OK Windows fans, recommend me a computer
ZnU
http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/ultrascope/
It literally won't be used for anything else, so the necessary specs are
pretty concrete:
- 2 GB of RAM if it runs XP, 4 GB if it runs Vista or Windows 7.
- Minimum of 1 free PCIe 1x slot and 1 free PCIe 16x slot.
- 2.5 GHz Core 2 Duo or better.
- As cheap, small, and quiet as possible.
Alternatively, I could use the USB 3 version of the product (it's $100
cheaper), which eliminates the need for the 1x PCIe slot but, of course,
adds a requirement for USB 3.
I'd prefer not to have to build something, but I will if I can order all
the parts from a single vendor and it will save me more than $150 or get
me a significantly smaller form factor.
For all that we hear about $300 Windows machines that are supposedly
better than Mac Pros, I haven't actually been able to find something
that meets these requirements for less than about $500.
--
"The game of professional investment is intolerably boring and over-exacting to
anyone who is entirely exempt from the gambling instinct; whilst he who has it
must pay to this propensity the appropriate toll." -- John Maynard Keynes
Steve de Mena
> I'm looking to pick up a cheap Windows system to use with this:
> http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/ultrascope/
>
> It literally won't be used for anything else, so the necessary specs are
> pretty concrete:
>
> - 2 GB of RAM if it runs XP, 4 GB if it runs Vista or Windows 7.
> - Minimum of 1 free PCIe 1x slot and 1 free PCIe 16x slot.
> - 2.5 GHz Core 2 Duo or better.
> - As cheap, small, and quiet as possible.
>
> Alternatively, I could use the USB 3 version of the product (it's $100
> cheaper), which eliminates the need for the 1x PCIe slot but, of course,
> adds a requirement for USB 3.
>
> I'd prefer not to have to build something, but I will if I can order all
> the parts from a single vendor and it will save me more than $150 or get
> me a significantly smaller form factor.
>
> For all that we hear about $300 Windows machines that are supposedly
> better than Mac Pros, I haven't actually been able to find something
> that meets these requirements for less than about $500.
>
I'm afraid you'll probably have to spring a whopping $450 - $500 to
meet those specs. I guess that brings you up to Mac Pro prices , so
no point....
Steve
Alan Baker
I notice you don't have the balls to actually point to a specific
system...
--
"The iPhone doesn't have a speaker phone" -- "I checked very carefully" --
"I checked Apple's web pages" -- Edwin on the iPhone
"It is Mac OS X, not BSD.' -- 'From Mac OS to BSD Unix." -- "It's BSD Unix with Apple's APIs and GUI on top of it' -- 'nothing but BSD Unix' (Edwin on Mac OS X)
'[The IBM PC] could boot multiple OS, such as DOS, C/PM, GEM, etc.' --
'I claimed nothing about GEM other than it was available software for the
IBM PC. (Edwin on GEM)
'Solaris is just a marketing rename of Sun OS.' -- 'Sun OS is not included
on the timeline of Solaris because it's a different OS.' (Edwin on Sun)
ed
> I'm looking to pick up a cheap Windows system to use with this:http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/ultrascope/
>
> It literally won't be used for anything else, so the necessary specs are
> pretty concrete:
>
> - 2 GB of RAM if it runs XP, 4 GB if it runs Vista or Windows 7.
> - Minimum of 1 free PCIe 1x slot and 1 free PCIe 16x slot.
> - 2.5 GHz Core 2 Duo or better.
> - As cheap, small, and quiet as possible.
>
> Alternatively, I could use the USB 3 version of the product (it's $100
> cheaper), which eliminates the need for the 1x PCIe slot but, of course,
> adds a requirement for USB 3.
>
> I'd prefer not to have to build something, but I will if I can order all
> the parts from a single vendor and it will save me more than $150 or get
> me a significantly smaller form factor.
>
> For all that we hear about $300 Windows machines that are supposedly
> better than Mac Pros, I haven't actually been able to find something
> that meets these requirements for less than about $500.
some options (not looking to advocate or argue, eh?):
if you're ok with amd and a refurb, this guy's pretty cheap at like
$329:
http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0340817
it's a amd dual core 3ghz, 4 gig ram, 64 bit, slots required, and a
small form factor.
for something new, but bigger in size, a dell inspiron 580 has a core
i3 (3ghz), 64 bit, slots required, 1tb for $450. use the home store
(no, i don't want to argue about that either).
ZnU
<a5dfb304-8625-4b7a...@13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
ed <ne...@atwistedweb.com> wrote:
Don't think the vendor has tested AMD processors with the card. Too bad,
because otherwise it's pretty much what I'd want.
> for something new, but bigger in size, a dell inspiron 580 has a core
> i3 (3ghz), 64 bit, slots required, 1tb for $450. use the home store
> (no, i don't want to argue about that either).
You're going to have to probably provide a link. Going to the Dell home
store and clicking on Inspiron 580, I get a $450 system with a Pentium.
The cheapest i3 model is $500. And only has a 320 GB HD (not that it
matters in this application).
Honestly, whenever I really go look at Wintel systems, I end up coming
away fairly disgusted. There isn't a single vendor that actually makes
it easy to find the right model, the number of things for sale in the
Windows world that just shouldn't be for sale at all (like Windows 7
desktops that max out at 2 GB of RAM) is silly, and everyone seems to be
screwing with consumers in various ways (like Dell making certain models
unpurchasable without buying one of their cheap analog monitors --
another thing that really shouldn't still be on sale in 2010).
Snit
9/28/10 12:37 AM:
Dell makes some great products and you can get them for a great price... but
the company sells like the stereotypical used car lot. You have to be savvy
and be willing to walk away to get a good deal. It really is a rather
sleazy company.
Compare that to Apple where the options and prices are laid right out for
anyone to see... where you can get the EDU pricing just on your word (what!
A company that trusts their customers!) If you like their products and are
willing to pay what they ask, you get it. If not you do not. No games.
None of the absurd silliness you find on the Dell site or when you call Dell
and try to buy a system.
Some of this is from the relative number of products and sales... but it is
also tied to the philosophy of the companies.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Steve de Mena
Hmmm....I guess I miss the place where I said there was a $300 system
to match his requirements.
Steve
Alan Baker
I guess I miss the place where I claimed you'd done that.
You said:
"I'm afraid you'll probably have to spring a whopping $450 - $500 to
meet those specs."
But failed to actually produce a system.
Sorry, Steve, but them's the facts.
Mayor Of R'lyeh
> I'm looking to pick up a cheap Windows system to use with this:http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/ultrascope/
>
> It literally won't be used for anything else, so the necessary specs are
> pretty concrete:
>
> - 2 GB of RAM if it runs XP, 4 GB if it runs Vista or Windows 7.
> - Minimum of 1 free PCIe 1x slot and 1 free PCIe 16x slot.
> - 2.5 GHz Core 2 Duo or better.
> - As cheap, small, and quiet as possible.
>
> Alternatively, I could use the USB 3 version of the product (it's $100
> cheaper), which eliminates the need for the 1x PCIe slot but, of course,
> adds a requirement for USB 3.
>
> I'd prefer not to have to build something, but I will if I can order all
> the parts from a single vendor and it will save me more than $150 or get
> me a significantly smaller form factor.
>
> For all that we hear about $300 Windows machines that are supposedly
> better than Mac Pros, I haven't actually been able to find something
> that meets these requirements for less than about $500.
>
professionals only use Macs you need to go with Windows for something
this basic? According to all the wind that's been expelled in here
you'd think there would be tons of Mac apps for this. Given who you
are I take it you searched high and low for a similar Mac app and
couldn't find one.
As to your requirements I'd suggest you roll your own. You have the
specs. Hit up Newegg.
Redjak
"Mayor Of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:634120bf-4416-42dd...@i3g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
He was FOS. He never intended to look at a PC. Just a sad attempt at
trolling. The tip off is his comparing a $300 PC with a Mac Pro. The only
thing that pisses all over a Mac Pro costs close to $1100. Everyone knows
that.
ed
<snip>
> > if you're ok with amd and a refurb, this guy's pretty cheap at like
> > $329:
> > it's a amd dual core 3ghz, 4 gig ram, 64 bit, slots required, and a
> > small form factor.
