ive been looking at macbooks. If I get one, I plan on just buying the cheapest one that has the 13" screen. My mom has one and I like it a lot. I know that If I do get one, it will have leopard OS on it, how does leopard compare to vista?
Secondly, does anyone have any good experiences with cheaper people? I dont really want to buy another HP or Sony at a place like best buy, but does anyone have good experiences with some other company? My friend has a toshiba and its pretty cool, etc.... PS, I do not want a gateway or dell, one of the computers my parents have is a gateway and my dad had a dell from his job and both had issues
Ebay is another option I guess, but in a scenario where the thing craps out when I turn it on I want to be able to have an option to get it fixed without paying
Final note: Spore...
first note spore lol... Steve i would recommend if you have any rent to own places down where you at can be a real good option you can try out a few before you actualy purches it... yes sure it can cost a penny after you paid it off but its worth it in the run for some reason...
1) protection if you loose or puter is burned up in fire covered and replaced no extra cost...
2) parts and labor no charge...
3) if you want a diffrent model trade out...
those are some of the benifts of renting to own and yes that is what im doing right now is typing on rented computer from a local store here - pat
I'd recommend finding where you can get an Acer laptop. They're really quite good - had one myself, gave me quite a few years of faithful service, but then I had to upgrade... :(
I don't really like Macs - they're user friendly, sure, but overpriced for the feature set they offer.
So, Acer are good. :P I think they've got some product lines in the US, but I'm really not sure.
Toshiba are good, we've had very little problems with it (I say very little, but the little i did have was a failed hard drive after a year, which was repaired in 4 days, which I thought was very good) and the customer service has been excellent. They do tend to come with a price tag though.
My advice would be to get the best you can afford. You will thank me for it in the long run.
Well, it's a bit of a mixed bag with Toshiba. This laptop's quite good (a Toshiba), but I've had problems -- the LCD screen failed. Twice in two weeks (both of them totally new). But they fixed it quite quickly.
Toshiba have served my laptops for years, and though i havnt owen a laptop since 2000, well i still have that one but it hardly runs win95(its from 95-96).
On the Vista vs Leopard, id say without using eather, that Leopard beats vista several times around. From all that ive heard, vista is just total crap, so much as to people actually reinstalling XP on their newly bought vista-pc's. Mainly because of all the spyware microsoft sends with it, its gonna take a few years of reverseengneering before vista us usable sadly :/
Though id like a Macbook too, for schoolwork, i just dont have that kind of money to put down on it.
Getting a pre-configured computer from a place like Best Buy or Circuit City is a no-no, because you can't configure anything. Buying direct from the manufacturer is the best. And I know that you ruled out Dell, but all my experiences with Dell have been stellar. My dad has had his Dell desktop for about 7 years, and we haven't had any major problems. He's replacing it soon, but that's only because it's old and outdated. And I've had my Dell laptop for about a year and a half, and I haven't had any problems so far.
Do not get an HP though. We've had two HPs (desktop and laptop), and both had numerous problems. And Acer's a good brand, except that they recently bought Gateway... Toshiba's great too though.
If you want to play Spore, you'd probably be better off with Windows-based, since Spore for Mac might not be released for a while.
Though I don't like Windows I would say go with that for gaming (though that may just be me liking it better than mac). Building your own would be alot cheaper, but really restricts you to a pc. Gaming laptops are expensive and not particularly good. AMD is alot better than Intel, Nvidia is better than ATI. Vista is rubbish at the moment. Acer and Dell are both rubish.
Joe
If you're looking for a PC laptop, then I'd also recommend either Acer or Tosh, although they really are pretty much the same these days. Toshiba have a long pedigree with laptops but Acer machines are nicely put together and work well. I bought a Core 2 Duo 2Ghz one for the missus for £400 and it's been a diamond. The built in wireless is powerful for a laptop with about the same range as my Apple...
