Comments on: Specs: Not Meaningless. But Getting There.

By: No Specs Please, We’re Apple | Technologizer

No Specs Please, We’re Apple | Technologizer — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:35:11 +0000

[...] some levels, I get Apple’s thinking here. I’ve written that tech specs are simply less important than they use to be: It would be a lousy idea to buy (or avoid) the iPhone 3G S based on its clockspeed or the amount [...]

By: Alan Moore

Alan Moore — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 15:20:24 +0000

I miss the phonebook sized Computer Shoppers. I miss comparing Zeos to Gateway. I miss trying to find the elusive EGA video card for my Epson Equity I at a price I could afford. I miss drooling over my new-to-me PS/2 55SX and Windows 3.1 with COLORS. But I also don’t miss DIP switches, floppy floppies, 20MB hard drives, CONFIG.SYS, and AUTOEXEC.BAT. It’s a lot easier these days to buy a computer based on the processor, RAM, and the color of the case. For the most part, the system will do everything you want it to do, unless you need blisteringly fast graphics for Couterstrike or serious video rendering power. “Yes, I have a 2-tone Claret Red and Quicksilver Core 2 Quad with 6GB of RAM, it’s better than my b*tchin Camaro!”

Uh, which I don’t, I have an ex-corporate lease Dell GX260 P4 1.8 with 2GB of RAM, a 40GB HD, and Windows 2000. But I have a dream…and even without Computer Shopper…my heart will go on…

By: Aaron Pressman

Aaron Pressman — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 21:44:10 +0000

I’d add one other factor — the demise of the phone-book-thick-sized computer magazines like the Computer Shopper’s and PC Magazine’s of yore. I remember in my teens and early 20s, reading every page and every advertisement and all the SPECS! And it was all part of being informed about the market and the value of your own PC and whether it was time to upgrade yet and exactly which five models would be in the running for your upgrade dollars.

By: Dave Barnes

Dave Barnes — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:04:53 +0000

Think stereo equipment.

In the 1970s, I would set my price point (usually $300 for a component) and then analyze all the candidates to death. For example, THD or Total Harmonic Distortion was an important metric.

The, one day, I realized that EVERY component at my price point was better than I would ever need. So, I bought on brand and how sexy it looked. Not one second given to the specs.

Why should PCs be any different?

In 2005, I switched from building my own machines to letting Steve Jobs telling me what to buy. My life is certainly simpler in this regard and I can devote more brain cycles to other aspects of my life.

By: Vulpine

Vulpine — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 15:23:03 +0000

It’s been proven more than once that it really doesn’t matter what specs you have; it’s how those specs are used. One of the biggest ‘spec’ arguments over the years was based on CPU clock speeds and how certain computers with an obviously-slower clock speed could process data twice as quickly as their competition. This sort of thing is still going on today, despite the fact that clock speeds are now essentially passé.

No, specs aren’t as critical as they used to be. What’s important is how well the computer does the job. That’s a product of the software and Operating System more than specs alone. Proof of this is quite clear when comparing the operating speed, for instance, of Windows XP, Vista and Windows 7. Put all three on otherwise equal machines and XP before SP3 was faster than Vista. Windows 7, a somewhat cleaned-up and more efficient version of Vista, is faster than Vista itself. This isn’t specs, this is software efficiency doing what it’s supposed to do.

Problem is, until 7 and Snow Leopard are released, system specs are still going to play a major role in how quickly things are done.

By: RulesRoulette

RulesRoulette — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 15:20:14 +0000

I agree, I was the same with every computer I have (and about ram and DOS, i used a lot of time trying to use the 2 megs in wolfestein 3d). But now is not necessary to be the same