>
> Don't think the vendor has tested AMD processors with the card. Too bad,
> because otherwise it's pretty much what I'd want.
it appears that if you want a verified system, you're looking at one
of 4 hp workstation class machines, so the question is kind of moot...
http://www.blackmagic-design.com/support/detail.asp?techID=195
<snip>
ZnU
<53c0cbc8-c38f-4b98...@f25g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
ed <ne...@atwistedweb.com> wrote:
Verified system, I can live without; the list doesn't seem especially up
to date. But the right processor and graphics card would probably be a
good idea.
ZnU
<634120bf-4416-42dd...@i3g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
It's not just an app. It requires a PCIe card. It's Mac compatible, but
I'm not going to tie up a Mac Pro tower with this. A Mac Pro is too
useful (and expensive) to use to for one task.
See, the reason I use Macs is not, as you seem to believe, because I'm
some sort of fanatic, but because they're better for the tasks I need to
perform. That doesn't happen to be the case for this particular task; a
cheap Windows box will do this just as well. There aren't even any
concerns about malware, since the machine doesn't even need a network
connection.
More generally, the reason a Windows box is a better choice for this use
case is because Apple builds well-rounded systems, and this use case
doesn't actually require a well-rounded system. So why pay for one?
> As to your requirements I'd suggest you roll your own. You have the
> specs. Hit up Newegg.
Doesn't really end up any cheaper, by the time you spend $100 on an OEM
Windows 7 license. At least as far as I could see.
ed
> ed <n...@atwistedweb.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 28, 12:37 am, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > > if you're ok with amd and a refurb, this guy's pretty cheap at like
> > > > $329:
> > > >http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=03...
> > > > it's a amd dual core 3ghz, 4 gig ram, 64 bit, slots required, and a
> > > > small form factor.
>
> > > Don't think the vendor has tested AMD processors with the card. Too bad,
> > > because otherwise it's pretty much what I'd want.
>
> > it appears that if you want a verified system, you're looking at one
> > of 4 hp workstation class machines, so the question is kind of moot...
> >http://www.blackmagic-design.com/support/detail.asp?techID=195
>
> Verified system, I can live without; the list doesn't seem especially up
> to date. But the right processor and graphics card would probably be a
> good idea.
yeah. that graphics card is the main thing that's gonna kill you i
think..
well, if you're ok with refurb, here's a dell coupon good for 20% off
computers from the dell outlet- expires friday. good for any computer
i think.
00ZTCHCWW1$1VG
this will get you (for example):
Inspiron Desktop 530s Slim Tower:
Core 2 Duo Processor E7400 (3MB L2 Cache,2.80GHz,1066 FSB)
4gb ram
64 bit vista business
256MB ATI RADEON HD 2400 Pro
PCI: 2 Slots
PCIe x1: 1 Slot
PCIe x16 (Graphics): 1 Slots
that card isn't listed, but does support opengl3.1
it's pretty small, and will run you $415 with the coupon.
the links have a session attached so don't work, but start at dell.com/
outlet
MuahMan
Why not just use your Mac? LOL Man it must suck to have to buy
systems for all the shit that won't run on your Apple Media
Consumption device.
Alan Baker
<6db7cf6b-bd06-40af...@p26g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
MuahMan <mua...@gmail.com> wrote:
He didn't say it would run. In fact, he said precisely the opposite.
What a pity reading wasn't one of the skills you mastered being one of
Jerry's kids.
MuahMan
> In article
> <634120bf-4416-42dd-a0cc-85e9f9211...@i3g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
Poor attempt at spin. Apple builds well rounded systems, they just
don't seem to suit your need in this case.
ZnU
> On Sep 27, 9:59 pm, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
> > I'm looking to pick up a cheap Windows system to use with
> > this:http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/ultrascope/
> >
> > It literally won't be used for anything else, so the necessary specs are
> > pretty concrete:
> >
> > - 2 GB of RAM if it runs XP, 4 GB if it runs Vista or Windows 7.
> > - Minimum of 1 free PCIe 1x slot and 1 free PCIe 16x slot.
> > - 2.5 GHz Core 2 Duo or better.
> > - As cheap, small, and quiet as possible.
> >
> > Alternatively, I could use the USB 3 version of the product (it's $100
> > cheaper), which eliminates the need for the 1x PCIe slot but, of course,
> > adds a requirement for USB 3.
> >
> > I'd prefer not to have to build something, but I will if I can order all
> > the parts from a single vendor and it will save me more than $150 or get
> > me a significantly smaller form factor.
> >
> > For all that we hear about $300 Windows machines that are supposedly
> > better than Mac Pros, I haven't actually been able to find something
> > that meets these requirements for less than about $500.
>
> Why not just use your Mac? LOL Man it must suck to have to buy
> systems for all the shit that won't run on your Apple Media
> Consumption device.
Heh. The machine running these video scopes will in fact be yet another
accessory attached to or installed in the Apple Media Creation device
(i.e. Mac Pro tower) that ties together our main online edit suite. And
one of the cheaper accessories; there are individual PCIe cards
installed in the Mac that cost several times as much. (In fact, there's
one card installed in the Mac that costs more than the Mac.)
The truth is, when it comes to buying computers for the office to
perform specific business tasks, I'm essentially platform agnostic. If a
couple key apps were Windows-only or Linux-only, I'd have a high-end
Windows or Linux machine tying together the ~$20K worth of hardware in
the suite. But instead those couple of key apps (in this case, Final Cut
Pro and the software version of DaVinci Resolve) happen to be Mac-only.
The Mac is sufficiently dominant in pro video that it's Windows that
tends to get neglected in that market.
Lloyd Parsons
<48d3b068-97ff-4082...@a19g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
MuahMan <mua...@gmail.com> wrote:
Nice attempt at your spin. Apple builds well rounded systems that
exceed his needs.
--
Lloyd
ZnU
<06d580a5-c7bf-4eb4...@30g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
ed <ne...@atwistedweb.com> wrote:
> On Sep 29, 3:02 pm, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
> > ed <n...@atwistedweb.com> wrote:
> > > On Sep 28, 12:37 am, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > > > if you're ok with amd and a refurb, this guy's pretty cheap at like
> > > > > $329:
> > > > >http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=03..
> > > > >.
> > > > > it's a amd dual core 3ghz, 4 gig ram, 64 bit, slots required, and a
> > > > > small form factor.
> >
> > > > Don't think the vendor has tested AMD processors with the card. Too
> > > > bad,
> > > > because otherwise it's pretty much what I'd want.
> >
> > > it appears that if you want a verified system, you're looking at one
> > > of 4 hp workstation class machines, so the question is kind of moot...
> > >http://www.blackmagic-design.com/support/detail.asp?techID=195
> >
> > Verified system, I can live without; the list doesn't seem especially up
> > to date. But the right processor and graphics card would probably be a
> > good idea.
>
> yeah. that graphics card is the main thing that's gonna kill you i
> think..
Well, that's why I wanted the free PCIe slot; I can always install a
supported card if necessary. (Some of them are pretty cheap, so that
wouldn't be the end of the world.)
> well, if you're ok with refurb, here's a dell coupon good for 20% off
> computers from the dell outlet- expires friday. good for any computer
> i think.
> 00ZTCHCWW1$1VG
>
> this will get you (for example):
> Inspiron Desktop 530s Slim Tower:
> Core 2 Duo Processor E7400 (3MB L2 Cache,2.80GHz,1066 FSB)
> 4gb ram
> 64 bit vista business
> 256MB ATI RADEON HD 2400 Pro
> PCI: 2 Slots
> PCIe x1: 1 Slot
> PCIe x16 (Graphics): 1 Slots
>
> that card isn't listed, but does support opengl3.1
>
> it's pretty small, and will run you $415 with the coupon.
>
> the links have a session attached so don't work, but start at dell.com/
> outlet
That looks fairly plausible. Unfortunately, the 530s appears to have
been disappeared from Dell's web site. I'm not entirely sure I
understand how one actually buys a computer from a vendor that behaves
like this; it seems like by the time you've figured out what model you
want, it's gone. Seriously, I'm pretty sure all of the research I've
done on this over the last couple of days is now literally worthless, as
Dell has changed its models around.
And then there's the part where some systems ordered now from Dell won't
ship for two weeks -- and you have no idea which ones until you add them
to your cart. We kind of need this thing for a project on 10/9.
Honestly, for all that I constantly get accused of being an anti-Wintel
bigot in CSMA, I seem to have actually bought into some of the
pro-Wintel hype here. I used to procure Windows systems occasionally for
a job I had a few years ago, and I'd forgotten just how completely
shitty the whole process was.
