Macbook Pro 15 or HP Envy 15?

[perfectshadows]

I have an envy 15 there really good machines but battery life is shockingly poor due to the hardware, if you get the extra 'slice' battery which is 9 cell, you end up with a 15cell laptop 6 cell + 9 cell lasts me about 4hrs in HP recommended power mode without it I get 1hr 15mins.

BUT the trade off the laptop becomes larger its not thin any more the weight goes up 1.295kg so it becomes large and heavy not nice if you have a shoulder style bag I use a back pack now or i'd be lopesided.

But other than that its brilliant, you get used to the touchpad, although not as slick as an MBP its still good, just pinch zooming is hardwork to use but scroll is okay if a little clunky.

but now here is the but, I have one but I am changing to a new macbook pro when they get released with Intel 'i' chips...my only reasons for changing though is OSX, battery to weight ratio, I am fed up being outdated so quickly, Most of the products I own are now apple and my laptop is the only windows based thing in my life.

 

[Puqq]

The Envy has good specs, but MBP has ~4-5h more of battery life. The i7-QM drains power like a beast... Other than that, Envy wins hands down.

Btw, if you have any doubts of MacOS vs. Win 7, don't worry. Win 7 is a very decent piece of software indeed

 

[SA22C]

The Envy has good specs, but MBP has ~4-5h more of battery life. The i7-QM drains power like a beast... Other than that, Envy wins hands down.

Btw, if you have any doubts of MacOS vs. Win 7, don't worry. Win 7 is a very decent piece of software indeed

See, I just don't get the group-think over Windows 7. It's hardly different than Vista. The look-and-feel is the same, the underlying driver architecture is the same. The only difference is a kludgy start bar and the (admittedly very cool) Aero Peek. I use 7 every day at work and I'd still choose OS X over Microsoft's latest OS offering.

As for which laptop to buy, this thread pretty much hits it on the head. If you care about usability, portability, battery life and quality; get the Mac.

If you're a spec whore, get the (ever so appropriately named) Envy.

 

[maflynn]

See, I just don't get the group-think over Windows 7. It's hardly different than Vista. The look-and-feel is the same, the underlying driver architecture is the same. The only difference is a kludgy start bar and the (admittedly very cool) Aero Peek. I use 7 every day at work and I'd still choose OS X over Microsoft's latest OS offering.

I disagree. I'm by no means a windows fanboy and in fact I use Linux over windows for my work stuff. I had to use win7 for a while and found it to a be a solid, stable OS. The features added were a plus and the stability was surprising. From what I've read regarding Vista is that as bad as it was in the beginning MS really did improve it.

To turn your statement around, there was significant group-think over vista, and when win7 hit the streets it was a decent albeit bloated OS.

The underlying driver architecture of win7 isn't bad, infact with vista MS attempted to improve that architecture. Since I'm not a regular user of win7, I cannot say if they accomplished that or not. In the end, I found that win7 didn't suck. I perfer fedora over windows any day so I use that when I can

 

[SA22C]

I disagree. I'm by no means a windows fanboy and in fact I use Linux over windows for my work stuff. I had to use win7 for a while and found it to a be a solid, stable OS. The features added were a plus and the stability was surprising. From what I've read regarding Vista is that as bad as it was in the beginning MS really did improve it.

To turn your statement around, there was significant group-think over vista, and when win7 hit the streets it was a decent albeit bloated OS.

The underlying driver architecture of win7 isn't bad, infact with vista MS attempted to improve that architecture. Since I'm not a regular user of win7, I cannot say if they accomplished that or not. In the end, I found that win7 didn't suck. I perfer fedora over windows any day so I use that when I can

You're absolutely right that Vista was unfairly tarred as a 'problem' OS. It's just amusing how the group consensus forms around simple themes that have little bearing on how the product (in this case, Windows) actually functioned. The bottom line is that Windows 7 is still slower on the same hardware than XP and the graphics performance of DX11 still hasn't caught up to the performance under DX9. Sure, Windows 7 looks prettier and has begun the march towards a saner security model, but XP is still the performance and stability king.

Compare that to OS X and I've seen a constant improvement in performance and appearance with each point release.

