Should I keep my MacBook?

[kim6ball]

I just bought a macbook last week and I am having second thoughts. I feel like I spent too much. Its my first laptop and I've always wanted an Apple computer. When I see the cheap PC's at best buy or sams club with 500 GB RAM and 4GB memory and 2.0 ghz(which is the model I got) it makes me want to return it.
Are the quality of the macs that much better to justify the cost? Any advice is a appreciated.

[MedHead]

Well I had the same kind of dilemma when I got mine, one of my friends was getting a pretty high spec dell for around the same money I was paying. However while the Dell looked better on paper he's had big problems with viruses and the os being generally useless. Where as I have had nothing but a very minor wireless problem on my macbook. Even performance wise my uMB seemed to be snappier than his dell xps.

[andalusia]

I just bought a macbook last week and I am having second thoughts. I feel like I spent too much. Its my first laptop and I've always wanted an Apple computer. When I see the cheap PC's at best buy or sams club with 500 GB RAM and 4GB memory and 2.0 ghz(which is the model I got) it makes me want to return it.
Are the quality of the macs that much better to justify the cost? Any advice is a appreciated.

For me, OSX is enough to justify the cost. Also, the design is a big factor. Not to mention the innovative ideas, such as Magsafe, lights for battery status, ease of upgrading, etc etc.

However, upon second thought, maybe it's just the Apple logo on the top of the lid that draws me in.. ;)

[hellrider]

The cost of Macs and PC can be debated into eternity, but it really comes down to what you will use the machine for. Also, personal preference is important. Do you enjoy Windows? If money weren't an issue, would you still go PC? I personally love the design of my unibody MacBook Pro - more than any PC laptop.

I would stick with the Mac, it is simply built better than any budget laptops out there. You get what you pay for with Macs. Also, expect the Macbook to retain a good chunk of its resale value after a few years.

[Finlandboy]

the main reason for me is OS X!!!

i no longer have to worry about viruses, crashes, errors....etc.

OS X just 'works' and i love it :D

[Burnsey]

Trust me in the end you will find yourself feeling ripped off with the windows machines. You will get far more enjoyment and productivity out of your mac, even if the crappy Dell has 52000 GB more ram.

[JamesGorman]

You may get 4 or 5 years of great computing from your macbook, whereas on the windows computer, you'll start experiencing slow downs within the first year, if not sooner. Your lucky if you get 2 or 3 years of reliable computing from the windows laptop. Stick with the macbook, it'll probably save you money in the long run.


Just FYI, if you use this mac for even 3 years, thats almost 300 dollars you could potentially save in not having to buy virus software..

[rgarjr]

A lot of people say its OS X, but the thing is, that's only 129 bucks. Just keep your Mac dude. These things are awesome machines. From their gorgeous looks to the reliability they perform.

[JamesGorman]

A lot of people say its OS X, but the thing is, that's only 129 bucks. Just keep your Mac dude.

There not saying OSX just for the price. People say keep it because of OSX because OSX is simply a better, more reliable OS. The experience and functionality is just better.

[aethelbert]

If there's no extra functionality in it for you, I would suggest that you return it to get something that better fits your needs while saving the price difference. Windows is equally, if not more so, capable as Mac OS.

[emt1]

I just bought a macbook last week and I am having second thoughts. I feel like I spent too much. Its my first laptop and I've always wanted an Apple computer. When I see the cheap PC's at best buy or sams club with 500 GB RAM and 4GB memory and 2.0 ghz(which is the model I got) it makes me want to return it.
Are the quality of the macs that much better to justify the cost? Any advice is a appreciated.

Please look up the differences between RAM and hard drive space. The computer you saw had 4GB of RAM, which is the same as memory, and a 500GB hard drive. The words are not interchangeable.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

You may get 4 or 5 years of great computing from your macbook, whereas on the windows computer, you'll start experiencing slow downs within the first year, if not sooner. Your lucky if you get 2 or 3 years of reliable computing from the windows laptop. Stick with the macbook, it'll probably save you money in the long run.


Just FYI, if you use this mac for even 3 years, thats almost 300 dollars you could potentially save in not having to buy virus software..

You do realize that all computer's hard drives get crapped up with stuff right? A Mac is just as susceptible to slow-downs as a PC. Only 2-3 years? I got more than 5 years from my last Dell. I would have gotten more, but it seems that it's got a busted motherboard.

I've had a few PCs with no anti-virus software whatsoever and they've been fine.

Though with a Mac, an old one is still usable. I've got a 733 MHz PM that I use for PS work in Tiger, and I may upgrade it to Leopard. (There's a great work-around for that.) Try running Vista on a 733 MHz PC! :)

And do keep you MacBook. You won't be disappointed once you unlock its power.

[jessica.]

I just bought a macbook last week and I am having second thoughts. I feel like I spent too much. Its my first laptop and I've always wanted an Apple computer. When I see the cheap PC's at best buy or sams club with 500 GB RAM and 4GB memory and 2.0 ghz(which is the model I got) it makes me want to return it.
Are the quality of the macs that much better to justify the cost? Any advice is a appreciated.

Nope, quality is not at all a factor with Apple computers over any PC. It's the OS that keeps me buying because it tends to require less maintenance than any of my windows boxes ever did.

[JamesGorman]

You do realize that all computer's hard drives get crapped up with stuff right? A Mac is just as susceptible to slow-downs as a PC. Only 2-3 years? I got more than 5 years from my last Dell. I would have gotten more, but it seems that it's got a busted motherboard.

I've had a few PCs with no anti-virus software whatsoever and they've been fine.

Though with a Mac, an old one is still usable. I've got a 733 MHz PM that I use for PS work in Tiger, and I may upgrade it to Leopard. (There's a great work-around for that.) Try running Vista on a 733 MHz PC! :)

And do keep you MacBook. You won't be disappointed once you unlock its power.

I do understand that hard drives do get crapped up with stuff on both OS's but OSX has better management for files and what not and from my experience, keeps things running smoother much longer than windows does. Just to echo on what you said about not having anti virus and being okay, I too was ok without any anti virus, but thats just because of smart computing and not going to high risk sites or downloading from untrustworthy sites. For most people they are better off to buy anti virus when they have a windows computer.

[JamesGorman]

If there's no extra functionality in it for you, I would suggest that you return it to get something that better fits your needs while saving the price difference. Windows is equally, if not more so, capable as Mac OS.

More capable than windows? That really depends on what your using it for, but as for ease of use, safety, and reliability, I say OSX wins hands down.

[Burning Radio]

I too am buying a Macbook for my first laptop and I won't regret it a bit. After using a friend's brand-new cheap Dell, I was so bored after 2 mins and didn't enjoy it at all! I just kept paying attention to all the design flaws and it was vista (what I'm used to already) and was just the boring same old, same old. I can't wait to use my Mac. I love learning new things, so the entire OS X experience will be terrific. I also appreciate the design of the computer more than some average users.

I honestly only have 3 programs in mind, all freeware, to download when I get my Mac. On a windows machine, I'd be making a list of programs to uninstall first and then another list of programs to download. :D

I've been eyeing a macbook since the whitebooks were introduced and Tiger came out.

[aethelbert]

More capable than windows? That really depends on what your using it for, but as for ease of use, safety, and reliability, I say OSX wins hands down.
Despite the fact that ease of use, safety, and reliability are a part of the user experience, they don't determine an operating system's capability in performing a versatile range of tasks. I personally find all three of these aspects equal across both systems.

[JamesGorman]

Despite the fact that ease of use, safety, and reliability are a part of the user experience, they don't determine an operating system's capability in performing a versatile range of tasks. I personally find all three of these aspects equal across both systems.

I think both OS's are capable. I do feel safer with OSX though, and thats just my personal opinion. I used to despise mac computers, but since switching I don't think I could ever go back. In no means am I an apple fan boy or whatever people call them, as I do still use windows occasionally and have really no problem with it, besides vista of course, but I really think windows went downhill after XP. With the release of windows 7 RC, things are looking up for windows, but even after they finally release Windows 7, I could not possibly go back. Besides, I think Snow Leopard will put windows 7 to shame. But thats yet to be determined.

