Explain to me how a Porsche (2.8 L 6) can be twice as fast as a charger (hemi 6.7 L V8)? Technically the V8 is stronger, bigger engine, faster parts. And to go further, how about we race through a canyon and see who gets to the finish line faster. You are rating CPUs on components that don't give you the end result. So many other things are taken into consideration. Hence the operating system, taking full advantage with the components. Your PC is using a fraction of what it really can use
Well I would not be surprised at all if both Apple and Google go into the video game console industry and technically they are already involved in the gaming industry. When the Wii U got released there was a big question as to if the video game industry had died off. Ever since the PS4 and the XBoxOne got released gaming sales have never been higher.
Dude, cars are not a good comparison. They aren't using the exact same components, while computers are in many cases. You said it yourself, the Porsche is using one engine, the Charger another. I don't think an OS is a good comparison for an engine because the engine is still just a part, a major one, but one that would not work without a number of other parts. The CPU is more like an engine. The OS is more like the car itself, tying together all the parts to make it a functioning machine. If you really must compare computers to cars, think of Nascar. They're supposed to all be the same vehicle, that's why they call them stock cars. Computers are very much the same in that they only have so many options when it comes to hardware. That's why so many of them use the same CPU's, same video cards, same hard drives, same mother boards, etc. The biggest difference IS the OS, but an overclocked PC is just as, if not faster, than an Apple. It all depends on the computer, how it's set up, and whether person running it understands what they're doing. You still haven't explained how a computer with virtually the same parts is worth twice the money.
Or you PCs are the "crew member 28" and apple is Captain Kirk. Or PCs are the Jamaican skiing team, while apple are the German skiing team
Maybe they use the same components, but nothing you listed proves they are. List SKUs or the actual components if you are going to claim they are the same. An i7 processor from 2011/12 is not the same as one today. 1TB hard drive from 2 years ago may (or may not) be the same as one from today. Hell, a 2 different 1 TB hard drives from today may be completely different in terms of speed/performance.
Its not even a consumer product yet. And they just released a 2nd version. Though, I doubt I'd ever get one.
They're not the same components. Apple has had to wait for Intel to release the newer CPUs to production before releasing each of their more recent computers and laptops. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_Bridge_(microarchitecture) (for example)
This is the stupidest post I've seen on this site in a long long time. Just moronic. Idiotic. Foolish. Need I go on?
Even though I don't really buy into the idea of Google Glass, I love that they're trying to be innovative. Hell, I wish Google would bring Fiber to Portland. I would love to have a 1 gig internet connection for a decent price. I hate Comcast. This country used to be all about innovation and cutting edge. I'm glad that some companies are still trying to carry that torch.
Oh, completely agree. I don't know if glass will catch on, but it will/could lead to something that is revolutionary. And I REALLY want Fiber to go national (or at least to a market I live in).
The only Apple product I've ever owned is an iPhone. I like my Galaxy much better. I'll probably never buy another Apple product for the rest of my life. Every time I see one that's kinda cool, there's a better (or the same), and MUCH cheaper alternative available. Apple, as a company, annoys me for the same reason Nike does. The "fans" who freak out about how amazing it is and talk about and defend it all the time. Annoys the shit out of me.
Agreed. It's like they have to try you convince you that your personal preference is wrong and won't relent until they either result to name calling or linking a million fanboy write ups
My MacBook Pro was delivered the day Lion came out. I paid $29 to upgrade the operating system. I've since upgraded to Mountain Lion, which cost me $19, and Mavericks was free. Microsoft Windows 7 upgrade costs $189. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...16714&ef_id=UW9ArwAAAeTnDaq5:20131204233511:s I have an iMac, too. All the software just magically appeared on it (iCloud) without me doing anything. I did have to install the OS upgrades, of course, but I didn't have to pay a second time. Apple's productivity suite cost me $60. I get to run it on both computers and my iPad and iPhone, too, at no extra charge. Microsoft Office 2003 upgrade costs $89. On operating system upgrades and productivity software upgrades alone, I've saved at least $1,000 over what I'd have spent on Windows versions. There are other apps I'd have paid for on Windows that I got for free for the Mac. Like SequelPro (free) vs. Navicat ($419). I'm not at all saying that the hardware is superior. It's packaging is, and if you care about battery life and screen resolution and a better user experience, there's only one way to go.
