# Mac Pro vs other laptop



## Yiannis

Hello,

I have always had Windows laptops and only experience with HP, Dell and Toshiba. Now this is what I do on my laptop:

1. Watch movies
2. Play Fotball Manager (low graphics high processing power needed)
3. Browse the internet
4. Programming for websites e.g building ecommerce websites

I am not sure if I should get a really good windows laptop for 800 Euros or get the same specs Mac Pro for 1800 Euros. 

Could someone tell me if it is advisable to go for a Mac Pro instead of another laptop? I mean is it worth the money for what I want it to do?

Thanks.


----------



## 1337dingo

with mac your paying for the logo, it has its ups but its to expensive for what it is, i suggest the windows based laptop, then you have 1000 euros left over to spend on sweets


----------



## daisymtc

I would say mac have better screen and user experience. However, it is hard to convience to pay extra 1000 euro.


----------



## Yiannis

So its not worth the extra money for what I need it to do?


----------



## daisymtc

Yiannis said:


> So its not worth the extra money for what I need it to do?



Yes. 
But there are people like the loyalty of using apple product.

Also, you need to check if the programme you want to run are availiable on MAC


----------



## Yiannis

What laptop manufacturer would you recommend?


----------



## wolfeking

PC wise, Toshiba, Asus, Lenovo. These are the best brands on the market.


----------



## daisymtc

wolfeking said:


> PC wise, Toshiba, Asus, Lenovo. These are the best brands on the market.



lenovo have to be thinkpad


----------



## soflanetworking

my 2 cents...

#1 - Macs are not any better than PCs, if you spent the same amount on a PC as an entry level MAC it would be just as fast, and just as capable.

#2 - If you have been using a PC for any length of time, the switch to a MAC is a challenge to say the least.  You have to relearn how to do everything.  Stay with PC, save a few bucks, and make it easy on yourself.  Those who rave about their MAC's are just showing off.


----------



## DMGrier

It is a personal preference but I will tell you this, if you buy a good laptop brand it will last just as long, Mac is now a target of Malware and from what I read the scanner they offer now for it is garbage as it was expected with new growing pains. Microsoft offers protection from virus, spyware and Malware with there software you can download and it works pretty well.

The OS in most bench mark test preform about the same and as some have already said, it is a different OS to learn. I am familiar with Windows and several Linux OS and I had to use a buddies Mac running Leopard and it was a living nightmare for me.

Get what you want but if you go PC I recommend Lenovo Thinkpad or a Sony Vaio.


----------



## tlarkin

You'll want to get the Mac, or a PC and run Linux.  The whole world wide web is ran off of open source standardized software.  With a Mac out of the box you get bash, mysql, perl, php, python, ruby, apache, ssh, and many other features you will want to use and learn if you are going to run giant ecommerece sites.

I assume you will be working with CMS systems a lot too, which are built from the ground up using open standards, like python, php, mysql and so forth.  Windows heavily lacks these features, and require you to install tons of third party apps.  Which, it is not impossible to install all of these things on a Windows box, but I just don't think it is optimal.



> It is a personal preference but I will tell you this, if you buy a good laptop brand it will last just as long, Mac is now a target of Malware and from what I read the scanner they offer now for it is garbage as it was expected with new growing pains. Microsoft offers protection from virus, spyware and Malware with there software you can download and it works pretty well.



Macs have had malware for a long time now, and Apple doesn't offer any sort of scanner. Security firms do, like Symantec and McCaffee.  Then there are free open source ones like ClamX that is for Unix based systems.

Here is what you do, 1) don't run as administrator and keep a separate account for administration - that right there doesn't allow any malware to install anywhere on your computer period, and 2) don't install janky software from the web or pirated software 

I am a pretty good computer user and I have maybe, like less than 10 times in my life got some sort of virus/malware/spyware/trojan on my Windows boxes in the past 15 years.  I still haven't ever had one on a Mac.

Malware that fools the user into installing it is nothing to do with security of the system, because it is fooling the end user.  This sort of thing there is zero defense against, except for the fact of educating the user.  If all users refer to my 2 suggestions earlier, regardless of windows, OS X or Linux they probably won't ever have a problem.


----------



## Des_Zac

I am bias towards Macs of course, so don't be surprised that I am going to say pick the Macbook Pro, (That's what you're talking about right?) But before I fixed my ibook I bought off of eBay I hadn't touched a Mac in my life and it took me 15 minutes to understand how to work it. It is not something that will take you months to understand.. That's a common misconception. 

But before you buy you must consider these things.

#1: Macs can dual-boot Windows OS

#2: Mac OS is not hard at all to understand

#3 Macs are, contrary to popular belief, supported for years.

#4 Macs are not at all over-priced, read here -> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/apple-mac-leopard-windows-vista,1985.html


----------



## mihir

Des_Zac said:


> I am bias towards Macs of course, so don't be surprised that I am going to say pick the Macbook Pro, (That's what you're talking about right?) But before I fixed my ibook I bought off of eBay I hadn't touched a Mac in my life and it took me 15 minutes to understand how to work it. It is not something that will take you months to understand.. That's a common misconception.
> 
> But before you buy you must consider these things.
> 
> #1: Macs can dual-boot Windows OS
> 
> #2: Mac OS is not hard at all to understand
> 
> #3 Macs are, contrary to popular belief, supported for years.
> 
> #4 Macs are not at all over-priced, read here -> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/apple-mac-leopard-windows-vista,1985.html



#2 - It is not about difficulty it is about the time taken to switch, which happens with every OS switch, some might consider it as a pain while others as a learning experience.

#4 - That link is from 2008.
Lets try that now - 
Macbook Pro - $2499
CPU - 2.2GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7
Memory - 4GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2X2GB
HDD - 750GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 RPM
Screen - MacBook Pro 17-inch Hi-Resolution Glossy Widescreen Display
GPU - AMD Radeon HD 6750M with 1GB GDDR5

Do I really need to link a Windows Laptop


----------



## Des_Zac

*Cough Mutter Cough* http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/latitude-e6420/pd?oc=blct64s4&model_id=latitude-e6420 *Cough Mutter Cough*


----------



## claptonman

Des_Zac said:


> *Cough Mutter Cough* http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/latitude-e6420/pd?oc=blct64s4&model_id=latitude-e6420 *Cough Mutter Cough*



And? The mac is $1300 more for minimal performance increase.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834157873

There ya go. A better laptop with a better card and more RAM. (comparing to the mac mihir posted.)


----------



## DMGrier

tlarkin said:


> You'll want to get the Mac, or a PC and run Linux.  The whole world wide web is ran off of open source standardized software.  With a Mac out of the box you get bash, mysql, perl, php, python, ruby, apache, ssh, and many other features you will want to use and learn if you are going to run giant ecommerece sites.
> 
> I assume you will be working with CMS systems a lot too, which are built from the ground up using open standards, like python, php, mysql and so forth.  Windows heavily lacks these features, and require you to install tons of third party apps.  Which, it is not impossible to install all of these things on a Windows box, but I just don't think it is optimal.
> 
> 
> 
> Macs have had malware for a long time now, and Apple doesn't offer any sort of scanner. Security firms do, like Symantec and McCaffee.  Then there are free open source ones like ClamX that is for Unix based systems.
> 
> Here is what you do, 1) don't run as administrator and keep a separate account for administration - that right there doesn't allow any malware to install anywhere on your computer period, and 2) don't install janky software from the web or pirated software
> 
> I am a pretty good computer user and I have maybe, like less than 10 times in my life got some sort of virus/malware/spyware/trojan on my Windows boxes in the past 15 years.  I still haven't ever had one on a Mac.
> 
> Malware that fools the user into installing it is nothing to do with security of the system, because it is fooling the end user.  This sort of thing there is zero defense against, except for the fact of educating the user.  If all users refer to my 2 suggestions earlier, regardless of windows, OS X or Linux they probably won't ever have a problem.



