Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
This Forum is Read Only

ATI HD 5750 1GB; good card?Follow

#1 Aug 11 2010 at 12:42 AM Rating: Decent
*
61 posts
Does anyone know how well this card might perform?

Thanks in advance.
#2 Aug 11 2010 at 12:52 AM Rating: Good
***
2,120 posts
For that price range it would be worth it to spend a little more for a 5770, or even a little more above that into a 4890, 5830 or gtx 460. Those last 3 would be a significant jump in performance...
#3 Aug 11 2010 at 12:55 AM Rating: Default
2 posts
not that good man, get a gtx460 its the hot card now. .
#4 Aug 11 2010 at 1:08 AM Rating: Decent
*
61 posts
I was wondering since it comes stock with the new imacs, and I didn't want to go to the annoying trouble of doing a mac upgrade. Anyway, think it would at least run it average?
#5 Aug 11 2010 at 1:19 AM Rating: Good
***
2,120 posts
I know nothing of macs, but I'm pretty sure this discussion already exists somewhere on the forum that would probably be a better help...as for the card itself, it's definitely mediocre compared to similarly priced cards...I wouldn't expect you to be pleased with the results...

You already have the computer or are you really set on getting a mac? If this is a new purchase you could do a lot better for cheaper by passing on the mac...

Edited, Aug 11th 2010 3:25am by TwistedOwl
#6 Aug 11 2010 at 1:41 AM Rating: Decent
*
61 posts
I prefer macs, so a PC wouldn't be considered. I know I'm not going to get fantastic performance given the problems everyone always cite, but I was curious if it would be playable.
#7 Aug 11 2010 at 1:50 AM Rating: Good
***
1,457 posts
Quote:
I prefer macs


I'm very sorry.
____________________________
Hunter Avril
Rogue Ultra
Paladin Awhellnah
Mage Shantotto
Shaman Lakshmi
Faith (Valefor)

#8 Aug 11 2010 at 1:54 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
5,159 posts
If you're set on using a Mac, then the 5750 should be sufficient for you to play, probably between low and medium settings. You can search around google to see what similar setups have been scoring on the benchmark for a better idea.
#9 Aug 11 2010 at 2:40 AM Rating: Decent
*
51 posts
These are my specs (desktop pc).

Athlon II x4 635 2.9GHz Processor

5770 HD Radeon - 1 GB

4GB RAM

500GB HD

I scored a 3600-4000 on low, 2600-3000 on High.

Not really sure how macs are compared to PCs, but with a 5750, and the rest the same, you'll run lower than what I got. Which would be running on Low settings on Low resolution. Lower if Macs are like laptops in that they don't perform nearly as well even with top of the line specs.

Or if your processor is that much better, you might get around the same as me or higher, depends really.

#10 Aug 11 2010 at 2:50 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
THIS FIRST PART IS VERY IMPORTANT:


The new iMacs don't even use an actual 5750, they use a MOBILITY 5750. In other words, it is a desktop using a laptop video card, and laptop video cards are terrible. In other words, IT WILL NOT RUN FFXIV AT ALL.

Sorry for the bold and underline and red, but this part is super important. A lot of people are thinking a 5750 is a 5750. In this case, a 5750 is a LAPTOP 5750, NOT a desktop one.

We're not talking "Oh, I'll have to turn settings down". We're not talking "Oh, it'll be choppy." We're talking will not run AT ALL.

Unfortunately I can find no data for these since they're new, but I'll give you a comparison.

Passmark rates a 9600 GT (The bare minimim to even run the game at all on the lowest possible settings) at a 928.
Now a desktop 5850 is rated 2,406 vs a mobility 5850 which is rated at 892. This is less than 928, meaning that a mobility 5850 is not powerful enough, or at best might BARELY make the cut if you're lucky.

Now we're talking about, by comparison, a 5750. A desktop 5750 clocks in at 1,418. Given that the mobility 5850 clocked in at A THIRD of the performance of the desktop version, we might expect the mobility 5750 to perform in around the 500ish range. As I said: Won't run the game at all.

Variyen wrote:
I prefer macs, so a PC wouldn't be considered. I know I'm not going to get fantastic performance given the problems everyone always cite, but I was curious if it would be playable.


The only way you're going to run FFXIV on a Mac is to get a Mac Pro and customize it with a 5770 or better, since the Mac Pro systems actually use desktop graphics cards. It's not even a matter of not getting fantastic performance, it's a matter of a $50 (or $75 if you get the collector's edition) coaster that won't run at any performance if you get an iMac or a Macbook.

A Mac Pro starts at $2500 and comes with a Quad core 2.8 GHz Xeon (comes in a little under an i7 860/920) and a 5770. This would run FFXIV at medium settings on low res.

If you have the money, go for the Mac Pro. If you can't afford a Mac Pro, reconsider buying a Windows system that will actually run the game. You can even install OS X on it if you want (But you're still going to have to play XIV through Boot Camp).

Edited, Aug 11th 2010 4:57am by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#11 Aug 11 2010 at 2:52 AM Rating: Decent
*
61 posts
To clarify -- and sorry, idk why I didn't just do this first -- here are the specs for the imac I want:

2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 processor with 8MB level 3 cache
8gb RAM
ATI Radeon HD 5750 1gb memory
1Tb HDD

I thought everything looked alright save the graphics card, and I didn't think it would be that bad.
#12 Aug 11 2010 at 3:01 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Variyen wrote:
To clarify -- and sorry, idk why I didn't just do this first -- here are the specs for the imac I want:

2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 processor with 8MB level 3 cache
8gb RAM
ATI Radeon HD 5750 1gb memory
1Tb HDD

I thought everything looked alright save the graphics card, and I didn't think it would be that bad.


The rest of that would be fine, except for the fact that your card is not a 5750, it is a mobility 5750. More detail in above post.

I noticed that I neglected a source:

http://reviews.cnet.com/2795-3118_7-429.html

Edited, Aug 11th 2010 5:05am by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#13 Aug 11 2010 at 3:10 AM Rating: Decent
*
61 posts
Well, this blows. This is why I dislike PC games: there's (compared to consoles) so much money and compatibility issues involved. With a console, you just buy the **** thing and everything runs great for the six or more years of its lifespan; no worries, just buy the game and put it in. I know XIV is coming for PS3, but we've all heard the difficulties. When I started playing XI I began on the PS2 -- obviously, I soon had to move to a PC.
#14 Aug 11 2010 at 3:19 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Variyen wrote:
Well, this blows. This is why I dislike PC games: there's (compared to consoles) so much money and compatibility issues involved. With a console, you just buy the **** thing and everything runs great for the six or more years of its lifespan; no worries, just buy the game and put it in. I know XIV is coming for PS3, but we've all heard the difficulties. When I started playing XI I began on the PS2 -- obviously, I soon had to move to a PC.