Now, onto Macs. The price is high, yes, but you really DO get what you pay for. It's an incredibly robust machine with the most advanced operating system available commercially. And here's the real winner: You can quite happily run XP or Vista on it too. Not emulated, but as if the machine was a PC. I am typing this on my macbook Pro whilst rendering in 3ds Max, and in a while I'll reboot and do some work on the Mac. It's like having 2 laptops without the weight. One thing though is the difference between the Macbook and the Macbook Pro is quite significant and definitely worth considering spending that bit extra. It's aluminium casing and advanced battery make it a machine that will outlast almost anything else.
Oh, and the games work beautifully too :thumbsup:
I would go with an HP or Acer myself. My roommate and I run an informal repair business out of our sunroom and we see the least of these two brands (we have around ten customers a week and they are almost all laptops).
The new HP's are very affordable and well-built machines.
I would suggest purchasing your next PC from NewEgg.com. They have a huge stock, fast shipping, and excellent customer service. I have done business with them since 2002 and have had no problem.
While Macs are nice, they are VERY expensive. I would recommend an HP:
I recently ordered an HP DV8000i for my future brother-in-law. It has an Intel Core Duo processor, 2 GB of RAM, and an ATI x1400 256MB video card, all for only $800 shipped!
That's my 2 cents. I'll keep tabs on what everyone else has to say.
Cheers,
Kevin
If you plan on using the laptop a lot - dont go for HP. They wear out real easy, mine is barely 2 years old, and already its on: Its 3rd harddrive, second keyboard, second cd/dvd writer, second monitor, second plugin etc, pretty much the only thing that hasnt had to be replaced is the motherboard. Its spent about 6-7 months of it life in for repairs - argh.
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on August 10, 2007, 08:11:00 AM
I'd recommend finding where you can get an Acer laptop.
... and I would recommend finding that place then moving as far away from it as possible. The laptop that I am typing on now is an acer that my parents paid almost £1500 for two years ago and it already has problems, the lid hinge is cracked and would break very soon if I continued to open and close it (I just leave it out on my desk instead), the DVD player won't play DVDs for films etc, but works ok for games, and the speakers have decided to stop working. In short, I'm not going to buying another Acer again unless they can offer me something very good.
Incidentally, I just bought a pretty beasty laptop from Dell the other day for £772, which is really cheap. Now, I know Dell has a bit of a reputation, but I did some thorough research and in all of the independent computer buyer magazines, they were top of the customer satisfaction league for new laptops, add to that the spec of the system for that price and I couldn't resist. Its due for delivery in 8 days. ()stsfd()
Fred
P.S. The spec is:
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor T7250 (2.00 GHz, 2 MB L2 cache, 800 MHz FSB)
2048MB 667MHz Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM [2x1024]
nVidia® GeForce™ Go 8600M GT with 256MB DDR2
250GB (5400RPM) SATA Hard Drive
15.4" Wide Screen WXGA (1280 x 800) Display
8X DVD+/-RW Drive
Intel® Pro Wireless 3945 802.11a/b/g Mini-Card
Windows Vista® Home Premium
could i possibly review your spec from my point of view Fred:
The processor is rubbish IMO (i dont like intel's for anything but low spec hunks of junk)
the RAM is nice
Pointlessly overpowerd graphics card for a laptop (laptops never work well with graphics as they have to process both drawing on the screen and making the graphics)
Nice HDD
Small screen for such a powerfull graphics card
dont particularly like vista at the moment
oh and here is my spec: all under £300
AMD Athlon X2 64 4200+
1GB Corsair
Widescreen 17" CRT (upgrading to 19"wide LCD No extra cost)
ASUS M2N mobo
nVidia GeForce 8500 G (512)
60GB+40GB (upgrading to 500GB No extra cost)
Joe
Vista is fantastic, providing that you have the power to run it (It's faster than XP for me). Mac OS X 10.5 is as cal said, a fantastic OS. If you're sick of editing the registry or ctrl alt delete, increasing the page size or turning the user access control off like me then it's definitely worth getting. I'm dual booting Vista and OSX right now on my new imac so I have the best of both worlds (They don't have the correct graphics drivers for boot camped vista yet however for proper gaming).
