Apple MacBook (Early 2009) Review Discussion

This thread is called "Apple MacBook (Early 2009) Review" not "What is a fanboy?". Stay on topic please. Thank you.

 

I can't stand these arguments about how Vista using more RAM is a bad thing.

Your computer won't run faster because you have 2 empty gigabytes of RAM sitting there, instead of 1.

Vista caches data about previously and frequently run programs to launch them faster the next time you use them. Vista puts this information in the RAM because it can then access it very quickly.

Now what happens when you launch Photoshop and open that 1GB file when you only have 500MB free? Vista will deallocate used RAM and give it to the requesting application. This process happens _very_ quickly. IE, any performance penalty you pay here is more than offset by the average increase in speed of using your other, smaller applications.

Ugh......

 

Vista works fine after some minor clean-up work. If you know what you are doing you can get a laptop and eliminate Vista and OEM builder bloat in under an hour. And then once that is done you can populate your system with all the freeware in the world.

My brother has a last-gen MBP and that I might say is worth the money if you have it to spend. The screen is incredible. However, I have seen him run into issues that I never have to deal with. i.e. his scanner will not run in OSX, his new Samsung phone won't BT sync with his Mac, and he had to buy an external memory card reader. All those instances are non-issues with my Asus.

The basic Macbook I don't see being competitive in the 1000-1600 price range (IMO, people will buy them anyway). There are far too many excellent notebooks in that range that have massively better specs and functionality. Honestly, if it had a nice screen I think it would be a much better buy.

 

But honestly though, how can you have a statement like " This is almost double what is used for the arguably superior Mac OS X. Arguably? Who am I kidding, a few minutes in Vista will having you running back to OS X or XP" in a review and not expect people to call him out on it.

If you had every laptop review comparing it to OSX, well, you'd have a LOT of OSX hating reviews!

I'll just link the last 5 non-OSX laptop reviews:
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4853&review=msi+gt627
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4847&review=acer+aspire+5735
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4832&review=asus+eee+pc+1000he
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4831&review=toshiba+qosmio+x305

And surprisingly none of them have comparisons to OSX! Since operating systems are personal preference, if you make a comparison for no reason at all, especially a statement like "Who am I kidding, a few minutes in Vista will having you running back to OS X or XP," you can expect a flameware. Perhaps these parts of reviews from OS X fans should be regulated? Just my 2c.

 

The review has 2,676 views so far and the people that have a problem with it are like 3-4. It's really easy not to call out something you have a problem with - just ignore it.

 

Should I translate that as "it's okay for Macs to take cheap shots at Windows users?"

Most Windows users seem to prefer not to because they seem to acknowledge it is personal preference. There's no reason to compare, as if one can someone be "superior" over the other, I don't know why OS X users can't see the same thing (citing this review.) Maybe I'm just caged in my own world.

 

There is no need to "translate" my words.

As this is going offtopic again, if you have any more questions or you want to continue this discussion please PM me.

 

Personally I feel a critique of the choice of (unabashedly biased) diction and telling the readers how they should think "...will have you running back to OS X..." is on topic, since it is about the review.

But you may be right, pointless to go on.. (that is unless, the next mac reviewer doesn't learn the lesson and somehow feels some urge to compare operating systems for no reason at all, when he's actually reviewing the laptop. Then in that case I do feel this has merit and I wouldn't mind citing this.)

 

Yeah we might as well leave it at that. The author isn't going to change it, and nobody is gonna make them.

But I think you have a point that you made earlier. If the reverse were true, and someone was reviewing a notebook running Windows and then said something like: "you would go running back to Vista in no time if you tried to use OSX" the flame war would have no end and the review would probably have to be changed or be pulled...

 

It's not a valid counterpoint since you can't legally install OSX on a PC.

 

But let's face it... people do. And really even though I won't go into detail since it's not allowed, let's just say it's not that hard to do...

