Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac Book vs Mac Book Pro for my wife

F

fjs08

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jun 25, 2003
1,252
0
My wife currently has a ThinkPad. Uses it for web apps like e-mail, shopping, more shopping, you get the picture. Also she runs our business software from our accountant. THIS software is the problem. Only runs on XP. Won't run on Vista. I have a MB Pro, love it, have used Apple/Mac's since the '80's. She is hesitant to change, doesn't want to learn a new system <ROFL>. I told her that actually the cheapest way to get XP on a new machine is to put it on a Mac. It may well be accurate. Anyway, for her needs and the need to put XP on to run this accounting package, would there be much difference between a MB and a MB Pro for her. She will run the computer off an external monitor with wireless mouse and keyboard. She actually never uses a numeric keypad. Anyway, any suggestions would be appreciated. I'm sure that once she goes Mac, she will never go back. But for the time being, I do need to put XP on any new machine. I do want a portable so we can do work when we travel or else I'd look at an iMac.
Thanks.
Frank
 
The Macbook should be mighty sufficient..
running xp in bootcamp or parallels/vmware virtualisation is simple and should easily be able to cope with an accounting package.
 
>>running xp in bootcamp or parallels/vmware virtualisation is simple and should easily be able to cope with an accounting package.<<

Bootcamp comes on both MB and MB Pro?? I know it's on my MB Pro. I guess it's part of Leopard??/ So it's not the notebook but the OS. Is that correct??

I'm sorry for the answers here but I've found that when I go up to the Apple store in Cleveland, I get salespeople who really don't know that much. It's happened the last 3x there.

Frank

I mean, sorry for the questions. Crazy morning already.
Frank
 
Yes, no matter if you get the Macbook or the Macbook Pro, as long as they have Leopard they'll have Bootcamp built in. :)
 
It is kinda nuts that the cheapest way to get XP on any box is via a Mac<g>.

I've been trying to get my wife to the Mac side for years. She's been content with the kids hand me downs. Now that they're grown and out of the house, and the ThinkPad is failing, I may be able to work the Mac in.

Frank
 
fjs08 said:
My wife currently has a ThinkPad. Uses it for web apps like e-mail, shopping, more shopping, you get the picture. Also she runs our business software from our accountant. THIS software is the problem. Only runs on XP. Won't run on Vista. I have a MB Pro, love it, have used Apple/Mac's since the '80's. She is hesitant to change, doesn't want to learn a new system <ROFL>. I told her that actually the cheapest way to get XP on a new machine is to put it on a Mac. It may well be accurate. Anyway, for her needs and the need to put XP on to run this accounting package, would there be much difference between a MB and a MB Pro for her. She will run the computer off an external monitor with wireless mouse and keyboard. She actually never uses a numeric keypad. Anyway, any suggestions would be appreciated. I'm sure that once she goes Mac, she will never go back. But for the time being, I do need to put XP on any new machine. I do want a portable so we can do work when we travel or else I'd look at an iMac.
Thanks.
Frank
Click to expand...

My wife has had both and prefers the newest MacBook for what she does.
 
Sounds like the MacBook would suit her needs. Could make a nice surprise gift for Valentine's or just because.
 
My mom just converted after a long-time PC user for the same reasons. She had a PC desktop but had certain software that was XP only. So we installed XP on her new macbook. And she loves it. She uses the mac for all the iLife type programs and then switches to XP to get her work done. Only problem might be screen size on the macbook but if she is using an external it shouldn't be that big of a deal.
 
The MacBook should be more than sufficient for the tasks that your wife is planning on using it for.
 
I think everyone has established that the Macbook will be more than sufficient for your wife, but I would suggest VMware fusion so that she can run her XP app in a window, this way she gets to learn Mac OSX quicker with good transition ;)
 
johny5 said:
I think everyone has established that the Macbook will be more than sufficient for your wife, but I would suggest VMware fusion so that she can run her XP app in a window, this way she gets to learn Mac OSX quicker with good transition ;)
Click to expand...
Very good point, either VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop.
 
>>And she loves it. She uses the mac for all the iLife type programs and then switches to XP to get her work done. Only problem might be screen size on the macbook but if she is using an external it shouldn't be that big of a deal.<<

She has nice external that she uses with her ThinkPad. It's a ViewSonic.

Seems folks here like Parallels and VM more than Bootcamp???

Frank
 
I'd never heard of VM Fusion before, but just received an ad for it. Maybe that's a sign<g>. Anyway, since she won't be running XP natively on Parallels or VMF, does it slow XP down a lot?? I can remember in the old days, I had a Windows emulator program and it was painfully slow.

With VMF or Parallels, do you use Mac printers or XP print drivers if you are using XP??

Any reason to get VMF vs Parallels?? Which is preferred or is it 50:50

Frank
 
In some cases its been proven that VMware and parallels run quicker than bootcamp especially when you use a virtual image.
I have both vmware and parallels, in a nutshell I prefer vmware for hard business type apps/excel - general business things and parallels is good (ok) for gaming.
 
johny5 said:
In some cases its been proven that VMware and parallels run quicker than bootcamp especially when you use a virtual image.
I have both vmware and parallels, in a nutshell I prefer vmware for hard business type apps/excel - general business things and parallels is good (ok) for gaming.
Click to expand...

Is that true?
I just can't believe that a virtual machine runs quicker than a native version of that OS. When you run a virtual machine, your hardware also needs to run your current operating system so you lose some of your available memory..

When you run Windows XP or Vista with Bootcamp, you can you use al of your memory and you have full graphics support.
 
GuntherS said:
Is that true?
.
Click to expand...

oh believe me, I have the same thoughts as you on this one!
but I posted up something on one of the developers of Parallels Blog site and he returned with valid answers.

Basically all the new core 2 duo chips have something called native Vx support so that the virtual OS has the same true access as say the bootcamp partition. Then he went on to say that as you are running a virtual image this is quicker.

I will see if i can find the link.
 
here is the link, it was 1% faster than bootcamp, but faster nevertheless :p :

http://parallelsvirtualization.blogspot.com/2007_12_01_archive.html


and quote :

1) Parallels Desktop is faster than either Boot Camp (1% faster, so not much) and Fusion (17% faster) when running Windows XP. This is a very important result, since the vast majority of our 700,000+ users are running Windows XP in their VM. It's the OS of choice for Windows/Mac integration, and we make it run better and faster than anyone else in the game.



BTW, after using both parallels and Fusion, my preferred choice has always been Vmware Fusion
 
johny5 said:
here is the link, it was 1% faster than bootcamp, but faster nevertheless :p :

http://parallelsvirtualization.blogspot.com/2007_12_01_archive.html


and quote :

1) Parallels Desktop is faster than either Boot Camp (1% faster, so not much) and Fusion (17% faster) when running Windows XP. This is a very important result, since the vast majority of our 700,000+ users are running Windows XP in their VM. It's the OS of choice for Windows/Mac integration, and we make it run better and faster than anyone else in the game.



BTW, after using both parallels and Fusion, my preferred choice has always been Vmware Fusion
Click to expand...

Interesting..
Thank you for giving me the link ;)
 
I suggest to get your wife in front of both machines. If she does some serious studying of business figures & charts, I don't think the 13" screen will cut it. Sure the specs of the base macbook are plenty for most people, but the screen is on the small side for serious research IMHO. On the other hand, she might like the more porable size of the macbook. What really matters is what your wife feels comfortable with, of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back