MacBook or "normal" laptop

[mac]

It's a bit of a myth that macs are more expensive, they just do not have a low end model.

If you were to look at a PC with comparable specs and with the equivalent software then you'll usually find very little difference in price.

Overall, definitely go for a mac, bought one around a year ago and will definitely never go back unless microsft decide to become innovative. All the new features you see in Vista now were done on a mac years ago

[Haunted]

Quoting mac from 18:45, 3rd Mar 2008
It's a bit of a myth that macs are more expensive, they just do not have a low end model.

If you were to look at a PC with comparable specs and with the equivalent software then you'll usually find very little difference in price.

Well I had to.

Lets go for quad core 2.8GHz 4GB RAM (800MHz) and an nvidia 8800GT and basic HDD

Mac: £1,879.00
Quick google for pc company found EasyPC.Ltd
Easy PC: £899.00

Not a completely fair comparison since the mac comes with a 320GB HDD whilst the pc comes with a 250GB HDD as well as an 18x DVD+-RW, the vastly superior 8800GTX, a liquid cooled processor (which is 3GHz as opposed to the macs 2.8) and is upgradeable to 8GB of DDR2 ram or 4GB DDR3.

[hr]

Now with 100% more corn

[Haunted]

Quoting niall from 19:49, 3rd Mar 2008
the idea behind it is for those that are travelling. For example, my dad commutes to London every week from Glasgow, so a macbook air would be suitable for him given that he wouldn't be able to cope with the small screens you get on compact laptops. Its not like he's going to be storing lots of videos/music on it given that the laptop is for work, and if he's in the office or at home he can hijack a nearby CD drive.

Macbook Air screen: 13"



[hr]

Now with 100% more corn

[Fawksie]

Quoting Haunted from 20:26, 3rd Mar 2008
Macbook Air screen: 13"

Sony Vaio TZ screen: 11.1"
Asus Eee PC screen: 7"
Dell Latitude D410 screen: 12.1"

[97hills]

Compare

http://www.pricerunner.co.uk/pi/27-1067 ... oduct-Info

and the middle range macbook

http://store.apple.com/Apple/WebObjects ... ly/macbook

Mac is around £500 cheaper, probably around £600 cheaper if you use your higher education discount. The Sony does have a slightly higher specs but certainly not £500 more. Then also consider the amount of bundled software that you would have to pay extra to get on any PC.

Edit: add OSX onto the list of extras because it is so far ahead of Vista. I unfortunately have to use Vista for work and after using OSX for around a year there is absolutely no contest between the two, I do not know anyone who has said Vista or XP is better than OSX (tiger) after they've used both for a prolonged period

Quoting Haunted from 20:23, 3rd Mar 2008

Quoting mac from 18:45, 3rd Mar 2008
It's a bit of a myth that macs are more expensive, they just do not have a low end model.

If you were to look at a PC with comparable specs and with the equivalent software then you'll usually find very little difference in price.

Well I had to.

Lets go for quad core 2.8GHz 4GB RAM (800MHz) and an nvidia 8800GT and basic HDD

Mac: £1,879.00
Quick google for pc company found EasyPC.Ltd
Easy PC: £899.00

Not a completely fair comparison since the mac comes with a 320GB HDD whilst the pc comes with a 250GB HDD as well as an 18x DVD+-RW, the vastly superior 8800GTX, a liquid cooled processor (which is 3GHz as opposed to the macs 2.8) and is upgradeable to 8GB of DDR2 ram or 4GB DDR3.

[hr]

Now with 100% more corn

[Haunted]

Quoting Fawksie from 21:01, 3rd Mar 2008
Macbook Air screen: 13"
Sony Vaio TZ screen: 11.1"
Asus Eee PC screen: 7"
Dell Latitude D410 screen: 12.1"

Yes they are small, 13" is small too, your point?
1. Vaio's are awful and expensive and I would never recommend them to anyone.
2. The Asus model is a subnotebook and is designed to be that small
3. The Dell D410 is £779. The macair is £1199-£2100.

Let me try this time.
(for $ comparison from notebookreview.com)

Dell XPS M1530 - 15.4"scr $999-$1800
Lenovo T61 - 15"scr $850-$925
Toshiba A200 - 15.4"scr $837-$947
MacAir - 13.3"scr $1805-$1819


[hr]

Now with 100% more corn

[Haunted]

Quoting 97hills from 21:15, 3rd Mar 2008
Compare

1.See above about viaos.
2. Since dell only has one laptop with a 13"scr or less I am forced to only one for show
http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/produ ... &cs=ukdhs1
starting at £599.
Given the motivation you can easily find similar specs for cheaper than that.

What people seem to be missing here is "oh I found a laptop that is way more expensive than a mac" does not mean "macs are always cheaper". You can't just post rip off deals on laptops and say macs are cheaper.

[hr]

Now with 100% more corn

[97hills]

At no point did I suggest that Macs were always cheaper, I just suggested that you can only compare like for like and when you do you will find very little difference between PCs and MAC (but that's not even including iLife or the superiority of OSX)

Using Dell: add on a comparable processor to the below laptop

http://configure.euro.dell.com/dellstor ... 3301&s=dhs


and then compare to the bottom end macbook. Very little difference in specs but pretty similar price.

Quoting Haunted from 21:30, 3rd Mar 2008

Quoting 97hills from 21:15, 3rd Mar 2008
Compare

1.See above about viaos.
2. Since dell only has one laptop with a 13"scr or less I am forced to only one for show
http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/produ ... &cs=ukdhs1
starting at £599.
Given the motivation you can easily find similar specs for cheaper than that.