 

Indeed they do. And the fact that they do, in light of the illegality of doing it, and which involves some effort to get it to run properly on some machines, speaks volumes to their confidence in OSX over Vista.

Anyway, this post will likely be deleted for being off-topic. Just trying to reach whomever will read it in hopes of bringing some rational thoughts instead of knee-jerk "fanboy" reactions to unflattering opinions and facts of the respective OSs.

 

Good review. Frankly, the author's take on Vista is pretty accurate- it's fairly memory inefficient compared to OSX and in real world usage I have found it to lag behind as well (I don't care what the justification for Vista's resource usage is, the end user does not see the benefit.) It's not as horrible as a lot of people make it out to be, but it definitely is a pig, and the reviewer should not be faulted for observing it.

Having owned both Mac and PC notebooks, my experience has been that the quality of Apple products tends to be superior, aside from some model-specific flaws. It's been consistent enough so that I'll give the nod to Apple. "Mature" Apple products tend to offer years of reliable service when they've had the kinks worked out (as I'd imagine this generation does.) Simply looking at specs doesn't really tell the whole picture- I have an HP laptop that blows away my Macbook in terms of specs but it's a horribly concocted machine that reeks of a rushed effort and shoddy engineering. It's far less than the sum of its parts.

I'll also say you probably won't find any other notebook at this price range with such excellent design/construction.

A $300.00 Netbook, let alone ANY Netbook, is by no means a comparable machine to this Macbook. What a dumb thing to say.

 

Sheesh. Guys, give him a break. He simply says he prefers both OSX AND XP to Vista.

And I'd almost agree with him. However, if you've got Vista on a computer with a good amount of RAM, it really is a decent OS. I personally use 7 and Linux though. XP is good in terms of memory, but I think that it's starting to show it's age. It does just what it needs to do (ie controlling hardware and software), and does nothing more. Aside from security (which, isn't as bad as people say), XP does everything an operating system NEEDS to do, and does it well. However, nowadays, it's about going a step beyond that, and each operating system has their claim to fame. OSX is known for security and cool tricks. Linux is known for flexibility and ease of open source software procurement. While 7 isn't totally notable for it's security or ease of software procurement, the information is more centralized, and the system does look nicer and more convenient.

In other words, to each his own.

Back on topic, I wouldn't mind too much purchasing one of these. Actually I prefer these aesthetics over the newer Unibodys, though less than the older aluminum MBP/PB G4s... The color is just off on the unibody alu MBs.

 

i agree i think the silver color makes the unibody macbook look REALLY ugly maybe thats just me though.

I wanna see white or black unibody macbooks.

 

Compared to what, exactly?

 

For me at least, compared to the older PowerBook G4 Ti/AluBooks and the older MBPs. The silver color almost has white mixed in. It's much brighter than the older gen MBPs, and just looks like it tries to look white while still being silver. It's terrible really.

 

The color of silver (or rather, the finish on the anodized aluminum) in the new Macbooks is the same as that of the Aluminum Books and Macbook Pros.

http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/mac/MacBookPro2008Update/buildquality.jpg

The assembly and build tolerances are much better.

 

i know and it isnt nice lol

Apple should have stuck with full white it was way more elegant. I mean it when i looks at the new one and old one i cant stop but admire how nice the older one is.

 

Iunno, still think they look different. Maybe it's the color scheme, who knows. Either that or I need new glasses.

 

Why should that matter? You're making a comparison of operating systems. Purchasing a better valued PC forgoes the overpriced cost of an OS X, so it is still about options. In other words, if you buy a PC, you would still make the exact same comparisons of that opportunity cost you are giving up in buying the PC. It is valid.

To be fair, the people switching to OS X are mac fanboys anyway. But they'd rather buy a PC because they acknowledge how overpriced macs are with relatively poor designs and lower processing power/storage stock. That's why you never hear of people buying macs to use for windows, because if you prefer windows anyway, there's no reason to spend that over-budgetted cost on mac specs/chasis when you get the best value on a regular notebook pc anyway!

