Dell - Truth or Lies?

[Some Guy]

HP  quote "USED" to be good, as i say again all new systems come with nothing but Intel Media accelerator Chipsets, the way of the failsuar is when intel starts making things other than processors to better thier chance in the markets when really no-one gives a flying shit about thier crappy and cheap-ass ideals to even attempt a graphics card in the first place.

[Silvermink]

Intel GMA's one plus is that it's cheap. My work laptop (HP Compaq nc6400) has one and it's okay for what I use my work laptop for, but I'm sure it would choke and die horribly the first time I tried to do anything remotely demanding with it.

Its management software is retarded, though, if only for the reason that its dual-display controls override Windows', making it impossible to use Windows' display controls to swap my two monitors (they keep reverting to the original configuration unless you make the changes through GMA's management software).

[Kithop]

Nail on the head right there - the whole reason Intel even bothers, I bet, is to lure motherboard manufacturers with cheap-as-dirt onboard video, thus tying the end user into Intel's much more expensive and profitable CPUs.  Why did AMD go to the trouble of buying ATI, if not to try and compete with them on this level, too?

The more I follow it, the more I start to dislike Intel's practices and feel bad for giving them money (though I've given AMD and ATI a fair share, too, and it's not all roses there).

When you start talking about cut-every-possible-corner manufacturers like Dell, too, I'm not surprised onboard GPUs are so popular.  Their customer base is looking for the cheapest computer possible, and that's all.  They don't care how many jiggawatts or microhurts it is, they just see cheap, and maybe how big the screen is, and if it can hold all their music/photos and go on the internet.

The elitist part of me wishes I were a bit older so I could have better experienced the days when only techies worked with computers, before they'd become so commoditized that people treat them like they would their fridge or microwave or TV. >.<

[Silvermink]

Yeah, many people barely even need a computer. They just need a little pad that allows them to access the Internet and maybe download photos from a camera and a couple of other things. Low-end laptops are about as close as you get currently.

[Kithop]

Hence the whole netbook craze, right now.  Man, I'm sort of hoping this whole Android-on-ARM-netbook thing takes off and eats MS's lunch. :D

[Vanilla Skunk]

I'll say what I know about Dell.

Laptops and desktops:  Yup, they're cheap, if you go Inspiron or Dimension.  They also have a "cost effective" business line, Lattitude and Optiplex.  The Optiplexes these days are looking like those itty bitty purolator stations that will fit on a TV tray with the kb and mouse.

Then you want a performance machine once you get sick of the cheap $#!~ and you see their XPS line.  It's like an orgasm of lightshows, and onboard graphics that performs, from nVidia or ATi.

Then you say you want to play games, and they have an XPS Gaming line, with dual GPU nvidia cards plugged into PCI-X slots, two of them SLi'd or whatever you cal the ATi flavour of linked cards, properly cooled, and ooh the lightshow.  BTW the monitors are Sony Trinitron with a Dell emblem on them... always have been.

And for the techies who need servers, Dell is one of the many hot swap kings.  Hot swap power supplies, hard drives, even processors.  I have one of their P3 models, and I was surprised when I was able to remove a CPU without the whole thing crashing out.

Do your research, guys.  I've actually seen just as many XPS's come into the repair shop I used to work for as the dimensions and inspirons... but HP takes the cake.  I've had the entire bench filled with HP's on a number of ocasions.

[Silvermink]

Yeah, my 9400 is basically an XPS M1710 minus the fancy lights. I think that's probably why you can't get the really good graphics options on the 9400s anymore - it came to like $600 less.