Why Apple notebooks outclass Wintel notebooks even without the speed bump

I think everyone on these forums has already realized that Mac laptops are better than PC laptops. However, I think your reasons are very good.

 

Add the battery time to this comparison and Apple wins every time. Yesterday I was working as a consultant in a big company and everyone's laptop died when my powerbook had still 2 hours remaining...

 

Re: Why Apple notebooks outclass Wintel notebooks even without the speed bump

Yes, but the problem is: there is a strong and quite healthy market for 8lb notebooks. Many if not most WinTel notebook users are in that realm. They specifically do not want to sacrifice speed for weight. For them, this is a monkeywrench in the whole "switch" machinery, keeping them from even considering an Apple lineup to replace their Wintel hardware.

If a company were to switch to the Mac, they would have to switch their desktops (easy enough) and their lightweight mobiles (easy enough) and their heavyweight mobiles. Apple has nothing, not a single product or workaround, for the heavyweight mobile replacement.

As for iBooks and PowerBooks beating WinTel ultra-portables in price: you really haven't looked at pricing very well!

Here's a Sony VAIO R505 (Superslim Pro), starting at $1699:

http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INT...u&ProductID=JxgKC0.N2DgAAADx8c1Lgj.x&Dept=cpu

and

http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INT...CategoryID=6_UKC0.Nt_MAAADxY3xLgj.u#configure


Weight? 4.3 lbs (6.75lbs if you add the docking station)
Processor: 1.2GHz P3
Screen: 12.1", 1024x768
RAM: 256 MB
10/100 Network
802.11b Wireless optional (+$89 from Sony, +$75 from retail)
HD: 30GB
iLink (FireWire minus power to devices)
2xUSB
DVD-ROM/CD-RW drive in base model

This blows away the base (667MHz model) PowerMac in price, and the only features missing are integrated 802.11b, the power provided to firewire, and gigabit networking.

Apple does NOT compete on features/money. Apple competes in:

1) design
2) usability

Apple holds its own in:

1) Overall power (depending on usage)
2) Battery life

 

Re: Re: Why Apple notebooks outclass Wintel notebooks even without the speed bump

You forgot

Apple owns in:
1) OS
2) Quality
3) iApps

So, wow, still looks like Apple outclasses the classless PCs.

 

Up until the latest revisions of the Powermacs the powerbooks have been right next to them. So in a Way apple is making laptops but they are for all intensive purposes desktop replacements, 5lb desktop replacements. It seems to me the PowerPC chips don't see the drop offs that x86 hardware does when it goes mobile.

Also with regards to the VIAO. The g4 was designed to compete and beat the p3. Which at 667 even with the choking effect of the slow memory the g4 goes do.

 

Well, two problems. First, note that my perspective is not a "typical user" perspective, in that I need much more power under my fingertips than one would require for the typical office apps suite. I program, and recompiles are measure3d in minutes, not seconds.

That having been said, my P3 800MHz laptop computer both compiles my code and runs my programs faster than my 733MHz G4 PowerPC (not PowerBook; actual desktop). Compile times are extraordinarily awful on the Mac, at about 30 minutes compared to about 5 minutes for a full recompile on the PC (thankfully I get by without having to do full recompiles very often ... and in case anyone is wondering this is with the latest Mac GCC (3.1) and the greatly improved precompiled headers improvements fully in place), but run times (CPU-intensive app) are basically 1:1 with MHz rating (ie, while a 500MHz PC is slower than a 733MHz Mac and an 800MHz PC is faster, if you interpolate down to a 733MHz PC my tests all run at almost exactly the same speed as the 733MHz Mac).

Now, the 800MHz laptop is a "desktop replacement", in that it has a large screen, every known feature plus the kitchen sink (known meaning known and available a few years ago), and a hefty HD and memory. But, like most laptops, it has a slow HD (4200RPM) and compromised data paths which generally slow things down (my 800MHz desktop at home flies comparatively!)

I've also used 1.2GHz laptops, which are noticably faster and more responsive than my 800MHz standby. I've also seen significantly faster P4-based notebooks, but that's not really under discussion here.

To boil it down:

A 733MHz G4 DESKTOP is slower than an 800 MHz P3 LAPTOP which itself is significantly slower than the Sony VAIO described above.

I find it incredibly hard to believe that the 667MHz G4 LAPTOP will be faster than both the 733MHz G4 DESKTOP and my 800MHz P3 LAPTOP to be in range to even compete, raw performance wise, with the 1.2GHz VAIO LAPTOP.

