[asiafish]

[quote name='smax013']
>

asiafish said:

>
>
> I'm with you on the glossy. The glossy screen on my MacBook Pro is amazing in its colors and really is impressive, but a strong backlight will make it into a giant mirror. People seem to fall into two groups, those who's eyes "shift" to see the image instead of the reflections, and those who's eyes see both and cannot separate. Doesn't seem to be caused by anything identifiable, just the way a particular person focuses their vision.
>
> I always see the reflection at first, but with a conscious shift am able to block it out and see only the image. It shouldn't be this way, and given the choice I'd buy a matte screen every single time. I think thats one reason why I use my ThinkPad more when seated at my desk.

I can use my mom's MacBook (old style) with its glossy screen, but I have never really used it in high backlight situations...only in rooms with no real light behind me. I did use a buddy's HP laptop with a glossy screen and had a window behind me and it was virtually impossible to use.

Thus, I face a real dilema when I am ready for a new one. I am hoping that Apple with their head out of their rear and offer matte screens again as an option, but I am probably dreaming. Personally, I see a trend of "form over function" at Apple that worries me. The MacBook Air is a rather nice machine, but it is clear that they made some choices that put form over function. The same is true of the iPod Touch. I really like my iPod Touch, but I could definitely live with it being thicker and heavier if it had a hard drive with LOTS of capacity rather than flash memory (I never understood why they put flash memory with a lower possible maximum capacity in a device that is CLEARLY the one that is best aimed at watching video, which are all large files, of the entire iPod line. That is kind of like putting a 10 gallon tank in a gas guzzling SUV in the hope that the lessor weight will improve the fuel economy...but then you have to fill the stupid thing after every trip around the block.

There is a company doing matte conversions, but I'm with you on form and function. Other than the reflection issue, the new MacBook Pros are glorious designs with exceptional build-quality. I tried it out and found that I can easily live with the gloss, despite my preference for matte. I sure hope to have a matte screen option available before my next new Mac though.

As for the 17", check out Apple's website about that battery. It seems like some pretty impressive battery technology that more than compensates for not being removable. Unlilke the Air, the battery in the 17" MacBook Pro and its new charging system promise 5 year replacement cycles and 8 hour runtime. Thats twice the capacity and twice the life cycle of a normal laptop battery. If that proves true, and with the $160 battery replacement fee makes this a very economical laptop from a battery cost perspective.

I would select such a battery option for the 15" model if it were available, as it is great improvement over my current arrangement of two 5 hour batteries that both end up useless after three years of use, alternating them monthly.

[TechieXP]

However...dispite I may not agree with everything you say...I never called you out of your name. Only an ignorant person who can't have a descent disagreement does that. One thing about it...I don't have to stoop to your level. Lawyers are already at the bottom of the gene pool along with their best friends known as politicians. But its all good...i've been called better or worse...sure you have too.

But show me where I lied about anything. I may have and I have admitted that I may have said things that weren't exactly right...because I didn't know better and it pays to look up stuff first to be ore specific. But I don't have time to play on words...nor people who take stuff out of context to bolster their ego-trip. Which makes you no less of a fanatic than anyone else...except you're your biggest fan, and your biggest cheerleader....
Message was edited by: smax013 - no personal attacks please

[asiafish]

TechieXP said:

11lbs is heavy to YOU. Don't speak for me...if 11lbs was to heavy for e...I wouldn't have bought it. Weighting 11lbs makes it not portable for YOU. I'm not you and so far I have biked fro mu house to the office with it in its back for a distance of 9 miles which takes me no more than 35 mins. And it still wasn't to heavy for me. Maybe like I said...I am not a wuss...maybe I am in better shape since I am a cyclist and I am use to carrying heavy object on a bike...the heaviest thing I every carried was a 90 lbs slab of granite...But I ended up walking with it...becuase it was to heavy on the tires. Weoght doesn't bother me and I a smaller than you...but probably more muscular. Weight matters to you so you don't consider the Asus portable. Its a ;aptop by definition that makes itportable no matter what you say and that is a fact you can't change. What is a fact is that it may not be a practical portable...but it is still a laptop. And reember Apple's first portable was 15lbs...and compared too todays technology is just a paper weight...like you must be to cry over 11lbs. If its too heavy for your taste than say that...but I don't have your taste...bec If I did I'd be wasting money lavishly on things I don't need. I didn't say it was wrong...to each it own. But it is wrong for you too say its too heavy for someone else.