 

It matters because what you took exception to, did not deal with economics (to which the concept of opportunity cost belongs) but deals with a factual statement about memory efficiency of the several OSs on the same hardware. The fact that it can only be done (installation of OSX, XP and Vista) legally on a MAC renders your counterpoint a non-sequitur.

In other words, so long as it is illegal to install OSX on a PC, you will never see a sanctioned review of it installed on a PC on this site, let alone one where it can be claimed that Vista is more memory efficient than OSX on the same unit.

To be factual and to not paint all purchasers of MAC products as "fanboys":

A number of people bought 24" iMAC's because there are no equivalent All-in-One PCs of that size with a Nvidia 8 series GPU in it and installed windows on it. What's more, I know a few who bought MAC Pro's because of the dual Xeon CPUs and LED cinema display and using Windows server 2008 for Itanium on it.

One can prefer an OS without being a fanboy. There are some things that OSX has to which Microsoft's OSs do not have which can be desirable to some. And depending on one's profession/hobby, there are some software titles for MAC that have no PC equivalent and vice-versa.

Let's get away from the "fanboy" branding and using it as a disparaging term to attempt to discredit a poster (ad hominem). Let's address the veracity of a claim(s) instead. If the claims are found to be false, that in and of itself would be sufficient.

So unless you can rebut the claim that OSX and XP are more memory efficient than Vista, let the comment that offended you, go.

[Otherwise the mods will continue to delete posts that take exception to that one comment. Likely in the interest of dissuading a "flame war." But I agree with you that discussing any part of the review is ON topic. But since I don't make the rules, this will be my last post along these lines. Whether or not this post survives.]

 

Do you know what opportunity cost even means? To put it in simple terms, it means what you forgo something for something else. And in this case, what you forgo from buying that PC is that of the Mac OS X. So you think comparing the weights of two different laptops vs cpu power is not valid? It is valid because what you are forgoing (we call this opportunity cost) is the specs in that laptop, and in this case, the Mac OS X. It doesn't matter if it's illegal on anything.

Then that makes your initial statement a, and i'm going to use the term, fanboy statement. While now contradicting it, you drew out the fact that it "speaks volumes to their confidence in OSX over Vista," somehow painting this picture as if it is this wonderous thing that causes people to switch to OS X despite it's illegality. While ignoring the fact that, hey, maybe people just have personal preferences to operating systems and would switch to their preferred OS that they are comfortable with, regardless of whether it's Mac -> Windows or Windows -> Mac. That was a useless statement, was the point being made. And it did sound fanboyish.

Why is there any reason to rebut "the claim that OSX and XP are more memory efficient than Vista"? I don't see any reason to. Many people don't find that a criteria in judging an operating systems merits, given they have an excessive amount of memory already (2-4GBs). Did it never occur to you that maybe they like the operating system? The "comment that offended you" (actually I wouldn't say it offended me, I would say it was egregious and highly biased and people were calling him out for it, nothing more nothing less) is independent of Vista's memory efficiency in that it makes a false generalization about the way everyone else will perceive the operating system, which they don't. Also, you have to demonstrate to me that memory efficiency is the only criteria in everyone else's mind to come to the logical conclusion that X operating system is better than Y operating system. You can't, because it's not even one of the criterias for people with enough RAM.

 

Well,mostly they become fanboys after using OS x Also,I know lots of people who are CEOs/mangers/owners of pretty big IT companies who use apple notebooks.I don't think that they bought them just bc they are "fanboys".

Then,"Mac is overpriced" is not a criteria for people with enough money

 

Whaaat? I mean the white wasn't bad but the Aluminum's way stiffer, has way less seams, feels fantastic in your hand, and is probably going to last longer. If you've seen one in person I can't imagine anyone preferring the white. Especially given that I don't know of another laptop that feels anywhere near as solid as the unibody Macbook line.