Briefly: Snow Leopard ship date, iPhone 3GS HD video - Page 2

even laptops a 15" MBP with 512MB graphics is going to run you $3000 by the time you add applecare and tax because they don't have the option on the low cost 15" MBP even though the hardware is exactly the same. I can get a Dell 15" laptop that is slightly larger than a MBP and about the same weight with a 512MB graphics card for $1000.

i won't have the same CPU, but i don't care since i'll never see a difference. i've read intel CPU benchmarks since the 1990's and you rarely see any difference in real world performance with a slightly faster CPU

I see the difference with a faster processor because I use my machine for work, but the other posters point that you cant honestly compare the processor speed, the GPU megabytes and display size and say that Macs are $2000 over priced. Its disingenuous. Try comparing a Dell or HP with that has that same CPU, is made to be thinner than the 1.3 behemoths and has a display that is measured by more than resolution and display size.

That is not to say that one doesnt need all that the Mac has to offer, but that is not to say that Macs are overpriced. By that logic then that $1000 15 Dell is overpriced compared to a $400 15 Dell. That $1000 machine may be too much machine for the buyer. In the end, the buyer has to make the choice that suits their needs best. For me, architecture, construction and a deeper understanding of the materials used is very important to my purchase, not just the superficial data that are seen on spec sheets.

Will that Dell have the same display quality? Unibody aluminum enclosure? Magsafe power connector? Slot-loading DVD burner? OS X (legally)? Multi-touch glass trackpad? Backlit keyboard? A charging system designed to extend battery life for years?

Will it come with the same quality and calibre of service as AppleCare?

Um... I'm not sure not noticing you're using a new OS is a particularly good thing. Apple are just laying the groundwork for 10.7 I guess, but sounds a little underwhelming. Not that I'm at all hyped. As long as it's more stable, quicker and more usable than Leopard, that's fine with me.

If its more stable, quicker and more usable than Leopard than you surely will notice that. You just dont have the bells and whistles of previous versions dancing in front of you this time. This is a good thing and at $29 itll likely be the fastest uptick of upgraders by percentage Apple has ever seen. The underbelly changes are quite impressive. I cant wait to see some real world comparisons of how things have changed. Especially after 3rd-party apps are retooled to be 64-bit, and use Grand Central Dispatch and OpenCL.

Yeah, and what's your favorite brand sax reed?

I'm partial to the sound of Mitchell Lurie reeds, myself. I also like FibraCell, since they last much longer than the average cane reed and have a more consistent sound over the "life" of the reed.

it's still $1000 cheaper even after I max it to the same CPU as the MBP and add a blu-ray rewritable optical drive and all the other upgrades. and the size difference is so small as to make it a non-issue

only thing you have to do is install everything yourself because it's unusable the way Dell ships them

How come nobody ever mentions what the cost of Snow Leopard is for people who are NOT upgrading from Leopard? And if anybody knows what that price is, I'd appreciate that info.

Well I'm basing it on what I've heard here, presumably from people who've used it. I think the GM is out already actually. Nevertheless, I don't think the general improvements I'd like to see (updating front row, improvements to the finder and fixing GIFs and proxies in Safari) can be regarded as "bells and whistles". I'd like to see more along the lines of what they've done with stacks. So in addition to my computer actually running faster, I'll actually be able to work faster.

------------------

I think we all understand WHY they don't - because its increasingly becoming a commodity business - just look at the price of dells desktops. But I do WISH Apple would offer us a consumer level desktop - maybe slim tower or something - that had easily serviceable parts (upgradeable graphics, optical drive, maybe multiple hard drives, etc...) that I could run OSX on.

I love my iMac, but I've been frustrated by the aging video card and a broken slot load POS optical drive (that died well after the warranty period).

I have a need for 2 kinds of computers:

1) an elegant one for general use (iLife type stuff) - great for an iMac or mini.
2) a upgradeable utility computer for gaming, dev, etc., which is great for a commodity desktop

I just wish I could run OSX on both, and I'm not about to shell out the bucks for a Mac pro tower that will be obsolete in a couple years.

I realize that Apple doesn't cater to the upgrader - It's just wishful thinking.

you can check on the internet, but there are a few Dell models that will take the current version of OS X with no issues. The Dell mini is the one that i remember for laptops. there is a forum on anandtech where they talk about building your own hackintosh and there are a few motherboards you can buy where you can install OS X without issue as well

-----------

Therein lies the rub. You have to compare apples to oranges to a certain degree, because apple doesn't offer a non all-in-one consumer desktop. This is a hole in Apple's lineup that I think more than a few mac users would like to see filled.

I generally appreciate that apple isn't necessarily interested in this market, but a few of us use inexpensive utility computers for certain tasks and would like to have one that would run OSX.

