Sorry but if the MacBook is so "expensive" for you, then you should of actually done some research into the specs before forking out more money then your comfortable with
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MacBook grafic card Intel GMA X3100
- Thread starter Zer00
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Sorry but if the MacBook is so "expensive" for you, then you should of actually done some research into the specs before forking out more money then your comfortable with
I think everybody ought to stop giving Zer00 so much sh!+. After all, all you have done dumb things in your lives, too.
It's not the holy grail, but dedicated graphics are a better start to playing games than integrated graphics. The 8400 is better than the X3100, which was the point, so if the 8400 is carved out of pure fail, the X3100 is the 8400's braindead step-child.
And the other point was, is there another laptop of similar specs to the Macbook at a similar price - yes. And if you take the time to think before falling into the "PCs =/= Macs so therefore they suck" mentality, look up some reviews of the XPS M1330.
Am I bashing Macs? No, but I am trying to show that the one sided approach that is often taken with regards to PC is exactly that - one sided.
As I've said before, people don't buy the MacBook because it is 13.3". They buy it because it is all they can afford. The 13.3" screen is NOT what attracts them to the system or anything like that. Its the fact that they canNOT afford to spend $2,000 on the MacBook Pro.
The OP is right, the MacBook is an expensive machine. In California, the MacBook with DVD writer will run you around $1400 after taxes depending on the county you're in. I got mine in LA County for $1406 and some change. If I had bought it in San Bernardino County, where the Victoria Gardens Apple Store is, it would have been $1399 and some change.
Anyway, that is a lot of money for a computer. Especially when you consider that you can go to any PC manufacturer and get roughly the equivalent of a 15.4" 1680x1050 screen, blu-ray, 2.4GHz C2D, 2GB of RAM, GeForce 9600M GT, and other options like higher capacity (but not physically bigger) batteries and fingerprint readers. For under $1,000 you can go with a 2.2GHz AMD system with Hybrid Crossfire using the Radeon 3200 IGP and Radeon 3450 GPU, 3GB of RAM, etc. The AMD 3200 IGP will mop the floor with the X3100 and the new X4500. If you go over to HP you can get a 15.4" 1680x1050 AMD based system with the Radeon 3200 IGP, 3GB of RAM, 160GB HDD, and a high capacity battery for $853.99. Thats WITH a DVD writer. The processor is faster than the one in the entry level MacBook and the graphics will beat any Intel GPU, especially the X4500. For an extra $100 you can toss in the Radeon 3450 which enables hybrid crossfire.
The prices Apple charges for their computers are simply outrageous. Theres no valid reason for the pricing. OS X is simply not worth the sometimes $1,000 premium you pay for Apple hardware (or about $700 in the case of the MacBook).
Not even close. The X3100 was supposed to be as fast as some dedicated GPUs. And just like the X4500, Intel instructed websites to do very limited pre-release benchmarks with a very limited number of software and specialized drivers.
Even benchmarks done by Apple fansites show the X4500 not even getting half the framerate of the 8400M GS while having a FASTER processor to work with than the 8400M GS. The x4500 will be another piece of trash that Apple should be ashamed of using in their systems.
And those benchmarks were done with OLDER nvidia drivers. Not the 177.xx series which gave a SIGNIFICANT boost in performance.
Apparently you've never used one.
My PC has a Core 2 Duo 2GHz (Merom core, Santa Rosa chipset) with 2GB of RAM and a 128MB GeForce 8400M GS. It plays Crysis at 800x600 with everything set to medium, but advanced settings set to low. It plays CoD4 at high settings with FSAA (default auto-detected settings!), GRID, UT3, Halo 2, Gears of War, HL2 EP2, etc.
The 8400M GS is also fantastic for video playback. DVDs look better on it than they do on my Onkyo upscaling DVD player, thanks to Windows taking advantage of the hardware (something OS X does NOT do). It can push blu-ray movies at around 5% CPU use.
The 8400M GS is a fantastic GPU as long as you keep your settings realistic (don't expect to play Crysis or GRID at native resolution at high settings) and use it for video playback.
The 8400M GS is still, to this day, FAR better than any of the Intel GPUs, X4500 included.
The use of Intel integrated graphics in the MacBook and Mac mini is actually quite amusing. When the Mac mini was introduced in 2005, Steve Jobs stood up and ripped on Intel GPUs while proclaiming how great the dedicated processor in the Mac mini was. A year later their "Consumer" line was filled with those same Intel GPUs he once made fun of. Thus proving that Apple cares more about profit than the consumer and that they will not back up their own words.
I also want to point out how sad it is that Mac owners are ripping on the OP for the fact that he was expecting good hardware for his money. IF you buy an expensive system you have every right to expect it to be the best in its class. Its not his fault he believed the Apple hype and didn't realize that Apple charges twice as much for their computers as they should.
