** UnhandledExceptionEventHandler :: OFFICIAL LC / CHATTER THREAD ** - Page 87 - Programming -- Two Plus Two Poker Forums

gaming_mouse · 08-25-2011, 11:42 AM

Good answers ITT, D&T

jjshabado · 08-25-2011, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeathAndTaxes

I never once said Air was overpriced.

Someone said "The air is good because it is light" someone else stated "the air is good based on its specs alone. Hard to find a laptop with those specs for under $1000".

I am parapharsing both.

I said:

Quote:

I haven't seen any notebooks with the basic air specs for significantly less than $1000.

and

Quote:

I don't think there are any laptops that beat the air's performance and price (at least not by very much).

When I wrote this I was thinking basically around the $800 or less mark. You found one that was comparable for $675. Definitely lower than I thought for a computer with those specs. I concede my original post was an exaggeration.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeathAndTaxes

So IF one wants an Air for the intangibles (build quality, ability to run OS X, Apple legendary customer support, "coolness" factor, insane weight and size, etc) then it likely is a good value.

I don't think the bolded are intangibles ('coolness' I agree we can ignore). I though the first version of your post also included things like the backlit keyboard, mag-safe connector, and battery life. Those are all valid specs that are independent of the size. For example, in the links you posted it's another $65 to get the one year extended warranties. So I still don't agree with the following statement when you compare everything (but still ignoring size like I had originally stated).

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeathAndTaxes

It isn't that powerful compared to equivalent priced laptops. Actually it is near the back of the pack.

Also, lol at rounding $75 to ~$50.

**_dave_** · 08-25-2011, 01:43 PM

macbook airs sure are cheap in the US, we're looking at £849 for the lowest model lol. It's certainly an overpriced, underpowered ripoff over here.

gaming_mouse · 08-25-2011, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _dave_

It's certainly an overpriced, underpowered ripoff over here.

Isn't that Apple's slogan?

:P

jjshabado · 08-25-2011, 02:11 PM

Paging rebutter of inaccurate information....

**kerowo** · 08-25-2011, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _dave_

macbook airs sure are cheap in the US, we're looking at £849 for the lowest model lol. It's certainly an overpriced, underpowered ripoff over here.

Is that pre or post VAT? There is a big bitch fest going on in Australia about the price difference between the states and most of it turns out to be because prices here include tax and in the states they don't. That and reasonable currency exchange padding explain most of the hardware cost differences. Album costs is something else all together though.

**_dave_** · 08-25-2011, 05:47 PM

post VAT, but it's way more than a reasonable padding for exchange rates, and completely out of line with the likes of Acer, ASUS, Sony etc. which while are more expensive than what $usd prices we see on newegg it always is.

at a lowball of current exchange rate, 1.6usd = 1gbp, then adding +20% for VAT - a $799 macbook air should cost almost exactly £599. the other way round, we pay ~$1132 pre-tax / $1358 in VAT

Zurvan · 08-25-2011, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gaming_mouse

Yabbut literally it could be just minimalist, just as light, just as usable, and still look a lot better. Like just through CSS. And it's not like it would be a hard thing to do. Pretty much any decent designer could improve it imo....

What does "improve" mean? Make it prettier?

Who cares if those sites are "pretty"? They are information sources for nerds, who just want their information. They don't want glossy buttons and slick interfaces.

They have near (NEAR) perfect UIs for the function they serve, and a user base that would very vocal about any change to the design - which wouldn't improve usability anyway. It's a high cost (designers are expensive), medium risk (you will likely lose readers, at least temporarily), low reward decision.

jjshabado · 08-25-2011, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zurvan

They have near (NEAR) perfect UIs for the function they serve, and a user base that would very vocal about any change to the design - which wouldn't improve usability anyway. It's a high cost (designers are expensive), medium risk (you will likely lose readers, at least temporarily), low reward decision.

Yeah, just look at how 2+2 users react over every single change to this forum.

gaming_mouse · 08-25-2011, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zurvan

What does "improve" mean? Make it prettier?

Who cares if those sites are "pretty"? They are information sources for nerds, who just want their information. They don't want glossy buttons and slick interfaces.

They have near (NEAR) perfect UIs for the function they serve, and a user base that would very vocal about any change to the design - which wouldn't improve usability anyway. It's a high cost (designers are expensive), medium risk (you will likely lose readers, at least temporarily), low reward decision.

prettier, yes. it matters.

EDIT: also your change objection doesnt explain why it was that way to begin with.

Low Key · 08-26-2011, 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil S

Same thing anyone does when they need anything built, such as a house or a website, when they lack the knowledge of how to do so.

Hire a professional.

Are banks giving out loans for dot com startups still? Or is that a thing of the past, like dinosaur-powered rocket skates?

Quote:

Originally Posted by _dave_

user supplied results makes things tricky, otherwise wordpress / drupal is a good place to start looking?

I don't know what you just said to me, but you opened up, so you special!

Zurvan · 08-26-2011, 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gaming_mouse

prettier, yes. it matters.

Why?

Quote:

EDIT: also your change objection doesnt explain why it was that way to begin with.

Because it doesn't matter. Check out Steve Krug's website. One of the masters of usability; it's plain and ugly. Amazon's original design was horrendous - and massively profitable.

Usability trumps pretty every single time, and pretty and usable is both hard to do and very, very expensive.

gaming_mouse · 08-26-2011, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zurvan

Why?

because we are human.... you can't just pretend our aesthetic reactions aren't part of our experiences.
do you think apple products are so popular just because they are "more usable"?

Quote:

Usability trumps pretty every single time,

i agree with this, doesn't imply pretty doesnt matter.

Quote:

pretty and usable is both hard to do and very, very expensive.

totally disagree. keep in mind there are degrees of pretty, too. it's not a 100% either or thing.

greg nice · 08-26-2011, 10:57 AM

not to mention, "pretty" usually also means unusable. i agree with Zurvan that to do both is hard and is partly why apple is good at what it does

semi-related, i dont know if i found this pic here or what, but i like it

gaming_mouse · 08-26-2011, 11:10 AM

you guys are making this way too complex, or are missing point. For example on Reddit I can find css on userstyles.org that makes it look better and changes the usability not at all. It's not "hard" to take a couple hours and think about your styles and make them a little more pleasing. My initial post was simply pointing out that these massive sites did not even appear to have done that.....