>> Oh, sure, an Apple Mac counts as both a "PC" and "normal". ;-)
> 
> Well, that depends what you mean. If you were implicitly excluding Macs 
> then I guess it doesn't count :) As for normal, well, I use them for the 
> same stuff most others use Windows machines for. It's personal tastes 
> really but I find it easier for most things (I'm not a big PC gamer so I 
> don't really lose out there).

I just meant that Macs are very rare. [Despite all of Apple's efforts.] 
In all the years I've been alive, I've never actually used one, or met 
anybody who uses one, and I've only ever seen 1 shop that even sells 
them. [Admittedly I don't know a vast number of people or go shopping 
all that might, but hey.]

>> (Seriously, if you can afford a Mac, the world is your oyster...)
> 
> Macs are not significantly more expensive than Windows PCs.

Sure. The cheapest Mac on the market costs £400, for which I could buy 3 
seperate PCs. But no, that's not significantly more expensive. ;-)

> I can afford 
> a Mac but I am not a particularly extravagant person...

Depends on what you mean. ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>>  From what I've seen of mobile phone "pictures" and "videos", the 
>> quality as so abysmal as to be laughable. I'm talking about video that 
>> you'd actually want to *watch*! ;-)
> 
> My camera takes still images at 3072*2304, but movies at 640*480; 
> mobiles phones at 320*240 (or better now).

My camera is 3 megapixels. My mum bought one that's 5 megapixels. She 
was all, like, "hey, my camera's better than yours!" Until we tried to 
use it. And we discovered that my camera takes "pictures", and hers 
produces grainy unrecognisible things.

I hypothesize this is due to my camera's 45 mm lense, and her camera's 
2.1 mm lense. >:-)

Having the best sensor in the world won't help you if you have crap 
optics. So, yeah, telling me the resolution is interesting, but it isn't 
the whole story.

> Neither of these items are 
> designed primarily for taking movies, so a trade-off has to occur.

No kidding.

(My camera fits in a backpack. My mum's camera fits in your shirt pocket.)

>> As for YouTube, most of it seems to be either illegal movies, mobile 
>> phone recordings [most of which demonstrate an awe-inspiring level of 
>> pointlessness], or footage of computer games.
> 
> Otherwise known as 'things young geeks do' :-)

LOL!

>> Video editing is something that moderately interests me. And I have a 
>> digital camcorder now. But I'm not aware of any way of getting the 
>> digital data from the camera to my PC, and that presumably means I'll 
>> need an expensive video capture card...
> 
> If you want real-time editing and remastering back to the camera then 
> quite possibly; if you just want to pull the data then play with it for 
> burning or uploading then as Gilles said you just need capacity. How 
> does your camera want to output data, let me guess Firewire?

Composite or S-Video.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Invisible escribió:
>> I realise this will probably be met with derision, but... you can edit 
>> video on a "normal" PC now?
> 
> Define "edit". My digital camera can trim beginning or end of a video, 
> right from the camera controls.

Mine can too - but only if you format the DVD a certain way. (i.e., the 
way that's incompatible with DVD players.)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible escribió:
>>>  From what I've seen of mobile phone "pictures" and "videos", the 
>>> quality as so abysmal as to be laughable. I'm talking about video 
>>> that you'd actually want to *watch*! ;-)
>>
>> My camera takes still images at 3072*2304, but movies at 640*480; 
>> mobiles phones at 320*240 (or better now).
> 
> My camera is 3 megapixels. My mum bought one that's 5 megapixels. She 
> was all, like, "hey, my camera's better than yours!" Until we tried to 
> use it. And we discovered that my camera takes "pictures", and hers 
> produces grainy unrecognisible things.
> 
> I hypothesize this is due to my camera's 45 mm lense, and her camera's 
> 2.1 mm lense. >:-)
> 
> Having the best sensor in the world won't help you if you have crap 
> optics. So, yeah, telling me the resolution is interesting, but it isn't 
> the whole story.

Sensor size matters too. If it has 5 megapixels stuffed into a VERY tiny 
area, graininess will show up.

Or so I read.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible escribió:
> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>> Invisible escribió:
>>> I realise this will probably be met with derision, but... you can 
>>> edit video on a "normal" PC now?
>>
>> Define "edit". My digital camera can trim beginning or end of a video, 
>> right from the camera controls.
> 
> Mine can too - but only if you format the DVD a certain way. (i.e., the 
> way that's incompatible with DVD players.)
> 

DVD? I'm talking about my photo camera, which can also film videos at 
640x480 30fps. It allows such "editing".

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:39:37 -0000, Nicolas Alvarez  
<nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom> did spake, saying:

> Invisible escribió:
>>>>  From what I've seen of mobile phone "pictures" and "videos", the  
>>>> quality as so abysmal as to be laughable. I'm talking about video  
>>>> that you'd actually want to *watch*! ;-)
>>>
>>> My camera takes still images at 3072*2304, but movies at 640*480;  
>>> mobiles phones at 320*240 (or better now).
>>  My camera is 3 megapixels. My mum bought one that's 5 megapixels. She  
>> was all, like, "hey, my camera's better than yours!" Until we tried to  
>> use it. And we discovered that my camera takes "pictures", and hers  
>> produces grainy unrecognisible things.
>>  I hypothesize this is due to my camera's 45 mm lense, and her camera's  
>> 2.1 mm lense. >:-)
>>  Having the best sensor in the world won't help you if you have crap  
>> optics. So, yeah, telling me the resolution is interesting, but it  
>> isn't the whole story.