That's why you hear some complain that - in that respect - macs are too expensive. It's also why a lot of us I'm guessing, have a cheap Dell or whatever hiding somewhere under our desk.

For Apple it's a business decision and I appreciate that, but for me its a product that would perfectly augment my iMac, AppleTV, iPhone, etc.

And you know Apple would do it right.

More important questions... And how many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop?

The reinstalling the OS from a new disc and then cleaning shit up is a major issue for me. i dont want that! The very thick, heavy and weakly constructed case of other notebooks is an issue for me. I dont want that! As I stated before, if a 1.3 plastic case with a VGA port, nonLED backlit, TN panel with poorly tested HW is right for you, then go for it. Dell, HP and other PC vendors make a lot of different machines to suit many needs, while other PC vendors, including Apple, make only a select number of models to suit a select clientele. If you dont fit into that category then you are not their target market, but dont think that Dell and others arent also selling thinner machines with higher-end tech that attempts to match Apple on HW and price, because they most certainly do.



Because the price is well known. Its $169 for the boxset that includes iLife 09 and iWork 09. That is the ONLY way you can upgrade directly from Tiger to Snow Leopard.

They do, its the Mac Mini. But performance-to-performance its quite expensive because it uses notebook-grade components. Your point is that they dont offer a cheap tower with desktop-grade components. That market is shrinking for consumers. In fact, Apples AIOs is the only desktop PC area that appears to be growing. How bout them Apples?

--------------------------

Not to keep beating a dead horse, but it's not disingenuous:

Apple Macbook Pro:
15" 900p widescreen, 2.53GHz Core 2 Duo, 250gig 5400rpm hard drive, DVDRW, 4 gig RAM, backlit keyboard, wireless n

the price is 1699.00

Dell Studio 15:
15" 900p widescreen, 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo (closest match), 250gig 5400rpm hard drive, DVDRW, 4 gig RAM, backlit keyboard, wireless n

the price is 999.00, for a difference of 700.00

What can be argued is that OSX is better and iLife is better than what is available on Windows. The industrial design of the Apple is better. OK, but the argument that apple laptops are comparably priced to similarly configured windows laptops is the disingenuous one.

I've said before that I'll buy iMacs, minis, iPhones, Apple TVs all day long, but for a laptop that I use simply to get work done there is no choice to be made. Apple laptops are very much overpriced. For some its worth it, but for most it isn't.

From Answerbag:

There are several factors, needless to say, even if it's the same person counting, the # of licks will differ at each attempt.

If you wanted to look at it semi-scientifically, the number of licks needed depend on these factors:

* Pressure per square inch the tongue is applied to the surface of the tootsie pop (TP)
* The average amount of square inch in contact between tongue and TP
* At what measurement from the center of the stick of the TP at which you declare that you have reached the center of the TP.
* The rotation factor of the TP - if the eater continues to lick one specific portion only to reach the center faster - or if licks are distributed evenly around the outer surface area of TP.

And to a lesser extent:

* Ambient temperature
* Use of teeth / or lack of teeth of eater
* Hunger of TP eater
* Boredom of TP eater
* Age of TP

The mac mini doesn't fit the criteria. It's essentially an low-end iMac without the screen.

You only quoted part of my post - yes I know that the market is shrinking - I said as much.

I only said it was wishful thinking, because that type of computer is still very useful to me.

You will have to pay full price for the "box-set" from what I understand. It's $169 i think?

Your example proves my point. Your only comparing this that you thing are matches but aren't comparing like items in quality, and by extension price. That 2.4GHz CPU in the Dell, how much does it cost in comparison to the 2.53GHz in the Mac? Did you look at the FSB, the L2 or even make sure the model numbers are even in the same class? Why didn't you adjust the $700 raping by Apple for the clearly cheaper CPU in the Dell? Why are you choosing Dell's cheap line and not the one they build to compete more directly with the Macs? Furthermore, you only mentioned the display size and horizontal resolution without mentioning the display type and backlight type. These are important factors for many.

Again, if that Dell with weaker components suits your needs then get it, If a $400 Dell suits your needs then get it, if a 7 year old PC still suits your needs then keep using it, but don't pretend that because a more expensive item doesn't suit your particular needs means you are getting raped by Apple because it simply isn't true.

for whatever reason Dell's cheaper line can be configured with better components than the expensive line. unless you are doing some specialized work you will never notice any difference from a 2.4GHZ to a 2.53GHZ.

i remember Intel used to pull these stunts in the 1990's with crazy CPU prices for tiny speed increases. Now with the GPU being more important, on the cheap Dell you can get an ATI 4570 graphics card as an option where with an MBP you have to choose the most expensive model to get the nice graphics. Dell offers the same CPU, but it's not worth the $175 upgrade.

unlike Apple, with Dell you can literally customize every single component of you computer and it's custom built just for you

There is no "whatever reason" here. We are talking about technology, about rudimentary physics. For the same reason desktop components are faster AND cheaper than notebook components, notebook conponents that are larger and/or have a higher TDP are cheaper than the more condensed and cooler running components. There is absolutely no mystery here.