At this point I'm leaning toward just buying a DIY kit from NewEgg, not
because I'll actually save any money, but because it seems easier than
dealing with this nonsense. Is there really no Windows OEM that actually
has a comprehensible line of computers that remains stable from day to
day, offers sensible build-to-order options, and can actually ship
something out in a reasonable period of time? Seems like there's a
market opportunity there.
ed
<snip>
> > well, if you're ok with refurb, here's a dell coupon good for 20% off
> > computers from the dell outlet- expires friday. good for any computer
> > i think.
> > 00ZTCHCWW1$1VG
>
> > this will get you (for example):
> > Inspiron Desktop 530s Slim Tower:
> > Core 2 Duo Processor E7400 (3MB L2 Cache,2.80GHz,1066 FSB)
> > 4gb ram
> > 64 bit vista business
> > 256MB ATI RADEON HD 2400 Pro
> > PCI: 2 Slots
> > PCIe x1: 1 Slot
> > PCIe x16 (Graphics): 1 Slots
>
> > that card isn't listed, but does support opengl3.1
>
> > it's pretty small, and will run you $415 with the coupon.
>
> > the links have a session attached so don't work, but start at dell.com/
> > outlet
>
> That looks fairly plausible. Unfortunately, the 530s appears to have
> been disappeared from Dell's web site. I'm not entirely sure I
> understand how one actually buys a computer from a vendor that behaves
> like this; it seems like by the time you've figured out what model you
> want, it's gone. Seriously, I'm pretty sure all of the research I've
> done on this over the last couple of days is now literally worthless, as
> Dell has changed its models around.
http://www.dell.com/us/en/dfh/desktops/inspndt_53xs/pd.aspx?refid=inspndt_53xs&cs=22&s=dfh
> And then there's the part where some systems ordered now from Dell won't
> ship for two weeks -- and you have no idea which ones until you add them
> to your cart. We kind of need this thing for a project on 10/9.
dell outlet computers are typically preconfigured and ship w/in 24
hours.
> Honestly, for all that I constantly get accused of being an anti-Wintel
> bigot in CSMA, I seem to have actually bought into some of the
> pro-Wintel hype here. I used to procure Windows systems occasionally for
> a job I had a few years ago, and I'd forgotten just how completely
> shitty the whole process was.
>
> At this point I'm leaning toward just buying a DIY kit from NewEgg, not
> because I'll actually save any money, but because it seems easier than
> dealing with this nonsense. Is there really no Windows OEM that actually
> has a comprehensible line of computers that remains stable from day to
> day, offers sensible build-to-order options, and can actually ship
> something out in a reasonable period of time? Seems like there's a
> market opportunity there.
does it matter if it's a "stable" line- just go to the website and
order whatever you want that day. do you really care if the new model
is a '560' instead of a '530'?
i personally prefer a different model designation when specs change-
i.e. when i go look at apple's refurbished computers and see a
"Refurbished iMac 21.5-inch 3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo" for $929, it's
really tough to tell at a glance if it's the same model as the current
imac (it's not). you end up going down the specs line by line to find
out what's up (usually the video card is the give away), and it's
something that a more casual buyer probably wouldn't notice.
Mayor Of R'lyeh
> In article
So much for the notion that Macs aren't any more expensive than PCs.
Did you accidently swallow some kind of honesty potion? You're
confessing to an awful lot here lately.
>
> See, the reason I use Macs is not, as you seem to believe, because I'm
> some sort of fanatic,
LOL! Scratch what I said about the honesty potion.
> but because they're better for the tasks I need to
> perform.
Well, you've convinced yourself of that anyway.
> That doesn't happen to be the case for this particular task; a
> cheap Windows box will do this just as well. There aren't even any
> concerns about malware, since the machine doesn't even need a network
> connection.
What happened to the MacOS being superior in all aspects? You'd think
you could toss in the card to the Mac Pro and maybe another video card
to run another monitor and let Apple's 'superior' multi-tasking run it
all on the same machine.
>
> More generally, the reason a Windows box is a better choice for this use
> case is because Apple builds well-rounded systems
That's one of your better euphemisms for 'overpriced'.
>, and this use case
> doesn't actually require a well-rounded system. So why pay for one?
That sounds a lot like arguments you've laughed at over the years.
Why not just go buy some real waveform monitors if money is tight? You
could get a whole pile of them in the used market for what even a
cheap computer costs.
>
> > As to your requirements I'd suggest you roll your own. You have the
> > specs. Hit up Newegg.
>
> Doesn't really end up any cheaper, by the time you spend $100 on an OEM
> Windows 7 license. At least as far as I could see.
>
I just realized what you sounded like in this thread. I just read a
news story a few days ago about a union that used non-union labor to
build a new union hall. One of their stated reasons was that union
labor was too expensive. The spokesmen said that without seeming to
understand how it contradicted the union's official line or even
seeming to understand the irony. Do you work as a union spokesman be
some chance, ZnU? 8)
MuahMan
> In article
> <6db7cf6b-bd06-40af-b393-05a2136e7...@p26g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
I've never once had to go buy a Mac because my Windows machine
couldn't do the job. Must suck for you guys to constantly have to buy
Windows boxes for all the stuff you can't do on your Apple Consumption
Devices.
ZnU
<4a5e5833-c53f-4e6d...@l6g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
"Mayor Of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 29, 6:03 pm, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
> > In article
> > It's not just an app. It requires a PCIe card. It's Mac compatible, but
> > I'm not going to tie up a Mac Pro tower with this. A Mac Pro is too
> > useful (and expensive) to use to for one task.
>
> So much for the notion that Macs aren't any more expensive than PCs.
> Did you accidently swallow some kind of honesty potion? You're
> confessing to an awful lot here lately.
You've merely confused yourself with your misrepresentations of my
positions. I have never claimed that there weren't some PCs that were
cheaper than the cheapest Macs Apple offered.
> > See, the reason I use Macs is not, as you seem to believe, because I'm
> > some sort of fanatic,
>
> LOL! Scratch what I said about the honesty potion.
>
> > but because they're better for the tasks I need to
> > perform.
>
> Well, you've convinced yourself of that anyway.
>
> > That doesn't happen to be the case for this particular task; a
> > cheap Windows box will do this just as well. There aren't even any
> > concerns about malware, since the machine doesn't even need a network
> > connection.
>
> What happened to the MacOS being superior in all aspects? You'd think
> you could toss in the card to the Mac Pro and maybe another video card
> to run another monitor and let Apple's 'superior' multi-tasking run it
> all on the same machine.
It doesn't really work like that. First off, the Mac Pro in question has
its slots full already. Secondly, most of the processing done by the
UltraScope software happens on the GPU, and one of the main applications
running on the Mac Pro requires real-time performance and is extremely
GPU intensive -- so much so that it requires _two_ graphics cards
installed, one disconnected from any displays and used purely for CUDA
processing. It really wouldn't be a great idea to try to do these things
on the same machine.
> > More generally, the reason a Windows box is a better choice for
> > this use case is because Apple builds well-rounded systems
>
> That's one of your better euphemisms for 'overpriced'.
>
> > and this use case doesn't actually require a well-rounded system.
> > So why pay for one?
>
> That sounds a lot like arguments you've laughed at over the years.
> Why not just go buy some real waveform monitors if money is tight?
> You could get a whole pile of them in the used market for what even a
> cheap computer costs.
Older SD gear, sure. But that's useless to me. The UltraScope card plus
a cheap PC will come in at ~$1300. This is _ludicrously_ cheap for
HD-SDI scopes. Hardware HD scopes generally cost over $5K and have tiny
little built-in screens that can't show multiple scopes at once.
[snip]
ZnU
<8048c282-55d7-4eae...@v6g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
ed <ne...@atwistedweb.com> wrote:
Doesn't appear in searches of Dell's site. Isn't listed on this page:
http://www.dell.com/us/en/dfh/desktops/ct.aspx?refid=desktops&s=dfh&cs=22
or this one:
http://www.dell.com/us/en/dfh/desktops/inspndt/ct.aspx?refid=inspndt&s=df
h&cs=22
The only way to find it seems to be from the "Check Availability &
Prices" drop-down menu in the sidebar.
Well, except the machine appears to have literally just become
unavailable in the last few seconds. Like, I hit the "Check Availability
& Prices" button in your post immediately upon opening it and there were
units available, but by the time I read the specs and tried to add one
to my cart (and had to fill out an unreadable capacha -- who makes users
do that to spend money?), I was told the item wasn't available, and
going back and checking availability again confirmed that "Sorry. No
inventory matching your filter options above was found at this time."
