[mikedgolf40505]

MacBook Pro, 15-inch, Aluminium
Part Number: Z0GR
2.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
320GB Serial ATA @ 7200
SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Backlit Keyboard (English) / User's Guide
Accessory kit
Gift message: Add
Remove $2,549.00 $2,549.00
Ships: 1 - 3 business days
Delivers: Apr 6 - Apr 10
Cart Subtotal: $2,549.00
Free Shipping: $0.00
Estimated Tax*: $152.94

Estimated Total: $2,701.94
HP Pavilion Entertainment dv7t customizable Notebook PC
NB444AV
– Espresso Black
– Genuine Windows Vista Home Premium with Service Pack 1 (64-bit)
– Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor T9550 (2.66 GHz)
– 8GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm)
– 500GB 7200RPM SATA Dual Hard Drive (250GB x 2) with HP ProtectSmart Hard Drive Protection
– 512MB ATI Mobility Radeon™ HD 4530
– 17.3" diagonal HD+ High-Definition HP BrightView Widescreen Display (1600 x 900)
– LightScribe SuperMulti 8X DVD+/-RW with Double Layer Support
– Webcam Only
– Wireless-G Card
– No TV Tuner w/remote control
– HP Color Matching Keyboard
– 8 Cell Lithium Ion Battery
– No Modem
– Microsoft® Works 9.0
– HP Home & Home Office Store in-box envelope
Estimated build date: April 10, 2009 $1,874.99 $1,874.99
To change quantities or remove selected items, click on
Notebook instant rebate –$150.00
Order subtotal $1,724.99
Much bigger hard drive, larger screen, 8GB of Ram, higher resolution screen. As type this on my MacBook Pro, which I love; I am also realistic. Some of my fellow MacHeads embarrass me. Folks reality is reality, and you can get a better spec high end system for at least $1000 less. I did not even price the 17" MacBook Pro it would have really been a lot more. It is personal taste. I love the build of the two MacBook Pros in my house. Both the unibody and the previous generation which my wife owns; are built like a battleship. I also love the security; but am grounded enough in reality to know that if Mac gains a large market share that it will change fast. I hope that Macs stay expensive; it guarantees it will still be a luxury brand and it will stay secure because of a much smaller market share. I also owned a HP DV9000t with Vista and actually love the PC. Did not have a problem with Vista, of course I bought it loaded. I sold it to an employee of mine and he loves it as well. My point is that other companies make good products as well. Like Apple they tailor their products to their market. Apple's market happens to be the high end of the spectrum

[mikedgolf40505]

Wintard you are the best!!! Much respect for you. I recommend you see the post I just submitted.

[asiafish]

Yes, the Pavillion has better specs and will run games at higher framerates than the MacBook Pro. How much does it weigh? How thick is it?

I can afford the 17" MacBook Pro, but my decision was between the 13" MacBook (high spec $1600) and the 15" because I care a great deal about size and weight. I carry my laptop all over the place. I often run from courtroom to courtroom and am constantly opening and closing the lid to access and modify my calendar. 15" is really pushing the limit on size (I always used to have 14" or 12" ThinkPads and PowerBooks), and 5.5 lbs is pushing the weight limit, especially when carried with a bunch of case files.

If I wanted a laptop that would sit on the desk all day just to play games, I would build a desktop PC like Wintard's. I play games on my laptop because I travel a lot and prefer PC gaming over drinking alone in hotel bars. I do not want to carry two laptops when I travel, so I compromise and carry a larger-than-desired 15" MacBook Pro instead of a smaller and lighter MacBook or MacBook Air, either of which would be more than adequate for my workday, but aren't up to entertainment duty.

The 15" MacBook Pro is not as good of a gaming machine as the Pavillion, but it is a MUCH better PORTABLE computer.

[WinTard]

I agree with you that installing OS X onto any PC isn't for everybody. I've not attempted it yet, simply because I had no interest. But I'm reading what others have experienced. Being quite familiar with Open-Source and Linux, it appears there is a growing interest in the end-user community about OS X.

