PITA to justify

[MidgetArcher]

a 13" Macbook pro with a duo core processor and 4 GB's and 256 MB video card.
when I can get an HP http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/s...odexp/hhoslp/psg/notebooks/ENVY/ENVY15_series

15" screen, 500 GB HD, I5 processor and its upgradable to 8 GB's of memory and 1 GB video card

the mac/PC would be used to make flash games. help will be appreciated.

I looked a bit, but, i could not find an apples to PC testing across the processors

I keep hearing the macs are more efficient, well, how do they compare against a PC with a better processor?
the 2.4 dual core VS the I5 or I7 processor?

thanks

 

[Xenophon]

I'm sure some Apple fanboys here will kick in with a vengeance, but here's my take on things as a mac owner:

Don't try to compare the incomparable. Hardware specs are what they are and all these so-called integration advantages will only take you so far, they don't work magic. I'm not too fond of HP but like what they've done with the case.

For me there's only two reasons for paying the (huge) Apple premium. One is the OS, second are the looks. That's it. And perhaps build quality (for the alu unibody) although the competition is picking up on that parameter. Certainly not the hardware specs or component quality.

If you compare prices, compare them with a 3-year warranty included (AC for the macbook pro and whatever it's called for the HP).

 

[thecarrot]

It comes down to a couple things IMO:

Do you value hardware?

Macbooks use extremely high quality materials and are built to last- they also are widely regarded as being the most aesthetically pleasing laptops. If you care how your laptop looks, you may want to chose a Mac, considering price is not a large issue for you.

Do you like OSX or Windows?

If you like windows, there is no point in getting a Mac unless you value hardware that much and are willing to pay extra for the higher quality. If you like OSX, you could still run it on a PC with Hackintosh but its difficult. At the same time with a Mac you can run both with Boot Camp, so if you need both open to you the more realistic option is a Mac.



Processors are processors, they will perform the same as long as its the same processor. Macs generally cost much more even while having a slower processor, but that cost is not from the processor it is from the hardware. If you had a Mac and PC with the same exact RAM, HD, processor, etc and ran windows 7 on each, the performance will be near identical.

 

[Eddyisgreat]

get the envy

 

[MidgetArcher]

I'm sure some Apple fanboys here will kick in with a vengeance, but here's my take on things as a mac owner:

Don't try to compare the incomparable. Hardware specs are what they are and all these so-called integration advantages will only take you so far, they don't work magic. I'm not too fond of HP but like what they've done with the case.

For me there's only two reasons for paying the (huge) Apple premium. One is the OS, second are the looks. That's it. And perhaps build quality (for the alu unibody) although the competition is picking up on that parameter. Certainly not the hardware specs or component quality.

If you compare prices, compare them with a 3-year warranty included (AC for the macbook pro and whatever it's called for the HP).

It comes down to a couple things IMO:

Do you value hardware?

Macbooks use extremely high quality materials and are built to last- they also are widely regarded as being the most aesthetically pleasing laptops. If you care how your laptop looks, you may want to chose a Mac, considering price is not a large issue for you.

Do you like OSX or Windows?

If you like windows, there is no point in getting a Mac unless you value hardware that much and are willing to pay extra for the higher quality. If you like OSX, you could still run it on a PC with Hackintosh but its difficult. At the same time with a Mac you can run both with Boot Camp, so if you need both open to you the more realistic option is a Mac.



Processors are processors, they will perform the same as long as its the same processor. Macs generally cost much more even while having a slower processor, but that cost is not from the processor it is from the hardware. If you had a Mac and PC with the same exact RAM, HD, processor, etc and ran windows 7 on each, the performance will be near identical.

looks are irrelevant IMHO, performance is king, if I was to go with the MAC, it would be my very first one.

I am taking a class on Flash, heard MACS rule when it comes to graphics ETC.
I would not mind toying with the idea of a
hackingtosh, but, would need more info as to how to approach it.

