Dell- "you need Dual core to use the internet and play mp3s at the same time!"

[Morgoth]

Not sure if this is the right forum section but..

Anyone else irritated/bemused by the ridiculous claims made sometimes about the PC specifications you allegedly need to do simple tasks that even a pentium 2 could handle? I'm sure that some of the PC magazines who perpetuate this kind of nonsense have actually themselves admitted on multiple occasions that the gain you get from newer, faster processors, is not really that significant for most users, and that any modern PC is very capable for most programs that aren't games.

Yet they also seem to suggest that somehow, the minimum spec needed for simple tasks is increasing at a phenomenal rate. Probably soon they'll be saying you will need a quad core QX6700 processor to use email.

I'd never make the mistake of saying that you'd never need spec higher than a certain level, because the demands of software are changing all the time, but there is a certain amount of marketing lunacy involved in the continual push to get people buying newer, better processors.

The most stunning example of ridiculously misleading, marketing stupidity about specifications is this advert that was showing on TV not long ago. I think it was for Dell. In it, the suggestion is made that you should get a dual core processor in your new Dell PC. Why? Have you ever noticed that sometimes, you want to do more than one thing at once on your computer? With a Dual core processor, you finally can! A dual core processor allows you to multitask, so that you can, for example, go on the internet at the same time as listening to music!



Oh, wow, thanks Dell! I didn't know I needed a dual core processor in order to use the internet and WinAmp at the same time! Here was me thinking.. well, I could do it on a Pentium 2 400mhz PC, so why shouldn't I be able to do it on a modern machine! But now I have seen the light- obviously my single core AMD 3200+ is inadequate for this most strenuous task!

That's actually such a deeply dishonest attempt to play on people's ignorance that it seems strange that it was legal to say it. Surely even people swayed by Dell PC adverts on TV are going to think back and realise that they can already have more than one program open at the same time, even on their crappy old PCs, maybe even ones at their workplace.

Similar lunacy comes from the ever changing 'minimum spec' recommended for PCs in 'Computer Shopper', now above that of my 1.5 year old PC. The implication is always that a cheaper PC, or any PC towards the minimum spec end of the spectrum, will do you for 'email, word processing and the internet', but nothing much else. They suggest also that last years mid range PC is this years useless-crap that-can-only-do-email PC. I don't think they've changed the basic description of what a 'minimum spec' PC can do in several years. Even the lowest spec PC these days is capable of more than just email, word processing and the internet. And if that's all you want a PC for, you could get by with something much older and cheaper, like an Athlon XP processor or a Pentium 3 (not that I really recommend it).

I understand, that, as the average speed of PCs goes up and they become more and more capable, for a given price, software companies often just raise the bar by producing software that relies on better hardware and puts a heavier load on the processor and RAM, takes up more space on the hard drive, and requires a better graphics card. This is of course especially true of games.

Also, there is a certain logic to computer shopper's 'minimum specifications' for a new PC, as a faster machine will be more likely to be of use in the future. It's just the claims that somehow, that these capable processors not actually good enough for anything but the most basic things which strike me as wrong.

I think I'm right in saying that the speed gains of the last few years have not really been all that momentous. I can't help but feel there's been a sort of leveling off of processor speed. AMD and intel have (probably sensibly) mostly abandoned the ghz race, and introduced new technologies, such as 64 bit processors, and dual core, to try and provide speed gains and more importantly to make people think that they are getting a better, faster product. A lot of it most likely hype, because the hardware is moving too fast for the software manufacturers - things aren't optimised in general for 64 bit or dual core as I understand it, though I could be wrong about the dual core part there.

[staffsMike]

It's kind of hard to get a dell laptop without some sort of dual core processor now.

Dual core sounds like super sci-fi tech to people who don't know anything..when i told someone they had a dual core laptop at work their jaw almost hit the floor..they love it...think its amazing..

Not many things are optimized for 64bit yet but some 3D programs are and other high end stuff.

Quad core's are very useful I think. When you see them in action you understand why they are "needed" for certain tasks..time is money afterall

You're right of course about not needing dual core.. i'm tying this on my 1.6ghz centrino laptop with 512mb of ram, watching a dvd and downloading

It's just marketing and when you know too much about certain things..marketing will always seem stupid to you.

[acrobat]

yeah its annoying. It just goes to show that these companies are not "reputable". They are either incompetent and giving bad advice, or they are just flat out lying.

It was also similar when I ordered this broadband connection from Virgin media. I said, "I'd like to sign up to Virgin media broadband", not "I am a spaz and need you to take care of me". And yet, the guy on the phone reeled off everything I had already read on their website, and then said, "Ahh you are a gamer, you will need the 10mb connection". I felt like biting his head off, but I just calmly explained that he was talking complete sh*te. I think I said, "Thats actually not true. Infact, until recently I was playing online games with a 56k modem.... I then had 512mb broadband and gaming was pretty perfect. I now have a 2mb connection and its more than fast enough for any online game".

It does annoy me, because people don't deserve to be lied to. If someone calls them up saying they "need internet and want to play games", then they will just be BS'ed into paying for a 10mb connection which is massively over the top.

Oh well. Thats the modern world.

[dk04_2]

Don't forget these PCs usually come with Norton leaving only 400mhz left per core anyway

[Funkstar]

Originally Posted by dk04_2

Don't forget these PCs usually come with Norton leaving only 400mhz left per core anyway

QFT!

[acrobat]

Originally Posted by dk04_2

Don't forget these PCs usually come with Norton leaving only 400mhz left per core anyway

heheh

[TooNice]

Maybe I've just grown cynical, but isn't it expected that those companies are not going to give the most impartial advice? Honestly, But I think it's their loss if the best their marketing team can come up with is something that most people would be sensible enough to know better (dual core for basic multitask).

[peterb]

Why do you think the larger xcompanies say "xxx recommends Windows xxx"? Because MS pay them a premium to do it (or give them better discounts on the OEM licences) Of couse Jore public sees that and thinks "If xx recommends it, it must be good"!

[staffsMike]

Personally I think if you are willing to take the advice of the company trying to sell you something.. you've already lost lol

[joshwa]

A company recently put out their specifications needed for a web based application, in it they suggest you NEED a minimum of a 2.7ghz P4 to run the website!! Now all the users think they need to buy new PCs... only they'll get confused when they end up with a dual core 2.0ghz CPU on their desk... and STILL think they're below spec!!!!

[jjcave]

Originally Posted by staffsMike

Personally I think if you are willing to take the advice of the company trying to sell you something.. you've already lost lol

Hehe

[alsenior]

Originally Posted by joshwa

A company recently put out their specifications needed for a web based application, in it they suggest you NEED a minimum of a 2.7ghz P4 to run the website!! Now all the users think they need to buy new PCs... only they'll get confused when they end up with a dual core 2.0ghz CPU on their desk... and STILL think they're below spec!!!!

BUT DUAL CORE 2GHZ MEANS 4.0GHZ DOESN'T IT ?

[staffsMike]

I've got a friend who swears blind his p4 2.8ghz is better than an E6600 @ stock settings.. oh yeah they exist..and they out number us!! lol

[Clunk]

[staffsMike]

Originally Posted by Clunk

I was waiting for you to do that.. you don't disappoint me haha

[-N!CK-]

the worst i've seen is someone trying to sell a quad core on ebay and multiplying the clock speed by 4, and just the other specs listed implies they know nothing really