You tell that hunk of junk, BR.

? Well, that wasn't my point so I still don't know why you wanna laugh @budzos.

My point was that, if you buy "nice" enough parts (like all parts of an Apple system are "nice"), you end up with a PC that costs about the same as a Mac.

Lol @ you.


>> ^jmzero:

I was gonna list my PC specs and their costs and then realized what a waste of time that is. Just for one example my case cost $400+, not $250. It's a big giant black hunk of brushed aluminum. It's bad-ass.

Meh, if you'd finished your price list, and assuming you went about "$400 case level" on all your components, I think what you would have demonstrated is how much more PC you can get for $2500 (just as I demonstrated how you can get that same hardware for much cheaper).
And I wasn't lol'ing at you for being a Mac fanboy or something. I was laughing at the idea that there's general price parity between Macs and PCs. There just isn't.
(Again, to avoid some pedantry, that doesn't mean people shouldn't get a Mac If you will be happier on a Mac, the price premium you pay on a model like this will almost certainly pay itself over the years.)

I was gonna list my PC specs and their costs and then realized what a waste of time that is. Just for one example my case cost $400+, not $250. It's a big giant black hunk of brushed aluminum. It's bad-ass.



Meh, if you'd finished your price list, and assuming you went about "$400 case level" on all your components, I think what you would have demonstrated is how much more PC you can get for $2500 (just as I demonstrated how you can get that same hardware for much cheaper).

And I wasn't lol'ing at you for being a Mac fanboy or something. I was laughing at the idea that there's general price parity between Macs and PCs. There just isn't.

(Again, to avoid some pedantry, that doesn't mean people shouldn't get a Mac If you will be happier on a Mac, the price premium you pay on a model like this will almost certainly pay itself over the years.)

Lol @ me? I'm a PC user, but not a fanboy either way. I have never used Apple because (in the past few years) I find their marketing obnoxious and I like to tinker with my PC. I do have an iPad and an iPhone.

I was gonna list my PC specs and their costs and then realized what a waste of time that is. Just for one example my case cost $400+, not $250. It's a big giant black hunk of brushed aluminum. It's bad-ass. Never have I looked at an Apple product and thought "bad-ass."


>> ^jmzero:

Or you could buy good PCs and see the price is pretty much the same.

Lol @budzos. Mac people have always said this, and it has always been funny. They used to have some magic wiggle room because so many parts were different (different processor, especially) - but that's mostly gone now. OK, so here you can get a quad core Mac Pro for $2499. Let's see what those parts it lists are worth:
Processor: $316 (here's the specific model)
Graphics Card: $109 (here's actually a slightly better model)
6GB of RAM: $100 (good RAM for that premium)
1TB hard disk: $100 (decent hard disk for that)
Motherboard: $250 (let's get a nice one)
Case: $250 (let's get a nice one)
Optical drive: $100
So far we're at $1225. Maybe they've got some Apple magic (whoo! Superdrive!) to make up a couple hundred more dollars - but it's going to take a lot to spend another $1275 (ie. more than double). If you prefer a Mac, go ahead and get one - but pretending they're the same price is silly.
To be clear, I don't hate Apple and some of their products are reasonably priced now. A Macbook Air, for example, has been a good deal for a while and is still much nicer than its competitors. But their hardware has historically been way more expensive, and lots of it still has a significant premium attached.

In reply to this comment by lurgee:
happy day of birth you hunk of rotting bovine byproducts


Thanks @lurgee !!!!!!

happy day of birth you hunk of rotting bovine byproducts

What a hunk!!

>> ^JiggaJonson:

With the votes being 1/1/28/1, you've touched on something that is clearly, as you put it, divisive. </sarcasm>
It may be divisive among the troglodytes that make up a good hunk of society, but I would hope, for most who are not ignorant of what evolution is, that this is not even a question. What @zombieater brings up about abiogenesis is something I agree with. @gwiz665 makes a good point too. It's just hard to answer a question like this when the question is not very specific.
On another note, I also don't believe extraterrestrial evolution is that far fetched; with The Voyager 1 reaching the boundaries of our solar system, I think it's certainly possible that even we are colonizing a few cells if by some chance they make their way to a habitable planet. That situation, however, requires that Darwinian evolution exists.


