Macbook Or Macbook Pro 13"

[uberlarry]

title says it all

both would be configured to 4GB RAM and 250GB HDD

2.26GHz Model for the Pro

Macbook costs $1717 AU and Pro costs $1966 AU

keep in mind macbook pro 13" don't have a digital line in port(wtf is with that?)
and i need to recored audio

this is for animating

[Jolly]

Macbook pro.
Macbook's suck. They're made of plastic.

[Zombie-Toaster]

Hey guys I have to decide between Cow shit and Buffalo shit!

[Nelson15]

I think normal macbooks are 13 inch too.
The macbook pro has a multi-touch trackpad but the normal one doesn't.
The keyboard on a pro lights up in the dark.
Both have cameras...pro has an SD slot...
yeah theres some stuff.

[bdash1990]

At 9/7/09 04:13 AM, JollySpace wrote: Macbook pro.
Macbook's suck. They're made of plastic.

he's right.

i have a macbook and the edges of the plastic crack and fall off.

get a pro. I'll be getting one in march

[Jon]

if you're certain you want the mac, may as well get the pro.

[uberlarry]

K i'll get the pro thanks for your opinions

[CHRlS]

No, please don't buy it.

I have had macs my whole life. And they seem very cool and neat when you first see them. But once you own them for a while, you slowly see how many apps you will never have until you buy a computer.

A lot of general online games won't even work, they just crash. Sure, the Macs look very sexy and sleek. But on the inside, it is a pussy of a machine.

Your best alternative (if you REALLY wanna mac) is to buy a big mac computer. Set up a nice big monitor, and use Boot Camp to dual boot Windows and Mac, so that you have access to both.

Just, trust me here.

[JamesKnox]

Get a PC?

[ThoseSneakyFrench]

I'm going to copy and paste this from another topic, for emphasis.

Macs don't get viruses.

Of course they do. As Mac gains marketshare, more people will develop viruses for the Operating System. Did you know the new Snow Leopard ships with an antivirus? I have owned my PC for over a year, and thus far have not had a single infection. You do not get a virus by being on the internet. You get a virus from being stupid on the internet. Ultimately, if you know their tricks, there is no way for you to get one. Ever. Antiviruses can only remove infection if you catch it early, they can't stop you from getting them.

Mac runs vista better than PC

No. Under that matte plastic finish, a Mac is still the same kind of processor, the same Ram, the same hard drive, and the same graphics card. The difference is in the specs. A mac with a dual core CPU is going to run Vista better than a PC with a single core. A PC with a quad core is going to run OSX better than a Mac with a dual core.

To use Windows on a Mac, you need to run Windows Vista through VMware. Correct me if I'm wrong about that, but that just added $270 to an already hefty premium.

[CHRlS]

At 9/7/09 07:37 AM, ThoseSneakyFrench wrote: To use Windows on a Mac, you need to run Windows Vista through VMware. Correct me if I'm wrong about that, but that just added $270 to an already hefty premium.

Actually, Boot Camp (a mac app) comes with every Intel mac. And all you need to do is have the start up disc for XP or Vista, and just insert that. And it'll all install.

Only purchase you would need is XP/Vista start up disc.

[closedahug]

do you have an image of that macbook?

[UnreaK745]

I say going for the Pro, simply because it's pro and not basic. Also, I suggest you wait for Apple's new laptop, as I'm sure they're gonna come up with something new and fresh.

[Deadly-Shadow]

Just get a PC, you'll get a much more powerful machine for a lot less than you would get a Mac.

When you buy a Mac, you're paying for the brand name and not the actual hardware inside of the machine.

[Wolfos]

At 9/7/09 10:23 AM, Deadly-Shadow wrote: Just get a PC, you'll get a much more powerful machine for a lot less than you would get a Mac.

When you buy a Mac, you're paying for the brand name and not the actual hardware inside of the machine.

when you buy a pc you only have crap operating systems, and the hardware compability is max, so you'll never see a crash (or hardly)

windows also doesnt support all hardware, sadly, they dont say so, resulting in a slower and most of the time more expensive pc then you'd have otherwise.

Mac supports x64 wich is really fast too.

the boot times are lower (I have a nearly full HD and it still boots in 20 secs, my pc has 20% full and boots in 3 minutes, and yes, the pc is powerful)

I'd say you should only buy a pc if your a gamer or your budget doesnt allow a mac.

[Wolfos]

At 9/7/09 07:37 AM, ThoseSneakyFrench wrote: I'm going to copy and paste this from another topic, for emphasis.

