So there's a bit of grumbling on the internets that PC World, like, totally sold out and lied about the MacBook Pro being the fastest Vista laptop they ever tested (presumably just so they could get mentioned in that new Apple commercial, right?) shortly before the staff went cow tipping and passed out drunk in a public park. The reality is PC World apparently hadn't tested a laptop faster than the MacBook Pro at the time, and it wasn't until weeks later they tested the Eurocom D900C Phantom-X, which handily bested Apple's lappie by a broad margin. At least that's what PC World's editor Harry McCracken told us, but then again we did hear he recently got an Apple tat and is planning a hostile takeover of Macworld magazine in '08.
Read - PC World's statement about the MBP
Read - ... and their review of the Eurocom
Read - The punter doing the grumbling
Watch - The Apple ad
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
daedalus @ Dec 7th 2007 2:26PM
lies and the lying liars that print them
Xzavier @ Dec 7th 2007 4:15PM
Yup... something is up with those benchmarks. I guess Dell, Gateway, HP, etc... had no idea how to crank out some K/A benchmarks on their own "Windows Only Certified Hardware." And they have been doing this stuff for years!
Now here comes along Apple with their little Macbook Pro thats not even design to run Vista "Vista Certified Hardware" not to mention any other OS and then, *POOF*, overnight they become king of the hill in benchmarks on Vista and everything else, meanwhile everybody else on the planet is complaining how Microsoft made their own OS to slow and it has way too many "compatibly" issues?
I guess Vista needed Steve Jobs blessing just for it to run faster and then installed on a MacBook Pro "Non Certified Hardware" just to get the bugs out!
Come on bro... I ain't *buying* that!
paloooz @ Dec 7th 2007 2:29PM
Wow, Phantom-X is $5158.
Ken @ Dec 7th 2007 3:06PM
Engadget needs to stop reffering to "boutique" brand and model notebooks.
Eurocom puts paint on a Clevo D900C jacks up the pirce a couple grand and calls it product. Sager sells it as the NP9260, NP9261, and NP9262.
The D900C has a desktop chipset, SLI (up to dual 512MB 8800M GTX), and up to 3 HDD's in RAID 0/1/5. No other notebook can come close that kind of power.
These notebooks can be built for as low as $2200, but can be specced above $5000. Eurocom's prices are ridiculous.
Ruben @ Dec 7th 2007 3:31PM
Its a quad-core in a laptop. Its one of the very, very few. To think it wouldnt be expensive because of the performance advantage is just naive.
And just because its a boutique laptop still means its a laptop. As far as PC world's statement, had they said the Mac Pro is the fastest Vista laptop for its price range, then there would be no argument. But they didnt. They said it was the fastest tested this year, a year that hadnt ended. Stupid move.
And, they said it twice, as if i had shit myself reading it once, cleaned up, then continued where i ended off just to have it reiterated. PCWorld is a dead resource for information.
Ken @ Dec 7th 2007 4:58PM
Ruben,
What I mean by boutique laptops are those webstores that just rebrand a laptop that is available elsewhere. FalconNW, Eurocom, and VoodooPC basically slap paint on a machine you can get somewhere else for less. Boutique laptops are rip-offs. For instance. VoodooPC offers a painted D900C (Envy H171) for $5742 base. I can get an exact same unpainted D900C for less than half that price!!! $2500 for some gimmick accessories and paint!?
Clevo is the manufacturer. You can get them barebones from www.rjtech.com. Or you can get well priced Sager (Clevo rebadge) from www.xoticpc.com with or without paint.
Harley3k @ Dec 7th 2007 2:37PM
Harry McCracken? Really?
I thought his name was Phil.
paloooz @ Dec 7th 2007 2:41PM
"PC World's editor Harry McCracken."
stillen @ Dec 7th 2007 2:52PM
More like Harry OnCracken...
z @ Dec 7th 2007 2:37PM
but then what is really a notebook?
http://www.computermuseum.li/Testpage/IBM-portable-computer-1984.gif
Das @ Dec 7th 2007 2:37PM
it was such a stupid thing for them to say since
1. The macbook pro running vista was just as fast as any other laptop with the same specs, which had nothing to do with it being an apple computer
2. For those specs, you're paying the apple premium so any other laptop which cost the same would be faster and any other laptop as fast would be cheaper
LukeA @ Dec 7th 2007 4:54PM
Price out a Mac and a comparable non-Mac, then come and tell me there's an Apple premium again.