To be fair, XIV is in a league of its own in terms of requirements. There isn't another game on the market that can hold a candle to the system requirements for it. Probably won't be for 2-3 years, either. It's the new Crysis, basically. 5 years from now, people will be asking "What's your FPS in FFXIV?" as a benchmark.

As I said, if you -must- get a Mac, get a Mac Pro. They're pretty solid systems. iMacs are basically just MacBooks with the screen put on backwards.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#15 Aug 11 2010 at 3:27 AM Rating: Good
***
2,120 posts
Indeed console gaming is much easier, if the release for PS3 hadn't been pushed back I would've had to consider getting one despite my strong disliking of anything Sony...it might be beneficial for ya to push through any disliking you have of non-macs if playing FFXIV is of high importance...
#16 Aug 11 2010 at 4:11 AM Rating: Good
Sage
***
1,099 posts
Mikhalia wrote:
To be fair, XIV is in a league of its own in terms of requirements. There isn't another game on the market that can hold a candle to the system requirements for it. Probably won't be for 2-3 years, either. It's the new Crysis, basically. 5 years from now, people will be asking "What's your FPS in FFXIV?" as a benchmark.

As I said, if you -must- get a Mac, get a Mac Pro. They're pretty solid systems. iMacs are basically just MacBooks with the screen put on backwards.


The answer will be "30, cause FFXIV is capped" :P FFXIV isn't really all that graphically demanding, it'll run on 6 series Nvidia. It *has* to have the graphics capability to run on an Xbox and a PS3. My current video card (8800GTS/320Mb) scores over 2k on the benchmark.

Quote:
Well, this blows. This is why I dislike PC games: there's (compared to consoles) so much money and compatibility issues involved.


PC's don't have compatibility issues, they have a layer (DirectX) which removes the incompatibility, if you look at your video card it'll say it's DirectX 9/10/11, that doesn't mean a DX9 card can't run a DX10 game, it just means it can't run it with DX10 bells and whistles. The only compatibility issue is with OS, you won't find OSX running PC games unless the PC games are designed for OSX (or run through Windows on bootcamp/vmware/etc.)
____________________________
A strange obsession, mine. But better to be addicted to smartphones and gismos than cocaine or ***, I suppose. Well, I don’t know, the result is the same after all, very little sleep, great expense and horrific mess everywhere.

-- Stephen Fry
#17 Aug 11 2010 at 4:43 AM Rating: Good
***
2,120 posts
Lexxuk wrote:
The answer will be "30, cause FFXIV is capped" :P FFXIV isn't really all that graphically demanding, it'll run on 6 series Nvidia. It *has* to have the graphics capability to run on an Xbox and a PS3. My current video card (8800GTS/320Mb) scores over 2k on the benchmark.


That just changed, no longer capped at 30...
http://ffxiv.zam.com/forum.html?game=268&mid=1281493850217338477&page=1
#18 Aug 11 2010 at 4:52 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
280 posts
I am just throwing this in here... I have an iMac (not the new version) with an i5, 4gb ram and HD 4850 and I was able to get a score of 2750 on the benchmark (1080). The system you are looking at should be a bit more spec'd. I read that the new card is app. 10% better performance. Pair that with the more ram and processor you are getting and you should be able to play FFXIV quite well and I would suspect that you would get well above 3000 in the benchmark and even be able to get higher res if you want.

The iMac won't give you mind blowing 3d as some of the home made systems will but you will need to ask yourself: is it enough? Do I really need more? Maybe you want a better system but I don't think you will really need it.

I am going to play the game on my system. I am still looking forwards to seeing how it will look but I am sure it will work with no problems at all. Besides you will have the most sleek looking machine ever with the iMac and it will handle everything you throw at it.

Edited, Aug 11th 2010 10:52am by Kidxxx

Edited, Aug 11th 2010 10:53am by Kidxxx
____________________________
I am working on a database called Disciples of the Land. Please check it out at http://www.disciplesoftheland.com if you want to fish, mine or harvest in FFXIV
#19 Aug 11 2010 at 5:22 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
22 posts
Variyen wrote:
Well, this blows. This is why I dislike PC games: there's (compared to consoles) so much money and compatibility issues involved. With a console, you just buy the **** thing and everything runs great for the six or more years of its lifespan; no worries, just buy the game and put it in. I know XIV is coming for PS3, but we've all heard the difficulties. When I started playing XI I began on the PS2 -- obviously, I soon had to move to a PC.


The problem is you aren't on a PC. You are on a Mac and they are not designed with games in mind. If you were a PC gamer and had put together a decent gaming computer, that cost less than your Mac, in the last 3-4 years you'd probably be able to play XIV on low res still. My previous computer from 4 years ago has a core2 duo and a 9800gt so even now it could play on low.

It wouldn't help you if this were a console only game because it's like you bought a Wii and you're upset a PS3 game won't play on it.
#20 Aug 11 2010 at 5:55 AM Rating: Excellent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
mikefx wrote:
not that good man, get a gtx460 its the hot card now. .
I see what you did there.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#21 Aug 11 2010 at 6:34 AM Rating: Good
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
bsphil wrote:
mikefx wrote:
not that good man, get a gtx460 its the hot card now. .
I see what you did there.
Smiley: laugh
____________________________
"Choosy MMO's choose Wint." - Louiscool
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist.
Keyser Soze - Ultros
Guide to Setting Up Mumble on a Raspberry Pi
#22 Aug 11 2010 at 8:30 AM Rating: Good
***
2,535 posts
Lexxuk wrote:
Mikhalia wrote:
To be fair, XIV is in a league of its own in terms of requirements. There isn't another game on the market that can hold a candle to the system requirements for it. Probably won't be for 2-3 years, either. It's the new Crysis, basically. 5 years from now, people will be asking "What's your FPS in FFXIV?" as a benchmark.

As I said, if you -must- get a Mac, get a Mac Pro. They're pretty solid systems. iMacs are basically just MacBooks with the screen put on backwards.