What people seem to be missing here is "oh I found a laptop that is way more expensive than a mac" does not mean "macs are always cheaper". You can't just post rip off deals on laptops and say macs are cheaper.

[hr]

Now with 100% more corn

[Fawksie]

The three models I picked (at random) are all classed by their manufacturers as sub-notebooks, even the Eee PC. And my point was that they all had smaller screens than the MacBook Air, which has a larger screen than most laptops of a similar weight.

[schmod]

Compared to a similarly-priced PC, the MacBook almost always comes out ahead.

Yes. You can get cheaper PCs, and there are also various PCs that fill various niches that Apple's product line might not be able to fulfill.

However, what it all boils down to is that the MacBook is a fantastic general purpose computer, and is a darn good value for the money.

(That said, Apple products are bloody expensive in Britain compared to what they cost in the rest of the world, so I can understand the gripes of many people on this thread)

[Raindog]

Book

[theshadowhost]

Quoting exnihilo from 16:26, 3rd Mar 2008
Steveo, please, you know the value of anecdotal evidence.

I've never had a problem with Macs, and I don't know anyone else who has either. That completely counters your case, surely?

And, of course, the cheaper PCs are being made by higher paid workers to a more exacting standard and being sold cheaply because Michael Dell is a philanthropist?

well heres some anecdotal evidence regarding mac build quality:- almost every single mac user in the computer science dept (that is staff and rsch students) has had major problems with leopard - now i know this isnt the build quality but it did mean that mine overheated and had to be replaced.

now i know people will step in and moan about VISTA at this point and i agree that vista isn't great but what does annoy me is how biased mac lovers are and how they wont admit to its faults - if they were honest they would be telling the original poster about the leopard problems, but they aren't.

at least you can buy pcs with windows xp, try buying a mac without leopard....


[hr]

[theshadowhost]

Quoting Fawksie from 15:27, 3rd Mar 2008

Catch a grip, when did you last see Windows pull a blue screen? When did you last see OS X crash? I have achieved uptimes in the order of months without any instability or OS crashes, and without the inevitable degradation that comes with running Windows for long periods without a reboot, and indeed running Windows for long periods without razing the damn thing and reinstalling.

http://www.wired.st-and.ac.uk/~bigwood/ ... screen.jpg

that is my mac blue screening

no it is not a fake - a took the picture in the event of this argument coming up

NB I also have a powerbook G4 that crashes all the time aswel. my xp system is super stable.

[hr]

[eagle]

Every Mac that I have used has worked without major problems (it's frozen from time to time, but neglible over 4 years).
Every PC I have used has failed in some way or another, requiring replacement parts. I've always bought from seemingly reputable companies, rather than building my own.
My dad bought a Mac, and has had to send it back twice due to faulty parts.
Every PC he's had has developed a fault in some way.

Win some, lose some.
(but win more with Mac)

[niall]

Quoting theshadowhost from 09:54, 4th Mar 2008

http://www.wired.st-and.ac.uk/~bigwood/ ... screen.jpg

that is my mac blue screening

no it is not a fake - a took the picture in the event of this argument coming up

It might not be fake, but that looks suspiciously staged

[theshadowhost]

Quoting niall from 10:45, 4th Mar 2008

Quoting theshadowhost from 09:54, 4th Mar 2008

http://www.wired.st-and.ac.uk/~bigwood/ ... screen.jpg

that is my mac blue screening

no it is not a fake - a took the picture in the event of this argument coming up

It might not be fake, but that looks suspiciously staged

i wish it was and that i didnt have to get a new one cause apple refused to fix it - even though i had apple care.

that mac is running linux now....

[hr]

[Haunted]

Quoting 97hills from 21:49, 3rd Mar 2008
At no point did I suggest that Macs were always cheaper, I just suggested that you can only compare like for like and when you do you will find very little difference between PCs and MAC

This marks a change from your previous post

Mac is around £500 cheaper, probably around £600 cheaper if you use your higher education discount. The Sony does have a slightly higher specs but certainly not £500 more. Then also consider the amount of bundled software that you would have to pay extra to get on any PC.

I will admit that the cost disparity on macbooks and laptops is not as great as it is on desktops (and mp3 players for that matter).

[hr]

Now with 100% more corn

[Haunted]

Quoting Fawksie from 00:08, 4th Mar 2008
The three models I picked (at random) are all classed by their manufacturers as sub-notebooks, even the Eee PC. And my point was that they all had smaller screens than the MacBook Air, which has a larger screen than most laptops of a similar weight.

So you admit your comparison was unfair then? Or could I get away with comparing a 32" HDTV to a portable TV?

Not just weight, why not compare volume? It is selling itself, not as a good laptop, but a thin one. If you can think of a situation where a 0.7" laptop is infinitely more necessary than even a 2" one then I'll concede that perhaps it's not just a gimmick.

[hr]

Now with 100% more corn

[theshadowhost]

Quoting Haunted from 13:42, 4th Mar 2008


Not just weight, why not compare volume? It is selling itself, not as a good laptop, but a thin one. If you can think of a situation where a 0.7" laptop is infinitely more necessary than even a 2" one then I'll concede that perhaps it's not just a gimmick.

[hr]

Now with 100% more corn

http://gizmodo.com/346856/4-reasons-you ... acbook-air

[hr]

[Fawksie]

Niall said that his dad wouldn't be able to cope with the small screens on compact laptops. You then replied stating that the screen on the MacBook Air was 13", as if to say "and you think that's not small?", and then I pointed out that there were compact laptops with even smaller screens.