Dell is fucking absurd. I honestly can't figure out how they actually
sell computers with this model. It's like one of those third-world
open-air markets, where (apocryphally, anyway) by the time you get the
money out of your wallet, the vendor is trying to give you a different
item from the one you were trying to pay for.
> > And then there's the part where some systems ordered now from Dell won't
> > ship for two weeks -- and you have no idea which ones until you add them
> > to your cart. We kind of need this thing for a project on 10/9.
>
> dell outlet computers are typically preconfigured and ship w/in 24
> hours.
>
> > Honestly, for all that I constantly get accused of being an anti-Wintel
> > bigot in CSMA, I seem to have actually bought into some of the
> > pro-Wintel hype here. I used to procure Windows systems occasionally for
> > a job I had a few years ago, and I'd forgotten just how completely
> > shitty the whole process was.
> >
> > At this point I'm leaning toward just buying a DIY kit from NewEgg, not
> > because I'll actually save any money, but because it seems easier than
> > dealing with this nonsense. Is there really no Windows OEM that actually
> > has a comprehensible line of computers that remains stable from day to
> > day, offers sensible build-to-order options, and can actually ship
> > something out in a reasonable period of time? Seems like there's a
> > market opportunity there.
>
> does it matter if it's a "stable" line- just go to the website and
> order whatever you want that day. do you really care if the new model
> is a '560' instead of a '530'?
It's more a matter of prices fluctuating about 20% for similar hardware
literally from hour to hour.
> i personally prefer a different model designation when specs change-
> i.e. when i go look at apple's refurbished computers and see a
> "Refurbished iMac 21.5-inch 3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo" for $929, it's
> really tough to tell at a glance if it's the same model as the current
> imac (it's not). you end up going down the specs line by line to find
> out what's up (usually the video card is the give away), and it's
> something that a more casual buyer probably wouldn't notice.
Why Apple doesn't number Macs like they do iPhones is a bit confusing to
me. But their approach is still a lot less nutty than Dell's.
Alan Baker
<99cb7138-728d-4fc0...@x42g2000yqx.googlegroups.com>,
MuahMan <mua...@gmail.com> wrote:
And he's not saying a Mac can't do the job, so you're still
demonstrating your inability to read.
Steve de Mena
> In article<6oGdnThR5Y7-gz7R...@giganews.com>,
I said he'll have to spend $450 to $500 for what he wants. He already
knew such systems existed at that price point. Look at Dell desktops.
He didn't ask for information on systems around $500, he wanted a
$300 system.
Learn to read.
Steve
Steve de Mena
Damn, it's in the OUTLET STORE, like he said. Look there. I see the
530s.
Steve
Mocassin Joe
"MuahMan" <mua...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:48d3b068-97ff-4082...@a19g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
"Well rounded"? BWAHAAAAHAAAAAAHAAAAAAAA!
ed
> ed <n...@atwistedweb.com> wrote:
<snip>
> Well, except the machine appears to have literally just become
> unavailable in the last few seconds. Like, I hit the "Check Availability
> & Prices" button in your post immediately upon opening it and there were
> units available, but by the time I read the specs and tried to add one
> to my cart (and had to fill out an unreadable capacha -- who makes users
> do that to spend money?), I was told the item wasn't available, and
> going back and checking availability again confirmed that "Sorry. No
> inventory matching your filter options above was found at this time."
weird- i could add it to my cart last night, and i can do it now-
unless there's like one left and i keep tying it up in my cart. :D
<snip>
> > i personally prefer a different model designation when specs change-
> > i.e. when i go look at apple's refurbished computers and see a
> > "Refurbished iMac 21.5-inch 3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo" for $929, it's
> > really tough to tell at a glance if it's the same model as the current
> > imac (it's not). you end up going down the specs line by line to find
> > out what's up (usually the video card is the give away), and it's
> > something that a more casual buyer probably wouldn't notice.
>
> Why Apple doesn't number Macs like they do iPhones is a bit confusing to
> me. But their approach is still a lot less nutty than Dell's.
i like dell's approach better in terms of model designations (and even
pricing), but there's no doubt that they could work on their site.
ZnU
Steve de Mena <st...@stevedemena.com> wrote:
I was looking in the outlet store, Steve. The model isn't listed on
several pages where you'd think it would be listed. I did eventually
find it, then the site told me it had become unavailable, and now it
appears to be back again. The entire buying experience here is frankly
ludicrous.
Alan Baker
Sorry, Stevie, but the reading problem is on your end. He didn't say he
wanted a system at any particular price. He made a comment in passing
about how certain Wintrolls here have claimed that such a system exists,
but he wasn't looking for that one in particular...
...and you still haven't produced the system.
ZnU
<baec76e6-9ad9-484e...@t20g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
ed <ne...@atwistedweb.com> wrote:
> On Sep 29, 11:06 pm, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
> > ed <n...@atwistedweb.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> > Well, except the machine appears to have literally just become
> > unavailable in the last few seconds. Like, I hit the "Check Availability
> > & Prices" button in your post immediately upon opening it and there were
> > units available, but by the time I read the specs and tried to add one
> > to my cart (and had to fill out an unreadable capacha -- who makes users
> > do that to spend money?), I was told the item wasn't available, and
> > going back and checking availability again confirmed that "Sorry. No
> > inventory matching your filter options above was found at this time."
>
> weird- i could add it to my cart last night, and i can do it now-
> unless there's like one left and i keep tying it up in my cart. :D
Yes, it's back now. Or it was recently; I haven't checked in the last 30
seconds. I think I might try to hold out for something with Windows 7
rather than Vista.
> <snip>
> > > i personally prefer a different model designation when specs change-
> > > i.e. when i go look at apple's refurbished computers and see a
> > > "Refurbished iMac 21.5-inch 3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo" for $929, it's
> > > really tough to tell at a glance if it's the same model as the current
> > > imac (it's not). you end up going down the specs line by line to find
> > > out what's up (usually the video card is the give away), and it's
> > > something that a more casual buyer probably wouldn't notice.
> >
> > Why Apple doesn't number Macs like they do iPhones is a bit confusing to
> > me. But their approach is still a lot less nutty than Dell's.
>
> i like dell's approach better in terms of model designations (and even
> pricing), but there's no doubt that they could work on their site.
Err... Apple's model designations don't necessarily tell you what specs
a computer has if you don't know the purchase date to within 8-12
months. On the other hand, Dell's models change so much that you can't
have any familiarity with their model lineup in the first place. I'm not
sure how the latter is supposed to be better.
ZnU
> On Sep 29, 6:03 pm, ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
> > In article
[snip]
> > Doesn't really end up any cheaper, by the time you spend $100 on an OEM
> > Windows 7 license. At least as far as I could see.
>
> Poor attempt at spin. Apple builds well rounded systems, they just
> don't seem to suit your need in this case.
Because this use case doesn't require a well-rounded system. It requires
a system entirely defined by about three specifications.
ZnU
Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> wrote:
> In article <S9WdndH1EL0m_jnR...@giganews.com>,
> Steve de Mena <st...@stevedemena.com> wrote:
[snip]
> > I said he'll have to spend $450 to $500 for what he wants. He already
> > knew such systems existed at that price point. Look at Dell desktops.
> > He didn't ask for information on systems around $500, he wanted a
> > $300 system.
> >
> > Learn to read.
> >
> > Steve
>
> Sorry, Stevie, but the reading problem is on your end. He didn't say he
> wanted a system at any particular price. He made a comment in passing
> about how certain Wintrolls here have claimed that such a system exists,
> but he wasn't looking for that one in particular...
>
> ...and you still haven't produced the system.
Yeah, you know, $500 isn't much given that the Mac Pro this PC is going
to be an accessory for has a PCIe card in it that retails for $4750. I
just find it rather amusing that I've got a use case here that requires
decent graphics (or a free 16x PCIe slot) and either USB 3 or a free 1x
PCIe slot. Graphics, expandability, and USB 3 are all things Wintrolls
very commonly hold up in CSMA as primary examples of Wintel advantages,
all while touting extremely cheap systems. The reality is that these
things aren't actually available on extremely cheap systems. And USB 3
isn't really on the radar yet at all.
