I may be wrong, but as far as I understand unless the notebook is running a 64 bit version of windows it can't use more than 2.5 G of that slower 4G. Strangely they don't mention that too often.
It's actually more like 3.2 - 3.5 GB, but it's likely to be a 64bit OS anyway, based on what's shipping nowadays.
The were able to fit it on the Mac Mini. In fact, same size as the original, now it has more ports and more stuff inside, and still has firewire. Space is not the issue here. They could have included it.
Really? Have you even looked at a MacBook? Looked at the relationship of where the battery, hard drive, optical drive and motherboard are?
Because if you had, you wouldn't be making such foolish statements....
With regard to FW, I think they could place it in no problem
Where would you physically like to place the port? Be specific - even better, draw a circle on a picture like this where you think they could place it in "no problem":
As for your BlueRay arguments, there are multiple factors that are in play with video - resolution is just one. Bit depth and frame rates are others.
Up converted DVD's can look amazing. Yes, BR is almost always better, but is it better enough to justify an expensive player, expensive disks and even more invasive copy protection?
Speaking of DRM:
Quote:
Let's look at what else Apple did as far as DRM goes.
Lets look indeed. They put it on at the demand of the content creators. Who was the first to call for it's removal? Who actually did as soon as the content creators allowed them to?
BTW - of the two High Def standards that allow managed copies, who actually allowed consumers to make copies?
As an Apple Sys admin, I have to say that upgrading the RAM on the new MBP is actually pretty tough. You have to take out the battery, remove about 8 tiny screws, and unsnap the entire bottom casing. After you do that, you'll see ALL the guts of the machine, which would probably scare off the average user.
Hmm, that's funny - the new Dell laptops (E6400) we have work the exact same way.
Much better then prying up the plastic trim and removing the keyboard on my Lattitude D630.
Average users aren't even going to take off two screws to a trap door and replace RAM - average users are going to find or pay someone else to do it
Considering resolution of DVD footage, you can see BR difference even on 1366*768 screen. It will not look 100%, but it will still look much better than DVD.
Really? "Much Better" is in the eye of the beholder, and so far consumers are voting with their wallets - and BR isn't exactly on fire.
There is nothing to prove, since no one has proven that Mac internals are any better or any different from PC internals.
And yet you still never address that when you compare, spec for spec, Macs vs similarly configured PCs that sometimes the PCs cost more.
I don't think anyone (anyone reasonable, anyway) will contest that you can get cheaper, less feature complete PCs. But when you make feature for feature comparisons, Apple fares quite well. Now that Apple is on the same architecture as the rest of the world, it makes these comparisons much more feasible and they have been done repeatedly by multiple sites/sources.
Here's the kicker though, call video symphony in Burbank. Largest film school fir avid fcp but most machines if you tour them now, are pc machines. I asked Gregg C. about this and he said the servers are cheap and very powerful. In the heart if Burnsnk no doubt. Peace.
Is this English? Seriously, I've been trying to decipher your last five or so posts but I think I'm about to give up...
I love these ads. Microsoft needs to do more of them and directly attack Apple's (lack of) features and overall prices more directly.
I'm a MacBook owner. I have a UniBody MacBook. It was a replacement for two plastic MacBooks that failed due to Apple's poor build quality.
I also find the arguments put forth by the Apple apologists to be hilarious.
One of the arguments that fails but is used the most is "total cost of ownership". A Mac user trying to use this argument is just downright stupid.
With a Mac Pro or MacBook Pro, you're spending more than double what you would on an equal PC. With the Mac Pro, you can build something with several times more GPU processing power and about 95% of the CPU power for around $800. With a MacBook Pro you can get a PC with the same processor, bigger HDD, blu-ray, a GPU that is at least twice as fast, and standard features like HDMI and card readers for half the cost. When you compare the iMac to PC desktops, there is no comparison. You can buy a better screen plus use actual DESKTOP components and get much more power for several hundred dollars less. I mean, look at the iMac. It's a laptop on a stand. You have to spend $1799 to get dedicated graphics. A $900 PC tower can have a Core i7 and at least a GeForce 9800 GT. Look at the MacBook. That system I compared to the MacBook Pro a few lines up is priced at $1299, same as the UniBody MacBook. Why even buy a MacBook? If you want a 13.3" screen, Dell's Studio XPS 13 offers dual GPUs running in hybrid SLI, an LED screen, 4GB of RAM, and a 7200RPM 320GB HDD for about the same price as the entry UniBody MacBook. It also has a 2.4GHz processor. Look at the Mac mini. $600 gets me 1GB of RAM and a notebook Core 2 Duo at 2GHz with a GeForce 9400M? $600 in the PC world will get me quad core, 4GB at least, and a good GPU.