[tayshon]

I made the switch 8 months ago, no more headaches no more viruses. Cost was not a issue with me when it came to peace of mine. Just brought our 2nd Mac for hubby. I think you should keep it, you will save yourself so many headaches in the future.

[dukebound85]

i am selling my first gen mb for $700 tomorrow after having it for around 3 YEARS

resale value is pretty good

[Demosthenes X]

Just FYI, if you use this mac for even 3 years, thats almost 300 dollars you could potentially save in not having to buy virus software..

Who the heck is paying $100/year for AV software?

[o2xygen]

The macs have a higher resale value, sturdier (IMO), look much nicer, lighter, longer battery life, better screens (IMO again..), and the huge trackpad is to die for.

The Dell may look nice on paper, but really its probably going to **** itself in a year. As a long hard PC user, I would upgrade/buy new every christmas. But with macs, I upgrade after 2 years at the earliest. A lot of people I know are still using their 1st Gen MBP's and are not planning on upgrading anytime soon.

[mosx]

Honestly, if you feel you paid too much, that feeling is going to get worse as time goes on.

When I got my first MacBook, about 3 months in, I got curious to see what was available on the PC side of things. I had believed the Apple hype that I had gotten what I had paid for and it was a good value. But as I went to newegg and started looking... I realized I had paid way too much money for my MacBook. At that time my MacBook was $1406. For that I got a 2GHz Core 2 Duo, 1GB of RAM, an 80GB HDD, an Intel GMA 950 GPU, and a 13.3" screen. For just over $800, a little more than half as much, I could have gotten a similar CPU, 17" screen, double the HDD space, twice the RAM, and a GeForce Go 7600 GT.

Conveniently, around that time OS X started to show its true colors. Meaning it wasn't as stable as Windows, plus the optical drive started to fail and Apple's build quality started to shine with the case starting to discolor and crack. I've regretted my purchase every day since then.

Especially after going through 2 replacements thanks to poor build quality and even worse repair work that left the first two systems in even worse shape than I sent them out in.

And now the hardware difference between a PC and a Mac is even greater.

For the same $1299 as that entry UniBody MacBook, you can get a PC with a 1680x1050 15.4" screen, 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB of RAM, 320GB 7200 RPM HDD, 1GB GeForce 9800M GS, blu-ray, HDMI, VGA, card reader, etc.

If you want a 13.3" system, Dell will you the Studio XPS 13 which ships with a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB of DDR3 RAM, GeForce 9400M + GeForce 9500M 256MB running in Hybrid SLI, 320GB 7200RPM HDD, HDMI, card reader, etc.

For $999 you can get a 15.4" or 16" system with specs similar to the 15.4" system above, but with a 1GB GeForce 9650M GT. Thats essentially more GPU power with FOUR TIMES the video memory of the MacBook Pro costing twice as much, and more GPU power with double the video memory of the $2,499 MacBook Pro.

When it comes to other important things, like extended warranties, Apple's are the worst. You pay more than you would for one from a PC manufacturer and they don't even offer the same perks, like liquid damage, accidental damage, on-site support, or even 24/7 phone support.

As for build quality, despite the fact that people love to go on about the aluminum casing, the aluminum housing the screen and covering the bottom of the UniBody systems is soft and weak and dents and scratches extremely easily. The "UniBody" piece itself bends if hit. A plastic system will come out of the same hit without a mark on it.

Apple's plastic MacBooks are built even worse. They have known and admitted build quality issues that cause the casing to crack and break down just from regular use. A plastic PC won't have this problem.

As far as OS X being better than Windows? Well, there is quite a bit OS X can't do that Windows can, like have good game support as well as play modern video like blu-ray. OS X can't even play DVDs up to the same level as Windows, as OS X currently does not support full bitstream decoding of video.

OS X is also not any more stable than Windows. I know this from experience. Tiger and Leopard are the only OSes I've used this entire decade that have a knack for hard locking the entire system. Prior to owning a Mac, I hadn't seen an OS completely and fully lock up since the original Windows 98.

Honestly, you really should return the system if you're already feeling buyers remorse. It will only get worse with time. On top of that, if you go with a PC notebook, you'll get a much faster and much more capable system for the same price as that MacBook, and you'll get an operating system that can actually be called "modern" and will actually take advantage of the hardware in your system. You'll also have the option of protecting your system with optional warranties that will cover both failures as well as accidents.

[yetanotherdave]

Look at those specs carefully before trading it in. The speed of the processor means nothing these days. It's all about which generation the processor it is. Think of it like gears on your car, the rpm (mhz) that the engine is turning doesn't determine the speed of the car, the gear (generation of processor) is what makes the difference. In first gear at 3000rpm you'll be doing 30mph, in 5th gear at 3000rpm you'll be doing 80mph!
I have a 2.4Ghz celeron D with 1 gig ram as my work desktop. Last week it took 10 hours to compress a 6gig zip file. I did the same compression on a first generation 1.8 core2duo with 512Mb ram and it completed the same task in 20 minutes. On a current generation core2duo that figure would go down again.

Look at the speed of the ram, is the 4gig 667mhz or 800mhz, or 1066Mhz, this will make a big difference. In the whitebook apple sue 800, in the aluinium ones they use 1066, I'm betting the budget laptop uses 667mhz.

Also take into consideration that the budget laptop will come with vista, vista will barely run on 2gig ram, os x is very fast onb 2gig of ram, because vista requires a lot more power to run.
this also applies to the processor, vista will demand a lot more from it than os x will.

The budget manufactures always try and make the specs look as good as possible, but it can be very misleading. I wonder what graphics processor they have, and what the screen is like (resolution etc)

[Burning Radio]

Look at those specs carefully before trading it in. The speed of the processor means nothing these days. It's all about which generation the processor it is. Think of it like gears on your car, the rpm (mhz) that the engine is turning doesn't determine the speed of the car, the gear (generation of processor) is what makes the difference. In first gear at 3000rpm you'll be doing 30mph, in 5th gear at 3000rpm you'll be doing 80mph!
I have a 2.4Ghz celeron D with 1 gig ram as my work desktop. Last week it took 10 hours to compress a 6gig zip file. I did the same compression on a first generation 1.8 core2duo with 512Mb ram and it completed the same task in 20 minutes. On a current generation core2duo that figure would go down again.

Look at the speed of the ram, is the 4gig 667mhz or 800mhz, or 1066Mhz, this will make a big difference. In the whitebook apple sue 800, in the aluinium ones they use 1066, I'm betting the budget laptop uses 667mhz.

Also take into consideration that the budget laptop will come with vista, vista will barely run on 2gig ram, os x is very fast onb 2gig of ram, because vista requires a lot more power to run.
this also applies to the processor, vista will demand a lot more from it than os x will.

The budget manufactures always try and make the specs look as good as possible, but it can be very misleading. I wonder what graphics processor they have, and what the screen is like (resolution etc)


+1 VERY good points. Honestly, after seeing what I could get on the PC end with 1500, I still don't feel like it would make much of a difference and don't want to find out. Definitely check out what you're getting before you buy.

[Dale Cooper]

Most of the time computers are not performing at nearly their maximum. Those hours of using OS X is (in my opinion) absolutely worth the few minutes you may have saved for heavy computing with a PC.

[polaris20]

I just bought a macbook last week and I am having second thoughts. I feel like I spent too much. Its my first laptop and I've always wanted an Apple computer. When I see the cheap PC's at best buy or sams club with 500 GB RAM and 4GB memory and 2.0 ghz(which is the model I got) it makes me want to return it.
Are the quality of the macs that much better to justify the cost? Any advice is a appreciated.

The MacBook is all about perceived value. If you like the aluminum casing, and like using OS X, then it's a good value. Apple's support is also better than HP, Dell, or Asus in my experience.

Computers aren't just about raw numbers. If you're looking at a machine strictly by what processor, drive, ram, and graphics card and not the overall package of the computer + operating system, then the MacBook probably isn't for you.