Yeah I'm assuming you have a still camera that takes decent still shots;  
crap in , crap out - what a surprise. What I'm saying is my 7MP camera  
doesn't take 7MP movies because it's not designed to shunt that amount of  
data around at 30fps.

> Sensor size matters too. If it has 5 megapixels stuffed into a VERY tiny  
> area, graininess will show up.
>
> Or so I read.

Which I why I'm glad I have a large sensor size and lense compared to the  
more pocket-friendly cameras of my friends.

>>> How does your camera want to output data, let me guess Firewire?

>> Composite or S-Video.

How old is it?

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> I just meant that Macs are very rare. [Despite all of Apple's efforts.]

Less common. I wouldn't say rare. I know half a dozen people who use 
them, and we all started using them completely independently.

> Sure. The cheapest Mac on the market costs £400, for which I could buy 3 
> seperate PCs.

That's very impressive, I had no idea you could buy PCs that cheaply. 
Although I personally certainly wouldn't risk it.

> But no, that's not significantly more expensive. ;-)

My use of 'significant' is certainly arguable. However, you act as if 
Macs are forever outside your price range, like Aston Martins to a 
second-hand Peugeot owner*. They're not. I bet you spent more on your 
last graphics card than I did on my last Mac. :)


*Apple wish.

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:
> A good scanner with a resolution of 4800x9600 (46 megapixels) will do. 
> There's a Canon one for 150 euros, so it's not like processing this kind of 
> image size is uncommon today.
> 

One should also notice that scanner resolutions are dpi-values, so 
that's 46 megapixels for a freakin' square inch. Now, if the photo is 
4*6 inches...

> 
> G.
> 


-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

>> I just meant that Macs are very rare. [Despite all of Apple's efforts.]
> 
> Less common. I wouldn't say rare. I know half a dozen people who use 
> them, and we all started using them completely independently.

Well, maybe it's because I work in the wrong field, but I've never ever 
seen a real, live Mac except on TV. To me, that seems pretty rare. 
(Also, presumably that's why they're so expensive? Because they can't 
sell many of them...)

>> Sure. The cheapest Mac on the market costs £400, for which I could buy 
>> 3 seperate PCs.
> 
> That's very impressive, I had no idea you could buy PCs that cheaply. 
> Although I personally certainly wouldn't risk it.

£20 for a case, £25 for a motherboard with on-board everything, £20 for 
a CPU, maybe £50 for some RAM, £20 for a CD-ROM, and £50 for a HD. That 
makes, oh, £185?

So I guess *three* is a slight exaggeration. But only slight...

I suppose if you wanted to be picky, the OS will cost you 2x that amount 
alone, assuming you're getting it from Micro$oft... [And when you buy a 
Mac, you're partly paying for a proprietry OS, so I guess that would be 
a fairer comparison.]

>> But no, that's not significantly more expensive. ;-)
> 
> My use of 'significant' is certainly arguable. However, you act as if 
> Macs are forever outside your price range, like Aston Martins to a 
> second-hand Peugeot owner*. They're not. I bet you spent more on your 
> last graphics card than I did on my last Mac. :)

Hmm, let me go check...

No, you're wrong.

XFX nVidia GeForce 7900GT 256MB DDR3 520MHz dual-DVI PCI-Express, £153.

I don't think there is any Mac in Creation that can be had for such a 
sum. And that's *the* most expensive graphics card I've ever bought, by 
at least one order of magnitude. :-P

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>>>> How does your camera want to output data, let me guess Firewire?
> 
>>> Composite or S-Video.
> 
> How old is it?

Bought in Christmas 2007?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:

> DVD? I'm talking about my photo camera, which can also film videos at 
> 640x480 30fps. It allows such "editing".

Interesting. My still camera will only do 12 FPS at 160x120. Which, 
coupled with the fact that everything looks like a glass of Guinness 
unless it's a blindingly bright midsummer's day at noon, makes it pretty 
useless...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> I realise this will probably be met with derision, but... you can edit 
> video on a "normal" PC now?

Good lord, man! I edited the videos I took in Africa like 10 years ago. 
Back when a 1 megapixel still camera was pretty naff.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>> Yes, you heard me correctly: 6.5 x 3.25 *feet*. As in, the size of a 
>>> wall.
>>
>> Have you sold any prints that size?
> 
> Uh... actually I don't think I've ever told any prints at all. Except to 
> myself. Hmm, maybe I should just close my Zazzle gallery?
> 

Or market it better.  For instance, if you frequent forums that allow 
both random signatures and pictures embedded in posts, create a series 
of signatures that contain thumbnail versions of your pics and have then 
randomly rotated :)

-- 
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

Am Tue, 18 Mar 2008 18:23:58 +0000 schrieb Orchid XP v7:

>>>>> How does your camera want to output data, let me guess Firewire?
>> 
>>>> Composite or S-Video.
>> 
>> How old is it?
> 
> Bought in Christmas 2007?

Then it's simply crap. Sorry to say. I've got a Panasonic GS70 in 2004 or 
so, it's got Firewire out *and* in (plus SVideo and Composite). And I 
have been video editing since then. On a (back then) normal PC. It didn't 
even have a Firewire input initially - I connected the cam to my (now 
also ancient) laptop and transferred the video data via ethernet. Which 
is around 12 Gb/h at standard quality BTW ("tens of GB" is a slight 
exaggeration).

Post a reply to this message

> From what I've seen of mobile phone "pictures" and "videos", the quality 
> as so abysmal as to be laughable. I'm talking about video that you'd 
> actually want to *watch*! ;-)

Again, maybe with phones from the era you have come from, but modern phones 
will record 640x480x30fps from their 2MP or higher image sensors onto 
multi-GB memory cards.