Quote from: star.torturer on October 22, 2007, 03:25:52 PM
could i possibly review your spec from my point of view Fred:
The processor is rubbish IMO (i dont like intel's for anything but low spec hunks of junk)
the RAM is nice
Pointlessly overpowerd graphics card for a laptop (laptops never work well with graphics as they have to process both drawing on the screen and making the graphics)
Nice HDD
Small screen for such a powerfull graphics card
dont particularly like vista at the moment
I'm not generally an intel fan, but I've heard great things about their dual- and quad-core chipsets. I know it isn't the most powerful one on the market, but it is supposed to be a good high-mid range chip.
The graphics card is not pointlessly overpowered for a laptop, it is a mobile card for a start, and so designed for laptops, and also it is one of the few DX10 mid-price graphics cards out there. The DX10 bit is important here, as DX10 is a big step up form DX9 in terms of what you get for your (graphics) processor time.
The screen is actually not that small, certainly its is big enough for my gaming adventures (and yes, I do play FPS' as well as SC4), it is also an HD screen, and the card supports HD rendering, so that will make the (currently few) games that support this significantly better looking.
As for Vista, I got that because it's £100
more to have XP installed, and also I would like to try Vista. I have a feeling I will adapt to it and end up liking it as much as I have XP.
As for your spec:
Quote from: star.torturer on October 22, 2007, 03:25:52 PM
oh and here is my spec: all under £300
AMD Athlon X2 64 4200+
1GB Corsair
Widescreen 17" CRT (upgrading to 19"wide LCD No extra cost)
ASUS M2N mobo
nVidia GeForce 8500 G (512)
60GB+40GB (upgrading to 500GB No extra cost)
The chip that you have there will never run at anything near 4.2GHz, that is just the theoretical limit of the chip's speed. The actual number will be closer to 3.8/3.9GHz probably, here you have a fast chip, but it is also based on an old architecture, so it won't have some of the more modern things you would expect in newer processor.
Corsair RAM is good, but 1GB is getting close to the lower end of the acceptable range now, it will almost certainly need to be upgraded in the 9-12 months.
The screen, I can't really comment on seen as I don't know the manufacturer or anything about it.
Good motherboard.
A good graphics card which is DX10 compatible, and really very similar to the one that will be in my laptop, just with extra memory.
Obviously plenty of HDD space there, which is good, but the manufacturer and RPM of the disc can make a fairly noticeable difference.
For £300 I would be pleased with that lot, but I wouldn't be expecting a bleeding edge rig either, it almost certainly won't be able to run something like oblivion at max screen resolution and with max details, not that I'm expecting my laptop too either, but I expect it to be close to the top.
Fred
hey, thanks for all your input
My situation has changed, while i'd like a new computer I found out I want those savings open for possibly living on temporarily when I move, so I don't have to work as much for a while. I'm finally transferring out of college and into a real university next fall, and I want time to actually have a life and still be able to study and pass,etc
I got my new laptop today, and I have to say, so far I am very impressed with the whole Dell package, it was cheaper than its rivals, with good service and a good product. Whether that will remain the case is a different matter altogether :).
Fred
I like new computers, except for getting rid of all the gimmicks and idiot-proofing.
I'd like a new computer eventually, I like the XPS I have currently (light on RAM but damn fast anyway)
I want an Alienware but I'll probably end up with a more conventional manufacturer.
Unsure if I(or someone else) mentioned this before but from what i gather the best make for a laptop would be Acer.
Ive played on a few mates acers and there really fast, and ther coustumer support is grand too.
Though i dont really like OEM-Manufacturers, and i havnt bought an OEM-Computer since 1995. I Prefer to pick and choose peices myself and build it, why would you buy a preassebled box of legos, the fun is in building & modifying them for optimal looks(or preformance & aethetics when talking computers). Also saves me a lot of swedish crowns, since it actually costs MORE to ship a computer WITHOUT an OS.
I do not have a laptop, but my machine is a custom build by my uncle running Vista Home Premium, and it works fine, aside from the parental controls....still a minor, i am. not long until 18 though. but anyhow, other than the parental controls, Vista is fine.
