MacBook Pro or Sony SR41M/S

Leopard

Aileen_Una wrote: »

Macs are never worth the extra money, sorry can say that as a past owner of both.

Aileen_Una,

It's not about Macs, it's about operating systems.

It's a question of whether, to the person spending the money, any additional cost incurred in buying a computer that can run Apple's operating system instead of Windows is worth it. Many feel that it is. Others don't. But it revolves around the software, not the hardware.

Marty_J

Leopard wrote: »

but it wouldn't be sensible to buy a Mac in order purely to run Windows.

I don't know, it makes as much sense as buying a £1000 Sony. A nice computer is a nice computer, regardless of who makes it.

Marty_J

Aileen_Una wrote: »

Macs are never worth the extra money

Darn it, I wish you had told me before I spent all that extra money. What's the best way to run all that Apple software in Windows?

Are all premium computers "never worth the extra money", or do you reserve such a distinction solely for Macs?

Leopard

The proof of my point is that, nice though it is, I wouldn't have paid £350 for my MSI Wind if it could only use Windows. I bought it because it could be Mac-hacked.

For £350 it makes a delightful little "Mac".

Marty_J

Leopard wrote: »

The proof of my point is that, nice though it is, I wouldn't have paid £350 for my MSI Wind if it could only use Windows. I bought it because it could be Mac-hacked.

For £350 it makes a delightful little "Mac".

True, but if someone is going to drop £1000 on a computer, a Windows running Mac makes no less sense than a Windows running PC.

It's true that you wouldn't be taking complete advantage of the Mac by just running Windows on it, but you wouldn't have the option of running OS X at all on a PC (for the most part).

Aileen_Una

markymoo wrote: »

but you don't say why.... That quote is your opinion, without a reason it has no weight at all IMO



if the OP wants to spend £1k on a laptop, i'd let them, you get a lot more processing power for £1k than you do on a netbook, and i'm sure you'd find it very difficult to play football manager on a 7 or 8 inch screen, nearly half the size and resolution of a 13" screen...

I don't do a lot on my laptop (now work are buying me one), but I'll still rather have something higher end, that will LAST, and the build quality is there, than a £500 piece of plastic, that won't last 18 months from wear and tear...

my current laptop is over 3 years old, and probably faster than any netbook on the market..

M

Yes its just my opinion, and is worth as much as your opinion of my opinion! I also worked in John Lewis electrical for 6 years (worth more than my opinion?) and know which laptops we had the most breakdowns with!!

To those citing SOFTWARE arguements (caps just to make it stand out as not quoting), the OP has cited no special Mac Software requirements, and has not had a Mac previously so does not seem to need it for continuity.

Not only does the OP doesn't seem to have any requirements of Mac Specialities but laptops have finite lives, so paying extra doesn't necessarily mean a longer life, better results can be keeping it running well and extra RAM can be purchased cheaply later in life. My £300 pound "piece of rubbish" is still working nice and fast 5 years later!

As for the budget, this site is called moneysavingexpert, no harm in the OP being given a bit of extra information eh?

Leopard

Aileen_Una wrote: »

To those citing SOFTWARE arguements (caps just to make it stand out as not quoting), the OP has citing no special Mac Software requirements, and has not had a Mac previously so does not need it for continuity.


Not only does the OP doesn't seem to have any requirements of Mac Specialities. Laptops have finite lives, so paying extra doesn't mean a longer life, better results can be keeping it tidy inside and extra RAM can be purchased cheaply later in life. Never mind the £500 piece of rubbish you mention, my £300 pound piece of rubbish is still working nice and fast 5 years later!

As for the budget, this site is called moneysavingexpert, no harm in the OP being given a bit of extra information eh?

You're still missing (or trying to ignore) my point.

If the OP has no current nor continuing need specifically to use either Windows or Mac software, the dilemma then shifts to the next question: namely, which operating system would the OP prefer to use?

Only then does it progress to which particular computer to run that on.

Aileen_Una

Sorry, didn't mean to ignore your point, (have MartyJ and MarkyMoo my hands!).

My point was that unless you specifically require something related to Mac software/OS its a big price jump just to compensate for simple preferences (the fact Vista is awful?).

So, last post here (thanks guys) but was just saying if the OP does not specifically require a Mac - for functions of software or the OS in general - there are other options that provide his stated requirements for cheaper.

Obviously not Mac bashing, if you bought one because you needed it good for you.

Marty_J

An expensive PC will have things a cheaper one might not have though - OLED screen, longer battery life, draft N wifi, backlit keyboard, nice design, metal body etc. The same goes for the Mac.

Leopard

Aileen_Una wrote: »

Sorry, didn't mean to ignore your point, (have MartyJ and MarkyMoo my hands!).

My point was that unless you specifically require something related to Mac software/OS its a big price jump just to compensate for simple preferences (the fact Vista is awful?).

So, last post here (thanks guys) but was just saying if the OP does not specifically require a Mac - for functions of software or the OS in general - there are other options that provide his stated requirements for cheaper.

Obviously not Mac bashing, if you bought one because you needed it good for you.

Fair enough. I think Marty J is off in another thread trying to sell iPhones at the moment, so maybe this is a good moment to address the software point.

So far as I am concerned, it's Mac OS X and not Windows that I want to use for my computing. And if that costs more, so be it. Spread over the life of the computer it's quite affordable.

Having made that decision, I then look around for a computer to run it on. As I have already pointed out, if I can find a better computer than an Apple to run it on, I will.

I'd actually be faced with that problem if anything happened to either of my 15" MacBooks Pro, at the moment. Mine (and my companion's, also) are 2007 versions, each equipped with Firewire 800, Firewire 400, an ExpressCard slot and a matte "anti-glare" display. No way would I (or she) buy a current version of the 15" MacBook Pro to replace one. Apple may finally have relented and restored the matte screen option for it but it's still missing a Firewire 400 port and (now) an ExpressCard slot. :mad:

So, I'd either go in search of a second-hand 2008 version in prime condition or, if I couldn't find one, look elsewhere for a well-equipped 15" laptop from another manufacturer that at least has an ExpressCard slot and Mac-hack that.

I feel that to start with a computer one thinks looks nice and then live with whatever operating it comes supplied with is tackling the dilemma from the wrong end.

Oops, spoke too soon - I see the heroic Marty J's just returned from the telephonic crusades. :j

But I hope you see my point.