AM I Nuts?

In my search for a compact 17" notebook, I was in the apple store and saw the mac book pro 17. I have used PC's for 20+ years and am a programmer. To my surprise, the Apple Guy said I could use the Mac as a PC just by loading Windows 7 on it.

I don't have any problem completely ignoring the MAC/Apple stuff because I don't know the first thing about Apple and am quite happy with that.

Would I be silly to buy the MAC 17 for exclusive use as a PC? Am I tempting fate?

The thing I like best is that I am using a dell precision m60 and Love my 6 year old 15.4" true WUXGA (1920x1200). I need to upgrade to an i7. No one, and I have looked everywhere, makes the screen anymore. They've all switched to 1920x1080 (except the Dell Precision M4400, but you can't get an I7 processor as far as I know).

So, I looked at physical dimensions, and the 17" is really not that much bigger. Weight wise, my old clunker dell is probably about as heavy as the newer 17 inchers.

So for me to get WUXGA, I need 17". The sleekest, smallest 17" seems to be the mac book.

So, again, would I be nuts? I have absolutely no need for any apple software, and i don't want to run in a windows emulation mode. I just want to load up win7 as if it were a pc.



Thanks for your thoughts
Doug

 

yea, kinda. but it's your money.

if you're going exclusively Windows regardless, consider:

HP Envy 17
(same form factor, more horsepower, though 1920x1080, significantly less)

HP 8740w Elitebook
(thin formfactor, max power, 1920x1200, same price range, superior power but less battery life)

these two are also likely to be more stable, as their drivers will be well-optimized for Windows.

if you really want to get a Mac after all that...nobody will stop you. But you can get more with your money with either of the above if it's going to simply be a windows box for you.

$0.02

 

You are correct, you would be nuts to use it as a windows only machine. I think it's alright for occasional use on windows, but not for windows use ONLY.

Defintely stick to a PC laptop.

 

The big problem with the 17" MacBook Pro as a Windows-only machine is you can't use the switchable graphics - it's stuck in discrete mode and that kills a lot of the battery life advantage the Mac has.

The Envy 17 should be a very nice 17", but indeed you only get 1920x1080.

However, I can see your point about the 17" MBP; it's probably the least bulky modern laptop offering WUXGA resolution right now, and if those are your priorities I can understand why you'd gravitate towards it. The EliteBook 8740w and Precision M6500 are much heavier, after all.

 

I find it pretty hard to believe you spent 20 years+ as developer without knowing that macs run windows as well, even my mother knows that.

 

if you don't want to primarily use Mac OS X as your main OS... you shouldn't get a Mac. Yes you can install Windows... but it'll be far from optimal. Its not as bad some some Windows laptops I've used... but it wont be as good as a top of the line Windows machine.... mainly in the driver support. Your better off getting a machine designed to run Windows. You could think of branching out to Macs or Linux or anything else... 20 years is a long time to be stuck with Windows.

 

MBP 17" does not have an I7 yet.

Alienware m17x has i7, wuxga in it.

 

umm....que?

 

Yes, MBP has an I7.

 

The M17x also weighs almost as much as two 17" MBPs.

 

Probably because it has the graphics horsepower of ten 17" MBPs.

I concur with the others. Buying a 17" i7-based MBP is going to set you back a minimum of $2500 ($2300 base price + $200 for the i7). You can get, for example, a G73 that will be substantially more powerful (quad-core versus dual-core i7, HD 5870 versus GT330) for nearly $1000 less. I suppose it comes down to whether that extra 120 pixels of vertical resolution and less than a kilo of weight difference (and remember, a 17" is a 17", it's never going to be "portable") is worth $1000 to you.

 

how about Lenovo W710 with 1920x1200 RGBLED backlit display???
(it's extremely pricey though)

 

wrong.

also, the differences don't boil down to a few extra lines of horizontal resolution. i'm not even sure that a knowledgeable man would compare a MBP to a G73.