The answer will be "30, cause FFXIV is capped" :P FFXIV isn't really all that graphically demanding, it'll run on 6 series Nvidia. It *has* to have the graphics capability to run on an Xbox and a PS3. My current video card (8800GTS/320Mb) scores over 2k on the benchmark.


FFXIV has moderate hardware requirements (not exactly high, but definitely not low either) - not because they're doing anything particularly groundbreaking visually, but because they are embarrassingly behind the curve in graphics programming. They use inefficient algorithms years behind their competition that are less performant, less impressive, and less convincing than their competition; in several respects they're stuck in the PS1/PS2 era on this front, which pretty much excludes FFXIV from being a serious contender for benchmarking uses.

And the system requirements aren't exactly in a league of their own, either - they're a step above the majority of games currently available, yes, but already games like Mafia II, ARMA II, Metro 2033, Dark Void, and Just Cause 2 have comparable requirements. And more such games are coming soon, including Crysis 2 next year.
#23 Aug 11 2010 at 11:31 AM Rating: Default
***
1,457 posts
Quote:
This is why I dislike PC games macs


Why are mac users so adamantly against switching to PC? I used mac first too, but once I realized their shortcomings it was a no-brainer.
____________________________
Hunter Avril
Rogue Ultra
Paladin Awhellnah
Mage Shantotto
Shaman Lakshmi
Faith (Valefor)

#24 Aug 11 2010 at 1:26 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
***
1,675 posts
GuardianFaith wrote:
Quote:
This is why I dislike PC games macs


Why are mac users so adamantly against switching to PC? I used mac first too, but once I realized their shortcomings it was a no-brainer.



Yeah really. It's 2010. Who doesn't know macs suck for good gaming.

Buy a mac mini for $700 (for your mac fix).

Build a $600 AMD quad core with a 5770 and play the game on low.

Buy a 23" monitor $250.

------------------------------
~$1500

Congratulations you just saved $1000.

But seriously if you want a mac, like it has been stated earlier buy this:

http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC560LL/A?mco=MTg2OTUwMjQ

Then:

Update the ram yourself

Buy a third party monitor

Its a couple hundred bucks more but you'll have a way more upgradable and powerful machine.
#25 Aug 11 2010 at 2:11 PM Rating: Decent
6 posts
I am running a PC with a 5770. Untouched, I only scored a 2500 on the FFXIV benchmark at 1920 x 1080 res. After oc'ing the card to max settings, I only scored 2900 - not a very big improvement at all. According to the grading scale, at 2500 you should be able to run the game at "default settings". Of course, I have no idea what the default settings for the game will be, so I can't say whether these will be acceptable for you or not. And on top of that, as previously mentioned, the iMac is not even running the desktop version of the 5750, so your results are likely to be lower. A score below 2500 means you'll have to tone down the settings below default.

More importantly, I don't believe a Mac version of the game is coming out anytime soon, which leads me to believe you'll be running the PC version through a vm. You may wish to reconsider, as I haven't read too many good things about playing games this way.
#26 Aug 11 2010 at 2:18 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Yeah, you're going to have to run Windows through Boot Camp or Parallels anyway to run the game. Might as well buy a new box rather than pay extra for the Apple logo. It's just like Alienware; same parts, higher price.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#27 Aug 11 2010 at 2:27 PM Rating: Decent
*
61 posts
We don't like switching because we enjoy the user experience, save for things like this. XIV is the only problem I've ever had with a mac.

And of course there are compatibility issues; one always has to fiddle with drivers, update, XIV comes out and then hundreds of players flock to sites like this asking how they can blow more than a thousand dollars to play the game. My friend just bought a new computer which could handle XI and other games great, but gets a 33 on the XIV benchmark; now she has to search on newegg for a new card and memory, order, etc, then install it; or she has to haul the thing somewhere and pay for someone else to. I have a MBP that can also handle XI well, then this happens. One can, of course, buy a comp in which you can mod everything, but no matter what you do the lifespan of all of the cards and chips will be about 4 years, forcing you to buy a load of new stuff or just buy a new one. It's simply a very expensive and frustrating way to enjoy a game.

Anyway, I don't mean to start some internet bickering, I'm just always a bit taken aback by the willingness to pay so much and spend so much time (comparatively) fiddling with software and hardware issues. All those threads on this site about rigs, benchmark runs, and etc? If it was a (good, fixed) console game, you just buy it.
#28 Aug 11 2010 at 2:33 PM Rating: Good
****
9,526 posts
it will be a good, fixed console game.

In March.
#29 Aug 11 2010 at 2:40 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
5,159 posts
mvxiv wrote:
More importantly, I don't believe a Mac version of the game is coming out anytime soon, which leads me to believe you'll be running the PC version through a vm. You may wish to reconsider, as I haven't read too many good things about playing games this way.

Technically you don't have to run it through a VM, you can just load Windows onto a partition using Boot Camp. I would still definitely recommend buying a PC to play just for the superior hardware, but allegedly the latest Macs would be capable of running it.
#30 Aug 11 2010 at 3:00 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
27 posts
Not to go off topic but on the Mac version - Yes, it usually takes 1-4 years before they make a equivalent for Macs. And that's IF Just looking at the past history of other games (not just MMOs) I would strongly advise against the Mac.

Windows 7 rocks and it's stable. People love it as far as OS's go. It's stable, reliable and performs fast even with pretty bells and whistles. PC hardware gets cheaper faster and is generally more powerful. Water cooled Quad SLI on a mac? I think not.

I run with EVGA cards because of the responsibility they take. Lifetime warranty means just that. Lifetime warranty. They have B-stock options to reduce your costs. They provide strong customer service. Out of 3 evga video cards I've owned, I only had one warranty issue once... shipped the card to them and they priority shipped a new one to me no questions asked.

EVGA cards do tend to run hotter than ATI cards so that's just something to consider. Really, both brands are putting out strong contenders.

#31 Aug 11 2010 at 3:12 PM Rating: Good
**
473 posts
Quote:
We don't like switching because we enjoy the user experience, save for things like this. XIV is the only problem I've ever had with a mac.

And of course there are compatibility issues; one always has to fiddle with drivers, update, XIV comes out and then hundreds of players flock to sites like this asking how they can blow more than a thousand dollars to play the game. My friend just bought a new computer which could handle XI and other games great, but gets a 33 on the XIV benchmark; now she has to search on newegg for a new card and memory, order, etc, then install it; or she has to haul the thing somewhere and pay for someone else to. I have a MBP that can also handle XI well, then this happens. One can, of course, buy a comp in which you can mod everything, but no matter what you do the lifespan of all of the cards and chips will be about 4 years, forcing you to buy a load of new stuff or just buy a new one. It's simply a very expensive and frustrating way to enjoy a game.

