Dell XPS M1330 better quality than Macbook?

[TheStu]

That is a whole lot to quote... so I won't.

I checked out the AVSForums, in the Mac section, like you suggested, but the only things I found were

Lots of people want to use the Mac Mini as an HTPC (and it makes sense) and that the Mac Mini cannot playback 1080p h264 files at 40Mb(or was it B?)/s. Except this one guy heard his friend say that is boss' daughter's boyfriend's cousin's dog's trainer had some success with that playback in Windows with CoreAV. (Ok, not quite as convoluted, but it is late... or early... take your pick)

All I can offer to this conversation are my own personal observations, I have no numbers to back it up since I never thought I would have to.

Pretty much all HD video that I play in OS X looks gorgeous, be it movie trailers from Apple, BluRay/HD-DVD Rips, or HD TV off my TV Tuner. It is crystal clear, and so long as I keep in mind the 720P limitation that I have found (both in terms of screen size and playback ability) I have no problems with it.

Trying to do the same in Windows... they still look good, because well they are 720P, but I don't know, the colors look better under OS X (neither has been changed from stock calibration), the de-interlacing is better in OS X (A little better in VLC than Quicktime, but for whatever reason, I prefer using Quicktime) and DVDs just play look incredibly in OS X as compared to Windows.

I have begun to gather that MOSX is a bit of a quality snob (nothing to be ashamed of, I am for audio, and most everything else... well, within my budget ) and regardless of how valid his claims are, I would suggest you get down to a store and look at the screens yourself. If you can, disregard what we have said, try to go down there without anything coloring your decision. Go to a BestBuy, or a CompUSA (even better since they sell Macs and PCs) and look for yourself. Try and get lighting conditions as close to identical as you can, same for brightness... and then watch some video, see which you prefer. Ultimately, you will be spending quite a bit of money on whatever you choose (unless you get one for $50) so you want to make sure that you are happy with your purchase, and once you are happy, try to avoid or ignore those people that try to convince you that what you bought is wrong just because they either prefer something else, or because they think that this other thing is better. Now admittedly, if they can bring you cold hard numbers, then that is a slightly different situation, but still, don't let them turn you off from getting what you want to get.

 

[mosx]

Pretty much all HD video that I play in OS X looks gorgeous, be it movie trailers from Apple, BluRay/HD-DVD Rips, or HD TV off my TV Tuner. It is crystal clear, and so long as I keep in mind the 720P limitation that I have found (both in terms of screen size and playback ability) I have no problems with it.

Trying to do the same in Windows... they still look good, because well they are 720P, but I don't know, the colors look better under OS X (neither has been changed from stock calibration), the de-interlacing is better in OS X (A little better in VLC than Quicktime, but for whatever reason, I prefer using Quicktime) and DVDs just play look incredibly in OS X as compared to Windows.

Software used for DVD playback in Windows?

One of the biggest complaints against the Mac by the HTPC crowd is the quality (or lack thereof) of DVDs in OS X. You can search the AVS forum for some threads from not too long ago where a guy posted comparison screenshots between DVD Player and the various Windows DVD Players. DVD Player was soft, detail was lost, colors were washed out. When fullscreen, DVD Player simply stretches the image and doesn't properly upscale it like Windows DVD players do.

I'm on my second MacBook now and I've had a number of new Windows PCs in the last two years. I'm on my 3rd this year. Each time the results have been the same. The PC has blown away the Mac when it came to video playback.

If you're using Quicktime to check the video playback of 720p videos in Windows, DON'T. As I said in my earlier post, Quicktime under Windows is absolutely terrible. Unnecessarily high CPU use, page tearing, dropped frames.. you name the problem and Quicktime in Windows has it. Apple really needs to step up in that department.

 

[gnasher729]

The Dell M1330 is a better laptop then the Macbook in EVERY aspect. Its lighter, has LED screen, santa rosa, dedicated graphics, longer battery (yes it does), everything is faster and better. There is no comparison. Hopefully Apple will raise the bar with the next iteration of the Macbook but for the time being Dell has them ******* on.