There are other aspects to the "total cost of ownership" argument Apple fans like to make. One being anti-virus software. First of all, good AV software is free. Secondly, you have to be pretty stupid to get infected these days. IE and Firefox both guard against malware actively, and will give you multiple warnings and try to stop you from downloading malware at every step. Then Windows itself will attempt to stop you from installing and running it. So that part is bunk.
Then people like to go on to the software aspect. Apple apologists like to point out that Macs come with iLife. Well, I just recently reinstalled OS X to remove all of iLife except iPhoto. iLife is the ultimate in bloatware. By reinstalling OS X without iLife installed I have about 10GB more of free space, even though iLife only requires 6GB to be installed. The iLife suite is useless for most people, and iMovie is only good if you want to do Youtube or Mobile Me clips. It's no longer any good for producing actual movies that would be good enough to burn to DVD, which is still what most people want. Even iMovie's newest and most impressive feature, image stabilization, is a gimmick. All it does is zoom up on the picture. So you have to decide between having a full resolution shaky image or a lower quality still image.
Freeware is almost non-existant on a Mac as well. Aside from VLC, Perian, and Adium, what decent freeware is there? Nearly every piece of software wants you to pony up $5, $10, $15 to fully unlock it. On Windows theres a whole world of freeware thats nearly as or as good as the paid stuff. With Windows, you can get by entirely on freeware.
Another aspect to the "total cost of ownership" argument would be warranty and service. Apple is known for not covering basic build quality issues, just ask the first gen MacBook Air owners about their hinge problems. Apple offers NO damage coverage. With a prebuilt PC, the manufacturer will offer warranties that cost about the same as AppleCare that cover accidental and liquid damage. Apple doesn't do this. AppleCare isn't even available for phone support 24/7. And if you're like me, and they replaced your screen with a defective one, you have to drive 75 miles to your closest Apple Store to prove its defective and get a replacement!
Now that the "total cost of ownership" argument is completely and utterly dead, let's go back to the commercial.
In this commercial she gets an HP HDX system. That means for about half the cost of the MacBook Pro she got a slightly faster GPU, the possibility of blu-ray, a bigger HDD, card readers, HDMI, and all of that good stuff.
Sure, the screen resolution MIGHT be 1366x768. It could be 1920x1080 as well, we don't know what specific model she got. However, 1366x768 is a true 16x9 resolution. Which means even though it is slightly lower than the 1440x900 screen on the MacBook Pro, its not the out an out of proportion 16x10 screen. It's a proper 16x9 screen which is perfect for video. And since it will have standard features like HDMI, she can connect it to any modern display (HDTV, computer monitor) without having to use a mess of expensive adapters and cables.
Some people mention "Windows Movie Maker" as the software Vista comes with. That is true. However, unlike a Mac, you're not stuck with only the pack-in software to choose from. It's extremely likely she already has the software she wants. Or she can buy the software she wants and still come in at saving money compared to buying a MacBook Pro.
The best part of the commercial is the comment about the amount of RAM the MacBook Pro comes with. It's true. Apple's computers tend to come with 1/4 (Mac mini) to 1/2 as much memory as PCs do. Some argue that its because OS X is more efficient. That's just a load of BS that you can smell from a mile away. I've been using OS X for years now, as well as Windows for even longer. Windows runs much better on the same hardware, and Leopard is every bit as "bloated" as Vista is.
In the end, Microsoft needs to keep these ads up. It shows what a ripoff Macs are and how you can get much better for half the money by going with a PC.
And to anyone who says Microsoft is "scared", keep in mind that Apple's worldwide market share is only at about 3.5%, Microsoft's is at about 90%. You think about that
If your computer were to crash, which would you prefer, the cheaper PC or the Mac?