Anyway, I don't mean to start some internet bickering, I'm just always a bit taken aback by the willingness to pay so much and spend so much time (comparatively) fiddling with software and hardware issues. All those threads on this site about rigs, benchmark runs, and etc? If it was a (good, fixed) console game, you just buy it.



I don't buy it about mac's when it comes to gaming, they just aren't built for it.
Driver support is non existent . ..

running an instance of windows in boot camp eats system resources....

the games aren't optimized to work that way. . . .

Not a mac hater but if your going to buy if just for gaming purpose, that is not a good expenditure.

2k+ for a mac barely able to play a game, an 800$ windows based PC can play with relative ease, and
default or slightly above default settings . . . .

I just don't get it sorry . . .
#32 Aug 11 2010 at 3:28 PM Rating: Good
6 posts
That's right. Totally forgot about boot camp. Thanks for the correction.
#33 Aug 11 2010 at 4:19 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Variyen wrote:
My friend just bought a new computer which could handle XI and other games great, but gets a 33 on the XIV benchmark; now she has to search on newegg for a new card and memory, order, etc, then install it; or she has to haul the thing somewhere and pay for someone else to.
You could run FFXI on a ps2. Think of trying to run FFXIV on a ps2. Had she come to this forum to ask for some advice, she probably would've paid less and gotten a much more powerful pc.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#34 Aug 12 2010 at 3:55 PM Rating: Decent
9 posts
I saw the CNET review where he listed the graphics cards as "Mobility Radeon 5750", but is there some reason I shouldn't believe apple's own website where they list the specs as well and make no mention of mobility at all? http://www.apple.com/imac/specs.html it seems unlikely that they would leave out that very important detail when listing the actual specs.
#35 Aug 12 2010 at 4:14 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
MrHawthorne wrote:
I saw the CNET review where he listed the graphics cards as "Mobility Radeon 5750", but is there some reason I shouldn't believe apple's own website where they list the specs as well and make no mention of mobility at all? http://www.apple.com/imac/specs.html it seems unlikely that they would leave out that very important detail when listing the actual specs.
The entire computer is contained within the monitor. It only weighs 8 pounds. How could you not be using mobility-grade parts? You can't put a standard card in there because there's no room for it. That's the drawback of using an iMac (or any other computer fully contained within the monitor, I know HP makes a touchscreen/wall mounted computer just like it), you're paying desktop money plus 50-150% Apple brand name markup for laptop performance.

Edited, Aug 12th 2010 5:17pm by bsphil
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#36 Aug 12 2010 at 4:27 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
MrHawthorne wrote:
I saw the CNET review where he listed the graphics cards as "Mobility Radeon 5750", but is there some reason I shouldn't believe apple's own website where they list the specs as well and make no mention of mobility at all? http://www.apple.com/imac/specs.html it seems unlikely that they would leave out that very important detail when listing the actual specs.


Well, the logical answer is that if you look at the size of the iMac, there's no room to fit the cooler for a desktop version. The logic board (aka motherboard) lies parallel to the monitor. An iMac is basically a slightly thicker laptop with the screen on backwards. Also, remember that previous generations have included GeForce M series GPUs as well. I own one of the original iMac G5s; before they even put the camera in it.

Perhaps they leave out the term "mobility" since, even though it's not a standard desktop GPU, it's not -technically- in a laptop, and therefore -they- don't consider it to be "mobility"? Remember that we're talking about a company that doesn't include flash on their iPhone because Steve Jobs "doesn't like flash".

Some people at macrumors have run GPU-Z on it and determined that it is in fact a mobility chip, although they think that the 5750 might actually be an underclocked 5850 based on the device ID, the memory type, and the bus width.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#37 Aug 12 2010 at 4:37 PM Rating: Decent
9 posts
Thanks for the quick responses and links, if we get a mac I guess it'll have to be mac pro w/ the Radeon 5870
#38 Aug 12 2010 at 8:42 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
I use this card on a Phenom quad core @2.5 stock clock and the beta runs very smoothly for me on near-max settings, though I wish I had got a 5770 or better instead. Unfortunately I only planned on using it for testing so I grabbed the cheapest one that would run the alpha well enough. That's when I planned on playing on PS3 at launch, before they announced the delay. I'll potentially upgrade again closer to release.

Anyway, this card is fine for the game, though you can certainly do better.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#39 Aug 12 2010 at 9:18 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
The Mobility HD 5850 is ok, but it's just not quite good enough to play FFXIV. I'm sure it'll run, if you don't mind playing at 15 fps or less, but it's hard to "play" with that.

I'd highly recommend against getting any mac, particularly for gaming.

Kachi wrote:
I use this card on a Phenom quad core @2.5 stock clock and the beta runs very smoothly for me on near-max settings, though I wish I had got a 5770 or better instead. Unfortunately I only planned on using it for testing so I grabbed the cheapest one that would run the alpha well enough. That's when I planned on playing on PS3 at launch, before they announced the delay. I'll potentially upgrade again closer to release.

Anyway, this card is fine for the game, though you can certainly do better.
Again, if it was a full-sized desktop card, the HD 5750 would be adequate. The mobility HD 5750 (actually the 5850) just isn't powerful enough to maintain a playable framerate. You might be able to sqeeze by with the minimum settings, but the card actually benches slightly under the minimum requirement (geforce 9600 GT).



Edited, Aug 12th 2010 10:23pm by bsphil
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#40 Aug 13 2010 at 2:53 AM Rating: Decent
*
61 posts
Just as an aside to those confused as to why people buy macs:

It is solely for user experience. For the general mac user, we know macs cost more for the same power, that it's difficult to upgrade, and all that; but that's not why we buy them. You can talk about the far lesser price of an HP with 3.6ghz to a 2.9ghz iMac, and we will simply not care. The OS is ergonomic and beautiful, the computer aesthetic is superb, and you have the apple store to go to for any and all questions you have. You can even bring your computer down and they will check it out for free, and, if it's the first year of buying or you have applecare, they'll fix it for you, too.

