MacBook Pro 13" or Sony S11?

[ag227]

Hi,

Im trying to decide between the 2 mentioned laptops and I am really struggling.

I don't mind windows 7 and I use it alot, and I dont mind OS X. Each to me have their benefits but neither of them seems better to me for any reason so that point is void.

I like the long battery life of the MacBook Pro 13" but I feel it is outdated hardware that is kind of slow. I also fear that the battery life will decrease when it is updated with core i series processors as they appear to use more power (35 vs 25 Watts, although on the core i series the memory controller and integrated graphics is included in this). It would also need a dedicated graphics card which would drain even more power, bringing the battery life claim down to arond 6 - 7 hours. Sony battery life is only around 2 - 3 hours.

I also love the screen quality on the MacBook Pro range and the reflectiveness doesn't bother me.

So for the two systems i can get...

MacBook Pro 13" 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB Ram, etc..
Cost £858 with student discount, including 3 years warranty, Sell the ipod after rebate (£100), and sell the printer after rebate (~£50). Making MacBook Pro £710 roughly. Although this does mean spending about £1100 until the rebates arrive.

Sony Vaio SR11 laptop im looking at has an offer of a free processor upgrade atm so i can get.
i7-620m 2.66-3.3ghz, 4GB ram, 310 graphics card, 320gb HD.
Cost is £840 roughly.

Both weigh about the same and are the same size.

I use my laptop for general things such as internet, music, videos etc. But also rip and convert a lot of dvds on it and I feel the i7 could help greatly using handbrake.

So i guess im asking, which is the better buy?

So many benefits of both that im just lost...

Thanks

 

[pyramis]

Go for the Mac. Sounds like you're a college student. The Mac is more future-proof than the Sony. You can sell it in a couple years for much more than the Sony cause it will hold its value. With your student discount initially, that'll be most of the cost you put into it. Turn that around and by the latest and greatest Mac at that point. It's a no-brainer investment.

 

[R94N]

I also love the screen quality on the MacBook Pro range and the reflectiveness doesn't bother me.

Do you mean the glossy screen? Yeah, it's really nice. The colours are great on it.


I think you should get the Mac. They're excellent quality (and will probably last longer than the Sony if you look after it), and like pyramis says, you'll be able to sell the MBP easier than the Sony.

 

[ag227]

Thank you both for your input. But i dont feel what either of you said is relevant.

Neither is more futureproof than the other, if anything the sony is because of the higher specs.

I dont plan on selling it in a few years, and sonys hold there value pretty well to, especially one that has a free £230 processor upgrade.

Sony are also good quality, probably better built in my opinion.

Neither is an investment anyway, its a tool.

Can i try it from another perspective. Lets say that both of the laptops were as i mentioned but the cases were swapped over. So the sony was in the unibody and ran windows 7 still. Which would you pick?

What about if the sony was in the macbook case AND ran OS X and the macbook the opposite?

Im just trying to take the case and operating system out of the equation....

Thanks

 

[wordoflife]

I agree with them - Mac is more future proof.
It's not all about the specs. More than likely the Mac will be more usable in the long run (hey look, is that person using a Powerbook G4???) and when you're done using it, someone will want to buy it on ebay for a decent price considering the state/age of the machine.

Do you even need a mobile i7 for what you're doing?

 

[R94N]

Yeah, expanding on wordoflife's point - people still use Macs from 2000 - 2004, and they still work fine. I don't think many Windows machines last that long. I think Macs are more expensive to start with but they last longer.