XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy   
   From: crude@sausa.ge   
      
   On 2025-12-17 8:26 p.m., -hh wrote:   
   > On 12/17/25 14:45, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >> On 2025-12-17 2:11 p.m., -hh wrote:   
   >>> On 12/16/25 19:48, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >>>> On 2025-12-16 7:09 p.m., -hh wrote:   
   >>>>> On 12/15/25 20:15, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 2025-12-15 5:54 p.m., -hh wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> What do current benchmarks show you between two comparable   
   >>>>>>>> machines at the same price?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Don't know, as I'm not currently in the market for new hardware.   
   >>>>>>> What's your current PC do and when was it put into service?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Zephyrus G14 2021 with AMD R9 5900HS CPU and RTX3060 GPU. It's a   
   >>>>>> 2021 model. The new 2TB NVMe is a Samsung 990 EVO.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Looks like its been a $2K-$3K laptop, +$200 more for the new NVMe.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I recall paying $1,899 plus tax Canadian in June 2021.   
   >>>   
   >>> Which is fine; I just did a quick google without listing features, so   
   >>> it could have had a newer GPU/etc.  That's a price point where one   
   >>> should get pretty respectable capabilities (snarky side eye at   
   >>> ChromeBooks :-)   
   >>   
   >> I never want to pay more than $2,500 (taxes included) on a machine   
   >> that I hold onto for no more than five years. If games don't run as   
   >> well on my five-year-old machine as they used to, I'm happy to drop   
   >> the graphics or buy older games. The latest and greatest means nothing   
   >> to me, especially since the new titles have become political anyway.   
   >> Still, I doubt I'll be playing for much longer. I generally stick to   
   >> Civilization more than anything else.   
   >   
   > I'd like for it to be <$100, but I also know that the market doesn't   
   > care what our personal preferences are, as they sell to huge market   
   > segments.  Typically, they'll design to a consumer price point and the   
   > product is what it is for that price point.  Apple used to chronically   
   > do this with their "starting at" and hurt their image by selling   
   > machines which were pragmatically under-specc'ed for their OS.  MS was   
   > similarly guilty with promises of how little RAM Windows needed, etc.   
   > Ditto with car manufacturers & everyone else.  As such, I tailor what   
   > the need is to the tasks, so a business laptop might be up to ~$2K these   
   > days, whereas my media workstation will not need to be mobile but will   
   > need more capacity.  This last go-around the core unit was just $2500,   
   > which was quite a bit less than its 2012 predecessor.   
      
   I make it a habit to always have way more than what the operating system   
   says it needs. I recall using Windows 95 on a 386DX-33 with 4MB of RAM,   
   the stated minimum. It was okay, but definitely not pleasant.   
      
   >>>> There is a good chance that the storage in Macs, by default,   
   >>>> performed better than my Zephyrus G14 did by default. With a RAID0,   
   >>>> I would expect that. However, both Apple computers and those of   
   >>>> competitors perform on par nowadays in their default configurations.   
   >>>   
   >>> I'd suspect/expect that the Macs which were using the RAID0   
   >>> performance approach 3-4 years ago are still doing that today, and   
   >>> those that didn't still aren't.  The minimally bumped basic MBP   
   >>> business machine that I picked up last year doesn't need higher   
   >>> performance and is an example of the latter:  it benches at just ~3K   
   >>> read/write, much less than the older personal machine that I   
   >>> prioritize performance for media work.   
   >>>   
   >>> FWIW, here's an example of a still very raw test dump I did last   
   >>> month on a personal project:   
   >>>   
   >>>    
   >>>   
   >>> ...this version's been de-rezz'ed down to just 1080p and lost its IQ.   
   >>> That's part of the next part to figure out.   
   >>   
   >> I have to admit that I'm looking forward to having an excuse to buy a   
   >> new laptop.   
   >   
   > My last laptop was doing fine, but at seven years it was getting due,   
   > and since Apple had moved from Intel CPUs to their own M series, a new   
   > one has 2-3x the battery life.  A cherry on top was that despite being   
   > seven years old, its trade-in value was ~10% of its original price.   
      
   At least the upgrade was worth it. The M processors are so great that it   
   is a true joy to move away from the Intel garbage they were using   
   beforehand. I would hate to have bought the i3 MacBook Air in 2020 only   
   to have Apple release the M1 version a little later.   
      
   >> In the meantime, games still play great on this nearly five- year-old   
   >> GPU and the machine itself has more RAM and storage than I'll ever   
   >> need. It's also in stellar shape (despite all the repairs I sent it   
   >> out for). I've had to have the keyboard replaced (typical issue   
   >> nowadays) and eventual motherboard replacement but the latter was of   
   >> my own doing. I was convinced that when they changed the battery, they   
   >> caused a spark which took out the fingerprint reader and was ready   
   >> break a connector to force them to replace it. I was right. It works   
   >> perfectly now. The repair cost me nothing in both cases.   
   >   
   > Not to say that Apple is perfect, but in trying to think of the last   
   > time that I had to have a Mac be serviced ... I'd probably have to go   
   > back to a 2005 vintage PowerMac G5's CD/DVD burner.   
      
   For what it's worth, I loved the PowerBook G4 I had in the early 2000s   
   and the iMac G5 that replaced it. The iBook G3 was okay for Mac OS X,   
   even with 640MB RAM, but it ran OS 9 beautifully. Even the MacBook Air   
   M1 I had was a joy to use. I don't think I've ever disliked anything I   
   got from Apple.   
      
   >>>> I'm not saying that it wasn't successful. In fact, it might have   
   >>>> been responsible for serious business people seeing Apple as the   
   >>>> only alternative to IBM rather than Commodore or Atari. However, it   
   >>>> gives a false impression that what Apple offered/offers is superior   
   >>>> to what the competition gives you.   
   >>>   
   >>> By whatever means, they have been one of the very few survivors, and   
   >>> did so without a abuse-of-monopoly type of overtone.  I think a lot   
   >>> of their staying power has come from the iPhone era, specifically   
   >>> during its introduction while RIM's Blackberry was so dominant in   
   >>> Corporate America:  what ended up happening was that the C-Suite   
   >>> executives preferred to use the iPhone over the BB and instead of   
   >>> asking their IT Dept if they could "pretty please" consider adding   
   >>> the iPhone, IT was flat out ordered to do it.   
   >>>   
   >>> Likewise, when it came to competition from Android in the office,   
   >>> when employees were allowed to choose (and didn't have to pay), the   
   >>> preference was pretty compelling.  I can recall an old COLA   
   >>> conversation on the Android-vs-iOS wars where I posted this pic from   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)