Posted 10/23/2009 at 08:45:29pm

Yes, I can understand the allure of the revenue, but this just makes no sense. First, since the times an Apple OS is installed, it's on a piece of hardware with Apple's logo on it, the ads (and the device hanging until you've viewed the ad sufficiently) will will be inextricably linked to Apple. Can you imagine how emberrasing it would be for some cool kid having to tell their friend that, no, I can't use that app, or my computer right now, not until the ad finishes playing. Oh yes, can you see the next generation I'm a PC ads... PC admitting that there are some times when malicious code causes a PC to stall, hang up for a little, then pointing out that the people inserting the malicious code into a Mac, is Apple itself!

Posted 07/30/2009 at 10:39:27am

I completely agree with installing Windows 7 on the entry level box, but to cost it out as free is a little deceptive . Yes, if you're not planning on using it for more than 6 or 8 months, it is free, but this is a budget machine and not a throwaway. You will need to buy an OS for it eventually, and that will be $110, so that should have been relected in the total cost.

Posted 05/07/2009 at 10:39:38am

Okay, I'm sure there are some people out there that can figure out a reason to spend $1000 on a CPU, but not very many. The 965 was only going to sell to those few with more money than brains. Similarly, the 940 at almost $550 was just priced too high. To spend essentially double the 920's cost to get another 12 or 13% better performance? For those wanting a blazing hot machine, the 920 got you there for a steep, but not ridiculous cost.

Then again, I tend to take the conservative route in my recommendations. With virtually every class of chip, the low end of that class is clearly the best buy when measured cost versus performance. I still build a few single-core PC's, but usually recommend a low-end dual core. If they need or want more power, we move up to a low end quad-core. Being partial to AMD chips (except the Core i7 changed the whole game) the Athlon 64 X2 5000 or 5200 are great values. Yes, you can get faster dual-cores, but the added performance comes at a steep price. For a quad-core, the Phenom 9600 is a great value. Yes, I've built more powerful machines, including one Core i7, but like I said, I tend to be conservative/realistic about recommendations.