MacBook: Worth it?

[manly]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom
My point is that all the Mac users I know have had to learn two operating systems instead of just one. So their whole argument for switching to Apple is pointless since they all still have to use Windows.

So you don't (or can't) distinguish between having to use something and actually wanting to use it?

 

[shfle]

I wouldn't hold my breath on a processor upgrade (Except a speed bump) too soon as they are hardly likely to upgrade their consumer notebooks before their pro ones, however I'm sure a general upgrade isn't far away.

It doesn't make any financial sense for them to equip both with the same processors at the same time either, so the macbook pros will arrive with core 2 duo well in advance of the macbooks (With the possible exception of the high end black model that might possibly come with the slowest version of the processor).

I'd still get one though, if I wor thee.

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom
My point is that all the Mac users I know have had to learn two operating systems instead of just one. So their whole argument for switching to Apple is pointless since they all still have to use Windows.

Why would the arguement for switching to Apple be pointless just because you need to know Windows as well? Logically thinking, you need to know an OS to operate it. Switching denotes going from one OS to another. Thus you need knowledge of both. To me it's like this: Given the option OSX is my first choice. When no option exists I use Windows on a Mac through Parallels. The need to know both has nothing to do with switching to OSX as a primary OS.

By the way- when you say switch to Apple that means a hardware switch to me. Apple is a company and one of the ways to switch is to use a Macbook and leave your HP, Dell etc. That doesn't necessarily mean you leave Windows behind. What it does mean is you now have an option to use the superior Mac OSX as an available primary platform, with Windows when you have to. I don't know what arguments you hear about switching to Apple but this in no way makes mine pointless.

Think about it this way as an example;

I own a fantastic expensive car that I absolutley love to drive, and drive it every chance I get. Sometimes there is inclement weather, or I have to park at the airport for a week. Do I use the fatanstic car that gets the driving job done so much better, to drive in/on snow/ice/hail or sit at the airport for a week, or do I drive the 2nd car that will get the job done and sit until the next time I need it? To me you drive OSX whenever you can and park Windows until you need it for a particular task. When you are done with that task it's back to Mac. The whole time I used Apple, and that switch involved continuing to use Windows at a hugely scaled back rate.

 

[6000SUX]

His point seems to be that for a new user, learning Mac OS is not easier than learning Windows OS if learning Mac OS means you have to learn Windows OS as well.

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: 6000SUX
His point seems to be that for a new user, learning Mac OS is not easier than learning Windows OS if learning Mac OS means you have to learn Windows OS as well.

So you mean somebody who started out in Linux??? This makes no sense. 99% of "switchers" start in Windows. They don't need to learn Windows, they know it when they switch.


Unless you are talking about a total new person who has never used a computer before. In which case they wouldn't be switching, would they?

 

[pm63]

I know Windows very well. For school/home use I don't mind it. I will probably keep it on my desktop, actually. I just want to buy a laptop with OS X for personal use, and use my desktop Windows, which the rest of my family will all be able to use too, for Windows-spefic tasks. I don't have any issues with switching, as I feel at home with most new programs I download, and get usdd to new UI's qickly. The same went for OS X, as I found out at the Apple store. I just have a few more questions:

1. I've had a look at replacement batteries, and they are all £100/$150!!!!! That much for a battery? Anyone know anything for cheaper?

2. Apparently, when you buy a MB they give you a choice of printers for free. I just heard it off a friend, anyone know if this is true?

3. Can you hoook up the MB to a printer using any cables?

4. They provide a free trial of a desktop publisher with the MB, only I cant remember what its called. It has a pretty simple interface, and you can buy it in full for something like £20. If anyone does know what Im talking about, can you comment on if it is any good? Sorry for being so vague here.

Thanks.

 

[ColdFlame]

Just a few data points for you so that you can make a good decision:
1) Windows is *the* development platform, going to the MacOS you are locking yourself out of a bunch of technologies and tools (or making using those pretty painful)
2) WindowsXP is not unstable, it is one of the best OSes out there; if you are having stability issues you need to look at your hardware and drivers (and also make sure you have your OS updated, etc.)
3) Windows has not only a lot more games than a Mac but a whole lot more software in general; another thing you need to be aware of is that not all current software for Macs is universal right now so it is very slow (i.e. MS Office, etc.)

Macs are beautiful machines but you will always be a red herring with one and you will feel incompatibilities and limitations everywhere once you grow out of the limited world Apple is trying to paint for you.