I actually a few months ago posted a link directly from Apple's tech support with a available scanner they do offer. I do agree Linux is a nice thing to install on a PC, I am just saying a PC can last just as long, my Mom's HP is well over four years and still running with no problems which surprise me due to the fact that HP has the highest failure rate amoung PC manufactures, in fact ASUS and believe it or not Toshiba has less hardware failure rates in there laptops then Apple in studies conducted by Engadget.com and then this other one posted by a member last week but cannot remember the link.


----------



## Des_Zac

I hate to fight about Mac vs. PC but..

#1 That laptop has a lower res screen, the Macbook Pro has 1920x1200.

#2 This Comes with Home Premium and you would have to pay an extra 210 dollars to get the best Windows OS, while Macs have one version of the OS, unless you consider the Server edition which is only $50 more.

#3 It doesn't have a better i7, the Macbook Pro clocks at 2.2Ghz and the Windows laptop you mentioned is only at 2.0Ghz.

#4 The Macbook Pro has a built in HD iSight Camera.

#5 The Macbook Pro comes with iLife 2011.

#6 Thunderbolt and Firewire 800 ports

#7 Comes with 100 dollar Mac App Store Gift Card

#8 Aluminum Unibody Enclosure

P.S. I was comparing to the base model.


----------



## Perkomate

just gonna throw in my 2 cents here.

If you want to have the brand, then go Apple. 
If you want to have value for money, go for a Windows machine.

Contrary to popular beliefs, Mac's aren't virus proof. They also aren't any faster than a Windows computer with the same specs.

The problem is, that to get the same specs, they start to become very VERY overpriced. I mean, to upgrade it on their website, is so much more expensive than a Windows computer.

Just have a think about what you need.


----------



## FuryRosewood

you cant compare a mac pro to a dell desktop, their running xeon processors with a workstation board...IT WILL cost a little bit more. the toms hardware article does have truth to it, if you want to turn a blind eye to it, go right ahead, try speccing a machine out with a workstation board, a good w3550 processor and some ram, and see how much it costs you, it likely will cost a bit more than what you imagine.


----------



## DMGrier

Des_Zac said:


> I hate to fight about Mac vs. PC but..
> 
> #1 That laptop has a lower res screen, the Macbook Pro has 1920x1200.
> 
> #2 This Comes with Home Premium and you would have to pay an extra 210 dollars to get the best Windows OS, while Macs have one version of the OS, unless you consider the Server edition which is only $50 more.
> 
> #3 It doesn't have a better i7, the Macbook Pro clocks at 2.2Ghz and the Windows laptop you mentioned is only at 2.0Ghz.
> 
> #4 The Macbook Pro has a built in HD iSight Camera.
> 
> #5 The Macbook Pro comes with iLife 2011.
> 
> #6 Thunderbolt and Firewire 800 ports
> 
> #7 Comes with 100 dollar Mac App Store Gift Card
> 
> #8 Aluminum Unibody Enclosure
> 
> P.S. I was comparing to the base model.



I am not saying that the Mac does have some up's but some of them really don't matter example being screen resolution to most is not going to matter considering most computer users don't need Facebook in HD. The baseline Macbook Pro does not come with a i7 it comes with a i5 2.3 Ghz where as a PC in the price range will usually come with the 2.5 Ghz i5. Aluminum body does not matter in fact for cooling purpose it is not good and I explained in a earlier discussion which no one could prove me wrong on that one. Thunderbolt completely awesome technology but 80% of computer users will never use it.

Here is the reality, Mac's are not built any better and most of it features users wont care about and if they do you can get all the same features with the exception to the things the Apple has patent for about 2-300 dollars less. What it comes down to is if you want performance and gaming  Windows is the best option, if you want the same performance if not better performance and outstanding security Linux is the next best option. Apple in my opinion is only good for those who want the name and that is not a bad thing but don't make the argument that Mac's price can be justified cause they cannot. They do offer a lot of cool stuff but 90% of users do not care about and would prefer to see a Macbook with a slightly lower resolution screen, no thunderbolt and even a Mac with a i3 if they could save a few hundred bucks.


----------



## Des_Zac

DMGrier said:


> I am not saying that the Mac does have some up's but some of them really don't matter example being screen resolution to most is not going to matter considering most computer users don't need Facebook in HD. The baseline Macbook Pro does not come with a i7 it comes with a i5 2.3 Ghz where as a PC in the price range will usually come with the 2.5 Ghz i5. Aluminum body does not matter in fact for cooling purpose it is not good and I explained in a earlier discussion which no one could prove me wrong on that one. Thunderbolt completely awesome technology but 80% of computer users will never use it.
> 
> Here is the reality, Mac's are not built any better and most of it features users wont care about and if they do you can get all the same features with the exception to the things the Apple has patent for about 2-300 dollars less. What it comes down to is if you want performance and gaming  Windows is the best option, if you want the same performance if not better performance and outstanding security Linux is the next best option. Apple in my opinion is only good for those who want the name and that is not a bad thing but don't make the argument that Mac's price can be justified cause they cannot. They do offer a lot of cool stuff but 90% of users do not care about and would prefer to see a Macbook with a slightly lower resolution screen, no thunderbolt and even a Mac with a i3 if they could save a few hundred bucks.



Now I'm starting to get confused  I switched to comparing the high end one since that is what I thought you were comparing it too.

 I'm in no way saying that the Macbook Pro is priced in the same tier as some laptops now, but don't in any way say that all of us buy it just for the name. The design is unmatched, I don't want 20 thousand LEDs in my laptop, I personally think that looks tacky now. And, if I could get Mac OS on a different laptop of course I would! The point of a Mac is not just because it is a Mac, it is because of Mac OS, which is, in my opinion, one of the best OSs out there. Of course I use Linux too.. but I like Mac OS better. I personally plan on getting a 15-inch Macbook Pro as soon as I can get a job. I too believe that they COULD lower their prices maybe 100-200 dollars, but since they are one-of-a-kind, (Legally) There is no other computer that can do what they can do.


----------



## DMGrier

The Mac is a good looking computer but in my opinion getting old. I loved the Macbook when it came in black cause it was different. I am tired of there white color, I remember when the Mac's use to be so colorful and unique.


----------



## Des_Zac

I completely agree with you that I would love a Tangerine Macbook Pro, but in this day and age it might look a little weird walking around with a clamshell now wouldn't it 

I am in the process of purchasing an orange ipod shuffle, then an orange nano, then an.... lemme stop myself there.


----------



## tlarkin

Perkomate said:


> just gonna throw in my 2 cents here.
> 
> If you want to have the brand, then go Apple.
> If you want to have value for money, go for a Windows machine.



High end PC laptops with similar specs are about the same price as the Macbook Pro.  The major difference is the screen quality, and Apple doesn't skimp on this feature.  They use typically very high end spec screens, in some cases some of their devices have IPS screens, which can range over thousands of dollars just for a the screen .  Depending on size and such.