11 lbs is heavy to EVERYONE who carries a laptop farther than home to driveway to office.

And why do you keep bringing up ancient hardware? Yes, Apple's first portable was 15lbs. It also wasn't a laptop, but a portable desktop much like the thing you have, designed to have no compromises in function compared to a desktop Mac of the time.

Quote

The fact is...when it comes to speed and performance I surely got my monies worth compare to the MacBook that you bought because it is pretty. The MacBook is more of a business look...or LUXURY. I don't want luxury at the expense of power. So you can brag and be happy with your Macbook that does less than mine can natively for that $2500 we both spent...in order for your Mac to do what I can do natively...you need to install Windows...while I already have it...and I have way more power and a fair cost. The comparison isn't weight...the comparision is under the hood. I got raw power for my money...and you got pretty looks for yours. We both win because we have what we like. So like it and be happy with it.

Yup, a gaming machine designed for speed is faster than a thin-and-light. A minivan has more seats than a sports car. They have nothing to do with one another and do not compete for the same buyer.

My MacBook Pro was $2,000, not $2,500. It does everything I need it to do for business without Windows. Haven't booted Windows on my MacBook in two weeks, and I use it every day.

YOUR comparison is processor speed, so you should compare your 11 lb desktop replacement against other 11 lb desktop replacements, of which there are many on the market. My MacBook Pro gives almost the same power in a much lighter, smaller and trimmer package that is a joy to carry and runs more than three times as long on a battery charge in half the weight and bulk.

Turning your so-called comparison the same way, I got twice the portability, 3 1/2 times the runtime and 90% of the speed for only 80% of the price.

[asiafish]

TechieXP said:

However...dispite I may not agree with everything you say...I never called you out of your name. Only an ignorant person who can't have a descent disagreement does that. One thing about it...I don't have to stoop to your level. Lawyers are already at the bottom of the gene pool along with their best friends known as politicians. But its all good...i've been called better or worse...sure you have too.

Most lawyers I know, on both sides of the courtroom, are educated, honest, sincere and hard-working folks doing their part to see that justice is served.

Quote

But show me where I lied about anything. I may have and I have admitted that I may have said things that weren't exactly right...because I didn't know better and it pays to look up stuff first to be ore specific. But I don't have time to play on words...nor people who take stuff out of context to bolster their ego-trip. Which makes you no less of a fanatic than anyone else...except you're your biggest fan, and your biggest cheerleader....

No, you have lied constantly, making up so-called facts only to have them proven false time and again.

As for playing on words, you don't even have time to spell them correctly. Most of your posts are filled with run-on sentences and spelling so bad that they are very difficult to read.

I am a fanatic, about truth and honesty. Since you are the worst offender on this forum at making up your own facts and seem to think that Apple is evil incarnate I take great pleasure in debunking every single one of your lies and fabrications. The really funny part is that you actually think I criticized your choice of computer, which is the farthest thing from the truth.
Message was edited by: smax013

[smax013]

asiafish said:

As for the 17", check out Apple's website about that battery. It seems like some pretty impressive battery technology that more than compensates for not being removable. Unlilke the Air, the battery in the 17" MacBook Pro and its new charging system promise 5 year replacement cycles and 8 hour runtime. Thats twice the capacity and twice the life cycle of a normal laptop battery. If that proves true, and with the $160 battery replacement fee makes this a very economical laptop from a battery cost perspective.

Oh, I have. And there is a good chance the if/when I am ready, it might be the 17" if Apple has not brought back the 15" matte screen. I have found that I rarely use the spare battery, so I would likely be fine with out the user replaceable battery on the 17".

But, I am no where near ready...and even if I was I am not sure I want a larger laptop.