Specs:
AMD Athlon 64 FX-53 processor (2.4 ghz)
2 GB RAM
NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT
I have had a few funny quirks, such as the graphics card overheating (slightly) and the processor hogging the power supply, but other than that it's ALL good. Don't particularly like Intel, mom has a vista pc with a core 2 duo, and it LAAAAAAGSSSS, while mine is pretty darn good for a single-core. and macs, don't like 'em much either...I have my reasons, such as the VAST majority of games being PC and not Mac. solid, good computers though.
Good luck!
Quote from: Xiziz on October 30, 2007, 07:39:15 PM
Though i dont really like OEM-Manufacturers, and i havnt bought an OEM-Computer since 1995. I Prefer to pick and choose peices myself and build it, why would you buy a preassebled box of legos, the fun is in building & modifying them for optimal looks(or preformance & aethetics when talking computers). Also saves me a lot of swedish crowns, since it actually costs MORE to ship a computer WITHOUT an OS.
I agree: it's quite a nice little challenge putting together a computer. The best moment, IMO, is when you turn on the computer for the first time and it works!
having someone else build it for you isn't bad either.
Quote from: dragonshardz on October 31, 2007, 03:51:56 PM
having someone else build it for you isn't bad either.
But you miss out on all the fun if you let someone else do it :P
and SA, that is an especially golden moment :P
Go with a Mac, they beat Vista laptops/PCs hands down.
As for me
3 year old HP zd8000 with:
Pentum 4 @ 3.2 GHz (x2)
90 GB HDD (May upgrade to 160 or 250 GB)
512 of RAM (soon to upgrade to 2GB)
128 MB graphics card, ATI Mobility Radeon X600
17 inch widescreen
DVD/CD ROM combo drive
Built in Wifi
Built in Bluetooth (never used it yet, though)
Windows XP Home
QuoteGo with a Mac, they beat Vista laptops/PCs hands down.
Windows XP computers, on the other hand, beat the crap out of Macs.
ach, who cares....
and anyway Linux beats you all :P , and then there is the genius that's AmigaOS4
the problem for me is i need a cheep laptop.... CHEAP + VISTER != smooth running. I need it for lessons, which means it needs to boot fast.. LOL never with vista and macs are just not my thing
Joe
Quote from: star.torturer on December 10, 2007, 10:50:20 PM
and anyway Linux beats you all :p
Agreed, i just need to learn the stuff before switching my main computer over, running it on my server/secondary(Ubuntu). Though im unsure of 3ds works on Linux :/
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on December 10, 2007, 09:49:16 PM
Windows XP computers, on the other hand, beat the crap out of Macs.
he he...not sure how you came to that conclusion, but I run XP on my Mac like you run it on your PC, so is that masochism? :D :D
And when OSX 10.5 gets to 10.5.2 it will become the the most stable, most sophisticated OS available commercially.
@Star.torturer: There is no such thing as a quick booting PC, sorry. Simply close the lid and the machine will sleep, ready to awake when you open it again.
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on December 10, 2007, 09:49:16 PM
Windows XP computers, on the other hand, beat the crap out of Macs.
You're kidding, right? I use Windows XP Media Center Edition and I know Macs are better. I just don't have a mac because they're way too expensive. &mmm
Since Vista is so crappy, Dell has an option where you can choose to have XP installed on your computer instead of Vista, which is great (luckily I got mine before Vista came out so I don't have that problem).
-- John
Meh I am talking relative, relative to a top spec vista booting LOL... anything is fast, even my old PC
and anyway... why is it always fight between Mack and Wondoze... i hate both equally... and am too lazy to use linux properly LOL
Joe
Quote from: star.torturer on December 11, 2007, 08:57:45 AM
and anyway... why is it always fight between Mack and Wondoze... i hate both equally... and am too lazy to use linux properly LOL
You're a bit stuffed then...oh, and both OSX and Linux are both grounded in the Unix operating system, so both are as equally stable. And it takes a maximum of 15 secs for my Mac to go from cold to usable :P
fighting over which OS is better is pointless. in the end they all use the same hardware, so what's the big deal? i'll use my vista pc, some of you will use a mac, others linux/ubuntu, and still others will use older OS's (XP, ME, Windows 2000, Windows 98, etc.) The OS does not matter. hardware specs, though, THOSE matter.