The way you're all acting is surely making many Mac owners ashamed to be a part of the "Mac Community".
people buy the macbook because it just works and for me to be able to run osx natively is worth the premium because most of us mac users buy a mac for ease of use and especially even after 7-10 years with old hardware osx still runs beautifully.
Basically buy once until it breaks on you and buy another one years later for mostly general computing needs. Also most MacBook users don't buy for gaming.
Basically buy once until it breaks on you and buy another one years later for mostly general computing needs. Also most MacBook users don't buy for gaming.
You make some good points (I personally prefer the ATI 3470 to the nVidia8400 but that's just personal preference), however I beleive your last points are somewhat flawed.
While several of the posts were indelicate in their expression of surprise that the OP would spend what he clearly felt was a fairly signifcant sum on a computer without the requisite research to make sure it met his needs, they are not incorrect.
To spend over $1000 on anything and ASSUME it will have all the features you desire is flawed logic and in my opinion indicative of poor reasoning. Such thinking would imply cost alone is the determining factor in feature/functionality and value equations. There are many, many products where asthetics or market cachet determine cost and yet those that desire such things will pay.
Buying a Mac is a choice, one that more and more people are making. I've been mildly amused at the concern expressed by a small but vocal few who really don't want the "unwashed masses" using their precious status symbol.
Mac are computers to be used for a variety of purposes. Each person must decide whether a Mac meets those needs and whether the premium they pay is worth it. If I didn't enjoy how a Mac works, I would use a PC all the time. As it is I must use one at work and to play the latest games. Yet, I paid my own money and indure the difficulties inherent to using a non-supported system within our corporate environment because I WANT TOO.
You cannot fault the people posting for stating the obvious. The OP made a decision, however uninformed and since nothing indicates he was forced to make this decision, he will need to live with it. If someone buys a product and has buyers remorse, he can return or sell it. In the case of Mac they currently command decent used prices so all is not lost.
Cheers,
No, you're shaming the PC world, which is kind of hard, taking in to account that it SUCKS so bad already. First you say you can get a PC for less, yes that's right, BUT hardware isn't the only thing in a computer. What happened to software? OS X can run faster and better with less hardware needs than Vista with more hardware. Secondly, quality. Hardware specs is one thing, quality is another. PC's build quality is pretty bad, unless you spend over $2000 or so. The MacBook is on par in terms of pricing, way above par in terms of NO VIRUSES. PCs are poorly built, cobbled together from various sorts of hardware, and stamped with an even worse OS, called Windows, it's a window to the garbage dump.
And, what is the $1000 premium for OS X? The MacBook Pro is $1,999, so you're saying you can find a similar spec'd notebook for $999? Vista Ultimate alone is about one third of that price. And the X4500 is NOT a piece of trash. Sure, it's NOT better than an nVidia. But NOT everyone is a gamer who needs an nVidia chip. Gaming is pointless and stupid and wastes time. People should see gaming like the Wii, casual fun, not "I'm gonna shoot ur head in COD!" The smarter people make games and watch people waste their time playing it, while the game makers count the cash.
And IF your so called PC can take advantage better than OS X can, how about this, can it run with 512MB of ram? Vista can't. Leopard can. End of story, that's "taking advantage of hardware". Blu-Ray is just one pirce of hardware amongst many. People have different ideas of expensive. Macs are the best of it's class, hardware isn't 100% of a computer, it's half. Software is the other half. MAcs have great hardware and better software, and excellent build quality. PCs have good hardware, but **** software, and terrible build quality.
I wouldn't expect you to understand, you're just a "specs are everything" type of person. PCs get viruses, Macs dont. One feature among many on why Macs >>>>>> PCs. Apple doesn't charge twice the money, PCs just give huge discounts to help sell crappy systems. That's why Apple rarely gives discounts on brand new systems. Apple wants their systems to be easy-to-use, while PC makers just want cold cash, and "screw the customers user experience". The way we are acting gives facts, not zealotry of PCs and nVidia GPUs. At least mac owners have a community, PC owner have something called "customer support", which is more like fighting on the phone to get help. Apple has award-winning customer support and excellent service. I don't see pcrumors.com. That's because PCs are just hardware-only. The OS, nobody could care less. Apple, here we discuss new iPhones, iPods, Laptops, desktops, etc. i don't see any PC owners doing that.
Was it neccesary to even write this rant? You make some of the same unsubstantiated generalizations you rail against.
There are plenty of well made PCs. Windows Vista or XP are not all bad (OS X is just much better).
The whole point of this thread was about the perceived lack of value represented by a Macbook because the OP failed to do the research not to rehash the ancient Mac vs. PC arguement.