Paying significant attention to the inventory out there for the first
time in a couple of years has been a real eye opener for me. I'm stunned
by how many systems still ship with Vista, how many systems have bottom
of the barrel processors, the price points you have to reach to get a
system without Intel graphics, etc. I'm not seeing many systems under
about $750 that I'd be comfortable with as general use desktops.
Now, look, Apple doesn't sell cheap towers. I think everyone is aware of
this. If you need a machine with expandability for under $2500, a Wintel
box is pretty much the only game in town, which is why I'm buying one.
But the respectable models are getting up into the price range of a Mac
mini, and the vast majority of consumers _don't_ need expandability, and
would likely benefit far more from the Mini's small form factor, better
OS, better software bundle, and from Apple's _dramatically_ better
buying experience.
Anyway, I think I'm just going to build something. Could probably even
get it dual-booting OS X, potentially making it useful for things other
than running video scopes. Might be a fun project.
Alan Baker
ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
Yeah.
I notice everyone who has said "You can find one of those anywhere" has
failed to produce an actual single example.
>
> Paying significant attention to the inventory out there for the first
> time in a couple of years has been a real eye opener for me. I'm stunned
> by how many systems still ship with Vista, how many systems have bottom
> of the barrel processors, the price points you have to reach to get a
> system without Intel graphics, etc. I'm not seeing many systems under
> about $750 that I'd be comfortable with as general use desktops.
>
> Now, look, Apple doesn't sell cheap towers. I think everyone is aware of
> this. If you need a machine with expandability for under $2500, a Wintel
> box is pretty much the only game in town, which is why I'm buying one.
> But the respectable models are getting up into the price range of a Mac
> mini, and the vast majority of consumers _don't_ need expandability, and
> would likely benefit far more from the Mini's small form factor, better
> OS, better software bundle, and from Apple's _dramatically_ better
> buying experience.
I convinced a client of mine to replace their aging G4 towers with iMacs
when they last upgraded. They were going to buy Mac Pros, but the iMacs
we got for them are fine for the DTP work that they're doing and they
saved more than a $1000 per station *and* they each ended up with a dual
monitor setup.
>
> Anyway, I think I'm just going to build something. Could probably even
> get it dual-booting OS X, potentially making it useful for things other
> than running video scopes. Might be a fun project.
Cool!
Snit
alangbaker-FFEE4...@news.shawcable.com on 9/30/10 10:53 AM:
>> Now, look, Apple doesn't sell cheap towers. I think everyone is aware of
>> this. If you need a machine with expandability for under $2500, a Wintel
>> box is pretty much the only game in town, which is why I'm buying one.
>> But the respectable models are getting up into the price range of a Mac
>> mini, and the vast majority of consumers _don't_ need expandability, and
>> would likely benefit far more from the Mini's small form factor, better
>> OS, better software bundle, and from Apple's _dramatically_ better
>> buying experience.
>
> I convinced a client of mine to replace their aging G4 towers with iMacs
> when they last upgraded. They were going to buy Mac Pros, but the iMacs
> we got for them are fine for the DTP work that they're doing and they
> saved more than a $1000 per station *and* they each ended up with a dual
> monitor setup.
I went from a G4 tower to an original aluminum iMac and now a current model
iMac... and used dual monitors on all. The iMacs serve me very well... the
older one would still be serving me well, but my wife was using the G4 tower
and it was getting a bit old. I got a new machine and she got my older one.
The G4 is now a stereo / media system for us.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
ZnU
Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> wrote:
> In article <znu-1BDFA5.1...@Port80.Individual.NET>,
> ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
[snip]
> > Now, look, Apple doesn't sell cheap towers. I think everyone is aware of
> > this. If you need a machine with expandability for under $2500, a Wintel
> > box is pretty much the only game in town, which is why I'm buying one.
> > But the respectable models are getting up into the price range of a Mac
> > mini, and the vast majority of consumers _don't_ need expandability, and
> > would likely benefit far more from the Mini's small form factor, better
> > OS, better software bundle, and from Apple's _dramatically_ better
> > buying experience.
>
> I convinced a client of mine to replace their aging G4 towers with iMacs
> when they last upgraded. They were going to buy Mac Pros, but the iMacs
> we got for them are fine for the DTP work that they're doing and they
> saved more than a $1000 per station *and* they each ended up with a dual
> monitor setup.
Yup. When it came time to replace our aging G5 edit stations, we moved
over to Mac minis. They're more than fast enough for editing with 720p
or 1080p ProRes HQ footage, which is what we work with for all of our
non feature film projects and what we use for offline editing on feature
projects. And they'll drive two displays. The only place we still need a
Mac Pro is in our online edit/color grading suite.
It's sort of crazy how few things actually still require a high-end
tower. We've deliberately tried to build our business model to
anticipate the fact that the things that the $20K worth of hardware in
our online edit suite can do will likely be possible to do on a laptop
in five years.
> > Anyway, I think I'm just going to build something. Could probably even
> > get it dual-booting OS X, potentially making it useful for things other
> > than running video scopes. Might be a fun project.
>
> Cool!
--
Steve de Mena
> On the other hand, Dell's models change so much that you can't
> have any familiarity with their model lineup in the first place. I'm not
> sure how the latter is supposed to be better.
You get the latest and greatest. You don't have to wait another year
for Intel's latest CPU to be available.
If you want stability, stick to the Dell business systems. Those
change much less frequently.
Steve
Steve de Mena
> Sorry, Stevie, but the reading problem is on your end. He didn't say he
> wanted a system at any particular price. He made a comment in passing
> about how certain Wintrolls here have claimed that such a system exists,
> but he wasn't looking for that one in particular...
>
> ...and you still haven't produced the system.
Blow me.
LOL.
Steve
Steve de Mena
You don't think $500 is a cheap system? You also limited your system
to Intel Core 2 Duo when "extremely cheap" systems typically use AMD CPUs.
Steve
Alan Baker
Steve de Mena <st...@stevedemena.com> wrote:
LOL
Can't actually do it, huh? Yeah... ...I think everyone had already
figured that out.
Sandman
<4a5e5833-c53f-4e6d...@l6g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
"Mayor Of R'lyeh" <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It's not just an app. It requires a PCIe card. It's Mac compatible, but
> > I'm not going to tie up a Mac Pro tower with this. A Mac Pro is too
> > useful (and expensive) to use to for one task.
>
> So much for the notion that Macs aren't any more expensive than PCs.
A Mac Pro is more expensive than a PC tower meeting ZnU's rock-bottom
low specifications. News at 11.
--
Sandman[.net]
Steve de Mena
Just like the Apple Store refurbished pages. Specific models come and
go daily.... Yawn. Non issue. Do you expect there to always be
refurbished inventory of every model?
Steve
MuahMan
> In article
I'm sorry Apple doesn't have any Chinese child slaves that build a
model that suits your needs. Don't feel bad, Apple computers don't
suit 98% of the planets users needs either.
ZnU
Steve de Mena <st...@stevedemena.com> wrote:
> On 9/30/10 9:48 AM, ZnU wrote:
>
> > On the other hand, Dell's models change so much that you can't
> > have any familiarity with their model lineup in the first place. I'm not
> > sure how the latter is supposed to be better.
>
> You get the latest and greatest. You don't have to wait another year
> for Intel's latest CPU to be available.
Unless Intel is releasing new CPUs twice a day, that obviously isn't the
explanation.
I think the issue is more that the current chaos allows Dell to a) toss
whatever components they happen to be getting the best prices on today
into systems and b) constantly tweak the exact models they offer to see
what lures people in. I'm sure it's all very efficient from their
perspective. It just sucks when you're actually trying to evaluate what
system to buy.
I wonder how much of this is even in human hands. One tends to get the
impression, watching this all unfold, that Dell's systems might not be
meaningfully designed at all -- that they literally are just collections
of parts, and some algorithm constantly changes those collections around
based on supplier pricing information, and continuously mutates them to
see if it can find variants that sell 3% better.
> If you want stability, stick to the Dell business systems. Those
> change much less frequently.
--
ZnU
It's higher than I was expecting, listening to the Windows fans in this
group. I should really know not to do that.
> You also limited your system to Intel Core 2 Duo when "extremely
> cheap" systems typically use AMD CPUs.
--
ZnU
Several points:
It's nearly as bad with non-refurbished models at Dell.
"Daily" is not the same as "minute by minute".
Apple products seem to have a much more straightforward correlation
between price and features. One of the infuriating things about shopping
at Dell is that often a _better_ system will be $100 cheaper, seemingly
for no reason. This makes it very hard to avoid the feeling that
whatever you buy, you're getting screwed because there was something
better for less money elsewhere.
