Unfortunately, this deal is no longer available
*
407°
Posted 12 March 2010
£259.97 Ebuyer PC Intel Quad Core Q8200 2GB 320GB Cheaper than parts!!!
Shared by
siliconbits
Joined in 2006
504
569
About this deal
This deal is expired. Here are some options that might interest you:
For those looking for a more substantial deal, try this one hotukdeals.com/ite…ore which comes with twice mem, Windows, 1TB, bluray, 1GB Geforce card.
The computer comes w/o peripherals or OS. Costs less than the price of separate components (£271.18 using parts from Ebuyer).
I've put the prices of the components in brackets.
This superb performance Intel based mATX PC is ideal for use at home or in the office. Optimised for high performance computing requirements, this system utilises high performance components suitable for this size of chassis.
The motherboard at the heart of this Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 Socket 775 system provides onboard LAN, 5.1 channel surround sound and integrated Windows 7 ready 2D/3D graphics. A 320GB SATA hard drive provides ample storage, whilst the 2GB of DDR2 RAM will be plenty to handle most software applications.
Please note that this desktop PC does not come with an operating system. Ebuyer recommends using genuine Microsoft Software and is Windows Vista compatible.
This desktop PC is perfect for anyone looking for a small, durable system for use in at home or as an office system.
Casing + PSU (£20.10)
Intel Core2 Quad Q8200 Processor 2.33Ghz (£149.22 - v expensive though compared to Scan's £110).
2GB DDR2 800MHz (£35.17)
Expandable to 4GB
2 x DIMM slot (1 free)
Hard Drive
320GB SATAII (£33.75)
Optical Drive (13.99)
DVD RW Supermulti
Motherboard (£32.94)
Operating System: None
Display
Monitor Not Included
Input Devices
Keyboard and Mouse - not included
Networking
Network Interface: 10/100M LAN, Realtek® RTL8101E
Dimensions
Width 450mm
Depth 180mm
Height 360mm
Interfaces
1 set 5.1 channel Audio jacks (3 jacks)
1x PS/2 keyboard port
1x PS/2 mouse port
1x Parallel port
1x Serial port
6x USB 2.0 ports
1x RJ45 LAN port
1x VGA port
Warranty
1 Year Manufacturer Warranty
The computer comes w/o peripherals or OS. Costs less than the price of separate components (£271.18 using parts from Ebuyer).
I've put the prices of the components in brackets.
This superb performance Intel based mATX PC is ideal for use at home or in the office. Optimised for high performance computing requirements, this system utilises high performance components suitable for this size of chassis.
The motherboard at the heart of this Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 Socket 775 system provides onboard LAN, 5.1 channel surround sound and integrated Windows 7 ready 2D/3D graphics. A 320GB SATA hard drive provides ample storage, whilst the 2GB of DDR2 RAM will be plenty to handle most software applications.
Please note that this desktop PC does not come with an operating system. Ebuyer recommends using genuine Microsoft Software and is Windows Vista compatible.
This desktop PC is perfect for anyone looking for a small, durable system for use in at home or as an office system.
Casing + PSU (£20.10)
Intel Core2 Quad Q8200 Processor 2.33Ghz (£149.22 - v expensive though compared to Scan's £110).
2GB DDR2 800MHz (£35.17)
Expandable to 4GB
2 x DIMM slot (1 free)
Hard Drive
320GB SATAII (£33.75)
Optical Drive (13.99)
DVD RW Supermulti
Motherboard (£32.94)
Operating System: None
Display
Monitor Not Included
Input Devices
Keyboard and Mouse - not included
Networking
Network Interface: 10/100M LAN, Realtek® RTL8101E
Dimensions
Width 450mm
Depth 180mm
Height 360mm
Interfaces
1 set 5.1 channel Audio jacks (3 jacks)
1x PS/2 keyboard port
1x PS/2 mouse port
1x Parallel port
1x Serial port
6x USB 2.0 ports
1x RJ45 LAN port
1x VGA port
Warranty
1 Year Manufacturer Warranty
More details at Ebuyer has currently Make your First Order and you and the referrer both get £10 Off campaign, if you want to use it you can do so from this .