It might be if you love to give free support to people. I hate helping people with their computers. That's why I recommend they buy Macs. Less work for me that way.

 

[alebar14]

Give us a break folks ! Shall we just enjoy whatever Apple offers for now. I am blessed having a current technology with a wonderful OS and its great design laptop.

 

[gnasher729]

you know, i did soooooo much research and finally decided the macbook would the perfect upgrade for me. small footprint, fast, long battery life, and i can afford to switch to osx. but after that gpu rant, now i'm wondering if i should get the m1330 instead with the dedicated gpu. i don't play any games, which is why i thought i'd never need it, but i do want to use my new laptop to hook up to my plasma and play movies with. if the picture difference (even with an upgraded SR graphics chip) is going to be worse than having a dedicated gpu, should i still get the macbook?

You definitely don't need a dedicated GPU unless you are using high end video games (and for certain video apps, but for those you would buy an eight core MacPro anyway and not a laptop). Unlike Vista, MacOS X uses graphic effects in the user interface in a very efficient way.

 

[gnasher729]

From what I remember, the Intel X3100 is quite good at handling video playback, and even the 950 is adequate. Now if you want 1080p, you will probably need something with a video card that has built-in h.264 encoding, which is uncommon in budget laptops.

When you think about it, 1080p (that is 1920 x 1080 resolution) is rather pointless for playback on a MacBook (1280 x 800 resolution). You are just wasting lots of time decoding pixels that will never appear on the screen.

 

[elppa]

The M1330 is what the 13" MBP could've been.

The form factor is nice, but the attention to detail in the styling would not measure up to Apple's standards.

So you're saying Apple's design would be inferior to the Dell design?

(cleary not!)

I think you misread my posts.

Forum member The Stu has summed it up quiet nicely.

 

[TheStu]

Software used for DVD playback in Windows?

One of the biggest complaints against the Mac by the HTPC crowd is the quality (or lack thereof) of DVDs in OS X. You can search the AVS forum for some threads from not too long ago where a guy posted comparison screenshots between DVD Player and the various Windows DVD Players. DVD Player was soft, detail was lost, colors were washed out. When fullscreen, DVD Player simply stretches the image and doesn't properly upscale it like Windows DVD players do.

I'm on my second MacBook now and I've had a number of new Windows PCs in the last two years. I'm on my 3rd this year. Each time the results have been the same. The PC has blown away the Mac when it came to video playback.

If you're using Quicktime to check the video playback of 720p videos in Windows, DON'T. As I said in my earlier post, Quicktime under Windows is absolutely terrible. Unnecessarily high CPU use, page tearing, dropped frames.. you name the problem and Quicktime in Windows has it. Apple really needs to step up in that department.

I think I was using PowerDVD, but I have since uninstalled my native Windows, only have VMWare now which is strictly there for Netflix steaming and the occasional thing that demands Windows.

For the record I am running Leopard, so it is possible that they fancy pants algorithms they have put in the DVD Player are making a noticeable difference.

 

[steviem]

I work as a Desktop Support Engineer and we recently bought 4 of these on the say so if marketing (basically they wanted 'flashy' looking laptops that were cheap).

I'll get the things that annoy me with it out of the way first.

1) The closure magnets arent strong enough (if it in fact does use magnets) I commend dell for not using an exposed latch anymore, as it is quite distracting, but its just not closed together nicely enough.
2) Lack of Windows XP support: This is the biggest sticking point. We are reluctant to give out Vista pcs ad hoc to users as we are planning a company wide rollout in Q1/Q2 2008, but would rather not support it just yet. Everything installs ok, except for the graphics card, and I am really disappointed about this.
3) Keyboard/Trackpad: This is more of a mac vs pc thing I think. I am very used to the texture of a Mac laptop's trackpad and pc ones either feel unresponsive or just have a strange feel on my finger, also I keep putting a second finger down and get no scrolling which annoys me a bit. The keyboard in silver plastic just feels and looks lacky. They could have used aluminium on the keys. Also, Asymmetry just looks wrong.
4) Ports: Having the ports spread over two sides is just messy now.