> Video editing is something that moderately interests me. And I have a 
> digital camcorder now. But I'm not aware of any way of getting the digital 
> data from the camera to my PC, and that presumably means I'll need an 
> expensive video capture card...

Doesn't your camera have a firewire socket?

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>> From what I've seen of mobile phone "pictures" and "videos", the 
>> quality as so abysmal as to be laughable. I'm talking about video that 
>> you'd actually want to *watch*! ;-)
> 
> Again, maybe with phones from the era you have come from, but modern 
> phones will record 640x480x30fps from their 2MP or higher image sensors 
> onto multi-GB memory cards.

As I said, the best image sensor in the world won't help you if you have 
a 2 mm lense.

I don't know how new my sisters phone is, or how new my grandparent's 
ones are (we bought them about 1 year ago), but the pictures from them 
are of laughably low quality. Mostly you can just about make out what 
it's a picture of, but that's about it.

>> Video editing is something that moderately interests me. And I have a 
>> digital camcorder now. But I'm not aware of any way of getting the 
>> digital data from the camera to my PC, and that presumably means I'll 
>> need an expensive video capture card...
> 
> Doesn't your camera have a firewire socket?

Not to my knowledge, no.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>> Uh... actually I don't think I've ever told any prints at all. Except 
>> to myself. Hmm, maybe I should just close my Zazzle gallery?
>>
> 
> Or market it better.  For instance, if you frequent forums that allow 
> both random signatures and pictures embedded in posts, create a series 
> of signatures that contain thumbnail versions of your pics and have then 
> randomly rotated :)

Zazzle offers some PHP especially for this purpose, in fact...

The bottom line is, I have a gallery of Mandelbrot fractals. Ooo, like 
nobody else has *those*...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> a écrit dans le message de news: 
47e0e0b4$1@news.povray.org...
> Zazzle offers some PHP especially for this purpose, in fact...

PHP? They have a flash panel with rotating images, but I wouldn't use this 
in a signature...
However they have a blog panel in Javascript that you could use in your 
blog.

G.

-- 
*****************************
http://www.oyonale.com
*****************************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray, Cinema 4D and Poser computer images
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

>>> Video editing is something that moderately interests me. And I have a 
>>> digital camcorder now. But I'm not aware of any way of getting the 
>>> digital data from the camera to my PC, and that presumably means I'll 
>>> need an expensive video capture card...
>>
>> Doesn't your camera have a firewire socket?
>
> Not to my knowledge, no.

Huh, you have a digital camcorder with no firewire socket?  Which one is it?

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:

> Huh, you have a digital camcorder with no firewire socket?  Which one is 
> it?

I couldn't tell you off the top of my head. I'll check when I get home...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:
> "Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> a écrit dans le message de news: 
> 47e0e0b4$1@news.povray.org...
>> Zazzle offers some PHP especially for this purpose, in fact...
> 
> PHP? They have a flash panel with rotating images, but I wouldn't use this 
> in a signature...
> However they have a blog panel in Javascript that you could use in your 
> blog.

Hmm, actually you're right, it *is* Flash, not PHP...

Personally, I'm still annoyed that I can't link to my Zazzle gallery 
from my blog. (Or rather, I can, but WordPress strips the star off the 
end of the URL...)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v7 wrote:
>>> I just meant that Macs are very rare. [Despite all of Apple's efforts.]
>>
>> Less common. I wouldn't say rare. I know half a dozen people who use 
>> them, and we all started using them completely independently.
> 
> Well, maybe it's because I work in the wrong field, but I've never ever 
> seen a real, live Mac except on TV. To me, that seems pretty rare. 

I only work with one of those people.

>>> Sure. The cheapest Mac on the market costs £400, for which I could 
>>> buy 3 seperate PCs.
>>
>> That's very impressive, I had no idea you could buy PCs that cheaply. 
>> Although I personally certainly wouldn't risk it.
> 
> £20 for a case, £25 for a motherboard with on-board everything, £20 for 
> a CPU, maybe £50 for some RAM, £20 for a CD-ROM, and £50 for a HD. That 
> makes, oh, £185?
> 
> So I guess *three* is a slight exaggeration. But only slight...

That would be a much lower spec machine than the minimac, I would guess. 
Would the motherboard have anything other than a token graphics card? I 
bought an Asus mobo for about that price and it can only do VGA, 16-bit 
colour. The minimac will have a much better graphics card, and ethernet, 
and firewire.

> I suppose if you wanted to be picky, the OS will cost you 2x that amount 
> alone, assuming you're getting it from Micro$oft... [And when you buy a 
> Mac, you're partly paying for a proprietry OS, so I guess that would be 
> a fairer comparison.]

That's not being picky, that adds at least £100! (unless you go for 
linux). Don't forget, it's not just the OS, there's a lot of bundled 
software too, including a very well-stocked UNIX flavour (yesyes, I 
know, technically that is part of the OS). Oh, and the mini's optical 
drive will be a DVD-reader too, at the very least.

>> My use of 'significant' is certainly arguable. However, you act as if 
>> Macs are forever outside your price range, like Aston Martins to a 
>> second-hand Peugeot owner*. They're not. I bet you spent more on your 
>> last graphics card than I did on my last Mac. :)
[snip]
> XFX nVidia GeForce 7900GT 256MB DDR3 520MHz dual-DVI PCI-Express, £153.

Okay, bad example through wild guess-work :) But my previous statement 
still stands. Yes you can buy a top-end Mac for upwards of 2 grand but 
the same can also be said of a PC. I have personally used several PC 
laptops priced at under 500 quid and several Mac laptops priced at 700 
quid and up, and I know which I consider better value for money, by 
quite a long way.