Community Updates
46 Comments
sorted bysouthwell65: thanks for being an honourable exception. I think that you're falling into the trap of being out of date though. There's not much to learn about an operating system nowadays - their graphical front-ends are all similar and intuitive to the same degree. There aren't many drivers that Linux has problems with nowadays, and indeed because distributions are designed to be installed by the user because they generally don't come pre-installed unlike Windows, they make a great effort to sort these issues out as automatically as possible, as well as being interoperable - if you install Linux on a PC that has Windows on it, it will not only do the partitioning for you and make it dual-boot, but it will mount the Windows partition automatically when running Linux, so that you can read and write all your files on there. Just try doing that the other way round!
In addition, most of the learning about operating systems is now learning about applications. If you are familiar with Firefox on Windows you will be familiar with Firefox on Linux. Same for OpenOffce - of course that is the reason why Microsoft will never produce a version of MS Office for Linux unless they are forced to by government (see brower ballot Windows update).
I am interested in your assertion that Linux needs antivirus software. Can you expand on that please, with some examples?
Edit: having read Zub's posting below, I agree too that you're making some daft comments. You are also being very naive in blaming "flaws" in Linux for the reason why it's not dominant. It really isn't hard to understand, if you do a little research into Microsoft's monopolistic behaviour (€1bn fine from the EC, anyone?), why dominant does not mean best. Particularly ironic for you to mention Betamax in this context - Betamax was actually a superior format to VHS, but died off in the domestic sphere for marketing reasons. So I guess you're complimenting Linux without knowing it with your analogy, which is flawed I'm afraid: because Linux certainly isn't dying off!
I don't think i've ever heard anyone as misinformed as you. First of, it's not the responsibility of the Linux distros to make drivers, that responsibility lies with the manufacturers, do you think Microsoft make the drivers for all the hardware in Windows?
You may need antivirus in Linux if you use it like an idiot, I've never needed it in 10 years.
One of the main reasons people stick with Windows are they are lazy. They don't want to put the extra effort into learning anything new. This is exactly like people using MS office instead of using Openoffice, they are too damn lazy to do the little bit extra work needed.
I don't understand the 'fragmented' comment about Linux either. The whole point of have different GUIs like KDE, Gnome etc. is to let people have a choice.
I'd like you to elaborate on the flaws Linux has as well? Every operating system has flaws but i'd specifically like you to mention what you see as the main flaws.
hotukdeals.com/ite…-co
Although this is a good starter PC if you only need a decent PC for general use but you will need an operating system.
Now your talkin...
My guess is basic on-board graphics, so for DVI or HDMI you would probably need to add a graphics card,
......
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
smile...im only joking...:w00t:
Windows 7 Home Premium is over £80 bought separately but probably less than £20 when pre-installed. A graphics cards is almost a neccesity these days and you can do nothing without a keyboard and mouse. The Dell has a larger hard drive and extra ram too.
This offer seems an attempt to get headlines for a far from usable system so to me is a bit of a shabby deal.
The Dell is a complete computer with a better processor and higher spec.
Voted cold.
I
And the RAM is rather inadequate, 2 GB is the bare minimum nowadays. The single channel RAM is going to limit the performance. So I would upgrade to 4GB ASAP, unfortunately that is the maximum then.
But it is still a really good price.
Get the deal up, rather interested in the deal.:)
ebuyer.com/pro…011
I've been looking at PC and it seems the dell deals are pretty much worth it as the software is included.
You can build a similar ugly PC for just under £200 and you all know you can! just look through Scan or overclockers even Ebuyer.
This motherboard is also very basic, not much in terms of upgradability
I think the point is that a lot of people can build there own system so pay someone else to do it.
I would think the specs on this machine would be more than adequate for lots of users and a much better buy than the Dell. There are likely to be quite a few people out there with a spare keyboard, mouse and copy of XP laying around.