but that doesn't mean that you should start arguing over whose computer has the better specs. ;)
Actually, software is everything...Without it you have a box full of transistors and wires, a foot pedal and a cup holder :P
And what most people want out of their software, more than anything, is reliability. Also, having high end hardware (Core 2 Quad for example) and having a standard OS (32bit) is a complete waste of hardware, as the OS can only address a finite amount of RAM per application (2GB by default, more if you "hack" Windows a little) and the processing capability is severely restricted by the OS itself. Both OS X 10.4 (Tiger) and the new 10.5 (Leopard) are 64bit OS's (Tiger was a hybrid), whereas you have to pay through the nose for a 64bit version of Vista, and as for XP x64, don't get me started!
This is where and why Apple machines are more expensive but more reliable. Dragonshardz is sort of right when he says it's the same hardware, but that generalisation is only partially accurate. The core components (Processor, Graphics chips, I/O ports and RAM) are generally the same as what's in a PC, but the way they are integrated into a unit is the key. The software is written for the hardware that Apple manufacture and have control over. A PC is built of a multitude of components spanning many manufacturers who each require a driver for their hardware to work, so Windows has to work with the lowest common denominator. With OS X, because the hardware is a complete "known" quantity, the drivers can be integrated into the core OS, rather than as an add-on, and it's this which gives the OS it's stability.
By the way, I'm typing this in Firefox, running Windows XP SP2 while rendering a 3D model in 3DS Max....and the hardware is a Macbook Pro. 2 for the price of one, each one having it's own benefits.
yeah, cal, you're right. but in the end, each is going to go with what works for him/her, and there's no point in arguing about what OS is better, because some (like myself) beleive that Windows is better and because of that beleif, it is better - for us. Others beleive that Apple is better, and because of that beleif, it is better - for them.
What I'm saying is that if you think that Windows is better, then it is - for you - and you should not go and try to force that on other people. Doing so would be like the Europeans forcing their beleifs on the Native Americans, when they had a perfectly functioning system. I'm not going to go any farther on that, firstly because I am of European descent myself, and secondly because I do not want to get on my computer tomorrow to find that I have been banned.
Well thats what I was essentialy saying... but i have grown to dislike them both equally.
and anyway, Hardware is the only real limiting factor, seriously all cal's points about optimisiation are true, but go look for AmigaOS, a really tiny OS that talks directlly with any hardware, (win win situation LOL :P )
Joe
Okay. Here's what I think about Macs: they're overpriced, and I hate the mouse. :P
But to each his own. I'm a gamer first, so that's why I'm sticking with XP (I've had it since 2001). If I was a content editor (ie. Photoshop, w/ever), I'd end up with a Mac.
This topic reminded me of an old email I saw years ago which I googled:
QuoteAt a recent computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated: "If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that get 1,000 to the gallon."
In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release (From Mr. Welch himself): "If GM had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics:"
For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.
Every time they repainted the lines on the road, you would have to buy a new car.
Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason, and you would just accept this, restart and drive on.
Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn, would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.
Only one person at a time could use the car, unless you bought "Car95" or "CarNT." But then you would have to buy more seats.
Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, reliable, five times as fast, and twice as easy to drive, but would only run on five percent of the roads.
The oil, water temperature and alternator warning lights would be replaced by a single "general car fault" warning light.
New seats would force everyone to have the same size butt.
The airbag system would say "Are you sure?" before going off.
Occasionally for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grab hold of the radio antenna.
GM would require all car buyers to also purchase a deluxe set of Ran McNally Road maps (now a GM subsidiary), even though they would immediately cause the car's performance to diminish by 50% or more. Moreover, GM would become a target for investigation by the Justice Department.
Every time GM introduced a new model, car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.
You'd press the "start" button to shut off the engine.
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on December 19, 2007, 05:46:33 PM
Okay. Here's what I think about Macs: they're overpriced, and I hate the mouse. :P
Overpriced depends on your point of view I suppose. You can buy a PC for around £300-£400 but you get a low end processor/graphics spec...Apples have always been aimed at the professional market and as such the build quality and components have always been the highest spec for the model range. BUT, the when the Imac was released, it became the biggest selling home computer for 2000-2002. It seems a lot of people look for quality and stability over price.