Michael Chastain @ Dec 7th 2007 7:09PM
The problem is that with only a few models and limited options, it's difficult to exactly match the configuration of a Mac. I've done it many times with similarly or better configured PCs at much cheaper prices, but let's try the reverse this time. Let's see if you can match either of the laptops I've bought this year with Macs.
1. 17" widescreen LCD, dual core, AMD X2, 100GB hard drive, 1GB, DVD/RW, GeForce Go 7600 w/ 256MB dedicated graphics, ExpressCard slot, modem, wi-fi, card reader, and Vista Home Premium for $700.
2. Gateway CX210 tablet, 1GB, 1.7GHz Core Duo, DVD/RW, 80GB hard drive, card reader, dedicated video card, 14" display, and Vista home premium for $950 (actually paid $750 after a glitch but I'll be generous).
I purchased both of those over 6 months ago, so you should have no trouble matching that, right?
carl @ Dec 7th 2007 7:31PM
That was easy. The Dell 15.4" laptop was about $900 less than the comparable Macbook Pro.
Dell: C2D 2.2, 4GB RAM, 3YR service, 8600m GT, 350GB HD, 1680 x 1050 screen, Wireless N, XP Pro, Upgraded Battery, express card sound card, integrated webcam. $2369
MacBook: C2D 2.2, 4G Ram, 250GB HD, 1440x900 screen, wireless-N, 8600m GT, AppleCare, and all the other non-configurable stuff: $3273.
Josh* @ Dec 7th 2007 9:00PM
Tell me you're not speccing a 4GB RAM MacBook Pro trough Apple's online store to prove a point. Lol. Apple are a joke for upgrades and extras, no secret there. Only a fool would BTO extra RAM through Apple.
Garst @ Dec 9th 2007 5:13AM
The hp dv6500t is about $800 cheaper comparably configured. I used the base configuration for the MacBook Pro with the 2.2GHZ processor at $1999. The hp with the same processor, Vista Ultimate (64-bit), 2GB RAM (albeit, not sure if they are the same speed), 128MB NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS (as close as you can get to the 8600 on the MacBook), added the webcam, wireless N, 120GB 5400 RPM HDD, 8x dual layer DVD burner WITH LightScribe, High Capacity 6 Cell Lithium Ion Battery, and added the $19 recovery CD. That only came to $1195.99. You do pay more for a Mac and a PC.
Garst @ Dec 9th 2007 5:18AM
The problem with the PC market is manufacturers sell crap base PCs. Of course, if you compare bottom of the market PCs to "bottom" of the market Macs, the Macs are going to kiss ass. Apple isn't going to sell people computers that won't work.
raven @ Dec 7th 2007 2:39PM
The apple ads are now stretching itself way too badly... I mean... with the load of crap that it says it's good, why is the PC Vs. Mac ratio still tipped in favor of PC? Ok, fine, PC users are morons, then the point? It's like go buy a mac so you can be cool like me... and make arrogant claims to PC users world wide, whoopy!
Machole @ Dec 7th 2007 3:07PM
I have an idea Apple. Rather than spending 100% of your advertising in bashing Vista, how about using those commercials to actually show off some Mac Hardware or the OS?
Honestly, what kind of marketing is this? If you have good product then why hide it? We haven't seen a Mac on TV since those performa infomercials!
m @ Dec 7th 2007 4:33PM
The lastI also agree that Apple's advertising is getting silly. The latest two seem very childish. I have both PCs and Macs but prefer my PC. However, there is nothing wrong with chosing a Mac but Apple need to show case what they have since now they concentrate more on Vista than themselves.
They say Vista is Bad but they do not sell the idea that Macs are really good. Even one of the ad says Vista is so bad and people are downgrading to XP, which is telling peopel wait on Vista insetad of conviencing them to go Mac...