And yet again, if those machines appeal to your needs then go for it but stop with the comments that Apple is ripping people off when the evidence shows other vendors selling machines at comparable prices for same type computer with the same basic components.

I already agreed that you should buy what suits your needs - that wasn't my point. And you're being dramatic - I never said Apple was "raping" me or anyone else. I said I buy their products and like them very much.


The components are not weaker. Both processors are Core 2 Duo at very close clock speeds. I could have upgraded that to a 2.8 for a few extra bucks and still been 600 or so cheaper, but those were the closest match. The FSB on both is 1066 and the cache on both is 3MB. The Dell has a 15" LED, just like the Apple. They may even be from the same manufacturer, since there are only a few of them.

I picked the mid-level Dell to compare to the lowest entry for a 15" Macbook. I would have compared it to the regular macbook rather than the macbook pro, but Apple doesn't offer a regular macbook with a 15" screen.

You're really reaching here which is the point I am trying to make. You said Apple laptops are better and I happen to agree with you. Your point was that the argument that windows laptops are cheaper was disingenuous and that is where I disagree. Apple laptops ARE clearly more expensive than comparably equipped windows laptops.

I forgot to mention that the Dell was configured with better graphics hardware.

And please stop with the dramatics - noone said Apple was ripping people off or raping them.

Your mention of Front Row reminded me that we've seen little if any mention of any tweaks to things like Front Row, iCal, Address Book, and Mail. The stuff that's standard with the OS and is usually updated with each major OS update.

I know Snow Leopard is mostly about the behind the scenes stuff, but have there really been no updates to these other applications, even minor ones? Front Row and iCal updates would be very, very welcome. I'd hate to think that I need to wait another two years for them to fix some of the poor iCal UI design. And it would be nice for FrontRow to learn a few tricks from the AppleTV (while maintaing things like access to content outside of iTunes, video_TS files, etc).

Here's a better one for you:

Dell Studio XPS 16 (the highest end without going to Alienware or Adamo which only has 13" screen):
15.6" WLED 900p
Core 2 Duo P8700 (3MB cache/2.53GHz/1066Mhz FSB)
4GB Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM at 1067MHz (2 Dimms)
250GB 7200 RPM SATA Hard Drive (macbook has 5400 RPM drive)
DVDRW
ATI Mobility RADEON® HD 3670 - 512MB (macbook has integrated graphics)
Wireless N

price: 1,159 - still 540 bucks cheaper

Again, I am not trying to beat a dead horse, but come on.

Oh, so close! You had a really good argument going right up until the point where you said "comparably equipped". You guys clearly have a different perspective what what "equipment" should be included on the list to be compared. And until you can agree on that list (which will never happen), the price/value discussion is pointless to continue. Please?

15.6" dell with same specs except .13 GHz less clock speed but better graphics: $700 bucks cheaper

15.6" dell with the slim anodized aluminum case and edge to edge display, better hard drive and discreet graphics: $540 bucks cheaper

15.4" Alienware with same specs but bigger l2 cache and faster hard drive: $400 bucks cheaper

How much more "comparably equipped" can you get - these could be argued to be "better equipped" as far as hardware performance.

Apple buys components from the same companies everyone else does. Screens, hard drives, RAM, chipsets, processors, graphics, and audio chips. What other equipment are you talking about? The case?

The $29 is ONLY applicable if you have an Intel Mac AND already have Leopard installed. If you are using Tiger OS and/or don't have an Intel Mac, you must pay $169 for Snow Leopard, it will NOT install on non-Intel Macs - they are trying to get old PPC users to upgrade to Intel systems. The $169 purchase includes Leopard, so it automatically upgrades your system to Leopard then upgrades to SL. I've read this on several sites, but here it is on Gizmodo: http://gizmodo.com/5335039/the-real-...x-snow-leopard.

And it is a FULL copy of SL, they're basically rewarding Leopard owners with a cheap upgrade, but lazy (cheap) Tiger users must pay more.

There you go.

Thank you.

Yet again to make Wiggin and my argument for it, yet still to see that the machines you UAE for examples aren't using the same priced and quality components. How many times does it need to pointed out that comparing base specs does not mean they are the same component in price and quality?

Geez this is getting old...

There are only a few components in a computer.

- Processor - in all cases they are Gen-U-Wine Intel core 2 duo - in the XPS one they are EXACTLY the same chip. The Alienware is a BETTER chip. The lower end dell is simply .13 GHz lower clock speed. Are you telling me that the ones in the dells are the fake, low quality Intel chips i haven't been hearing about?