Which is why I said: Apple competes in (bad choice of words; I meant dominates the competition, not just "meets" the competition) design and usability (OS X, iApps, etc). Apple gets close enough to not be completely dismissed in: available power and battery life (which I didn't go into great detail with; the above VAIO has a 9hr battery option, although that costs $100 more).

In other words: don't buy a PowerBook under the impression that you're kicking your train ride neighbor's butt in peni- I mean raw processing power. Buy it because it gives you OS X and a terrific design.

 

i agree with jettredmont

Apple makes great laptops, they do compete on size, weight, battery life and cool design. They also rock on the other Mac fronts.

However, Apple is missing 3 groups of users:

1) Ultra portables - Look at the 3lbs range of PC laptops available that use docking stations for extra drives, the ibook comes close, but not close enough.

2) Midrange laptops - something between the iBook and the TiPB, this one is a gray area, because if you have a good product matrix, do you really wanna screw with it?

3) Desktop replacements - MacWorld did a piece a while back looking at how TiPBs could replace the desktop machines. Well, now that we have all Duals, that no longer applies for the PowerMacs. And the amount of power available in the laptops is also behind PC offerings for the price (similar situation to the PowerMacs).

might 2.5 cents.

 

Re: Re: Why Apple notebooks outclass Wintel notebooks even without the speed bump

You forgot the 15.2 inch display with a DVI out port.

 

Re: Re: Why Apple notebooks outclass Wintel notebooks even without the speed bump

Ummm... and a 15" monitor!

 

umm... I own an 800 mhz pIII laptop with win xp and it is DEFINITELY a great deal slower than g4 733 desktop, in fact, it is even slower than my sister's 667 powerbook g4, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. A 733 g4 will beat a pIII 800 any day.

kungfu

 

hmm... im going to have to say that the sony really kills the tibook, but of course the only thing is that the tibook has the optical drive built in, and the sony needs the base station (which is a good idea) which adds weight and thickness. The only thing that makes the TiBook compare to windows peecees is OS X.

 

That would be kinda funny if the laptops that come out and were 7 pounds. You would be like 'DOH!'. ;D

 

Interesting. Shows how useful such anectdotal evidence is ... What kinds of programs do you run on your laptops?

Like I said, my measure of performance is based on fairly narrow but 100% reproducable measurements: how long does it take me to recompile my entire active project, and how long does it take me to get through a "full" test suite against that project. Those two timings do not vary by more than about 3% from one run to the next. I can tell you 100% surity that the 733MHz G4 performs slower than my 800MHz P3 on that test.

To me, I spend 90% of my time doing one of those two things (or coding in Project Builder/Visual Studio) so those numbers mean a lot; to you they probably mean next to nothing. I'm not measuring the AltiVec engine at all as far as I know, nor any of the Intel SIMD instruction sets. Just pure, balls-to-the-wall number crunching. I have a fairly large (~5-10MB) working set of memory on most of my tests, too, a fact that also favors the PC, come to think of it.

Subjectively, I spend a lot more time waiting for Project Builder (on OS X) to do stuff (have a 'folder' with ~100 source files expanding in the tree window? Grab something to read while you wait! Click "Find" ... wait! Hit "Build" ... time to start working on a different machine for a while!) than I do waiting for Visual Studio to do similar tasks. But then, Project Builder is a fairly young product compared to Visual Studio, and a bit more ambitious in some respects.

As for a guy just trying to write a memo in Word? I have no doubt that the PPC would be just about as fast as my laptop, maybe even faster, who knows. But then, the perceivable difference wouldn't be significant even with a much slower (say, 300 MHz PII) PC or G3. If you don't need speed then it really doesn't matter how fast your processor can go.

It all depends on what you want to do. I'd really like to hear what you find faster on your 667 G4 than on your 800MHz P3, though!

 

I would also suggest that a guy writting a memo in word would be FAR more hindered by the OS he is running and the coding in his version of word than the processor in the machine.

 

Why do certain Mac users try so hard to "prove" that Apples are better/faster/cooler/holier than PCs even if the face tremendous evidence to the contrary? Is there ego at stake here? Is Apple a church?

 

lol, i don't deny what you said, but you said it funny

 

Exactly. Which is, of course, where OS X and the design principles (hardware and software) at Apple really shine.

IMHO, the "next big thing" in personal computing is not bigger/faster. 90% of consumers already have more than enough power for the things they need to do. The next big thing is making these machines easy and natural to use. Which is, of course, why I am rooting for Apple; they have a tremendous advantage over their Wintel PC counterparts.