You see, the problem with OS X, is the requirement to purchase new hardware, when really it is only an artificial imposition, because that is the differentiating factor between an Apple PC versus other standard PC's, pre-built brand name and otherwise.

This is a double-edged sword. I totally understand Apple's motivation for wanting to prevent clones, because they would lose their large profit margins, if they were to open the market. Thus they lock it in one way or another to OS X, and have done a very nice job of it. Also, they have done nice work on OS X itself.

Credit where credit is due. I think Apple did an outstanding job! As reflected by their financial success in the marketplace. Well deserved.

I think Apple are indeed cool machines, high-quality and all the attributes that endears the brand to its loyal followers. And there is nothing wrong with that.

Yet I believe in free-enterprise also, and that competition is what keeps everyone on their toes, change continuing, improvements coming, and Apple is a GREAT competitor. But also Apple needs stiff competition in order to improve themselves, and vice-versa.

I do not dispute any of the positive aspects of Apple.

My only point of contention is the perception the Ultimate supposedly comes from Apple, and that an enthusiast can't do better? If we look into the automotive world, purchasing a pre-built model is only the starting point for performance modifications, regardless of brands!

Mass produced items, are never optimized to the yin-yang. They build a certain manufacturing tolerance, 'reliability' factor, so everything works just right for most. But you can 'blueprint' an engine, balance the camshafts, the pistons, replace them with titanium connecting rods, and the like. Replace the cork gaskets with metal header gaskets, etc... You can boost the internal compression of an engine beyond what comes out from the factory line. Change the ECU and performance point management etc. You can't however purchase them that way. Hence my point. For true enthusiasts, who like to polish, tinker, tweak, and obtain the last drop of performance out of their cars, audio systems, or computers, that too is a valid, legitimate, useful, entertaining, educational endeavor. It's an art, and hobby. It's not just to go from point A to point B. That can be done in a Lada as well as anything else (in the short term). But like you say you prefer a Mercedes over a Camry, I prefer an optimized computer system over any standard run-of-the-mill box purchased out there. So we have something in common. Enjoyment, passion, and seek fun?

We're not that different when you think of it. You wear your Omega Constellation wristwatch and I wear my titanium diving watch for the same reasons.

I say people speaking different languages still can truly communicate, once the purpose of a dialogue is mutually understood. If the purpose is to criticize other people's legitimate choices, than what's the point of discussion? You don't see me go into a Mac oriented forums, and start contradicting all their beliefs, by quoting PC, PC, PC crap? The same applies here. So the point of discussion must lead to discovery and mutual understanding, not based a win/lose objective. Me pointing out my fundamental reasons for building my own computers, is in no way a put-down onto Apple, and could also apply to Dell, HP, Gateway, Sony, Toshiba, or whatever. However the topic of this thread is specific. Mac vs. Windows: What Does $1K Get You?

The simple facts, no bull, no bias, no BS. That's how mature and sincere members in goodwill of PCWorld could agree to discuss upon, to bridge the gap in understanding, not create a deeper void.

Facts are neither good nor bad. Delusions about denying reality could be less than wise however.

[Vader]

Who really cares how large the laptop is? Now you are talking looks over value and power idiot! Your MAC has some shiny little features but when it comes to power for value PC BEATS MAC! Are you to weak to carry a bloody 6lb laptop? And who cares how long the batteries last? I don't game on batteries I game with my laptop plugged into a power supply. And instant sleep is worthless to! Its a nice feature but when it comes to value and power its useless in the end!

[mikedgolf40505]

I could have priced a smaller and thinner Windows PC, but I thought it would be easier to demonstrate the huge price difference; even on a high performance, larger PC. I agree the HP is rather large and I did not like packing mine around a lot. I looked at the 17" MacBook Pro, but thought it a little too big to. I have the 15" inch unibody, my wife has the 15" older model. HP and other makers make much smaller and thinner units as well, I think it is important to note that as well. For a 17" PC the dv9000t I used to own was still thinner the Dell 15" I used to own. I think ALL computer makers are making thinner and lighter notebooks these days.

