Lol I'm in the UK too! I read bout it in STUFF mag a few months ago, so it should have trickled into their product range by now. Ah the good ol' 3G card.... they're great
you could always buy the US one then use a USB 3G dongle.
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.
Sony Vaio Z Series Vs. MacBook Pro
- Thread starter asd31083
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Lol I'm in the UK too! I read bout it in STUFF mag a few months ago, so it should have trickled into their product range by now. Ah the good ol' 3G card.... they're great
you could always buy the US one then use a USB 3G dongle.OK, lets end this question once and for all - just post what YOU would buy if it were YOUR money and we can help this guy on his way to making a decision ASAP. No more "oh the GPU will be fixed" or "Sony's come with crap" - just pick one of the laptops.
My opinion - VAIO.
My opinion - VAIO.
I haven't seen it yet, but if my current Sony's - multiple SZ's, TZ's and UX's - against my current multiple Apples are anything to go by, definitely the Z11.
MBP no question. I just bought one this week, so my money is where my mouth is. The VAIO was a slight blip on my radar screen for oh... about 5 seconds. I was until now a lifetime Windows user. Now that I've fooled around on a Mac some, I'm even more convinced that Wintel machines are pieces of junk. If you're at all concerned about looks and usability, getting the MBP is a no brainer.
OK, after looking at everyones' posts, I think the general consensus is:
- go for the sony if you don't mind Vista and need the extra features (HDMI, Blu-ray, smaller form factor etc) or just want to save the money.
- go for the MacBook Pro if you need OS X, the bigger screen and the style (though the Sony is not ugly by any means) and don't need excess features.
That's as good a conclusion as you'll find here, methinks. Hope we've helped you and enjoy whatever you go for - they're both awesome in their own way.
Enjoy mate
- go for the sony if you don't mind Vista and need the extra features (HDMI, Blu-ray, smaller form factor etc) or just want to save the money.
- go for the MacBook Pro if you need OS X, the bigger screen and the style (though the Sony is not ugly by any means) and don't need excess features.
That's as good a conclusion as you'll find here, methinks. Hope we've helped you and enjoy whatever you go for - they're both awesome in their own way.
Enjoy mate
Lol - you wouldn't like me when im angry
They made a film about it, but had to paint me green for copyright reasons Not all Wintel machines are equal. The high-end Sony models generally are a higher build quality than the high-end Macs. Also, the Japan market serves first as "beta" testers. Usually, by the time a high-end Sony model hits American shores, it's already been pretty proven.
Looks are subjective. After 5 years, the 15" PB/MBP looks awfully dated too, and the keyboard on the MBP looks like it was spray painted under office lighting. The keyboard on the MBP doesn't utilize the size of the MBP, instead it uses a 12" laptop keyboard in a 15" laptop. Furthermore it's all the way deep into the computer, half of my forearm is on the computer as I type. The thing GETS HOT and my watch scrapes the palmrest.
Sony products provide a range of amenities that Mac just does not offer, for example custom-made Sony privacy filters that fit perfectly to your Sony computer (with visual clarity a million miles ahead of the nearest 3M competitor product). I don't know about you, but I appreciate that a lot when actually USING my laptop as a mobile device on planes and trains.
Thanks everyone
Thanks to all who have posted replies. In response to those who question my technical savvy, I humbly assert that I have had a lot of experience Macs and PCs alike. I had a small business putting PC and UNIX systems together for local businesses and used a self-built PC myself until about '02 or '03 when I bought a TiBook. I was really impressed by the Mac - so much so that after giving my TiBook to my brother-in-law when his computer died I bought the 17". Yes, the crack in the screen is my own fault, but the striping issue can be blamed on a certain factory in Shanghai.
I'm not terribly worried about bloatware - though I'm a little rusty with Windows I would certainly be able to get rid of it myself.
I've been trying to get a feel for how Windows is going to feel on a computer with these specs. I haven't gotten a chance to play with any Montevina-based machines - the last time I was at Best Buy I didn't see any. Is OSX on a "slower" machine going to feel just as fast as Vista on a "faster" machine? I mean, Office is always slow on Macs but what about Final Cut vs. Adobe Premiere? Outlook e-mail vs Mail? Photoshop on Vista vs. Photoshop on Leopard?
Thanks to all who have posted replies. In response to those who question my technical savvy, I humbly assert that I have had a lot of experience Macs and PCs alike. I had a small business putting PC and UNIX systems together for local businesses and used a self-built PC myself until about '02 or '03 when I bought a TiBook. I was really impressed by the Mac - so much so that after giving my TiBook to my brother-in-law when his computer died I bought the 17". Yes, the crack in the screen is my own fault, but the striping issue can be blamed on a certain factory in Shanghai
.I'm not terribly worried about bloatware - though I'm a little rusty with Windows I would certainly be able to get rid of it myself.
I've been trying to get a feel for how Windows is going to feel on a computer with these specs. I haven't gotten a chance to play with any Montevina-based machines - the last time I was at Best Buy I didn't see any. Is OSX on a "slower" machine going to feel just as fast as Vista on a "faster" machine? I mean, Office is always slow on Macs but what about Final Cut vs. Adobe Premiere? Outlook e-mail vs Mail? Photoshop on Vista vs. Photoshop on Leopard?