Granted, there are still CPU-suckers out there (voice recognition, etc) that might some day be applicable to the average consumer, but right now Apple has a huge head start on what the rest of the PC world will soon come to realize is the goal of the immediate future.

 

the wintel world is coming out with a new mobile P4 chip that is super low wattage and will make the wintel world superior in battery time over macs

right now, all PC mag reviews i read like the mac notebooks because of their great battery times

the wintels still have the mobile ati video cards with 64 MB

i love my ibook but still i lust after some wintel notebooks i see from time to time

 

News flash:

1 Ghz powerbook with airport and superdrive and 512 MB RAM at $2999
take that wintel

 

Re: Re: Why Apple notebooks outclass Wintel notebooks even without the speed bump

I just bought an iBook (my first Apple) and certainly had the option to buy something like a Sony Vaio SuperSlim or Dell Latitude SuperSlim. However these models only have external optical drives, and I wanted a small laptop with built-in DVD so I could use it as a portable player. I really believe that at $1300, the iBook was the best value laptop I could buy. I mean, you're comparing a Vaio superslim with 12.1" screen to a PowerBook with a 15.2" screen, where you should be comparing it to the iBook instead. I could not even configure a Dell "Thin and Light" Inspiron for less than $1500 with specs comparable to the iBook (except for CPU), and Dell is supposedly the industry's value leader!! I think you'll find that both the iBooks and the PowerBooks compare quite well in value to WinTel laptops in the *same* general product category.

By the way, my 600 MHz Pentium III Dell was plenty fast for me - the reason I got rid of it is because it's an 8 lb. hunk of junk that overheats (the fan noise drives me nuts), and that I'm literally holding together with tape because it has developed cracks all over the case after only 2 years. My 800 MHz G3 iBook is faaaaast for browsing or using any software I am interested in. There's no reason the average consumer needs a 2.0 GHz Pentium 4 computer. That, to me, is about as useful as a car that has a top speed of 300 MPH. What's the point, besides empty bragging rights? To continue the analogy, I'd rather have a smaller, more affordable, more comfortable, more fuel efficient car for everyday use, thank you.

 

Re: Re: Re: Why Apple notebooks outclass Wintel notebooks even without the speed bump

From Dell, try the Latitude 400, $1499 (price just dropped) (you can go to an 866 MHz P3 with 10GB HD for $1299, but the online customizer won't allow it ... they might be out of stock on it ...)

http://www.dell.com/us/en/bsd/products/model_latit_latit_c400.htm

1.0 GHz P3
12" screen
24/10/24 CD-RW
128 MB RAM
20 GB HD

Or, better yet, an Inspiron 4150, $1437, compared to the $1499 iBook:

1.7GHz P4-M (better than 800MHz G3)
14.1" XGA (1024x768) screen (same)
Radeon 7500 with 32MB VRAM (same)
24/10/24 CD-RW+DVD combo drive (same but faster CD-R and CD-RW rated speeds [iBook is 16x8x24], or save $99 and get the CD-RW only drive)
30 GB HD (same)
256MB DDR RAM (same quantity, but faster)
Wireless Ready (internal antennae; mini-PCI internal card is $89 - same)
5.6lb/1.4" thin (iBook is 5.9 lb, 1.35" thin)

Looks pretty close to me, except the price tag to a small degree. And the processor power (remembering that the G3 chip can't fall back on the AltiVec sometime speed bump ... and that the P4 has one heck of a nice vector processing unit itself).

Or compare the same computer with the PowerBook low-end ($2299), and you find the Dell lacking only in screen form factor (widescreen ... if you care about such) and the specific video chip (the Dell doesn't have a Radeon 9000 yet), and of course gigabit networking, for $1487 (added higher-res (SXGA+) screen and 40GB HD to above config). A $612 difference, not to be taken lightly! The only justifications from a feature POV would be if you highly value Gigabit networking, the Radeon 9000's extra "oomph" in Quake, or the widescreen screen form factor for some reason.

So, yes, it's hard to find 12" PC laptops, primarily because PC laptop buyers tend to believe bigger==better and sneer at ultra-portables. But in the "larger" PCs, you find parity in price/features (if not PCs being much cheaper), and much heftier processors going along with it.

Again, the Mac is bought not because of features, but because of design (the two Dulls listed above are butt-ugly) and usability (Win XP Home just doesn't cut it!)