The things that I like. However, are:

1) Screen: The screen is very nice and compared to my 2 week old MacBook, is probably slightly better.
2) PCMCIA Card: Having this slot is really useful and I would miss it if I was migrating from pc to macbook. Also, the remote control is a great addition.
3) Casing: The case design is a great improvement over previous dell laptops. they have even used a slot loading optical drive which is nice. I'm not 100% sure on the wedge shape, as it reminds me of my grandad's old Honeywell 286 laptop. I would like to have seen usb ports in the hinges possibly.
4) Extras: You get a lot of nice extras with the M1330 - the Leather Portfolio case, incase style laptop sleeve and some good quality headphones (that I am using for me )
5) Santa Rosa: This is self explanatory. I think apple switching to intel might have made laptop manufacturers raise their game, a couple of years ago you couldnt have bought a desktop rivaling laptop for under £1000.

I personally wouldnt buy a PC laptop, my macbook (and prior to that iBook G4) serves its purpose very nicely. Yes, nvidia or ati graphics would be nice, but having OSX as my primary os is more important.

Dell seem to have hired some ex Sony designers, as when i first opened it I immediately thought 'VAIO'. Maybe it will now push apple to become more creative with their designs and find a way to get MultiTouch integrated nicely to help distinguish their Portables from the competition.

 

[elppa]

Also, Asymmetry just looks wrong.

I'm glad this bugs someone else, yet 99% of PC OEMs still uses this design. In the centre is where it belongs, anywhere else is wrong.

1) Screen: The screen is very nice and compared to my 2 week old MacBook, is probably slightly better.

It has a LED display, so I'm not surprised. Hopefully Apple deems this a consumer feature in the next round of MacBook revisions.

 

[mkrishnan]

Dell seem to have hired some ex Sony designers

The whole thing, down to including a leather sleeve for the notebook, does sound very VAIO. That's not a bad thing for Dell at all.

 

[Roba]

I don't have an issue with the way the XPS M1330 closes.

Drivers for XP and Linux actually can be downloaded from the Dell website for the XPS M1330.

I never really worked out or liked the two finger clicking that you have to do with a Mac.

The keyboard is a matter of preference.

Here is what Trusted Reviews had to say about the XPS M1330 keyboard-

the M1330 is also a great notebook to use….. while the keyboard layout is truly excellent with none of the annoying issues one sometimes finds. Keys themselves are crisp and responsive, making typing a pleasure; while the touchpad below the keyboard is well placed and doesn't obstruct typing.

I would agree with this.

I think that it is good to spread the ports out on both sides of a laptop. I don’t want everything bundled together. Btw, the XPS M1330 has got one usb port on the alternate side of the laptop. It is not like the ports are spread out all over the place.

I work as a Desktop Support Engineer and we recently bought 4 of these on the say so if marketing (basically they wanted 'flashy' looking laptops that were cheap).

I'll get the things that annoy me with it out of the way first.

1) The closure magnets arent strong enough (if it in fact does use magnets) I commend dell for not using an exposed latch anymore, as it is quite distracting, but its just not closed together nicely enough.
2) Lack of Windows XP support: This is the biggest sticking point. We are reluctant to give out Vista pcs ad hoc to users as we are planning a company wide rollout in Q1/Q2 2008, but would rather not support it just yet. Everything installs ok, except for the graphics card, and I am really disappointed about this.
3) Keyboard/Trackpad: This is more of a mac vs pc thing I think. I am very used to the texture of a Mac laptop's trackpad and pc ones either feel unresponsive or just have a strange feel on my finger, also I keep putting a second finger down and get no scrolling which annoys me a bit. The keyboard in silver plastic just feels and looks lacky. They could have used aluminium on the keys. Also, Asymmetry just looks wrong.
4) Ports: Having the ports spread over two sides is just messy now.
.