 

[thecarrot]

If looks are not an option for you I would strongly recommend getting a PC...that PC you linked IMO actually looks pretty good anyways. Here is what you what need to do to get OSX on it:

http://www.hackintosh.com/

If you don't mind having OSX on it that way, then by all means get the PC-it is a much better deal in terms of processor, gfx card, ram, and HD. If you want OSX as your primary OS I would get the Mac.

 

[Xenophon]

If looks are not an option for you I would strongly recommend getting a PC...that PC you linked IMO actually looks pretty good anyways.

Ditto that.

Apart from that the OS and the applications you will use or have invested in are the determining factor. If you're starting with a clean slate and value specs above all, forget about the mac.

 

[MidgetArcher]

If looks are not an option for you I would strongly recommend getting a PC...that PC you linked IMO actually looks pretty good anyways. Here is what you what need to do to get OSX on it:

http://www.hackintosh.com/

If you don't mind having OSX on it that way, then by all means get the PC-it is a much better deal in terms of processor, gfx card, ram, and HD. If you want OSX as your primary OS I would get the Mac.

thanks, going to play it by ear and this thread, ultimately, on the first day of class i am going to bug the teacher to see what he recommends.

 

[HLdan]

It's very easy to justify buying a Macintosh with "less specs" vs. a PC notebook with "better specs".
The gist of it is, in the PC world the usual BIG stuff is the only thing concentrated on and Apple concentrates on the little things for their notebooks and IMHO the little things are really what counts when it comes to overall experience in computing.

For example, a PC's worth is measured on the HDD, GPU and CPU. When looking at an Apple Macintosh they are largely measured on build quality, screen quality and the little things that Apple does that the PC world either won't do or won't do well, or just can't do due to Apple's patents.

In all Macbooks you get the Magsafe power adaptor, high contrast screen with excellent black levels and large vertical viewing angles. Mini displayport connector which is superior to the HDMI port in terms of driving larger displays with higher resolutions. Glass trackpad which is very smooth to the touch, wear resistant with multi-touch gestures which increases productivity flow. Line-in audio and built-in mic which I've never found on PC notebooks. Full restore DVD of the OS and included iLife software. PC companies make the customer burn their own restore discs from the image on the drive regardless how much the PC cost. On the Macbook Pro you get the ambient light sensor for the screen and the backlit keyboard and the keyboard can go bright to dim. Battery life is king on a Mac notebook and the battery indicator is etched into the metal enclosure on the Macbook Pro so you don't have to have the computer turned on to see how much power the battery has.
Lastly, the Mac OS is integrated with the hardware so the experience will be much better than a common PC with Windows.

So, for me, it's the little things that count and not the usuals (CPU, GPU and HDD) as they don't generally increase productivity that much on a notebook computer.

 

[MidgetArcher]

wasnt there a place that sold Hackintosh PCS already configured?

 

[mark28]

a 13" Macbook pro with a duo core processor and 4 GB's and 256 MB video card.
when I can get an HP http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/s...odexp/hhoslp/psg/notebooks/ENVY/ENVY15_series

15" screen, 500 GB HD, I5 processor and its upgradable to 8 GB's of memory and 1 GB video card

the mac/PC would be used to make flash games. help will be appreciated.

I looked a bit, but, i could not find an apples to PC testing across the processors

I keep hearing the macs are more efficient, well, how do they compare against a PC with a better processor?
the 2.4 dual core VS the I5 or I7 processor?

thanks

But you only get 2 hours of battery life with it's standard configuration

Sexy machine though. Core i5, ATI 5830 and so on. This machine has similiar GPU performance as the new 27 inch iMac i7

So if you like gaming, the HP Envy is the one you should get. If you like OS X, the superior trackpad and battery life, then the 13 MBP is the choice for you.

 

[revelated]

I looked a bit, but, i could not find an apples to PC testing across the processors

http://gizmodo.com/5359331/hp-envy-hands-on-macbook-pro-clone-better-than-the-real-thing

http://blog.laptopmag.com/5-ways-the-hp-envy-is-better-than-the-macbook-pro

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-10405256-64.html

http://www.tested.com/news/hps-new-envy-14-and-17-vs-apples-macbook-pro/239/


What I surmise from all of these old and new reviews and opinions: The trackpad swallows, the rated battery life isn't totally representative of real-world usage all the time (some have reported 2-3 hours vs. the rated 7-8 hours under light loads, not sure how true that is), and some sporadic QC issues.