G73 offers a better GPU and CPU...comparisons end there.

MBP offers:

-4x the battery life (yes, 17" can be portable when it isn't built like a space ship, weight 8lbs + the power brick, and 2 inches thick)
-a far superior trackpad (with buttons that aren't uncomfortable to press)
-a far superior screen (color reproduction and accuracy, depth)
-a higher resolution screen
-a lighter form-factor
-a thinner form-factor
-an i5 or i7 dual core that is more than sufficient for 95% of consumers needs
-silent operation
-an expresscard slot (oops. Asus forgot that people might want to expand their features)
-Firewire
-doesn't look like a big black monolith you'd be embarrassed to show up to a real business meeting towing (they really could have left the Gamer's Republic logo off the back lid)
-legit gesture support with the ability to expand it even further (amazing stuff)

does that all total $700 more value? it's in the eye of the beholder. But it's only ignorance or self-deception that could have lead you to suggest the only thing that separates a MacBook Pro and a G73 was "that extra 120 pixels of vertical resolution". To me, I'd spend the extra $700 to not have professionals and clients sitting across from me using Thinkpads, tablet PCs and Elitebooks wondering if I'm an overgrown kid wasting their time.

the person buying an Asus G73 is a totally different kind of person.

a better comparison is the Envy 17.

 

This is a big problem, but it is hardly the biggest. You will need to use the thing exclusively tethered to the wall regardless of the battery life because the trackpad is so wonky in windows - you'll need an external mouse for anything more than occasional windows use.

 

Perhaps the G73 wasn't the best comparison, it was just the first that popped into my head. The Envy 17 might indeed be a better comparison, as you suggested. It too, however, boasts a much, much more powerful video card than the 17" MBP, better speakers, a numeric keypad, and dual hard drives while using similar processors and having a similar build - and still starts at $800 less than a MBP.

The point is, when it boils down there's only one major reason to own a Mac: OSX. If you never intend to use OSX, there's really no justification for paying the hefty premium the Apple logo carries with it.

 

Overall, the i7-720QM is no better than the i7-620M, really. The OP also seems not to have any real need for a powerful video card.

Judging by the OP, it's all about the screen and the weight here, and while the MBPs are rather overpriced, to some people the screen in particular is very important. Also, one thing the MBP has that sets it apart from many other laptop screens is the option for a matte screen, which is typically only offered in business models. Indeed, if the Envy 17 offers a matte screen it will be a very strong competitor to the MBP, and I'd probably recommend it more highly, but how good the 17" Envy is remains to be seen.

On the other hand, if WUXGA is really that important to the OP, and most 17" business laptops are too heavy, what other options are there?

Would I buy an MBP? No, and I wouldn't recommend them to most people either because the price is excessive. However, they do have a number of advantages that are lacking in other laptops.

 

Have you considered an ENVY 17? It's better than the MBP 17 if you don't intend to run OS X at all.

Furthermore, it has an ATI 5850 and starts at 1400 USD ... You will take a hit on battery life however.

 

Uh how many pixels does one need exactly ... 1920 x 1080 is plenty. I mean, that's the resolution I use on my 23" monitor. Any higher and I'll be squinting.

 

I would seriously consider HP 8740w. it's truly one of the best PCs money can buy. it is heavier than the MBP. but it has impressive performance and built like a tank and comes standard with 3 year on site warranty.

I agree. you would be nuts to get a mac for windows only. BTW the battery life in windows on a mac is less than half what apple advertises.

 

I have 1920x1200 on a 24" and I love it, but I settled for 15" 1680x1050 on my laptop. However, it's neither your decision nor mine how many pixels the OP wants or needs.

 

yes indeed it has i7 but the i7 apple is selling with the 17 inch is just not a true quad core i7 like all other i7's out there. It's actually a dual core.

 

wow... have you ever gotten a clue? you need to go do more research.

"...true quad core" ... "like all other i7's..." really? thanks for the chuckle.