If my computer was about to crash, I couldn't really care less which one I have. When they crash, they crash pretty much the same. Or you reckon dead RAM in Mac is less of a trouble than dead RAM in PC..?
No, the Levono T400 uses a 9.5mm drive. It's not slot load, but Macs don't need to be slot-load.
Wow, trolling? Really? The ports having to all be on one side and the hard drive being in the upper left corner is why there isn't room for Firewire. I assumed that the unibody Macbook's slimmer design played a role in all of that, but as I said perhaps it does not.
At any rate, the whole thing seems like a chicken and egg scenario to me. 9.5mm Blu-Ray drives are expensive because only one manufacturer seems to be using them (everyone else builds 1.5-2 inch thick "laptops"). If Apple were to use them in their MacBook Pro line the cost of the drive would decrease due to supply and demand (again, superdrives cost $1k when Apple started putting them in Powermacs). Regardless, there's absolutely no excuse for Blu-Ray not being available (if not standard) in their desktop series.
And that is another form-over-function decision Apple is frequently making.
Jobs: "I want those new Macbooks to be thin as. That will look cool and sell well."
Engineer: "But we won't be able to use some handy peripherals in that case!"
Jobs: "Who cares? We'll just convince our users they don't need it. But they need thin as. Because thin is cool."
You have really low expectations and little computer experience if you think Vista works fine with 2 GB. Pinnacle Studio? Video editing for housewives with not nearly the features of iMovie much less FCE or FCP. Its not even thought of highly in the PC World.
Thank you for opening my eyes. I'll toss away my 20+ years of working in IT and go for completely different profession. Advertising sounds like fun
Studio is best seller in home video editing segment in PC world. I don't know if it is the best in that segment or not - as I mentioned in other posts, video editing is not really my thing. Version 12 works fine on 2GB box with whatever home videos I throw on it. I'm not making fully featured movies, just my vacation gigs. It does work much faster on my new Quad Core 8GB box, though. Hardly a surprise.
And features iMovie has over Pinnacle Studio are..?
You are mistaken. Apple boards are designed by Apple in conjunction with Intel. Apple used to design their boards in conjunction with IBM. Foxconn manufacture lots of things for lots of companies but just because the make boards for Apple and others doesn't mean they are the same boards. Is that really so hard to grasp? They do not use all the same chipsets as cheapo PC's. You just don't know what you are talking about.
So what chipsets are used in current iMacs and Macbooks?
All of you are missing the obvious fact the commercial is flawed from the start.
A film maker wouldn't be looking for a laptop. They would do all do their filming and take it back to a studio or a desktop with at least two monitors, and commence their editing there.
The laptop screen would be too small and the surface and interface cramped and cumbersome to work in.
Lets not forget the jog wheels and other custom (more than likely logitech or other brand) hardware interfaces necessary to accurately craft their "masterpiece".
Then again, maybe I'm getting ahead of myself, and lots of people are learning to do all their editing on notebooks, but last I knew this was not the ideal environment to do anything of worth, thus immediately and clearly invalidating the add from the outset.
Very naiice. Are you in Malaysia? That image has the watermark "PC Modding Malaysia". Ironically I am in Malaysia and looking for a decent PC case last month I didn't see that Silverstone anywhere. Only ugly Cooler Masters. Gigabyte has a few nice ones but nothing I was willing to spend on.
I do have a Silverstone PSU now though. Holding up alright.
Comments
I may be wrong, but as far as I understand unless the notebook is running a 64 bit version of windows it can't use more than 2.5 G of that slower 4G. Strangely they don't mention that too often.
It's actually more like 3.2 - 3.5 GB, but it's likely to be a 64bit OS anyway, based on what's shipping nowadays.
Despite what you wannabe "filmmakers" think, it's still the standard.
http://tvbeurope.com/index.php?optio...1269&Itemid=46
If you can find something newer, I'm game...
The were able to fit it on the Mac Mini. In fact, same size as the original, now it has more ports and more stuff inside, and still has firewire. Space is not the issue here. They could have included it.
Really? Have you even looked at a MacBook? Looked at the relationship of where the battery, hard drive, optical drive and motherboard are?
Because if you had, you wouldn't be making such foolish statements....