MuahMan
tower can. I decent mini is only like $800.
Oh wait. You'll need a monitor
So add $350
and a keyboard....
and a mouse.....
Oh wait. No expansion slots. Nevermind.
Chance Furlong
> Just buy yourself a Mac Mini it can do everything a cheapo Windows
> tower can. I decent mini is only like $800.
>
> Oh wait. You'll need a monitor
>
>
> Oh wait. No expansion slots. Never mind.
Except catch malware whle using OS X.
MuahMan
Can someone translate this? I don't speak retard. Jimmy Lee Jr. you
are a shining and glorious example of Apple users everywhere. Keep up
the good work buddy!
Alan Baker
<ac3c67b3-94e8-451c...@t20g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
MuahMan <mua...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 30, 10:14 pm, Chance Furlong <T-B...@megakatcuty.com> wrote:
> > On 9/30/10 9:05 PM, MuahMan wrote:
> >
> > > Just buy yourself a Mac Mini it can do everything a cheapo Windows
> > > tower can.
> > Except catch malware while using OS X.
>
> Can someone translate this? I don't speak retard. Jimmy Lee Jr. you
> are a shining and glorious example of Apple users everywhere. Keep up
> the good work buddy!
Done.
Redjak
"MuahMan" <mua...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ac3c67b3-94e8-451c...@t20g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
It's a secret language called "Gorkspeak". And the only people who
understand it are other Gorks.
Redjak
"Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:alangbaker-41E8B...@news.shawcable.com...
> In article
> <ac3c67b3-94e8-451c...@t20g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
> MuahMan <mua...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sep 30, 10:14 pm, Chance Furlong <T-B...@megakatcuty.com> wrote:
>> > On 9/30/10 9:05 PM, MuahMan wrote:
>> >
>> > > Just buy yourself a Mac Mini it can do everything a cheapo Windows
>> > > tower can.
>
>> > Except catch malware while using OS X.
>>
>> Can someone translate this? I don't speak retard. Jimmy Lee Jr. you
>> are a shining and glorious example of Apple users everywhere. Keep up
>> the good work buddy!
>
> Done.
Another Gork!
Steve Mackay
> I'm looking to pick up a cheap Windows system to use with this:
> http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/ultrascope/
>
> It literally won't be used for anything else, so the necessary specs are
> pretty concrete:
>
> - 2 GB of RAM if it runs XP, 4 GB if it runs Vista or Windows 7.
> - Minimum of 1 free PCIe 1x slot and 1 free PCIe 16x slot.
> - 2.5 GHz Core 2 Duo or better.
> - As cheap, small, and quiet as possible.
>
> Alternatively, I could use the USB 3 version of the product (it's $100
> cheaper), which eliminates the need for the 1x PCIe slot but, of course,
> adds a requirement for USB 3.
>
> I'd prefer not to have to build something, but I will if I can order all
> the parts from a single vendor and it will save me more than $150 or get
> me a significantly smaller form factor.
>
> For all that we hear about $300 Windows machines that are supposedly
> better than Mac Pros, I haven't actually been able to find something
> that meets these requirements for less than about $500.
>
If you don't mind refurb....
Alan Baker
Steve Mackay <mackay...@att.net> wrote:
So the only way to get a computer for around $300 that meets his
requirements...
...is not to buy a new one?
MuahMan
> In article <i8986h$2m...@news.albasani.net>,
Isn't there a Mac for $300 that meets his needs?
Steve Mackay
http://goo.gl/pFdK This was $350 today. But the card MFG doesn't list
AMD processors as recommended.
Find a new or refurb comparable mac for less than $2000 that meets his
specifications.
Alan Baker
Steve Mackay <mackay...@att.net> wrote:
If it is, it's already gone up: $399.99 when I checked your link just
now.
>
> Find a new or refurb comparable mac for less than $2000 that meets his
> specifications.
No.
That wasn't his point.
So far, what is the actual cheapest new computer that meets his
requirements? Right now, it's more than $350 and that's all I'm certain
of.
ed
> In article <i8986h$2m...@news.albasani.net>,
> Steve Mackay <mackay.st...@att.net> wrote:
> > > cheaper), which eliminates the need for the 1x PCIe slot but, of course,
> > > adds a requirement for USB 3.
>
> > > I'd prefer not to have to build something, but I will if I can order all
> > > the parts from a single vendor and it will save me more than $150 or get
> > > me a significantly smaller form factor.
>
> > > For all that we hear about $300 Windows machines that are supposedly
> > > better than Mac Pros, I haven't actually been able to find something
> > > that meets these requirements for less than about $500.
>
> > If you don't mind refurb....
>
> > goo.gl/3LUt
> > goo.gl/oX8O
>
> So the only way to get a computer for around $300 that meets his
> requirements...
>
> ...is not to buy a new one?
probably, if he's on a deadline to get it in. if he were able to wait
for a sale, he could most likely catch one around $350-$400 within a
few weeks. w/out waiting, he can get good deals, but not the deal
he's looking for. ;D
for example, he can snag a dell vostro core 2 duo (2.9ghz), 32bit win
7, 2 gb ram, office starter, and a 18.5" lcd for $439. not bad at
all, just not what he's looking for. ;D
Redjak
"ed" <ne...@atwistedweb.com> wrote in message
news:7addb75e-ebe7-457d...@u31g2000pru.googlegroups.com...
If you look at the OP, he can't find anything to equal a Mac Pro for under
$500.
ZnU
"Redjak" <redja...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I was looking for a machine with a 2.5 GHz Core 2 Duo or better and one
16x PCIe slot + one 1x slot. That's hardly Mac Pro class hardware.
ZnU
Thanks. Those are close, but neither quite meets the minimum CPU
requirement. This application requires real-time performance, so that
little difference is potentially critical.
Anyway, I ended up just ordering some parts from NewEgg for about $430.
I'll use a hard drive, optical drive and a spare copy of Vista
(originally purchased for a now rarely used copy of VMWare Fusion) that
I've got lying around. This gets me pretty much exactly the specs I
want, and somehow it seems like I can obtain components and assemble a
computer about a week faster than Dell can.
Plus, a bit of research shows that OS X can be coerced into booting on
the hardware I ended up with. That should be an entertaining weekend
project if things are a little less crazy around here a month from now.
Redjak
"ZnU" <z...@fake.invalid> wrote in message
news:znu-9C70BD.1...@Port80.Individual.NET...
A Mac Mini should work.
Lloyd Parsons
"Redjak" <redja...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Ah I see reading comprehension on your part is a bit off. A mini
doesn't have slots.
--
Lloyd
MuahMan
> In article <i8aavl$in...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>
>
>
>
>
> "Redjak" <redjack...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "ZnU" <z...@fake.invalid> wrote in message
> >news:znu-9C70BD.1...@Port80.Individual.NET...
> > > "Redjak" <redjack...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > >> "ed" <n...@atwistedweb.com> wrote in message
Maybe the $2000 iMac will take care of him. I can't recommend to a
Windows PC to an Apple user. They are too technically challenged to
figure out stuff. All those ports and connections will confuse the
hell out of ZnPoo
John Slade
> On 9/27/10 6:59 PM, ZnU wrote:
>> I'm looking to pick up a cheap Windows system to use with this:
>> http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/ultrascope/
>>
>> It literally won't be used for anything else, so the necessary
>> specs are
>> pretty concrete:
>>
>> - 2 GB of RAM if it runs XP, 4 GB if it runs Vista or Windows 7.
>> - Minimum of 1 free PCIe 1x slot and 1 free PCIe 16x slot.
>> - 2.5 GHz Core 2 Duo or better.
>> - As cheap, small, and quiet as possible.
>>
>> (it's $100
>> cheaper), which eliminates the need for the 1x PCIe slot but,
>> of course,
>> adds a requirement for USB 3.
>>
>> I'd prefer not to have to build something, but I will if I can
>> order all
>> the parts from a single vendor and it will save me more than
>> $150 or get
>> me a significantly smaller form factor.
>>
>> For all that we hear about $300 Windows machines that are
>> supposedly
>> better than Mac Pros, I haven't actually been able to find
>> something
>> that meets these requirements for less than about $500.
>>
>
> to meet those specs. I guess that brings you up to Mac Pro
> prices , so no point....
>
> Steve
>
>
Nah, they don't look like a Mac. I would advise him to
just buy another Mac and install Windows on it.