 

[jeremy6044]

can anyone who's been using leopard comment on the quality difference between dvd player on leopard and dvd player on tiger?

 

[flopticalcube]

I think that it is good to spread the ports out on both sides of a laptop. I don’t want everything bundled together. Btw, the XPS M1330 has got one usb port on the alternate side of the laptop. It is not like the ports are spread out all over the place.

That is a handy feature I wish my MacBook had. Same with my iMacs. 3 USBs, all on the back. I can see why from a design standpoint but functionally its not as good.

 

[mosx]

For the record I am running Leopard, so it is possible that they fancy pants algorithms they have put in the DVD Player are making a noticeable difference.

It definitely makes a difference. DVD Player in Leopard is a pretty big leap in quality over that in Tiger. It's still not up to what Theatertek/WinDVD/PowerDVD/Vista MC offer, but for those who have only ever used a Mac, it'll finally make them realize they've been getting shafted when it comes to DVD playback.

It has a LED display, so I'm not surprised. Hopefully Apple deems this a consumer feature in the next round of MacBook revisions.

I really don't understand how Apple gets off calling the "MacBook Pro" just that, a "professional" system. It uses a consumer level GPU that can be found in PCs costing less than half as much, the CPU is exactly the same as those found in "consumer" notebooks that cost less than half as much, and they purchase their screens from the same manufacturers as all other "consumer" notebook manufacturers. The only thing "pro" about the MBP is the price, which is only slightly ridiculous.

When I bought my first Mac back in March, my friend asked me "why didn't you buy the MacBook Pro!?" He (being a PowerBook owner) was only slightly offended when I said "because I'm not stupid enough to spend $2,000 or more on a system that could be had, spec wise, for considerably less".

can anyone who's been using leopard comment on the quality difference between dvd player on leopard and dvd player on tiger?

It's a very big difference. Almost night and day. In my opinion, its just as drastic as the difference between DVD Player in Tiger and WinDVD in XP on the same Intel GMA 950 based system.

But its still nowhere near as good as what you get with a dedicated GPU and Windows. As I said, this is definitely the area where OS X loses pretty badly and Windows wins by a very large margin. DVD playback on Windows with a modern GPU looks astonishingly good. Unless you have a good hardware upscaling DVD player connected to your HDTV, you will never have seen DVDs look this good.

DVD Player in Tiger still lacks a couple of very crucial features though.

Disc caching (at least, it lacked this when I played with it). WinDVD, and some others, will cache the disc to your RAM and play the movie from there while you're on battery power. If you have 2GB of RAM, even with Vista, you'll hear the disc spin up maybe 5 times per movie and only for a minute or so at a time. This not only greatly increases your battery life (half an hour or more in my experience), but it saves the life of your DVD drive.

Another very important feature (to me) is DVD Player's inability (in Tiger and Leopard) to decode and pass the LFE channel out. Basically, if you're listening on headphones or speakers (no digital output with Dolby Digital/DTS decoding), you lose the bass. You lose the .1 in the 5.1 sound. Now if you're listening on headphones, you're obviously getting only stereo sound. However, you'd be hard pressed to find a Windows DVD player that canNOT decode the LFE (.1) channel and send it to your headphones/speakers so you get all of the original bass.

I can't even begin to tell you how disappointing it is watching a movie where bass is present and only hearing a very dull thud on OS X, where the same movie on a Windows DVD player will give your speakers/headphones a very good and deep rumble. It reminds me of back in the 90s, when the first software DVD players for Windows had this feature... but you had to do registry edits to enable it and you frantically got online and searched for what you had to do to enable it because the movie you were listening to sounded awful. Unfortunately, DVD Player OS X has no option for this at all except a generic EQ.

Windows DVD players can also decode DTS sound, compelete with the LFE channel.

 

[Mundy]

You guys are seriously making me disappointed in my one and a half month old MacBook.

You shouldn't be. These are the sort of people who spend their time comparing penises while the rest of us get work done.