So, for those who don't understand, this is why. It sucks that macs aren't geared for gaming, but basically once you go mac you never go back — at least for most primary mac users. We need to talk about hardware specs here, obviously, but the simplistic "Y get a mac, it sux and costs liek 1000 more for teh same" is addressing null points.

PS to those who suggest buying two computers: how much money do you think everyone has? I'd rather just forget about FFXIV and take a trip to Tunisia, or buy a big ******* trampoline and a ****-ton of beer than get an 800 or more computer on the side. But, I suppose I'm simply not a techy PC gaming guy.
#41 Aug 13 2010 at 3:17 AM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Variyen wrote:
Just as an aside to those confused as to why people buy macs:

It is solely for user experience. For the general mac user, we know macs cost more for the same power, that it's difficult to upgrade, and all that; but that's not why we buy them. You can talk about the far lesser price of an HP with 3.6ghz to a 2.9ghz iMac, and we will simply not care. The OS is ergonomic and beautiful, the computer aesthetic is superb, and you have the apple store to go to for any and all questions you have. You can even bring your computer down and they will check it out for free, and, if it's the first year of buying or you have applecare, they'll fix it for you, too.

So, for those who don't understand, this is why. It sucks that macs aren't geared for gaming, but basically once you go mac you never go back — at least for most primary mac users. We need to talk about hardware specs here, obviously, but the simplistic "Y get a mac, it sux and costs liek 1000 more for teh same" is addressing null points.

PS to those who suggest buying two computers: how much money do you think everyone has? I'd rather just forget about FFXIV and take a trip to Tunisia, or buy a big @#%^ing trampoline and a sh*t-ton of beer than get an 800 or more computer on the side. But, I suppose I'm simply not a techy PC gaming guy.


For the sake of argument, if you like the OS so much, you can buy Mac OSX for $129 and install it on any wintel system.

I used to work -for- AppleCare Tech Support; it was my second IT job after a PC refresh project for a healthcare organization. (Cool little secret: CareFirst used Windows NT up until 2004 when they upgraded to XP)

Anyway, when I worked there, and when the iMac G5 came out, they had people optionally fill out a piece of paper; you had to answer 10 tech questions about the iMac G5 (processor speed options, included software, etc etc) and something along the lines of "What makes the iMac G5 so great?" (I can't remember what I put), and drop it into a box. They said they would pull papers out and the first one they pulled that got all of it right won an iMac G5; the only condition was that you had to set it up at your desk for everyone to see, and you could take it home with you that night.

Well, I won. I still have it, although it's running OS 10.3.9 because I don't care to spend the money to upgrade it beyond that. It's a nice computer and I use it for music while playing games on my main system.

Picture here

Anyway, I gotta say, my iMac doesn't do anything that my gaming rig or my laptop can't do, and both cost less than the iMac would have cost. I mean, if you like them, and you wanna spend the extra money, then you're certainly able to. Macs are nice computers, but I would never personally own one if I didn't win it for free. Even if I were offered 75% off, I'd probably still decline to purchase one because it just doesn't offer me anything tangible.

Now Macs are great for people learning to use a computer for the first time because they're a lot harder to inadvertently @#%^ up, and they're a lot more intuitive to people who do not consider themselves "a computer person". They're also great for the iLife suite that comes with them as well, if you like to make your own movies. High end programs like FCP and Aperture are nice as well.

but for someone like me who is primarily a gamer, I need a Windows system to run that on, and I am running Ubuntu on my laptop because it makes web-browsing hassle free since I can go to whatever site I want and pretty much never have to worry about viruses or spyware or keyloggers. My Mac comes in a distant third in terms of my computer use between the three systems.

I'm not going to get into the whole "which is better" thing because it is a matter of preference and what you're doing with it, and that's primarily subjective, especially the first part. For me, however, I find that I use my Mac very infrequently in comparison to my Windows Desktop or my Linux laptop.

In the end, I'd rather have two computers than a trip to Tunisia, since you will still have your two computers for a while, but the trip is over when you get home.

The trampoline and beer I might have to put more thought into before making a decision.

If you gotta have a Mac though, go with the PowerMac.

EDIT: derp link fail

Edited, Aug 13th 2010 5:18am by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#42 Aug 13 2010 at 5:55 AM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Variyen wrote:
Just as an aside to those confused as to why people buy macs:

It is solely for user experience.
I'm not confused as to why people buy macs. I know exactly why.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#43 Aug 13 2010 at 4:05 PM Rating: Default
*
61 posts
Quote:
For the sake of argument, if you like the OS so much, you can buy Mac OSX for $129 and install it on any wintel system.


This is the sort of thing I tried to address which PC users constantly ignore. It isn't simply the OS, it's how the computer looks and feels also, along with the apple store support.

Quote:
Now Macs are great for people learning to use a computer for the first time because they're a lot harder to inadvertently @#%^ up, and they're a lot more intuitive to people who do not consider themselves "a computer person". They're also great for the iLife suite that comes with them as well, if you like to make your own movies. High end programs like FCP and Aperture are nice as well.


It's kind of a **** move to assume that macs are only useful to computer idiots and film editors, because it implies that the other huge mac userbase who just like the computers are fools constantly getting the shaft willingly. My post above was meant to clarify that most mac users understand all of the arguments, are just as computer literate as the average PC user, and choose macs simply because they like the "whole deal" better. Also, why would you not want a more intuitive OS?

Quote:
In the end, I'd rather have two computers than a trip to Tunisia, since you will still have your two computers for a while, but the trip is over when you get home.


You'd rather have a pointless second computer so that you can, what, have one in the kitchen too, rather than have an exciting trip to another country, where you can discover another culture and experience another way of life? Have you never traveled?

#44 Aug 13 2010 at 4:13 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,457 posts
Macs are girly ;) teehee
____________________________
Hunter Avril
Rogue Ultra
Paladin Awhellnah
Mage Shantotto
Shaman Lakshmi
Faith (Valefor)

#45 Aug 13 2010 at 4:23 PM Rating: Good
***
2,120 posts
Quote:
My post above was meant to clarify that most mac users understand all of the arguments, are just as computer literate as the average PC user, and choose macs simply because they like the "whole deal" better. It isn't simply the OS, it's how the computer looks and feels also


Sounds kind of a like a religion, ignoring anything that would go against said religion because they "feel" it's right...somethin' like...
"I don't care, it is not a mac, macs are the best"
#46 Aug 13 2010 at 4:38 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
22 posts
Variyen wrote:

This is the sort of thing I tried to address which PC users constantly ignore. It isn't simply the OS, it's how the computer looks and feels also, along with the apple store support.