> Contrary to popular beliefs, Mac's aren't virus proof. They also aren't any faster than a Windows computer with the same specs.



This is where I will have to put my foot down and call this just plain wrong information.   There are zero viruses in the wild for OS X or any Unix based OS for that matter.  A virus self replicates by definition.  A virus is NOT malware, spyware, Trojans, etc.  If you really want to get into the security specifications and pros and cons of every platform out there, you should at least get your terminology right.   

Most Malware fools the user into installing it anyway, by masking itself as legit software.  The human element cannot be fixed by technology, humans have to be trained on how to properly use their technology.



> The problem is, that to get the same specs, they start to become very VERY overpriced. I mean, to upgrade it on their website, is so much more expensive than a Windows computer.
> 
> Just have a think about what you need.



That is why you buy extra RAM third party.

Also, the Macbooks I believe have been discontinued, so expect either a new model of laptops coming out, or just iOS devices, the Macbook Air and the macbook Pro.


----------



## mihir

Des_Zac said:


> I hate to fight about Mac vs. PC but..
> 
> #1 That laptop has a lower res screen, the Macbook Pro has 1920x1200.
> 
> #2 This Comes with Home Premium and you would have to pay an extra 210 dollars to get the best Windows OS, while Macs have one version of the OS, unless you consider the Server edition which is only $50 more.
> 
> #3 It doesn't have a better i7, the Macbook Pro clocks at 2.2Ghz and the Windows laptop you mentioned is only at 2.0Ghz.
> 
> #4 The Macbook Pro has a built in HD iSight Camera.
> 
> #5 The Macbook Pro comes with iLife 2011.
> 
> #6 Thunderbolt and Firewire 800 ports
> 
> #7 Comes with 100 dollar Mac App Store Gift Card
> 
> #8 Aluminum Unibody Enclosure
> 
> P.S. I was comparing to the base model.


Lets compare Macbook Pro to Overpriced PC.
Ok 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834200296

It kills the macbook pro and also is $200 bucks cheaper. And it literally kills the macbook.
And still Alienware is overpriced for a Windows PC.


----------



## Des_Zac

mihir said:


> Lets compare Macbook Pro to Overpriced PC.
> Ok
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834200296
> 
> It kills the macbook pro and also is $200 bucks cheaper. And it literally kills the macbook.
> And still Alienware is overpriced for a Windows PC.



But it's not practical, it's 12 pounds, thick as a textbook, and not to mention ugly 

A Macbook Pro can be upgraded to close to those specs, the processor in the MBP is still better from what I can see.

It comes with Home, so for you to get Ultimate you'd have to invest an extra $210.00. Bringing it to the Price of the MBP.

It has a lower-res display.

The MBP has an HD Camera.

I would never get that Laptop, and if someone got it for me I'd return it


----------



## paulcheung

Ok how about this.
Half of the price. You can add an addition 128gb SSD for $200 and get lightening speed.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834230099


----------



## claptonman

Ultimate compared to home has very little difference. The guy above picked out an awesome laptop. And no HD camera? Once again, with the price difference, you could pick up an HD camera and still have money to spend.

All in all, nothing we can do will convince you that a PC is better and nothing you can do will make us think a mac will be better.


----------



## FuryRosewood

home premium will limit how much ram you can stuff in it to 16 gigs...if you want more than that, you need professional or better.


----------



## bm23

Razer Blade 
I know it's $300 more than a stock MBP, but the hardware is way superior, more than enough to justify the extra cost, and then some.


----------



## Perkomate

tlarkin said:


> This is where I will have to put my foot down and call this just plain wrong information.   There are zero viruses in the wild for OS X or any Unix based OS for that matter.  A virus self replicates by definition.  A virus is NOT malware, spyware, Trojans, etc.  If you really want to get into the security specifications and pros and cons of every platform out there, you should at least get your terminology right.
> 
> Most Malware fools the user into installing it anyway, by masking itself as legit software.  The human element cannot be fixed by technology, humans have to be trained on how to properly use their technology.
> 
> .



There is no such thing as a virus-invulnerable OS. And also by saying viruses, I meant to include trojans and the like. 

Unrelated, but I could get into a very long debate about how overpriced Macs are, but meh. I'll leave that to everyone else.


----------



## mihir

FuryRosewood said:


> home premium will limit how much ram you can stuff in it to 16 gigs...if you want more than that, you need professional or better.



Impractical point.


----------



## wolfeking

bm23 said:


> Razer Blade
> I know it's $300 more than a stock MBP, but the hardware is way superior, more than enough to justify the extra cost, and then some.


if that is more than a MBP your getting ripped off. You can get a far superior Alienware for hundreds less than a MBP and they are still overpriced. 


claptonman said:


> All in all, nothing we can do will convince you that a PC is better and nothing you can do will make us think a mac will be better.


that is the most eloquent point said in this thread. And  absolutely true. You will never convince me that MBP isnt worth the money.


----------



## patrickv

Former windows user here. I no longer run windows as I have a Macbook Pro. I will not take sides with anyone here, you have the money to buy a Mac then go buy it, you have the money to buy a windows Based laptop ? then do so. 

Each of those laptops have their advantages over another. You CAN'T boil a discussion to Macs > windows or windows > Macs.Not possible. Tlarkin knows his stuff, he's not selling Macs to anyone but merely pointing out facts. Facts that everyone seem to avoid.

However I will say this. Only retards will come on a forum and say windows > Mac and Mac >windows. This is an infinite debate, it's pointless.



> There is no such thing as a virus-invulnerable OS.



There is.. unix and Macs are based off that, same for Linux.


----------



## patrickv

DMGrier said:


> Apple in my opinion is only good for those who want the name and that is not a bad thing



Hahah you know, I seriously LOL'd at this one


----------



## patrickv

Yiannis said:


> Hello,
> 
> I have always had Windows laptops and only experience with HP, Dell and Toshiba. Now this is what I do on my laptop:
> 
> 1. Watch movies
> 2. Play Fotball Manager (low graphics high processing power needed)
> 3. Browse the internet
> 4. Programming for websites e.g building ecommerce websites
> 
> I am not sure if I should get a really good windows laptop for 800 Euros or get the same specs Mac Pro for 1800 Euros.
> 
> Could someone tell me if it is advisable to go for a Mac Pro instead of another laptop? I mean is it worth the money for what I want it to do?
> 
> Thanks.



If you're willing to spend money, buy your Macbook Pro. No one on here can make your decision because most people on here are biased and those discussion ends up in argument to a closed thread. Do a little research here and there, go to the Apple store if needed and go hands on with the MacBooks and make your decision. If they don't fit you, it's your choice to another laptop.

I've had mine for a while now and I do only webdesign/graphics and stuff, it suits me as a good machine. Your experience might be different though.

and Oh, THIS is available for Macs.


----------



## DMGrier

patrickv said:


> Hahah you know, I seriously LOL'd at this one



Glad you got a good laugh I guess ?

But what about the technology that matters to users that Apple does not have? Example being is thunderbolt is cool but 95% of users will never use it, but what about USB 3.0? Apple does not have HDMI and VGA? How about max resolution output for macbook pro is 720p due to gpu unless you purchase the $1,800 dollar model. No Bluray or 3D screen technology or touch screen.