I wouldn't compare components-to-components. That strategy never works in computers. You could take an equally spec'd HP Pavilion tower and compare it to a Dell Precision tower, and it's a good bet the Pavilion would experience some sort of issue long before the HP would. Spec-for-price comparisons just don't work in computing. Buy what works for you.

 

[mark28]

http://gizmodo.com/5359331/hp-envy-hands-on-macbook-pro-clone-better-than-the-real-thing

http://blog.laptopmag.com/5-ways-the-hp-envy-is-better-than-the-macbook-pro

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-10405256-64.html

http://www.tested.com/news/hps-new-envy-14-and-17-vs-apples-macbook-pro/239/


What I surmise from all of these old and new reviews and opinions: The trackpad swallows, the rated battery life isn't totally representative of real-world usage all the time (some have reported 2-3 hours vs. the rated 7-8 hours under light loads, not sure how true that is), and some sporadic QC issues.

I wouldn't compare components-to-components. That strategy never works in computers. You could take an equally spec'd HP Pavilion tower and compare it to a Dell Precision tower, and it's a good bet the Pavilion would experience some sort of issue long before the HP would. Spec-for-price comparisons just don't work in computing. Buy what works for you.

MBP breakdown, they overheat and shut down when gaming because they get too hot? Is it fair to compare the MBP with the 8600M to the 2010 MBP? From what I read, the heat issues of the last gen Envy have been fixed with the current ones.

And HP clearly states that you get 2 hours of battery with it's standard configuration. The 6 hours of battery life is an optional CTO.

 

[aeboi]

wasnt there a place that sold Hackintosh PCS already configured?

Psystar and PearC sold/sells them
Psystar (based in florida or something) got sued by apple and pretty much disappeared even though they said that they were going to appeal this year.
PearC still sells them...but they're in Germany.
You'd have a hard time finding a compatible new awesome full fledged laptop capable of running OSX w/o a hitch.
Netbooks like the Dell mini 10v run it fine as well as the MSI wind.
Of course this is educational only, I do not endorse it.

I <3 Steve Jobs long time. in case you're reading this...

 

[mulo]

I'm sure some Apple fanboys here will kick in with a vengeance!

hell yes!

 

[Xenophon]

PearC still sells them...but they're in Germany

And they only ship to customers based in the EU. Reason is they claim to have found a loophole that allows them to do their thing under EU-legislation, in the US it would be illegal.

 

[chrono1081]

Here is my take.

Let me start by saying you cannot compare hardware across OSs. It's not possible. Anyone who thinks otherwise is sorely mistaken.

What you CAN compare is how fast different programs run tasks on different operating systems. That being said the MacBook pro in my sig completely blew away my seven thousand dollar hp workstation I had at work in these programs:

Maya
Photoshop
Lightroom
Zbrush
Flash
After effects

This is why i use Mac. I switched two years ago and haven't looked back. I would bring my laptop to work and work off of it.

 

[aeboi]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y08-RGdFg3c&feature=search

Nuff said.

 

[Xenophon]

That being said the MacBook pro in my sig completely blew away my seven thousand dollar hp workstation I had at work in these programs:

And the above I find very hard to believe...unless that workstation had some serious issues. Miracles just don't exist.

 

[FatPigs]

It's very easy to justify buying a Macintosh with "less specs" vs. a PC notebook with "better specs".
The gist of it is, in the PC world the usual BIG stuff is the only thing concentrated on and Apple concentrates on the little things for their notebooks and IMHO the little things are really what counts when it comes to overall experience in computing.

For example, a PC's worth is measured on the HDD, GPU and CPU. When looking at an Apple Macintosh they are largely measured on build quality, screen quality and the little things that Apple does that the PC world either won't do or won't do well, or just can't do due to Apple's patents.