[asiafish]

[quote name='smax013']
>

asiafish said:

>
>
> As for the 17", check out Apple's website about that battery. It seems like some pretty impressive battery technology that more than compensates for not being removable. Unlilke the Air, the battery in the 17" MacBook Pro and its new charging system promise 5 year replacement cycles and 8 hour runtime. Thats twice the capacity and twice the life cycle of a normal laptop battery. If that proves true, and with the $160 battery replacement fee makes this a very economical laptop from a battery cost perspective.
>

Oh, I have. And there is a good chance the if/when I am ready, it might be the 17" if Apple has not brought back the 15" matte screen. I have found that I rarely use the spare battery, so I would likely be fine with out the user replaceable battery on the 17".

But, I am no where near ready...and even if I was I am not sure I want a larger laptop.

The current 15" MacBook Pro (and 13" unibody MacBook) are now 8-months-old, so a we are due for a speed bump soon. With Apple products, timing is always important. Needless to say, if we do get matte screens of the new batteries on the smaller machines it won't be until on or near WWDC at the end of the month, when Apple is likely to announce its speed bumps. From everything I've read, the new battery technology in the 17" MacBook Pro is a real improvement.

[NYSkater]

I used to respect you. I still do, but in a different way.
Message was edited by: smax013 - no personal attacks please

[quackadilly]

Geeze man.... if you're going to attack someone, have SOME dignity and get the grammar and spelling right.....





BTW.... TechieXP does actually have a lot of very good and very true information.

[Evildave]

Realistically, you're not going to use an ASUS W90 on a bus or at an airport, either. It doesn't have any battery runtime to speak of. Fifteen minutes after you switch it on, it'll be warning you about the battery being drained. Airports don't have tons of publicly accessible power outlets, on average. Outside of a kiosk that you PAY to use.

In a car, maybe, with a 300 watt inverter fan screaming by your leg, you could use it, but then you're gonna cook your crotch because the thing will be too hot to have in your lap. Unless you ride in a fairly large vehicle, you probably won't have space to comfortably use that big notebook, anyway. Not that in-car use of notebook PCs is any fun. BTW, The exhaust air from that machine reaches 153.14?F after 30 minutes of runtime. That is well beyond the threshold of tolerable pain. It will melt waxes and some plastics/adhesives. HUMAN SKIN burns at about 130?F. In other words, that PC needs to be on a desk. Period.
http://techgage.com/article/asusw90184notebook-atruedesktopreplacement/3

On an airplane, if you have an airline outlet on your airplane, and had the presence of mind to buy an airline adapter, you could use it. Assuming you can wrestle it out from under that seat in front of you, get it set up between the flight attendants' pestering, and the open dismay of the drink-spilling passengers next to you, and assuming you have any space at all on your tiny tray table to use it. The bulk makes it 'too much of a good thing'. I doubt any carry-on bags could properly protect it AND fit under the seat. Not to mention the poor soul seated in front of you who gets his back cooked by your computer's air exhaust.

If I want a toy to keep me occupied while traveling, a Gameboy, netbook or iPhone would fulfil that role better than a 'monster notebook' that leaves me tethered to power outlets. A kindle would be even better, or even the hypothetical 'new Apple touch tablet' might be better (or worse, or just different) than that. Anything small, lightweight and relatively cheap/durable is a win. Big, heavy, fragile and expensive, like a W90 is a multiple-lose.

My 17", dual hard disk Dell Vostro has NEVER been useful WHILE traveling, even though it has the '6 hour' (4 hour) battery pack on it. Too big, awkward and fragile to just dig out of the backpack and start using, knowing I'll have to cram it right back in the bag again when I've got to go, and always, every moment being mindful of where it is. Even when I could drag it to a coffee shop and make some use of it, I don't get as much DONE as I want. Little devices I've had, like the tiny (netbook sized) VAIO I used to have, or the old Motion M1400 that I still (for some reason) have, actually did see extensive use while traveling. Once settled into a hotel room, it works OK... but so would an iMac.

At the moment, a quad core CPU would be 'nice', in the same way that having my own 747 would be 'nice'. In a couple more years, everything will have them, including portable devices. A few years more, they'll all have 8/16/32 core CPUs. For now, a quad core in a notebook just gobbles power and makes heat, both of which are unforgivable sins for a device you'd USE while travelling. The dual core CPUs in everything else are 'plenty fast enough' for the current generation of software applications, and the next.