 

[ScottishDuck]

You're absolutely right that Vista was unfairly tarred as a 'problem' OS. It's just amusing how the group consensus forms around simple themes that have little bearing on how the product (in this case, Windows) actually functioned. The bottom line is that Windows 7 is still slower on the same hardware than XP and the graphics performance of DX11 still hasn't caught up to the performance under DX9. Sure, Windows 7 looks prettier and has begun the march towards a saner security model, but XP is still the performance and stability king.

Compare that to OS X and I've seen a constant improvement in performance and appearance with each point release.

I don't know what is trolling more. Your comments on Windows 7 or your claims that Mac OSX is getting better.

 

[SA22C]

I don't know what is trolling more. Your comments on Windows 7 or your claims that Mac OSX is getting better.

If you have a particular issue with my comments, I'd like to hear it so as to promote discussion. It's been my anecdotal experience, from running many different versions of Windows on the same hardware, that XP is still the performance champ and that 7 is no faster or more stable than Vista SP2. As I mentioned, the new Aero Peek feature is nice but hardly a game-changer.

I have also noticed that each version of OS X, again run on the same hardware, runs faster and smoother than the one that came before. These are my observations and hardly constitute 'trolling.'

From your signature line, it would appear that, between the two of us, you're the one who is more likely to be trolling.

 

[bluefox9er]

I caught the "waiting for Arrandale" virus, and finally got tired of waiting, looked up my options, and chose between these two.

Macbook Pro 15
2.8 GHZ C2D
4 GB of RAM
9400m+9600m GT
500 GB 7200 RPM HD
Internal Superdrive
Integrated Battery
1400x900
or
HP Envy 15
1.73 GHZ Core i7-720QM
6 GB of RAM
Mobility Radeon HD 5830
500 GB 7200 RPM HD
External BD-ROM USB Drive
6-cell+9-cell slice battery
1920x1080

Primary use (from highest to lowest): Web Browsing, MS Word/Excel/PPT, Gaming (Star Wars: The Force Unleashed only), Photoshop CS3 and Flash CS3 (soon to be CS5), and occasionally some video transcoding. When I work in Photoshop, a little less than half the time, I work at resolutions equal to or greater than 1920x1080. In Flash, I usually have a w/h of 1600x900 and 72 fps. I don't make long animations, just 5-20 sec. ones. Gaming performance doesn't really matter to me.

OS Preference: I am impartial, though I have mainly used windows in my computing experience.

So, which should I go with?

lol..after writing down the specs you still confused to pick sandra bullock over rosie o'donnel??

get the HP...it's fairly clear that apple are not committed to their range of laptops.

 

[Gata]

How would the Envy handle the things I do relative to the C2D 2.8GHZ MBP?
Also, I need a good 3-4 hours of battery life, but weight doesn't mean much to me.
I just need a computer that can do what I need to do without slowing down.
And BTW, I have until June 15-16th.
But if I had to pick between both right now, which one should I get?

 

[seanconn]

How would the Envy handle the things I do relative to the C2D 2.8GHZ MBP?
Also, I need a good 3-4 hours of battery life, but weight doesn't mean much to me.
I just need a computer that can do what I need to do without slowing down.
And BTW, I have until June 15-16th.
But if I had to pick between both right now, which one should I get?

if you have until June, wait.

but I'd still probably for the Core 2 Duo, you can probably pick up the 2.8 for 1600ish and the 2.66 for 1350-1400 or so?

what could the Envy possibly do better if your not worried about playing games other than Sims 3 or Force Unleashed or w/e it was that u play.

Apple laptops hold there value, you can sell it after a year at a 200 dollar loss or even less. HP you are stuck with for life basically.

i can't get over the mass amount of ppl on a mac forum telling u to buy an HP. like WTF

 

[bluefox9er]

i can't get over the mass amount of ppl on a mac forum telling u to buy an HP. like WTF

because there are folks who can see the world without apple glasses...

 

[esmode]

If you have a particular issue with my comments, I'd like to hear it so as to promote discussion. It's been my anecdotal experience, from running many different versions of Windows on the same hardware, that XP is still the performance champ and that 7 is no faster or more stable than Vista SP2. As I mentioned, the new Aero Peek feature is nice but hardly a game-changer.

I have also noticed that each version of OS X, again run on the same hardware, runs faster and smoother than the one that came before. These are my observations and hardly constitute 'trolling.'

From your signature line, it would appear that, between the two of us, you're the one who is more likely to be trolling.

