Re: Apple Lags Behind On DVD-R/RWs?

In article <1239909797.2715.54.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Sermo Malifer <sermomalifer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 19:06 -0500, Lloyd Parsons wrote:
In article <IfudnWgXe_tdo0jUnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Steve de Mena <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Lloyd Parsons wrote:
In article <_L6dnUbPC9lIgUjUnZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Steve de Mena <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

KDT wrote:
On Apr 2, 2:24 am, Steve de Mena <st...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
KDT wrote:
On Apr 1, 8:39 pm, Steve de Mena <st...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
ZnU wrote:
In article <FOMAl.22487$c45.17...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"John Slade" <hhitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If there is any more proof that Apple is lagging behind on
it's
novelty machines, just look at the Mini and the iMac. All models
have
8x
DVD-R/RW drives. Why don't they have 16x, 18x or even 20x
DVD-R/RWs
on
their
mainstream computers.
Because very few people really care,
Translation: It's Apple, so their customers will be happy with
sub-par
performance.
The majority of people at least in the US are buying laptop
computers
and have been for the last two or three years -- so they obviously
don't care about the fastest performance. But why would most
people
care about the speed of the DVD player regardless? Do you really
think that the majority of people are burning files to flimsy
DVD-RW's
instead of using some type of flash media?
Also if you want to talk about sub-par performance, let's look at a
few things....
1. No Mac user is buying laptops with Celeron processors, or
Pentium
Dual Core processorss (not Core Duos)
2. Weren't the PC users just defending Lauren for buying a slow AMD
Turon based laptop with a crappy display ?
3. Looking at the average selling price of computers sold by Dell,
HP,
ASUS, etc, most PC buyers are buying low-end laptops with "sub par"
performance.
AMAZING HOW SUB-PAR DVD BURNERS FROM APPLE ARE JUSTIFIED HERE.

Not a single defense could even remotely be considered valid.

Steve
So how about all of the PC users not only buying sub par DVD Burners
(which relatively few people are using) but are also buying computers
with sub par processors, video hardware, displays, etc?

Since Apple doesn't sell *any* computers with anything less than a
Core 2 Duo 2Ghz besides the Air, by definition, no Mac users are
buying the sub par computers that the average Windows user is buying.
Since every Mac comes with graphics hardware that is at least four
times faster than Intel's integrated graphics *no* Mac user is
buying
a computer with the level of graphics that come on Dell's and HP's
low
end computers. So obviously, it's PC users who are buying Celeron
based computers with crappy displays running Vista Home Basic that
don't care about performance.
AMAZING HOW SUB-PAR DVD BURNERS FROM APPLE ARE JUSTIFIED HERE.

That says it all.

Steve

To you, but then that is expected.

I notice that you don't 'justify' those sub-par windows boxes for their
shitty graphics and processors...

Well, we were discussing DVD BURNERS. And you have seemingly
excluded all Intel systems with "non shitty" graphics and processors.

Steve

Yes, I have. There's nothing wrong with the more upscale intel/windows
machines. It is at the lower end of the market that Apple doesn't serve
that the crap is found.

A lot of good computers are found there too.

A matter of opinion, I suppose. A computer at the lower end that isn't
making money for the mfg or the reseller isn't a good computer. There
is no incentive for them to make it one either.


Although all too often in the Dell and HPs,
they seem to stay with integrated graphics more than I would have
expected.

The Mac Mini still has integrated graphics.

Very true, but as Apple's entry level computer that is basically a
laptop without screen/mouse/keyboard and a very small form factor, how
could it be otherwise.

How many laptops have you seen with discrete video cards?
.

Loading