[Whybother]

Looking at your Top 10 Performance Laptops and your Macbook Pro review I have a few questions.

1. The Macbook Pro tested says $2949. But if you configure the same machine on Apple it's $3599? (see image below or go to the Apple Store )

http://img503.images...ropricect3.png]

2. Why do laptops that cost less, score better in almost all Workbench tests you did, are lighter weight and have better features, score lower than the $3600 Macbook Pro? (see image below)

[http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/3853/compare3sb5.gif]

3. When did you guys start taking bribe money from Steve Jobs so he could put a commercial on TV that says the fastest Vista laptop out there is a Mac?

Some links for your ease of use :)

PCW Macbook Pro Review
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,135062-page,1-c,notebooks/article.html#

Top Ten Laptops
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,123729-page,1/article.html

Compare 3 from [Top Ten Power Laptops

[Whybother]

What no replies? Is everybody at PCW too busy making back alley deals to answer my questions and tell us why an innacurately reported Macbook Pro is scoring higher than the lower cost, better performing with more features PC notebooks? C'mon people I am open to discussion. Anyone... Bueller... Bueller...

* lame:|

[KellieCM]

Well, given that there were only a few hours between your first post and follow up, I wouldn't exactly call that a thundering silence. Nor would I say that it's a signal to go ahead and insult us with a "back alley deals" comment.

I will send a link to your thread to our editorial reviews department. They may be able to shed some light on your questions. They might not. But regardless -- know that I read your complaint and did something about it.

[Whybother]

Fair enough, thanks Kellie. I look forward to the editorial department possibly shedding some light on my questions.

[RastaMon]

Regarding pricing, it appears the price is based on a 2 GiB MacBook Pro with a third party 4 GiB RAM kit installed (Here's one such kit for $96 plus shipping.). While this is realistic, it does deserve mention in the article. Another possible, but less likely, possibility is that Apple does not charge the inflated prices for memory that are listed on their website, something that also should have been mentioned in the article. I have experienced such pricing inconsistencies with Apple, although not with RAM, since I have always ordered the base amount and upgraded it myself.

The World Bench test results are listed in seconds required to perform tasks, so lower scores are better. Only on one test, Firefox 2, did the MacBook Pro not outperform the other two laptops with which you compared it in your link. Overall, based on Z-scores of the performance of each of the ten laptops tested, the MacBook Pro was only outperformed by the Eurocom. The top three performers, and the sum of their Z-scores for each of the thirteen tests, along with their price are:

Eurocom D900C, 11.967, $5158
Apple MacBook Pro, 10.832, $2949 (or $3499 if RAM is purchased from Apple)
HP Pavillion HDX, 6.535, $3499

I think your criticism of the article is unfounded.

[Whybother]

Rastamon,
Yes it would be nice if the article mentioned the details about the RAM and the fact that Apple charges an incredibly inflated price for it. About the worldbench scores... Myself and at least four other people who have looked over those scores and the articles never noticed the fact that the results are given in seconds and lower is better. I purposely had other people look because I wanted to make sure I wasn't on crack. I guess I am on crack : All of the people that looked over this are computer enthusiasts and not average users. I guess it is just a little misleading to have a final score be ranked by higher is better, while having individual scores ranked as lower is better and gaming scores ranked as higher is better.
Something else worth mentioning is if you want to run Autodesk, Far Cry etc... on your Mac you will need to spend yet another $xxx for a copy of Windows, something that comes with all the other notebooks in the tests. Not to mention gaming on a Mac is hardly even worth mentioning rolls eyes. So now we are looking at $3499 Windows taxes & shipping... Meh I think the price per performance ratio is through the roof.
Looking at this comparison of the Macbook Pro vs a $2000 Acer and a $1400 Gateway, you are getting what... 25% more performance for 75% - 133% increase in price? The Acer has more HD space, an HD DVD drive and great customer support with an almost "no hassle" RMA service. And Apple says... "But I'm fun and trendy!"
The PCW Top Ten Performance Laptops chart clearly has it's own rules on what justifies the number one spot. It's not performance because the D900C beats the Mac as you pointed out. It's not price per performance because just about anything else on the chart beats the Mac. So what is it? What merits the number one spot on this chart?

[RastaMon]

>Something else worth mentioning is if you want to run Autodesk, Far Cry etc... on your Mac you will need to spend yet another $xxx for a copy of Windows, something that comes with all the other notebooks in the tests. Not to mention gaming on a Mac is hardly even worth mentioning rolls eyes.