Please note, I'm not trying to persuade you to buy a Mac - it *is* a lot 
of money to spend on something you don't know much about. And many 
people won't like them. And you're a gamer, so you definitely can't 
replace your PC with one. I'm just saying that it's not the 
order-of-magnitude difference you seem to be focusing on!

I do get annoyed by their excessively smug marketing, tho.

Post a reply to this message

>> Well, maybe it's because I work in the wrong field, but I've never 
>> ever seen a real, live Mac except on TV. To me, that seems pretty rare. 
> 
> I only work with one of those people.

Well, as you know, I don't know many humans...

>> £20 for a case, £25 for a motherboard with on-board everything, £20 
>> for a CPU, maybe £50 for some RAM, £20 for a CD-ROM, and £50 for a HD. 
>> That makes, oh, £185?
>>
>> So I guess *three* is a slight exaggeration. But only slight...
> 
> That would be a much lower spec machine than the minimac, I would guess. 
> Would the motherboard have anything other than a token graphics card? I 
> bought an Asus mobo for about that price and it can only do VGA, 16-bit 
> colour. The minimac will have a much better graphics card, and ethernet, 
> and firewire.

OK, well I just bought a new motherboard for my grandparent's PC. I 
don't recall the price off the top of my head, but Socket AM2 (i.e., it 
accepts an Athlon64 X2 CPU), supports up to 4 GB RAM, has an onboard 
nVidia GeForce 6200 graphics card, onboard stero sound, onboard gigabit 
Ethernet, 6 USB ports, and I *think* it might even have Firewire. All 
for around £30 or so. It even claims to have RAID. (But I wouldn't trust 
that as far as I could throw it!)

Similarly, a drive that can read and write CD, DVD (+/-) SL/DL in all 
its various colours, etc. typically costs £20 or so. These things *used* 
to cost money, but today you can bearly buy a drive that *doesn't* 
support writing every format known to human kind.

The Mini Mac has, what? Well it has a low-end Intel Core 2 Duo processor 
[which never the less is pretty damn expensive], 1 GB RAM, a working 
graphics card, working sound card, gigabit Ethernet, lots of USB, 
firewire, 80 GB HD, and a DVD drive. I can only assume most of the price 
is coming from the expensive Intel CPU and the Mac OS software.

>> I suppose if you wanted to be picky, the OS will cost you 2x that 
>> amount alone, assuming you're getting it from Micro$oft... [And when 
>> you buy a Mac, you're partly paying for a proprietry OS, so I guess 
>> that would be a fairer comparison.]
> 
> That's not being picky, that adds at least £100!

Well, true.

> Oh, and the mini's optical 
> drive will be a DVD-reader too, at the very least.

That's not expensive any more.

>> XFX nVidia GeForce 7900GT 256MB DDR3 520MHz dual-DVI PCI-Express, £153.
> 
> Okay, bad example through wild guess-work :)

Uh, yeah. ;-)

> But my previous statement 
> still stands. Yes you can buy a top-end Mac for upwards of 2 grand but 
> the same can also be said of a PC.

And my point is that a few years back, I put together a really high-spec 
PC with a boatload of RAM, very fast CPU and a quality GPU for £500. 
Apple virtually doesn't *sell* anything that cheap. Their *entry level* 
stuff costs that much.

> I have personally used several PC 
> laptops priced at under 500 quid and several Mac laptops priced at 700 
> quid and up, and I know which I consider better value for money, by 
> quite a long way.

Well, the idea of an Power Mac with 8 all-powerful Xeon cores does 
appeal to me greatly. But obviously, I don't have £4,000 just laying 
around. You could almost buy a second-hand *car* for that!

Apply make some damn nice stuff. It's just that it's all extremely 
expensive. I imagine you probably do get what you pay for, but I simply 
don't have that kind of money...

> Please note, I'm not trying to persuade you to buy a Mac - it *is* a lot 
> of money to spend on something you don't know much about. And many 
> people won't like them. And you're a gamer, so you definitely can't 
> replace your PC with one. I'm just saying that it's not the 
> order-of-magnitude difference you seem to be focusing on!

Right. Sure. The MacBook Air has a *starting price* of £1,200. The 
laptop I bought my sister isn't quite to the same spec. But it also cost 
£400. I can afford £400. I can't afford £1,200. It's that simple. (And 
if that's not "an order of magnitude difference", I'm not sure what is...)

> I do get annoyed by their excessively smug marketing, tho.

http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20060513

http://icanhascheezburger.com/2007/12/14/halp-stuck-in-apple-comershal/

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> a écrit dans le message de news: 
47e0ec18$1@news.povray.org...
> Personally, I'm still annoyed that I can't link to my Zazzle gallery from 
> my blog. (Or rather, I can, but WordPress strips the star off the end of 
> the URL...)

Hmm, I see some Wordpress blogs that do link to starred Zazzle URLs (for 
instance http://rainmountain.wordpress.com/). Have you tried to put the star 
in a product's URL? In any case, even if you can't trick WP into accepting 
the trailing asterisk, just put a no-star link, you won't get the extra 7% 
of referrals but that's better than no link at all.

G.

-- 
*****************************
http://www.oyonale.com
*****************************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray, Cinema 4D and Poser computer images
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> OK, well I just bought a new motherboard for my grandparent's PC. I 
> don't recall the price off the top of my head, but Socket AM2 (i.e., it 
> accepts an Athlon64 X2 CPU), supports up to 4 GB RAM, has an onboard 
> nVidia GeForce 6200 graphics card, onboard stero sound, onboard gigabit 
> Ethernet, 6 USB ports, and I *think* it might even have Firewire. All 
> for around £30 or so. It even claims to have RAID. (But I wouldn't trust 
> that as far as I could throw it!)

