Originally posted by Hoodlum
View Post
This is a console/TV-only resolution. PC games are typically run at 1280x1024 and 1680x1050, with 1024x768, 1440x900, 1920x1080 and 1920x1200 trailing far behind (source: Steam hardware survey). Only one of these resolutions comes close to the 720p baseline you like to quote - yes, you can build a cheap PC to game at such low resolutions, but the number of PC gamers that do so is vanishingly small (check the survey).
You argue that old PCs can be upgraded cheaply to play games, so there isn't any cost advantage in favor of consoles. I argue that few people upgrade such old machines to play games - they either buy new ones (cost disadvantage) or buy dedicated consoles. If you factor in continuous PC upgrades required to play the latest games (new GPU every 2-3 years), the cost disadvantage of PCs becomes even more obvious.
Pretty much anything with a Core 2 duo, i7 or a Turion II processor and a dedicated ATI or Nvidia card is capable of being a "desktop replacement" these days. Which covers almost anything above the "budget" range, basically.
Besides, you won't find high-end graphics and CPUs on anything smaller than 17''.
Sales Statistics:
"The third quarter of 2008 was the first time when notebook PC shipments exceeded desktops, with 38.6 million units versus 38.5 million units."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laptop#Sales .
"The third quarter of 2008 was the first time when notebook PC shipments exceeded desktops, with 38.6 million units versus 38.5 million units."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laptop#Sales .
I guess that the difference lies between worldwide vs US-only shipments.
@deanjo: I picked Apple precisely because of its marketing machine. No matter how much you dislike Apple (I certainly do), you have to admit they are trend-setters. If Apple is advertizing 7+ hours batteries, it means that the public wants or will soon want them (It doesn't even matter if it's false marketing). You can observe this trend in laptop reviews: anything less than 3 hours is now considered something between bad and borderline acceptable (but worse than a macbook), while two years ago 3 hours batteries were considered just fine.
Comment