John
ZnU
John Slade <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> Nah, they don't look like a Mac. I would advise him to
> just buy another Mac and install Windows on it.
It's really amazing how many of you trolls have severe reading
comprehension problems.
John Slade
>
>
I think you should go with an Athlon II or Phenom II CPU.
They are just as good or better than their Intel counterparts
these days.
John
Alan Baker
John Slade <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
Can you not read, man? He isn't specifying Core 2 Duo for no reason.
"Processor
€ Intel Core 2 Duo 2.5 Ghz or better
€ Intel i5-750 2.66 Ghz or better
€ Intel i7-860 2.8 Ghz or better"
<http://www.blackmagic-design.com/support/detail.asp?techID=195>
Chance Furlong
> Nah, they don't look like a Mac. I would advise him to just buy another
> Mac and install Windows on it.
>
> John
Why would anyone put Windoze on a Mac?
Chance Furlong
> On Oct 3, 12:56 pm, Lloyd Parsons<lloydpars...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>> Ah I see reading comprehension on your part is a bit off. A Mini
>> doesn't have slots.
>>
>> Lloyd
>
> I can't recommend to a Windows PC to an Apple user.
Can you recommend a Mac to a Windoze user?
> They are too technically challenged to figure out stuff.
Windoze users?
> All those ports and connections will confuse the hell out of ZnPoo
Hallucinating again?
MuahMan
To run the myriad of software that can't run on OS X, the biggest OS
failure since the last version.
Chance Furlong
Yes, you are hallucinating again.
Alan Baker
<39af30fa-4293-406c...@n26g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
MuahMan <mua...@gmail.com> wrote:
What myriad would that be, Brian.
More and more software is returning to Mac OS X all the time.
Witness Autocad's return and SolidWorks demoing its software on Mac.
Witness Microsoft re-adding support for both VBA and a full Exchange
email client for the Mac version of Office.
Witness Steam now supports the Mac.
ed
> > > > Nah, they don't look like a Mac. I would advise him to just buy another
> > > > Mac and install Windows on it.
>
> > > > John
>
> > > Why would anyone put Windoze on a Mac?
>
> > To run the myriad of software that can't run on OS X, the biggest OS
> > failure since the last version.
>
> What myriad would that be, Brian.
>
> More and more software is returning to Mac OS X all the time.
>
> Witness Autocad's return and SolidWorks demoing its software on Mac.
oooh, really? was solidworks demoed as a native app, or was it a
cloud app?
<snip>
Redjak
"Lloyd Parsons" <lloydp...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:lloydparsons-25A5...@port80.individual.net...
No need to get cranky, pops., did you miss nappie time. I'm not that
familiar with the Mac line, but for 800 bucks it should have all the bells
and whistles. No wonder the PC guys think you're a bunch of assholes.
Alan Baker
<35e342fd-9fa3-4b77...@u5g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
ed <ne...@atwistedweb.com> wrote:
I don't know.
But clearly they're interest in Mac users is rising, or else why demo it
on a Mac at all?
MuahMan
> In article
> <39af30fa-4293-406c-8d0d-efc1b1a0e...@n26g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > On Oct 3, 4:39 pm, Chance Furlong <T-B...@megakatcuty.com> wrote:
> > > On 10/3/10 3:10 PM, John Slade wrote:
>
> > > > Nah, they don't look like a Mac. I would advise him to just buy another
> > > > Mac and install Windows on it.
>
> > > > John
>
> > > Why would anyone put Windoze on a Mac?
>
> > To run the myriad of software that can't run on OS X, the biggest OS
> > failure since the last version.
>
> What myriad would that be, Brian.
>
> More and more software is returning to Mac OS X all the time.
>
> Witness Autocad's return and SolidWorks demoing its software on Mac.
Where can I pick it up today? Oh yeah. I can't because it's vaporware.
>
> Witness Microsoft re-adding support for both VBA and a full Exchange
> email client for the Mac version of Office.
LOL Wow. In 2010. That's just awesome. Bwhaha
Doesn't really matter though. The Mac is banished from the enterprise.
>
> Witness Steam now supports the Mac.
>
Wow, Steam. So quick. Only 3 years late.
How bought the most popular game out today. Civilizaton 5. Where can I
buy that for the Mac today. I see I can get the older versions from
2001. Bwahahahaha
How about Sonar/Depth Finder software for Humminbird GPS/Plotters?
MuahMan
>
>
>
>
>
> ed <n...@atwistedweb.com> wrote:
> > On Oct 3, 4:16 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <39af30fa-4293-406c-8d0d-efc1b1a0e...@n26g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > > > Nah, they don't look like a Mac. I would advise him to just buy
> > > > > > another
> > > > > > Mac and install Windows on it.
>
> > > > > > John
>
> > > > > Why would anyone put Windoze on a Mac?
>
> > > > To run the myriad of software that can't run on OS X, the biggest OS
> > > > failure since the last version.
>
> > > What myriad would that be, Brian.
>
> > > More and more software is returning to Mac OS X all the time.
>
> > > Witness Autocad's return and SolidWorks demoing its software on Mac.
>
> > oooh, really? was solidworks demoed as a native app, or was it a
> > cloud app?
>
> > <snip>
>
> I don't know.
>
> But clearly they're interest in Mac users is rising, or else why demo it
> on a Mac at all?
>
They were probably considering it. Then they saw OS X's abysmal market
share and were like, "Why bother?"
Alan Baker
<0bf0af8f-c4b5-4ed5...@l20g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
MuahMan <mua...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 3, 7:16 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <39af30fa-4293-406c-8d0d-efc1b1a0e...@n26g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > MuahMan <muah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Oct 3, 4:39 pm, Chance Furlong <T-B...@megakatcuty.com> wrote:
> > > > On 10/3/10 3:10 PM, John Slade wrote:
> >
> > > > > Nah, they don't look like a Mac. I would advise him to just buy
> > > > > another
> > > > > Mac and install Windows on it.
> >
> > > > > John
> >
> > > > Why would anyone put Windoze on a Mac?
> >
> > > To run the myriad of software that can't run on OS X, the biggest OS
> > > failure since the last version.
> >
> > What myriad would that be, Brian.
> >
> > More and more software is returning to Mac OS X all the time.
> >
> > Witness Autocad's return and SolidWorks demoing its software on Mac.
>
> Where can I pick it up today? Oh yeah. I can't because it's vaporware.
Autocad isn't.
>
> >
> > Witness Microsoft re-adding support for both VBA and a full Exchange
> > email client for the Mac version of Office.
>
> LOL Wow. In 2010. That's just awesome. Bwhaha
>
> Doesn't really matter though. The Mac is banished from the enterprise.
Then why did Microsoft bother?
>
> >
> > Witness Steam now supports the Mac.
> >
>
> Wow, Steam. So quick. Only 3 years late.
>
> How bought the most popular game out today. Civilizaton 5. Where can I
> buy that for the Mac today. I see I can get the older versions from
> 2001. Bwahahahaha
Wow. Not every game is available for the Mac...
>
>
> How about Sonar/Depth Finder software for Humminbird GPS/Plotters?
--
MuahMan
>
>
>
>
>
> MuahMan <muah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Oct 3, 7:16 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <39af30fa-4293-406c-8d0d-efc1b1a0e...@n26g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > MuahMan <muah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Oct 3, 4:39 pm, Chance Furlong <T-B...@megakatcuty.com> wrote:
> > > > > On 10/3/10 3:10 PM, John Slade wrote:
>
> > > > > > Nah, they don't look like a Mac. I would advise him to just buy
> > > > > > another
> > > > > > Mac and install Windows on it.
>
> > > > > > John
>
> > > > > Why would anyone put Windoze on a Mac?
>
> > > > To run the myriad of software that can't run on OS X, the biggest OS
> > > > failure since the last version.
>
> > > What myriad would that be, Brian.
>
> > > More and more software is returning to Mac OS X all the time.
>
> > > Witness Autocad's return and SolidWorks demoing its software on Mac.
>
> > Where can I pick it up today? Oh yeah. I can't because it's vaporware.
>
> Autocad isn't.
Where can I pick a copy of Autocad for OS X in the morning. I want a
copy now.
>
>
>
> > > Witness Microsoft re-adding support for both VBA and a full Exchange
> > > email client for the Mac version of Office.
>
> > LOL Wow. In 2010. That's just awesome. Bwhaha
>
> > Doesn't really matter though. The Mac is banished from the enterprise.