Actually, Mac gaming is improving. It's not like Windows gaming yet (Windows strong suit), but it's getting better. Windows was just used for comparison purposes. Of course if we add in the cost of Windows for the Mac, we should add in the cost of all the software necessary to bring the Windows machines up to the capabilities of OS X, also. For example, only three of the Windows machines come with Vista ultimate 64 bit, so that would have to be upgraded. The Mac also comes with iLife, and doesn't need anti-virus/anti-spyware software for protection from such malware. Besides, many people with extensive experience on both platforms would say that OS X is worth a price premium, anyway. It's probably easier for our purposes just to ignore the software inequalities, since it would give the MacBook Pro an unfair advantage.

Quote

Looking at this comparison of the Macbook Pro vs a $2000 Acer and a $1400 Gateway, you are getting what... 25% more performance for 75% - 133% increase in price?

Actually, if you take the mean Z-score? for all the performance tests of each machine and the Z-score for each machine based on prices (such that prices less than the mean give positive Z-scores), and average them together, the MacBook Pro still does well. That's the fairest, most realistic comparison for a comparison based on price and performance. Here are the results (scores are in parentheses, followed by the same scores adjusted to a scale from 1 to 10, with 1 being defined as the lowest scoring machine, 10 being defined as the highest scoring machine?, and the other eight scored relative to those two):

With the MacBook Pro priced at $2949 (most realistic for PC World readers)

1. Gateway NX860XL (0.542) 10
2. Apple MacBook Pro (0.317) 8.39
3. Acer Aspire 5920G (0.216) 7.66
4. HP Compaq 8710p (0.061) 6.55
5. Lenovo ThinkPad T61p (0.039) 6.39
6. Dell Inspiron 1720 (?0.032) 5.89
7. Toshiba Satellite X205-S9359 (?0.084) 5.51
8. HP Pavilion HDX (?0.116) 5.28
9. HP Pavilion dv9500t (?0.230) 4.46
10. Eurocom D900C Phantom-X (?0.713) 1

With the MacBook Pro priced at $3499

1. Gateway NX860XL (0.551) 10
2. Acer Aspire 5920G (0.233) 7.63
3. Apple MacBook Pro (0.085) 6.53
4. HP Compaq 8710p (0.084) 6.52
5. Lenovo ThinkPad T61p (0.068) 6.40
6. Dell Inspiron 1720 (?0.013) 5.80
7. Toshiba Satellite X205-S9359 (?0.062) 5.43
8. HP Pavilion HDX (?0.080) 5.30
9. HP Pavilion dv9500t (?0.209) 4.34
10. Eurocom D900C Phantom-X (?0.658) 1

As you can see, even at $3499, the MacBook Pro ranks number three in terms of price and performance. At the more realistic price of $2949, it ranks number two out of the ten tested. The Gateway does appear to offer outstanding performance at its price point, despite it's below average performance. On the other hand, the Eurocom Phantom X is simply too expensive relative to the competition, despite besting the other nine laptops in six of thirteen performance categories, and scoring in the top three in three other categories. By comparison, the next best performer, the MacBook Pro, performed best in two categories, and performed in the top three in ten other categories, doing below average only in battery life.

Quote

The Acer has more HD space, an HD DVD drive and great customer support

Apple's customer service leads the industry. What good is an internal HD DVD player with only 800 lines of resolution? The Acer has only 1.024 megapixels of resolution, compared to the MBP's 2.28 megapixels. The Acer lacks an integrated external monitor port, and has no FireWire 800 port.

Quote

The PCW Top Ten Performance Laptops chart clearly has it's own rules on what justifies the number one spot.

PC World is up front about how they determine their scores. They consider performance, features, design/usability and price, equally weighted, except in the event of a tie, in which case the categories are weighted in the order I have listed them. For more detailed information, see A Guide to PC World Ratings.

? A Z-score is defined as the difference between the mean score and a computer's score, divided by the standard deviation. Note that these scores are only meaningful when comparing these ten laptops to one another.

? This number was obtained by subtracting the lowest score from each computers score, and the dividing the result by the difference between the top score and the low score, divided by nine, plus one. i.e. (x ? L) ? {(h ? L) ? 9} + 1, where x is the computers score, L is the low score, and h is the high score. This offers a scale from 1 to 10 that preserves relative price performance values.

Message was edited by: RastaMon to correct errors