I have the uMBP, and it's definitely a sturdy machine; no scratches, dents, or otherwise. And I'm certainly not gentle with it. OS X has been extraordinarily stable even while running 4 to 5 virtual machines as well as having Firefox, Entourage, and Excel open.

At the same time I run an HP workstation with Windows 7 x64 and Ubuntu. Both also great OSes.

I would say that if you're going to go to Windows, that's fine. But get a quality machine such as a Lenovo Thinkpad or high end Dell. I personally would avoid HP; yes I run one, no I didn't pay for it (though their workstations are relatively decent, albeit overpriced). I find their service to be pretty bad these days.

Something like the Thinkpad T400 with the same specs as the 2.4Ghz MB but with a dedicated ATI Radeon 3470 and an ExpressCard slot would run $1200, and it's actually a solid machine, unlike the crap you'll find at Best Buy.

[ikos]

I got my macbook 2.4GHz three weeks ago and absolutely love it. It's my third laptop that I've owned (Toshiba and Sony being the previous two) and it is such a huge difference in build quality, ease of use and ofcourse the OS X Leopard. It puts a smile on my face each time I turn it on! When I look at pc laptops now they all look ridiculous with all that glossy cheap plastic. Plus don't let the specs get you down, 2gb of ram running OS X and 2gb running vista is a huge difference. And if you think that you have to have the 4gb ram it's just another $100 that you can upgrade later on. So keep the Mac and stop worrying, enjoy!!

[JamesGorman]

Who the heck is paying $100/year for AV software?

Norton antvirus is $89.99 Before tax, which after tax, In canada anyway, would bring it up to $100.78. This may differ a couple dollars either way, depending on which province your in.

[polaris20]

Norton antvirus is $89.99 Before tax, which after tax, In canada anyway, would bring it up to $100.78. This may differ a couple dollars either way, depending on which province your in.

Norton AV is horrid, and should never, ever be used. There are quite a few free solutions that are excellent, such as Avast and AVG that do the job better. If you want to pay, ESET NOD32 is a better choice, and that's only $40.

[mosx]

Look at those specs carefully before trading it in. The speed of the processor means nothing these days. It's all about which generation the processor it is. Think of it like gears on your car, the rpm (mhz) that the engine is turning doesn't determine the speed of the car, the gear (generation of processor) is what makes the difference. In first gear at 3000rpm you'll be doing 30mph, in 5th gear at 3000rpm you'll be doing 80mph!
I have a 2.4Ghz celeron D with 1 gig ram as my work desktop. Last week it took 10 hours to compress a 6gig zip file. I did the same compression on a first generation 1.8 core2duo with 512Mb ram and it completed the same task in 20 minutes. On a current generation core2duo that figure would go down again.

Look at the speed of the ram, is the 4gig 667mhz or 800mhz, or 1066Mhz, this will make a big difference. In the whitebook apple sue 800, in the aluinium ones they use 1066, I'm betting the budget laptop uses 667mhz.

Also take into consideration that the budget laptop will come with vista, vista will barely run on 2gig ram, os x is very fast onb 2gig of ram, because vista requires a lot more power to run.
this also applies to the processor, vista will demand a lot more from it than os x will.

The budget manufactures always try and make the specs look as good as possible, but it can be very misleading. I wonder what graphics processor they have, and what the screen is like (resolution etc)

Theres a lot of things wrong with this post.

First of all, you'd be hard pressed to find a PC notebook running a Core 2 Duo that is not Penryn based these days. Let's not forget that PC notebooks typically upgrade WELL before Apple. Apple only upgrades twice a year in most cases. A Spring and a Fall update. PC manufacturers upgrade as the new hardware becomes available. If you can find a Merom based Core 2 Duo PC notebook being sold still, its either a refurb or very old stock that nobody will buy.

Any Core 2 Duo system you buy new from Dell, HP, Asus, MSI, Gateway, eMachines, the list goes on, will have a Penryn revision CPU in it.

At this moment, having DDR2 667 versus DDR3 1066 makes very little difference in a notebook. When it comes to gaming, it does make a dramatic difference with the 9400M, because DDR3 is fast enough so that one channel is basically good enough to feed the CPU and the other channel is essentially free and dedicated to the GPU. But when it comes to how it affects overall CPU performance, the difference is almost not there. That will change when Intel finally starts making a mobile version of Nehalem, which can take full advantage of DDR3's triple channel capabilities and is actually fast enough to be able to keep up with that kind of bandwidth. But right now the Core 2 Duo benefits very little, if at all from DDR3. Again, the only time DDR3 is beneficial is when we're discussing the 9400M being used to play games. But why bother with that? For $1299 you can get something with a 9800M GS and outperform any of the MacBook Pros by about double. A $1,000 PC with a 1GB GeForce 9650M GT will still outperform any of the MacBook Pros, and it will especially outperform the $1,999 MBP with 256MB of video memory because of that ridiculous lack of memory. Even though the 9650M is only slightly faster than the 9600M, the fact that PCs at that price have 4x the video memory will allow them to perform much better at higher resolutions because they have more dedicated memory to work with.

It's also not true that Windows Vista is more of a resource hog than Leopard. Both have almost exactly the same system requirements. And having run both on the same hardware with a 2GHz Core 2 Duo and 1GB of RAM (way back at first launch) and more recently on the UniBody MacBook, I can tell you from experience that Leopard is more of a RAM hog (it runs AWFUL on 1GB) and Leopard throws more CPU cycles at every task than Windows does. Leopard also tends to just run slower and feel slower than Vista SP1. Windows 7 makes the gap even bigger.

Also, if you want to talk about screen quality, its a well known fact that MacBooks tend to have some of the worst screens available. My LED backlit UniBody MacBook screen is brighter than my CCFL backlit HP screen, but the HP screen has more natural colors and is sharper overall despite being the same resolution and 2" bigger. The HP's viewing angles are also significantly improved over the MacBooks screen. And the best part is the HP is more than a year older than the MacBook and, at the time of purchase, was almost $500 less. And it has dedicated graphics and double the memory!

[windywoo]

My experience of Vista is that it runs on 1GB but is quite sluggish. It will do the basics if thats all thats needed. It runs briskly on 2GB of RAM but I don't know if I would trust it for something intensive like gaming with that much. 4GB is great for gaming on Vista.

Leopard is running on my 1GHz iBook with 768MB of RAM, but I wish I could go back to Tiger (Tiger won't let me use my mobile phone as a tether). It seemed very smooth on the 2GB iMac in the Apple Store.

And about the antivirus, someone mentioned the free ones which are fine, but I want to correct that $100 quote for Norton. Maybe the initial purchase would be $100 but thereafter the fee to continue receiving updates is much less. I can't give you an exact figure because I never use Norton :)

[JamesGorman]

My experience of Vista is that it runs on 1GB but is quite sluggish. It will do the basics if thats all thats needed. It runs briskly on 2GB of RAM but I don't know if I would trust it for something intensive like gaming with that much. 4GB is great for gaming on Vista.

Leopard is running on my 1GHz iBook with 768MB of RAM, but I wish I could go back to Tiger (Tiger won't let me use my mobile phone as a tether). It seemed very smooth on the 2GB iMac in the Apple Store.

And about the antivirus, someone mentioned the free ones which are fine, but I want to correct that $100 quote for Norton. Maybe the initial purchase would be $100 but thereafter the fee to continue receiving updates is much less. I can't give you an exact figure because I never use Norton :)

The price of norton is per year. When ever my subscription was over, I had to go and buy another norton AV for full price. Although there is cheaper solutions than norton, even at 50 dollars, if you use your computer for 5 years, thats an extra 250 dollars. I guess in the long run, thats not to bad, but thats 250 dollars that wouldn't be necessary to spend if using mac OSX.

On a side note, I realize not everyone needs, or even buys AV software for their PC's. So maybe the OP would not even need to purchase software, Im just saying that if he does purchase it, than thats money that would not have to be spent if he/she were using OSX.