Why is it that windoze luzers always bring up 'games', anyway? I have an almost four year old XBOX 360 (only got the 'ring of death' once, so far) and a GameBoy DS. They play games just fine. They didn't cost two thousand dollars, and the DS doesn't burn my hands. They have served their purpose for longer than any single PC I've had could reliably keep playing any new games.

[quackadilly]

Fore sure......That'd be a machine for anything but your lap. But the portableness of that level of power is amazing. When I travel, I have my Zune and thats it. I don't even break out the laptop.


The thing I hate about computers is no matter what you do, you WILL have to upgrade at some point if you're a gamer. While on consoles you can play new games for years, after a year or so, none of the new games are really pushing the envelope. That's why PCs make great (and expensive) gaming machines if you want to play all the new stuff.





I've had the ring of death twice on my XBOX360. And I got my 1st system from the release of Guitar Hero 2 (XBOX360) in New York city (for free straight from MS). Very shortly after receiving it, like 9 or 10 months......dead.

[Evildave]

Actually, a small UPS would be more like five to ten minutes of run time. It's not to run 'off the grid'. I like my computers to stay running when someone turns an air conditioner on next door. The UPS is only for line conditioning and brief backup power. Too many people with poo for brains run desktop PCs without a UPS, and wonder why they don't last very long.
I get zero productive use from a PC while I'm at motion, or waiting to move somewhere. If I'm traveling, gimme something small, lightweight and easy to stow where it won't get stolen.
It takes no more time to dump an all-in-one PC like the iMac out of a big bag and plug it in, and then a keyboard/mouse than it does to take a super-sized notebook like the 'W90' or 17" MacBook Pro out of its big bag, plug it in, and plug a keyboard/mouse into THAT.
I'm either demoing something, or programming. Sometimes both. Neither activity is suitable with a notebook while 'in the wild'. Too much other noise. Too many distractions. Either case, you need a big, high-resolution screen. For programming, you need a GOOD keyboard, too.
I looked at images of the keyboard. The W90 has the same kind of crappy P.O.S. as my Dell's. For some reason, the morons who design big notebook PCs always demand keyboard layouts containing the numeric keypad, and scramble/delete the navigation keys, instead. Saw off the numeric keypad and leave the entire rest of the keyboard 'normal', and you would have something useful. Otherwise, it's just another bouncy, rubber contact chicklet keyboard that gets uncomfortably warm to the touch. In other words, it requires an external keyboard and mouse to make any use of the machine. Why squander desktop space with two keyboards?

[Evildave]

Microsoft was at least 'good' about the Ring Of Death. When it happened, I emailed tech support, they shipped me a box with a prepaid label, then shipped the thing back a couple of weeks later in serviceable condition. It was out of warranty, but it didn't matter. If they hadn't handled it as they did, I'd have just cashed out my XBOX games and got a PS3. As a couple of million other XBOX customers would have.

If you can only use the portable machine on a desk, it's not really portable anymore. Just luggable.

So if you can't use it until you're at a desk, with a power outlet, why not just lug something a little bigger (larger, more comfortable display, real keyboard/mouse), and a little better, and quite a bit cheaper for the road trips? And when it comes time to demo, having it demoed on something 'pretty' makes a difference. Always.

[quackadilly]

"Actually, I use my MacBook Pro for "structural simulations" all the time. As a structural engineer, I run my structural analysis software on my MacBook Pro and it runs just fine. Granted I have to run it in Windows using Parallels as there are no longer any companies that currently produce Mac versions of structural analysis software."



So is it really running on your Mac Book Pro? You have to use Parallels to run Windows in order to use the software...... I mean it's not really the "Mac" running it.



Kinda defeats the purpose....... I guess I have trouble seeing the point in buying a Mac, and running XP on it so you can do these things. Why not just get a PC laptop? (Aside from personal preference of having OSX at your fingers)

[quackadilly]

True.... MS was very good about the defect. Replaced in about a week in my case. IMO, it shouldn't have happened in the first place..... and it shouldn't have been allowed to continue.