Comparing the 8400M to the X3100 for games playing is like comparing a horse to a goat when looking for a suitable life partner for a human. You can carve out whatever reason you like why one is better than the other, but you're missing the point that even the "better" one is still completely unsuitable.
Wow. This is the first time someone has ever implied that I'm an Apple fanboy. I feel kinda honoured. I'd like to thank my parents, the academy, Reddit....
Maybe you didn't notice the bit where I said that Dell's approach was sometimes lacking compared to other Windows vendors, and that I was specifically using that to set the whole PC vs Mac thing aside?
Though to be fair the new studio range of lappys and desktops from Dell don't look too bad, I actually tried to buy one of the desktop jobs for a special job at work but our Dell AM couldn't get a decent price for us so I ended up going for a Mini w/ bootcamp instead.
mosx:
I can easily afford the Macbook Pro. Heck it was only $450 dollars more than the Macbook I have. I chose not to get it because I didn't need the extras it comes with. I don't play games, make movies, ect.. I chose it because I personally love the Apple brand(you don't and that is OK--we all can choose to do whatever we want with our money). I also chose it because of its size. It might weigh about the same as the Pro, but the dimensions are a lot smaller or it seems a lot to me. I travel a lot for my job and the Macbook is perfectly suited for it.
I would be careful lumping everyone into one group. It takes away from your arguments. I'm sure there are many others who chose the Macbook for precisely the same reasons I did. I know a number in my place of employment who did and they make a pretty good salary.
At the end of the day, you can choose whatever you/others want and I/others can choose the Apple brand. I don't understand why you want to come to a dedicated Mac site to bash Apple. I'm sure you have better things to do or I hope you do.
I can easily afford the Macbook Pro. Heck it was only $450 dollars more than the Macbook I have. I chose not to get it because I didn't need the extras it comes with. I don't play games, make movies, ect.. I chose it because I personally love the Apple brand(you don't and that is OK--we all can choose to do whatever we want with our money). I also chose it because of its size. It might weigh about the same as the Pro, but the dimensions are a lot smaller or it seems a lot to me. I travel a lot for my job and the Macbook is perfectly suited for it.
I would be careful lumping everyone into one group. It takes away from your arguments. I'm sure there are many others who chose the Macbook for precisely the same reasons I did. I know a number in my place of employment who did and they make a pretty good salary.
At the end of the day, you can choose whatever you/others want and I/others can choose the Apple brand. I don't understand why you want to come to a dedicated Mac site to bash Apple. I'm sure you have better things to do or I hope you do.
As I've said before, people don't buy the MacBook because it is 13.3". They buy it because it is all they can afford. The 13.3" screen is NOT what attracts them to the system or anything like that. Its the fact that they canNOT afford to spend $2,000 on the MacBook Pro.
Err wrong. I know many, myself included, who would buy the Macbook over the Pro any day because of the smaller screen.
Anyway, that is a lot of money for a computer. Especially when you consider that you can go to any PC manufacturer and get roughly the equivalent of a 15.4" 1680x1050 screen, blu-ray, 2.4GHz C2D, 2GB of RAM, GeForce 9600M GT, and other options like higher capacity (but not physically bigger) batteries and fingerprint readers. For under $1,000 you can go with a 2.2GHz AMD system with Hybrid Crossfire using the Radeon 3200 IGP and Radeon 3450 GPU, 3GB of RAM, etc. The AMD 3200 IGP will mop the floor with the X3100 and the new X4500. If you go over to HP you can get a 15.4" 1680x1050 AMD based system with the Radeon 3200 IGP, 3GB of RAM, 160GB HDD, and a high capacity battery for $853.99. Thats WITH a DVD writer. The processor is faster than the one in the entry level MacBook and the graphics will beat any Intel GPU, especially the X4500. For an extra $100 you can toss in the Radeon 3450 which enables hybrid crossfire.
If you buy a $899 computer, thats exactly what it is, an $899 computer. A revoltingly hideous thing with a joke for an OS. By the way hows the 1.5 hour battery life on that badass machine
Ooh bet that AMD processor is nice, want to bench it against my Mini I doubt it.
The prices Apple charges for their computers are simply outrageous. Theres no valid reason for the pricing. OS X is simply not worth the sometimes $1,000 premium you pay for Apple hardware (or about $700 in the case of the MacBook).
Theres a perfectly valid reason, you get a real computer with a real OS. Why are you still here? If you don't want to pay the price then theres the door.
Not even close. The X3100 was supposed to be as fast as some dedicated GPUs. And just like the X4500, Intel instructed websites to do very limited pre-release benchmarks with a very limited number of software and specialized drivers.
I'll get the Violin. Again, don't like it? Buy a PC. Apple is not going to sell you a crappy machine just because your too cheap.
Apparently you've never used one.