[windywoo]

Norton is $100 a year? Yipes. I use Kaspersky and it costs me 15pounds a year (I think that must be about $25) and I can put it on 3 machines. Student prices ftw.

In fact I don't even bother to put it on my dad's old computer because it would slow it down, and free antivirus does the trick. Its really a case of not downloading crap like free smilies and screensavers, and being behind a router helps. But with wireless these days, routers are very common.

[JamesGorman]

Norton is $100 a year? Yipes. I use Kaspersky and it costs me 15pounds a year (I think that must be about $25) and I can put it on 3 machines. Student prices ftw.

In fact I don't even bother to put it on my dad's old computer because it would slow it down, and free antivirus does the trick. Its really a case of not downloading crap like free smilies and screensavers, and being behind a router helps. But with wireless these days, routers are very common.

Kaspersky is that cheap? wow, in canada its 79.99 before tax, so just around 90 with tax..

[mosx]

I just want to point to this: http://www.ibuypower.com/ibp/store/configurator.aspx?mid=418

2.4GHz Core 2 Duo (Penryn on the Montevina platform), 2GB DDR3, 250GB 7200RPM HDD, proper 16x9 display, Radeon 4650 512MB all for $879 For a little less than $200 more you can bump it up to a 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB of RAM, and 320GB HDD.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834220499 $1,199. Screen resolution is a little low for 15.4", but you get a 1GB GeForce 9650M GT, 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB of RAM, 320GB 7200 RPM HDD, HDMI, VGA, eSATA, card reader, fingerprint reader, 30 day zero bright dot warranty on the screen, 1 year accidental damage standard, and 2 year standard warranty, along with a free case.

Even better: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834220526 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB, 320GB 7200 RPM HDD, blu-ray(!), GeForce GT 120M 1GB, 16" proper 16x9 display, same 30 day screen warranty, 1 year accidental, 2 year standard warranties, HDMI, etc.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834152099 15.4" 1680x1050 screen, 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB of RAM, 320GB HDD, GeForce 9800M GS 1GB, blu-ray, HDMI, Firewire, eSATA, and it supports Dolby Digital Live. So if you've got that system hooked up to your HDTV and surround sound via an HDMI cable, you'll get true 5.1 sound out of your games. It only weighs 5.9 pounds and is only 1.22" thick at the back. All that for $1299, the same as the UniBody MacBook that gets you half the RAM, half the HDD space, a GPU thats not even close to being in the same league (probably not even 1/8th as powerful), no HDMI, no ExpressCard, slower processor, lower quality and smaller screen.. basically damn near nothing in comparison.

Ugh, I have a SERIOUS case of buyers remorse regarding my MacBook right now.

[tabovbo]

mosx, why are you even on this website if you have buyers remorse. Why dont you go ahead and sell your macbook if you dont like it. Remember, Macs arent for everyone, thats the great thing about choice. I think your logic is VERY flawed. Dont you realize that the sum of the parts DOES NOT always equal the whole.
Most people buy macs for one or more of the following reasons'

1. Stability
2. Design
3. OSx

There are many other reasons (especially for people involved in creative pursuits). You are essentially comparing a 38K Nissan 350z with 330 HP to a 60k Porsche cayman S with 296 HP (might have been updated to more horsepower). Yes the Nissan might have more horsepower and might offer a much better bang for the buck, but there are many people willing to pay more for a Porsche because of its combination of refinement, luxury / status and performance. With the Nissan, you get performance and not much else. Same analogy with a 26k 260HP Honda accord and a 38K BMW 328i. Stop pushing hardware specs, it doesnt mean much. To be honest, I see where you are coming from, but it doesnt matter if a computer has all the specs in the world if you dont even use it. Why would anyone want to watch a Blu-ray movie on a 13" PC ?? Who cares about a 256MB graphics card if I dont play games (not even solitaire), The difference between a 1" thick PC and a 1.22" thick PC is major, lets not even go there. As for HDMI, why would I need HDMI on my PC when I dont plan on ever connecting it to a TV (sorry but thats what a PS3 or XBOX or appletv is for... at least in my case). And as for weight, I am about to go back to school so every pound counts.
I was in a store the other day and I saw a sony laptop that had a pretty nice design which I really liked. Unfortunately, it cost $1900 (pretty well loaded though) and was built of really flimsy plastic some of which was chrome plated (which cheapened it a bit). In the same store (Bestbuy), I played a bit with a macbook (unibody). Night and day difference. For me design carries a bit of a premium and you cant really put a price tag on it. Even though I am an Engineer, the only other thing that is more important than design is ease of use which OSX definately has....
So there you have it, another point of view. By the way, I currently have a 5 year old dell 600m with a 40gb hardrive and 512mb of RAM which I should be upgrading on the 8th of June to a shiny new unibody macbook. I like my dell but I am not really a fan of windows, or the designs of their laptops. I will likely dualboot windows 7 with the laptop because it looks promising. Even if I end up hating OSX (highly unlikely based on my experience), I still LOVE the design of the MACS. That alone is worth the price premium...
Good Night

[mosx]

Remember, Macs arent for everyone, thats the great thing about choice. I think your logic is VERY flawed. Dont you realize that the sum of the parts DOES NOT always equal the whole.

That is true, there is more to a computer than just the parts. However, when you bring this argument up, it shows how Macs fail in an even greater sense.

Most people buy macs for one or more of the following reasons'

1. Stability

And I can tell you from using various versions of OS X on multiple Macs, along with the experience of former Mac owners I know (who switched back to Windows), OS X does not have the stability people claim it to have. It is honestly nowhere near as stable as XP SP2/3 or Vista SP1/2. When I bought my Mac, after using OS X for a couple of weeks and having the system hard lock when emptying the trash (nothing but JPG files my friend had sent me), that was the first time I had seen a system fully lock up since the first version of Windows 98. Not even Vista's beta locked up like that. Applications tend to be more stable under Windows as well. I've had iTunes, Safari, Firefox, Mail, and DVD Player, and other apps crash for seemingly no reason under OS X. None of that happens on Windows.

2. Design

This is subjective. The UniBody systems are no more than HP's old two tone and glass design combined with Sony's keyboard in a metal frame. The "UniBody" piece in the middle of the system is nice and sturdy, but the bottom and top metal are soft and more prone to denting and scratching than plastic cracking on a well built PC. My year and a half old HP's bottom and top plastic, especially the bottom, are more sturdy than the aluminum housing on my MacBooks top and bottom. The bottom on my HP is solid as a rock, yet if I hold the MacBook I feel as if I might warp the aluminum if I have too tihgt of a grip.

3. OSx

Which is overrated and, honestly, not as capable as Windows. OS X uses more RAM and more CPU cycles than Vista. Video playback isn't as optimized as Windows. Third party software, in comparison to Windows, is virtually non-existent. In some cases you only have ONE piece of software to choose from for a specific task. Under Windows you have endless choices. We all know the 3D support under OS X isn't even up to where Windows was with DirectX and OpenGL back in the 90s, seeing as how poorly OpenGL native games run under OS X. You can't play modern video, pass modern audio over digital connection (8 channel LPCM over HDMI like you can in Windows). OS X doesn't allow you to set custom resolutions or even properly control external displays if you're running a portable Mac. I mean I could go on all night. The only way someone can truly be happy with OS X is if they either bought into the hype, or they were Mac users all their life and they've never experience all Windows has to offer over OS X. I remember the first few days I had my MacBook. I didn't want to put Windows on it. I wanted it to be OS X only. But I found out pretty quickly that I'd need Windows to still do what I wanted and needed to do.

There are many other reasons (especially for people involved in creative pursuits). You are essentially comparing a 38K Nissan 350z with 330 HP to a 60k Porsche cayman S with 296 HP (might have been updated to more horsepower). Yes the Nissan might have more horsepower and might offer a much better bang for the buck, but there are many people willing to pay more for a Porsche because of its combination of refinement, luxury / status and performance. With the Nissan, you get performance and not much else. Same analogy with a 26k 260HP Honda accord and a 38K BMW 328i.

The car analogy fails miserably. I don't even know why those who defend Apple still use.

