bigmudcake said:Anyone who shrugs it off as troll bait is ignoring the harsh realities.
Regardless there are other threads on this same subject with a full blown debate.
bigmudcake said:Anyone who shrugs it off as troll bait is ignoring the harsh realities.
bigmudcake said:Anyone who shrugs it off as troll bait is ignoring the harsh realities.
The MacBook Pro does have an advantage with the faster/better graphics card, but this is not what Apple Marketing is concentrating on when they are trying to convince us to buy, its all focused on the Intel Core Duo.
I am worried that alot of Potential buyers from the PC/Windows side of the market (the overall majority) will look at the harsh realities, be confronted with the Apple Intel marketing, look at the prices and say its not worth it.
No one can objectively argue that the Macbook Pro is cost competitive.
gekko513 said:You seem to ignore the fact that all laptop offers from manufacturers who actually have laptops in the same market segment as the MacBook are in the same price range.
Look at that Dell site again.
![]()
The Inspiron series is the budget series. The specs, the quality control and the price of the Inspiron series is in the budget segment.
The Latitude series is in the pro segment. It costs more, the specs are better and the quality control is better. This is the same segment as the MacBook is in, but Dell hasn't dragged their Latitude asses into 2006 yet. You'll have to wait some more time for Dell to come up with a Core Duo offer in that segment before you can start comparing Dells with MacBooks.
sintaxi said:You can easily objectively argue that the MBP (or any mac for that matter) is cost competitive. Just build a PC with all the same features as a MBP. Not just chip and ram, all the same features. The Mac will win.
bigmudcake said:I did, refer to the start of this thread
QCassidy352 said:no, you didn't. You didn't account for the many, many advantages of the MBP as outlined in the 3rd or so post.
bigmudcake said:I did by also not accounting for the many many advantages of the Dell as outlined on their webpage.
Well, yes, Apple will probably release an iBook replacement with a Core Duo option that's more comparable to this Dell, but if I know Apple right, they will not have options for the highest processor speeds in that model.bigmudcake said:So since the Dell Laptop is in a lower segment even though it has a Core Duo 1.83Mhz, 2Gb RAM, 100Gb HDD, then maybe I should also expect Apple to release an iBook with the same specs as the Macbook Pro in order for the iBook to compete in the same lower segment.
QCassidy352 said:such as? spyware and viruses?
gekko513 said:Well, yes, Apple will probably release an iBook replacement with a Core Duo option that's more comparable to this Dell, but if I know Apple right, they will not have options for the highest processor speeds in that model.
But the Dell doesn't have the same specs as the MacBook pro as you seem to claim again. It has the option for the same speed processor and the option for the same amount of RAM, that's all.
What price difference? Are you reading any of the answers you're getting here? The PC laptops with the same specs as the MacBook pro are also the same price as the MacBook pro.bigmudcake said:Not enough to justify the price difference.
The Dell has 1280x800, the MacBook pro has 1440x900bigmudcake said:....and the same size screen
bigmudcake said:Both OS's are capable of getting spyware and viruses,
OSX even more so recently with the introduction of widgets,
a virus writers dream with high level scripting and easy install
of payload.
I can also be very critical of Windows with its deficiencies in design
and security which makes it a virus/spyware haven.
But I believe all have their good and bad.
Not enough to justify the price difference.
bigmudcake said:Hi all,
$2,256 Dell Inspiron 6400 Laptop
- Windows XP Pro, MS Works 7
$4,167 MacBook Pro
- OSX 10.4 Tiger, iLife 06
Its interesting to see the price difference.
gekko513 said:Well, yes, Apple will probably release an iBook replacement with a Core Duo option that's more comparable to this Dell, but if I know Apple right, they will not have options for the highest processor speeds in that model.
But the Dell doesn't have the same specs as the MacBook pro as you seem to claim again. It has the option for the same speed processor and the option for the same amount of RAM, that's all.
I'm guessing it will top out at 1.67MHz Core Duo, but even if they had a 1.83MHz option, I would get the MacBook Pro because I need the better screen and the GPU to make it do everything I want.bigmudcake said:That raises an interesting point.
If Apple releases an iBook with a Core Duo 1.83Mhz that you can spec up with 2Gb of RAM and 100Gb HDD and still be $1,000 Australian Dollars cheaper than the MacBook Pro, would you still buy the MacBook Pro ?????
gekko513 said:The Dell has 1280x800, the MacBook pro has 1440x900
Saluki Alex said:How does one compare Microsoft Works to iLife? Last time I looked, Works isn't a photo editor, video editor, DVD creator, and it doesn't allow you to record audio, design websites, or play music. In fact, Works isn't even that good of a word processor, it's just a cheaper condensed version MS Office.
plinden said:If you must compare, you have to choose the market that Apple is targetting with the MBP, which is not the low level cheap consumer market that the Dell 6400/E1505 is targetting. So you have to compare with Sony Vaio and Lenovo Thinkpads.
You don't seem to have noticed my post about the Lenovo T60, a more direct competitor to the MBP, which is AUS$2000 more expensive. Or perhaps you are deliberately ignoring it because it's evidence that doesn't fit your premisconceptions.
How about the Sony Vaio FE590PB, which is the same price as the MBP in the US (I don't know if these are available in Australia).
Anyway, even if you are a troll, as many suspect, rather than just misguided, it always pays to occasionally point out price comparisons for PCs that are comparable to Macs.
When the Intel iBooks are released, we can compare them to the Dells.
Hahahahahahahahaha! You cannot be serious. I've used the WinXP programs and I've used iLife. There is no comparison. I challenge you to take 3 hours of DV footage, import it into a PC, create a movie and burn it to DVD in NTSC and PAL formats, with professional looking menus and transitions, taking one afternoon to do it ... using software provided only with Win XP.bigmudcake said:iLife is more comparable to Windows XP itself in what it offers (not quality though) as in Media Player, Movie Maker.
plinden said:Hahahahahahahahaha! You cannot be serious. I've used the WinXP programs and I've used iLife. There is no comparison. I challenge you to take 3 hours of DV footage, import it into a PC, create a movie and burn it to DVD in NTSC and PAL formats, with professional looking menus and transitions, taking one afternoon to do it ... using software provided only with Win XP.
Then import photos from a digital camera and publish a webpage with a slide show in less than half an hour.
Then take a couple of the clips you downloaded from your DV camera and create another webpage with the clips optimized for the web, again in less than 30 minutes.
The last two are what I did last Thursday ... took me less than half an to publish using iWeb, the first time I even used it ... link