[WinTard]

mikedgolf40505, you too are the best! I truly appreciate the fact you are a contributing member to our PCWorld community, and are helping bridge the gap so we all understand each other better. Even though I'm pretty new here (2.5 months) you have been one of the first having actually opened my mind to Apple and I thank you for that.

You are a good and honest man, and I am proud to consider myself your friend.

Thank you for your prior post above. I learned something new today and that makes me happy.

~~~~~~~~~~
Fools say that they learn from experience. I prefer to learn by other people?s experience.
~ Bismarck
:)

[asiafish]

Vader said:

Who really cares how large the laptop is? Now you are talking looks over value and power idiot! Your MAC has some shiny little features but when it comes to power for value PC BEATS MAC! Are you to weak to carry a bloody 6lb laptop? And who cares how long the batteries last? I don't game on batteries I game with my laptop plugged into a power supply. And instant sleep is worthless to! Its a nice feature but when it comes to value and power its useless in the end!

Who cares how large it is? I do. I use it on airplanes where space is often at a premium. I use it in parking lots while sitting in the driver's seat of my car, again where space is at a premium. Am I too weak to carry a 6lb laptop? No, but that Pavillion is not a 6lb laptop, it is an 8lb laptop. Can I lift 8lb? Of course. Do I want to pick up and put down 8lbs all day, carry it across the terminal in a shoulder bag, walk across town with it? Hell no. I used to carry a ThinkPad X41 that weighed 2.7 lbs and I REALLY MISS that laptop quite often. The trade-off was that it was under-powered, cramped and lacked storage.

Value is getting the most of what your priorities are for your money. If your priority is maximum framerates and you could care less about size and weight, then a MacBook Pro (or a ThinkPad, or a Vaio) is not for you. Personally, I value portability more than framerates. I value strong materials more than gizmos (MacBooks don't even have card readers). I value clean and elegant design over low price. Those are my priorities, and given those priorities, I keep coming back to Apple and IBM/Lenovo for laptops. Now that I can have OS X and Windows in the same laptop, Apple is a better value for me.

As for instant sleep, I value that quite a bit. It is a feature that makes my day easier, each and every day. I reboot my computer only when switching from Mac to Windows or Windows to Mac (work to play). When its running OS X for work, I never have to wait on the computer, it is just always ready for me. When I carried a PC to court, I had resume failures more than once and judges just don't like to wait for things like that, and after the third time, I just disabled sleep from lid closure and left my PC running whether open or closed, in the bag or out. Not very good for the hard drive or battery life, but better than pissing off the judge. Instant sleep makes OS X a better tool in the courtroom.

[asiafish]

Very well said Wintard.

[asiafish]

mikedgolf40505 said:

I could have priced a smaller and thinner Windows PC, but I thought it would be easier to demonstrate the huge price difference; even on a high performance, larger PC. I agree the HP is rather large and I did not like packing mine around a lot. I looked at the 17" MacBook Pro, but thought it a little too big to. I have the 15" inch unibody, my wife has the 15" older model. HP and other makers make much smaller and thinner units as well, I think it is important to note that as well. For a 17" PC the dv9000t I used to own was still thinner the Dell 15" I used to own. I think ALL computer makers are making thinner and lighter notebooks these days.

Thats true, but thin-and-light is a class, that is different from gaming or desktop replacement. Apple is a premium brand at a premium price, and they happen to only offer a high-end ultraportable (Air), a large thin-and-light (17" MBP), a medium thin-and-light (MBP 15") and two small thin-and-lights (MacBook White and MacBook). If you don't want a thin-and-light or an ultraportable, then Apple doesn't make what you want.

HP makes business laptops and they are quite nice. Many of them are thin-and-lights that compete with Apple's at similar prices. Some of them are tablets for which Apple has nothing that competes. Some are netbooks for which Apple has nothing to compete. The point is, compare machines in the same class. It is very fair to compare the Toyota Corolla to the Honda Civic, but so fair to compare the Corolla to the Accord.