Wow, that's good. I can't find any with onboard ethernet and > VGA 
graphics for that price. Where did you get it? (This makes a pleasant 
change, I must say ;-))

> Similarly, a drive that can read and write CD, DVD (+/-) SL/DL in all 
> its various colours, etc. typically costs £20 or so.

Sorry, you didn't mention DVD, that's all.

[snip a little]
> And my point is that a few years back, I put together a really high-spec 
> PC with a boatload of RAM, very fast CPU and a quality GPU for £500. 
> Apple virtually doesn't *sell* anything that cheap. Their *entry level* 
> stuff costs that much.

Well they do sell stuff that cheap then don't they ;-)
What about a screen? Keyboard?

> Well, the idea of an Power Mac with 8 all-powerful Xeon cores does 
> appeal to me greatly. But obviously, I don't have £4,000 just laying 
> around. You could almost buy a second-hand *car* for that!

Huh. My car cost me £200 and a PS2. You could almost buy a brand-new car 
for that. :)

> Right. Sure. The MacBook Air has a *starting price* of £1,200. The 
> laptop I bought my sister isn't quite to the same spec. But it also cost 
> £400. I can afford £400. I can't afford £1,200. It's that simple. (And 
> if that's not "an order of magnitude difference", I'm not sure what is...)

An order of magnitude difference would be x10 to my mind. Anyway, why 
compare with the Air? A bog-standard regular Macbook has a higher spec 
and is only £700. You're paying through the nose for style (and a *tiny* 
HD and no optical drive - what a con). At least compare like for like!

>> I do get annoyed by their excessively smug marketing, tho.
> 
> http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20060513

Snigger.

> http://icanhascheezburger.com/2007/12/14/halp-stuck-in-apple-comershal/

Hmm. iCat, anyone? Is this the firewire port? *MRAAAAOW!*

Post a reply to this message

Bill Pragnell wrote:

> Wow, that's good. I can't find any with onboard ethernet and > VGA 
> graphics for that price. Where did you get it? (This makes a pleasant 
> change, I must say ;-))

OK, hold on a sec...

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/132273

Gigabyte GA-M61SME-S2, £32.49.

>> And my point is that a few years back, I put together a really 
>> high-spec PC with a boatload of RAM, very fast CPU and a quality GPU 
>> for £500. Apple virtually doesn't *sell* anything that cheap. Their 
>> *entry level* stuff costs that much.
> 
> Well they do sell stuff that cheap then don't they ;-)

They sell *one* product that cheap - the MiniMac. (And that's the 
starting price.) Everything else is way more expensive.

> What about a screen? Keyboard?

What about them? I already own those things, so I don't need to buy any 
more...

>> Well, the idea of an Power Mac with 8 all-powerful Xeon cores does 
>> appeal to me greatly. But obviously, I don't have £4,000 just laying 
>> around. You could almost buy a second-hand *car* for that!
> 
> Huh. My car cost me £200 and a PS2. You could almost buy a brand-new car 
> for that. :)

And my car cost me £6,000 second-hand. You're point?

[AFAIK, *new* cars start at around £25,000. I don't have and will likely 
never have that kind of money.]

> An order of magnitude difference would be x10 to my mind.

Right. Well to me, if the prices have different numbers of *digits* in 
them, they're pretty damn far apart! ;-)

> Anyway, why 
> compare with the Air? A bog-standard regular Macbook has a higher spec 
> and is only £700.

Ah, so only 2x instead of 3x the price then. :-)

> You're paying through the nose for style (and a *tiny* 
> HD and no optical drive - what a con). At least compare like for like!

Well, you can't deny, the Air does *look* damn fine. ALL Mac products 
look pretty damn good. Jesus, I wish my website looked as sleek as 
apple.com! But, unsurprisingly, Macs come with a price tag to match...

>> http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20060513
> 
> Snigger.

I *will* infect the world with CAD! >:-D

> Hmm. iCat, anyone? Is this the firewire port? *MRAAAAOW!*

o_O

No group hug for you...

http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20031205

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

> And my car cost me £6,000 second-hand. You're point?
>
> [AFAIK, *new* cars start at around £25,000. I don't have and will likely 
> never have that kind of money.]

WTF! You spent 6000 of your hard earned cash without even bothering to find 
out the price of new cars?!?!?!

A brand new small car can be bought in the 7000-9000 pounds range (eg 
Peugeot 107/207 type car).  For 25,000 you'd be able to get a pretty fast 
luxury family car.

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:

> WTF! You spent 6000 of your hard earned cash without even bothering to 
> find out the price of new cars?!?!?!

Well nobody else in my family has ever been able to afford a new car. 
All the cars we've ever owned have been ancient wrecks. The car I have 
is actually about the nicest car anybody I know has ever had. [Well, 
until my sister bought a second-hand sports car a few months ago...]

It's not like I went to a shop and just purchased the first thing they 
offered me. I visited quite a number of places, looking at various cars. 
For £2,000 I could have had a old Suzuki Swift. But it was a bit 
rubbish, so I declined. Similarly, I saw a rather nice Vaxhual Astra for 
only £4,500. I was actually quite keen... until I drove it. No matter 
how hard you boot it, it JUST WON'T MOVE! Huge 2 liter engine, and it 
goes slower than my old 1.1 L Ford... WTF?