In all Macbooks you get the Magsafe power adaptor, high contrast screen with excellent black levels and large vertical viewing angles. Mini displayport connector which is superior to the HDMI port in terms of driving larger displays with higher resolutions. Glass trackpad which is very smooth to the touch, wear resistant with multi-touch gestures which increases productivity flow. Line-in audio and built-in mic which I've never found on PC notebooks. Full restore DVD of the OS and included iLife software. PC companies make the customer burn their own restore discs from the image on the drive regardless how much the PC cost. On the Macbook Pro you get the ambient light sensor for the screen and the backlit keyboard and the keyboard can go bright to dim. Battery life is king on a Mac notebook and the battery indicator is etched into the metal enclosure on the Macbook Pro so you don't have to have the computer turned on to see how much power the battery has.
Lastly, the Mac OS is integrated with the hardware so the experience will be much better than a common PC with Windows.

So, for me, it's the little things that count and not the usuals (CPU, GPU and HDD) as they don't generally increase productivity that much on a notebook computer.

Apple definitely has integration down, as they're able to unify the entire machine into one solid piece. But people compare specs as the components are usually what makes up a majority of the cost of the machine, so it's not too surprising. With HP/Dell releasing coupons nearly every week, the price issue is also going to stick with buyers.

The problem, however, is that plenty of manufacturers are catching up to the MBP's advantages.

Take for example, the HP Envy 14, which has great build quality, a comparable display (provided you pick the Radiance display option), BOTH mini displayport and HDMI, dual-mic arrays next to the webcam, and a backlighted keyboard. You can order a recovery disc shipped withe PC if you want, though sadly, it's $19.

With that said, the MBP is still king when it comes to battery life* and trackpad. The only question: for how long?

*the Asus U30JC already has 12 hours of battery life so MBP 13s aren't so alone.

 

[Xenophon]

The problem, however, is that plenty of manufacturers are catching up to the MBP's advantages.

Take for example, the HP Envy 14, which has great build quality, a comparable display (provided you pick the Radiance display option), BOTH mini displayport and HDMI, dual-mic arrays next to the webcam, and a backlighted keyboard. You can order a recovery disc shipped withe PC if you want, though sadly, it's $19.

With that said, the MBP is still king when it comes to battery life* and trackpad. The only question: for how long?

It's true that the others are catching up fast and that's a good thing and probably the only thing that everyone here will agree on. It will stimulate Apple to do something with the machines that actually justifies the price difference. Nothing like competition.

About the battery lifespan: there's lies, damn lies and then there's battery life claims. I know for a fact that the Apple claims for the MBP as posted on the site are totally unrealistic in real life. The only test that would count in my eyes is if I could use both systems, do my thing and then compare. All the rest is BS spewed into thin air.

 

[MidgetArcher]

settled
http://www.frys.com/product/6132099

toshiba S6040 16" notebook featuring an Intel Core i7-720QM with 6GB DDR3 memory and NVIDIA GT330 1GB Graphics

 

[sn0warmy]

I'm on my 3rd Macbook Pro since 2006, simply because I typically sell my old one to get the new technology every couple years.

The release of Windows 7 and improved laptop designs, have forced me to consider switching over to Windows a few times.

However, even with the price difference I always end up changing my mind. Windows 7 on my work PC still lacks greatly in comparison to the stability of OSX. And even the new HP Envy's physical design does not hold a candle to the unibody MBP.

Sure the picture makes it look the same. But go into a Bestbuy and pick one up for yourself and you will see its sub par build quality, without a doubt.

 

[MidgetArcher]

I'm on my 3rd Macbook Pro since 2006, simply because I typically sell my old one to get the new technology every couple years.

The release of Windows 7 and improved laptop designs, have forced me to consider switching over to Windows a few times.

However, even with the price difference I always end up changing my mind. Windows 7 on my work PC still lacks greatly in comparison to the stability of OSX. And even the new HP Envy's physical design does not hold a candle to the unibody MBP.

Sure the picture makes it look the same. But go into a Bestbuy and pick one up for yourself and you will see its sub par build quality, without a doubt.

looks are no where near as important as performance, at least to me.

 

[aeboi]

there's absolutely no reason to get a mac if you rank flat out performance on top