The Dell XPS 15" is an excellent machine and the Asus ZenBook Pro 15" is awesome value for money and also metal-body. True, none of the alternatives are built AS sturdy and sophisticated as an Apple MBP, BUT you get other advantages in advance, like for a few mm thicker body you get dedicated graphics like NVidia GTX 960 M with up to 4 GB VRam or like in the case of dell the option to totally easily upgrade your ram through a bottom-latch and with just a few screws go even into the latop itself if that is your thing.
Don't get me wrong folks I love MacOS and I love Apple products, but for me I'm at a point where I need to look at my productivity and Windows 10 (after you got rid of the bloated starting menue and all that tile ****, which is fairly easy) is blazingly fast. I have no experiences yet how Win10 will behave with 3 years worth of software and crap in the registry (if it will lead to more frequent crashes and slowdowns which is typical windows behaviour) but freshly out of the box it's really amazing, maybe not as intiuitive to use as Mac Os but the differences really become less and less.
I'm not sure if I'm willing to pay up to 3.000 for a MacBook Pro if same and in certain areas even higher performance can be bought from dell for example for around 2.200 fully decked. I just expect some real performance and value for my money, a mm shaved of thickness and maybe 3 mm shaved of a screen bezel is not what I call "worth my money" honestly. I do LOVE design and build quality but I love productivity and money's worth more. Very subjective though.
If they'd decide to put Macbooks Keyboard on the Pro it's a switch for me anyways...
[doublepost=1455277222][/doublepost]
http://www.dell.com/us/business/p/xps-15-9550-laptop/pd?ref=PD_OC
Just look at the stats, user upgradable to 32 GB DDR4 Ram...
Just saying.
Yes some parts are still plastic, yes it's Windows.
But still, Apple is not "light years ahead"anymore. Maybe in design... if even.
AND another thing I was wondering.
For whom is a MacBook Pro?
I get that it offers performance as mobile as possible. But I figured people that really need some OOMPH in their work, are mostly bound at a location anyways, are they not? I don't see sound engineers mix their work on a bus or on a bench in a park. Also I don't see working film students or professional special effects guys working away in premiere and after effects while on the go or sitting at Starbucks. So for whom is it? For graphic designers like me, mostly making brochures, leaflets and catalogues? Probably, I enjoy to do my work on the terrace or have the laptop with me when I'm at an appointment and get that dreaded call from the printers that I need to fix a tiny thing on the PDF and resend it. The mobility allows me to quickly fix it up in an cafe or elsewhere instead of having to drive home into my office.
But still, do I need that kind of performance on the go? Wouldn't I be better off (logically and financially) to keep using my more-than-strong-enough MacMini late 2012 (around 12000 in geekbench) and just get a Macbook Air for my occassional writing sessions and quickly editing something for a customer? Adobe Creative Suite works well enough on such a small thing (heck it even works on my 270,- Acer Netbook reasonably well) for quick things on the go. Sure, writing a print PDF takes 8x longer than on my Macmini, but still...
Is it worth investing around 3K in money for a laptop that probably has lost it's focus? What do I mean by that... I mean that when I look at Lenovo they offer the P50 and P70 Laptops and brand them as "mobile workstations". It's for industrial workers, architects, engineers who often have to do work "on location". Those laptops are nowhere near as beautiful as the MacBook Pro. They are practical and sturdy. Black Plastic all over and even a bit bulky. Still portable enough to carry them in a case or rucksack, bring them to some construction site and work away your 8 hours before taking it home again. I like that concept.
The ULTRA-portability and ULTRA performance the Macbook Pros try to achieve are somewhat "unfocused" on my book. What I mean by this is, STOP making them thinner. Yes, sure redesign them, less bezels, colors etc... but still, don't make them thinner, use the space for more performance and better cooling. They're more than portable enough. Most people that need even more portability are off well enough with a Macbook Air (maybe updated one) or at maximum Macbook Pro 13". At least that's how I see it. Bloggers, Journalists, heck maybe even Photographers will probably take their pictures, check them out on their MacBook Air, or entry level 13" Pro, do some color corrections but I don't think they will do model-retouching or composition of large multi-megapixel images on a tiny screen on site will they?
So I basically mean: Do you NEED a Macbook Pro thats SO powerful and SO expensive because it also tries to be SO portable? I want a Macbook Pro to not only work in my small home office that started to feel like a prison the last years... I want to work in the garden, on the terrace, in an cafe. I mostly do brochures and catalogues so no "artsy" graphic design. I don't think I need the same kind of performance maybe some video editor or sound engineer would need, but then again I question anyways why they would need such performance on the go anyways, when they're most likely dependent on other equipment, thats stationary, anyways.
Thoughts?