Dell XPS 17"
2nd generation Intel® Core™ i7-2620M processor 2.70 GHz with Turbo Boost 2.0 up to 3.40 GHz
NVIDIA® GeForce® GT 555M 3GB graphics with Optimus
8GB Shared Dual Channel DDR3 Memory
750GB 7200 RPM SATA Hard Drive
17.3" FHD (1080p) with 2.0MP HD Webcam
Tray Load Blu-ray Disc BD-Combo (Reads BD and Writes to DVD/CD
Intel© Centrino© Advanced-N 6230 and Bluetooth 3.0
JBL 2.1 Speakers with Waves Maxx Audio 3 + Creative SoundBlaster X-FI MB 1.2
$1,814.99, I would take this over any Mac and if I want I can run Windows or my Favorite Linux Distro if I need the security of OSX.


----------



## DMGrier

Those who do not want to run Windows but want a Linux OS without doing the installing them self could go with system76 and this for the price rivals a Mac in its price.

http://www.system76.com/product_info.php?cPath=28&products_id=114

System76 Serval Professional $1,349.00
Display: 15.6" Full HD LED Glossy Display (1920 x 1080)
Graphics: up to nVidia GeForce GTX 580M - The worlds fastest mobile GPU
Touchpad: Multitouch with two finger scrolling
Audio Output: THX TruStudio PRO
Networking: Gigabit LAN (10/100/1000), WiFi
Wireless: Intel Wireless 802.11 abgn
Ports: DVI-I, HDMI, 2 x USB 3.0, 2 x USB 2.0, eSata/USB 2.0 Combo Port, FireWire Port, Headphone Jack, Microphone Jack, S/PDIF Output Jack, Audio Line In, SD Reader
Camera: Built-In 2.0 MP Webcam
Security: Fingerprint Reader, Kensington® Lock
Power Management: Suspend & Hibernate
Battery: Serval Pro Li-Polymer Battery Pack
AC Adapter: includes one AC adapter
Dimensions: 14.80" x 10.08" x 1.38"~1.69" (WxDxH)


----------



## speedyink

bm23 said:


> Razer Blade
> I know it's $300 more than a stock MBP, but the hardware is way superior, more than enough to justify the extra cost, and then some.



Oh..My..GOD..

That laptop is awesome!  It's got killer specs, and it's still less than an inch thin!  Not to mention that wicked LCD touchpad and customizable LCD keys


----------



## Des_Zac

speedyink said:


> Oh..My..GOD..
> 
> That laptop is awesome!  It's got killer specs, and it's still less than an inch thin!  Not to mention that wicked LCD touchpad and customizable LCD keys



Still, unless I hit the lottery there is no way I would spend that much just for that touch screen attachment : / Plus it only has a 320 GB Hard drive, that could be better if I'm going to spend 2700 dollars on it.


----------



## tlarkin

Perkomate said:


> There is no such thing as a virus-invulnerable OS. And also by saying viruses, I meant to include trojans and the like.
> 
> Unrelated, but I could get into a very long debate about how overpriced Macs are, but meh. I'll leave that to everyone else.



Sorry but you are wrong.  Try finding a virus that wildly infects any Unix based OS.  You won't, because there is this thing called POSIX which is the fundamental set of permissions that the Unix based OSes operate off of (Linux, Unix, and OS X), which separate user access from the kernel via the shell.  Users operate in their own cut off environment and cannot modify or add anything to the system level with out first inputting admin level credentials.

This design right here stops all virus attacks.  A virus is something that self replicates, malware is not a virus.  Just like a virus in real life, it is a self replicating series of cells that attack a person's body.   

On the note of the Dell, I would never own one - ever.  Having professionally supporting Dells at an old job I know first hand they use cheap crappy parts and build their systems to the lowest of quality to be able to slash their prices to maintain profits in sales.   Gateways are also just as horrible.   I cannot tell you how many thousands of Gateways and Dells failed while I worked at my previous job.   

If I were to go out and buy a PC laptop today, I'd buy a high end Lenovo (their low end is pretty sucky), an Asus (probably my favorite), or at one point a HP business class.  However, since HP announced they are no longer going to be making hardware, I would probably hold off on that one.

As for the Macs being over priced, again everyone fails to compare them spec for spec, material for material and so forth.   They are aluminum, they use high quality parts, they use really high quality screens (pull the OEM number off one of their screens and google it, you'll find they are in fact the most expensive out there) they also standardize technology among all their laptops and include features like:

ABGN wireless
Blue Tooth
multitouch trackpad
backlit keyboard
FW800
Thunderbolt
HDMI
optical audio (not really needed if you are using HDMI, but still, it is there)
Sudden Motion Sensor
Not to mention the OS and bundled software.

Lion upgrade cost $29, and feature for feature is on par with Windows 7 Professional, yet Lion costs 10 times less.  

In the end it is a preference because both a Mac and a PC are just tools, tools to get the job done.  In some regards one may have bonuses over the other and vice versa, but a lot of that would be considered opinion and not fact.   Macs and PCs both get a lot of ignorant hate from the uninformed for sure though, and when people pick sides and start spouting out misinformation about the product they blindly love/hate it makes me think of how absurd humans can be at times.


----------



## Des_Zac

tlarkin said:


> Sorry but you are wrong.  Try finding a virus that wildly infects any Unix based OS.  You won't, because there is this thing called POSIX which is the fundamental set of permissions that the Unix based OSes operate off of (Linux, Unix, and OS X), which separate user access from the kernel via the shell.  Users operate in their own cut off environment and cannot modify or add anything to the system level with out first inputting admin level credentials.
> 
> This design right here stops all virus attacks.  A virus is something that self replicates, malware is not a virus.  Just like a virus in real life, it is a self replicating series of cells that attack a person's body.
> 
> On the note of the Dell, I would never own one - ever.  Having professionally supporting Dells at an old job I know first hand they use cheap crappy parts and build their systems to the lowest of quality to be able to slash their prices to maintain profits in sales.   Gateways are also just as horrible.   I cannot tell you how many thousands of Gateways and Dells failed while I worked at my previous job.
> 
> If I were to go out and buy a PC laptop today, I'd buy a high end Lenovo (their low end is pretty sucky), an Asus (probably my favorite), or at one point a HP business class.  However, since HP announced they are no longer going to be making hardware, I would probably hold off on that one.
> 
> As for the Macs being over priced, again everyone fails to compare them spec for spec, material for material and so forth.   They are aluminum, they use high quality parts, they use really high quality screens (pull the OEM number off one of their screens and google it, you'll find they are in fact the most expensive out there) they also standardize technology among all their laptops and include features like:
> 
> ABGN wireless
> Blue Tooth
> multitouch trackpad
> backlit keyboard
> FW800
> Thunderbolt
> HDMI
> optical audio (not really needed if you are using HDMI, but still, it is there)
> Sudden Motion Sensor
> Not to mention the OS and bundled software.
> 
> Lion upgrade cost $29, and feature for feature is on par with Windows 7 Professional, yet Lion costs 10 times less.
> 
> In the end it is a preference because both a Mac and a PC are just tools, tools to get the job done.  In some regards one may have bonuses over the other and vice versa, but a lot of that would be considered opinion and not fact.   Macs and PCs both get a lot of ignorant hate from the uninformed for sure though, and when people pick sides and start spouting out misinformation about the product they blindly love/hate it makes me think of how absurd humans can be at times.



