hmmm, nope... MacBook beats all of those laptops every which you think about it.... No, I'm not an Apple Fanboy and use Dell, IBM and Lenovo at our office but really, it's been said before and will be said again --- MacBook Pro's are just some of the best laptops money can buy. They're sleek, built solid, fast in every regard and while their OS might bother some die-hard Bill Gates fans, you can run your precious Windows XP, VIsta, Windows 7 in a virtualized environment. Try running OS X on a Dell... Not happening...
This isn't some, douche-bag, argument about OSes. It's about LCD quality, and it's no secret that Apple's been putting crappy LCDs in their notebooks for years.
Running any OS in a virtual environment for more than one or two tasks is a mistake in itself. If I just run windows, I don't need to boot into OSX for anything, so why not just boot into it?
Also, if you want a sleek Lenovo, check out their u330.
Yes, you are a fanboy. Considering its NOT the fastest laptop, the Alienware Area 51 is equipped with a faster CPU and GPU at a lower price. Thinkpads have just as good build quality. Evidently, MBPs have only average screens. The only real thing the MBP has going for it is its aluminum case, looks, and the ability to run the Mac OS at a huge premium. And yes, we can run OS X on a Dell, Google it.
Don't even get me started on Apple's desktop hardware, its a joke. iMacs run mobile chips, and the Mac Pro is shamelessly overpriced. (My $2000 Nehalem setup runs quicker then Apple's $3000 Mac Pro)
Like every Apple fanboy; you don't look at the big picture. Windows is more cumbersome and sluggish then Apple's OS X is because its compatible with EVERYTHING, unlike OS X which is only certified to be compatible with Apple's very narrow line of hardware. When Apple makes a OS that runs as smooth, quick as Windows 7 and have it be able to run on ANYTHING, then you can compare. Its like comparing Apples to much less obnoxious Oranges.
I think this is another example of Apple putting Macintosh down the list of their priorities. A couple of years ago Macintosh would of been at the top when it comes to colour accuracy.
Funny you should say that, OSX works quite well on my XPS M1330. And the pricetag was a lot lower than your fabled MBPs. And it had better specs. And it has a replaceable battery and user-serviceable parts. The only reason "Dell's don't run OSX" is because Apple refuses to let their software run on other manufacturer's hardware, it's not like Apple PCs are better in some way.
Get used to it. The day Apple switched from PowerPC to X86, you lot lost any right to brag about being different.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
hmmm, nope... MacBook beats all of those laptops every which you think about it.... No, I'm not an Apple Fanboy and use Dell, IBM and Lenovo at our office but really, it's been said before and will be said again --- MacBook Pro's are just some of the best laptops money can buy. They're sleek, built solid, fast in every regard and while their OS might bother some die-hard Bill Gates fans, you can run your precious Windows XP, VIsta, Windows 7 in a virtualized environment. Try running OS X on a Dell... Not happening...
http://www.atomicsub.net
And I said it before on Engadget, but that Lenovo is FUGLY
objective statistical data vs subjective descriptions
I know which one I would choose. The data shows the overpriced Macbook in very poor light. It's funny that Apple touts it for Creative types.
And you can run OSX on the Dell perfectly file.
Did you even read the article?
This isn't some, douche-bag, argument about OSes. It's about LCD quality, and it's no secret that Apple's been putting crappy LCDs in their notebooks for years.
Running any OS in a virtual environment for more than one or two tasks is a mistake in itself. If I just run windows, I don't need to boot into OSX for anything, so why not just boot into it?
Also, if you want a sleek Lenovo, check out their u330.
Yes, you are a fanboy. Considering its NOT the fastest laptop, the Alienware Area 51 is equipped with a faster CPU and GPU at a lower price. Thinkpads have just as good build quality. Evidently, MBPs have only average screens. The only real thing the MBP has going for it is its aluminum case, looks, and the ability to run the Mac OS at a huge premium. And yes, we can run OS X on a Dell, Google it.
Don't even get me started on Apple's desktop hardware, its a joke. iMacs run mobile chips, and the Mac Pro is shamelessly overpriced. (My $2000 Nehalem setup runs quicker then Apple's $3000 Mac Pro)
Like every Apple fanboy; you don't look at the big picture. Windows is more cumbersome and sluggish then Apple's OS X is because its compatible with EVERYTHING, unlike OS X which is only certified to be compatible with Apple's very narrow line of hardware. When Apple makes a OS that runs as smooth, quick as Windows 7 and have it be able to run on ANYTHING, then you can compare. Its like comparing Apples to much less obnoxious Oranges.
I think this is another example of Apple putting Macintosh down the list of their priorities. A couple of years ago Macintosh would of been at the top when it comes to colour accuracy.
Funny you should say that, OSX works quite well on my XPS M1330. And the pricetag was a lot lower than your fabled MBPs. And it had better specs. And it has a replaceable battery and user-serviceable parts. The only reason "Dell's don't run OSX" is because Apple refuses to let their software run on other manufacturer's hardware, it's not like Apple PCs are better in some way.
Get used to it. The day Apple switched from PowerPC to X86, you lot lost any right to brag about being different.