Question from a Thinkpad user

Before I bought my current Thinkpad, about 2 1/2 years ago, I checked out a MacBook. I had a few problems. Then it was a head ache living in both a PC world at work and an Apple world otherwise. At the time I used Palm software, and the Apple application was pathetic (now I use Outlook). Also, the Apple notebook got so hot, I could not use it in my lap.

That said, I have not been thrilled with the Thinkpad. The Wifi is iffy, I often have to reboot to get it to work, unless I am plugged in the screen brightness--well the word brightness does not apply--, and the boot up time is lengthy, even after defragmenting.

I am getting close to getting a new notebook. I live in a PC world at work, so I need to go back and forth fairly readily.

Any comments and/or updates?

Thanks.

 

It all depends on what you are looking for. A new PC is bound to solve the issues you have due to faster processors and a clean install.

I use Windows at work and Mac at home without many problems. I'm sure it would be more seamless if I used Office on my MBP but I prefer iWork. My main problems come when I forget to convert my iWork file into the Office format.

 

1)Either switch to Windows 7 or do disk maintainance on your laptop.
2)In software world less is more install less application = more performance so only install the necessity
3)Update the Wireless Drivers
4)Uninstall useless OEM Software

All your issues would have been easily solved if you asked in the correct places.

 

Which ThinkPad do you have? There may be some fixes for your issues. For the boot time you may wish to turn off any apps that are starting with Windows including the ThinkVantage Tools. They all have their place, but no one uses them all. You might want to try dumping Access Connections for the WiFi. You certainly could get a MBP and it will meet your needs, but it's not a huge upgrade performance wise. Fixing what you've got now seems a more wallet friendly course of action.

 

concerning the heat issue, this problem is still un-solved.

 

heat issue "problems" are subjective

 

Temperature is not.

 

thinkpad not withstanding (coz of the thick chassis) most of the notebook nowadays is pretty similar to the macbook in term of casing temperature.

the original 1st gen core duo macbook pro do get very hot even when on idle. the 1st gen macbook does not get really that hot, in fact, when it is on load, the fan spools up and the thing is cooler than it is on idle, cold in fact.

my current SR 17" MBP does not have issue with heat to speak of.

not to sure about the unibody, i inspect one at the store, and it seems there are no heat issue to speak of.

 

The current MBP's don't typically run hot unless you're doing some serious work/gaming or running Bootcamp. In comparison to the 1st gen MBP's the current machines run ice cold.

 

correct, they run ice cold on os x.but they run burning hot on windows...the op said he used windows at work, so i guess he wants to bootcamp on his mac.

 

Really depends on what his software requirements are. If he is using general business apps like SAP, Excel, Word, coding, etc. Parallels/Fusion would be more than enough. If he is doing 3D modeling, rendering, video editing, CPU intensive work then he'll need to use Bootcamp.

 

The last major issue I think is that Mac still isn't supported in a lot of arena's, though it's getting better. A lot of companies (Such as mobile phone manufacturers) do not support using their products on a Mac. Don't ask me why, but it's still an issue. If you have a company provided cell phone, just make sure you'll be able to use it with a mac first. I think one of the big reasons why it's slow to be picked up in the corporate world is finding IT people to maintain them. They had a posting here for an IT person with OS X experience for 4 months before they finally took it down and hired someone without experience and they are having to train them.

 

Thanks for the feedback. As I recall, when I briefly had a Macbook, it ran hot runing Word using the Apples software (though I am not positive about this). Just to make sure I understand what people are saying, over the last 2 1/2 years the Macbook has improved in this regard, though perhaps not when running Windows software.

Related question: At work I use Outlook. I take it the I-phone can synch with Outlook. What about a MacBook--a little overkill, but what if I wanted to have the same data on the Macbook, the work computer, and, e .g., the I phone?

 

Office for Mac has had performance issues for years. The previous version (which is most certainly what you used) of Office (2004) was not coded for OS X's native language so it had to be ran under Rosetta (emulation). So it's not surprising to hear that you had performance issues. The current version of Office (2007) is written to run natively so performance is better. It runs perfectly fine on current hardware.

There have been several hardware revisions to the Macbook/Macbook Pro in the past 2 1/2 years, and the current machines run much cooler. Mostly due to lower power CPUs, software written natively for OS X, and aggressive power management in OS X. Doing normal office tasks, surfing, watching movies doesn't tax the CPU much so the machines get very good battery life and run cool. Now if you are doing something that really pushes the CPU/GPU you can expect the machine to run warm and the fan to spin up. The machines can get very warm to the touch if you push them hard enough. If you run Bootcamp which is essentially running Windows in a stand alone environment the machine will run warm/hot. This is due to a) the Apple drivers are not optimized for Windows, b) Windows power management is subpar in comparison to OS X, c) if you buy a machine with the combo nVidia 9400/9600 video cards Windows can only use the 9600 which uses more power which results in more heat. Suffice to say if possible it is better to run Windows inside of OS X if possible.