Thank you. This is exactly what I was trying to say, but your explanation is a lot less jumbled


----------



## speedyink

Des_Zac said:


> Still, unless I hit the lottery there is no way I would spend that much just for that touch screen attachment : / Plus it only has a 320 GB Hard drive, that could be better if I'm going to spend 2700 dollars on it.



Hard drives are cheap and easy to replace.  

Plus it's only $300 more than the base 17" Macbook pro, so it's not a crazy amount of money.


----------



## DMGrier

tlarkin said:


> Sorry but you are wrong.  Try finding a virus that wildly infects any Unix based OS.  You won't, because there is this thing called POSIX which is the fundamental set of permissions that the Unix based OSes operate off of (Linux, Unix, and OS X), which separate user access from the kernel via the shell.  Users operate in their own cut off environment and cannot modify or add anything to the system level with out first inputting admin level credentials.
> 
> This design right here stops all virus attacks.  A virus is something that self replicates, malware is not a virus.  Just like a virus in real life, it is a self replicating series of cells that attack a person's body.
> 
> On the note of the Dell, I would never own one - ever.  Having professionally supporting Dells at an old job I know first hand they use cheap crappy parts and build their systems to the lowest of quality to be able to slash their prices to maintain profits in sales.   Gateways are also just as horrible.   I cannot tell you how many thousands of Gateways and Dells failed while I worked at my previous job.
> 
> If I were to go out and buy a PC laptop today, I'd buy a high end Lenovo (their low end is pretty sucky), an Asus (probably my favorite), or at one point a HP business class.  However, since HP announced they are no longer going to be making hardware, I would probably hold off on that one.
> 
> As for the Macs being over priced, again everyone fails to compare them spec for spec, material for material and so forth.   They are aluminum, they use high quality parts, they use really high quality screens (pull the OEM number off one of their screens and google it, you'll find they are in fact the most expensive out there) they also standardize technology among all their laptops and include features like:
> 
> ABGN wireless
> Blue Tooth
> multitouch trackpad
> backlit keyboard
> FW800
> Thunderbolt
> HDMI
> optical audio (not really needed if you are using HDMI, but still, it is there)
> Sudden Motion Sensor
> Not to mention the OS and bundled software.
> 
> Lion upgrade cost $29, and feature for feature is on par with Windows 7 Professional, yet Lion costs 10 times less.
> 
> In the end it is a preference because both a Mac and a PC are just tools, tools to get the job done.  In some regards one may have bonuses over the other and vice versa, but a lot of that would be considered opinion and not fact.   Macs and PCs both get a lot of ignorant hate from the uninformed for sure though, and when people pick sides and start spouting out misinformation about the product they blindly love/hate it makes me think of how absurd humans can be at times.



I will admit you are right about the Virus thing, I looked and they just do not exist for Unix based and Unix Like OS. Mac's do not have HDMI though, there is adapter you have to use which is a pain and as I said before on the discussion of gpu, unless you buy the $1800 Macbook Pro the gpu in the other models max is 720p with PC you can get 1080P and as I listed in that Dell link or even the system76 they do offer very nice screens that can display 1080p and they have the gpu and optical drive to actually use the screen. Plus what depicts quality? I know you hate Dell's but all Dell's I have owned last just as long as most Mac's so I see no real quality difference and we are talking about a majority of users that don't care and if they do that is why the PC is customizable. 

In the End I post two laptops earlier one being Windows based and the other running Ubuntu and both smoke the Macbook pro in features, performance and price so the evidence is there,

PC, things Apple does not offer:
HDMI
VGA
Bluray
USB 3.0
3D Screens
Touch Screens
Lets not forget being able to go onto a manufactures web site and customize to your needs with hardware and even looks so your computer does not look like everyone out there as a Apple computers all look the same.


----------



## mihir

> Lets not forget being able to go onto a manufactures web site and *customize to your needs with hardware* and even looks so your computer does not look like everyone out there as a Apple computers all look the same.



Apple does offer that, but it is expensive.


----------



## Des_Zac

mihir said:


> Apple does offer that, but it is expensive.



It's pretty expensive no matter what website you go to, it's always cheaper to do it yourself, Apple just goes a little over the line is all.


----------



## tlarkin

DMGrier said:


> I will admit you are right about the Virus thing, I looked and they just do not exist for Unix based and Unix Like OS. Mac's do not have HDMI though, there is adapter you have to use which is a pain and as I said before on the discussion of gpu, unless you buy the $1800 Macbook Pro the gpu in the other models max is 720p with PC you can get 1080P and as I listed in that Dell link or even the system76 they do offer very nice screens that can display 1080p and they have the gpu and optical drive to actually use the screen. Plus what depicts quality? I know you hate Dell's but all Dell's I have owned last just as long as most Mac's so I see no real quality difference and we are talking about a majority of users that don't care and if they do that is why the PC is customizable.
> 
> In the End I post two laptops earlier one being Windows based and the other running Ubuntu and both smoke the Macbook pro in features, performance and price so the evidence is there,
> 
> PC, things Apple does not offer:
> HDMI
> VGA
> Bluray
> USB 3.0
> 3D Screens
> Touch Screens
> Lets not forget being able to go onto a manufactures web site and customize to your needs with hardware and even looks so your computer does not look like everyone out there as a Apple computers all look the same.



What constitutes performance?  What some tech writer publishes in some magazine?  What some benchmark software score tells you?  I hate using car analogies but here they work.

I can give you a basic 4 cylinder car, like a KIA.   It will get you from point A to point B, drive 80MPH easily on the highway, get decent gas mileage and so forth.  You can even upgrade and get the 6 cylinder KIA with all the bells and whistles, and it will still cost you around or under $20k for a new car.  On the other hand you can instead buy a Subaru, which will have all wheel drive, a 4 cylinder engine, not every bell and whistle that the high end KIA goes, but at the end of the day we know the Subaru WRX is a highly engineered and better vehicle.  It handles better, it is designed better, the suspension and wheel base and the AWD are all designed from the ground up with a concept of performance.  The KIA, while not a bad car, and has a larger engine and can probably output more power.  In fact if you look at the current 4cylinder turbo charged KIA Optima, it is a hell of a deal for under 20K brand new.   Where as the Subaru WRX which actually has a smaller engine with a few less horse power is nearly 10K more once you add in the features.

A Mac is much like the Subaru.  It is designed from the ground up.  They design every aspect where PC manufactures have no say in what software companies develop for Operating Systems.  They simply build hardware, this gives them less over head and more of a means to mass produce (meaning they are made cheaper) and therefore get to sell them cheaper. They also may have used some cheaper components in the KIA which also drive down the price, however the transmission is a 6 speed and the engine has more horse power than the WRX.

Now, I will definitely agree that Apple marks up their prices on standard basic hardware like RAM, hard drives, optical drives, etc.  However, you can buy after market so that is really a moot point in my book.  You can buy RAM kits off of newegg that work fine in Macs.  I know, because I do it all the time, and yes it is way cheaper.  That is just called being a smart consumer.

