Which of these two systems would be best...

[crinkles]

Each is $2000 (australian). All else being equal (except OS of course) which one would be best value for money.

Dell

Intel Core 2 Quad 2.4 GHz 1066 FSB 8 MB cache
4GB memory @ 800 MHz
22" wide screen display
ATI Radeon HD3870 512MB graphics card
500GB HDD with free upgrade to 750GB

Apple

Intel Core 2 duo 2.66 GHz 6MB cache
2 GB memory
20" display
ATI Radeon HD2600 Pro 256MB graphics card
320 GB HDD

 

[simple_gifts]

http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news/news.phtml/13718/14742/apple-facing-imac-displays-lawsuit.phtml

Quote:

While 24-inch iMacs are capable of displaying 16,777,216 colours on 8-bit, in-plane switching screens, the 20-inch iMac have 6-bit twisted nematic film LCD screens that can display only 262,144 colors.

The complaint states: "The inferior technology of the 20-inch iMac is particularly ill-suited to editing photographs because of the display's limited color potential and the distorting effect of the color simulation processes".


Apple has decided to equip the 20" Imac with bias ply tires

I wouldn't touch a Dell Vista system with a 10 foot pole, however.

 

[digitalSniperX1]

this statement, quoted from the article pointed to by the link says it all....

"Beneath Apple's 'good guy' image is a corporation that takes advantage of its customers. Our goal is to help those customers who were deceived and make sure Apple tells the truth in the future."

If Apple's loyal followers ever figure this out and/or admit to it, Apple will receive their comeuppance.

I wouldn't touch an Apple with a 10 foot pole after my experience with their so called high technology, lol.

Excluding the software, Apple "technology" is derived almost exclusively from the PC hardware infrastucture. Besides the packaging (which has in the past thrown thermal issues to the wind, without a much needed cooling fan), and the OS, there is no exclusive technology coming from Apple.


But to answer your question.....

If you need the space afforded to you by the iMac and don't mind limited software selection, or need specifically software that runs best and/or only on Apple's, then get it.


If you want the superior hardware, and can live with Vista until MS gets it all fixed, which I believe they've been doing, get the Dell.

 

[MGregoir]

I have been succesfully running Vista for 11 months with half as much hardware as that Dell specs out.

 

[OVERKILL]

System #1 is definitely the best "bang for buck".

If you just HAVE to have OSX, you can get it on there with a bit of work.

 

[crinkles]

thanks for the comments guys. I keep changing my mind between the two.

I will probably get the dell, but there is some "excitement" factor in getting an apple for someone who has lived with DOS as a kid, Windows 3.1, 95, etc. since "way back when".

I would like to get Flight Sim X and while it is a windows platform it could always work on a mac by running windows. the apple display lawsuit is disappointing. However the budget Dell screens aren't all that great (but not terrible).

plus i Think having the better hardware would make the dell a longer term efficient machine i.e. becoming obsolete much later than the apple hardware would.

 

[digitalSniperX1]

Vista runs fine on my HP as well. I don't have any issues with it. Not a big Vista power user though. And I'm not too fond of them moving everything around on Office 2007 either. I'll get used to it, but now I'm [censored] about it.

 

[1sttruck]

Running Vista on a low end Compaq, works fine provided you turn off the stupid stuff like the 'glass' effects. If however you like whizzy stuff like that get an Apple as it seems to do graphics and graphic effects better out of the box.

I use two Dell towers at work, most people seem to have a Dell tower, and I don't hear much about hardware problems. Software problems above some low baseline level are to some degree are a lifestyle / personal choice problem, as the people that I see having the most complaints are the ones that like to open a bunch of aps and keep them running until something breaks, not doing any maintenance in the process.

A few years back a coworker asked an IT guy why I got to try out the newest stuff before others did, and the IT guy said that I didn't have problems with my PC, unlike others who will remain nameless.

 

[RTexasF]

Were the choice mine it would be the Dell.

 

[ToyotaNSaturn]

Originally Posted By: simple_gifts

I wouldn't touch a Dell Vista system with a 10 foot pole, however.



Is that because of Dell, or Vista?

 

[GrtArtiste]

I have these two Dells, and no complaints so far. Aside from operator error, I've had no problems to speak of with any of the hardware or with Windows.

Dell XPS400 new 8/2006
Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition version 2002 SP 3
Dual boot Ubuntu 8.04
Pentium D 2.8 Ghz processor VIIV 800 FSB
250GB SATA
2GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM 533Mhz
nVidia GeForce 7300LE 256 MB

Dell Inspiron 530 new 5/3/2008
Microsoft Vista Premium SP1
Intel Q6600 2.4 Ghz Quad Core 8MB L2 1066FSB
500GB SATA
3GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM 800Mhz 4 DIMMS
nVidiaGeForce 8300GS 128MB

 

[simple_gifts]

Quote:

Is that because of Dell, or Vista?

Choose your poison; I have enough Dell horror stories to last a lifetime; fortunately I have never been directly involved in any of them since I would choose cleaning out the stalls @ the Big Top before ever choosing to do PC end user support. The horror stories actually extend into enterprise sales too.

Sufficed to say, low cost is their goal for EVERYTHING, even if it means tons of extra labor hours for customers who buy thousands of PC's a year.... They just don't care and their market share now reflects this.