> A brand new small car can be bought in the 7000-9000 pounds range (eg 
> Peugeot 107/207 type car).  For 25,000 you'd be able to get a pretty 
> fast luxury family car.

I doubt it - the "luxury cars" they show you on Top Gear all cost a damn 
site more than £25,000. (Try £80,000... for a base model...)

Besides, my dad was with me at the time, and he thought £6,000 was a 
perfectly reasonable price. In fact, he seemed to think it was a pretty 
damn good deal. And he's owned a hell of a lot of cars...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

> Similarly, I saw a rather nice Vaxhual Astra for only £4,500. I was 
> actually quite keen... until I drove it. No matter how hard you boot it, 
> it JUST WON'T MOVE! Huge 2 liter engine, and it goes slower than my old 
> 1.1 L Ford... WTF?

I have a 1.9 Astra at the moment and I hate it (I didn't have any choice in 
the matter).  A) the turbo-lag is so bad that it's dangerous sometimes, you 
put your foot down and nothing happens for at least 1 second, *then* it 
goes.  B) You cannot turn off the really agressive traction control, so you 
are going round a bend and suddenly it cuts the power for a second or two, 
C) it's front wheel drive D) all the controls feel like they are connected 
to jelly.  I can't wait until I get the replacement.

>> A brand new small car can be bought in the 7000-9000 pounds range (eg 
>> Peugeot 107/207 type car).  For 25,000 you'd be able to get a pretty fast 
>> luxury family car.
>
> I doubt it - the "luxury cars" they show you on Top Gear all cost a damn 
> site more than £25,000. (Try £80,000... for a base model...)

They are getting on for supercars, like Aston Martins, Porsches and 
Ferraris, certainly not family cars.  I'm talking about cars like a BMW 320, 
Audi A4 etc, Mercedes C Class, all would be looked upon as a luxury family 
car and cost about 25k (compared to say a basic Ford Mondeo or Peugeot 407 
which can be had for around 15000 pounds).  You can even get a brand new 
Porsche for 33k.

> Besides, my dad was with me at the time, and he thought £6,000 was a 
> perfectly reasonable price. In fact, he seemed to think it was a pretty 
> damn good deal. And he's owned a hell of a lot of cars...

Oh yeh, I wasn't disputing whether it was a good deal or not, just that you 
can buy a perfectly decent brand new car for under 10k, a basic family car 
for 15k, and a fast luxury family car for 25k.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>> Wow, that's good. I can't find any with onboard ethernet and > VGA 
>> graphics for that price. Where did you get it? (This makes a pleasant 
>> change, I must say ;-))
> 
> OK, hold on a sec...
> http://www.ebuyer.com/product/132273

Nice. Ebuyer is now bookmarked.

>>> And my point is that a few years back, I put together a really 
>>> high-spec PC with a boatload of RAM, very fast CPU and a quality GPU 
>>> for £500. Apple virtually doesn't *sell* anything that cheap. Their 
>>> *entry level* stuff costs that much.
>>
>> Well they do sell stuff that cheap then don't they ;-)
> 
> They sell *one* product that cheap - the MiniMac. (And that's the 
> starting price.) Everything else is way more expensive.

Well, it starts at 399 actually but that doesn't alter your point!

>> What about a screen? Keyboard?
> What about them? I already own those things, so I don't need to buy any 
> more...

But Apple don't sell DIY bits. So it's a bit unfair to compare with that 
scenario. "I already own a MacBook* so I don't need to buy one. Free!"

*Haha, I typed McBook by mistake the first time, how crap a laptop would 
that be. Although, you'd probably get a drink and fries with it...

>>> Well, the idea of an Power Mac with 8 all-powerful Xeon cores does 
>>> appeal to me greatly. But obviously, I don't have £4,000 just laying 
>>> around. You could almost buy a second-hand *car* for that!
>> Huh. My car cost me £200 and a PS2. You could almost buy a brand-new 
>> car for that. :)
> And my car cost me £6,000 second-hand. You're point?

Cars are not expensive second-hand unless you want an almost-brand-new one.

> [AFAIK, *new* cars start at around £25,000. I don't have and will likely 
> never have that kind of money.]

See Scott's reply.

>> An order of magnitude difference would be x10 to my mind.
> Right. Well to me, if the prices have different numbers of *digits* in 
> them, they're pretty damn far apart! ;-)

999 and 1,000 ? (cheap shot, I know ;-))

>> Anyway, why compare with the Air? A bog-standard regular Macbook has a 
>> higher spec and is only £700.
> 
> Ah, so only 2x instead of 3x the price then. :-)

Rounding up by some, I guess so. That makes it sound £100 more expensive 
than it is, though.

> Well, you can't deny, the Air does *look* damn fine.

I can't, and I won't! :)

>> Hmm. iCat, anyone? Is this the firewire port? *MRAAAAOW!*
> 
> o_O
> 
> No group hug for you...

Hey c'mon, it's an honest mistake anyone could make...

Post a reply to this message

Invisible escribió:
> Right. Well to me, if the prices have different numbers of *digits* in 
> them, they're pretty damn far apart! ;-)

That's why they sell stuff for $999 instead of $1000.

Post a reply to this message

scott escribió:
> Doesn't your camera have a firewire socket?

My still image camera can film videos too;
but my actual *video* camera uses 8mm tapes...

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Invisible escribió:
>> Right. Well to me, if the prices have different numbers of *digits* in 
>> them, they're pretty damn far apart! ;-)
> 
> That's why they sell stuff for $999 instead of $1000.

Yeah, I noticed that...

Like, when my dad bought Farcry, it wasn't £5. It was £4.99. Do you have 
any *idea* how many 1p coins I now own??