The Asus is big, and so is the iMac setup. What if you had a real emergency (not sure what kind) and you had to use a computer NOW? I guess that and the raw processing power would be the only real advantages. I guess I just like having an all-in-one package deal as opposed to a portable desktop setup.

[smax013]

quackadilly said:

So is it really running on your Mac Book Pro? You have to use Parallels to run Windows in order to use the software...... I mean it's not really the "Mac" running it.

As opposed to running on some fictitious Lenovo or Dell computer that I do not have. The point is that it is still running on the MacBook Pro, which is the computer. The implication was that a MacBook Pro could not handle structural simulations...when it can. And the Mac OS could handle it too if a structural software company still made structural software for the Mac OS (there was one that started on the Mac, but now only makes a Windows version).

Sorry but you are trying to use semantics. The fact is that the computer (i.e. the MacBook Pro...whatever OS it is running) is perfectly capable of doing such tasks contrary to what was stated.

Quote

Kinda defeats the purpose....... I guess I have trouble seeing the point in buying a Mac, and running XP on it so you can do these things. Why not just get a PC laptop? (Aside from personal preference of having OSX at your fingers)

That is because you don't seem to find value in Apple's hardware...and that is fine. But not everyone is you. Personally, I find value in Apple's hardware and their support. My previous laptop was a Compaq and it did not really last two years before the case cracked and the DVD drive would not play DVDs. My MacBook Pro is now going on three years with no problems other than a battery that was replaced by Apple after the warranty was over due to defects. Personally, I have yet to find a PC laptop that matches the build quality of my MacBook Pro. But, then that is just me.

And I prefer the Mac OS to Windows...when I can use it.

[quackadilly]

But the Mac Book Pro can't run the software by itself. You need Windows through the use of Parallels.. The hardware's no different than in a PC. It's the OS.



You can't seriously base all PC laptops' hardware off of 1 bad experience. My 1 experience with Compaq has been great so far. So who's testimony is right? neither. Statistically speaking you need 30 data points..... between you and me, we don't have that.

[rgreen4]

Some have had great experiences, some have had bad. It's true of every consumer product out there. While Smax and I have chided each other in the past, what he hasn't brought out is that he has also built from scratch at least one WinTel desktop that I know of. I like to describe him as ambidextrious, in that he is equally at home with OS/X and XP. I refer all the Mac questions I come across to him and he refers all the Vista questions he comes across to me.

The whole point of this 700+ responses, is there is not real "right" answer to the originally posted question. No one disputes that a Mac will cost more that a similar PC, but is it dearly? It depends on the consumer and their situation.

An example. Long after I had changed to ordering most if not all of my computer supplies from Newegg, one Sunday afternoon I drove down to the local Best Buy and paid the retail price for a boxed Seagate 500GB hard drive. Just two months previously, I had purchased two from Newegg. They had been installed in my NAS on my home network and all of my data files were on it. That morning I walked into the room with the computers and noted that instead of the two little green lights, I only had one. I verified I had a dead drive when I opened it and one was cold and one was warm. I was willing to pay the difference for peace of mind by paying the extra price for a replacement second drive. I had another spare from Newegg in three days, but I slept better in those three days by paying a little more (yes I also did an updated full backup of all the data).

As consumers, every day we make price versus benefit decisions. I have never been unhappy with Windows, so have never had a desire to even try a Mac. There are those who are happy with Mac and therefore have never seen the need to try a PC. There are those who use both. There those who have changed.

[quackadilly]

Thats good that he has built a WinTel machine from scratch. Many people have. I have built many of dozens. When it comes to building a custom PC, I don't need to go to anyone. All of that is irrelevant when it comes to Mac. You can't properly build a Mac from scratch right now. If Apple opens up their OS to the public, I will most likely build a few of those too.



Dual 500GB drives in a NAs is a great idea. Redundency is a very smart idea when it comes to computer storage. I've never doubted that. But that price/benefit decision isn't the same as making one between PC and Mac. You can do redundant storage on both.