>
> Then why did Microsoft bother?
Pity
>
>
>
> > > Witness Steam now supports the Mac.
>
> > Wow, Steam. So quick. Only 3 years late.
>
> > How bought the most popular game out today. Civilizaton 5. Where can I
> > buy that for the Mac today. I see I can get the older versions from
> > 2001. Bwahahahaha
>
> Wow. Not every game is available for the Mac...
>
Granted almost no games are available for the Mac. Not even the most
popular games in the world. LOL
>
>
> > How about Sonar/Depth Finder software for Humminbird GPS/Plotters?
>
You missed this one.
Where is the Power Commander software for OS X. I use it daily to tune
motorcycles.
Alan Baker
<a6742668-877f-4add...@i3g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
MuahMan <mua...@gmail.com> wrote:
<http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?edc=2175978&enkwrd=ALLPROD
%3a(2175978)>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > > > Witness Microsoft re-adding support for both VBA and a full Exchange
> > > > email client for the Mac version of Office.
> >
> > > LOL Wow. In 2010. That's just awesome. Bwhaha
> >
> > > Doesn't really matter though. The Mac is banished from the enterprise.
> >
> > Then why did Microsoft bother?
>
>
> Pity
LOLOOOOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOL
> >
> >
> >
> > > > Witness Steam now supports the Mac.
> >
> > > Wow, Steam. So quick. Only 3 years late.
> >
> > > How bought the most popular game out today. Civilizaton 5. Where can I
> > > buy that for the Mac today. I see I can get the older versions from
> > > 2001. Bwahahahaha
> >
> > Wow. Not every game is available for the Mac...
> >
> Granted almost no games are available for the Mac. Not even the most
> popular games in the world. LOL
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > > How about Sonar/Depth Finder software for Humminbird GPS/Plotters?
> >
>
>
> You missed this one.
>
>
> Where is the Power Commander software for OS X. I use it daily to tune
> motorcycles.
Run it under Parallels, or VMWare Fusion, or whatever Sun's free
emulator is called.
Get a Mac and get the best of all worlds!
John Slade
Can you read? A triple-core Phenom II with 6MB of cache
can be a lot better than the Core 2 Duo he cited. He did not say
it had to be an Intel CPU, he just said "or better".
John
Alan Baker
John Slade <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
He linked to the product page and the product page specifies only Intel
CPUs.
So it's no surprise that you snipped out the salient quote I provided
you.
ZnU
John Slade <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> On 10/3/2010 1:34 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
[snip]
> > "Processor
> > ¤ Intel Core 2 Duo 2.5 Ghz or better
>
>
> Can you read? A triple-core Phenom II with 6MB of cache
> can be a lot better than the Core 2 Duo he cited. He did not say
> it had to be an Intel CPU, he just said "or better".
Yeah, because what you really want to do with specialty
hardware/software products that require real-time performance and were
tested for compatibility with very specific hardware, is use completely
different hardware. That always works out so well.
Lloyd Parsons
John Slade <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
He did say that it needed to be an Intel in one of the other posts he
made about it.
--
Lloyd
John Slade
But not in the post I responded to. If he wants an Intel
system, that's just fine, that system can be had for under $500
for a Core 2 Duo.
John
Alan Baker
John Slade <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> On 10/3/2010 10:12 PM, ZnU wrote:
> > In article<GZcqo.30073$iM3....@newsfe07.iad>,
> > John Slade<hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/3/2010 1:34 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >>> "Processor
> >>> ¤ Intel Core 2 Duo 2.5 Ghz or better
> >>
> >>
> >> Can you read? A triple-core Phenom II with 6MB of cache
> >> can be a lot better than the Core 2 Duo he cited. He did not say
> >> it had to be an Intel CPU, he just said "or better".
> >
> > Yeah, because what you really want to do with specialty
> > hardware/software products that require real-time performance and were
> > tested for compatibility with very specific hardware, is use completely
> > different hardware. That always works out so well.
> >
>
> It's not completely different hardware. AMD CPUs will do
> exactly what you want. Dell, HP and other companies sell both
> Intel and AMD based computers. Apple is even toying with the
> idea of using AMD CPUs as the recent ones have outperformed
> their Intel counterparts. Some at lower prices too. So what your
> saying has no basis in reality or fact.
>
> John
You really don't get this:
In a production environment, you don't want to use hardware that isn't
recommended for use with another piece of hardware. You want everything
to work--all the time.
You also don't want to have any issues if you do have a problem and have
tech support for your product tell you that you can't get support
because you've installed the product on unsupported hardware.
Lloyd Parsons
John Slade <hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> On 10/3/2010 10:12 PM, ZnU wrote:
> > In article<GZcqo.30073$iM3....@newsfe07.iad>,
> > John Slade<hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/3/2010 1:34 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >>> "Processor
> >>> ¤ Intel Core 2 Duo 2.5 Ghz or better
> >>
> >>
> >> Can you read? A triple-core Phenom II with 6MB of cache
> >> can be a lot better than the Core 2 Duo he cited. He did not say
> >> it had to be an Intel CPU, he just said "or better".
> >
> > Yeah, because what you really want to do with specialty
> > hardware/software products that require real-time performance and were
> > tested for compatibility with very specific hardware, is use completely
> > different hardware. That always works out so well.
> >
>
> It's not completely different hardware. AMD CPUs will do
> exactly what you want. Dell, HP and other companies sell both
> Intel and AMD based computers. Apple is even toying with the
> idea of using AMD CPUs as the recent ones have outperformed
> their Intel counterparts. Some at lower prices too. So what your
> saying has no basis in reality or fact.
>
> John
I guess the mfg of the specialty product doesn't know what they are
talking about then. They are the ones saying Intel only.
You really need to quit cherry picking posts to respond to or at least
read the whole thread to have a clue about what is going on. That way
you probably wouldn't make assinine statements like your last.
--
Lloyd
Lloyd Parsons
Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> wrote:
John doesn't really get much when it comes to business or tech outside
of the little one-man show he has going on.
--
Lloyd
Snit
PM:
> On 10/3/2010 10:12 PM, ZnU wrote:
>> In article<GZcqo.30073$iM3....@newsfe07.iad>,
>> John Slade<hhit...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/3/2010 1:34 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>>> "Processor
>>>> € Intel Core 2 Duo 2.5 Ghz or better
>>>
>>>
>>> Can you read? A triple-core Phenom II with 6MB of cache
>>> can be a lot better than the Core 2 Duo he cited. He did not say
>>> it had to be an Intel CPU, he just said "or better".
>>
>> Yeah, because what you really want to do with specialty
>> hardware/software products that require real-time performance and were
>> tested for compatibility with very specific hardware, is use completely
>> different hardware. That always works out so well.
>>
>
> It's not completely different hardware. AMD CPUs will do
> exactly what you want. Dell, HP and other companies sell both
> Intel and AMD based computers. Apple is even toying with the
> idea of using AMD CPUs as the recent ones have outperformed
> their Intel counterparts. Some at lower prices too. So what your
> saying has no basis in reality or fact.
>
> John
What reputable source shows Apple as looking at AMD? They might be. They
might not be.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Redjak
"Alan Baker" <alang...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:alangbaker-EE11A...@news.shawcable.com...
The link is broke.
-hh
It was in the Original Post (OP), which should have at least been read
before making any comment.
> If he wants an Intel
> system, that's just fine, that system can be had for under $500
> for a Core 2 Duo.
Except that the OP stated was that this sort of claim is made all the
time ...
... yet when it comes time to literally buy such a system, none of the
Windows advocates are able to provide specifics of make/model# with
prices.
Since you didn't provide any specific examples, you failed in the
manner that was predicted a full week ago.
PS: better go back and read the OP & thread again, before trying to
make a hardware suggestion now ... there's a few other requirements
which are not being re-repeating for your lazy ass personal
convenience.
-hh
MuahMan
stick with Mac. Put that card in a mini, or iMac. Be happy. Move on.
We are extremely upset you can't find a $300 dollar PC that can do
what your $3000.00 Mac can. You're probably gonna have to spend like
$500 if you want to crush the Mac Pro.
Chance Furlong
>> <http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?edc=2175978&enkwrd=ALLPROD
>> %3a(2175978)>
> The link is broke.
It works for me on mhy MacBook under Snow Leopard. You lose again, zara.
MuahMan
You misspelled "my" you illiterate twat.