More Droid love from real users

nospam wrote:
> In article <hfj6pt$kgf$1@posting2.glorb.com>, WindsorFox
> <windsor.fox.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I gave you the specs according to the web site on that monitor. You
>> presented some spec from wikipedia.
>
> i asked how many pixels the acer display had and you said it was wxga
> and a tn panel. since you did not say how many pixels it had, i cited
> the definition of wxga.
>
>>> it's also completely bogus to compare the budget model of one brand
>>> with a midrange model of another and pretend that's a valid comparison.
>> Purely by those words I agree, but the specs for the $500 Acer I
>> bought are equal to or better than the specs for the $1000 iMac.
>
> they aren't equal at all. there are numerous differences.
>
>>> apparently pc world magazine must be run by mac fanbois because they
>>> found macs to be cheaper:
>>> <http://www.pcworld.com/article/148032/mac_vs_windows_laptops.html>
>>>
>>> and comparing last year's imacs, the mac is a better deal:
>>> <http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune....penheimer-new-
>>> imac-a-better-deal-than-dell-hp/>
>>>
>>> ...given Apple's reputation for premium pricing: he found the new
>>> iMacs to be "a better value than competing Windows-based products."
>> All I can say is he doesn't know how to shop.
>
> always an excuse.
>
>> First, I never did a
>> laptop comparison, but I would be willing to bet I can buy one with the
>> same specs as an Mac for the same or less $. If I get bored during the
>> Holidays I'll do that.
>
> go for it. and be sure it's the same specs.
>
>> Except that the specs of this Acer are the same as the iMac that was
>> available at the time it was bought. I actively compared them before the
>> purchase. Since she used the Ubuntu machine I had for a month without
>> the first "How do I do this" question, I considered the iMac as an option.
>
> you only compared a few of the specs and called it equivalent. you even
> said that the acer does not have wireless and has a lower resolution
> and lower quality display. that's *not* equivalent.

He probably compared the specs that were IMPORTANT TO HIM. This does
not necessarily include all, or even most, specs. Even if he considered
all specs it doesn't mean that all were equally important.

Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> He probably compared the specs that were IMPORTANT TO HIM. This does
> not necessarily include all, or even most, specs. Even if he considered
> all specs it doesn't mean that all were equally important.

After 'nospam' listed many differences, he acknowledged (by saying
those don't matter to the user), yet in a later post said twice that
there were no differences.

OTOH, it is true that most people do not need the features and quality
that Apple offers in hardware. Unfortunately, most of them, due to
lack of expertise DO need features and quality that Microsoft DOESN'T
offer in software.

But if they have a gamer friend, that friend probably uses and
understands Windows, and may be technical enough to reinstall
for them when they need it.

--
Wes Groleau

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you
what can't be done and why. Then do it.
-- Robert A. Heinlein