My PC has a Core 2 Duo 2GHz (Merom core, Santa Rosa chipset) with 2GB of RAM and a 128MB GeForce 8400M GS. It plays Crysis at 800x600 with everything set to medium, but advanced settings set to low. It plays CoD4 at high settings with FSAA (default auto-detected settings!), GRID, UT3, Halo 2, Gears of War, HL2 EP2, etc.
Well once you've got passed the glory graphics and realised that both Crysis and COD4 have terrible gameplay, you might want to go and kick a ball or something.
The 8400M GS is also fantastic for video playback. DVDs look better on it than they do on my Onkyo upscaling DVD player, thanks to Windows taking advantage of the hardware (something OS X does NOT do). It can push blu-ray movies at around 5% CPU use.
Well theres something for the Microsoft Ads eh!
"We may have a ****** operating system, but at least we can push blu ray at 5% CPU usage."
The 8400M GS is a fantastic GPU as long as you keep your settings realistic (don't expect to play Crysis or GRID at native resolution at high settings) and use it for video playback.
The 8400M GS is still, to this day, FAR better than any of the Intel GPUs, X4500 included.
The use of Intel integrated graphics in the MacBook and Mac mini is actually quite amusing. When the Mac mini was introduced in 2005, Steve Jobs stood up and ripped on Intel GPUs while proclaiming how great the dedicated processor in the Mac mini was. A year later their "Consumer" line was filled with those same Intel GPUs he once made fun of. Thus proving that Apple cares more about profit than the consumer and that they will not back up their own words.
An American corporation caring about profit Never!
I also want to point out how sad it is that Mac owners are ripping on the OP for the fact that he was expecting good hardware for his money. IF you buy an expensive system you have every right to expect it to be the best in its class. Its not his fault he believed the Apple hype and didn't realize that Apple charges twice as much for their computers as they should.
You do get a computer the best in its class. Your a typical Windows user that things hardware is the be all and end all of a computer. Push off and get a Dell, you'll make your life and our life much better.
Err wrong. I know many, myself included, who would buy the Macbook over the Pro any day because of the smaller screen.
Anyway, that is a lot of money for a computer. Especially when you consider that you can go to any PC manufacturer and get roughly the equivalent of a 15.4" 1680x1050 screen, blu-ray, 2.4GHz C2D, 2GB of RAM, GeForce 9600M GT, and other options like higher capacity (but not physically bigger) batteries and fingerprint readers. For under $1,000 you can go with a 2.2GHz AMD system with Hybrid Crossfire using the Radeon 3200 IGP and Radeon 3450 GPU, 3GB of RAM, etc. The AMD 3200 IGP will mop the floor with the X3100 and the new X4500. If you go over to HP you can get a 15.4" 1680x1050 AMD based system with the Radeon 3200 IGP, 3GB of RAM, 160GB HDD, and a high capacity battery for $853.99. Thats WITH a DVD writer. The processor is faster than the one in the entry level MacBook and the graphics will beat any Intel GPU, especially the X4500. For an extra $100 you can toss in the Radeon 3450 which enables hybrid crossfire.
If you buy a $899 computer, thats exactly what it is, an $899 computer. A revoltingly hideous thing with a joke for an OS. By the way hows the 1.5 hour battery life on that badass machine
Ooh bet that AMD processor is nice, want to bench it against my Mini I doubt it.The prices Apple charges for their computers are simply outrageous. Theres no valid reason for the pricing. OS X is simply not worth the sometimes $1,000 premium you pay for Apple hardware (or about $700 in the case of the MacBook).
Theres a perfectly valid reason, you get a real computer with a real OS. Why are you still here? If you don't want to pay the price then theres the door.
Not even close. The X3100 was supposed to be as fast as some dedicated GPUs. And just like the X4500, Intel instructed websites to do very limited pre-release benchmarks with a very limited number of software and specialized drivers.
I'll get the Violin. Again, don't like it? Buy a PC. Apple is not going to sell you a crappy machine just because your too cheap.
Apparently you've never used one.
My PC has a Core 2 Duo 2GHz (Merom core, Santa Rosa chipset) with 2GB of RAM and a 128MB GeForce 8400M GS. It plays Crysis at 800x600 with everything set to medium, but advanced settings set to low. It plays CoD4 at high settings with FSAA (default auto-detected settings!), GRID, UT3, Halo 2, Gears of War, HL2 EP2, etc.
Well once you've got passed the glory graphics and realised that both Crysis and COD4 have terrible gameplay, you might want to go and kick a ball or something.
The 8400M GS is also fantastic for video playback. DVDs look better on it than they do on my Onkyo upscaling DVD player, thanks to Windows taking advantage of the hardware (something OS X does NOT do). It can push blu-ray movies at around 5% CPU use.
Well theres something for the Microsoft Ads eh!
"We may have a ****** operating system, but at least we can push blu ray at 5% CPU usage."
