General Mac hardware discussions forum: Why do mac's have weak (256) shared graphics on most mac's

You can buy weak PCs too. If you need to push the video card up, look at the Mac Pro.
Bob

But what force is there here? You ultimately decide to buy or not buy. No force that I can see is being applied.

What else can I say?

im talking about the fact that there is nothing higher then mb graphic cards with mac's. i see a lot of pc's with 1gb standard.

I think by now you should realize that Mac's for the most part are made up of laptop type hardware. That makes the iMac compact and so is the Mini. Obviously Mac's have never attracted hard core gamer's and so the gaming software industry has not responded. No big game titles no need for better graphics. But your miss guided thinking that more RAM on a graphics card makes it better. 256Mb ram is as good as 512MB if the game does not use anymore then 256MB. Headroom does not buy you a lot more speed. Where as a faster graphics CPU would definitely be more help. Apple is supplying very good graphics for most people. Its a step above Intel in graphics and it provides enough video power. Except for gamer's Mac's are good computers.

Specs on paper don't always reflect real-world performance. If you're so concerned with Macs' video capabilities (which they have been lauded for countless times over the years), put your own card in or get a PC if it bothers you so much. Apple chooses not to offer more powerful cards on some of their products. Ok. At least with Snow Leopard, the system utilizes OpenCL capabilities to make better use of the available video horsepower even when the computer is handling regular processes. You get your money's worth with Apple's hardware, in my book.

-BMF

is not configured in the same way as the iMac.

Just for starters, you have failed to mention that the monitor for your "much cheaper price" Dell is smaller and has a lower resolution than the iMac 27" LCD.
I also don't see anything about a built-in camera.
What? No Firewire?

The Hard drive on the Dell is half the size.

Although the processors are the same, it brings up that old adage, "it's not what you've got, it's the way that you use it"
OS X's use of the processor is much more efficient than Windows, plus, Apple designs the logic board and the OS which makes the whole thing a much better proposition than the Dell.
Bottom line, that machine is still running Windows and will still have all the Windows problems associated with it.

However, if the price is all you are concerned about, go with the Dell and "save" $650.

Seriously, and to answer your question. No, the Dell is not better than the new iMac.

P

everyone has one.

Interesting that Apple are the only computer company that currently does not have declining sales figures.

P

i'll tell you what i do like about mac's: Build Quality, Simplicity, apperently Simple & more secure software compared to window's pc's. what i dont like about mac's is overpricing & lack of options on the few upgrades that are available. Also unecessary hardware (on new imac's 1,499 and up) like 1tb Hd's with no option to go lower and save some $$$ if you do not need a tb of storage, built in camera again no option to remove it to save $$$, your stuck with it, and monitor options , glossy screens on all mac's except on 15-17inch macbook pro's but to get antiglare screen you pay extra. Also with pc's catching on to apple's lead on energy efficency. It begs the question as to who's is an overall better value pc's or mac's.

Ok, so it's been determined, apparently, that you think the Dell is a better value if it has some similar specs and is technically cheaper up front. The main difference between Macs and PCs is the operating system and its software. That's it. Apple uses almost the same lot of components that many other manufacturers purchase themselves. No doubt that there will be "conflicting" prices in the eyes of some people, such as yourself. That said, Apple has quite the ability and flair to design incredible machines such as the new iMacs or MacBooks. Other, high-end PCs might offer the same C2D or i5/i7 processors, but you have to take everything else into account as well.

Why would you want a smaller hard drive? The fact that the standard size is now 1TB on all of the models, save the lowest-tier iMac, is a great improvement when compared to its predecessors, as Peter says. And yet even that iMac has a 3.06Ghz C2D chip. That's quite impressive. 4GB RAM standard across the board... And technically, with a starting price of $1200, you're getting quite a lot, with plenty of room to upgrade memory and hard drive capacities if you choose to. There's plenty of bang for the buck, but you would rather them cut the price by a small margin just to save a few dollars? In the long run, I don't think it would matter so much. After all, having built-in iSight, FireWire, amongst other capabilities, is extremely convenient for most people. Easy chatting online, fast and reliable data transfers from cameras and hard drives... etc. Must I go on?