The group think approach was what made it look trollish.

The taskbar is a huge difference, and a well received one. I wouldn't dismiss that as minor as it is the most visible and probably most used component of the Windows OS. I do find the Start menu kludgy although improved with some nice new features. Overall though there were a lot of visible and functional UI tweaks. Enough so that I am really displeased when I go from a 7 machine to a Vista one.

Also even if what you said was 100% accurate, it wouldn't suggest that 7 isn't decent compared to OSX like the original post stated. If anything I think your overview of both 7 and OSX were overly simplistic.

 

[cathyy]

I went to have a look out of curiosity at the Envy and damn that think is cheap looking/feeling. When all the chatter about it being a macbook pro clone was doing the rounds before release the press photos etc made it look really nice quality but in reality its cheap and nasty.

Specs don't need to be spoken about in the decision as everybody knows and can see in black and white.

To me it has all the appeal of a chinese iPhone copy.

Err what? HP has been using the standard black bezel, black keys and silver case design for a much longer time than Apple has. There were a ton of people complaining about how Unibodys looked like cheap HPs when it was first released.

 

[Gata]

More and more, I lean towards the HP Envy. The Design's pretty close to the MBPs, the build quality is pretty high, performance is great, and I can fully spec it and add a coupon and get it less than a C2D 2.8GHZ MBP.
I've also edited the 1st post with some updated info.

 

[jjahshik32]

More and more, I lean towards the HP Envy. The Design's pretty close to the MBPs, the build quality is pretty high, performance is great, and I can fully spec it and add a coupon and get it less than a C2D 2.8GHZ MBP.
I need people to reason out what they are saying. I can't make a good decision based on "Get the Mac".

No OSX. Thats the number one reason why I use a mac, period.

Bad ass hardware running Windows 7 vs. More than good enough hardware running OSX, I'd still choose OSX as it gives me the best overall experience.

While hardware is generally important, to me software matters a whole lot more than hardware.

What good is hardware when it has crappy software to go with it.

Basically you can use the macbook pro and get the futuristic/more reliable/better work flow/NO VIRUS/MUCH better overall experience from OSX and 95% of the time you forget.. iWHAT and its supposed to be 20% at most faster which can help me accomplish something that I cant otherwise do now!?!? Or just get the HP Envy and while your still able accomplish your daily tasks at a much less pleasant experience, you could drool at the i7 core emblem at the palm rest and be happy.

The choice is yours.

 

[Gata]

No OSX. Thats the number one reason why I use a mac, period.

Bad ass hardware running Windows 7 vs. More than good enough hardware running OSX, I'd still choose OSX as it gives me the best overall experience.

While hardware is generally important, to me software matters a whole lot more than hardware.

What good is hardware when it has crappy software to go with it.

Basically you can use the macbook pro and get the futuristic/more reliable/better work flow/NO VIRUS/MUCH better overall experience from OSX and 95% of the time you forget.. iWHAT and its supposed to be 20% at most faster which can help me accomplish something that I cant otherwise do now!?!? Or just get the HP Envy and while your still able accomplish your daily tasks at a much less pleasant experience, you could drool at the i7 core emblem at the palm rest and be happy.

The choice is yours.

I've (personally) had a rather good experience with windows, on par with OSX.
That, and you have to note that there now exist for OSX, malware and trojans. True, the number is exceptionally small, but it exists and it will grow.

 

[SA22C]

Err what? HP has been using the standard black bezel, black keys and silver case design for a much longer time than Apple has. There were a ton of people complaining about how Unibodys looked like cheap HPs when it was first released.

Link or it didn't happen.

 

[JoeG4]

Bad ass hardware running Windows 7 vs. More than good enough hardware running OSX, I'd still choose OSX as it gives me the best overall experience.

The MacBook Pro hardware is NOT more than good enough, **** it's not even good enough IMHO. In 2 years, it'll probably be somewhat pathetic.

What good is hardware when it has crappy software to go with it.

Sometimes, when doing programming I feel the same way about OS X dev tools.

 

[billgates99]

Originally Posted by Gata
I caught the "waiting for Arrandale" virus, and finally got tired of waiting, looked up my options, and chose between these two.