The 8400M GS is a fantastic GPU as long as you keep your settings realistic (don't expect to play Crysis or GRID at native resolution at high settings) and use it for video playback.
The 8400M GS is still, to this day, FAR better than any of the Intel GPUs, X4500 included.
The use of Intel integrated graphics in the MacBook and Mac mini is actually quite amusing. When the Mac mini was introduced in 2005, Steve Jobs stood up and ripped on Intel GPUs while proclaiming how great the dedicated processor in the Mac mini was. A year later their "Consumer" line was filled with those same Intel GPUs he once made fun of. Thus proving that Apple cares more about profit than the consumer and that they will not back up their own words.
An American corporation caring about profit
Never!I also want to point out how sad it is that Mac owners are ripping on the OP for the fact that he was expecting good hardware for his money. IF you buy an expensive system you have every right to expect it to be the best in its class. Its not his fault he believed the Apple hype and didn't realize that Apple charges twice as much for their computers as they should.
You do get a computer the best in its class. Your a typical Windows user that things hardware is the be all and end all of a computer. Push off and get a Dell, you'll make your life and our life much better.
well i got both the wii and the xbox360
and macs are quite nice for gaming aswell if you have the correct hardware but anyways i am still happy with my macbook ^^
dont worry it isnt too expensive for me and as i said before: i made a mistake and next time i will simply buy a macbook pro however i am still happy with the macbook for now.
work?, more like being creative, showing off your photo album and making home video's to family and friends.
While this may be true for some, it isn't for many. There are plenty of reasons to get a MB over a MBP.
The only comparable machine I've seen is one of Sony's laptops. I'd challenge you to find a Win PC built on Penryn/Santa Rosa that has similar features to a MB that costs substantially less. The Sony is about the same price (and is based on Penryn/Santa Rosa).
I actually bought my MacBook for a number of factors;
The 13.3 inch screen is more portable, a 15 inch screen is too big for me
I don't need to edit video, I am a designer I use photoshop, Illustrator etc.
It is more affordable, but it suits my needs fine
Plus I don't have to baby my MacBook, I don't treat it badly but I also don't worry about putting it in its sleeve and chucking it in my bag
Not true. I bought the MacBook because it suited my needs. I was considering getting the MBP but ended up buying the MB because I needed more portability but at the same time wanted functionality (Hence not buying an Air).
I'm not saying that you are, but I certainly hate when people hate on the MacBook. It's a great consumer machine for $1,099. Why spend more money on a Pro machine when you are a consumer who doesn't need pro features. And, even though it is a consumer machine, it still has no trouble with Adobe CS3 or Final Cut, from what I hear.
All I can say is that all of these people whining about the MB being bad for gaming is getting old.
If you want to play video games buy a desktop or an xbox or something, quit buying a 13" laptop and expecting it to be the best gaming machine ever.
But don't stop posting about the graphics card, I get a lot of good laughs out of the replies sometimes.
If you want to play video games buy a desktop or an xbox or something, quit buying a 13" laptop and expecting it to be the best gaming machine ever.
But don't stop posting about the graphics card, I get a lot of good laughs out of the replies sometimes.
Well, considering that most, if not all, Windows notebook PCs in the $900+ range come with dedicated graphics, one has the right to assume that any computer hardware will be spec'ed the same. One shouldn't be told "should have done your research" when any person could walk into Best Buy and see all of the $900+ Windows systems that have Radeon HD2600 Pros, 3450s, GeForce 8600M GTs, 8800M GTS (and thats all under $1300!). So one who isn't well versed in computer hardware should have the right to assume that a product that is generally marketed as better all around than the competition would at least have similar hardware and not be the complete ripoff that it is.
Good for you. But a lot of us (and I gather even more in the future thanks to Apple's current high sales) have seen that light and have seen that OS X really isn't all its cracked up to be. And we've "switched" back to Windows. If OS X could do what I wanted (even at least give me decent video playback) and the hardware was reasonably priced, then I wouldn't have any complaints. If the MacBook shipped with the equivalent of a GeForce 8400M GS, I wouldn't have any complaints at all. Could use OS X for browsing and emailing (all its good for really) and Vista for everything else. But since the MacBook ships with an Intel GPU, its essentially no better than a $300 EEE PC.
Unfortunately, the OP will have to suffer a ridiculous restocking fee if he chooses to return it or lose a bit more money by selling it.
According to your youtube, you're 14 years old. You're old enough to at least display a little bit of maturity. So please try, okay?
Thats not true at all. Vista runs faster on the same hardware, and both Vista and Leopard have VERY SIMILAR hardware requirements. Both on paper and in real world. Both need modern processors and both need 2GB of RAM to "shine" as well as decent GPUs to draw all of their eye candy.
