And as a loyal PC user, I love my Mac. I use Windows for some things, I use Leopard for others. It doesn’t really matter. The only thing I will say that Apple has going for it that PC’s have never really figured out how to do, is to make a decently looking machine that’s relatively thin AND has decent innards. If you want a fast, thin, powerful PC, you gotta go with a Lenovo/IBM, and they’re sinfully ugly.

Also, everyone who keeps saying that the Mac’s look like they’re “from the 90’s”, what the hell does that even mean? They still look great, although that glossy screen with the black matte is a bit of a turn off. They’re aluminum rectangles. How is that 90’s? It’s about as nondescript as you get.

This PC vs. Mac whine-war will never cease, or at least it’s unlikely, but it’s really pretty stupid. Leopard is more efficient because it’s Linux based, hand’s down, but Windows has a lot of compatibility and history behind it that makes it powerful. If MS figures out how to decrease the bloat of Windows, it could easily be as fast and efficient as OS X. It’s not right now, but it could be. Anytime I run applications against each other; under Windows and then under Leopard (on the same Machine), OS X outperforms Windows every time, in every task, except the ones that only Windows can do. Which is where Windows is necessary. You have to have it for some things.

  0

I understand the customization aspect. Windows runs on open hardware. Anyone can build a PC for windows. I build my own Windows desktops.

As far as peripherals and software. A lot of stuff is now supporting Apple. All the new external hard-drives, mice, displays, WWAN modems, etc… All the little shit peripherals. Even High end software packages like ProEngineer, Matlab & Prism work in Mac OS X.

And as Microsoft is trying like hell to dig themselves out of this hole they called Vista – A lot more Apps and hardware are including Mac Support.

If Microsoft got their head out of their ass, and remade the OS from the ground up instead of adding some stupid EyeCandy it would be different. We wanted the WinFS, the new command console and scripting languages, etc… We wanted a faster OS, pure 64-bit.

Games are a big issue. A lot more games work on Mac OS X now than ever before, but if your a Gamer, then Windows is your OS. The other love/hate benefit/curse is the closed hardware. On one end, it makes the entire package 100x more stable on the other, it does really limit your options and Apple doesn’t have a mid-priced tower or quad-core consumer grade chips (non-Xeons).

As far as catching up to the lead. They don’t have to. I personally would love them to stay the underdog. #1 is viruses and malware. It’s a lot harder to write viruses for a Mac because you really need to know the underling architecture and anyone smart enough to do it, is smart enough NOT to do it. If Mac OS X was to supplant Windows, a lot of people would do a lot of research and would start attempting to write malware for Mac OS X.

  0

  0

Now the tables have turned. Apples Marketing Machine is rolling full steam while Balmer is fucking Microsoft.

  0

Answer: Marketing. Man they knew how to do it back in the 90’s. Windows 95 created lines around blocks all over. I remember CompUSA in NYC with the line it had…insane.

Also because it can run on systems that were built on computers made by companies such as Compaq, who was beating IBM on the HW side. Apple was too tight to allow their OS run on anything else but their own HW. Scully royally screwed Apple during his tenure.

  0

Why is it most widely used? I ask that question every day. People are scared of change and MS took the corporate world when Mac was at its worst (1987-1996). People used MS at work, so they used it at home as well. I know because I was in college in 1992 after I got out of the Military. Mac’s OS back them was shit. Complete useless shit. Windows was light years ahead. People started to use Windows. Linux was nothing back then. Linux came out in 1991 but didn’t become really popular until 1996 at least. When I was at UPenn, doing ACSM – 99% of us were using Mac OS X and SSH’ng to our cluster running Debian. But most of the grunt work was done on Mac OS X.

However, today Mac OS X is better than Windows XP and Vista.

I buy a Mac laptop. ALL LAPTOPS ARE STATIC. Those DIY laptops are just barebones preconfig jobs. I buy Mac Mini’s because they make great little beowulf clusters and they are dirt cheap – but I have been changing up to EEE PC’s because they use less power and carry a bigger punch with a nice FreeBSD install on it. Hell, even PCBSD works GREAT on those little EEE boxes.

I don’t buy Mac desktops. I build my own desktops. I run Windows XP on those. Sometimes. Right now I have a FreeBSD desktop, but I have XP in a virtual machine. I even have Vista in a VM environment

I was talking about the MacBook Pro. But even the regular macs. I bought my sister a 24″ iMac. It does what she needs and she doesn’t have to worry about antivirus and antispyware. My parents, however are stuck on Windows. I tried to get them on Ubuntu, but after 3 weeks they didn’t like it.