Wow, the result... I figured we'd have a few more for Creationism and especially Theistic Evolution, BUT all I can say is that I'm guessing education (YES, this is a big player!) played a large part into the outcome of this poll. The only two things that could be making such a large play on this poll is, one: education--this is pretty straight forward, but basically everyone that voted had a considerable higher source of education (or perhaps even better grades, thus more attention and better retention of the knowledge they learned). Two: cultural (or better said sometimes as: community education), this could be due to the literal source of where this poll is located such as in this case, "The Internet", meaning it attracts a certain type of person and ONLY persons that have access to the Internet (which already means that those people most likely have access to things you only commonly see in a First World society--especially if it seems to be a common place discussion...); second, the culture and community around the person voting. In this case we could say that the culture and community are both the Internet. The last choice is of course your personal one; we all have it in the end, but this poll was taken on the Internet and shown to have a stark difference between a "real world" poll and a tongue-and-cheek version.

Of course the original was the U.S. only and also was across all types of people. It would be interesting to go back to those polls and have them mark out the reasoning for why they made the choices they did. Was it religion? Was it religion, but evolution is on their minds they just don't think science has proved it yet...? Was it science? Was it what they were taught (belief)? Did they guess or just pick what they thought was right? Lets see a poll on that as well.
----------------
For example if you go to this page here: wiki-answers: Do you believe in Creationism or Evolution and why?

It REALLY is a Creationism page! Sure they "try" to be nice to evolution, but apparently whoever understands evolution there knows about it in a 1970's Junior High textbook read-through half-assed way, looking back after 47 years they wrote a very brief summary of what they "thought it was (after writing some stuff down from Wikipedia too flesh it out)" and then left it for the masses.

They even put up links, plenty of creationist, creationism, or young-earth scientist links, BUT when they got to evolution they put up:...not even the Wikipedia entry. THEN they call it an answer on a page were people go looking for answers and this is a page that gets HIGH HITS from Google! They can barely even explain what the word evolution is, they know know enough to not get "clowned" by every single person.

BUT, here's the thing I bet the majority of the people that voted yes for evolution on this poll COULD in fact tear into this person and make a mockery out of that page. The page tries to be friendly to what I would call: "Atheist Suckers". They come on soft and nice, telling you how religion got you down, but guess what there is so much evidence that is just plain strange--it makes no sense.

As I said though, there is absolutely no page to back up their claims; just some names of idiotic scientists that most likely were Dentists and decided it was their job to tell you that carbon dating is fake, and so on and so forth.
----------------
To me it is as clear as day, but maybe I'll FORCE someone to make a poll besides me on this subject. Why did you vote for evolution, creationism, intelligent design, or the aliens (don't forget comedy for the alien choice ), or maybe just quickly post below as it would much quicker get the job done and allow for every response in the book, including multi-responses. Maybe even tell what choices you were originally if you changed over time and HOW those choices changed (was it due to faith or education)!?

With the votes being 1/1/28/1, you've touched on something that is clearly, as you put it, divisive. </sarcasm>

It may be divisive among the troglodytes that make up a good hunk of society, but I would hope, for most who are not ignorant of what evolution is, that this is not even a question. What @zombieater brings up about abiogenesis is something I agree with. @gwiz665 makes a good point too. It's just hard to answer a question like this when the question is not very specific.

On another note, I also don't believe extraterrestrial evolution is that far fetched; with The Voyager 1 reaching the boundaries of our solar system, I think it's certainly possible that even we are colonizing a few cells if by some chance they make their way to a habitable planet. That situation, however, requires that Darwinian evolution exists.

>> ^Fletch:

Am I the only one who thinks this is stupid? Especially with no communication with whoever is pulling you. Just one scrape into coral can mess you up badly. And when you're bleeding, you aren't just "flying underwater" any more. You're bait. <img class="smiley" src="http://cdn.videosift.com/cdm/emoticon/smile.gif">


Might be just me, but it looks like the sort of thing, that when you're speeding toward that big hunk of coral, you would... oh I don't know... maybe... LET GO???

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by Issykitty.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Time-For-Timer-I-hanker-for-a-hunk-a-CHEESE

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by jonny. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

Government's spend money to get into space for one reason only, the military advantage it provides. It means the capability to hit a target anywhere on the planet, and it's the entire reason that the cold war states ever started the space race. The race to the moon was just an extension of that. The important technology being the ability to get the heaviest object possible into orbit, again with major military implications as even just a hunk of rock in orbit is a serious weapon.

The lag of space exploration and advances has been the same. The military advantages are tapped out and there's no good reason to go much further, so funding is short.

you don't want a big hunk of cheese.