Now to address your list:

_PC, things Apple does not offer:_
HDMI - *wrong, they offer full HMDI via mini display adapter*

VGA - *Again, wrong, mini display adapter can output to any video format*

Bluray - *This you got me on, but I don't think that is a deal breaker for me, plus everything is going streaming and downloads anyway, optical media will be obsolete soon.  Apple knows this, look at the ITMS and App store*

USB 3.0 - *Look at thunderbolt, it supports everything new Macs have it*

3D Screens - *Meh, 3D screens most likely do not live up to Apple's standards yet to even be considered.  I saw a ton at best buy when I bought my new TV and they all sucked*

Touch Screens - *You want a touch screen buy an iOS device, which works perfectly in conjunction with your Mac*


So, in conclusion we must realize as humans who can logically think and look past the marketing schemes and hype put in front of us, deep down inside and under the hood is where the real performance takes place.   Your hardware can only run as fast as your software lets you, poorly coded software and software bloat will destroy resources.  When looking at laptops Apple is huge on portability, that is why their batteries last forever.   You will be hard pressed to find a laptop with those specs, that design, weigh that much and be that thin and get that much battery life.   

Just because some benchmark scores says your computer is awesome doesn't mean it will out perform other computers in real world application.  Things like video cards really don't do much for the end user unless they are doing a few select things like:  Rendering audio/video, playing high end video games at high end settings, or using heavy 3D applications.  Gaming cards give pretty much nil performance for rendering over a good workstation card does anyway, and of course a work station card sucks at playing video games.

Just remember they are all tools, tools to get whatever job you want to get done.  I am a long time Mac/PC user and I still use both.


----------



## tlarkin

FuryRosewood said:


> home premium will limit how much ram you can stuff in it to 16 gigs...if you want more than that, you need professional or better.



This is a good point when you look at much Microsoft feature limits their OSes.  A copy of the newest OS for a Mac is $29, that is it. Feature for Feature is is comparable and in many ways has more features than Windows 7 Ultimate which is $300 plus, so it is 10 times the cost.

OS X also has a much less of a finger print, takes up way less HD space, and uses less CPU/RAM to run.   So, if you want to compare any PC with a Mac you will have to upgrade to Windows 7 Ultimate.


----------



## paulcheung

tlarkin said:


> Sorry but you are wrong.  Try finding a virus that wildly infects any Unix based OS.  You won't, because there is this thing called POSIX which is the fundamental set of permissions that the Unix based OSes operate off of (Linux, Unix, and OS X), which separate user access from the kernel via the shell.  Users operate in their own cut off environment and cannot modify or add anything to the system level with out first inputting admin level credentials.
> 
> This design right here stops all virus attacks.  A virus is something that self replicates, malware is not a virus.  Just like a virus in real life, it is a self replicating series of cells that attack a person's body.
> 
> On the note of the Dell, I would never own one - ever.  Having professionally supporting Dells at an old job I know first hand they use cheap crappy parts and build their systems to the lowest of quality to be able to slash their prices to maintain profits in sales.   Gateways are also just as horrible.   I cannot tell you how many thousands of Gateways and Dells failed while I worked at my previous job.
> 
> If I were to go out and buy a PC laptop today, I'd buy a high end Lenovo (their low end is pretty sucky), an Asus (probably my favorite), or at one point a HP business class.  However, since HP announced they are no longer going to be making hardware, I would probably hold off on that one.
> 
> As for the Macs being over priced, again everyone fails to compare them spec for spec, material for material and so forth.   They are aluminum, they use high quality parts, they use really high quality screens (pull the OEM number off one of their screens and google it, you'll find they are in fact the most expensive out there) they also standardize technology among all their laptops and include features like:
> 
> ABGN wireless
> Blue Tooth
> multitouch trackpad
> backlit keyboard
> FW800
> Thunderbolt
> HDMI
> optical audio (not really needed if you are using HDMI, but still, it is there)
> Sudden Motion Sensor
> Not to mention the OS and bundled software.
> 
> Lion upgrade cost $29, and feature for feature is on par with Windows 7 Professional, yet Lion costs 10 times less.
> 
> In the end it is a preference because both a Mac and a PC are just tools, tools to get the job done.  In some regards one may have bonuses over the other and vice versa, but a lot of that would be considered opinion and not fact.   Macs and PCs both get a lot of ignorant hate from the uninformed for sure though, and when people pick sides and start spouting out misinformation about the product they blindly love/hate it makes me think of how absurd humans can be at times.


You have some good points here, but like in my position, I have a little over $1500 in my account and I can get that Asus laptop for $1199 and $134 for a ssd to add to the system. I don't think this laptop will be slower than any of the Mac Pro out there. 
With the money I saved on the hardware I can buy the Win7 Ultimate if I want. But hey Who really want more than 16gb Ram in a laptop? What is it good for?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834230099
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148447
Cheers.


----------



## DMGrier

You are right, you can ouput through adapters but as a PC I don't deal with adapters I just use the cable that was intended, as a apple user would say it just works. Plus do not dismiss touch and 3D screens cause I have met people who want or use them. Thunderbolt is nice but most devices I see do not mention compatibility with thunderbolt so USB 3.0 seems like the smarter move. All I am saying is you name your features I will name mine, Apple has a limited hardware support since they manufacture there computers and if you google it a lot of Apple users want the features I list.

tlarkin, I mean this with the up most respect but you are not aloud to use car concepts anymore cause that was horrible cause KIA and Subaru is just a bad comparison cause I think a better concept is a BMW vs a Mustang but that is just me but I am a huge car person.

Either way where I am going is OSX is nice but the computers are and are not over priced, They are because 95% of there users do not use all the features they have that make them expensive where as a PC can be more tailored to a individual needs for the price since you can go to a web site and pick what hardware and quality of screen and sometimes even pick the color or graphic on it. Plus many laptops these days will last 4-5 years if not more and by this point you should be replacing anyway.

Also earlier I see the Aluminum was brought up again, plastic cools better. The people who design car engines get paid way more then the loser who designs apples shells and many things on the engines these day are being replaced with plastic like the intake manifold cause it stays cooler then aluminum there for delivering a cooler charge to the engine creating more power, better gas and better emission.


----------



## tlarkin

paulcheung said:


> You have some good points here, but like in my position, I have a little over $1500 in my account and I can get that Asus laptop for $1199 and $134 for a ssd to add to the system. I don't think this laptop will be slower than any of the Mac Pro out there.
> With the money I saved on the hardware I can buy the Win7 Ultimate if I want. But hey Who really want more than 16gb Ram in a laptop? What is it good for?
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834230099
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148447
> Cheers.



Windows 7 features that are only in the Ultimate edition

*remote desktop
*encrypted file system support
*ability to bind to a domain controller
*Windows XP mode

These features really break to deal for you?  Probably not, but you won't be able to bind to active directory if you try to take it to work or college, and that means you won't be able to log into your school/work profile.  

Not everyone can afford the Subaru over the KIA, but given the choice and money was not an obstacle most people would probably pick the Subaru over the KIA.   

That Asus is a great deal and it will perform on par with the Macbook Pro, but it won't drive the same.  Just like the turbo charged KIA optima will perform on par against a Subaru WRX in most basic things, but the WRX is a better drive once you use it's features.  By all means, the KIA optima is actually a great car for the price to be honest.  It has a great warranty and consumer reports say they are reliable cars.  

If you want the best bang for your buck, a PC is most likely the way to go, or the lower end Macbooks.  However, cost should be looked at the cost of overall ownership.  Macs hold their resell value, which is unheard of for technology.  If you replace your Mac every two to three years and sell your old one you are only looking at several hundred dollars out of pocket to upgrade your laptop.

The high end 2009 Macbook Pro sells for approximately 1500 bucks used.  Show me a 2 year old PC laptop in that range keep that sort of resell value.

Overall cost of ownerships, macs are actually pretty well priced once you consider everything.  Like I said though, it is just a tool and some people prefer brand hammer X versus brand hammer Y, and at the end of the day both hammers can nail down nails.


----------



## paulcheung

tlarkin said:


> Windows 7 features that are only in the Ultimate edition
> 
> *remote desktop
> *encrypted file system support
> *ability to bind to a domain controller
> *Windows XP mode
> 
> These features really break to deal for you?  Probably not, but you won't be able to bind to active directory if you try to take it to work or college, and that means you won't be able to log into your school/work profile.
> 
> Not everyone can afford the Subaru over the KIA, but given the choice and money was not an obstacle most people would probably pick the Subaru over the KIA.
> 
> That Asus is a great deal and it will perform on par with the Macbook Pro, but it won't drive the same.  Just like the turbo charged KIA optima will perform on par against a Subaru WRX in most basic things, but the WRX is a better drive once you use it's features.  By all means, the KIA optima is actually a great car for the price to be honest.  It has a great warranty and consumer reports say they are reliable cars.
> 
> If you want the best bang for your buck, a PC is most likely the way to go, or the lower end Macbooks.  However, cost should be looked at the cost of overall ownership.  Macs hold their resell value, which is unheard of for technology.  If you replace your Mac every two to three years and sell your old one you are only looking at several hundred dollars out of pocket to upgrade your laptop.
> 
> The high end 2009 Macbook Pro sells for approximately 1500 bucks used.  Show me a 2 year old PC laptop in that range keep that sort of resell value.
> 
> Overall cost of ownerships, macs are actually pretty well priced once you consider everything.  Like I said though, it is just a tool and some people prefer brand hammer X versus brand hammer Y, and at the end of the day both hammers can nail down nails.


If I need to connect to active Directory then I will get the Ultimate, but most people don't. 
Also you seem have a point of resell value, but deeply look down that is not a point at all. the resell value on the PC is already there from the begining! I didn't paid for it at all! I am pretty sure if I want to sell back this laptop in 2 year time I might still can sell it for $500 Dollars. when you paid the MacBook Pro for $2500 or more that when you resell it back for $1500, it still cost you $1000 or more. 
The PC only cost $700 for the two year. The comparission with the car is not right. The PC does not work like a KIA and the Mac Book Pro does not work Like SUbaru. My son have a Mac book that he can't play games at all. but the PC does. I am sure the Mac book Pro can play Games but it won't beat the PC like European Car compare to Korean cars. You forgot one thing, They are use the same engine that built by INTEL!!

Cheers


----------



## tlarkin

paulcheung said:


> If I need to connect to active Directory then I will get the Ultimate, but most people don't.
> Also you seem have a point of resell value, but deeply look down that is not a point at all. the resell value on the PC is already there from the begining! I didn't paid for it at all! I am pretty sure if I want to sell back this laptop in 2 year time I might still can sell it for $500 Dollars. when you paid the MacBook Pro for $2500 or more that when you resell it back for $1500, it still cost you $1000 or more.
> The PC only cost $700 for the two year. The comparission with the car is not right. The PC does not work like a KIA and the Mac Book Pro does not work Like SUbaru. My son have a Mac book that he can't play games at all. but the PC does. I am sure the Mac book Pro can play Games but it won't beat the PC like European Car compare to Korean cars. You forgot one thing, They are use the same engine that built by INTEL!!
> 
> Cheers



Believe it or not KIA get great reviews.  If you ever listen to the car talk guys on NPR (and they are some super smart car guys) they give KIA great reviews.  That was what first led me onto the fact they are decent cars, but that is side tracked.

A PC laptop isn't worth much once it is 3+ years old at all.  Macs hold some resell value, 1500 on a 3 year old 2400 MBP would be the lowest you could get.  You could probably get close to 2k for it.  Especially if selling to a country where Macs aren't readily available.   That is why used iPhone 3GS still sell for $400 to people in Russia.  I sold my 6 year old G4 MDD for $700 when I sold it.  It was $2k and 6 years old and I sold it for $700 6 years later.  That is a pretty dang good resell value on electronics.

On a side note, a lot of European cars are crap.  I have owned three personally and my family has owned dozens.  My father used to get a new benz every year when he owned his own company (company car).   Don't get me wrong, some of their cars are great, but the ones that are affordable to the average person are crap.

Also, for me video games are something I would never desire to play on a laptop. I have a desktop for that.  My laptop is a pure work machine.  I need to take notes, write code, do emails, manage systems remotely and I need to be on the go, so it has to have a good battery life.  For my job, the Macbook Pro is worth a ton more than any PC period, and the productivity on it is a lot greater.  Like I said, right tool for the right job.

If you want to just play games and that is the staple of performance for you, then you need to buy a PC.


----------



## paulcheung

tlarkin said:


> Also, for me video games are something I would never desire to play on a laptop. I have a desktop for that.  My laptop is a pure work machine.  I need to take notes, write code, do emails, manage systems remotely and I need to be on the go, so it has to have a good battery life.  For my job, the Macbook Pro is worth a ton more than any PC period, and the productivity on it is a lot greater.  Like I said, right tool for the right job.If you want to just play games and that is the staple of performance for you, then you need to buy a PC.



Well said, That is exactly my point, why spend so much more and the PC laptop just do the job for me and most people and more!!
cheers


----------



## tlarkin

paulcheung said:


> Well said, That is exactly my point, why spend so much more and the PC laptop just do the job for me and most people and more!!
> cheers



Well I bought the Subaru over the KIA and it was about a 10K difference and I am 100% satisfied with my purchase.

If you want a PC then get a PC. I am not disagreeing with you at all.  I am just saying Macs, for everything you get with them are pretty well priced.


----------



## DMGrier

tlarkin said:


> Well I bought the Subaru over the KIA and it was about a 10K difference and I am 100% satisfied with my purchase.
> 
> If you want a PC then get a PC. I am not disagreeing with you at all.  I am just saying Macs, for everything you get with them are pretty well priced.



and I am not disagreeing with you, what I am not saying is if you do not use the features then the Mac is over priced. I cheaper PC running Windows or Linux (depending on distro) will be good for the end user. What ever makes the buyer happy I guess.

I am glad you bought the Subaru over the Kia, unless Kia is buying the engine from a different manufacture Kia engines use very low end Metal for there blocks and there head or heads depending on the motor are pron to rebuild at around 100k.


----------



## Perkomate

ok, ok. Let me just say this.

Why don't you buy a Windows laptop....

And then get a $30 copy of a Mac OS and put it on it. You get pretty much the best of both worlds.


----------



## speedyink

tlarkin said:


> OS X also has a much less of a finger print, takes up way less HD space, and uses less CPU/RAM to run.



I don't know if this is true anymore with the release of Lion.  The minimum requirements are double that of Windows 7 and soon to be Windows 8.  I can also feel it while using Lion on my macbook, core 2 duo and 2gb of ram.  Feels less than snappy, and the cpu fan winds up much more than before, on stupid tasks like opening a video or browsing around the file system while listening to music.  

Sorry, don't mean to butt in, just saying.


----------



## tlarkin

Perkomate said:


> ok, ok. Let me just say this.
> 
> Why don't you buy a Windows laptop....
> 
> And then get a $30 copy of a Mac OS and put it on it. You get pretty much the best of both worlds.



Then you are tossing the whole, it just works out the window.  Hacking around the TPM to install OS X on non Apple hardware is going to have it's issues.  Also, drivers will too, and Macs use EFI firmware and not BIOS.



> I don't know if this is true anymore with the release of Lion. The minimum requirements are double that of Windows 7 and soon to be Windows 8. I can also feel it while using Lion on my macbook, core 2 duo and 2gb of ram. Feels less than snappy, and the cpu fan winds up much more than before, on stupid tasks like opening a video or browsing around the file system while listening to music.
> 
> Sorry, don't mean to butt in, just saying.



The system requirements are still less, and OS X 10.7 takes up a lot less HD space.  However, I honestly haven't messed with Lion all that much.  I have a copy I got via the store but haven't had time to play with it.  Plus, in my experience with OS X is that I never upgrade until the .3 or .4 upgrade comes along.  So, when 10.7.3 comes out I will probably look at upgrading.


----------



## DMGrier

speedyink said:


> I don't know if this is true anymore with the release of Lion.  The minimum requirements are double that of Windows 7 and soon to be Windows 8.  I can also feel it while using Lion on my macbook, core 2 duo and 2gb of ram.  Feels less than snappy, and the cpu fan winds up much more than before, on stupid tasks like opening a video or browsing around the file system while listening to music.
> 
> Sorry, don't mean to butt in, just saying.



I can't believe how much Lion requires to run anymore, it is like the bulk issue we experience of Vista and I do not see any features worth the need of 2GB of memory that I see on it. 

On the note of buying a PC and installing OSX it is pretty much impossible due to the fact of lack of hardware support since Apple only uses only certain hardware example being if you buy a Asus running a Nvidia 540m GTX there is no such driver for that. Plus we use different things like the kind of wifi cards and so on. There are select models that have been able to run OSX, one I know is the Dell mini 9 and if I am correct no PC can run past 10.5.


----------



## speedyink

tlarkin said:


> The system requirements are still less, and OS X 10.7 takes up a lot less HD space.  However, I honestly haven't messed with Lion all that much.  I have a copy I got via the store but haven't had time to play with it.  Plus, in my experience with OS X is that I never upgrade until the .3 or .4 upgrade comes along.  So, when 10.7.3 comes out I will probably look at upgrading.



Windows 7:
1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
1 gigabyte (GB) RAM (32-bit) or 2 GB RAM (64-bit)
16 GB available hard disk space (32-bit) or 20 GB (64-bit)


OSX Lion:
Intel Core 2 Duo, Core i3, Core i5, Core i7, or Xeon processor
2GB of memory
7GB of available space

The system requirements are NOT less.  The only requirement that is less is Hard drive space, which is not exactly a huge issue considering the size of hdd's and ssd's nowadays.


----------



## Des_Zac

speedyink said:


> Windows 7:
> 1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
> 1 gigabyte (GB) RAM (32-bit) or 2 GB RAM (64-bit)
> 16 GB available hard disk space (32-bit) or 20 GB (64-bit)
> 
> 
> OSX Lion:
> Intel Core 2 Duo, Core i3, Core i5, Core i7, or Xeon processor
> 2GB of memory
> 7GB of available space
> 
> The system requirements are NOT less.  The only requirement that is less is Hard drive space, which is not exactly a huge issue considering the size of hdd's and ssd's nowadays.



What? That's completely wrong. 

OSX Lion:
Intel Core 2 Duo, Core i3, Core i5, Core i7, or Xeon processor
- It only supports Intel Processors, the only unsupported one is Core Duo, which was only used 5 1/2 years ago.
2GB of memory
-It's 64-bit
7GB of available space
-Amazingly low amount of space.


----------



## tlarkin

speedyink said:


> Windows 7:
> 1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
> 1 gigabyte (GB) RAM (32-bit) or 2 GB RAM (64-bit)
> 16 GB available hard disk space (32-bit) or 20 GB (64-bit)
> 
> 
> OSX Lion:
> Intel Core 2 Duo, Core i3, Core i5, Core i7, or Xeon processor
> 2GB of memory
> 7GB of available space
> 
> The system requirements are NOT less.  The only requirement that is less is Hard drive space, which is not exactly a huge issue considering the size of hdd's and ssd's nowadays.



That is because Lion is a pure 64bit OS , and uses 64bit memory addressing.  It dropped all support for Rosetta and PPC in 10.6 and then went full 64 in 10.7.   That is also why it requires a core 2 duo as well, and the first gen Intel Macs that have Core Duos cannot run 10.7.

You gotta compare the 64bit requirements bro.


----------



## speedyink

tlarkin said:


> That is because Lion is a pure 64bit OS , and uses 64bit memory addressing.  It dropped all support for Rosetta and PPC in 10.6 and then went full 64 in 10.7.   That is also why it requires a core 2 duo as well, and the first gen Intel Macs that have Core Duos cannot run 10.7.
> 
> You gotta compare the 64bit requirements bro.



You said they were less, which they clearly aren't except for hard drive space.  

Whatever the system requirement are, it still feels bloated on 2gb of ram and a core 2 duo cpu.  That's not cool.  Snow Leopard was great but Lion is way more taxing to the system.


----------



## bkribbs

Lion runs nicely on my laptop with an i3, and 4 gigs of ram, and a hd 3000.


----------



## DMGrier

tlarkin said:


> That is because Lion is a pure 64bit OS , and uses 64bit memory addressing.  It dropped all support for Rosetta and PPC in 10.6 and then went full 64 in 10.7.   That is also why it requires a core 2 duo as well, and the first gen Intel Macs that have Core Duos cannot run 10.7.
> 
> You gotta compare the 64bit requirements bro.



So what about the 64 bit Linux OS that only use 1 GB, are they not pure 64 bit?


----------



## tlarkin

DMGrier said:


> So what about the 64 bit Linux OS that only use 1 GB, are they not pure 64 bit?



Depends on the hardware, dual channel means you are required 2 sticks, 1gig sticks are so cheap, why put in 2x 512mb sticks?  heck can you even buy 512 sticks anymore?

That is just a product of the times.


----------



## speedyink

bkribbs said:


> Lion runs nicely on my laptop with an i3, and 4 gigs of ram, and a hd 3000.



Well I should damn well hope so, lol.  An i3 with 4 gigs of ram should run smoothly regardless of the OS.


----------



## DMGrier

I have a i3 with 4 GB of memory on a 64 Bit system and Ubuntu can run on 512 MB ( I think that is for 32 Bit) but preferred 1 GB.


----------



## tlarkin

Linux can be tailored to run on a wrist watch man.....you can install and run Linux on anything pretty much, especially if you compile micro kernels and minimal system service (daemons) on it.


----------



## wolfeking

DMGrier said:


> I have a i3 with 4 GB of memory on a 64 Bit system and Ubuntu can run on 512 MB ( I think that is for 32 Bit) but preferred 1 GB.


Ubuntu can still run on 128MB of PC133MHz on a P3-500MHz. It just wont run Unity.


----------



## tlarkin

Oh duh!  I forgot that Lion runs apps in sandbox mode, which is why it takes up a bit more memory.  Each app runs in it's own sandbox so that it cannot affect, crash, or even exploit other apps or the system.

They are sort of bringing in features of iOS into OS X now it seems.


----------

