I have fuller comments that will have to wait; for now I shall just point out that he did post a Core 2 Duo machine. He matched clock speeds but plumped for a lower FSB and a reduced cache.

Indeed, thats why I paid an extra $150 for my 6MB L2 cache and a few hundred extra mhz. The stock cpu for my laptop is a 1MB L2 cache cpu.. Very lame. Next one up was a passable 3MB, but They had the option for the 6MBL2, so I got it

Are you sure you're actually interested? It is rather dry and boring.

the cache is where the CPU CACHES data from memory, and devices. It can also be used for other functions, but generally its just a really fast local cache of ram. You might think ram is fast, but its darn slow compared to the cpu and cache. More cache means less trips to ram (or even worse, disk ), which means the cpu can stay busy longer. Though too much cache can be a downside too, generally, the more memory there is, the higher the latency to access it, which means its slower So theres a balancing act.

append:

So can someone try and match up my new purchase with an equivalent Apple laptop?

ThinkPad SL500
Intel Core2Duo T9400 @ 2.53Ghz 6MB L2 cache
1x2GB PC2-5300
1x160G 5400rpm disk
802.11bg wifi
GbE lan
9 cell LiIon battery
LED backlit 15.4 WXGA LCD

Cost about $994 cad including taxes.

Not necessarily. I know several computer sacience majors that were never taught anything about hardware. The university I was at didn't have a hardware component to the computer science courses when I was there, though they do now.

Sorry not to let the thread die as it looked like it had several days ago, but for the purposes of not appearing to ignore Dustin:

Repeating what I've said with expletives doesn't make something "your point".

After think about this article a little bit, I think the only kinds computer software I have ever bought are OS and games. Nothing else, ever. I don't pirate stuff either. So... oh well. I know the topic has moved on a bit; and we all agree that the article is bogus.

edit

I know a few people who use to have that mouse... the scroll ball jammed up in all of them so that it didn't work at all.

Thanks, Thomas. I'll go inform these friends that their mouse broke because they are unclean. Although, I don't think they'll care much about that anymore as the dysfunctional mouses (mice?) have been replaced with new ones that don't have that problem.

How ever they wish to take the advice is up to them. But most people never clean their mouse. and many people will happily eat snacks at the computer. gunk on your hands means gunk in the mouse.

Based on poor reading of the spec you posted originally, hence my unreasoned dismissal, but I would argue that a slower CPU (on account of a 25% reduction in FSB and 33% reduction in cache, though the internal clock speeds are the same) and a probably slower graphics card (by, ummmm, 1000 — I've really no idea how GPU numbering works, but I assume an 8400M is a bit slower than a 9400M) are a sufficient impediment to make a machine "worse" in the sense of less valuable notwithstanding substantial improvements in storage, especially as storage can be upgraded.

Anyway, the original point was just that there is at least one major Apple machine for which they are not charging a significant mark-up. That they offer nothing like the range of any other major manufacturer, let alone all the other manufacturers put together, is obviously conceded.