Macs don't get viruses.

Of course they do. As Mac gains marketshare, more people will develop viruses for the Operating System. Did you know the new Snow Leopard ships with an antivirus?

that aint really true, the OS doesnt gain popularity for nothing, and there are really little viruses cause the way its build (linux cant even have viruses)

and you do get a virus from being on the internet, sometimes servers get hacked and malware gets installed on their homepage

also, cause the compability of the hardware is maxed it runs windows better, but you could buy a pc with the same configuration to get the same effect

[ThoseSneakyFrench]

At 9/7/09 11:01 AM, robin1232 wrote: windows also doesnt support all hardware, sadly, they dont say so, resulting in a slower and most of the time more expensive pc then you'd have otherwise.

Windows can support any hardware that it's installed on, while OSX only supports the hardware that mac makes it's computers from.

Mac supports x64 wich is really fast too.

Windows Vista and 7 have 64-bit versions. x64 does not make an operating system faster, it merely allows the system to address more than 4GB of ram.

the boot times are lower (I have a nearly full HD and it still boots in 20 secs, my pc has 20% full and boots in 3 minutes, and yes, the pc is powerful)

My machines are into windows in less than a minute. Again, you don't state the hardware differences in the two computers. If you take a mac and a PC with similar specs, you will find the boot-up time will be similar.

that aint really true, the OS doesnt gain popularity for nothing, and there are really little viruses cause the way its build (linux cant even have viruses)

Nothing is uncrackable.

compability of the hardware is maxed

What does that statement even mean?

[firemaker60]

At 9/7/09 07:37 AM, ThoseSneakyFrench wrote: To use Windows on a Mac, you need to run Windows Vista through VMware. Correct me if I'm wrong about that, but that just added $270 to an already hefty premium.

It's been three years, and yet people are still missing the point...

[Elder]

If I were you, I'd say the pro, but....this is better, for less.

The computer's really looking overpriced here, can you please look into the PC section? You can get things a lot better for the same price.

[ThoseSneakyFrench]

At 9/7/09 11:25 AM, firemaker60 wrote:

At 9/7/09 07:37 AM, ThoseSneakyFrench wrote: To use Windows on a Mac, you need to run Windows Vista through VMware. Correct me if I'm wrong about that, but that just added $270 to an already hefty premium.

It's been three years, and yet people are still missing the point...

You still need to buy a retail Windows disk. What part of that does not click?

[Gortag]

I can't help you decide between a peice of shit and another peice of shit.

[firemaker60]

At 9/7/09 11:27 AM, ThoseSneakyFrench wrote: You still need to buy a retail Windows disk. What part of that does not click?

It's interesting that such an avid user of Newegg.com does not know the right places to look for low priced OSes...

[Wolfos]

At 9/7/09 11:14 AM, ThoseSneakyFrench wrote: stuff

because the hardware is max compability it will run everything better.

64 bit windows doesnt support 32 bit apps thus being pretty useless.

64 bit is a whole different kind of binary, wich is used to calculate things faster, so it really speeds up things, not just more RAM.

also, if you bought vista on a pc that said it did support it but it didnt you'd know what I mean in that windows doesnt support all hardware (frequent crashes in common tasks and stuff)

[tuckerton296]

i advise geting a flame sheld,
get a pc if you realy love macs that mutch go and get a pc and run osx on it

[Rage]

At 9/7/09 11:01 AM, robin1232 wrote:

windows also doesnt support all hardware, sadly, they dont say so, resulting in a slower and most of the time more expensive pc then you'd have otherwise.

Is this some sort of joke? 99% of the time, Macs and "PCs" use the same exact hardware in the first place. If you're upgrading a component other than the hard drive or memory, better break out the soldering iron!. Actually in most cases it's just impossible

By the way, the Apple variant of most hardware has a huge price markup. X1900 XT apple upgrade kit: $399 at the Apple store. This card is 3.5 years old and a piece of shit nowadays! You can find it in new condition on eBay for $50+ or in some stores for $80+

Mac supports x64 wich is really fast too.

There have been 64bit versions of Windows since Windows Server 2003 64bit. Wouldn't surprise me if there were earlier versions. Too bad the vast majority of software out there doesn't isn't 64 bit. Of course, there are 64bit operating systems that AREN'T Windows, too.

the boot times are lower (I have a nearly full HD and it still boots in 20 secs, my pc has 20% full and boots in 3 minutes, and yes, the pc is powerful)

Funny that you mention this. One reason that they boot faster is they're dealing with a much smaller scope of hardware, while other machines have to be compatible with hardware from literally hundreds of different vendors. Macs may boot 10 seconds faster but at least I didn't pay $2500 for a 12gb RAM upgrade kit

At 9/7/09 11:31 AM, robin1232 wrote:

because the hardware is max compability it will run everything better.

