I spent 2000 on this Inspiron 3 and a half years ago for my sister, they sure werent cheap:
And it sucks that the build quality is so god awful
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.
Microsoft Releases Second 'Laptop Hunters' Commercial
- Thread starter fpbecker
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And it sucks that the build quality is so god awful
Didn't know that, I buy mostly Latitude/Precision/Optiplex. For those, the model gets incremented when there's an architecture change. Speed bumps and minor stuff bumps no change, but new CPU or chipset gets an increment.
I think the business models are just worlds better than their home-use counterparts. I am typing this on a bargain-basement Dell Vostro 1000 laptop and it has served our family well for 18 months so far.
Exactly. That was EXACTLY my experience. It actually got recalled on me too, not that they radically changed anything. I bought a 12" Powerbook on Craigslist for $600, and then upgraded to a new 13" MacBook (the $1,600) a little later. Both are serving us very well still, and I expect to have them around for a long time to come, much like my iMac. Meanwhile, all my Dell mini-towers are almost garbage to me, and their cases are barely staying on. My old Mac G4 has experienced little more than a hard drive failure, which would represent a simple swap-out if I wanted to revive it.And it sucks that the build quality is so god awful
~ CB
I still don't see why everyone cares about what computer other people own.
we all get what we want in the end. porn.
Huzzah! a voice of reason!
After all, isn't that what almost everything boils down to: porn.
Heehee...That made me grin.
hello there. can you read the bold part to yourself again (and the rest that follows that sentence) ?
so you are first saying you can get similar or better spec'd pc for $799 compared to apple. but you are saying a $799 pc is unusable. it implies that apple is also unusable? no? one must add a good graphics card, enough processor and enough ram to their apple computer to make it usable? after all you said pc needs those upgrades to make them usable.
you see my friend, for the sake of argument, i will accept your $3000 upgrade claim. but i can gurantee you, if you make the same upgrades on an apple computer, you will be looking at more than $6000!
$3000 is a lot of money. what exactly were you upgrading? have i misunderstood you? i was simply following your sentences.
you are new here i see. we are all glad to see a surge in "newcomers" contributing to this thread.
some have disappeared though.
not sure, my Athlon 2500+ overclocked to 3200 from 2003 is STILL working as a surfing/chatting PC. 2003 >> 2009
thats 6 years of being overclocked lol, the ram is overclocked slightly too. (the overclock is 1.833GHz to 2.2GHz)
I still don't see why everyone cares about what computer other people own.
we all get what we want in the end. porn.
correct, and ive proven macs are better at porn however with Pc's of the same price you have a higher porn/minute ratio (faster HW, faster porn)
maybe he should of got this then for $1,299.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834152099
CPU Type Intel Core 2 Duo P8600 2.4G
Screen 15.4" WSXGA+
Memory Size 4GB DDR2
Hard Disk 320GB
Optical Drive BD Combo
Graphics Card NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GS
Video Memory 1GB DDR3 VRAM
Communication Modem, Gigabit LAN and WLAN
Card slot 1 x Express Card
IEEE 1394 1
Video Port 1 x VGA, 1 x HDMI
Other port 1 x ESATA/USB Combo
compared to what? a 5 year old computer?
that reminds me of the funny apple blogs/news sites
New computers are faster than old ones~!!!! OMG WOW!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.computerworld.com/action...=Macintoshes&articleId=9130908&taxonomyId=163
CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT!@!! the FASTEST Mac pro is the newest Mac pro!!!!! OMGWTFBBQH4x0ringSauce!! mp3!!
EDIT: WTF is wrong with apple's pricing.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161268
a 4870 is $170ish ($155 after rebate)
now to UPGRADE on apple's website (as in remove the GT120 becuase you dont get it when you upgrade and buy a 4870) costs $200?
$170 retail pricing vs Apple's $200 UPGRADE + losing your GT120, also with the newegg purchase you get a free game too.
Apple = pay to lose
Amen brother! Basically every PC trackpad I have is slightly to the left of center. It drives me bonkers. Apple puts it smack in the middle of the machine and that is perfect in my eyes. No idea why every other vendor messes up this particular detail.