The difference between a Porsche and a Nissan, or a Honda and a BMW, is much different than the difference between a Mac and a PC. BMW and Porsches are built much better. Everything from the various components in the engines, to the seats, to even the mountain brackets for the seats are all of MUCH higher quality than a Nissan or Honda.

Macs and PCs use the same exact parts. In a Mac you'll find the same Intel processor you get in a PC, the same Intel or nvidia chipset, the same Intel or nvidia or ATI GPU, the same HDDs (though lower speed and capacity on a Mac), the same RAM (though, again, lower capacity), now you'll find the same LG DVD writers (though in a different form factor), the same LG screens (though sometimes with a different backlight).. I mean, everything is the same. The only thing thats different is the casing. And, like I explained above, it is certainly not better on a Mac. The UniBody MacBook (and Pro) really do feel as if you can warp the top and bottom casing if you grip it too tightly. That is not the case on a well built consumer notebook like a Dell, HP, Asus, MSI, ibuypower, etc.

On the issue of performance, cheaper PCs greatly outperform more expensive Macs. When you get into the same price range as Macs, theres absolutely no comparison because a similarly priced PC will completely blow away the Mac. The $1,500 and above price range in PCs these days brings 2.6 to 2.9GHz Core 2 Duos, 2GHz and above Core 2 Quads, as well as Core 2 Extremes (quad core), GeForce 9800M GTs, dual GeForce 9800M GTs, single GeForce GTX 260s, and above. Even in the compact 13.3" range, Dell offers a system thats barely over an inch thick, LED backlit screen, dual GPUs running in Hybrid SLI with a faster processor, twice the memory, faster HDD that is also double the capacity of the same priced MacBook ($1299).

As far as luxury or being a premium product goes, the Mac fails there as well. Premium and luxury products always have more features than the cheaper products and are built much better. Macs are not built better at all. Macs certainly don't offer more features either. In fact, Macs are lacking in features even compared to systems now several years old. These days, on notebooks, standard features include HDMI, card readers, fingerprint readers, full size ExpressCard, eSATA, Firewire (which not all MacBooks have!), even Dolby Digital Live! capabilities. Macs offer either none of these features, or a half assed stripped down version. Like HDMI, the only way to get that is through an adapter. When you do have that, the DisplayPort standard has handshaking issues with the HDMI standard so its really hit and miss whether it will work or not. Macs don't even have VGA output without an adapter. It's ridiculous. Even those crappy little netbooks have standard VGA outputs. A premium computer should also have screens that are actually higher quality and higher resolution than the competition, not worse.

Stop pushing hardware specs, it doesnt mean much.

Specs mean everything. The specs of your system tell you how capable it is and exactly what you can do with it.

To be honest, I see where you are coming from, but it doesnt matter if a computer has all the specs in the world if you dont even use it.

And that just describes a Mac. OS X won't let you take full advantage of the hardware it includes. You need Windows to do that.

Why would anyone want to watch a Blu-ray movie on a 13" PC ??

A number of reasons. First of all, the difference between blu-ray and DVD is visible on any high def display. Blu-ray downsampled from 2 million pixels to 1 million will look better than DVD upscaled by 2.5x. I can think of a number of reasons why a small system would benefit from blu-ray. Maybe its the only system you have and you connect it to a nice external display. I connect my MacBook and HP to a nice 23" LG display that blows away the Apple Cinema Displays. It's a proper 16x9 1080p display. I might want to watch a movie on it, you know? In fact, I often do at night. Which brings me to the next point, maybe its late at night and you're not tired and you want to watch a movie but others in your household are sleeping. In that case, watching a movie on a computer makes perfect sense. What if you travel a lot? Then you'll want to watch a movie on your computer.

Who cares about a 256MB graphics card if I dont play games (not even solitaire)

Video playback. OS X doesn't take full advantage of the GPU for video playback, but Windows certainly does and has for years. Snow Leopard will start to do what Windows has been doing for years now, but it won't quite be up to the same level. Theres also OpenCL, CUDA, and DirectX Compute. A Core 2 Quad based Windows notebook with a GeForce GTX 260, costing less than the middle and top MacBook Pros, will outlast any Mac currently available as these technologies catch on.

It's also funny you mention 256MB of video memory. Only extremely low end PCs under $600 ship with that these days. Yet Apple somehow manages to sell one for $2,000.

The difference between a 1" thick PC and a 1.22" thick PC is major, lets not even go there.

How is it major? I put my HP and my MacBook in the same case (not at the same time) and the difference when inside that case made for computers, it makes no difference at all.

As for HDMI, why would I need HDMI on my PC when I dont plan on ever connecting it to a TV (sorry but thats what a PS3 or XBOX or appletv is for... at least in my case).

HDMI is good for a number of reasons. Every respectable display these days has HDMI. I use HDMI on my 23" display. I get a small cable that plugs in and works perfectly rather than having to deal with a bunch of adapters that might or might not work depending on the standard used. Windows Media Center in Vista and Windows 7 also works far better than the PS3 and Xbox360, and especially the Apple TV which is limited to low quality low bitrate 720p video.

And, again, if you play games... A $1299 notebook PC will ship with a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, a 1GB GeForce 9800M GS, HDMI, and Dolby Digital Live capabilities. You hook that system up to your HDTV and surround sound system and you have a better gaming rig than either the Xbox360 or PS3. That system might just push 8 channel LPCM in real time (not from a blu-ray) over HDMI as well, so rather than Dolby Digital Live!, you get uncompressed multi-channel surround sound along with a gaming system thats more powerful than either one of the consoles.

And as for weight, I am about to go back to school so every pound counts.

I just finished school a few years ago. Most books weigh more than the 6 pound computer, so it makes little difference if you have a system that weighs 5 or 6 pounds. Especially when that 6 pound system is good enough to be your primary system and will give you better entertainment than the current generation of game consoles. Unlike the MacBook which is akin to a very expensive netbook (secondary system) with an optical drive.

For me design carries a bit of a premium and you cant really put a price tag on it.

Again, quality of design is subjective. Macs certainly aren't built better, especially the plastic units. But as far as how they look goes, that is entirely subjective. Me personally, I feel the enlarged bezel (they actually made the system larger for the larger bezel) on the 15.4" MacBook Pro is ridiculously ugly. The two tone design is what HP has been doing for years now and, because of it, my MacBook looks almost exactly the same as my HP. The only difference is that my HP is built out of plastic that feels sturdier than the aluminum top and bottom of the MacBook, and the HP has more features and a better keyboard. Don't even get me started on how bad the keyboard is on the MacBook.

Even though I am an Engineer, the only other thing that is more important than design is ease of use which OSX definately has....

OS X easier to use? Absolutely NOT. Not at all. The only advantage it has is installing SOME apps (some still have Windows-style installers) is easier. However, uninstalling leaves a trail of files behind you have to hunt down and get rid of in various folders across the HDD. Its ridiculous. If Finder crashes and won't relaunch from the Force Quit window, you're basically out of luck. Theres no way for you to get the system to shut down other than holding the power button down. I had that happen to me the other day. Finder froze and wouldn't relaunch or shut down. In Windows Vista and 7, control-alt-delete ALWAYS brings up a secondary window that overlays all others and takes focus so it can't be trapped behind a frozen application (as I've had happen to me too).

Ease of use and stability are certainly not there in OS X.

I still LOVE the design of the MACS. That alone is worth the price premium

So you're willing to spend 2-3x the price just to have a case that looks prettier, in your opinion, than a more well built and considerably more powerful PC? I mean, if you want to discuss build quality and you're concerned with it, HP and Dell's business systems are built like tanks and come with 3 year warranties as standard, as well as optional on-site support and damage protection.

I like my dell but I am not really a fan of windows, or the designs of their laptops. I will likely dualboot windows 7 with the laptop because it looks promising. Even if I end up hating OSX (highly unlikely based on my experience)

You don't even own a Mac yet? And you're "not a fan of Windows"? You sound like me two years ago. You're in for a rough wake up call once the honeymoon period is over. After that return window is closed you're going to realize you spent 2-3x as much as you should have, got 1/4 to 1/2 as much hardware as you should have, and the system is built anywhere near as good as everyone told you it was, as well as OS X being far more limited than you could have imagined prior to owning the system.