 

[TheStu]

I really don't understand how Apple gets off calling the "MacBook Pro" just that, a "professional" system. It uses a consumer level GPU that can be found in PCs costing less than half as much, the CPU is exactly the same as those found in "consumer" notebooks that cost less than half as much, and they purchase their screens from the same manufacturers as all other "consumer" notebook manufacturers. The only thing "pro" about the MBP is the price, which is only slightly ridiculous.

When I bought my first Mac back in March, my friend asked me "why didn't you buy the MacBook Pro!?" He (being a PowerBook owner) was only slightly offended when I said "because I'm not stupid enough to spend $2,000 or more on a system that could be had, spec wise, for considerably less".

Man, could you come up with a more original reason to not get the machine? 'It is over-priced, waaaah!' is a little passe and un-informed.

Link me to a notebook that uses an 8600m GT that costs at most $999.50, and it better be the 8600 not the 8400, and the GT not the GS.

What would you rather they use than the Core 2 Duo Santa Rosa? God forbid intel sell their wares to someone other than Apple so they can't be the only ones with them. For the record, when the MBP got refreshed, no one else had the hardware that they had, for a good few weeks actually. Apple has proven time and time again that they can get intel to provide them with exclusive deals (3.0GHz Quad Core Xeons on the Mac Pro). Again, find me a notebook that has a 2.2GHz or better Core 2 Duo Santa Rosa (faster FSB) for $999.50

Where would you rather they purchase their screens from? There is no one else. It is not like there are hugely better panels out there that Apple is simply not buying. They are getting what exists.

How is $1999 a ridiculous price? $3999 is ridiculous, $1999 is approaching silly. I scoured the interwebs, and found a Dell Inspiron (not technically in the same class as the MBP) that was $1600 or so configured as close as I could to the MBP (I think the MBP had a better burner, but the Dell had more VRAM). And frankly I would spend the $400 dollar difference to get a Sudden Motion Sensor, backlit keyboard, ambient light sensor, .5" thinner case, aluminum shell, and OS X. You obviously wouldn't since you seem to only own a MacBook so you can justify coming into here and posting un-verified swill on a Mac forum about how much better Windows is at this or the other.

Jeebus, I get so tired of the "apple is too expensive" BS... you don't like it, buy a freaking dell and leave us alone.

 

[lwcoffer2]

I have been saving for a macbook or pro for a while now and I have to agree with mosx on some points. I think the MBP could be priced better, considering the competition. Anyone purchasing a new machine wants to know they got a good value for their buck.

 

[tibi08]

i'm not happy because i don't have a laptop yet. i'll be happy when the macbook specs (and possibly design) are upgraded and i can buy without remorse. or i'll be happy if they don't upgrade the macbooks at all, and i can get the m1330 or something.

it's not happy to be in a holding pattern. maybe in a few weeks we'll all be happier.

I feel exactly the same as you. I was going to buy a new laptop with Leopard in June, but then Leopard was delayed until October. Fine, I thought - get a new laptop in October.

But now, the Macbook is woefully under spec, and needs Santa Rosa, LED backlighting and by the sounds of this forum a dedicated GPU. What are the chances of this wish-list coming true when they revamp the Macbook? Very little, I think.

So the Dell sits there looking all smug and the only disadvantage I can see, other than the fact I don't like Dell, is the fact that it can't run OS X.

 

[mosx]

Link me to a notebook that uses an 8600m GT that costs at most $999.50, and it better be the 8600 not the 8400, and the GT not the GS.

What would you rather they use than the Core 2 Duo Santa Rosa? God forbid intel sell their wares to someone other than Apple so they can't be the only ones with them. For the record, when the MBP got refreshed, no one else had the hardware that they had, for a good few weeks actually. Apple has proven time and time again that they can get intel to provide them with exclusive deals (3.0GHz Quad Core Xeons on the Mac Pro). Again, find me a notebook that has a 2.2GHz or better Core 2 Duo Santa Rosa (faster FSB) for $999.50

Sorry, but the $1,999 MBP doesn't really count as being "high end". A 128MB GPU for $1,999? Please.