Then definitely avoid IBM IntelliStations (although I think they might be discontinued now, not sure?). Holy God, there are now four of those horrid things in the photo lab at work and not only are they LOUD, they also raise the ambient temperature to about nintey-five degrees F!!
I have no idea what the noise is for, they're no larger than most other black PC towers...Then there's Apple's "laptop on a stand" and the Mac mini....hell they're all really really quiet!
Bear in mind that for the most part, computers are only as usable as the operating system installed on them...and Mac OS X is far more stable on a system with "insufficient" specs than Windows is. From personal experience. I got the "from 799 to 3,000" claim from configuring various Dell, Sony, and HP laptops, since I'd been looking for something to make a "HackBook Pro" out of. But if I'm not mistaken, the only Mac that hits $6,000 (in passing)
is the Mac Pro, but it's a workstation, and workstations are expensive period. I was somewhat vague there, I'll admit.
The current Dell line up of Studio laptops are actually built pretty well, and of course the latitude and precision lines are supurbly well constructed.
Buy my next laptop is going to be this:
http://www.costcentral.com/proddetail/Lenovo_ThinkPad_T500_2082/208227U/V15781/
I just can't seem to justify a Macbook Pro no matter how hard I try, when the Lenovo just has so much more going for it, for less money.
The one thing a lot of people have brought up is the lack of a consumer grade Mac tower system, and I have to admit I agree wholeheartedly.
As someone on their fourth iMac (through upgrading, not system failure), it's safe to say I'm happy enough to continue to go with the iMac for my needs. Would I like a Mac Pro? Yes, and no. Yes, because it's a screamer of a system, the best Apple offer. No, because it's ridiculously priced and, in all honesty, I don't need that much power.
When it comes to Desktops, Apple only offer three realistic options; the Mac Mini, the iMac, and the Mac Pro. As far as I am concerned, there is space for another SKU in the Mac desktop market, and it would be a tower system for the general consumer, a Mac Pro Mini for lack of a better term.
I don't know why Apple assume that only huge power users have the need to upgrade components. Surely a mini/midi tower version of the Mac Pro allowing access to the components the same as the Mac Pro does, is not too hard to introduce? I know for a fact that, as someone who moved from a PC background almost a decade ago now, I would have snapped up a mini/midi tower Mac long before a new iMac when I upgraded last month.
Some people argued that the iMac should make way for a mini/midi tower Mac, but the all-in-one market still requires catering for and is a completely different audience from those wanting an upgradable consumer tower. There is space for another SKU in the desktop line-up, but I think we all know we're not going to see it.
The Mac Mini is a little too "entry level" for it's own good, the iMac is too restricted in that only the RAM can be upgraded, and the Mac Pro is either too expensive or just way too much power than most normal consumers looking for a desktop computer need.
Personally, I'd love to see the introduction of a mini/midi tower "Mac Pro", with the same design as the full blown Mac Pro, just smaller but with the same removable side panel to gain access to memory, hard drives, graphics cards, etc. One of those, hooked up to an LED Apple Cinema Display would be amazing.
However, for now it's time to stop dreaming ... my iMac is still a gorgeous piece of machinery for now.
As someone on their fourth iMac (through upgrading, not system failure), it's safe to say I'm happy enough to continue to go with the iMac for my needs. Would I like a Mac Pro? Yes, and no. Yes, because it's a screamer of a system, the best Apple offer. No, because it's ridiculously priced and, in all honesty, I don't need that much power.
When it comes to Desktops, Apple only offer three realistic options; the Mac Mini, the iMac, and the Mac Pro. As far as I am concerned, there is space for another SKU in the Mac desktop market, and it would be a tower system for the general consumer, a Mac Pro Mini for lack of a better term.
I don't know why Apple assume that only huge power users have the need to upgrade components. Surely a mini/midi tower version of the Mac Pro allowing access to the components the same as the Mac Pro does, is not too hard to introduce? I know for a fact that, as someone who moved from a PC background almost a decade ago now, I would have snapped up a mini/midi tower Mac long before a new iMac when I upgraded last month.
Some people argued that the iMac should make way for a mini/midi tower Mac, but the all-in-one market still requires catering for and is a completely different audience from those wanting an upgradable consumer tower. There is space for another SKU in the desktop line-up, but I think we all know we're not going to see it.