[Richard1028]

All good points mosx.

After skipping Vista entirely when it was introduced, I recently installed it (w/SP2) on a Dell and it screams. I haven't used Windows7 yet but from what I hear, the OSX developers have a lot of work to do and I'm not sure Snow Leopard is the answer.

But I don't think Win7 will pull any of us back to PC hardware anytime soon because we paid too much for our macbooks :D). I do believe though that Win7 will stop the migration to OSX in a big way. I'm only hoping Apple responds appropriately but I seriously doubt it.

That's what happens when you back the underdog horse I guess.

[kim6ball]

Both car analogies both 'fail miserably.' Nissans and Hondas have way better quality and longevity than BMW's and Porsches. Nissan's and Honda's luxury divisions, Infinity and Acura, definitely have better quality than their German counterparts.

Also, cars all have the same parts, like you say Mac's and PC's have, yet there's a real big difference between GM's cars and Honda's cars. Naturally, the products we're comparing are going to be almost the same because why else would you be comparing the two? It seems that the quality of a product depends on who makes it.

[JamesGorman]

Both car analogies both 'fail miserably.' Nissans and Hondas have way better quality and longevity than BMW's and Porsches. Nissan's and Honda's luxury divisions, Infinity and Acura, definitely have better quality than their German counterparts.

Also, cars all have the same parts, like you say Mac's and PC's have, yet there's a real big difference between GM's cars and Honda's cars. Naturally, the products we're comparing are going to be almost the same because why else would you be comparing the two? It seems that the quality of a product depends on who makes it.

I know this is a computer forum, but to say that Infinity and Acura are better than bmw's and porsches is far from the truth. The only american cars that come close to those cars, are cadillac and Lincoln's.


Edit: Porsche is, I'd say, in a league of its own. A great balance between luxury and performance.

[CRAZYBUBBA]

I agree with Mosx. I believe that arguments for stability and build quality are tenuous at best. Windows has come along way. I've recently switched to windows and I've found no problems with stability, I'm using a free antivirus and finding it very much to my liking. For me the main point was thinkpad hardware vs apple hardware, for me the thinkpad won.

[TRAG]

Keep it. Mac OS X is the best thing to use IMO. I also like the computers themselves. If I could have any computers, I'd have my current MacBook, Mac Mini HT setup, and maybe an iMac. Just remember all the points when you try to justify the cost of a Mac.

OS X, multi-touch pad, backlit keyboard, no viruses, great design, durable, :apple: logo :p, LED glass screen, seamless hardware/software integration, the ability to run Windows, UNIX, etc.

It's so worth it. Plus they last for YEARS. I've used eMacs that run better than some of the newest PCs.

[3GROC]

I own both and use both. both have their quirks simple as that.

my macbook has a better processor speed wise...same family (I think) though.

I purchased both within 3 months of each other last (08) spring. they both work.
both are missing things that are now of worth to me. HDMI would be nice but neither has it. a card reader would be nice on my mac but its not there...

I dont have buyers remorse at all. I knew what I was buying when I bought it. I knew that a comparable pc is cheaper but it didnt bother me.

[dman777]

I use only Linux, so OS doesn't matter to me. I really wanted a Macbook 13". Really bad! I love the design of it and the feel of the unibody. I assumed because it is a Mac that everything would be top quality. Well, I went to Best Buy and compared the screens with my XPS M1330. The Macbook 13" was horrible. I think at the price that is being charge, Apple should include a top qaulity...or at least a average quality screen. But instead the screen as horrible. It's almost like robbery.

[yetanotherdave]

I use only Linux, so OS doesn't matter to me. I really wanted a Macbook 13". Really bad! I love the design of it and the feel of the unibody. I assumed because it is a Mac that everything would be top quality. Well, I went to Best Buy and compared the screens with my XPS M1330. The Macbook 13" was horrible. I think at the price that is being charge, Apple should include a top qaulity...or at least a average quality screen. But instead the screen as horrible. It's almost like robbery.

Check one out at an apple store, they've updated the panels used recently to a much better quality and Best Buy probably has old stock. Of course they may not have swopped the display unit around either.

[RDM3]

I just bought a macbook last week and I am having second thoughts. I feel like I spent too much. Its my first laptop and I've always wanted an Apple computer. When I see the cheap PC's at best buy or sams club with 500 GB RAM and 4GB memory and 2.0 ghz(which is the model I got) it makes me want to return it.
Are the quality of the macs that much better to justify the cost? Any advice is a appreciated.

Stick with Mac! I grew up on Mac, switched to PC simply for MS Office, and now I can't wait for my desktop to die on me so I can get a Mac Mini, my Dell Desktop is slow, freezes all the time and just plain stinks, it is about 2 years old, also Apple doesn't clutter the HD up with freeware like PC's do and you won't need antivirus and it is more stable.

Plus they look really cool :apple:

[RiCEADDiCTBOY]

i agree full heartedly with mosx concerning feature and price and hdmi.

but, in a laptop world - osx is in my favor. less concerns overall for myself. however, desktop is a different story and windows 7 will remain king in the computer room. i am going to purchase a mac mini just for daily computing for the family as my daughter and wife absolutely destroyed it by accidently downloading viruses (via msn messenger and etc) and lack of maintance.

when i use my windows gaming rig - i am doing maintance on it weekly. with osx it is a little bit harder to slow it down - but, it does occur...just not as painful as windows.

...and i think it brings up an interesting point. from my experience - most mac users ARE laptop users. so i can see why many favor the osx flavor. for me windows is king on desktops and osx is great for laptops. that is mine. no scientific research involved. just user experience.

i am very impressed with micosoft lately (project natal, zune hd, software development including windows 7) and if you have anything negative to say you are one extremely biased individual. but, each to his own.

i realized i always asked these questions alot and debated quite often with friends and forum members. however, that is why God gave us apples and oranges...choice. be happy you have a choice and go with what you enjoy most.

i honestly can't imagine using a laptop now without spaces and multitouch. i think when i messed with a unibody mac - that sealed the deal for me...despite the price. those two features on a 13" were a godsend and makes productivity much more efficient. +1 point for apple in the notebook department...high price or not.

[TRAG]

mosx, why are you even on this website if you have buyers remorse. Why dont you go ahead and sell your macbook if you dont like it. Remember, Macs arent for everyone, thats the great thing about choice. I think your logic is VERY flawed. Dont you realize that the sum of the parts DOES NOT always equal the whole.
Most people buy macs for one or more of the following reasons'

1. Stability
2. Design
3. OSx

There are many other reasons (especially for people involved in creative pursuits). You are essentially comparing a 38K Nissan 350z with 330 HP to a 60k Porsche cayman S with 296 HP (might have been updated to more horsepower). Yes the Nissan might have more horsepower and might offer a much better bang for the buck, but there are many people willing to pay more for a Porsche because of its combination of refinement, luxury / status and performance. With the Nissan, you get performance and not much else. Same analogy with a 26k 260HP Honda accord and a 38K BMW 328i. Stop pushing hardware specs, it doesnt mean much. To be honest, I see where you are coming from, but it doesnt matter if a computer has all the specs in the world if you dont even use it. Why would anyone want to watch a Blu-ray movie on a 13" PC ?? Who cares about a 256MB graphics card if I dont play games (not even solitaire), The difference between a 1" thick PC and a 1.22" thick PC is major, lets not even go there. As for HDMI, why would I need HDMI on my PC when I dont plan on ever connecting it to a TV (sorry but thats what a PS3 or XBOX or appletv is for... at least in my case). And as for weight, I am about to go back to school so every pound counts.
I was in a store the other day and I saw a sony laptop that had a pretty nice design which I really liked. Unfortunately, it cost $1900 (pretty well loaded though) and was built of really flimsy plastic some of which was chrome plated (which cheapened it a bit). In the same store (Bestbuy), I played a bit with a macbook (unibody). Night and day difference. For me design carries a bit of a premium and you cant really put a price tag on it. Even though I am an Engineer, the only other thing that is more important than design is ease of use which OSX definately has....
So there you have it, another point of view. By the way, I currently have a 5 year old dell 600m with a 40gb hardrive and 512mb of RAM which I should be upgrading on the 8th of June to a shiny new unibody macbook. I like my dell but I am not really a fan of windows, or the designs of their laptops. I will likely dualboot windows 7 with the laptop because it looks promising. Even if I end up hating OSX (highly unlikely based on my experience), I still LOVE the design of the MACS. That alone is worth the price premium...
Good Night

Well said, sir. Good night indeed.