I do think that Apple charges more for comparable hardware MOST of the time, but nowhere near as much as most people think. I've compared a few ThinkPads to comparable Apple laptops and the difference is usually about $100 to $200 more for the Apple. There are examples where the ThinkPad costs more, but in those instances you are also getting a higher spec that Apple doesn't offer, such as integrated WWAN. I consider a ThinkPad to be absolutely equivalent hardware in terms of build-quality, superior in terms of hardware versatility (batteries, docking, etc.) and inferior in terms of OS (no OS X - my opinion). I'll repeat, if a ThinkPad were offered with OS X I would buy it, even at a $100 to $200 premium over equivalent Apple hardware, but since no such ThinkPad is offered, I buy Apple hardware which while not quite as versatile, is equally high quality.

Quality to me also includes design. I hate flashy design and prefer simplicity and elegance. I love that the new Apple laptops are seamless without any silly doors covering their ports. I like how the lid has a magnetic latch instead of sliding plastic lever to break or snag.

[MacHelp]

I love a good pissing match!

So here are two questions for all business owners, manufacturers, and marketers out there:

1) Are you selling benefits and experiences or products?

2) Are you delivering an experience that makes customers happy to spend as much money as they can afford with you, or one that leaves them wanting to spend the least they can?

Answer the questions carefully. The answers to these questions are the difference between the best and the worst of US retailers.

The head of Black and Decker once said, folks don?t buy our products because they want one inch drills, they buy our stuff because they want one inch holes.

When Dell was king of PCs and low prices were the mantra of PC retailing, this insight was complete heresy. But it also held the key to Apple's success: sell Apple benefits and experiences, not Apple products.

[mikedgolf40505]

HP Pavilion Entertainment dv4t customizable Notebook PC
NK091AV
? Espresso Black
? Genuine Windows Vista Home Premium with Service Pack 1 (64-bit)
? Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor T9550 (2.66 GHz)
? 4GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm)
? FREE Upgrade to 320GB 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive with HP ProtectSmart Hard Drive Protection
? 512MB NVIDIA GeForce G 105M
? 14.1" diagonal WXGA High-Definition HP LED BrightView Widescreen Display (1280 x 800)
? SuperMulti 8X DVD+/-R/RW with Double Layer Support
? [For LED Display] Webcam + Fingerprint Reader
? Wireless-G Card
? No TV Tuner w/remote control
? HP Color Matching Keyboard
? 6 Cell Lithium Ion Battery
? No Modem
? Microsoft® Works 9.0
? HP Home & Home Office Store in-box envelope
Estimated build date: April 13, 2009 $1,409.99 $1,409.99
To change quantities or remove selected items, click on
Notebook instant rebate ?$150.00
Order subtotal $1,259.99

HP Pavilion Entertainment dv3z customizable Notebook PC
FJ745AV
? Genuine Windows Vista Home Premium with Service Pack 1 (64-bit)
? AMD Turion™ X2 Ultra Dual-Core Mobile Processor ZM-86 (2.4 GHz)
? 8GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm)
? 500GB 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive with HP ProtectSmart Hard Drive Protection
? ATI Radeon™ HD 3200 Graphics with 64MB Display Cache Memory
? 13.3" diagonal WXGA High-Definition HP LED BrightView Widescreen Display (1280 x 800)
? Tray Load SuperMulti 8X DVD+/-R/RW with Double Layer Support
? Webcam + Fingerprint Reader
? Wireless-G Card
? HP Color Matching Keyboard
? 6 Cell Lithium Ion Battery
? Microsoft® Works 9.0
? HP Home & Home Office Store in-box envelope
Estimated build date: April 14, 2009 $1,499.99 $1,499.99
To change quantities or remove selected items, click on
Notebook instant rebate ?$150.00
Order subtotal $1,349.99



asiafish I agree with your points. I prefer my Mac as well. But to say there is not a significant price difference would be false. These are both thin, llight and well equipped. The 13" inch even has 8GB of Ram.

[asiafish]

How thin? How light? How durable? How elegant? You get what you pay for. Those are still Pavillions, meaning consumer-grade laptops with plastic cases and lots of pulsing and flashing lights and buttons. That is not what I want. Also, look at the screen resolution on those, 1280X800, much cheaper than 1440X900.

Are those machines a good value? Sure, but the 13" isn't any cheaper than a 13" MacBook, though it is of higher specification if you don't count the AMD vs. Intel.

I'm not saying the HPs aren't good value, just that people shopping for a MacBook Pro aren't going to compare it to a consumer-grade Pavillion with low-resolution screen. The buyers of the white MacBook and the entry-level unibody probably will, but even the unibody, again slightly lower spec, is a much nicer machine in terms of build and design.

In the end, these are aimed at different buyers completely. Most people who want a consumer machine with as many features tacked on at the lowest possible price won't even consider Apple, while those who want a premium business-class laptop may look at HP, but won't look at the consumer entertainment models.

I just went to HP's website and configured the closest I could to a 13" MacBook (unibody) and 15" MacBook Pro. To match the MacBook Pro I configured the following...