Beyond gaming, is there much you can't do with a Q8200, 2GB of Ram and onboard graphics?
Video editing/converting will be ideal with the CPU just need to up the RAM.
Transcoding doesn't use much RAM at all. Industrial photoshop use would eat the RAM up as would working with humongous spreadsheets in excel...
RAM use hits about 150mb on this machine running 3D modelling programs. 2GB is enough for most if you're not going to be gaming much or running a small subset of RAM hungry apps.
Looks fine to me, nice deal.
Is ram still needing to be in matched sets? If so i wish they would offer memory upgrades from the off as it makes the memory shipped in the unit redundant for future upgrades.
Nope, you just need them to be the same speed and size. There's a few wrinkles to it beyond that but as a rule of thumb it's speed and size.
hahahaha :thumbsup:
I know I am still in the 20th century, but only this week I configured a pentium3-733mhz machine with 512mb ram to run linux as the OS, and installed apache webserver for my own website, and phpbb3 to run my own forum, with a mysql db as the backend
I also downloaded kompozer onto it to build the website
so this kind of core2 hardware stuff blows my mind
I have a PC (though in a different country) which blew something up and even a numty like me could put that HD in (which has an OS) and most people either have a keyboard or can get one. People swap screens all the time now anyway. Something like this would have done me as I'm a grown up, not a child playing games.
I guess most people just use the PC for WP, internet, perhaps some Excel and downloading stuff. This is fine for that.
That (probably) wouldn't work. You generally have to re-install windows or the linux kernel when you move chipsets, even within chispsets you're not certain to have the OS work without re-installing.
This is buying parts, they may be well put together parts and even compatible parts but it's far more reasonable to compare this to BYO than a Dell with software already installed.
Hmm, seems ok, however the PSU is a worry (only 255W IIRC). Also is DDR3 with 2 slots not strange?
Why do people vote cold if they can build cheaper or same price? Not everybody wants to build their own PC. Buying prebuilt means there's no question of who is to blame when something goes wrong. If you can find a prebuilt cheaper then say so.
Linux still isn't good enough for the average user. This pic sums it up >
[image missing]
Enlightened? Like all those students who eat lentils and protest against the government of the day, think capitalism is evil, stone mcdonalds, put stupid colours in the hair or dreadlocks. Irritate and alienate their parents, go on rallies, and think we should all live in communes oh and their OS should be free.
Eventually, they grow up.. The fragmentation of the Linux world is the reason it will never be a dominant desktop OS. Ok for servers though.
I think pibpob, you should buy this machine for your Grandma, then tell her the URL of OpenBSD and just tell her to be enlightened and get on with installing it. Please send me a screenshot of her Xorg desktop when shes finished tweaking her cron jobs.
This is more accurate I think
youtube.com/wat…zTY
youtube.com/wat…2qo
Linux is for hobbyists. Many people who work with computers through their jobs don't want to have to learn to use a new operating system. Especially one that is very fussy regarding drivers etc. Linux is Betamax in disguise. It does need antivirus and is just as flawed as Windows or Mac OS it's just that not many hackers can be assed writing a virus for software that is rarely used. There are so many flaws with Linux that it's laughable that people keep touting it as a viable option to the existing operating systems on the market. It's FREE and it still can't break through, I wonder why that is.
So is a single core p4 system
Fail 1: OpenBSD is not Linux. At least base your criticisms on the same thing!
Fail 2: You don't need to download Linux from the internet - although of course you can, unlike Windows - entirely free. You can ask a friend to burn you a copy - entirely legally, and with no activation keys or phoning home to monitor what you're doing and try to prevent you. You can buy it on CD/DVD for the cost of the medium, duplication and shipping. Or for a large mark-up in a shiny box. Still cheaper than Windows though, and you won't be forced to buy it again or face atrophy when Microsoft's shareholders complain that their dividend isn't big enough so they squeeze out a new version for commercial rather than technical reasons.