64 bit windows doesnt support 32 bit apps thus being pretty useless.

64 bit is a whole different kind of binary, wich is used to calculate things faster, so it really speeds up things, not just more RAM.

It's pretty obvious at this point that you've no idea what the fuck you're talking about. Here's a screenshot of some of the processes running on my Vista Business 64bit OS. See those that are suffixed with "*32"? Yeah, those are all 32 bit apps. Could it be because ... 32 bit apps are actually supported? Hurrdurr...

[JKMonkey]

neither, since all Mac products are over-priced crap.

[ThoseSneakyFrench]

At 9/7/09 11:31 AM, firemaker60 wrote:

At 9/7/09 11:27 AM, ThoseSneakyFrench wrote: You still need to buy a retail Windows disk. What part of that does not click?

It's interesting that such an avid user of Newegg.com does not know the right places to look for low priced OSes...

I'm well aware that system builders versions of Vista exist for about half the price. But that price is not usually worth it. Let's say that you use that OEM disk to install on bootcamp for a mac. However, at one point you no longer need to use Vista on one Mac, so you uninstall it and intend to put it on a different one. You cannot do this, because you purchased an OEM disk with an OEM license, meaning the operating system is tied to the system it is first installed on, and you are not allowed to install it on another one, even if you remove it from the original.

In boot-camp's scenario, it seems more practical to purchase a retail DVD, which is why I mentioned so.

At 9/7/09 11:31 AM, robin1232 wrote: because the hardware is max compability it will run everything better.

That statement still doesn't make any sense in the english language.

64 bit windows doesnt support 32 bit apps thus being pretty useless.

This is wrong. x64 and x86 memory addressing work exactly the same on windows and mac. I run 64-bit vista, and 64-bit 7, and they will work with any 32-bit applications I have, just as a 64bit mac will work with any x86 programs as well.

64 bit is a whole different kind of binary, wich is used to calculate things faster, so it really speeds up things, not just more RAM.

64bit is a memory addressing system, not a binary. There is only one kind of binary, 0s and 1s. If you can provide definitive proof of how 64-bit memory addressing calculates things faster, show me.

also, if you bought vista on a pc that said it did support it but it didnt you'd know what I mean in that windows doesnt support all hardware (frequent crashes in common tasks and stuff)

No, I still don't understand what you are trying to say.

[Rage]

Meant to include this in my first post, but if you've got your mind set on a Mac, go with the pro.

I wouldn't recommend a laptop for animating, though. You're way better off getting a desktop computer unless mobility is a huge importance to you.

[ThoseSneakyFrench]

At 9/7/09 11:48 AM, RageVI wrote: I wouldn't recommend a laptop for animating, though. You're way better off getting a desktop computer unless mobility is a huge importance to you.

Oh yeah, I thought for a second the title of this thread was "Macs rule PCs suck."

I agree on this point. Whether you end on Mac or PC, you should get a desktop. For the money, you get much more powerful hardware. And with a desktop, PC does have one advantage that mac can't even come close to touching- Custom Built.

And robin, I don't really blame you for not knowing what you're talking about, much more all manufacturers for playing off the stupidity of the common man. For example...

[Yiffy]

At 9/7/09 11:31 AM, robin1232 wrote:

At 9/7/09 11:14 AM, ThoseSneakyFrench wrote: stuff

because the hardware is max compability it will run everything better.

64 bit windows doesnt support 32 bit apps thus being pretty useless.

64 bit is a whole different kind of binary, wich is used to calculate things faster, so it really speeds up things, not just more RAM.

also, if you bought vista on a pc that said it did support it but it didnt you'd know what I mean in that windows doesnt support all hardware (frequent crashes in common tasks and stuff)

XP and Vista 64BIT have native 86x emulation, they run nearly every 86x application.

Unless you really require the extra applications of an apple computer, I wouldn't really recommend to get one. Every somewhat serious piece of software is compatible with most operating systems. Not to mention with the money you save you can buy better performing / higher quality hardware and / or a higher quality screen specially made for photo editing and animating.

Macs are shiny, neat and have some nice exclusive applications. Only get one if those are really important to you. Macs being better at photo editing, movie editing and the likes seems to be more like a myth than a fact. The applications you'll be working with stay the same, other than that it's just perference.