The Mac Mini is a little too "entry level" for it's own good, the iMac is too restricted in that only the RAM can be upgraded, and the Mac Pro is either too expensive or just way too much power than most normal consumers looking for a desktop computer need.
Personally, I'd love to see the introduction of a mini/midi tower "Mac Pro", with the same design as the full blown Mac Pro, just smaller but with the same removable side panel to gain access to memory, hard drives, graphics cards, etc. One of those, hooked up to an LED Apple Cinema Display would be amazing.
However, for now it's time to stop dreaming ... my iMac is still a gorgeous piece of machinery for now.
Problem is that Apple reads this and says "Great, we sold this guy 4 iMacs instead of a single Mac Pro Mini with upgrades that probably wouldn't have come from us anyways".
I need to chime in again on this whole debate.
I think its funny that people actually buy into this whole "Pro" and "Consumer" thing that Apple has set up. People actually believe that MacBook Pro is a "Pro" machine.
But let's look at the MacBook Pro for a minute. Assuming it is a "Pro" machine, that put its up there with the Business notebooks from Dell and HP. If the MacBook Pro is a "Pro" machine, why does it use a consumer GPU? On top of that, if its a "Pro" machine, why is it using what is considered to be the lowest of the midrange consumer GPUs? The "Pro" machines from HP and Dell come with considerably faster mobile workstation GPUs (Quadro and FireGL GPUs). If the MacBook Pro is a "Pro" machine, where are the quadcore options? Aside from the more expensive option on the MacBook Pro, where are the anti-glare screen options? Why only offer consumer grade screens? Where are the blu-ray writer options? HDMI? Full disk encryption? RAID support? Not to mention the card readers (memory and smart card), full size ExpressCard, fingerprint readers, eSATA, etc. What about the build quality? The MacBook "Pro" is built out of material that easily dents, scratches, and can generally be easily destroyed. The "Pro" systems from PC manufacturers are built out of much stronger materials that can take a hit and not even show it. PC manufacturers are so confident in their build quality that their "Pro" systems come with 3 year warranties as standard. Some of them even offer 3 years of on-site support as standard, but for most its an option for about the same cost as Apple's extended warranty that requires mail-in service to service centers that are notorious for sending the system back in worse shape than they received it in (I know this from first hand experience). Not only does Apple's 3 year warranty cost as much as PC's optional warranty, it doesn't cover as much as PC makers warranties. Really, if the MacBook "Pro" is a true "Pro" machine and truly better than those from PC manufacturers, why doesn't Apple stand behind their product the way HP, Dell, and others do?
I mean honestly, if the MacBook "Pro" is a "Pro" machine, why does it offer not even half of the options of true "Pro" machines from PC manufacturers? Why does it have less options than consumer notebooks costing less than half as much? Why isn't built as well as those consumer notebooks costing less than half as much? It can't even begin to compare to the build quality of "Pro" machines from PC manufacturers. Why does it only offer "consumer" options for the GPU, screen, and other features?
The MacBook "Pro" is nothing more than a consumer machine with the word "Pro" tacked on.
Now let's look at the Mac "Pro". Apple, again, claims this is a "Pro" system. Sure it has the Xeon processor. But where are the processor options? Why am I stuck with only a couple? Where is the RAM expandability? HP "Workstations" offer up to 192GB of RAM. Where are the workstation GPUs? Why am I, again, stuck with low-end consumer grade GPUs that even moderate gamers wouldn't consider worth the money? Why do I have to buy a card for RAID? Where are the blu-ray burners that aren't from 3rd parties that are only interested in extreme price gouging? What about expandability? Why am I stuck with only one PCIe x16 and 2 PCIe x4? A "Pro" system should at least offer the same amount of expandability as a $100 motherboard for a "consumer" desktop system.
So, again, the Mac "Pro", aside from the processor, is nothing more than a glorified and ridiculously overpriced consumer grade system. Other than the processor, it has absolutely nothing in common with true workstations from other manufacturers and offers less expandability than a $600 desktop from Best Buy. The sad thing is you can make that $600 desktop from Best Buy a more capable "workstation" because you can actually get a workstation quality GPU and throw it in, and that desktop will have all of the expandability options it needs to be a "workstation".