- Memory - there are only a few manufacturers out there and Dell and Apple both use them. we'd have to know which brand each has in it, but they are probably pretty much the same. You might be able to make a small argument about quality here, but I'm betting they are very comparable.

- Hard Drive - again there are only a few manufacturers - my iMac has a Western Digital in it. I'm not sure which one is in any specific macbook, but its gonna be a WD, Seagate, IBM, Hitachi, or Samsung, cause those are the only choices. Dell uses those brands too, and all are top brands and of comparable quality.

- Graphics Chip - all of the dell examples had BETTER graphics hardware. Both use either ATI or Nvidia. Both are good quality.

- Chipset - Both are likely the same Intel chipsets.

- Screen (since we're talking about laptops) - Only a few Manufacturers again, Samsung, LG, Hitachi, Sony a couple others. Apple and Dell both use bright, high-quality screens. The XPS dell has newer WLED screen.

- Audio Chip - probably both use the same realtek audio chip.

- trackpad - there are only a few manufacturers and they probably use the same ones

- Optical Drive - only a few manufacturers - both likely use panasonic or pioneer(matsushita i think?). the macbooks have a lot of failure here with the slot load drives. i think the dell xps one has a slot load too which is probaly the exact same one that's in the macbook.

That pretty much leaves us with the case, and the XPS dell (the closest comparison) also sports an anodized aluminum case. Even has some leather trim on it

Those are the essential components - I may have missed something, but those are the essential ones. Apple doesn't make this stuff. They get it from the same manufacturers as everyone else. Which components specifically are you claiming are inferior? If you have a specific example, lets hear it. Otherwise the only differences are subjective ones - but those aren't the argument.

Yes, its quite old. Your inabilty to realize that the same manufacturer makes varying classes of components that do the same thing but cost wildly differently prices depending on quality and technologies utilized.

Ive explained it several times and you keep posting your rudimentary knowledge of basic spec sheet stats so there is nothing more to discuss until you can realize and/or admit that having the same resolution and size display doesnt mean that the display technologies, quality and costs are the same.

--------------------

Yep the dell I listed uses a newer, better technology for its display. Dell is known to use very good displays with good black levels and color accuracy.

the main components i listed - processor, chipset, graphics chip, audio chip, hdd, optical drive are the exact same components. How can they be inferior if they are exactly the same models of each component?

Cite a specific component.

Nvidia has a Performance chart on their website and the mbp graphics chips are at the bottom

the Ati graphics chips that Dell uses are a lot faster and newer

Yep because they are integrated and probably underclocked to meet heat specs in the confined space of the laptop case.

This idea that Apple uses superior components is just a myth. They use the same commodity components as Dell and HP. It used to be that they used better screens, but even that is no longer true. You can get comparable screens in Dell and HP laptops. Apple has superior Industrial design, they have to pay for the development of their great software (which the others don't have to do), and they probably have higher profit margins. That's why they cost more - not because they use a couple inferior sticks of RAM.

An Intel Core 2 Duo P8700 (3MB cache/2.53GHz/1066Mhz FSB) in a Macbook is exactly the same as an Intel Core 2 Duo P8700 (3MB cache/2.53GHz/1066Mhz FSB) in a Dell.

Several details you missed.

MBP 15 - screen resolution 1440x900
Dell Studio 15 - screen resolution 1366 x 768

MBP 15 - .95" thick
Dell Studio 15 - 1.5" thick

MBP 15 - weight 5.5 lbs
Dell Studio 15 - weight 6.11 lbs (w/ 9-cell battery)

MBP 15 - 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM
Dell Studio 15 - 800MHz DDR2 SDRAM

MBP 15 - 7 hours battery life
Dell Studio 15 - 6 hours battery life (w/ 9-cell battery)

MBP 15 - unibody aluminum
Dell Studio 15 - plastic parts

MBP 15 - multi-touch glass trackpad
Dell Studio 15 - two button single touch trackpad

This isn't entirely true. Apple's motherboards are custom designed, Apple has gotten custom CPU's from Intel, and the NVIDIA GeForce 9400M was originally a custom design for Apple.

Eventually these parts move on to be sold as commodity parts for the rest of the PC industry. But they were originally designed for Apple

You don't understand how to read the chart. You have to understand when you pick a mobile graphics card you are balancing performance with energy consumption and heat generation.

The faster the graphics card the more energy it consumes, the more heat it generates, which makes for a larger heavier notebook with loud fans and crappy battery life.

The Nividia 9400 balances this equation to offer decent performance with efficient energy consumption and minimal heat generation, so that the MacBook Pro can be relatively light and thin.