How many people would still complain if the MacBook had an ATI HD 3450 or a nVidia 8400M/9300M G instead of Intel graphics?
How many people would sacrifice a clock speed multiplier to have a dedicated video card?
With regard to the comparison of the Macbook pro to the XPS M1530...
I just finished reading an article in Maximum PC (yes a PC mag) that compared these two laptops. Yes, the hardware is practically identical, but the Mac outperformed the Dell machine in most benchmarks. And that was with both Notebooks running Vista. They gave the Macbook the higher rating and "Best in Class" status in the "Professional Notebook" category. The $500 price difference didn't seem to matter in light of the performance advantage.
Even with similar hardware, Apple engineering does seem to make a difference.
Granted Apple didn't fare as well in the "Mainstream" or the "Ultraportable" categories,but the point is you can't just compare hardware. Performance counts as well.
Article.
You must have had some extremely bad luck, then, because three of the five computers in my house right now are all Dells. One from 2004, and two from 2006. They all work fine, and frankly, I find the build quality great. I just recently got rid of a 2001 Dell that also worked fine, it was simply too old to continue to hang on to.and every dell computer ive had has literally fallen apart, whats your point?
Question: Give me an eight year old Dell notebook, and compare it to an eight year old Mac notebook. The Pismo G3 is the SAME thickness as my dad's BRAND NEW Dell laptop - it took dell eight years to finally get to be that thin.
cosmokanga2 said:Well, I think the overall consensus on the article is that though Macs are more, they are WAY better than any comparable or not PC. After all, I don't think many people are still working everyday on a 4-6 old PC smoothly, where as many of the Macs are still going strong.