Aside from the iPod and iPhone, Apple really is the Bose of computing. You spend a lot more money for a lot less overall features and performance in a package that isn't built half as well as cheaper products.
I think its funny that people actually buy into this whole "Pro" and "Consumer" thing that Apple has set up. People actually believe that MacBook Pro is a "Pro" machine.
But let's look at the MacBook Pro for a minute. Assuming it is a "Pro" machine, that put its up there with the Business notebooks from Dell and HP. If the MacBook Pro is a "Pro" machine, why does it use a consumer GPU? On top of that, if its a "Pro" machine, why is it using what is considered to be the lowest of the midrange consumer GPUs? The "Pro" machines from HP and Dell come with considerably faster mobile workstation GPUs (Quadro and FireGL GPUs). If the MacBook Pro is a "Pro" machine, where are the quadcore options? Aside from the more expensive option on the MacBook Pro, where are the anti-glare screen options? Why only offer consumer grade screens? Where are the blu-ray writer options? HDMI? Full disk encryption? RAID support? Not to mention the card readers (memory and smart card), full size ExpressCard, fingerprint readers, eSATA, etc. What about the build quality? The MacBook "Pro" is built out of material that easily dents, scratches, and can generally be easily destroyed. The "Pro" systems from PC manufacturers are built out of much stronger materials that can take a hit and not even show it. PC manufacturers are so confident in their build quality that their "Pro" systems come with 3 year warranties as standard. Some of them even offer 3 years of on-site support as standard, but for most its an option for about the same cost as Apple's extended warranty that requires mail-in service to service centers that are notorious for sending the system back in worse shape than they received it in (I know this from first hand experience). Not only does Apple's 3 year warranty cost as much as PC's optional warranty, it doesn't cover as much as PC makers warranties. Really, if the MacBook "Pro" is a true "Pro" machine and truly better than those from PC manufacturers, why doesn't Apple stand behind their product the way HP, Dell, and others do?
I mean honestly, if the MacBook "Pro" is a "Pro" machine, why does it offer not even half of the options of true "Pro" machines from PC manufacturers? Why does it have less options than consumer notebooks costing less than half as much? Why isn't built as well as those consumer notebooks costing less than half as much? It can't even begin to compare to the build quality of "Pro" machines from PC manufacturers. Why does it only offer "consumer" options for the GPU, screen, and other features?
The MacBook "Pro" is nothing more than a consumer machine with the word "Pro" tacked on.
Now let's look at the Mac "Pro". Apple, again, claims this is a "Pro" system. Sure it has the Xeon processor. But where are the processor options? Why am I stuck with only a couple? Where is the RAM expandability? HP "Workstations" offer up to 192GB of RAM. Where are the workstation GPUs? Why am I, again, stuck with low-end consumer grade GPUs that even moderate gamers wouldn't consider worth the money? Why do I have to buy a card for RAID? Where are the blu-ray burners that aren't from 3rd parties that are only interested in extreme price gouging? What about expandability? Why am I stuck with only one PCIe x16 and 2 PCIe x4? A "Pro" system should at least offer the same amount of expandability as a $100 motherboard for a "consumer" desktop system.
So, again, the Mac "Pro", aside from the processor, is nothing more than a glorified and ridiculously overpriced consumer grade system. Other than the processor, it has absolutely nothing in common with true workstations from other manufacturers and offers less expandability than a $600 desktop from Best Buy. The sad thing is you can make that $600 desktop from Best Buy a more capable "workstation" because you can actually get a workstation quality GPU and throw it in, and that desktop will have all of the expandability options it needs to be a "workstation".
Aside from the iPod and iPhone, Apple really is the Bose of computing. You spend a lot more money for a lot less overall features and performance in a package that isn't built half as well as cheaper products.