M
Andrew @ Dec 7th 2007 4:20PM
Apple uses this type of advertising because it sticks vividly in the mind. That's all they need to do to create an effective ad.
daedalus @ Dec 7th 2007 4:20PM
@Machole
THERE IS NO STEP THREE
(step three is a lie?)
robjennings @ Dec 7th 2007 4:33PM
@ Machole:
You seem to know a lot of about advertising. I suggest applying for a job at TBWA/Chiat/Day. It's obvious they need a new account planner or even a creative director to work on the Apple account. Imagine relying on something as tried and true as comparative advertising to overcome barriers in the minds of consumers.
rip @ Dec 7th 2007 4:36PM
Your logic is moronic.
A 10,000 sq. ft. mansion is a lot nicer than a double-wide trailer. Guess which sells more?
Any Mercedes is nicer than any Chevy. Guess which sells more?
Wal-Mart sells a buttload more than Macy's. But which is better?
Vizio sells the most tv's, but they are not the best available.
An assload of happy meals from McDonalds is not better than one steak dinner from Morton's.
Quantity does not mean quality or superiority. It generally means you hit a low price point.
michael @ Dec 7th 2007 5:00PM
@rip:
So what are you comparing here?
Are you trying to say that PC's are the low-end in computers? That less #'s = good?
I use a Sony Vaio, and it works awesome. In some ways, better than my MacBook Pro. It all depends on what YOU think is better.
rv @ Dec 7th 2007 5:15PM
@Andrew- Marketing 101- Never have an ad campaign that bashes your competitors completely instead of promoting yours. It leads to worse brand recognition(though Im pretty sure this wouldn't be a problem for the mac) and doesn't always sit well with the consumer.
rip @ Dec 7th 2007 5:57PM
@michael:
What I was saying is that just because something has market share doesn't mean it's better or the best.
The large windows market share is partly due to millions of people who don't know jack about computers buying the cheapest pc they can at Wal-Mart or Best Buy or wherever. Apple doesn't play in that market so they will probably never have >50% market share. Or even 25%.
And Vaio's tend to be higher priced pc's. A lot of the windows posters on here say the same thing about Vaios as Macs; they are overpriced and they built their own pc that will play Crysis at 500fps with some copper wire, duct tape, a soldering iron and a couple of coconuts.
barlo.mung @ Dec 7th 2007 10:35PM
@rip
Apple doesn't play in the Best Buy market? Last time I was in there I saw some Mac systems. Apple's lagging market share isn't because they don't try to compete with other PCs.
Mateo @ Dec 8th 2007 1:48PM
Comparing pc sales to mac sales is stupid because apple only sells relatively high end computers. Not everyone wants to or can afford to pay that much for a computer.
raven @ Dec 8th 2007 9:01PM
like you said, if PC and Macs can't be compared in sales due to difference in "Class" then why is Macs lowering themselves to beat up the cheapskate PC? Isn't that pure arrogance?
Like, you drive a BMW while I drive a Honda, then you purposely tell me you have more horsepower, better luxury equipment and so on... Isn't that just bullying? So how is that fair?
paloooz @ Dec 7th 2007 2:42PM
MacBook Pro starts at $1999
Kiwi616 @ Dec 7th 2007 2:45PM
Granted that it is a portable....that thing is huge and at 11+ pounds, that's just crazy. But price wise you can almost get 2 macs or 4-5 PCs for the price of one phantom and potentially have a faster computer. :)
stillen @ Dec 7th 2007 2:49PM
Or 12 eee's...and have some money left over to mod them!
ekwmin @ Dec 7th 2007 4:10PM
Anyone remember the term "desktop replacement"? Nowadays they seem to call everything laptops or notebooks, no matter how heavy, or gigantic they are. Actually 17" powerbooks used to be referred as desktop replacements if I remember right. It seems like the term "laptop" is more about the form factor rather than actually being portable. Not to mention that they get too hot to use on your lap anyways, except in the winter when it keeps you nice and toasty. You could probably use them to heat up your coffee on those long trips.
yoshi @ Dec 7th 2007 2:57PM
Meh. I slapped my 30" monitor onto the side of a Mac Pro with the help of some heavy-duty hinges, welded on a case for a couple of car batteries, and added a nice slide out keyboard with trackpad.