  0

It still baffles my mind that out of all the IT guys i worked with at Colgate University none of them ever bought a MAC when it came down to them getting computers because they wanted to build their own and costumize it. However, they all would not stop talking about how they loved Macs. Now I’m pretty sure all you fanboys here do the same but won’t admit it simply because you’re too ashamed. It’s ok because we all know if you buy a MAC that’s all you’re stuck with. You can’t really do shit to it but install another OS on it or increase the memory and little nonessentials like that. If you know of a website where you can buy your own parts and construct your own Mac please let me know and I’ll concede that your little static machine is more superior.

  0

RAS: You have to love the windows fanboys. They don’t understand.

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

Not to mention the price premium that comes with this manufacturing technique. I can only imagine how long it takes to machine each case. Somewhere in China a bunch of kids are being trained on end mills to satisfy our need for needlessly lighter things.

  0

  0

  0

You go, ZOMG This Dell has a 2.6Ghz processor over the 2.53Ghz processor and it can do 192GFlops on the video chipset so the mac sucks.

The product is the sum of its parts. By and large 99.9% of all laptops made are exactly the same. Your budget laptops commit to the Centrino or Centrino 2 platform, which consist of all the same exact components with the only difference in processor used which makes very little difference.

You can have a water pump that can push 3,000 GPM at 120PSI, but if the hose that its going through only supports 250GPM at 100PSI – That’s all your getting buddy. No other laptop uses this nVidia chipset. So actually you have no fucking clue in HELL as to how this will run compared to them.

Second, your comparing Apples to Oranges. Mac OS X is not Windows Vista. I repeat. Mac OS X, is NOT Windows Vista. It’s not even arguable that Mac OS X 10.5.5 runs significantly faster than Windows Vista (Around 30 – 45%).

Then, you COMPLETELY missed the entire point of what they did. Apple wanted to #1, shut up the hippies; #2 shut up the people without a pot to piss in and #3 Increase their profit margin and reduce cost doing so. Well, a brand new fabrication process never before used in the production of laptops that produces a laptop that is only .94″ thick. This isn’t an ultra portable – this is a full featured laptop.

Second, its light and tight. The Build finish of the MacBook Pros blow away any other PC. I also have a Lenovo T61P 15.4″ WUXGA laptop. It feels like a POS toy compared to my 17″ MBP. And speed? The Lenovo has a faster processor and faster video card running Windows XP Pro, and its slower than my mac. So much slower for what I do that I need to replace my work PC every year. My Macs last me more than twice as long.

So, bitch and complain and self justify all you want. This is a remarkable laptop. A remarkable piece of engineering.

Obviously none of you here are engineers. It is truly exciting. Just if they could build cards like that.

And the greener laptop will make Greenpeace happy.

  0

  0

  0

  0

@Tyrone: Is the XPS M1730 .95″ thick? no?

  0

For $2,399 you can get a much better system – Dell XPS M1730:

Intel® Core™ 2 Duo T9300 (2.5GHz/800Mhz FSB/6MB cache)
Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium Edition SP1
17 inch UltraSharp TrueLife Wide-screen WUXGA
CD / DVD Burner (DVD+/-RW Drive)
4GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz
Speed: 200GB2 SATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) Free Fall Sensor
NVIDIA®SLI™Dual GeForce®8700MGT with 512MB3 GDDR3 Memory
Integrated Sound Blaster Audigy HD Software Edition
Dell Wireless 1395 802.11g Mini Card
85 WHr Lithium Ion Battery (9-cell)
Crimson Red
2Yr Ltd Hardware Warranty,4 InHome Service after Remote Diagnosis

I know Apple fans will argue that this has DDR3, which I thought was cool – I’m not gonna lie :0)

Maybe Dell has refresh scheduled to come out soon ;0)

  0

  0

Thanks Apple for making my matte screen MBP keep its value

  0

The “whole touchpad is a button” sounds awfully like the Blackberry Storm to me

  0

  0

  0

by Intimidated October 14, 2008 10:29 AM PDT
“There are 16 parallel graphic cores, and it delivers 54 gigaflops of graphics performance. It’s a “stunner,” he says.”

Compared to PC laptops:

* 9800M GT: G94, 500MHz core clock, 96 shaders (1,250MHz), 256-bit, 360 gigaflops
* 9800M GTS: G94, 600MHz core clock, 64 shaders (1,500MHz), 256-bit, 288 gigaflops
* 9700M GTS: G94, 530MHz core clock, 48 shaders (1,325MHz), 256-bit, 190.8 gigaflops
* 9700M GT: G96, 625MHz core clock, 32 shaders (1,550MHz), 128-bit, 148.8 gigaflops

Apple come through again with substandard hardware.”

  0

More than one mouse button?
touch point as an option?
Nicer industrial design, not so froufy looking?

  0