Yeah, the noise levels on the iMac and the Mini are truly examples for the rest of the industry to follow. I didn't think my old Mini G4 even had a fan. Until I watched a Flash trailer, which for some reason despite the lightweight task (some basic 2D vector animations isn't exactly Crysis) made the Mini sweat like John Goodman in a sauna. Is there not one person on the Flash team who knows anything about optimization?Then definitely avoid IBM IntelliStations (although I think they might be discontinued now, not sure?). Holy God, there are now four of those horrid things in the photo lab at work and not only are they LOUD, they also raise the ambient temperature to about nintey-five degrees F!!
Then there's Apple's "laptop on a stand" and the Mac mini....hell they're all really really quiet!
It has Firewire = Pro
But on a serious note, the "pro" tag means so little these days. The MB is really better value, and now that is has shed the plastic body, it Apples best laptop. When i look back at my 2005 Powerbook, it really deserved its powerbook tag, it had everything. They might as well rename the MBP to a 15" MB.
If only the MB 2.4 had a proper screen. Just hate it how apple gimps its products to force you to upgrade to the next model up.
Again: Trackpads on PCs are centered to the basic hand position for typists. If you draw a line between the keys G and H (where you'll also find a pointing stick on many PC keyboards) and follow it downwards you'll end up in the center of the trackpad. Apple does the exact same thing, but it ends up smack in the middle because they've made some keys smaller (backspace, return, right shift, cursor keys etc). Remember the discussion we had in another thread about the Apple keyboard's Return key being crazy narrow on Euro keyboards? That's how they manage to align the basic hand position and the trackpad to the center of the machine.
PC notebook keyboards (13-15") have the G and H keys off-center. On 17" PC notebooks they're way, way off-center because there's a numpad on the right. Like this one:
If they were to put the trackpad in the middle of this mobile workstation it would end up below the right Ctrl key, and the pointing stick would be between [L] and [;], which would be a violation of Ergonomics 101 that makes an off-center trackpad look like a blessing. A left-handed person would have to reach under his right hand to use the trackpad.
Probably has something to do with the lack of thermal headroom. Apple painted themselves into the "thinness" corner a long time ago, they can never release a new product that's thicker than the last one, so they're constantly having to come up with new compromises, the logical conclusion of this race to nowhere being the MBA which is so crippled in every conceivable way, the real magic trick isn't how they managed to make it fit inside an envelope but how they managed to remove so many things and still make people want to buy it.
IBM probably had a functioning mobile G5 at some point, and it would probably have worked inside something with the thermal headroom of a HP or Dell mobile workstation, but it would melt a PowerBook enclosure. So Apple found themselves in a dead end and had to sit by and watch Intel PC notebooks run circles around the PB G4 at ever increasing speeds. And it's happening again with cutting edge mobile GPUs and mobile quad-core. The form factor puts a cap on the power.
Ah, I can understand the logic now behind the PC placement of the trackpad. I just checked on my Dell Latitude E6500 and it's exactly as you stated, smack between the G and H key. But although I understand the logic, I don't agree with it in terms of ergonomics. I'm floating my two hands in a home row typing position and on the PC my left palm is hovering over the trackpad. This, I'm reasoning, is due to more keys being to the right of the G and H keys than to the left. So the natural tendency of the right hand is to drift more towards the right in order to cover all the extra keys.
Compare this to my Macbook Unibody which as you stated has the G and H key slightly shifted to the right compared to a PC keyboard. Drawing a straight line down, the Apple trackpad is not centered between these keys. It's shifted slightly to the right and ends up exactly in the center of the machine. In terms of ergonomics, holding both my hands in home row position, both my palms are perfectly centered over the trackpad and are overlapping the trackpad in exactly equal amounts.
I think I did a fair comparison here. I'm not trying to be biased in either the PC or Apple direction. I think Apple made the better choice in terms of ergonomics to ignore the G and H centering. I'm almost surprised at how perfectly centered their keyboard layout is in terms of both getting the trackpad in dead center and at having both palms perfectly centered over the trackpad in home row. Like we talked about before, I think Apple did screw up the arrow keys by making them too small, but I stand by my claim that their trackpad positioning is perfect.
i agree, that's why i buy for value when shopping my white book. can't justify the exuberant pricing even for the great bundle in OSX and iLife software. of course others here will proclaim the missing intangibles, i.e.: stability, usability, and virus-free. is that worth the extra $$$ for me, no, i can also get that from PC world too.