Really? Have you even looked at a MacBook? Looked at the relationship of where the battery, hard drive, optical drive and motherboard are?
Because if you had, you wouldn't be making such foolish statements....
So camroidv27 can see what you are referring to...
?*http://files.myopera.com/mkrzych/alb...ray_hi-res.jpg (4052x2943)
With regard to FW, I think they could place it in no problem
Where would you physically like to place the port? Be specific - even better, draw a circle on a picture like this where you think they could place it in "no problem":
http://www.flickr.com/photos/blakespot/3027681748
EDIT: Nevermind, solipsism provided a much better picture
Apple is known for not covering basic build quality issues
Really? Is that why my Mom got her white MacBook case that was cracked replaced with no issue after she took it into the Apple Store?
Is that why I got several replacement iPods with no questions asked after I demonstrated their faulty behavior to the Genius at the store?
So Apple consistently having higher customer satisfaction ratings then their competitors are just a fluke too?
Now that the "total cost of ownership" argument is completely and utterly dead
Now that your credibility is completely and utterly dead, next?
Apple controls the prices of Macs. You're extremely unlikely to find a current generation Mac being sold for more than $50 less than MSRP.
Wow, I guess you have never visited this link:
http://www.appleinsider.com/mac_price_guide/
As for your BlueRay arguments, there are multiple factors that are in play with video - resolution is just one. Bit depth and frame rates are others.
Up converted DVD's can look amazing. Yes, BR is almost always better, but is it better enough to justify an expensive player, expensive disks and even more invasive copy protection?
Speaking of DRM:
Let's look at what else Apple did as far as DRM goes.
Lets look indeed. They put it on at the demand of the content creators. Who was the first to call for it's removal? Who actually did as soon as the content creators allowed them to?
BTW - of the two High Def standards that allow managed copies, who actually allowed consumers to make copies?
It wasn't (and still isn't) Blue Ray....
As an Apple Sys admin, I have to say that upgrading the RAM on the new MBP is actually pretty tough. You have to take out the battery, remove about 8 tiny screws, and unsnap the entire bottom casing. After you do that, you'll see ALL the guts of the machine, which would probably scare off the average user.
Hmm, that's funny - the new Dell laptops (E6400) we have work the exact same way.
Much better then prying up the plastic trim and removing the keyboard on my Lattitude D630.
Average users aren't even going to take off two screws to a trap door and replace RAM - average users are going to find or pay someone else to do it
Considering resolution of DVD footage, you can see BR difference even on 1366*768 screen. It will not look 100%, but it will still look much better than DVD.
Really? "Much Better" is in the eye of the beholder, and so far consumers are voting with their wallets - and BR isn't exactly on fire.
If you read this biased article:
http://bluray-depot.com/blueray/blu-...occhio-release
and spin the last sentence around, Dark Night is being outsold two to one by regular, plain-ole DVD.
That's something to be proud of for such an obviously superior technology?
I like the promise of BR, and own a BR player. But I despise the implementation and the very real Bag of Hurt that SJ commented on.
There is nothing to prove, since no one has proven that Mac internals are any better or any different from PC internals.
And yet you still never address that when you compare, spec for spec, Macs vs similarly configured PCs that sometimes the PCs cost more.
I don't think anyone (anyone reasonable, anyway) will contest that you can get cheaper, less feature complete PCs. But when you make feature for feature comparisons, Apple fares quite well. Now that Apple is on the same architecture as the rest of the world, it makes these comparisons much more feasible and they have been done repeatedly by multiple sites/sources.
Here's the kicker though, call video symphony in Burbank. Largest film school fir avid fcp but most machines if you tour them now, are pc machines. I asked Gregg C. about this and he said the servers are cheap and very powerful. In the heart if Burnsnk no doubt. Peace.
Is this English? Seriously, I've been trying to decipher your last five or so posts but I think I'm about to give up...
I love these ads. Microsoft needs to do more of them and directly attack Apple's (lack of) features and overall prices more directly.
I'm a MacBook owner. I have a UniBody MacBook. It was a replacement for two plastic MacBooks that failed due to Apple's poor build quality.
I also find the arguments put forth by the Apple apologists to be hilarious.
One of the arguments that fails but is used the most is "total cost of ownership". A Mac user trying to use this argument is just downright stupid.