But wait a minute. Earlier you were complaining about the graphics on the lower-end Macs, right? Well, only the base 21.5-inch iMac lacks a dedicated graphics card. With 4GB of RAM (and a max of 8GB for that particular model), there's more than plenty enough memory available for the shared graphics. The others possess the same NVIDIA chipset with true cards. There is so much power for OS X to use with these new hardware arrangements, and I am sure that it does use it all. Can Windows dig into the hardware as far as Apple's system?

Those are but a few of the many benefits of a Mac. No, they're not perfect, but the whole package is simply a good deal. If many of these capabilities and options that you feel are unnecessary or pointless add too much to the cost, then don't get one. If you don't want it, don't buy it. You should understand that the fact that the items you mentioned are included with the Mac, and not added at the customer's expense. The value lies in the mind of the beholder, so to speak. I'm not going to tell you which is better for the money because it really just depends on what you want your computer to do. It's your call. Hope you make a decision that you're comfortable with.

-BMF

I felt that had been sufficiently implied and stated to a certain extent. Forgive me if I did not make that clear enough.

You just have to look at the big picture to see what you're getting. Apple offers some well-rounded hardware configurations, and the performance and usability of their computers reflects that. Sure, some Windows PCs are going to have similar components, but they're also going to have different ones, different software, and some flavor of Windows that "could" be as fully-featured as OS X. Macs come with one system; Windows comes in many versions, each adding more and more features as you go up the ladder. You also have to shell out more for AV software and essential programs that aren't included with Windows PCs, whereas the only thing you would really need to install on a Mac (assuming you're new to Macs and are content with Apple's consumer programs) is a productivity program suite of some sort, be it Office, iWork, or one of the many free alternatives online. There are plenty of factors.

Visit an Apple Store and just play around with a new Mac. See what you do or don't like about the system, because that's really the key element here. OS X sets Apple apart. You have to understand and perhaps appreciate the ease of use and the flow of the Mac OS to truly enjoy using it. Windows runs well on a Mac, but running just Windows on one turns it into any other PC that can't fully utilize its operating system. Windows just isn't coded to take advantage of all the components out there. Again, that's a very distinct difference between the systems. You'll find a lower-end Mac can at times compare favorably with a theoretically more powerful PC because of this reason. Go try out OS X, see how fast it is, and whether you'd like it or not. That can help you better determine its value.

-BMF

"OS X's use of the processor is much more efficient than Windows, plus, Apple designs the logic board and the OS which makes the whole thing a much better proposition than the Dell.
Bottom line, that machine is still running Windows and will still have all the Windows problems associated with it."

Look:

Macs account for about 10%, give or take, of the computing population. Any malware that exists for it can only harm the computer provided that the user (you) authorizes it do so. You will never catch a virus for a Mac as they don't exist. No one has spent the time to develop and unleash a true virus for the platform. OS X requires an administrator to authorize all system changes, so it would be difficult for an unfriendly program to ruin your computer or compromise your files and records if you didn't give it access. If you have a private, residential internet connection or service in your home, with a router using a standard firewall, you should have nothing to worry about whatsoever. Safari and Firefox also have built-in malware and anti-phishing features to help protect you from fraudulent sites and scams. Windows on the other hand... well, I think I'll let you Google that.

Peter and I have both said that only you can determine if a new Mac is worth it or not. It's your choice to switch. As I posted earlier, you should probably try one before you considering purchasing. If you are still confused about which is better, may I suggest a comparison or two. Or you know, you can try everyone's favorite search engine. Read some reviews of both the systems and the actual computers you are looking at and then pick which you think is best. If you still have questions, I'd recommend rereading everything we have all discussed over the past few days. And then go to an Apple Store or Best Buy. They let you try out Macs there, believe it or not. And who knows, maybe you'll find what you're looking for.

-BMF