[asiafish]

quackadilly said:

Thats good that he has built a WinTel machine from scratch. Many people have. I have built many of dozens. When it comes to building a custom PC, I don't need to go to anyone. All of that is irrelevant when it comes to Mac. You can't properly build a Mac from scratch right now. If Apple opens up their OS to the public, I will most likely build a few of those too.





Dual 500GB drives in a NAs is a great idea. Redundency is a very smart idea when it comes to computer storage. I've never doubted that. But that price/benefit decision isn't the same as making one between PC and Mac. You can do redundant storage on both.

The price difference between a Mac and a comparable premium-grade retail PC varies, but is usually about $100. Sometimes more, sometimes less. Likewise, sometimes the Mac is more expensive, sometimes its cheaper, but usually a small difference nonetheless.

Comparing the price of a Mac to the price of a budget PC is no more of an equal comparison than comparing the price of a Lexus with that of a Toyota. Even though they may have many of the same parts, they also have many different part, mostly the ones that the user/driver can see, feel and touch. Who cares if the Mac and PC use the same hard drive or memory module, its the tactice parts that differentiate the user experience. The higher quality keyboard of a premium computer is something that makes using it nicer, each and every day, and is one reason why ThinkPads remain popular despite their high prices.

In laptops the difference bewteen premium and budget is far more drastic than in desktops. All of the ciriticism of using that Asus W90 on an airplane, in an airport, ona bus or its lack of advantages in a hotel room are real limitations of the large format laptop, not related to it being a comsumer-grade model or a premium model. The cheap-feeling keyboard, flimsy display hinges and bulk instead of design to make the thing strong-enough are what makes it a budget model. Yes, it has very high-end desktop components inside, but it is a budget system in that it puts those fast parts together as cheaply as Asus could possible do so.

Compare that to a premium system. Plastics are higher grade, more durable and better assembled. Exotic materials add strength while reducing size and weight. Extra attention is given to the parts you will see and touch, like the display (all LCDs are not created equal), the keyboard and the pointing device. Most premium PCs are also getting away from the practice of installing so much crapware as to make a new PC into a paperweight until the new owner uninstalls everything. Dell and HP are already offering crapware-free PCs in the business line, while Apple always has and Lenovo is somewhere in the middle, with crapware installers on the desktop and splash screen intros to entice you, but the programs not actually installed.

[rgreen4]

That was not my point. My point was that at that point in time, it was worth it to me to pay full retail for a drive that I could get at a discount by waiting a few days. When some one chooses to pay more for a Mac, they do it because in their analysis, it is worth it to pay the extra amount. To them at that point in time, it's worth the extra money. The next person in line may make a different decision.

Many people choose to get the cheapest PC they can for whatever reason. Around the first of the year, the mother of a very good friend bought a very cheap Dell at Wal-Mart. It turns out the machine had already been registered and set up. (Most likely a return). It then started giving problems (random restarts) so my friend had her call me. When I looked at the machine, I could see the problems. I deferred her a few days, came home, loaded Vista on a machine I had build and tested, but never fully installed software. I then took that machine out to her so she could return the Dell (her previous machine died).

I then sat with her and got a price that they could live with (including a monitor) and build them a machine, ordering the parts and a 22" monitor. It was tight, and a few parts came off my shelf with no comment and I threw in the OS because I was not going to be using it (it had never been registered). They live on a fixed income and while I would not have built such a basic machine for me, it fits their needs and she is as happy as a clam with it.

All of us have a price decision point about what we feel we are willing to pay. If we don't see the extra value, we won't make the purchase, we will get the Chevrolet rather than the Buick, or the Toyota rather than the Lexus. Some may rather have a pre-owned Lexus than a new Toyota. All of these choices make the market go around.

Let us all not forget, those who use the WinTel machines benefit from the presence of the Mac. Those of us who use Intel processors benefit from the presence of AMD. Those who use the Mac also benefit from the presence of the WinTel machines, and those who use AMD benefit from the presence of Intel. Those who drive Toyotas also benefit from the presence of GM. I remember the Toyotas of 30 years ago, and while fine for their original market, they strived to gather more of a market presence in the US, so they worked on changing their product to meet our needs and desires. Otherwise, we would still be driving small tinny economy cars, but then that's for another thread.