OS X will "feel" faster as there is a much quicker boot time than compared to Vista, plus Macs seem to just be snappier in operation, as the software is optimised for the hardware.
That said, Vista on a Montevina machine will rocket - especially with SP1, which addressed a lot of issues. Of note, Macs run Windows faster than most, if not all, Windows rivals (iRonic, no?)
So, the only place you'd really notice a speed difference in favour of the MBP is boot time and shut down time. With regard to Outlook vs Mail and the two photoshops, I'd say the difference is very negligible, especially since that - currently - the Sony has a faster processor, FSB and higher amount of RAM than the MBP.
I picked Vista up very quickly and i've been on Macs since I was 8. Truth be known, Vista has a good user-friendly interface.
Hope this helps
The Vaio Z series look awesome and the build quality is good. I'd wipe the OS and install either SUSE or Ubuntu.
In fact, those Z series laptops are smiling at me to the point of making me consider doing just that...
EDIT: Having said that, I hope Linux won't go down the crapper now that they're telling their programmers to copy microsoft.
They are about the same after Vista SP1. Vista has more animation and transparency effects so may appear to be slower, but it's mostly an illusion.
OS X takes goddamn forever to shut down, you have to wait, save and confirm for every application and file you have open. Vista has a kill-all way of shutting down. Much faster.
You guys are comparing it to the current MBP, which hasnt been updated SINCE FEBRUARY 2008. Just wait for the MBP to come out before you all jump to conclusions.
Get the Sony.
If I'm infertile one day, I'm going to sue Apple for frying my nuts with their MBPs. The aluminum casing might look cool on the MBP, but essentially it's just a giant heat sink you are putting on your lap. I swear it gets about 120-140 degrees on my lap. It's sometimes unbearable, and I wear jeans.
The Sony chassis is carbon-fiber, and pretty thick at the back, so it should be much cooler on your lap. And the Sony is a whole 2 lbs lighter. That's 40% lighter. You can almost carry two Sony's for the weight of one 15" MBP. Cooler + Lighter = Happier Sperms.
Plus the Sony has HDMI output, which is a must now as many of us have large HDTVs that we sometimes want to use as a giant LCD. Both are the same resolution too (16:9), so no unsightly black bars.
If I'm infertile one day, I'm going to sue Apple for frying my nuts with their MBPs. The aluminum casing might look cool on the MBP, but essentially it's just a giant heat sink you are putting on your lap. I swear it gets about 120-140 degrees on my lap. It's sometimes unbearable, and I wear jeans.
The Sony chassis is carbon-fiber, and pretty thick at the back, so it should be much cooler on your lap. And the Sony is a whole 2 lbs lighter. That's 40% lighter. You can almost carry two Sony's for the weight of one 15" MBP. Cooler + Lighter = Happier Sperms.
Plus the Sony has HDMI output, which is a must now as many of us have large HDTVs that we sometimes want to use as a giant LCD. Both are the same resolution too (16:9), so no unsightly black bars.
So far it seems like you're big on resolution and small size. Fair enough, but you an't exactly hold the 15" display against the MBP (though you can hold its relatively low resolution against it)
HDMI you're not going to get period, but the MBP does switch its graphics core and memory to I believe 100 MHz during idle and not much higher during non-3D work. So you do save power that way. You can always upgrade to larger HDDs on the MBP, too.
I believe the 9300M actually is affected, and it's slower than the 8600 GT, and the 9600 GT or the 3650/3670 that'll be in e new revision MBP.
The 1066 MHz FSB means very little in terms of performance, and of course you'd never notice the <5% difference between the 2.4 and 2.5 GHz CPUs.
Vista really *does* suck. There's a reason they say you need about 50% more RAM for applications while running Vista... it's a resource hog. And it's especially bad when coupled with nVidia GPUs, which apparently are the #1 cause of Vista crashes.
You know what sucks more? The OSX Finder.
The only times I've restarted for Vista in the last two months were for overnight updates. People have a knee jerk reaction to how Vista sucks and that, but usually the problem is due to incompetence on the end-user. Since Windows XP SP2, I have had no problems with Windows on half a dozen machines with wildly different configurations and devices installed.
That may be so, but my comments were based on OS looks and usability. To the extent that Wintel machines use Windows, Wintel machines are more or less "equal" -- equally junk.
I find Vista in some places to be better looking than Leopard.
And to say you base your impressions of an OS on it's looks suggests you don't know what you're talking about. An OS is to be used first, admired second.
As i said before, MS have done a good job with making Vista user friendly within the OS - not counting programs where they hide the "File, Edit, View" etc menu bar by default. Damn that's annoying.
We'll agree to differ on that - my MacBook (2GHz C2D, Leopard) shuts down in about 8 seconds.
My Dell 1501 (running Home Premium on a 1.8GHz AMD) takes nearly 20 to completely go off.
Well, why not just close your apps before you attempt to shutdown?
It suggests you don't know how to read. I based my impressions on looks AND usability. Which part of "looks and usability" do you not understand?
Saying that an OS is to be "used first, admired second" is consistent with what I said. Or do you not know what you're talking about either?
And your remarks about Vista are laughable given your usability mantra. Vista is king in the form without function stakes. Aero? LOL. But for your risible comments about Vista, you're basically contradicting yourself while agreeing with me. Really. Think before you type.