This is the part where I point out how silly the statement I put in bold is because of one key factor: Apple's iMacs are NOT tower builds. They are "all-in-one" builds. You CANNOT find a similarly spec'd Windows PC all-in-one for the price of the iMacs. In fact, last I checked, there are NO Windows PC all-in-ones with Intel i7 CPUs like the new upscale iMacs have. Comparing a tower build PC to an all-in-one iMac is quite frankly...kinda dumb. It's two different sorts of product models. Compare all-in-ones to all-in-ones. If you wanna compare tower builds, you have to compare the Mac Pro builds to comparable PC tower builds. That's a fair comparison. And that's the comparison that most tend to ignore as the only right one to make. If you are in the market for an all-in-one unit, the iMacs are not only comparably affordable, but in most cases more powerful overall than the competition. Quite frankly the ONLY absolutely overpriced Apple computer currently out is the Mac Mini. That thing should be quite a bit less than it currently sells for, as there are comparable mini box/tower Windows PCs that are a lot less.
There's nothing wrong with comparing two different things. In fact, it's not that easy comparing two things that are totally identical. If you've gotta spend money and you want something to play games on, the sensible thing to do would be compare iMacs to tower-build PCs... and then probably buy a PC. I'd be far more annoying if someone went out and bought an iMac, found out it was terrible for gaming, came back here and said "why didn't anyone tell me iMacs are terrible for gaming?" and got the reply "we don't compare them to PCs because they're not the same".
"Gotta spend money and want something to play games on" There's a litany of products that do that. Personal computers of different types of builds. Home game consoles. Mobile platforms like iPhone/touch. Portable game systems like PSP or DS. Etc. If you're specifically talking personal computers, how high on the value scale is that for that particular consumer? Is it higher than the build, how much space it takes, how powerful it is for that size, how energy efficient, or how much productivity and creative software it runs? And I vehemently disagree that comparing two more similar products against each other is "more difficult" than two things more different from each other. There's no actual sense in comparing two different types of builds against each other as an "equal" comparison, because the two things are not equal. Why just compare the tower builds to the all-in-one Macs? The more sensible thing to do would be to figure out what type of build you want first and foremost. Are you more in the market for a computer, or a specific type of computer? If the latter, is it an all-in-one? A laptop? A desktop tower? If just general, you'd have to lump in the Windows all-in-ones in there too, which your example ignores (why ignore the PC all-in-ones and just focus on the tower builds)? If you're in the market for an all-in-one, you're more likely to compare the all-in-ones than throw in the tower builds. I'd be far more annoyed that someone didn't actually research something before buying it. And Macs aren't terrible for gaming. It's OS X that is not supported by most game developers, but the hardware itself runs games just fine. Most PC games (a dying market, btw) run on Windows. You can run Windows on a Mac legally. Problem solved right there.
I think we're arguing two seperate points here. You just compared iMacs to PCs yourself in that post, when minutes ago you said such an action was kinda dumb.
not at all, dunno what that is but they HAVE been doing exceptionally lately. pushing out something new every time you think they've reached a limit
I can't imagine switching from a Windows OS to OSX. Sure, it would be fine if you started out on Apple OSes, but after being spoiled with Windows 98SE, XP, VistaSP1 and 7 (The only really good versions Windows IMO), it would kill me to lose all of the benefits. I had the opportunity to use OSX Leopard where I used to work (my office was shared with some guys from another department, and they used a Mac for video editing), and while I can see why some people like it (it is fairly easy to use, it has a nice clean GUI), I really hated it.
The problem is that each OS is different. When I was a kid all we had were apples and it's systems were quite natural. When PCs became common I got uses to the windows layout. Years later when I used a Mac I was lost.