With a Mac Pro or MacBook Pro, you're spending more than double what you would on an equal PC. With the Mac Pro, you can build something with several times more GPU processing power and about 95% of the CPU power for around $800. With a MacBook Pro you can get a PC with the same processor, bigger HDD, blu-ray, a GPU that is at least twice as fast, and standard features like HDMI and card readers for half the cost. When you compare the iMac to PC desktops, there is no comparison. You can buy a better screen plus use actual DESKTOP components and get much more power for several hundred dollars less. I mean, look at the iMac. It's a laptop on a stand. You have to spend $1799 to get dedicated graphics. A $900 PC tower can have a Core i7 and at least a GeForce 9800 GT. Look at the MacBook. That system I compared to the MacBook Pro a few lines up is priced at $1299, same as the UniBody MacBook. Why even buy a MacBook? If you want a 13.3" screen, Dell's Studio XPS 13 offers dual GPUs running in hybrid SLI, an LED screen, 4GB of RAM, and a 7200RPM 320GB HDD for about the same price as the entry UniBody MacBook. It also has a 2.4GHz processor. Look at the Mac mini. $600 gets me 1GB of RAM and a notebook Core 2 Duo at 2GHz with a GeForce 9400M? $600 in the PC world will get me quad core, 4GB at least, and a good GPU.
There are other aspects to the "total cost of ownership" argument Apple fans like to make. One being anti-virus software. First of all, good AV software is free. Secondly, you have to be pretty stupid to get infected these days. IE and Firefox both guard against malware actively, and will give you multiple warnings and try to stop you from downloading malware at every step. Then Windows itself will attempt to stop you from installing and running it. So that part is bunk.
Then people like to go on to the software aspect. Apple apologists like to point out that Macs come with iLife. Well, I just recently reinstalled OS X to remove all of iLife except iPhoto. iLife is the ultimate in bloatware. By reinstalling OS X without iLife installed I have about 10GB more of free space, even though iLife only requires 6GB to be installed. The iLife suite is useless for most people, and iMovie is only good if you want to do Youtube or Mobile Me clips. It's no longer any good for producing actual movies that would be good enough to burn to DVD, which is still what most people want. Even iMovie's newest and most impressive feature, image stabilization, is a gimmick. All it does is zoom up on the picture. So you have to decide between having a full resolution shaky image or a lower quality still image.
Freeware is almost non-existant on a Mac as well. Aside from VLC, Perian, and Adium, what decent freeware is there? Nearly every piece of software wants you to pony up $5, $10, $15 to fully unlock it. On Windows theres a whole world of freeware thats nearly as or as good as the paid stuff. With Windows, you can get by entirely on freeware.
Another aspect to the "total cost of ownership" argument would be warranty and service. Apple is known for not covering basic build quality issues, just ask the first gen MacBook Air owners about their hinge problems. Apple offers NO damage coverage. With a prebuilt PC, the manufacturer will offer warranties that cost about the same as AppleCare that cover accidental and liquid damage. Apple doesn't do this. AppleCare isn't even available for phone support 24/7. And if you're like me, and they replaced your screen with a defective one, you have to drive 75 miles to your closest Apple Store to prove its defective and get a replacement!
Now that the "total cost of ownership" argument is completely and utterly dead, let's go back to the commercial.
In this commercial she gets an HP HDX system. That means for about half the cost of the MacBook Pro she got a slightly faster GPU, the possibility of blu-ray, a bigger HDD, card readers, HDMI, and all of that good stuff.
Sure, the screen resolution MIGHT be 1366x768. It could be 1920x1080 as well, we don't know what specific model she got. However, 1366x768 is a true 16x9 resolution. Which means even though it is slightly lower than the 1440x900 screen on the MacBook Pro, its not the out an out of proportion 16x10 screen. It's a proper 16x9 screen which is perfect for video. And since it will have standard features like HDMI, she can connect it to any modern display (HDTV, computer monitor) without having to use a mess of expensive adapters and cables.
Some people mention "Windows Movie Maker" as the software Vista comes with. That is true. However, unlike a Mac, you're not stuck with only the pack-in software to choose from. It's extremely likely she already has the software she wants. Or she can buy the software she wants and still come in at saving money compared to buying a MacBook Pro.