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>> OK, hold on a sec...
>> http://www.ebuyer.com/product/132273
> 
> Nice. Ebuyer is now bookmarked.

Good boy. ;-)

I do almost all my shopping with ebuyer, unless I really *need* 
something right this second. Then it has to be Maplin, because you can 
walk in and buy stuff immediately rather than wait 4 days for it to be 
posted to you.

>> They sell *one* product that cheap - the MiniMac. (And that's the 
>> starting price.) Everything else is way more expensive.
> 
> Well, it starts at 399 actually but that doesn't alter your point!

AFAIK, the next-cheapest item is £700, which is almost 2x that price.

>>> What about a screen? Keyboard?
>> What about them? I already own those things, so I don't need to buy 
>> any more...
> 
> But Apple don't sell DIY bits. So it's a bit unfair to compare with that 
> scenario. "I already own a MacBook* so I don't need to buy one. Free!"

I don't see your point?

> *Haha, I typed McBook by mistake the first time, how crap a laptop would 
> that be. Although, you'd probably get a drink and fries with it...

LMAO!

Would using it make you fat and stupid?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:

> I have a 1.9 Astra at the moment and I hate it (I didn't have any choice 
> in the matter). I can't wait until I get the replacement.

IIRC I had a Vaxhuall Astra (or was it a Vectra?) as a curtasy car once. 
It drove like a brick, unless you press the little "SPORT" button. And 
then it drives like a dodgem car. o_O Neither is much fun...

>> I doubt it - the "luxury cars" they show you on Top Gear all cost a 
>> damn site more than £25,000. (Try £80,000... for a base model...)
> 
> They are getting on for supercars, like Aston Martins, Porsches and 
> Ferraris, certainly not family cars.

Well yeah - they're luxury cars, and have a price tag to match.

> I'm talking about cars like a BMW 
> 320, Audi A4 etc, Mercedes C Class, all would be looked upon as a luxury 
> family car and cost about 25k

You can buy a *BMW* for less than £200,000??? 0_0

If that's the case, why do all the people driving them act like they own 
the entire road network then? I always thought that the BMW drivers' 
massive superiority complex comes from the fact that the car costs as 
much as a small house...

Similarly, I was under the impression that a Mercedes is so expensive 
that only rock stars can actually afford to buy one.

> (compared to say a basic Ford Mondeo or 
> Peugeot 407 which can be had for around 15000 pounds).

I wouldn't drive a Ford if you paid me. I have no idea what a Peugeot 
407 is, but it sounds much more inviting...

> You can even get a brand new Porsche for 33k.

Seriously?

Heh, good thing my dad doesn't have 33k! ;-)

> Oh yeh, I wasn't disputing whether it was a good deal or not, just that 
> you can buy a perfectly decent brand new car for under 10k, a basic 
> family car for 15k, and a fast luxury family car for 25k.

Well, I guess at 10k it might as well be 10,000k - either way I don't 
have that kind of money - but I find your statements extremely 
surprising. Cars contain *metal*, and metal is very expensive. Cars 
require extensive safety testing, and that's expensive. And few people 
make cars, so they can charge the earth for them. Why *wouldn't* they be 
expensive?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>> Invisible escribió:
>>> Right. Well to me, if the prices have different numbers of *digits* 
>>> in them, they're pretty damn far apart! ;-)
>>
>> That's why they sell stuff for $999 instead of $1000.
> 
> Yeah, I noticed that...
> 
> Like, when my dad bought Farcry, it wasn't £5. It was £4.99. Do you have 
> any *idea* how many 1p coins I now own??

Enough to buy an Apple computer or a second-hand car? ;-)

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> I do almost all my shopping with ebuyer, unless I really *need* 
> something right this second. Then it has to be Maplin, because you can 
> walk in and buy stuff immediately rather than wait 4 days for it to be 
> posted to you.

I will continue to shop around, I'll just include ebuyer too from now on. :)

>> But Apple don't sell DIY bits. So it's a bit unfair to compare with 
>> that scenario. "I already own a MacBook* so I don't need to buy one. 
>> Free!"
> 
> I don't see your point?

Facetious comment. No real point, except that the reason you think Macs 
are expensive appears to be that you only ever buy PCs on a DIY basis. 
Very sensible, by the way. :)

>> *Haha, I typed McBook by mistake the first time, how crap a laptop 
>> would that be. Although, you'd probably get a drink and fries with it...
> 
> LMAO!
> 
> Would using it make you fat and stupid?

Hmm, I don't know. If it did, presumably you'd blame your glands.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible escribió:
> Like, when my dad bought Farcry, it wasn't £5. It was £4.99. Do you have 
> any *idea* how many 1p coins I now own??

Everything in supermarkets and such are .99, but they add up, and when 
you end up paying those $267.32 with a credit card, you don't get any 
change back anyway :) Small shops all have "rounded" prices.

It has been some years since I last saw a 1c coin.

Post a reply to this message

>> Like, when my dad bought Farcry, it wasn't £5. It was £4.99. Do you 
>> have any *idea* how many 1p coins I now own??
> 
> Enough to buy an Apple computer or a second-hand car? ;-)

Hint: NO!

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>> Like, when my dad bought Farcry, it wasn't £5. It was £4.99. Do you 
>>> have any *idea* how many 1p coins I now own??
>>
>> Enough to buy an Apple computer or a second-hand car? ;-)
> 
> Hint: NO!

*chuckle chuckle*

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> It even claims to have RAID. (But I wouldn't trust 
> that as far as I could throw it!)