You can get any "look and feel" you want with a PC too as there's no limit to available cases, lighting, or whatever floats your boat. Similar support can also be had as long as your willing to pay the 50%+ markup on a PC just like you do on an Apple. Buy an Alienware, Falcon Northwest, etc. brand and you'll need almost as much lube as when you buy an Apple. In other words not an argument.

Variyen wrote:

It's kind of a **** move to assume that macs are only useful to computer idiots and film editors, because it implies that the other huge mac userbase who just like the computers are fools constantly getting the shaft willingly. My post above was meant to clarify that most mac users understand all of the arguments, are just as computer literate as the average PC user, and choose macs simply because they like the "whole deal" better. Also, why would you not want a more intuitive OS?


True enough! Everyone needs a doorstop or paperweight at times. The "average" PC user is a moron so I can agree with you that mac users are their equals. The average gamer however is another beast and the mac has no counterpart since macs can't game.

Variyen wrote:

You'd rather have a pointless second computer so that you can, what, have one in the kitchen too, rather than have an exciting trip to another country, where you can discover another culture and experience another way of life? Have you never traveled?


Sorry, PCs are cheap. You aren't going to make it out of the country for the cost of a budget gaming system.
#47 Aug 13 2010 at 6:04 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
11,539 posts
I'm just continuing the argument for argument's sake, for the record, I'm not angry with/at you or being hostile, just debating your points here:

Variyen wrote:
Quote:
For the sake of argument, if you like the OS so much, you can buy Mac OSX for $129 and install it on any wintel system.


This is the sort of thing I tried to address which PC users constantly ignore. It isn't simply the OS, it's how the computer looks and feels also, along with the apple store support.


Regarding the computer's look and feel: An apple keyboard and mouse are simply USB that can plug into anything; yes, even a Windows system. Furthermore, "PC" simply means personal computer.

Is an iMac a computer? Is it your PERSONAL one? Then your iMac is a PC.

They use the same parts, just different cases. To say that the advantage of Mac systems is their appearance physically is like saying "HP is better than Dell because I like their cases better". Sure, you like their cases better, but you neglect to realize that not only does the case have absolutely nothing to do with performance, but you can quite literally buy whatever case you want.

Have you seen a Sony Vaio JS?

Screenshot


That's "a PC", and yet it looks almost the spitting image of an iMac. Install Mac OS X on it and I challenge you to tell me you wouldn't think that it wasn't one.

MacBook/iBook/PowerBook laptops look pretty close to other laptops as well, and the Mac Pro is just a tower, except that it has an Apple logo on it.

If I took your Mac Pro and replaced the internal components with parts I buy from Newegg and installed OS X on it, you would have NO WAY of knowing. The parts are the same, the only difference is the case. You can use vague terms like "look and feel" and "the experience" but what your argument boils down to is this:

"I like the case better".

That's it. The only thing I haven't covered that you mentioned is the support:

Variyen wrote:
Quote:
Now Macs are great for people learning to use a computer for the first time because they're a lot harder to inadvertently @#%^ up, and they're a lot more intuitive to people who do not consider themselves "a computer person". They're also great for the iLife suite that comes with them as well, if you like to make your own movies. High end programs like FCP and Aperture are nice as well.


It's kind of a **** move to assume that macs are only useful to computer idiots and film editors, because it implies that the other huge mac userbase who just like the computers are fools constantly getting the shaft willingly. My post above was meant to clarify that most mac users understand all of the arguments, are just as computer literate as the average PC user, and choose macs simply because they like the "whole deal" better. Also, why would you not want a more intuitive OS?


You can't tout the great support that Apple Stores provide and then also claim that Mac users are geniuses. Once you get past being a "new user", you shouldn't NEED Apple Store support any more. The good thing about Apple Stores is that they do repairs in shop (Geek Squad is basically the Windows equivalent of a Mac Genius, and everyone hates Geek Squad, yet everyone loves Mac Geniuses; oh, the double standard) and that they provide training classes on how to use the computer and the programs.

If you know how to use the computer and the programs, then you don't need those classes, and if you @#%^ed something up and need someone in a store to fix it for you, there are plenty of places you can go for a Windows system and only three you can go to for an Apple (amusingly enough, Best Buy is the second place; they're an Apple Authorized Retailer. Fry's is the third one)

As for the Phone support... eh, it's okay. Remember how I mentioned I used to work FOR Apple? When they interviewed me, they asked me "How much experience do you have with Macs?" and I was honest and told them "I really haven't used one since 7th grade." They said "That's okay; we'll teach you".

And teach me, they did. I was given a one month training course and put on the phones, ready to answer your questions. Have you ever called 1-800-APL-Care? That's the quality of support we offer. One month of training.

Incidentally, "we don't support how-to". That was DRILLED into our head. If someone called and asked "How do I...?" We were pretty much REQUIRED to point them to the knowledge base on apple.com/support. We were NOT allowed to answer the question. AT ALL. If we were caught answering how-to questions, we got written up.

If you've ever called Apple Tech support and asked a guy a bunch of how to questions and he actually gave you answers, his boss probably reamed him for it later. WE GOT IN TROUBLE FOR ANSWERING QUESTIONS. That's the great Apple Support you get. Again, I worked there for over a year and a half and was even a SUPERVISOR. That's right; it was MY JOB that I got PAID for, FROM APPLE, to tell other agents to NOT tell customers how to do things.

Oh, and if anyone tells you "Apple doesn't outsource their support to India like Dell!", That's bullsh*t too. We had two locations in India and several in Canada, the US, and the UK that provide outsourced support for Apple computers. Call 1-800-APL-Care and ask the person where they are. If they don't say Austin, TX or Sacramento, CA, he's outsourced. If you ask him if he works for Apple, he's required to say yes. If you ask if Apple outsources their support, he is REQUIRED to lie to you and say no. But if he isn't in Sacramento or Austin, he "isn't an Apple employee" in the literal sense.

That's what you're paying extra for: People to lie to you who get yelled at for answering simple questions simply. Given that even Apple's tech support is TRAINED to make things seem more difficult than they are, is it any wonder that Apple users act like Macs are such a huge deal?

Variyen wrote:
Quote:
In the end, I'd rather have two computers than a trip to Tunisia, since you will still have your two computers for a while, but the trip is over when you get home.