 

[AmigaMan]

Originally posted by: pm63
I know Windows very well. For school/home use I don't mind it. I will probably keep it on my desktop, actually. I just want to buy a laptop with OS X for personal use, and use my desktop Windows, which the rest of my family will all be able to use too, for Windows-spefic tasks. I don't have any issues with switching, as I feel at home with most new programs I download, and get usdd to new UI's qickly. The same went for OS X, as I found out at the Apple store. I just have a few more questions:

1. I've had a look at replacement batteries, and they are all £100/$150!!!!! That much for a battery? Anyone know anything for cheaper?

2. Apparently, when you buy a MB they give you a choice of printers for free. I just heard it off a friend, anyone know if this is true?

3. Can you hoook up the MB to a printer using any cables?

4. They provide a free trial of a desktop publisher with the MB, only I cant remember what its called. It has a pretty simple interface, and you can buy it in full for something like £20. If anyone does know what Im talking about, can you comment on if it is any good? Sorry for being so vague here.

Thanks.

I don't think you want to get 3rd party batteries anymore. Doesn't matter if I had a Dell, Lenovo, or HP, I'd still buy the battery from the laptop manufacturer. As far as the printers go, that may have been a back-to-school promotion thing, I'm not sure they do that now or not. You can check the online Apple store if you want. And for the connection, as long as the printer is a USB printer, you should be fine. For that desktop publisher software, I think it's called Pages 2. It's supposed to be like Word except with more of a desktop publishing feel. Haven't really used it, because I have Office 2004.

 

[AmigaMan]

Originally posted by: ColdFlame
Just a few data points for you so that you can make a good decision:
1) Windows is *the* development platform, going to the MacOS you are locking yourself out of a bunch of technologies and tools (or making using those pretty painful)
2) WindowsXP is not unstable, it is one of the best OSes out there; if you are having stability issues you need to look at your hardware and drivers (and also make sure you have your OS updated, etc.)
3) Windows has not only a lot more games than a Mac but a whole lot more software in general; another thing you need to be aware of is that not all current software for Macs is universal right now so it is very slow (i.e. MS Office, etc.)

Macs are beautiful machines but you will always be a red herring with one and you will feel incompatibilities and limitations everywhere once you grow out of the limited world Apple is trying to paint for you.

1) I guess if you develop software that ONLY runs on Windows, that would be true. But for people who develop for the web, OSX is a much better platform. As a Java developer, my OS of choice is OSX, followed by Linux, and then Windows. And if all I had was Windows, I'd have Cygwin installed to make it more Linux-like.
2) No arguments here. My wife's XP machine is stable and free from viruses. But you have to get it that way to be safe and stable. OSX is that way out of the box.
3) Again, no arguments, the Windows software base is greater than OSX and Linux. Yet I can run just about any Windows software available using Parallels or dual booting into Windows itself. But I've found that I can do everything in OSX (with the exception of games). As the OP has said, games aren't that important to him.

Your conclusions are a bit misleading. With one exception (MS Project), I have at no time had imcompatibilities, limitations, or felt like a "red herring". I recently switched from Windows about a year ago and I haven't looked back. The Apple environment is not limiting, if anything it's giving you more options than you had before.

BTW, I run MS Project in Parallels and it runs great for the few times I've had to use it. So even my one exception to being limited isn't true either.

 

[BladeVenom]

1) If you develop for the web, and don't use Windows, what about .net and ActiveX?

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: ColdFlame
Just a few data points for you so that you can make a good decision:
1) Windows is *the* development platform, going to the MacOS you are locking yourself out of a bunch of technologies and tools (or making using those pretty painful)
2) WindowsXP is not unstable, it is one of the best OSes out there; if you are having stability issues you need to look at your hardware and drivers (and also make sure you have your OS updated, etc.)
3) Windows has not only a lot more games than a Mac but a whole lot more software in general; another thing you need to be aware of is that not all current software for Macs is universal right now so it is very slow (i.e. MS Office, etc.)

Macs are beautiful machines but you will always be a red herring with one and you will feel incompatibilities and limitations everywhere once you grow out of the limited world Apple is trying to paint for you.

Apparently there are people who continue to ignore that you can run Windows in OSX. Everything stated above is then mitigated, and you get to grow into the world Apple has "painted" for you.

Point 3 is way off base with the exception of games, which is not a concern for the OP and irrelevant to the conversation. You can run Windows in OSX. What is the point to saying Windows has more software?

Office for Mac is not slow by any stretch. It is developed by the Mac team at Microsoft for the Mac. It is a universal product, as will Office 07 a few months after it's release. If for some reason you think it's slow run it in Windows then.