But Vista has features that OS X does not. Such as caching. Vista will cache the data for all of your most used software. Thanks to this, Firefox 3, iTunes, and other cross platform software that I use regularly loads FASTER on Vista than it does on my Mac after a fresh boot.
Also, Vista and XP (even Windows 98!) take advantage of the hardware in the system. For example, audio playback. Look at the difference in CPU use between Windows and OS X when playing music. If you're using software in Windows that takes advantage of hardware acceleration (nearly everything), you get roughly 0% CPU use while playing music. iTunes in OS X? Anywhere between 4-6% CPU use. Yeah thats not much but it is a significant difference. Look at DVD playback. In OS X, DVD Player can eat as much as 30% CPU time depending on the bitrate, onscreen action, de-interlacing mode selected (the default mode sucks), EQ (have to EQ it since DVD Player does NOT decode the LFE channel, like all Windows DVD players do). In Windows? About 2%.
Not only that, but thanks to ATI and nvidia, software developers ALREADY have the technology to take advantage of the GPU for speed improvements. They had it a full year before Snow Leopard will be released and they had been talking about it before Apple even mentioned they would try it in Snow Leopard. Not to mention the fact that Apple's version of the technology is entirely dependent on their awful OpenGL support.
rofl, you're funny. If Apple's build quality is so good, then why do hundreds of people at this very forum agree that Apple's build quality has sunk to the lowest its ever been? If the build quality is so good, why do the MacBooks have so many issues? The discoloring issue still exists, though not as much as before. But the white MacBook can also yellow on the bottom and on the hinge due to HEAT. It can also crack on the bottom due to heat, and around the hinge as well due to heat. The magnetic latches are notorious for cracking the top case. People in this branch of the forum have even accepted as fact that the MacBooks are meant to be "soft" on the port side and sometimes under the mouse as well. To me, a well built computer has NO "soft" spots. When my MacBook came back from repair (due to the case literally coming apart even though it lived a desk life, and the battery warping) with soft spots I sent it back and demanded it be rebuilt as strong as it was when I bought it. I most certainly would NOT have bought it with any soft spots.
The MacBook Pros also come OUT OF THE BOX in some cases with bent, warped, and dented cases. Sometimes the case on it starts to separate. Sometimes the MacBook Pro will WARP due to heat. The MacBook Pro also has known issues with yellowing screens and the poorly designed cooling system causes motherboard and chip failures.
The iMacs have been known to have condensation issues. Yes, actual water forming from heat under the glass screen.
The PowerMac G5s had issues with their cooling systems failing.
The MacBook Air is known to have motherboard failures caused by heat. Many MacBook Airs can't even watch downloaded iTunes videos because of heat issues causing throttling and core shut downs.
If you want to talk about good build quality then Apple is the LAST company you will talk about.
You can. Hell, you can get a notebook from Best Buy with more RAM and a GeForce 8800M GTS for $1300. You can get a Gateway with the same processor, more RAM, bigger HDD, etc. with a Radeon HD2600 Pro (8600M equivalent) for $1050.
Vista Ultimate over at newegg is $50 more than Leopard
Full version. Dedicated graphics do a lot more than play games. They're good for video as well as the technologies that are already available from nvidia and ATI that will allow software developers to use the GPU for high speed tasks. Also, the most recent revision of Flash for Windows uses DXVA. Too bad OS X has nothing like that
Please, the Wii is a joke. If game developers are so smart, why do they sign contracts with big publishers like EA that make the record industry look innocent? With the exception of very few developers (like Rockstar North), many of those "smarter people" end up signing contracts that would make most recording artists happy with their deal with the devil and end up making crap games.
Thats funny because not only do both require 512MB of RAM, I do know somebody that IS running Vista on 512MB of RAM. Granted Aero and all of that is disable. At least Windows gives you the option to tweak advanced settings. You know, I can actually go into advanced settings in Windows and set my clock speed and power saving settings for specific pieces of hardware? Can't do that with OS X.
Oh, and neither Vista nor Leopard runs good on 512MB of RAM. Tiger didn't even run good on 512MB of RAM, but XP flies on 512MB of RAM. You need at least a dual core processor and 2GB of RAM for either Leopard or Vista to run good.
Let me know when Apple's OpenGL support makes OpenGL native games run as fast as they do in Windows and Linux. Let me know when OS X has system wide hardware acceleration for sound and video.
Blu-ray is for those of us who care about quality. But considering you only have a MacBook, you wouldn't know what quality video playback is like.
If you honestly believe Macs have "excellent build quality" then you need to read around these forums a little more and read google a little more. Even the most hardcore Apple fanboys will tell you that Apple's build quality has been on a steady decline over the last several years. I can vouche for that. Both of my MacBooks have had build quality issues. The first one discolored from heat and the optical drive died. The second one started falling apart. My HP on the other hand is built like a rock. No soft spots, no spots that can discolor, none of that nonsense.