Macbook Pro 15
2.8 GHZ C2D
4 GB of RAM
9400m+9600m GT
500 GB 7200 RPM HD
Internal Superdrive
Integrated Battery
1400x900
or
HP Envy 15
1.73 GHZ Core i7-720QM
6 GB of RAM
Mobility Radeon HD 5830
500 GB 7200 RPM HD
External BD-ROM USB Drive
6-cell+9-cell slice battery
1920x1080

Primary use (from highest to lowest): Web Browsing, MS Word/Excel/PPT, Gaming (Star Wars: The Force Unleashed only), Photoshop CS3 and Flash CS3 (soon to be CS5), and occasionally some video transcoding. When I work in Photoshop, a little less than half the time, I work at resolutions equal to or greater than 1920x1080. In Flash, I usually have a w/h of 1600x900 and 72 fps. I don't make long animations, just 5-20 sec. ones. Gaming performance doesn't really matter to me.

OS Preference: I am impartial, though I have mainly used windows in my computing experience.

So, which should I go with?

USB 3.0 is a pretty significant advantage for the Envy 15. I'm able to transfer 4-5GB DVD files within a ridiculously short period of time back and forth to drives sitting in my USB 3.0 external dock.

I purchased a custom Envy 15 with the following specs about 1 month ago:

i7-820QM
16GB DDR3 RAM 1333mHz
320GB SSD Raid0
1GB ATI Mobility Radeon HD5830
USB 3.0 ports

It is the most lightning fast experience I have ever had working with large files in Photoshop and Illustrator (using CS4 64-bit versions). I can instantly Alt+Tab back and forth between various windows open with memory intensive tasks, such as huge poster files in Photoshop, DVD Studio Pro encoding, 3D games in fullHD 1080p resolution with high fps, such as Mass Effect, Dragon Age, etc., with no lag whatsoever.

It does have several drawbacks, namely:
- runs extremely hot - i use Zalman nc1000 laptop cooler and that seems to do the trick
- low battery life - with the optional 9-cell slice battery it lasts about 4-5 hours, which is much longer than my previous laptop; however, not great. i think for any int'l flight I would need to take an extra slice battery. With the slice battery in, it is extremely heavy, but the slice battery is well designed so that it retains a relatively sleek shape. without the slice battery, forget it, you only get 2 hours max.
- the multi-touch trackpad is kind of a joke -- much less sensitive than the MBP trackpad. I often have to jiggle my fingers around in order to do 2-finger scrolling or special gestures
- horrible placement of special function keys on the keyboard - i often wind up hitting some moronic key to open a print menu or email application when i'm in the middle of working in photoshop or playing a game
- low 4k read speed - it is about 10x slower than it should be, even slower than the 4k write speed - many others have found the same problem with the Envy's - however, as I mentioned, it is so fast I cannot notice any difference. I'm not sure in what practical situation I would be using the 4k read speed, but the fact that it is lower than it should be concerns me.
CrystalDiskMark 2.2 (C) 2007-2008
--------------------------------
Sequential Read : 469.045 MB/s
Sequential Write : 155.626 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 253.068 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 133.743 MB/s
Random Read 4KB : 10.294 MB/s
Random Write 4KB : 55.438 MB/s
Test Size : 100 MB Date : 2010/03/10 1:54:01

I need to run Final Cut Pro for work and I've been trying to decide whether to
(1) buy used MacPro desktop;
(2) buy used MBP;
(3) sell my Envy and buy new MBP; or
(4) install hackintosh'd OSX on my Envy

Any suggestions?

I noticed the new MBPs are using the i7-620QM, Nvidia Geforce 330M , no USB 3.0, no eSATA and cost around $1k more than comparable Envy 15 models.

I'm really interested to see some reviews from anyone who purchased a new MBP. It's funny someone mentioned that people are recommending the Envy on this Mac forum because I was on the HP Envy forum earlier and people are recommending MBPs ;-)

 

[JoeG4]

There is no i7 620QM, they use the 620M, which is an i5 with more cache. (dual cores!! NOT QUAD)

No onboard memory controller either (it's "on package")

 

[billgates99]

There is no i7 620QM, they use the 620M, which is an i5 with more cache. (dual cores!! NOT QUAD)

No onboard memory controller either (it's "on package")

I understand that Windows 7 and most PC apps do not fully make the best use of quad/hexcore CPU, but does anyone know whether OSX does this (at least to the extent that Windows7 does)?