PCs one-up macs. AGAIN.

[YT300000]

The L372NL is NOT a laptop. It is a desktop.

Then please post a working image link. When a computer has PCMCIA slots and someone says it's 1 inch thick, I assume it's a laptop.

Their site is temporarily down.

It can't be a laptop, because:

1. It has no internal power source
2. It has a seperate keyboard and mouse, no touchpad or anything.
3. It has a stand.
4. They market it as a desktop.

The processors are different, but 400 is more powerful than 266, is it not?

I dunno, have you compared a POWER4 1.7 GHz to a Pentium 4 3.2 GHz lately?

I was being sarcastic. Sorry about the lack of a smiley.

You said the palm-top was not necessarily more powerful than my old PC. I said that it was, giving numbers to back myself up. End of discussion.

[Durandal]

You said the palm-top was not necessarily more powerful than my old PC. I said that it was, giving numbers to back myself up. End of discussion.

No, that was Phong. Your numbers consisted of the MHz rating of each of the chips and "I looked at the stats." Did they run this PDA through Spec tests? Embedded and desktop chip markets have completely different design goals, and if you think that you can compare the two based on MHz alone, then you're insane.

[YT300000]

You said the palm-top was not necessarily more powerful than my old PC. I said that it was, giving numbers to back myself up. End of discussion.

No, that was Phong.

In that case, never mind.

Your numbers consisted of the MHz rating of each of the chips and "I looked at the stats." Did they run this PDA through Spec tests? Embedded and desktop chip markets have completely different design goals, and if you think that you can compare the two based on MHz alone, then you're insane.

I used cpu speed as my only comparison for a good reason. It was the only stat the flyer gave.

Later, I rooted around, and found the RAM, which was twice what my old computer has.

The two system's purposes are different, and uncomparable. But power-wise, this Pocket PC owns my old comp. I can compare the power. So I did.

[Durandal]

I used cpu speed as my only comparison for a good reason. It was the only stat the flyer gave.

Then you obviously don't know nearly as much about computers as you'd like to lead people to believe. Or do you think I was asking you about a 1.7 GHz POWER 4 vs. a 3.2 GHz Pentium 4 just because I felt like typing? It is possible for a system to be half the clockspeed of another one, yet still slaughter it in benchmarks and real-world application performance.

[SPOOFE]

Also, how are any of the advantages of the G5 dispelled? Dual 2Ghz, soon to be dual 3Ghz vs. a single 3.2? I think the G5 clearly has an advantage.

... Until you realize that the G5 costs five times as much...

[lux]

5 times as much? I think you are overexaggerating. Yes, they are more expensive, everyone knows that. But I personally think it's worth it. The dual 2Ghz is awesome for multitasking, which is what I do all the time. Which doesn't work as well on windows obviously being that I don't have dual processors on my computer, wich simply pisses me off. The OS is so much nicer! Everything is logical and easy to do. Whatever you do on a pc, you can most likely do more easy on a mac, with advantages (this however only refers to OSX mind you). And if you complain about lack of games, then a mac is not for you. Simple as that. Think of it as buying a special computer, like an alienware.
You will end up paying more, but you're happy in the end because of the performance that you need for what you like to do.

So argueing about it is pretty useless, being that it's simply a matter of taste and what you need to get done on a computer. I do alot of graphics, and like to run a lot of programs at the same time. I also like things to be simple. So therefor, I like macs.

[Shadowhawk]

Speaking of such, have you seen those new 'Voodoo' systems? A friend of mine showed me one in some PC magazine...it was $4900, without monitor, mouse, keyboard, or speakers (those would up the price to $6900). They seem to think that extensive detail to paint jobs justifies outrageous prices ($130 for a fucking keyboard).

Wait.. that insane price for graphics on your computer/Keyboard/Other?? What is the computer (inside) like? If it's just for the pretty drawings thats rather stupid. No one comes over to stare at my computer.

The inside specs were pretty good, but sure as hell weren't worth $4900. 3GHz P4, a gig of RAM, 2 120GB SATA HDDs, R9800... I think if you component-priced it, you'd come out to maybe $2800, at most.
I don't even think it had a DVD-RW.
And you could get a professional airbrusher to do some custom job on all of your viewable components for $500 or less, I'm sure.

[Durandal]

Also, how are any of the advantages of the G5 dispelled? Dual 2Ghz, soon to be dual 3Ghz vs. a single 3.2? I think the G5 clearly has an advantage.

... Until you realize that the G5 costs five times as much...

It costs $3000. Are you saying that Pentium 4's 3.2 GHz run for $600? Well that's somewhat true ... if you're talking about just the CPU core ...

[YT300000]

I used cpu speed as my only comparison for a good reason. It was the only stat the flyer gave.

Then you obviously don't know nearly as much about computers as you'd like to lead people to believe. Or do you think I was asking you about a 1.7 GHz POWER 4 vs. a 3.2 GHz Pentium 4 just because I felt like typing? It is possible for a system to be half the clockspeed of another one, yet still slaughter it in benchmarks and real-world application performance.

Yes, it is possible. But in the case of the PPC (Pocket PC) vs my comp, it won't happen. My comp is so weighed down by useless files, miniscule amounts of RAM, and a bunch of performance sucking programs that this PPC can easily beat it.

I know the comparison is unfair, but the one computer I have that is more powerful than that old one effortlessly treads all over the PPC. It was the only semi-sensible comparison, using computers that I own, that I could have done.

[Durandal]

Yes, it is possible. But in the case of the PPC (Pocket PC) vs my comp, it won't happen. My comp is so weighed down by useless files, miniscule amounts of RAM, and a bunch of performance sucking programs that this PPC can easily beat it.

I know the comparison is unfair, but the one computer I have that is more powerful than that old one effortlessly treads all over the PPC. It was the only semi-sensible comparison, using computers that I own, that I could have done.

Comparing two chips of different architectures and design principles based on clockspeed alone is nothing even resembling "sensible."

[YT300000]

Yes, it is possible. But in the case of the PPC (Pocket PC) vs my comp, it won't happen. My comp is so weighed down by useless files, miniscule amounts of RAM, and a bunch of performance sucking programs that this PPC can easily beat it.

I know the comparison is unfair, but the one computer I have that is more powerful than that old one effortlessly treads all over the PPC. It was the only semi-sensible comparison, using computers that I own, that I could have done.

Comparing two chips of different architectures and design principles based on clockspeed alone is nothing even resembling "sensible."

Considering that was the only stat I could compare them on, I believe that it was quite sensible.

[phongn]

Yes, it is possible. But in the case of the PPC (Pocket PC) vs my comp, it won't happen. My comp is so weighed down by useless files, miniscule amounts of RAM, and a bunch of performance sucking programs that this PPC can easily beat it.

Then you aren't comparing processors, you're comparing systems. Furthermore, PocketPC apps are quite stripped down compared to their full Win32 counterparts

[YT300000]

Yes, it is possible. But in the case of the PPC (Pocket PC) vs my comp, it won't happen. My comp is so weighed down by useless files, miniscule amounts of RAM, and a bunch of performance sucking programs that this PPC can easily beat it.

Then you aren't comparing processors, you're comparing systems. Furthermore, PocketPC apps are quite stripped down compared to their full Win32 counterparts

But that doesn't change the fact that that PPC is more powerful than my computer. Which was what I originally said. So can we stop debating this?