You'd rather have a pointless second computer so that you can, what, have one in the kitchen too, rather than have an exciting trip to another country, where you can discover another culture and experience another way of life? Have you never traveled?


I've been to Jamaica, it's pretty nice. But after I left, the money was gone and so was Jamaica. Also been to Vegas, to Orlando, to Gettysburg... I've traveled and traveling is a fun diversion but it costs a lot of money for a limited period of fun. In the end, all you have left is memories and pictures. And memories and pictures are nice and all, but the difference between a $1000 computer and a $1000 trip is that in two months, you'll still have the $1000 computer.

I did post a pic of my computer room earlier. I live with my fiancee and we have 5 computers between the two of us.

If you will look back, you will notice that I mentioned that I do have an iMac in addition to a laptop and a tower. Of the three, I use my iMac the least because it doesn't do anything that my tower and laptop can't already do for me. Only time my iMac sees use is when I'm playing a fullscreen game and want to look something up without alt-tabbing and don't feel like getting my laptop, or when I want to listen to music while playing a game in fullscreen mode.

That's all my Mac is good for.

I don't understand your huge aversion to having a second computer for a different purpose is. Why is it that you feel that you should have one and only one computer, and that's it? I mean, I'm using two of them at once RIGHT NOW. I'm typing this message to you on my Linux laptop and I'm playing Minecraft on my Windows desktop. My Mac is just sorta sitting there though; it's off right now, and I can't remember the last time I turned the thing on, because there is absolutely nothing that my Mac offers me that my Windows or Linux systems do not also offer me.

Again, if you like your Mac, fine. But I'm telling you from experience of having worked for them that the service is horrible and that physically, the parts are exactly the same except the case (which, when you factor in that Vaio I linked, is a non-point as well).

There's nothing wrong with liking a Mac, but you seem to freak out at the mere thought of having a second computer for other things your Mac can't do, and you rely too much on vague, non-quantifiable terms like "the experience". Using a computer is not an experience. It's just a computer. I mean, they're awesome and all, but it's a bunch of circuits and pieces of metal and plastic that put pretty pictures on a screen. Any OS can do that. I'm not even telling you that you should stop using your Mac, because if you like it, then that's fine. But you act like the mere thought of using a product without an Apple logo on it will make you burst into flames.

EDIT: Just wanted to add, not sure if you remember, but when Apple was announcing the switch from PPC chips to Intel chips, people FREAKED OUT. Oh, the horror that my Mac is going to be even more like one of those evil "PCs". It's not just you; no, the cult of Apple flips the **** out when it comes to Windows systems for no freaking reason other than "It's not an Apple, therefore it is bad".

Edited, Aug 13th 2010 8:17pm by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#48 Aug 13 2010 at 6:09 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Athan10 wrote:
Variyen wrote:

You'd rather have a pointless second computer so that you can, what, have one in the kitchen too, rather than have an exciting trip to another country, where you can discover another culture and experience another way of life? Have you never traveled?


Sorry, PCs are cheap. You aren't going to make it out of the country for the cost of a budget gaming system.


Oh yeah, this. Flying coach internationally will set you back a grand or more per person, not counting the hotel/accommodations, local transportation, food, etc...

Traveling is fun, but it costs WAY more than a new computer would set you back.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#49 Aug 13 2010 at 6:47 PM Rating: Default
*
61 posts
Maybe if you didn't have three **** computers, your iMac wouldn't be gathering dust. And guess what, you can type and play games on the same computer!

You're talking to me like I'm a moron, who doesn't understand what a "personal computer" is. Yeah, every computer that isn't a server is personal; yeah, the case has nothing to do with performance; You're still missing the point and pointing things out to me like I'm a child. I like the OS, I like the OS to be in the mac casing, I like that I have not just any support but apple support, and I like that I can just buy the computer and have the **** thing work instead of fiddling with it to finally run OS X or using an OS I find less intuitive and more prone to problems. My terms of "feel" and "user experience" aren't vague at all, you're just taking them to be. If you want to boil it down to the utter technicalities, yes I would rather pay an extra 1000 for a nicer casing and components (mouse, keyboard, etc) that work together and look part of a theme, not have to deal with partitioning and installing OS X on another comp, and have the ease, comfort, and yes, hip-value, of going to an apple store and asking for help there. Mac users know all this, and like I said, we don't care, we want the ease of not having to be power users. That vaio you showed? I think it looks like a dumb knockoff of the iMac.


Maybe I'm wrong, but you seem like a heavy power user. If you are then more power to you, but not everyone wants to sit in front of a computer all day fiddling with drivers and installing parts. Some people just want to buy a computer and it works. If it stops, just take it to the apple store and say "fix, please", and it's in a modern, comfortable environment. Not everyone has the time to order parts on Newegg and fix their own computer, or even cares enough to do so. Like I said, it's about the feel and experience, which means ease of use, beauty, and ergonomics.

Edit:

I enjoy windows also, I simply prefer macs. You're taking me to be one of the few of the "apple cult". Many, if not the majority, are not like that. If anything I could say that you're part of the huge "PC cult" that ******* and moans every time someone isn't decking out their comp for the lowest price with parts they built themselves, and actually just wants to use their computer, instead of mucking around to save a few bucks.


Edited, Aug 13th 2010 2:54pm by Variyen
#50 Aug 13 2010 at 7:28 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
312 posts
Variyen wrote:
not everyone wants to sit in front of a computer all day fiddling with drivers and installing parts


This is my favorite Mac-lover argument. Because everyone knows that people spend their whole day on a Windows box installing and uninstalling drivers and parts. My grandmother, who sends attachments one email at a time because she doesn't know any better, has no problem using a laptop with XP on it. It's not hard, it's just different. And I can't imagine why someone would be against taking an hour to learn the ins and outs of using Windows, especially when they had nothing against taking an hour to learn the ins and outs of using OSX.
____________________________
Steam: Xavier1216
FFXI: Astyanax (Bismarck)


#51 Aug 13 2010 at 11:36 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
I'm well aware I can type and play on the same computer, but it's easier to type on one and play on another.