You also need to grow up and actually use Vista. You'll see its far more capable than OS X.
XP SP2 made it next to impossible for IE to download and install viruses without the users knowledge. Before that, Firefox/Mozilla and others had made it impossible. Outlook Express hasn't been automatically running attachments since the Win9x days. Vista has all of that plus UAC (which only appears as often as a password prompt in OS X) which has been proven to catch all forms of malware.
rofl, no. Apple charges more than anyone else. Thats why a company that only sells between 6-8% of all computers accounts for more than 1/4 of all of the money spent on computers.
Also, look at realistic prices. The $1299 MacBook comes a 2.4GHz C2D, 2GB of RAM, DVD writer, GMA 950, 13.3" 1280x800 screen. For $1230 at HP you get the same processor, 250GB HDD, 2GB of RAM, DVD writer, fingerprint reader, high capacity battery, GeForce 9600M GT 512MB, HDMI output, memory card reader, fullsize expresscard slot, VGA, S-Video, 3 USB, firewire, and a 15.4" 1680x1050 screen.
So for less you get a more powerful GPU than any in current Apple notebook, and all but 1 of the iMac models, and better than the stock GPU in the Mac Pro. You get more connectivity options than any Mac, a bigger screen, higher resolution than all but the 17" MacBook Pro, etc. etc. Do I need to go on?
OS X is no more easy to use than Vista.
So you acting like a child with your immature insults somehow gives "Facts"? You want facts, head over to some PC enthusiast sites.
As I said, you really need to grow up because you're giving all teenagers a bad name. I'm sure many others that post at this site are upset with the way you're acting and how immature you're being.
PC owners have SEVERAL communities. In fact, some of the smaller communities, like AVS, have over half a million members. Let that sink in for a minute. "Small" PC communities have more than double the members of this forum.
There are countless other communities as well, like futuremark and all of the communities of hardware review sites like hardocp.
If you want to talk about lies, go watch the Get A Mac ads
Everything I've said is fact. Go look it up.
One last thing. If you want to talk about Apple's customer support, you need to experience it first hand. What happens when something goes wrong with your MacBook? For example, my first MacBook (along with the discoloring) had a bad optical drive. I had to call Apple up and set up the shipment in (because I wasn't about to drive 150 miles across 2 round trips to an Apple Store and have them send it in anyway). I sent it in. It was shipped to the company they contract, Flextronics. It came back with a new case, same DVD drive, and the new case was scratched to hell and back. So out it went again. Yet another new case and this time they performed work on the optical drive that made it completely unable to function.
Fast forward to my second MacBook. The battery starts to warp and the case is coming apart in the bottom right corner. It gets shipped out. It comes back with a new case, same battery, both scratched to all hell. It comes back and comes back again the same way but with a new battery. The third time they get it right.
What happened when the optical drive went bad in one of my HPs? I called them up, told them. Two days later I had a new DVD drive waiting for me on my door step. Less than 2 minutes later it was installed and the call made to FedEx to pick up the defective part.
That system was out of service for a full 2 minutes. While I was without a MacBook for a combined total of about 6 weeks.
The 8400M GS is perfectly capable of playing modern games at reasonable settings. You're not going to play UT3 at 1280x800 all high settings. But you will play it at 800x600 medium settings. Same with GRID. It won't run at native res and high settings on an 8400M GS, but it will run flawlessly at 800x600 and medium settings.
Those were the same reasons for which I originally bought my MacBook. But after a few months of having it and seeing that I could have (at that time) gotten a 17" system with a GeForce Go 7600 and more RAM and HDD space for $600 less, I came to realize that I should have bought better for the money. Overall, the MacBook really isn't that much smaller than a standard 15.4" PC. They bought require the same size cases to be carried. I don't lose any space in my Targus case when comparing the Mac to the PC I own. So I'd rather have the better hardware.
If you want a smaller screen, there is still better hardware than the MacBook to be had.
A joke of an OS? care to explain? And give me some REAL reasons as to why you think Windows is a "joke". Not all of the lies and BS nonsense that Apple spits out either. Don't give me "viruses" or "spyware" because those are no longer relevant. You have to actively download, install, and run malware these days. The basic reason Windows is better than OS X? Well, Windows takes advantage of the hardware at hand. The GPU plays video. The sound processor does sound. OS X's answer to everything is to throw more CPU cycles at it. This is why certain things in OS X take significantly more CPU time than Windows on the same exact hardware.
Oh and my $950 HP gets real world 3 hours and 20 minutes of battery life. The screen set to lowest is equal to the MacBook at 50%, which takes its battery life down to around the same 3.5 hours.