Pavillion DV3z with 2.4GHz Turion X2, 4GB RAM, 250GB HD, N wifi with bluetooth and slot-load optical drive for $1152. Yes, its $147 less than an entry-level aluminum MacBook (or $153 more than a white MacBook), is almost identical in spec except for the AMD processor vs. Intel and ATI integrated graphics vs. nVidia integrated graphics. The HP was upgraded to Vista ultimate (comparable to Leopard) and to slot-loading drive. It weighs the same as the Apple, but is made of plastic instead of a solid block of aluminum.

Performance is probably pretty close, but for my money, I'd pay an extra $147 for aluminumn and OS X.

[mikedgolf40505]

I am on the same side as you. I love my Macs. I do think that $147 is a bit deceptive. The HP also has 8GB of memory and a 500GB hard drive that is not even available on the Mac. It also has a backlit keyboard. I these comparisons are not equitable. We are comparing the proverbial apples to oranges (pardon the pun). A PC would be like a Nissan Maxima and the Mac would be a Mercedes. It is a matter of personal taste and financial means. I guess having been a PC user for many years before converting to Mac, I am put off by the attitude (not yours) of many Mac users. Insulting PC users is ridiculous. Most PC users are net tech heads, and are very happy with the computers they have bought. My first PC was a Pavilion desktop with Windows 98, that I kept until 2004 when I bought my first laptop, a Dell. My point is that the HP desktop lasted about six years and I had no problems with it. I find it interesting that some Mac users measure their self worth based on their computers. If you have to bash your competition (a lot of the times unfairly) and their consumers to defend your choice; you must ask yourself some serious questions about yourself. Asiafish this is not directed at you, you have been very reasonable in your arguments.

[TechieXP]

ECC is to help prevent data lost. Can you explain why would you need that in everyday applications? Most desktop users aren't working with data long enough to lose data. So thus the extra cost of just hype at best. That is why Xeon is a server CPU. Unless you were running OSX Server, there is no need for the extra cost. But hey it is okey to spend the money if you have it. For the addition cost of ECC based ram, is money spent on a faster CPU or more drives, or maybe a few applications. I remember when Xeon cost above $3000. Since Intel crammed them into first the 478 socket and now the 775 and 1366 the cost is lower per cpu production. Intel is teh only company that has a 500% markup on hardware.

I remember back in the 90's when Intel first released teh Pentium III and the special website that only work with the cpu, we tied to guess how much it actually cost Intel to make a single chip. We realize like automakers, protype developement takes a bit of funding. Intel has already perfect the micro process of creation. It is also a fact that all the lastest cpu's are just vamped up versions of the Pentium Pro. The biggest thing Intel has to get past is heat. We estimate Intel cost to manufacture a chip in an Asian country where labor is cheap is probably less than $50 per chip...no matter which family. Yes I agree we are paying for technology that not anyone can do, but it doesn't mean the markup has to be that high.

You said you bought the Mac for its expandibility? Why don't you name something you can expand? Lets see...you can upgrade the ram to 32GB....explain what you plan to do that would require 32GB of ram....unless you plan to use it as a server eventually and then why a workstation. You can't upgrade teh CPU, you may be able to install a new video card and drives at best. And of course upgrade the OS.

I am guessing the next OS from MSFT or Apple will nearly diuble system reqirements because teh hardware for it already exist. MSFT may even push the x64 envelope as all of Intel latest CPU's have x64bit extensions and LSFT has had a 64bit OS for quite some time...unlike Apple who has for the first time released an os that supports it...as thre previous platforms didn't offer 64bit.

With the power of all computers these days it is time to really see both companies push to make the desktop more awesome. Especially graphic wise. The boring 2D desktop GUI is boring. Vista and Windows 7 is a very nice attempt to have some 3D in the GUI...but it isn't enough. Apple with Safari and Itunes has shown some 3D features. If less powerful gaming consoles have 3D and PC's do in games...the desktop GUI should too. Espeically since 1GB memory video cards are already on the market.

[WinTard]

MacHelp, outstanding post! The only point I disagree with is the "pissing match". ;)

Thank you, you succinctly synthesized the essence to the marketing strategy of Apple, and made me realize what it was.

And I will add this Black & Decker quote to my collection of pearls of wisdom. Again thank you.

~~~~~~~~~~
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
~ Albert Einstein

[WinTard]

Oh thank you my friend TechieXP for the kind words.

Well, whatever video RAM is on any peripheral (to the motherboard) card, isn't ECC protected.

By the way, ECC is implemented on the DIMM and entirely transparent to the OS in question. The purpose of ECC is to add a level of verification to the actual byte stored in that particular location, byte per byte. In the early days of the IBM PC, there was a 'parity' byte which was a simple summation of all the 8 bits forming the byte, and would add a 9th bit, automatically set by hardware, to indicate if the entire result should be ODD or EVEN. In hardware, if the system was set for let's say EVEN parity, and the resulting was ODD, then it would trigger a NMI (Non Maskable Interrupt) which in turn would vector to a routine halting the system, but also advising the user, there were some problems with the RAM memory. Usually, this was caused by flaky socket contacts, yes in the early days RAM chips could have been mounted onto sockets, due to their inherent unreliability. As technology progressed, yields of semiconductor crystals progressively became better and better, alleviating the need for such control mechanisms. The ECC RAM is there as a precaution, a helmet or seat-belt if you wish, to correct potential bit-errors that may introduce themselves into the hardware. Usually due to random Gamma radiation hitting the transistor, and causing a different charge potential into the Dynamic Ram, which is merely a capacitor, that must be 'refreshed' in order to keep its state. Now the ECC (Error Correcting Code) will actually rectify or redress any potential random stray bit error that might occur in RAM due to these 'gamma' random particles occurring constantly through our time/space... However, nowadays, the manufacturing techniques have improved to the point these errors are infinitesimal for all practical purposes, and in 99% of computer user cases, we do not see such errors occur anyway. Thus ECC RAM is an anachronism, a legacy of times past and long forgotten. Similarly, HDD used to have 'bad sectors' but in the past ten years or so, every single HDD has zero bad sectors, due to higher quality manufacturing processes.

Succinctly, ECC is virtually unnecessary nowadays. Or else, your computer would crash much more often... Especially in light of the numbers of computer users.

Practically, all non-server computers are running without any buffered, parity protected, or ECC RAM anymore. Yet we get practically perfect results.

Similarly, nowadays, it is common for a simple common car (Honda Civic) not to require a tune-up before 100,000 miles. By tune-up I mean opening the engine and adjusting valve clearances, or even simply replace the irridium plated spark plugs. Basically the engine is trouble free for the life-time of the engine. All you have to do is to regularly replace fluids, and filters, and that's it. Personally, I've redlined all my engines, every single day for each and every car I owned, and NEVER ran into any wear-and-tear problems in the engines themselves. Always peripheral components. That to me is quality, and reliability. The same applies nowadays to RAM and HDD.

So ECC is a nice feature, not worth the expense, or the speed-reduction IMHO. And I'll take 24GB over 6GB of ECC in a fraction of a second, everytime, anytime. The corollary to this is if all RAM was ECC, then it would be the same cost as non-ECC RAM....

What bugs me is Intel and others, make their controllers locked into one or the other mode, and that too is an artificial restriction, imposed by marketing in an attempt to justify more dollars... I wouldn't be surprised, if a microcode FLASH couldn't turn a i7-920 into a Xeon and vice-versa.... We'll leave the real hackers to find that solution for us. Same goes for locked multipliers in overclocking...