Let's break it down:

"I like the OS" <-- Can be installed on any system
"I like the OS to be in the mac casing" <-- "I like the case"
"I like that I have not just any support but apple support" <-- already explained all the faults of Apple Support, but it doesn't surprise me that an Apple fanboy would ignore facts that are inconvenient. Again, if you're brand new to using computers, then a Mac is a good system and Apple Support is great. If you're an educated user, you don't NEED support. You can't have it both ways. Either you need the support because you aren't an educated user or you are an educated user and therefore the support is irrelevant.
"and I like that I can just buy the computer and have the **** thing work instead of fiddling with it" <-- what fiddling? I've done just as much "fiddling with it" on my Mac as I have on any other computer I've owned. Set the background to something you like, change the GUI around to look nice, set the shortcuts you want on your desktop/dock, set the resolution where you want it. That's it. You act like Macs take 5 minutes to set up and Windows/Linux takes two hours. This is what all you Mac users do, you make everything that isn't Mac sound like it's impossible.

You know those infomercials where they're like "Do you ever knock over your can of soda? You need this cap!" or "Blankets are such a chore! You need a snuggie!" That's what Mac users do; they make mundane things that NO ONE WITH A BRAIN has a problem doing seem like rocket science by comparison to "how easy Macs do it"

Again, Macs are easy systems for new users to pick up on, yes. But once you're no longer a new user, you don't need the Macincrutch. You can keep using it if you prefer it, but it's not some magical box of awesome. It's just a computer.

"I would rather pay an extra 1000 for a nicer casing and components (mouse, keyboard, etc) that work together and look part of a theme, not have to deal with partitioning and installing OS X on another comp, and have the ease, comfort, and yes, hip-value, of going to an apple store and asking for help there."

Okay, so you're fine with overpaying, knew that already. Components can look like WHATEVER you want them to look like regardless of what you buy. And again, you make it sound like installing Mac OS on a non-Mac is any more or less of a chore than it would be if you had to install Boot Camp or Parallels on a Mac, and yet the cult of Apple is pretty much in agreement that even installing Windows on a Mac is easy and "just works". It's a @#%^ing double standard. It's the same parts and the same OS architecture. A case with an Apple logo does not magically make the parts inside of it "Just work", and a case without one does not magically cause problems that could have theoretically not occurred if the case had some magic Apple logo.

"Mac users know all this, and like I said, we don't care, we want the ease of not having to be power users. That vaio you showed? I think it looks like a dumb knockoff of the iMac."

Again, you're making it sound like it's this huge to-do to use any system other than a Mac. I think that you must be intentionally TRYING to make non Mac use difficult or something. Tell me, if Apple systems are so much better than Windows systems, why do 90% of the world, including nearly all large businesses use Windows workstations? Why do companies trust their data on Windows or Unix servers?

You want a secret that will REALLY blow your mind? And remember I told you before that I worked for Apple so I state this with not assumption but firsthand knowledge: Apple uses Windows on some of their servers.

That's right. Even APPLE runs Windows on some of their systems. Their databases that customer data is stored in? Windows Server. Their IRC server for their Tier 1 tech support to communicate with Tier 2 tech support when they put you on hold? Also a Windows Server.

So tell me, if Mac OS is so much better than Windows, WHY DO APPLE THEMSELVES USE WINDOWS?

Again, I like my Mac and all; it's nice and I've said from the start that Apples are nice for beginners. Perhaps that's it; if you're a beginner user then I can understand why you need Apple's Support to help you use your computer, and why anything other than that is scary and confusing, but once you get to the stage that you actually know how to use a computer, it really doesn't matter. If you find yourself getting frustrated and flabbergasted, it's probably because you're making it harder on yourself than you need to.

Variyen wrote:
Maybe I'm wrong, but you seem like a heavy power user. If you are then more power to you, but not everyone wants to sit in front of a computer all day fiddling with drivers and installing parts. Some people just want to buy a computer and it works. If it stops, just take it to the apple store and say "fix, please", and it's in a modern, comfortable environment. Not everyone has the time to order parts on Newegg and fix their own computer, or even cares enough to do so. Like I said, it's about the feel and experience, which means ease of use, beauty, and ergonomics.


Do you even know what a driver -IS-? I've heard this argument before and it's downright silly. That's like saying "I have a hybrid because not everyone wants to sit in front of a car all day fiddling with spark plugs and installing distributor caps". It doesn't mean anything. No computer user "sits in front of their computer installing drivers all day". That argument holds less water than a rock, and it floats about as well as one too.

Again with the "ordering parts" and "fixing your own computer", you make it sound like these are impossible activities that all Windows users do every single day; like Windows users just spend their entire day replacing parts and installing drivers and never actually do anything.

Let's steer the conversation away from Windows.

I use Linux Ubuntu 10.4 on my Laptop. I want you to tell me why a laptop with Mac OS X is better than my laptop with Linux. I want you to tell me what a MacBook can do that my Ubuntu notebook cannot do. No Windows involved. My Linux system is a Unix-based OS with a GNOME shell, just like OS X is, so explain to me what makes OS X so much easier or better than Linux.

Variyen wrote:
I enjoy windows also, I simply prefer macs. You're taking me to be one of the few of the "apple cult". Many, if not the majority, are not like that. If anything I could say that you're part of the huge "PC cult" that ******* and moans every time someone isn't decking out their comp for the lowest price with parts they built themselves, and actually just wants to use their computer, instead of mucking around to save a few bucks.


You keep forgetting that I WORKED FOR APPLE. I fielded 40-50 calls per day from Apple users. Yes, nearly all of them are like that. Nearly every one of them I talked to just enjoyed the **** out of telling me how great their Apple is. I even had one person ask me if I used Windows on my home computer; I said I had Windows and Mac on my home systems and they said "I'm not talking to a Windows user" and HUNG UP ON ME because they couldn't BEAR to have someone help them with their Apple if they even OWNED a Windows system. Nearly every person I spoke to acted like their sh*t didn't stink because they own a Mac; as if spending extra for a computer with a pretty case puts them in some sort of upper echelon above the poor, depraved Windows users.

I'd say that 60-70% of the callers I spoke to on a regular basis:

1) Called about some of the dumbest @#%^ing problems imaginable, and were fixable in under 5 minutes
2) Honestly believed with every ounce of their being that Macs are God's gift to mankind.

All of these "I enjoy the experience" and "It just works" are bullsh*t lines of marketing that the users parrot because they love the living sh*t out of a computer on a level that is borderline unhealthy. You are not saying anything to me that I have not heard for 5 days a week for a year and a half.

Granted, you're not the craziest Mac fanatic I've ran into, but you're definitely getting up there.

Edited, Aug 14th 2010 1:45am by Mikhalia
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
« Previous 1 2
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 21 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (21)