If you use an Microsoft exchange server at work (likely) OS X has the ability to connect and sync directly to the server just like an iPhone. So you can set up your Mac to sync all of your contacts, email, and calendar using built in programs that come free with the Mac.

 

b) is incorrect it is due to Apple's firmware not supporting ACPI 4.0 standard hence overheating occurs.
It is like you are saying Windows should follow Apple firmware standard when it is Apple who refuse to follow the industry standard.
Even Linux uses ACPI...

 

No, I'm referring to the battery life of Window's notebooks vs. Mac notebooks running similar hardware. In every test the Window's box could not come close to the run time of the Mac. This points directly to OS optimizations and the tight integration of hardware to software for the Mac portables. There have been several articles at Anandtech that mention this issue. Here's a couple..

http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=3435&p=13

http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=3672&p=8

 

1)You have to consider you are comparing different machines
If you want an accurate comparison on OS X optimization you have to compare hackintosh installation and Windows Installation in a scientific experiment where you only change one variable: the OS.
If you use a Macbook to compare it won't be accurate because ACPI on Macbooks are essentially broken but they are the core of Operating System behaviour on Windows / Linux installation meaning if you analyse it carefully more than one variable has changed because Macbooks do not implement proper ACPI.
2)Another reason Windows has lower battery life is the amount of active background process is higher.

If you compare a Macbook Windows installation directly with a OS X installation it is easy to come out with the mistaken conclusion is subpar simply because ACPI which is require for proper operation on Windows OS is broken in Mabooks, and Apple has actually no valid reason not to support it as it is an open standard.
Even the Compliers and documentation are free for download by public.
The more logical reasoning is simply Apple wants their users to think Windows is subpar and want them to continue using OS X by breaking fully compatibility.

If a proper comparison is to be done the Macbook must fully support ACPI or a fully working hackintosh has to be use to do a fair comparison.

 

I think you're missing the point. Today, if you go buy a Windows notebook with X parts that match up part for part to a Mac notebook the Mac will run longer when doing normal work. It's as simple as that. Sure you can do a scientific experiment as you mentioned, but those combinations are not available to consumers. Which is, when you boil it down, is all that really matters.

 

Have you done the comparison you said?
Part for Part includes battery.

 

The best tests performed to date are at Anandtech. In one of the links I sent they compare an X300 to a Macbook Air. The X300 has a more efficient CPU than the Macbook while everything else is very similar (chipset, SSD, display size) and the Macbook has double the battery life (OSX on the Mac vs Vista on the Thinkpad).

Here's something interesting. If you take a look at the Anandtech tests you'll see that the 13" MBP lasted a little over 7.5 hours doing basic tasks. Compare that to the 11.6" Asus EEEPC 1101HA. It is a netbook that has an Atom processor that is several orders of magnitude slower than the C2D processor in the Macbook. The EEEPC has an energy efficient chipset/graphics which is abysmally slow. The Macbook Pro has the nVidia integrated chipset/graphics which is also orders of magnitude faster than the EEEPC Intel solution. Etc., etc., etc., one thing they do have in common is that they have similar capacity batteries. The MBP has a 60 Watt hour battery while the Asus has a little larger 63 Watt hour battery. Surely, one would think the Asus with it's power sipping components would outlast the Macbook? Nope, actually they get about the same battery life (the Asus averages between 6-8 hours).

 

Are the test done idling or one flash surfing the other idling?
The Thinkpad X300 was stated as having a smaller battery capacity than the Macbook Air.
I hope someone can do a valid hackintosh comparison for the sake of knowledge.

 

One test which I have done here is between my ASUS UL50VT, I can actually get 9 hours of WORK done on it ( browsing, flash video, Word, Excel, VNC ) and have my screen at 50% brightness. My MBP 13" and 15" cant even come close. This is part of why I am shifting my on the road machines to the UL series and others at this time.

 

If you use an Microsoft exchange server at work (likely) OS X has the ability to connect and sync directly to the server just like an iPhone. So you can set up your Mac to sync all of your contacts, email, and calendar using built in programs that come free with the Mac.[/QUOTE]

This part I am a little unclear on. So if I have an I phone, I can sycn with my work Windows pc via Outlook (just as I do now with my Windows cell) and also with the notebook?

Thanks.

 

Mac computers sync just like iPhones. It isn't going to be perfect though, depending how extensive your use of Outlook is. So yes, they should sync up, for the most part.

But it should be adequate for most users.