[xraydoc]

In my experience, Apple's build quality is no worse, and probably better, than the likes of Asus, Dell and HP. I have an HP/Compaq laptop assigned to me from work (which gets almost no use) and it creaks and groans when you pick it up, unlike my MacBook which feels like one solid piece of metal.

(Though the HP/Compaq 2.16GHz C2D and ATI x1600 mobility did make for a fun experiment with the 64-bit version of Windows 7 RC)

But design aspects and such can be debated until you're blue in the face and there will be no winner - like politics, everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion.

It all comes down to this - if you prefer MacOS X, then your choice is simple. If you prefer Windows or don't care what OS you use, then you've got lots of different manufacturers to choose from and different options to sort through.

In my own experience, using both MacOS X and Windows virtually all day, every day at work and at home, I much prefer MacOS X. Thus, my choice is simple and I've had no buyer's remorse. And I don't have to beat myself up over cheap MSI and Acer laptops because they aren't even an option - no MacOS X.

I'm fortunate that I can afford any computer that I want, so it comes down to how much I'm willing to spend (just because I can afford a $3800 loaded 17" MBP doesn't mean I'll buy one). So if money is the single most important issue and you must get maximum bang-for-the-buck, OS be damned, then a Windows machine looks like your best option.

But if MacOS X is what you want, then don't even worry about the cheap PCs.

Apple does charge a premium, but along with that comes (IMHO) superior industrial design, better build quality, hardware that is at least as reliable as other major manufacturers and better software (MacOS X, iLife, etc.). The Dell Adamo, Dell's attempt at high-level industrial design, is a very nice piece of hardware, but one that also costs significantly more than plastic-shrouded, 1.4" thick designs of similar hardware and is lower in spec than computers costing less. Design costs. That's the way life works. If you don't want to pay for design, or you don't like [Apple's], then you're free to pursue other options.

[Primejimbo]

Who the heck is paying $100/year for AV software?

I agree. I pay 24.99 or so for System Suits (http://www.avanquest.com/USA/pc-utilities/anti-virus-anti-spyware/antivirus-anti-virus/System_Suite_Professional.html?lp=1&tr1=AQ_US_PP_GO_VC&gclid=CKPGl5fP-JoCFSAhDQodsxKBeQ) after a rebate(for my old PC) and even Norton (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8998695&st=Norton+Anti+virus&type=product&id=1218007842101) is only 39.99 and the full Norton security is only 69.99 (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8998686&st=Norton+Anti+virus&type=product&id=1218007384407) I don't know anyone paying 100.00 for anti virus especially where you have descent free ones out there too.
To the OP, is this your 1st big item you ever got? When I bought my 1st item that was over 1000.00 I was so upset, but after a few it doesn't even phase me anymore.

[opinioncircle]

I agree. I pay 24.99 or so for System Suits (http://www.avanquest.com/USA/pc-utilities/anti-virus-anti-spyware/antivirus-anti-virus/System_Suite_Professional.html?lp=1&tr1=AQ_US_PP_GO_VC&gclid=CKPGl5fP-JoCFSAhDQodsxKBeQ) after a rebate(for my old PC) and even Norton (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8998695&st=Norton+Anti+virus&type=product&id=1218007842101) is only 39.99 and the full Norton security is only 69.99 (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8998686&st=Norton+Anti+virus&type=product&id=1218007384407) I don't know anyone paying 100.00 for anti virus especially where you have descent free ones out there too.
To the OP, is this your 1st big item you ever got? When I bought my 1st item that was over 1000.00 I was so upset, but after a few it doesn't even phase me anymore.

Why would you even pay for security software? Not enough common sense on your behalf ? :D

[Primejimbo]

Why would you even pay for security software? Not enough common sense on your behalf ? :D

I was looking for something close to $100.00. Besides they are good if you have young ones playing on a PC... or a wife :D
(If my my wife reads this, you know I am kidding :D I know you're pretty good with computers and stuff)

[tabovbo]

That is true, there is more to a computer than just the parts. However, when you bring this argument up, it shows how Macs fail in an even greater sense.



Didnt feel like quoting your rebuttal, You must be a lawyer because you are adept at twisting my arguments to suit your points.. Touche to you on that.

You might be correct about the stability (or lack thereof) of OSX, I dont own one so I might be in for a rude awakening.

Ok lets start with your Points

1. Design:
You claim that "The UniBody systems are no more than HP's old two tone and glass design combined with Sony's keyboard in a metal frame". Wow, you are a bit clueless. That is like saying "A pretty person with a nice body is no more than an ugly person with a nice face" or that a pair of designer jeans is no more than "$30 walmart jeans with the details of a pair of diesel jeans and the cut of a pair of dior jeans". An to compare HP design with apple shows how little of a premium you place on design. A Mac computer is a piece of artwork, a functional blend of Aluminum and glass, fused together in an almost seamless manner. The designs are the epitome of understated elegance. No cheap tacky extra buttons, or unsightly ports, or annoying led's. I realize that design is subjective, but all the design aficionados all love (and own Macs). Design has nothing to do with durability so throwing in arguments about how plastic is more durable than Aluminum is a moot point. That is not Apple's fault, this fact is unique to the properties of Plastic vs. Aluminum. Apple likely picked Aluminum for aesthetics, stability and low weights vs. Plastic. If you didnt like the Aluminum perhaps you should have bought a HP or Sony laptop and hacked it to run OSX

2. My Car analogy between Macs and PC's

You claim that "The difference between a Porsche and a Nissan, or a Honda and a BMW, is much different than the difference between a Mac and a PC. BMW and Porsches are built much better. Everything from the various components in the engines, to the seats, to even the mountain brackets for the seats are all of MUCH higher quality than a Nissan or Honda."

Definately not TRUE !!!! While BMW's are engineered more precisely than Honda's and Nissans, they are not better built. Almost all German luxury cars start rattling past 50K miles (My last car was an Audi A4 and my dad has always owned BMW's) but most of their non luxury japanese counterparts dont suffer from this condition. BMW's are more expensive because they use less to accomplish more and they perform and handle much better than their non luxury peers. Yes they use more expensive materials, but their overall quality on all levels is worse than the Toyotas, Hondas, and Nissans...

However, I do agree that you can shoot a lot of holes in my argument so I tip my hat to you in this regard. I was just trying to emphasize the point that Speed and Specs DO NOT make a system.

You claim that specs mean that something is more capable. That is incorrect. Most of the HTC phones that sport windows mobile have far better specs than an iphone. However the iphone wipes the floor with them because of its far more intuitive software. A 296 HP .96g Porsche cayman is faster than a 337HP 1.01g Nissan 370z in both a straight line and around a track despite having less "Specs". Plus the 370z has more features (i.e better Nav system, Bluetooth, Rev matching trans... e.t.c) than the more expensive Porsche, but the Porsche is still the choice of the automotive enthusiast who CAN afford it. Yes I know there are a lot more reasons for this choice, but when it all comes down to it, the Nissan has more "Specs" but is still inferior. The Windows mobile phones have more specs but are still inferior. When will you people understand that above a certain point (and to most users) hardware means nothing. "Wow you can get a 2.96GHZ PC for cheaper than a MAC, and it comes with HDMI, 1TB hard drive, Blu-ray ... 6GB of RAM, 17" WSXGA scrreen and it costs $900", Look, I am not speaking for anyone but myself, but I dont need 1TB, or HDMI, I dont need Blu-ray on such a small screen (next thing you are going to be asking to 1080P on a 10" TV). I know Blu-ray always has better quality but I really dont care.. How much is good enough ??? I dont need the very best hardware. I just need hardware that is good enough. Right now I use the supplied Iphone earbuds to listen to music. Its quality is barely passable. I have owned countless other buds that have better sound quality (and cost more) but in the end I picked the apple ones because they are good enough. There is better but I dont care, this is good enough. Thats the reason why a lot of MAC users buy them. They have excellent software, a good and appealing user interface, killer design, less hassle, and their hardware is good enough (for most users). So there you have it....