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on December 19, 2007, 05:46:33 PM
But to each his own. I'm a gamer first, so that's why I'm sticking with XP (I've had it since 2001). If I was a content editor (ie. Photoshop, w/ever), I'd end up with a Mac.
I use OS X for pro work (Photoshop/Quark etc), but 3D model and play games on XP, both on the Macbook Pro. So instead of spending a fortune on an Apple and another fortune on a PC laptop of equal spec, I just bought the MBP.
IMO, it's not that the Macs are overpriced, it's that they cost too much. :P And I don't particularly like the mouse either, but when I was in high school journalism our laptops had two-button mice so I rarely had to use the regular mouse.
I'll probably get an Apple once I graduate from college, with Boot Camp so I can use XP/Vista/whatever is out at that time.
-- John
Quote from: DFire870 on December 20, 2007, 06:05:05 AM
IMO, it's not that the Macs are overpriced, it's that they cost too much. :P And I don't particularly like the mouse either, but when I was in high school journalism our laptops had two-button mice so I rarely had to use the regular mouse.
I'll probably get an Apple once I graduate from college, with Boot Camp so I can use XP/Vista/whatever is out at that time.
-- John
Buy a cheap 3 button mouse or scrolly wheel one...works with Macs just as well. That's what I have, cost me £5
I like building my own computers. So, I must say I will never build a Mac.
My latest incarnation of my computer has:
Processor: AMD Athlon 64 4200+ (always had Intel before, I am impressed with the AMD chip)
Video Card: NVIDIA (forget the name) 256 mb SLI-ready, TV output, Dual Monitor Capabilities
RAM: 2 - 512 mb (soon to get 2 - 1 gb to add to the final 2 slots for xmas)
HD: 80 gb Serial ATA (250 gb USB HD)
Monitor: 22" LCD Widescreen Samsung Monitor
My last upgrade, I had an ASUS Motherboard which died on me. I baught a new ASUS motherboard and it was faulty and returned it. I was disappointed with ASUS because I had only had the first motherboard for about 2 years. So, I bought a completely different company (forget the name), and said let's go with AMD this time. I overhauled the computer and re-built it with keeping only the RAM and 2 CD drives for a whopping $450 CAD after taxes. Then I spent $350 on my monitor. I had Dual Monitors running on my computer while I was away at school, it was great for my AutoCAD homework, so much more viewable space! Any CAD Tech would know what I mean.
Lets just say I have been very happy with the new system, the old one was a prebuilt with an Intel P4 2.6 ghz with 1 gb of RAM and a 32 mb ATI video card.... It runs ALOT faster now.
I've never had problems with ASUS mobos... on the other hand, I've had nothing but problems with Gigabyte motherboards. I had to get rid of my old Gigabyte mobo after having it for just 6 months, because it hardware-crashed every time I used a graphics-intensive application.
2 years is not bad for a motherboard at all, considering the rate of technological advances in computing (such as faster, more efficient CPUs, etc). Especially for Intel-derived chipsets - if you want a new processor and you've got an old mobo, chances are, despite same socket design, it won't work, because of updates made to the memory controller and the chipset used on the motherboard might not be compatible with the CPU (because the memory controller used in the motherboard might be too old for the CPU).
I usually replace mine every two to three years, they're cheap anyway (about 110 for a good one... I got this ASRock [ASUS's budget brand] mobo, it's SLI, and works beautifully, never given me any problems... and I got it for $110! SLI mobos are normally about $180-$200.).
Next in my plan would be to upgrade in 2008-2009 some time to a quad-core system.
Quote from: jplumbley on December 20, 2007, 08:34:13 AM
Then I spent $350 on my monitor. I had Dual Monitors running on my computer while I was away at school, it was great for my AutoCAD homework, so much more viewable space! Any CAD Tech would know what I mean.
I talked the tech in the office into to 'test one of the screens for dead pixels' :thumbsup: