Mac users input requested.

Please elaborate. Which other specs are you referring to? Hard drive speed? The MBP at 2500 is running a 5400RPM HD by default. Amount of RAM? The MBP has 4GB of ram at 1333.

If you want to choose a mac because you like the look or the OS, go ahead. I have no problems with that. I won't even argue that as it's all personal preference anyways.

I was addressing the "equal or better specs". If we aren't talking about speed and performance, than which specs are you referring to? I'm guessing you'll go with weight/battery or something along those lines. That's fine too. I've always used a laptop backpack and really don't care about weight/size as long as it isn't as crazy as the Dell I had at work one time.

Don't pretend it's for the dollar value of the internal hardware though.
 
Screen quality, multitouch trackpad, battery life, and the list continues.
I get that to a lot of people that stuff never matters... until they have one and get used to it.
 
Chibo said:
Screen quality, multitouch trackpad, battery life, and the list continues.
I get that to a lot of people that stuff never matters... until they have one and get used to it.
Click to expand...

this is exactly what i was gonna say. lol

so does that Sager get 7 hours of battery life? nope. probably gets an hour and a half TOPS. I have 2 gaming rigs, windows based. i DONT need a Gaming laptop.

The fit and finish, and style stomps Sager all day.

the trackpad can't be beat. use one and you'll never want to use anything else.

the OS is smooth and LOGICAL. If i don't know how to do something, chances are i can figure it out on my own in about 2 minutes, on a windows machine it'd require a google search and a youtube video.

I don't care about the biggest and baddest mobile video cards, I had a PC notebook with a radeon 5870m graphics card, yes it ran games great, but had constant crashes and BSOD due to crap drivers.

I like PC's, i still have my gaming rigs.

But i wanted a Mac, end of story.
 
Crax said:
Please elaborate. Which other specs are you referring to? Hard drive speed? The MBP at 2500 is running a 5400RPM HD by default. Amount of RAM? The MBP has 4GB of ram at 1333.

If you want to choose a mac because you like the look or the OS, go ahead. I have no problems with that. I won't even argue that as it's all personal preference anyways.

I was addressing the "equal or better specs". If we aren't talking about speed and performance, than which specs are you referring to? I'm guessing you'll go with weight/battery or something along those lines. That's fine too. I've always used a laptop backpack and really don't care about weight/size as long as it isn't as crazy as the Dell I had at work one time.

Don't pretend it's for the dollar value of the internal hardware though.
Click to expand...

a good computer is more than the internal hardware. If you build your PC's by just taking the most expensive parts and throwing them in, you have SERIOUS learning to do.
 
lewblue83 said:
a good computer is more than the internal hardware. If you build your PC's by just taking the most expensive parts and throwing them in, you have SERIOUS learning to do.
Click to expand...
Who said to do that? I think Sager is a great brand and uses quality parts. If you value looks > performance that's fine, but that's part of owning an apple. Don't argue macs look nicer(fair argument and probably do) AND perform faster at an equivalent price.

lewblue83 said:
t
I like PC's, i still have my gaming rigs.
But i wanted a Mac, end of story.
Click to expand...
Cool, no argument from me. You made the money, spend it on what you want. My post was in response to Terpfen who said you can't find an equivalent specced PC from an OEM vendor for the same price or less.
 
Crax said:
Who said to do that? I think Sager is a great brand and uses quality parts. If you value looks > performance that's fine, but that's part of owning an apple. Don't argue macs look nicer(fair argument and probably do) AND perform faster at an equivalent price.
Click to expand...

If the size and weight of the machine are just "looks" to you, it makes me wonder if you actually carry your laptop around or use it away from a power outlet. Also, that Sager you specced out weighs almost twice as much and only gets a quarter of the battery life. It's not even a fair comparison.
 
CEpeep said:
If the size and weight of the machine are just "looks" to you, it makes me wonder if you actually carry your laptop around or use it away from a power outlet. Also, that Sager you specced out weighs almost twice as much and only gets a quarter of the battery life. It's not even a fair comparison.
Click to expand...

I don't recall the argument being the mac gets better battery life and weighs less. If that's your argument, I'll bow out now, you win. Congrats.

Looks/Weight/Battery life - Mac wins.
Raw Performance per dollar - PC.

Do you disagree?
Also, that Sager you specced out weighs almost twice as much
Click to expand...
The 17" MBP is 6.6 lbs. The sager is 8.6 How is that almost twice as much?
 
Last edited:
Crax said:
I don't recall the argument being the mac gets better battery life and weighs less. If that's your argument, I'll bow out now, you win. Congrats.

Looks/Weight/Battery life - Mac wins.
Raw Performance per dollar - PC.

Do you disagree?
Click to expand...

It just seems strange to me to separate out aspects of of the device's physical performance as not being related to its computational performance. I think battery life and weight are "performance" metrics, an ones that become increasingly important as technology progresses. If aerodynamic engineering and fuel efficiency/capacity can be performance metrics for cars, why not computers? All things considered, I think my Macbook Air gets better performance for my dollar than any other platform I could have purchased at the time I bought it.
 
That's fine. Obviously we look at them a bit different. I don't recall the Air even being in the conversation. If I was buying a 17" laptop and wanted the best performance for the $2500, I'm not going to cry about a 2lb weight difference. I spent a fair amount of time at the airport and on the road at a previous job and bought a laptop backpack for that reason. Shoulder strap bags sucks either way.
 
Yea I had a laptop backpack for my Alienware m15x. And that thing was heavy. My back was crying for mercy.

I don't intend to carry this MBP everywhere.

Also the sager is nice hardware wise. But it's not all about FPS in games. It's about usability, smoothness, and more importantly how all the components work together.

I'm more than satisfied with the MacBook. I just wish people didn't judge a computer by how much ram it has lol.
 
Crax said:
So, I'm $500 less and have a better system spec wise that would beat the base MBP in about any benchmark. I could take that 500 and double up to 16GB of ram and still have extra money if I felt like it. Oh, the 15" 2.4 GHZ MBP is 2199, so I'm cheaper than that as well and have a 17" with better hard drive, more ram, etc.
Click to expand...

Swing and a miss. Your specs are limited, not equivalent, as you've fallen into the trap of believing that if you just match up the CPU, GPU, and RAM, you have an equivalent machine. You don't.
 
My friends Sager has been sent back for repair 4 times now for video card issues. I would get the MBP just for the warranty, support, and excellent customer service you get.
 
Terpfen said:
Swing and a miss.
Click to expand...
Nice curveball. So really the only thing I could link you to satisfy you would be an exact copy of the MBP without the apple logo running windows sold for cheaper. Ok. Fun discussion. Why did you even ask the question then if no answer would satisfy you?
 
The basic axiom of laptops is

"Power, Portability, Price, Choose Two".

Mac's are an attempt to balance the three.
Sure, you can easily spec laptops with more power (e.g. your Sager), you are paying in "portability" to get "Power and Price".
You can spec laptops that are powerful and more portable, but you are paying for them. (E.g., Sony Z series @$2000+ to match a MBP).

Portability doesn't just mean weight, it's battery life, footprint, thickness, charger, etc. It's the encompassing package of "how easy is this thing to carry around?".

You made a cost-benefit analysis, and decided you wanted a portable desktop, so you purchaced/spec'd a high end Sager. Many of us, in fact, most laptop users, do not need, nor want a portable desktop. We want something light and sleek enough to carry around, while having enough performance to do the things we want, and doing so with enough battery life that we can frequently leave the charging cord at home.

Why does other people making their own cost-benefit analysis, and coming to a different conclusion, bother you so much.
 
Bother me? It doesn't. I wasn't the one that issued the all encompassing challenge, that was Terpfen. As you said, different things for different people. If you want a mac due to portability and battery power, that's cool with me. As you mentioned it's a balance. Some people here seem to think the mac is the best in anything it tries to do and can be all things to all people. A mac wouldn't do what I would want it to do for the money it would cost me. It may be great for some users though. I never said every single person should go buy a sager. I'd never recommend one to many of my family members.

Many of us, in fact, most laptop users, do not need, nor want a portable desktop
Click to expand...
I'd argue most people don't need a $2500 laptop to begin with........
 
Last edited:
Crax said:
I'd argue most people don't need a $2500 laptop to begin with........
Click to expand...

true. But I wanted one. So i got one.

img0112se.jpg
 
Crax said:
I'd argue most people don't need a $2500 laptop to begin with........
Click to expand...

I'd agree, which is why the majority of Mac's sold are MBA's and 13" MBP's. Which max out (default) at $1600, and absolutely obliterate your Sager on portability. Of course they are obliterated as far as performance goes, but 90%+ of people will never, in a million years, notice the performance difference.

But everyone can notice the portability difference.
 
Crax said:
Nice curveball. So really the only thing I could link you to satisfy you would be an exact copy of the MBP without the apple logo running windows sold for cheaper. Ok. Fun discussion. Why did you even ask the question then if no answer would satisfy you?
Click to expand...

So it's my fault that you can't find an equivalent device. Nice one.

It's the height of irony that you would come into this thread and attempt to say "I found an equivalent PC for cheaper" when the OEMs are struggling to produce ultra books that are anywhere near price competitive to the MacBook Air, they can't produce anything like the iMac at an equivalent or lower price, and the MBP is destroying them left and right. You can't find an equivalently specced machine for a lower price. The days of the Apple tax are long gone, particularly in the $500-1200 range.
 
I don't know what you guys are talking about, but I find the base 13" MacBook Pro and Air are very good value, while the 15" and 17" MBPs are just too expensive. They should be closer to 1500 and 2000, respectively.

Just look at the price difference of $300 between the base 13" MBP and the upgraded model. Slightly larger hard-drive and slightly-faster-already-super-fast CPU?

I do agree that the slimness/battery life/touchpad/weight of the 15/17 inch MBPs is probably unmatched by PC laptops. But the price of 15/17" PC laptops is definitely lower.
 
shurcooL said:
I don't know what you guys are talking about
Click to expand...

We aren't really "talking" about anything. Crax attempted to prove wrong my statement that there are no PCs equivalently specced to Apple products for equal or cheaper price. He failed, because he apparently thinks that specifications are limited to CPU type and speed, amount of RAM, and GPU type.

We're now in a market where Apple products not only have generally high-end specs, but win on price. Look at how the iPad is thrashing competitors on price, and how OEMs can't build an ultrabook cheaper than an MBA to save their companies.
 
Hello? Boot camp?

Done.

Osx lion is pretty nice, but mouse acceleration curve is so bad that I prefer windows whenever I have a mouse.

I have the newest 15" mbp with a 2.2ghz quad core i7, 4gigs ram and some radeon 6 series with 1gb of memory. You definitely can't max out crysis but games like tf2 run great.
 
I noticed the Lion switch did weird things to the touchpad sensitivity too.
 
Actually lion made the mouse movement a little better in my opinion. It's closer to windows now but still a little too much acceleration. I don't mind it when I'm using a tracpad but for mouse movement it drives me nuts.
 
Intel macs can run both OS X & windows, so do your real work in OS X & use windows for your game playing... been doing this for years now......'nuff said :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top