[Primejimbo]

Didnt feel like quoting your rebuttal, You must be a lawyer because you are adept at twisting my arguments to suit your points.. Touche to you on that.

You might be correct about the stability (or lack thereof) of OSX, I dont own one so I might be in for a rude awakening.

Ok lets start with your Points

1. Design:
You claim that "The UniBody systems are no more than HP's old two tone and glass design combined with Sony's keyboard in a metal frame". Wow, you are a bit clueless. That is like saying "A pretty person with a nice body is no more than an ugly person with a nice face" or that a pair of designer jeans is no more than "$30 walmart jeans with the details of a pair of diesel jeans and the cut of a pair of dior jeans". An to compare HP design with apple shows how little of a premium you place on design. A Mac computer is a piece of artwork, a functional blend of Aluminum and glass, fused together in an almost seamless manner. The designs are the epitome of understated elegance. No cheap tacky extra buttons, or unsightly ports, or annoying led's. I realize that design is subjective, but all the design aficionados all love (and own Macs). Design has nothing to do with durability so throwing in arguments about how plastic is more durable than Aluminum is a moot point. That is not Apple's fault, this fact is unique to the properties of Plastic vs. Aluminum. Apple likely picked Aluminum for aesthetics, stability and low weights vs. Plastic. If you didnt like the Aluminum perhaps you should have bought a HP or Sony laptop and hacked it to run OSX

2. My Car analogy between Macs and PC's

You claim that "The difference between a Porsche and a Nissan, or a Honda and a BMW, is much different than the difference between a Mac and a PC. BMW and Porsches are built much better. Everything from the various components in the engines, to the seats, to even the mountain brackets for the seats are all of MUCH higher quality than a Nissan or Honda."

Definately not TRUE !!!! While BMW's are engineered more precisely than Honda's and Nissans, they are not better built. Almost all German luxury cars start rattling past 50K miles (My last car was an Audi A4 and my dad has always owned BMW's) but most of their non luxury japanese counterparts dont suffer from this condition. BMW's are more expensive because they use less to accomplish more and they perform and handle much better than their non luxury peers. Yes they use more expensive materials, but their overall quality on all levels is worse than the Toyotas, Hondas, and Nissans...

However, I do agree that you can shoot a lot of holes in my argument so I tip my hat to you in this regard. I was just trying to emphasize the point that Speed and Specs DO NOT make a system.

You claim that specs mean that something is more capable. That is incorrect. Most of the HTC phones that sport windows mobile have far better specs than an iphone. However the iphone wipes the floor with them because of its far more intuitive software. A 296 HP .96g Porsche cayman is faster than a 337HP 1.01g Nissan 370z in both a straight line and around a track despite having less "Specs". Plus the 370z has more features (i.e better Nav system, Bluetooth, Rev matching trans... e.t.c) than the more expensive Porsche, but the Porsche is still the choice of the automotive enthusiast who CAN afford it. Yes I know there are a lot more reasons for this choice, but when it all comes down to it, the Nissan has more "Specs" but is still inferior. The Windows mobile phones have more specs but are still inferior. When will you people understand that above a certain point (and to most users) hardware means nothing. "Wow you can get a 2.96GHZ PC for cheaper than a MAC, and it comes with HDMI, 1TB hard drive, Blu-ray ... 6GB of RAM, 17" WSXGA scrreen and it costs $900", Look, I am not speaking for anyone but myself, but I dont need 1TB, or HDMI, I dont need Blu-ray on such a small screen (next thing you are going to be asking to 1080P on a 10" TV). I know Blu-ray always has better quality but I really dont care.. How much is good enough ??? I dont need the very best hardware. I just need hardware that is good enough. Right now I use the supplied Iphone earbuds to listen to music. Its quality is barely passable. I have owned countless other buds that have better sound quality (and cost more) but in the end I picked the apple ones because they are good enough. There is better but I dont care, this is good enough. Thats the reason why a lot of MAC users buy them. They have excellent software, a good and appealing user interface, killer design, less hassle, and their hardware is good enough (for most users). So there you have it....
I enjoyed reading your posts and I do agree with you, but you have to remember who you're arguing with.
mosx bought a Mac sometime ago. He was happy at 1st then complained about OSX and did nothing but put it down and tell us how Windows is better, and OXS is crap.
So time has passed and what does mosx do? He buys another Mac. Now IMO he lost all creditability.

[tabovbo]

I just finished school a few years ago. Most books weigh more than the 6 pound computer, so it makes little difference if you have a system that weighs 5 or 6 pounds. Especially when that 6 pound system is good enough to be your primary system and will give you better entertainment than the current generation of game consoles. Unlike the MacBook which is akin to a very expensive netbook (secondary system) with an optical drive.



So you're willing to spend 2-3x the price just to have a case that looks prettier, in your opinion, than a more well built and considerably more powerful PC? I mean, if you want to discuss build quality and you're concerned with it, HP and Dell's business systems are built like tanks and come with 3 year warranties as standard, as well as optional on-site support and damage protection.



.


Regarding weight, I too went to school, I had heavy books as well, and I CAN DEFINATELY tell you that EVERY OUNCE COUNTS. I carried my 1.25" thick, 5.5 pound dell laptop everywhere. Every ounce counts. As for thinness of the case, it matters. I feels nicer to type of slimmer laptops. Thinner laptops (to a certain pt) are much easier to hold and move around. On paper .25" does not seem like much but in person, it is much more dramatic. Cmon, dont even go there, I am quite suprised that you will dismiss weight in this manner. You should know better. A lot of people buy Macbooks vs. the Pros mainly because of this fact. Same reason for the appeal of the air and other ultra light laptops. Your argument doesnt even hold in this regard. Not at all.

As for cost, Heck yeah I am willing to spend 1.3 - 1.5x - aka 25 to 50% more (where did you get the 3x from) just to get what I consider to be a superior (on every level) design and user experience. I dont care about specs. People pay more to get what they want. Dont tell me about the build quality of Dells like I dont own one right now. My dell is racked with all sorts of issues (most of which happened within a year of owning it. 2 HD crashes, screen issues, .... But is has been quiet for the past 2 years). My work laptop is a dell and it is even worse than my personal PC. It has a really thick case, and is heavy as heck. I wouldnt even use it for school if it was offered to me for FREE. Thats how particular I am about the balance of features and functionality. "But wait, it only weighs 2 pounds more than a Macbook, 2 pounds should not make a difference". It really does, and I can attest to that fact after owning it for 2 years. The best designed PC's are sony's and they typically cost more than apple when equipped similarly (they usually have slightly better hardware specs though). Why are they expensive ? Its because they are better designed (subjective). Great design costs money, look around you to confirm that fact.
Anyway, to close my long winded statements, your logic is sound in a lot of areas but you place very little premium on design, style, and preference. You assume that consumers are all value driven. Who defines value anyways ? I define value as getting what I want. A Mac is what I want. A Mac is what I am getting (tomorrow :-). If you want something different, get something different. But dont come here and complain to others who are content with what they have. Most of us are technology savvy and are quite aware of pricing out there. Ok, I understand its a free world so we are all entitled to our opinions, and this IS a public forum so I really should quit whining...
Ok I will.. It was nice arguing with you :-) I hope the OP has enough info from both sides of the fence to make an informed decision....

[dukebound85]

i never minded having a heavy backpack

in fact i preferred it as it was more of a workout in my mind