Fail 3: You are assuming that if my grandma was given a copy (in lieu of a URL, which can't be done) of Windows and this machine, that she would have no problems installing it. That's the comparison you are clumsily making, even if you don't realise it.
Fail 4: I have supplied Linux machines for at least three non-savvy computer users (one of them elderly) and they get on with them fine. One of them previously had a Windows laptop so riddled with malware that it would hardly work at all. Windows is supposed to be easy to use, so she just used it.
Fail 5: No need to "tweak cron jobs". Perhaps I was premature in my previous posting about stupid anachronistic statements? You don't even need to know what a cron job is. I really hope that my grandma would tweak her anti-virus software if using Windows though...
I don't think you had your brain engaged when you made that posting, did you?
Well it's quite the opposite, Windows is for hobbyists. 80%+ of web servers run on linux. 446 out of the top 500 computers in the world run linux (as of Nov 2009). In fact bar your home/office standalone computer nearly every computer you interact with will be running linux.
You're right though, that it's really weird that people regard Linux as somehow a "toy" operating system. Most of the world's supercomputers run it. Google is built on it. I use it professionally for high-speed real-time number crunching where being able to know exactly how the operating system works is critical for reliability. If my team comes up against a problem caused by the operating system, they have a possibility of solving it themselves rather than relying on the vendor who will have no interest in helping them unless they can see it will improve their bottom line. Goodness knows what horrors are going on under Windows' bonnet - only Microsoft is unlucky enough to be privy to that can of worms.
Moreover, they will not be struck dead by the vendor announcing that the version they are using is suddenly obsolete so they will have to start again with another version. I've seen that happen with MacOS - the whole project had to be abandoned when the version they built it on became obsolete.
These examples may seem a bit arcane when talking about which OS to use at home. However, the improvements that are constantly being made by so many people to the Linux kernel and its associated operating system get fed down to whoever chooses jump on the bandwagon and use it.
Just want to check what you are saying because you seem to have commented on certain things I mentioned and ignored what suits.
You are saying that Linux definitely 100% does not need antivirus? Because not everybody is as careful as you guys obviously are.
To many PC users learning how to use a new operating system is not a priority and learning to use a PC or MAC is complicated. They are not all as comforable with software as you seem to suggest.
The Betamax comment was exactly as intended. I am well aware that Linux is superior in many ways. It is however never ever going to be the consumers choice. I'm not saying it shouldn't just that it won't.
You are quite right that it is not up to Linux to write driver software for devices it's up to the manufacturer. However, for many manufacturers Linux is not a priority.
These are the things that should be pointed out to someone before suggesting they use Linux.
Most people want to use the same system as their friends and family and also what they use at work. It's easier and lazy but there you go it's human nature.
I like Linux a lot but I believe in being realistic.
I am acutely aware of how difficult some people find it to learn to use computers, because of the work I've done with these people. For a lot of them, the standard desktop and its applications are all unnecessarily complicated and something like the Linpus interface, which computer-savvy people love to laugh at, is in fact extremely good because of its simplicity. For someone who hasn't used computers before, or who has used an old version of Windows which differs significantly from the latest, the learning curve of Linux would be no steeper.
I appreciate your comments - they are much more reasoned this time.
I commented because I work in the industry. An associate has built PC's for clients and assured them that Linux would suit their purposes. On almost every occassion they ask for Windows to be installed instead. He still persists as he believes in Linux but he certainly does give himself a lot of unnecessary extra work.
I use Linux myself but also use Windows and a MAC occassionally. I use the complete Photoshop suite so for me Windows and a MAC are necessary.
At least you know that if you have a dual-boot machine, when running Linux you can get at your Windows files. Trying to do the opposite is painful!
I would definitely not install Linux, as Linux is not familar to most people (admin staff). Most people are familiar with Windows and therefore that is the OS I will be installing.
I realise that there are some hardcore, anti-MS, computer users here, but at the end of the day an MS operating system is infinitely more usable than Linux, if only because most people (even Linux users), know their way around a MS OS.
Very few people I know use or have ever used a Linux OS.