Point blank, Windows any versions supports ECC and so does any Linux or any other OS. Because it's transparent to the OS. It's controlled at the hardware level.

;)

[TechieXP]

To me the Mac Mini is a laptop without a screen. The only thing yoiu can add is ram...none of the parts are upgradable. I can buy a Netbook with no OS and add a reatil copy of Vista Ultimate and though it will be slow my cost would be about...wow 599 amazing....isn't it?!

Its so funny how you ahve to pull a desperate rabbit out the hat. The MM is a cool lil number that at best forces you to buy a new computer if you want something faster. Example...the new Mac Mini only offer more ram and a 2.2 GHz cpu over the 2.0 the other ccame with. So you really think it is worth bragging about? I don't. I'm not impress...do better next time.

Fact in order to upgrade to get a faster mac it requires buying a new Mac. Not true of PC and never has been. The only way a single Mac PC will last ten years is if your needs don't change and the newer OS don't change either.

The last PC I built was a Tyan server motherboard that used dual slot 1 cpu. The first CPU's I placed on it were Pentium II's 450's. Over time as Windows progressed I simply bought faster CPU...the system last me from Windows 98 to 98SE and ME and 2000, 2000 Server, 2003 Server, Windows XP and it even ran Vista. I chose to upgrade only because teh board didn't support more than 4GB of ram. It has a FSB that maxxed out a 800Mhz. That allowed me to use 5 family of processors...how many families of CPU's can u use on any Mac? 1...It also allowed me to use multiple memory options too. How many can you use on a Mac? 1 Only teh x86 Macs allow for video card upgrades. Before that you could only replace teh component with teh same or it required an Apple technician to install bec only they had the drivers. With Macs you have to be selective about everything. For Windows I can go to any computer store blind-folded and pick up any device, software or hardware bring it home no knowing what it is and it will be WIndows compatibile. PERIOD. And for all that I actually can buy hardware for cheaper than Apple can. it must be true. I have a system I built right now that has a complete total of about $1500 And it is faster than any mid-ranged price Mac Pro at 2499 and I can overclock it to match a Mac Pro without soending a dime. Which of use you think has a better chance of getting 10 years out his buy. I managed to get 12 years out og my last system. My system supports any socket 775 cpu, with 667, 800, 1066, 1333 and 1600(OC) FSB speeds...which means my only buy for teh next decade is newer cpu's which will cost me almost nothing as faster onces come out. The most I ever paid for a cpu is $250. However this summer I plan to go all out and get a Extreme Edition CPU at 3.4GHz. It can be overclocked to as high as 4.5Ghz....my present board supports 8GB of ram...but how much more you think I really need. I only use 2GB out of 4 unless I open a virtual PC...

To compare a Mac to a OC is just dumb. They both have pluses and minus. A Windows PC has more options for way less cost.Right now I can go one Craigmslist here in Chicago and find someone selling a Mac that is 3yrs old or less. The reason that Macs have a high resale value is because they cost so much in the first place. If I bought any computer or built my own for $3000, and I sell it in 3 years...well duh it is still woth at least 1/2. As old as my last system was, I was still able to sell it for $1000. and it was 12 years old. Over teh 12 years I owned it I spent about $1500 on it. So who came out on top?

A Mac can't do what a PC can do even with Windows. And that isn't even a bragging right. If I had a Mac I would never run WIndows on it. As another commenter said. Why run Windows on a Mac? From ppl who constantly bash Windows, it would seem hypoctitical to run Windows on your hardware. The reason you have to run Windows on a Mac is bec OSX isn't compatible with most of todays needed technologies. That will change a bit with Snow Leopard. 30 YEARS TO LATE.

[HeroofAvalon]

Why buy from retailers in the first place, anyway? I mean, you have to if you want a notebook, but if you want a desktop, you could save sooooo much money by building one and equipping it with an OS of your choice.
Afterthought: Unless Macs have a restriction on what hardware they can run on....

[WinTard]

Apparently, it's not such a restriction... Google is your friend.