Don't make fun of AMD processors either
They're every bit as fast as Core 2 Duos. They might not score as high in synthetic benchmarks, but in the real world you'll notice the significant price difference before you notice the speed difference. My girlfriend has an HP with a Turion64 X2 (slower than the current Turions shipping in the current HPs) running at 2.1GHz with 3GB of RAM. Her and I both used Handbrake to encode the same video on her system and on my MacBook (2.16GHz Core 2 Duo, 2.5GB of RAM) and they were done within seconds of eachother. Sometimes hers finished first, sometimes mine finished first. For the record, my $950 HP, which is almost a year old now, shipped with a 2GHz Core 2 Duo with 2GB of RAM, a GeForce 8400M GS, HDMI output, fullsize ExpressCard, memory card reader, fingerprint reader, high capacity battery, etc. while at Apple will still shipping the MacBook with 1GB of RAM, 2.16GHz Core 2 Duo, DVD writer, GMA 950, and none of those extras for $1299. My HP also has a 15.4" screen. Much the same way you can get an AMD based system with dedicated graphics and blu-ray for cheaper than the entry-level MacBook, or an Intel system for less than the middle MacBook that comes with a better GPU than the stock GPU in the Mac Pro.
Windows is a real OS. And its more capable out of the box than OS X. You get an OS that takes full advantage of available hardware, as opposed to the all software based ways of OS X. You get built-in software like Windows Media Center, which mops the floor with Front Row, and Media Center's built-in DVD and video decoders also take ful advantage of the hardware. Thats the thing with Windows. It is built around taking advantage of the hardware. Where OS X is built more around eating as much CPU cycles as possible to get the same thing done. OS X uses the hardware more as an interface for the software to do all of the work, where Windows uses the hardware to do the same thing with less overall resources used and, in many cases, less time.
You have to realize that Apple IS selling crappy hardware but it is NOT cheap. $2,000 for a 2.4GHz processor with only 2GB of RAM and a GeForce 8600M GT? Not when $1200 gets me the same processor, RAM, and a 9600M GT, along with HDMI, full size ExpressCard, memory card readers, a 1680x1050 screen, proper cooling system, etc.
Call of Duty 4 was THE highest selling game of the year last year. Its still the most played game on Xbox Live. I would say your opinion is just that, your opinion. There are millions of people out there who bought CoD4 and millions who still play it who will happily disagree with you. Keep in mind that about half as many people bought CoD4 overall as there are Mac users total.
Make fun of Windows all you want. It won't change the fact that it actually takes advantage of the hardware its installed on. It won't change the fact that almost 5x as many people have bought Vista as there are Mac users total.
You do NOT get the best computer in its class. Why is it a MacBook costs $1400 after taxes and ONLY ships with a GMA X3100? Why is it that an $1100 system only comes with a combo drive when a $400 PC notebook from Wal-Mart will ship with a DVD writer? Why is it that for the same $1400 from HP you can get a system with better graphics, stock, than a Mac Pro, blu-ray, and a higher resolution screen than any of the 15.4" MacBook Pros?
Showing off photo albums and making home videos for family and friends? Can do that on a PC. Equivalent software can be had for free for Windows. Being creative? How?
Head over to the "My parents hate Apple" thread and look for the screenshot I posted. A system built at HP with a 2.4GHz C2D, 2GB of RAM, GeForce 9600M GT, 15.4" 1680x1050 screen, blu-ray drive, for $20 more than the MacBook after taxes. Take out the blu-ray drive and it costs LESS before and after taxes than the MacBook with DVD writer does BEFORE taxes.
The problem is that for $1099 you ONLY get a 13.3" screen, you ONLY get 1GB of RAM, you ONLY get an Intel GMA X3100 GPU, and you ONLY get a combo drive! The combo drive should be banned at that price point.
For around $1,000 over at HP you can build an AMD based system with a faster processor, 2GB of RAM (maybe 3 depending on the promotion), a bigger HDD, DVD writer, HDMI output, dedicated graphics with hybrid crossfire, etc. etc. etc.
The real problem with Apple notebooks is that you get SO LITTLE hardware for SO MUCH money.
MOSX please go away. you obviously don't like apple, macs or os x.
So why are you on an Apple forum, where people who actually like OS X and Macs and don't mind paying for it talk.
I'm sure theres some windows forums out there, stop trying to irritate everyone
You've found an OS that works for you, well done. So has everyone else on here.
So why are you on an Apple forum, where people who actually like OS X and Macs and don't mind paying for it talk.
I'm sure theres some windows forums out there, stop trying to irritate everyone
You've found an OS that works for you, well done. So has everyone else on here.
Great argument there. In Windows, all the HD stuff is decoded by the video card, so even a Pentium 3 could run 1080p with a Purevideo HD or AVIVO HD card. Can't do that on OS X.
Also don't forget there is Linux too.
- Status