Head over to newegg and, for less than $1,900, you can find a Toshiba with a Santa Rosa Core 2 Duo, 240GB HDD (2 x 120GB), HD-DVD driver, HDMI output, memory card reader, and DUAL GeForce 8600M GTs for a total of 512MB of video RAM, running in SLI mode. Yes its "thicker", and the processor is only running at 2GHz. But the dual GeForce cards definitely offset that. And considering you'd be carrying it in a case, the extra thickness is not an issue.

An HP with a Core 2 Duo Santa Rosa at 2.2GHz with 2GB of memory and a GeForce 8400M will run you a cool $1,008 Drop the processor down to 2GHz, bump the HDD up to 160GB and for less than the cost of the entry level MacBook, you get a system that walks all over it and has at least 85% of the "power" of the MacBook Pro that costs nearly $1,000 more.

I just configured a Dell Inspiron with a 9 cell battery, 2.2GHz Core 2 Duo (Santa Rosa), 2GB of memory, 256MB GeForce 8600M GT, 160GB HDD, DVD writer, 15.4" 1650x1080 screen, and a 2MP webcam for $1,489.

A full $81 more than what my first MacBook with a 2GHz Core 2 Duo, 1GB of RAM, 80GB HDD, SuperDrive, and Intel GMA950 cost after taxes.

I scoured the interwebs, and found a Dell Inspiron (not technically in the same class as the MBP) that was $1600 or so configured as close as I could to the MBP (I think the MBP had a better burner, but the Dell had more VRAM).

The MBP having a better burner? Not as long as Apple continues to use Matsushita drives that tend to live up to the four letter word hidden within their name.

Sudden Motion Sensor, backlit keyboard, ambient light sensor, .5" thinner case, aluminum shell, and OS X.

Sorry, but all of those features combined don't equal or justify the extra $500+ cost over the Dell I just configured, especially when you're getting a smaller HDD and half the video memory, and a lower resolution screen.

I also don't like aluminum on my systems. I've seen too many MacBook Pros get scratched and dented from very small accidents that would leave a plastic notebook without any marks. I've also never dropped a notebook or ever heard of someone dropping it. Backlit keyboard and ambient light sensor? That costs maybe what? $20 to put in?

Mac OS X and iLife are nice.. but considering that iPhoto and iTunes are generally the only two iLife apps that get used regularly, the premium you pay is not worth it. For $1,999, a "Pro" system should come with professional features. Look at what you get from HP and Dell in "Professional" systems. You get GPUs that are geared towards professional apps, like the Quadro series, you get 4GB RAM standard on a lot of systems for the same price as the MacBook Pro. You get 17" screens, THREE year warranty standard with optional on-site warranty.

You obviously wouldn't since you seem to only own a MacBook so you can justify coming into here and posting un-verified swill on a Mac forum about how much better Windows is at this or the other.

Nope. I really wanted a MacBook. You can look back at my post history and see that I was genuinely happy to get a Mac and excited about entering the "world of Apple". But after several months of using a Mac and looking at what I could get on the PC side of things for the same price, I've come to the realistic conclusion that I could have gotten a lot more for less money. I've also realized that most of the stuff the diehards say, such as virus and spyware problems, is mostly absolute nonsense. Such as remarks in this thread that sleep mode on Windows doesn't work, or that you MUST run anti-virus and it takes up as much as 10% of your CPU time. I like my MacBook.. but considering everything, it should have cost at least $400 less, while the MacBook Pros are consumer notebooks that should cost anywhere between $800 less for the "entry" model and $1,000 less for the highest end model. Or, if they want to keep their current prices, give you what you pay for. A $1,999 system should have no less than 200GB of HDD space, 4GB of RAM, and a 512MB GPU. The 17" model should have one of those high end 300+GB 2.5" HDDs, 4GB of memory, and dual GPUs with no less than 1GB of video memory.