

The right £400 computer is not the cheapest you can buy. But it's all that most people need.



David, David, David. We've never been talking about what you need. Read the thread again.

When you talk about £200 PC's, you are talking about cheap PC's, just like an £80 Halfords cycle. You can ride a £80 cycle, so by the way you have been saying you only need spend the bare minimum, it follows that you also would be happy with a cheap £80 cycle.

It takes very little requirement to easily justify something a lot more expensive than £400, and is done so by most just by saying they ALSO want to play games.

You are arguing against me and my favouring of Macs over PC's. I don't see myself as anything other than having a standard requirement on the hardware. It is about what I need, and you are telling me I waste my money on machines I don't need. Can you be any more personal than tel someone else that they waste their money?

£400 buys a basic PC. For those that do the odd email, a little Internet, and No gaming, but the odd bit of WP and spreadsheet, that's fine, if a PC is what they want.

Alternatively, they COULD do the same thing with a MAC.

There again, add gaming, which the AVERAGE household computer is wanted for, at least in part, and you then need a different machine all together. That, or accept that gaming may not be up to much.

Will you please accept the fact that the are Horses for Courses???? Last time I ask.

 

[davidwalton]

I have little interest in what you are saying because you are suggesting that because you have very specific needs, then everyone else should buy the same computer as you.

You're mixing up the argument about what's best (and the jury is still out on that one as well) with the one about what people actually need.

Rubbish.

 

[davidwalton]

So, Apple is the Burberry of the computer industry.

That's us all agreed then.

More rubbish.

 

[davidwalton]

Read the £200 pound comment again. You'll see I was talking about second-hand pcs. It's a separate discussion.

Don't scrabble around trying to make claims by assumption about what I'm saying despite me making myself very clear (the £80 bike bit). It makes you look silly.

If you think that then you either don't actually know much about computers, or are just trying to drag something over to your side of the argument, as with your regular use of 'probably'.

No I'm not. Read the thread again.

I'm not talking about what you need. Stop getting defensive man.

It'll do far more than that.

If they're prepared to spend money that they don't have to.

Nope.


Accept something that wasn't part of the discussion? Why?

Topic has ended and I am unsubscribing. Going further will result in things getting out of hand, and I don't want that.

Good bye.

 

[Aperitif]

Really interesting thread - thanks to all with the knowledge to contribute.

 

[red_tom]

Pah. Solaris 10 FTW.

Or a Hackintosh.

 

[Nortones2]

It strikes me, davidwalton, if you ever revisit this tattered thread that the PC uber-alles brigade are somewhat twitchy about the reliability and usability of Macs. Denial? Might explain their tetchiness in the face of a reasoned and less strident approach.