The best part of the commercial is the comment about the amount of RAM the MacBook Pro comes with. It's true. Apple's computers tend to come with 1/4 (Mac mini) to 1/2 as much memory as PCs do. Some argue that its because OS X is more efficient. That's just a load of BS that you can smell from a mile away. I've been using OS X for years now, as well as Windows for even longer. Windows runs much better on the same hardware, and Leopard is every bit as "bloated" as Vista is.
In the end, Microsoft needs to keep these ads up. It shows what a ripoff Macs are and how you can get much better for half the money by going with a PC.
And to anyone who says Microsoft is "scared", keep in mind that Apple's worldwide market share is only at about 3.5%, Microsoft's is at about 90%. You think about that
Very nice post.
If your computer were to crash, which would you prefer, the cheaper PC or the Mac?
If my computer was about to crash, I couldn't really care less which one I have. When they crash, they crash pretty much the same. Or you reckon dead RAM in Mac is less of a trouble than dead RAM in PC..?
And your point is..?
An HP over an Apple?1 You have to be kidding me.
And yet, 90+ % of computer users is not using Apple. Go figure that out.
And yet, 90+ % of computer users is not using Apple. Go figure that out.
More like 97% worldwide, though HP only has about 25% of that despite their low cost systems.
No, the Levono T400 uses a 9.5mm drive. It's not slot load, but Macs don't need to be slot-load.
Wow, trolling? Really? The ports having to all be on one side and the hard drive being in the upper left corner is why there isn't room for Firewire. I assumed that the unibody Macbook's slimmer design played a role in all of that, but as I said perhaps it does not.
At any rate, the whole thing seems like a chicken and egg scenario to me. 9.5mm Blu-Ray drives are expensive because only one manufacturer seems to be using them (everyone else builds 1.5-2 inch thick "laptops"). If Apple were to use them in their MacBook Pro line the cost of the drive would decrease due to supply and demand (again, superdrives cost $1k when Apple started putting them in Powermacs). Regardless, there's absolutely no excuse for Blu-Ray not being available (if not standard) in their desktop series.
And that is another form-over-function decision Apple is frequently making.
Jobs: "I want those new Macbooks to be thin as. That will look cool and sell well."
Engineer: "But we won't be able to use some handy peripherals in that case!"
Jobs: "Who cares? We'll just convince our users they don't need it. But they need thin as. Because thin is cool."
Engineer: "But..."
Jobs: "THIN. AS."
You have really low expectations and little computer experience if you think Vista works fine with 2 GB. Pinnacle Studio? Video editing for housewives with not nearly the features of iMovie much less FCE or FCP. Its not even thought of highly in the PC World.
Thank you for opening my eyes. I'll toss away my 20+ years of working in IT and go for completely different profession. Advertising sounds like fun
Studio is best seller in home video editing segment in PC world. I don't know if it is the best in that segment or not - as I mentioned in other posts, video editing is not really my thing. Version 12 works fine on 2GB box with whatever home videos I throw on it. I'm not making fully featured movies, just my vacation gigs. It does work much faster on my new Quad Core 8GB box, though. Hardly a surprise.
And features iMovie has over Pinnacle Studio are..?
You are mistaken. Apple boards are designed by Apple in conjunction with Intel. Apple used to design their boards in conjunction with IBM. Foxconn manufacture lots of things for lots of companies but just because the make boards for Apple and others doesn't mean they are the same boards. Is that really so hard to grasp?
So what chipsets are used in current iMacs and Macbooks?
A film maker wouldn't be looking for a laptop. They would do all do their filming and take it back to a studio or a desktop with at least two monitors, and commence their editing there.
The laptop screen would be too small and the surface and interface cramped and cumbersome to work in.
Lets not forget the jog wheels and other custom (more than likely logitech or other brand) hardware interfaces necessary to accurately craft their "masterpiece".
Then again, maybe I'm getting ahead of myself, and lots of people are learning to do all their editing on notebooks, but last I knew this was not the ideal environment to do anything of worth, thus immediately and clearly invalidating the add from the outset.
So says most film schools, such as NYU......
I do have a Silverstone PSU now though.
I love the case I chose for my build:
Isn't that sexy?