Pangloss Posted November 7, 2007 Posted November 7, 2007 ... is an Apple Macintosh. This according to PC World magazine, in a recent test of a dozen Vista laptops. This rather earth-shattering piece of news has been shaking up the Windows computer vendor industry, with companies like Dell, already suffering from falling user opinion, suddenly finding that they're not producing anything LIKE the correct performance numbers that Vista should be capable of, something that Vista users have been screaming about since early beta. http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,136649-page,3-c,notebooks/article.html And one of the most interesting things about this development is that the Mac doesn't cost significantly more than the other Vista laptops tested. It's right in the same ballpark with a typical high-end Vista laptop. Yeah it's more than a LOW-end Vista laptop, but given Vista performance on a low-end laptop, you'd be better off with XP anyway, so it's moot.
bascule Posted November 8, 2007 Posted November 8, 2007 This raises the question of who in their right mind would buy a Mac and run Vista on it
insane_alien Posted November 8, 2007 Posted November 8, 2007 indeed OSX 10.5 is much much better than vista, and it will work with everything guaranteed.
Sayonara Posted November 10, 2007 Posted November 10, 2007 Call me cynical but it doesn't surprise me that a demonic triumvirate such as Dell, Intel, and Microsoft might capitalise on peddling crap.
Pangloss Posted November 13, 2007 Author Posted November 13, 2007 indeed OSX 10.5 is much much better than vista, and it will work with everything guaranteed. Well, everything available at any rate. Which reminds me, I need to check out EVE Online for OSX! It just came out last week, and EVE rocks -- best-detailed space market sim evahr.
no genius Posted December 3, 2007 Posted December 3, 2007 its not because its a "mac" that it runs vista better.. its because its got the following inside of it: "2.4-GHz Core 2 Duo T7700 processor, the maximum 4GB of RAM, a 160GB hard drive, and nVidia's new top-of-the-line notebook graphics card, the nVidia GeForce 8600M GT"
insane_alien Posted December 3, 2007 Posted December 3, 2007 its still a laptop regardless of who sells it and what packaging it comes in.
iwant2know Posted December 4, 2007 Posted December 4, 2007 its still a laptop regardless of who sells it and what packaging it comes in. I often laugh at people that say "oh Macs are better for graphical art, 3D rendering, etc.... Now before I spark a mindless debate over what's better, Mac or "PC" (which in itself is a fallacy because Apple computers are personal computer, a.k.a. "PCs") let me explain where I'm going with this. My point is that the function of whatever you're doing is only as good as the software powering it. One of the big selling points for Macintosh is that it comes with all sorts of software already installed. Of course you and I know that this is basic software like office suite stuff, email, browser, a few games, and whatever else. However anymore it's hard to get a Windows platform machine without the same deal. Even if you need to pay for a license of MS Office, there are excellent alternatives online that are either open source or freeware (Open Office and Google Documents to name a couple). I personally prefer Open Office to MS Office any day, but that's just me. Furthermore if you want to get into specific things like 3D graphics and animation, that software doesn't automatically come on a Macintosh. If I wanted to get into high end 3D rendering and animation I'd look to purchasing licenses for Lightwave and/or Maya. Since the software is available for both Mac and Windows, then it's pretty much the same thing. The interfaces are pretty much the same (from what I am guessing at least. I'm not into 3D rendering and stuff) and how efficiently it processes is based on the available hardware. Now if I wanted to make a full length feature film with 3D rendered graphics, I'd invest in a computer that is specifically designed and optimized for that purpose. Why? Because PCs (including Macintosh. See my definition above) are hybrid technologies. Hybrid technologies, though making things convenient, often end up becoming lesser quality machines (see the airplane car below for example) Sure this vehicle may be able to get you around all those suckers stuck in traffic on the freeway, but it lacks the fuel economy and horsepower of a regular car, and it lacks the speed and maneuverability of an airplane. The end result becomes a vehicle that is not particularly good at being either a car or an airplane. If you want to go on a vacation your money is better spent on airfare and renting a car at your flight destination. Truth is that Windows & Macintosh can do the same stuff. I see no reason for someone to switch from a Windows platform to a Macintosh, or visa versa. Computers are computers, and the wise IT support staff should be acquainted with both. Just use what you love.
Sancho Panza Posted December 4, 2007 Posted December 4, 2007 Vista The new WINDOWS ME nuff said Sancho Panza
insane_alien Posted December 4, 2007 Posted December 4, 2007 was i saying that macs or PC's were crap? no i was saing that a mac book is still a laptop. don't be puting words in my mouth. i'm neutral on the whole mac v PC thing. they can both run linux so i'd be happy either way.
iwant2know Posted December 5, 2007 Posted December 5, 2007 don't be puting words in my mouth. By no means. In fact what I said was Truth is that Windows & Macintosh can do the same stuff. I see no reason for someone to switch from a Windows platform to a Macintosh, or visa versa. Computers are computers, and the wise IT support staff should be acquainted with both. Just use what you love. My personal preference is Windows XP running on an IBM compatible computer. I personally (there's that word again) feel that Macintosh is of no valid use other than providing economic competition to Microsoft. Apple is the Yin to the otherwise exponentially more powerful/efficient/economically sound/etc... Yang that is Microsoft. However, with my opinion stated, people may use whatever they prefer. Being outnumbered by my siblings in the Windows vs. Macintosh debate (I'm the only one that uses Windows) I tend to keep my opinions to myself at family gatherings. Furthermore I don't mind supporting Mac from an IT perspective. It helps to keep me sharp.
Psyber Posted December 31, 2007 Posted December 31, 2007 My wife rather likes the machine running the Ubuntu OS I built for her. I do, however, have a desktop and a laptop running XP Pro because of specialist software I need to use. Yes, I could run XP on a Mac, but PC parts are cheap and they are easy to build and upgrade yourself. I guess Macs are moving towards that.
bascule Posted January 2, 2008 Posted January 2, 2008 PC parts are cheap and they are easy to build and upgrade yourself. I guess Macs are moving towards that. That's generally a moot point with laptops...
Psyber Posted January 3, 2008 Posted January 3, 2008 That's generally a moot point with laptops... Yeah, some you can't open without special tools, and if you buy integrated video with no slot for something better you are in trouble.. I can't remember the name offhand but there is a company marketing a laptop case which is designed to let you swap generic components in and out.
Rakdos Posted January 3, 2008 Posted January 3, 2008 Yeah, some you can't open without special tools, and if you buy integrated video with no slot for something better you are in trouble.. I can't remember the name offhand but there is a company marketing a laptop case which is designed to let you swap generic components in and out. The high-end Sager and Asus laptops let you do this
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now