The whole point is, the battle over which is better is all well and good. That battle will never be over as long as one of the products remains in the market. In the mean time buy a MacBook and run them both. I only go to Windows when I have to, and it's as easy as a keystroke to go back and forth.

 

[AmigaMan]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom
1) If you develop for the web, and don't use Windows, what about .net and ActiveX?

Have you heard of Java? Ruby? If I cared about .net and that POS known as ActiveX I'd use Windows in BootCamp on my Mac. But I don't.

 

[ColdFlame]

Please don't get into argument whether Ruby is better than .NET All I was saying is if you want to develop then on Windows you can, say, do both Ruby and .NET and on the Mac you can't do .NET.

Regarding apps available on Mac platform, there are apps Apple makes (iTunes, iLife, etc.), there is MS Office and a few more. Then there is a bunch of apps for Windows that have not been released for Mac. While it is true that for a lot of cases and a lot of people all you need is MacOS + Apple apps + MS Office + Adobe apps there are instances when you need more and it is not there. If it is not a problem for *you* then good for you, but it doesn't mean the problem is not there.

Regarding MS Office for Mac, it is NOT a universal binary and it runs slow on Core Duo 2 machines. It will only be addressed when Office 2007 for Mac ships which will be after Office 2007 for Windows ships which hasn't happened yet. And the same is true for many other apps. Check this out for Rosetta performance: http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2740&p=14 it is anything but fast.

 

[dnuggett]

Regarding apps available on Mac platform, there are apps Apple makes (iTunes, iLife, etc.), there is MS Office and a few more. Then there is a bunch of apps for Windows that have not been released for Mac. While it is true that for a lot of cases and a lot of people all you need is MacOS + Apple apps + MS Office + Adobe apps there are instances when you need more and it is not there. If it is not a problem for *you* then good for you, but it doesn't mean the problem is not there.

The problem is not there if you run Windows. On the Mac.

Regarding MS Office for Mac, it is NOT a universal binary and it runs slow on Core Duo 2 machines. It will only be addressed when Office 2007 for Max ships which will be after Office 2007 for Windows ships which hasn't happened yet. And the same is true for many other apps. Check this out for Rosetta performance:

I stand corrected on it being a universal binary. It runs fast enough to where I never noticed the difference. Maybe we should ask the OP when the last time he opened up a 116 page word doc (the test you linked to) was. The point is, it does not run slow on the Core Duo machines. It runs slow in tests that are not what the typical user would do in a day of use. In any event it is at roughly 80% of the G4 baseline in every Office test conducted with the exception of boot time and inserting .jpgs. For a normal user; booting you do once or twice a day, .jpgs less often than that.

Comprehensive Office test

It is anything but slow.

If someone really thinks they are hindered because they are such a power user, don't buy Office for Mac. Buy the Windows Office and as I've said a million times before; run it in Windows in OSX.


Side note to these earlier value comments I've read-


Apple = absolute value for many of us. The correct concept of value is not defined as how cheap a product is. It is defined by what that product offers the user relative to what they would expect to pay. If you confuse value with cheap you miss the point every time.

 

[shfle]

This old argument is getting very boring, if this http://www.amazon.co.uk/Classic-Etch-Sk...sr_11_1/026-0992949-1369253?ie=UTF8had received the financial backing that it deserved, then windows may not be seeing the underserved virtual monopoly it now has, and 64 bit would be prehistoric.

OK, I'm pissed

 

[AmigaMan]

Originally posted by: ColdFlame
Please don't get into argument whether Ruby is better than .NET All I was saying is if you want to develop then on Windows you can, say, do both Ruby and .NET and on the Mac you can't do .NET.

Regarding apps available on Mac platform, there are apps Apple makes (iTunes, iLife, etc.), there is MS Office and a few more. Then there is a bunch of apps for Windows that have not been released for Mac. While it is true that for a lot of cases and a lot of people all you need is MacOS + Apple apps + MS Office + Adobe apps there are instances when you need more and it is not there. If it is not a problem for *you* then good for you, but it doesn't mean the problem is not there.

Regarding MS Office for Mac, it is NOT a universal binary and it runs slow on Core Duo 2 machines. It will only be addressed when Office 2007 for Mac ships which will be after Office 2007 for Windows ships which hasn't happened yet. And the same is true for many other apps. Check this out for Rosetta performance: http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2740&p=14 it is anything but fast.

No one said anything about Ruby is better than .net? Where did you see that? All I said was that's what I use plus Java. Never said it was better (that's a whole 'nother thread).