It's only slightly more heavy than the Phantom but blows prit-near EVERYTHING out of the water as far as speed goes - laptops and desktops alike. I expect a call from PC World real soon now.
snitch @ Dec 7th 2007 2:59PM
they also forgot to mention that the Phantom-X has a 2.66GHZ QUAD CORE and the macbook pro has a 2.4GHz CORE 2 DUO.
this post really does not make any sence. sure i can build something faster out of my baseman if i had the extra money and time, but also everyone knows QUAD CORE is faster than CORE 2 DUO on any machine. but you guys are also welcome to compare the Phantom-X to the the macpro desktop that comes with 2 3.0GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon processors (8-core)and that my friend makes the macpro the fastest windows running machine ever. it my be the zune banners getting into engadget & Gizmodos heads though
Phil Perman @ Dec 7th 2007 3:15PM
"Your car is only faster than mine because it has a much bigger engine!"
Yes the Phantom-X is more powerful because it has a better processor, thats how these things work. Saying it shouldn't be counted because it has a quad core is stupid. The Mac got beat fair and square.
Oh, and fyi, the Mac Pro definitely isn't the fastest Windows PC out there. Theres the new Dell T7400's for a start, and lets not even get into some of the brutes that Tyan has built in the past
Ruben @ Dec 7th 2007 3:24PM
Actually, no, since Dual Quad Core Xeons at 3.4GHz are out, and Apple doesnt offer it. From Dell:
Intel® Xeon™ Quad processors 3.4GHz, 16MB Cache, 800Mhz FSB
Times 2!!!!
Apple does not update its hardware as quickly as companies like HP, Dell, etc, so they can never be number 1 in the PC world for long.
snitch @ Dec 7th 2007 5:01PM
maybe you should check apple.com and check all the ways you could configure a macpro before saying anything
Phil Perman @ Dec 7th 2007 5:16PM
Ok, lets do a top spec comparison between the Mac Pro and Dell T7400
Processor:
Mac: X7350, 65 nm, 8 MB L2, 2.93 GHz
Dell: X5460, 45 nm, 12 MB L2, 3.16 GHz
Graphics:
Mac: Single Nvidia Quadro FX 4500 512MB
Dell: Dual Nvidia Quadro FX 5600 1.5GB
Memory:
Mac: 16gig
Dell: 32gig (although I could only spec that on the UK site, not the US one oddly)
Hard drives:
Mac: 4 bays, up to 1TB each
Dell: 5 bays, up to 1TB or 15,000rpm 146gig
Now, which of those is more powerful?
Jonathan Bergeron @ Dec 7th 2007 3:02PM
I have a computer that runs a 4.2 - 40. How you like them Apples?
Hollywood Ron @ Dec 7th 2007 3:27PM
But how's it do in the shuttle drill?
XtremeDude @ Dec 7th 2007 4:50PM
I've got a Quad Core sitting on my desk that specs at 5.5 running Vista... XtremeNotebook's Xtreme917V. You can read about it here: http://reviews.cnet.com/laptops/xtreme-notebooks-917v-accelerator/4505-3121_7-32751902.html?tag=pdtl-list
Jonathan Bergeron @ Dec 7th 2007 8:11PM
good in Okalhomas and can pass rush like nobody's business
JamesR @ Dec 7th 2007 3:04PM
When will we stop differentiating Apple from other PC builders? It is analogous to the question, "Should my next vehicle be a BMW or a car?"
Jonathan Bergeron @ Dec 7th 2007 3:09PM
I'd go with the BMW. Cars are so last year.
carl @ Dec 7th 2007 7:42PM
That reminds me, should I buy an iPod, or an MP3?
Ken @ Dec 7th 2007 3:10PM
Devin Hester made a computer?
Ken @ Dec 7th 2007 3:11PM
dammit, that was supposed to be in response to Jonathan Bergeron
singingigo @ Dec 7th 2007 3:21PM
I dropped my PCworld sub this year. I got sick of their lackluster reviews and blatant Apple bias...not to say the MBP isn't a good laptop, but seriously, PCW wouldn't test a decent, widely available configuration of a competitor, well, enough said.