I would have thought at the price range and target market that at least 4Gb of RAM would be required?

What a joke. That's like sticking yugo wheels on your ferrari. If you're going high-end then 4gb should be the starter, with room for 8 at least. When will PC manufacturers get it into their heads that the one thing that can drastically improve performance is RAM and people are sick of buying machines with paltry amounts of the stuff in them?

I have a unit for my screen which has a fair bit of well ventilated space inside it, where I could hide a larger main box for a system, and for a while now I've been looking for an external enclosure which could take the optical drives and an IR sensor so that the lovely sleek externals aren't spoiled by a massive great PC.

The price is not in line with my purposes, but the form factor certainly is.

Should that be RAID 1? There's no real advantage to a RAID 0 except capacity. And with a few hundred additional slots available, RAID 1 is the obvious choice. I also see a time in the not too distant future where we will see high end systems with RAID 5.

I want a new desktop. I went onto Dell's site, you can't configure a PC with a Blu Ray player (I checked with their chat support). Same for HP's site (I'm amazed they're still selling under HP and COMPAQ brands for new PCs). And Fulitsu.

So, if you want a new PC with a built in Blue Ray player, you don't have any choice apart from buying and configuring your own drive unless you want a Sony. Not what I want, I want the vendor to do all the end-end engineering so I can watch Blu Ray movies on the PC without any problem (i..e compatible graphics card with HDMI).

For £2500, I would expect 4GB and a better graphics configuration, with 10,000 RMP hard disk. I guess it'd be too much to expect a 32GB solid state drive for that money.

Taken from that dubious source (wikipedia) - "provides improved performance and additional storage but no fault tolerance from disk errors or disk failure"

Trust me, it gives a massive increase in performance. Effectively you're reading/writing from two drives in parallel. RAID 1 allows the read performance increase, but not the write performance hike. I'd almost wager that RAID 0 would give a bigger boost than doubling the RAM.

I recently added an identical drive to my machine and striped the discs - Windows screams along in comparison whether booting or loading applications etc. I've also got a RAID 1 mirrored pair for data and have made the comparisons. As a video editing rig, RAID 0 is a godsend.

I have used Vegas Video and Adobe Premiere and I think Vegas is much better, and Sony owns Vegas, I can't believe that they paid to bundle Adobe with this computer.