And you seem to neglect the fact that I can run anything a Windows user can run plus more. Sure it's virtualization or dual booting, but for that one pesky app, that's all I need and it's fast enough to be usable. So the "problem" is not there.

I do agree with you about Office being slow. For 99% of the time I use it, it's fast enough, but when I have a multi-page Word document open with lots of graphics, maximised on my external LCD, it gets a little choppy when scrolling.

 

[AmigaMan]

OP, I know I said I wouldn't personally consider a third party battery, but i did come across this one for $100 http://fastmac.com which is for the MacBookPro.

 

[ForumMaster]

Originally posted by: pm63
I'm a student and a Windows user (for now) and I've gotten quite sick of it, hence me wanting to change. I was considering a MacBook (basic vesion), since I tried one out the other day and it seemed very nice, with OS X easy to get used to. I know there are threads on this around and I have read them, but I still have some questions:

1. Is it really worth the price? The cheapest one (1.8 Ghz Core Duo, 512 RAM, 60GB HDD) is £750, and I can get a better deal with ASUS, where I can get a computer with an AMD Sempron 64bit processor, 1GB RAM, 80GB HDD, and 15.4" screen for £600? What is it that you are paying for when you buy a Mac, because it seems to me that half the price comes from the Apple name.

2. I will be using it for desktop publishing/word processing, image creation/editing, HTML/PHP coding, web browsing, instant messaging, programming... mainly school work and web design, to be honest. Is the MacBook more suitable for these than Windows XP? And can I get a decent ammount to shareware/open-source software for it?

3. I dont play games at all, but I might feel the need to instal one or two basic ones on the MacBook when I get bored... will it be up to this?

4. The battery life isnt as good as I would like it to be, can you get exchangable batteries for it like on a PC laptop to double the life?

5. OS X is only about $100. Is it not better I buy this and a cheaper laptop, and install it myself?

6. I have had bad experiences with my iPod regarding poor customer service and support. Was this a one off, or are Apple always like this?

That's basically it. I would REALLY love some help on this one, as it seemed great but overpriced. Thanks!

1). The ASUS isn't even a comparison. The Sempron sucks vs the Core Duo. the only thing it's got is more memory which you will have too add. But Vista requires 1GB too. OS X is simply ahead. Also, the MacBook includes a really good software suite that the ASUS doesn't.

2)The MacBook could be better since it has a good software suite for whatever you need.

3)It does have integerated graphics. depends on what you expect from it. For Older games, it should be fine.

4) Maybe. there are plenty of replaceable batteries for iPods for example. it is taking a risk though.

5)You can't install it without hacking and it illegal too. if you depend on this for schoolwork, i wouldn't trust my computer with a hacked OS that might not be entirely stable. plus, OS X will only run on very certain mobo's and definently not well on an AMD.

6) For the most part, Apple has average customer support. although better then dell's.

in fact, it's not that overpriced once you consider the software suite that is included with it.

 

[tatteredpotato]

About the only reason I see to get a Mac is if you want OS X. If you want a machine to run windows, then don't waste your money paying the premium for something you don't need. I think its fairly obvious you can get a similarly spec'd windows machine cheaper than the Mac, but then again if your fed up with windows the money may be worth it for you to get OS X.

Basically decide if the OS is worth the upgrade to you. Asking this question here wont do much good, as the Mac lovers will say yes, and the Mac haters will say no. I'd personally rather put the extra money into a nicer windows machine, but thats because I'm not a windows hater.

 

[andrewbabcock]

I saw one and school the other day and checked it for heat...There was none anywhere. Whatever problems they had, they fixed and i would definitely recommend it to anyone.

 

[gnusense]

If you guys don't mind me saying, most of these Windows vs OS X posts are not helping pm63 a lot. First of all because the Macbook can run both operating systems. Second of all, even if you don't want to run Mac OS X, it seems that pm63 would like to give it a try. I'd certainly recommend that anyone out there not happy with their OS to give something else a try, be it Mac OS X, Ubuntu, Windows, etc.

Sure, there are things you'll have to boot Windows for because you can't do them in a Mac. There are also things you can't do on Windows, or things you need Linux even. What matters here is what pm63 might need Windows for, and if he would be happy with Bootcamp or Parallels for that.

By the way: while Linux and Mac OS X can't run the official .NET implementation from Microsoft, they can both run Mono. Java is not the same but it's one hell of an alternative.

 

[tatteredpotato]

He asked if its worth it, and i gave my opinion, as did most people. Its probably a bad question to ask in the first place here as it tends to start a flame war.