I want to know why every one of our three different types of servers at 
work (everything from a now-ancient PC to a cutting edge Dell Poweredge) 
has hot-swap drives, and every one of them requires you to boot into the 
BIOS at the console in order to change a drive. (Well, the Dells do. The 
others just need a power cycle.) Why bother making it "hot-swap" if you 
have to be physically present and out of the OS in order to swap it? 
What's "hot" about that?

BTW, does anyone know how to get into the remote console configuration 
on a Dell Poweredge 1950? :-)  At least then I wouldn't have to walk 
someone non-technical through "importing the foreign RAID configuration" 
when they put in a new disk for us.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Invisible escribió:
>> Right. Well to me, if the prices have different numbers of *digits* in 
>> them, they're pretty damn far apart! ;-)
> 
> That's why they sell stuff for $999 instead of $1000.

Wow. I thought only the Americans did that crap. :-)  I don't remember 
anything in Europe costing something other than a nice round number.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New escribió:
> Wow. I thought only the Americans did that crap. :-)  I don't remember 
> anything in Europe costing something other than a nice round number.
> 

A supermarket around here celebrated its 5 years with an ad on the 
newspaper saying something like "happy 4.99 (uh, sorry, it's the habit)".

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez escribió:
> Darren New escribió:
>> I don't remember anything in Europe costing something other than a nice round
number.

Oh and *I* am not in Europe btw.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Personally, I'm still annoyed that I can't link to my Zazzle gallery 
> from my blog. (Or rather, I can, but WordPress strips the star off the 
> end of the URL...)

In the "is it turned on, is it plugged in" category, did you %-escape 
the star?

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
> 
> I have a 1.9 Astra at the moment and I hate it (I didn't have any choice 
> in the matter).  A) the turbo-lag is so bad that it's dangerous 
> sometimes, you put your foot down and nothing happens for at least 1 
> second, *then* it goes. 

Astra 1.9 DTi (the now-selling common rail engine) and a over second 
long turbo-lag? Sounds like something's seriously wrong - Saab 9-3SC 
with the same engine has one of the unnoticeable turbolags I've ever driven.

  > They are getting on for supercars, like Aston Martins, Porsches and
> Ferraris, certainly not family cars.  I'm talking about cars like a BMW 
> 320, Audi A4 etc, Mercedes C Class, all would be looked upon as a luxury 
> family car and cost about 25k (compared to say a basic Ford Mondeo or 
> Peugeot 407 which can be had for around 15000 pounds).  You can even get 
> a brand new Porsche for 33k.

Actually 407 sounds a lot more luxury than base-priced A4 (or can you 
really get equipped quattro under 25k£ at UK?). Basically A4 is small 
(actually painful with little children, as the look-backwards 
-childseats can't fit behind 180cm driver), uncomfortable, slow, lousily 
equipped and it doesn't actually handle well. I've always wondered where 
the heck the hype of "French comfort" comes from - then I drove few 
VAG's (3 Golf Variant's, 4 Audi A4 Avant's)...

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> 
> Wow. I thought only the Americans did that crap. :-)  I don't remember 
> anything in Europe costing something other than a nice round number.
> 

Next time you visit somewhere around here, feel free to open your eyes 
at the store (and even more preferably if you're driving... :p).

'bout every store at Finland does that.

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> It even claims to have RAID. (But I wouldn't trust that as far as I 
>> could throw it!)
> 
> I want to know why every one of our three different types of servers at 
> work (everything from a now-ancient PC to a cutting edge Dell Poweredge) 
> has hot-swap drives, and every one of them requires you to boot into the 
> BIOS at the console in order to change a drive. (Well, the Dells do. The 
> others just need a power cycle.) Why bother making it "hot-swap" if you 
> have to be physically present and out of the OS in order to swap it? 
> What's "hot" about that?
> 
> BTW, does anyone know how to get into the remote console configuration 
> on a Dell Poweredge 1950? :-)  At least then I wouldn't have to walk 
> someone non-technical through "importing the foreign RAID configuration" 
> when they put in a new disk for us.

OK, that's pretty special...

(Our servers don't have hot-swap drives, so you gotta shut it down 
anyway. But you can *configure* it once Windoze has loaded back up. You 
don't *have* to configure it from the BIOS screen - although obviously 
you *can*...)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> Personally, I'm still annoyed that I can't link to my Zazzle gallery 
>> from my blog. (Or rather, I can, but WordPress strips the star off the 
>> end of the URL...)
> 
> In the "is it turned on, is it plugged in" category, did you %-escape 
> the star?

Yes. This causes WordPress to leave it in, but confuses Zazzle.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> 
> I want to know why every one of our three different types of servers at 
> work (everything from a now-ancient PC to a cutting edge Dell Poweredge) 
> has hot-swap drives, and every one of them requires you to boot into the 
> BIOS at the console in order to change a drive. (Well, the Dells do. The 
> others just need a power cycle.) Why bother making it "hot-swap" if you 
> have to be physically present and out of the OS in order to swap it? 
> What's "hot" about that?

Nothing. Real hot-swap -HD's can be swapped just with taking the broken 
disk off and inserting a new one *without even touching the software*. 
Eg. HP Proliants support this. Actually, even couple of my personal 
machines at home support this :p.

> BTW, does anyone know how to get into the remote console configuration 
> on a Dell Poweredge 1950? :-)  At least then I wouldn't have to walk 
> someone non-technical through "importing the foreign RAID configuration" 
> when they put in a new disk for us.

Nope, but with Raritan Dominion you'd get full local console over the 
network (KVM-over-IP):
http://www.raritan.com/kvm/

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message