Mac; worth the switch?

Currently, I have an Alienware m14x. The higher end 15" MBP currently performs about as well as my currently m14, maybe just slightly under, but definitely in the same range. I'm currently thinking about selling my m14 and picking up said MBP, or perhaps buying it in a few years when my current laptop becomes to dated.

Obviously, I'll need some information on how it might perform in games. But I really would like to hear from people who own a MacBook on why they love the device so much. I'm currently looking into one because OSX is very appealing form what I've used of it, and I'm interested in developing for iOS (which can sadly only be done on OSX).

 

I've did the switch recently. This thing works just like a dream. But then, I do not do any gaming anymore, and haven't tried any games either.

I just use my MBP for Music, movies, mail and social networks…

I do not know if you only use your laptop for gaming, but the battery life is amazing… While doing basic tasks this machine is completely silent!

Feel free to ask if there is anything you wonder specific about OSX...

 

I am sure there are many that would like to give you some insight, just keep in mind that you are in the Apple section of the forums so some responses might be one sided. It would be like walking into a Microsoft store and asking someone why they like Windows so much.

Personally, I wanted Apple's combination of hardware design and OS. They both go hand-in-hand and OS X provides a really nice experience when paired with Apple's hardware. Their trackpads are still the best out there and battery life seems to be matched only by business models or units with battery slabs. I have come across very few consumer level notebooks packing the same hardware as any MBP or MBA yet was able to achieve ~6 hours of solid work on a single charge.

I don't think the MBP is the right choice if you are mainly concerned with gaming though. OS X games tend to be sloppy PC ports and you would want to end up installing Windows for gaming. It works but Apple drivers for Windows are rather bad. The 15" features Intel integrated graphics and a dedicated GPU. When in Windows, only the GPU can be used. Trackpad drivers are awful, the keyboard backlight doesn't work properly, battery life is drastically reduced, etc.

It isn't that bad if you are going to plug the notebook in and game but using Windows in any type of a portable environment is just a pain. So keep that in mind as you may want to pair the MBP with a reasonably priced desktop if PC gaming is going to be your main focus. Either that or not buy a Mac at all. It will depend on how much you run Windows.

My ideology is that unless you are going to run OS X the majority of the time, there is no need in buying a Mac. There are a handful of users on here that purchased Macs to solely run Windows. I think they paid way too much for getting a sub-par experience and they tend to be a small niche category of members here in the forums. Most people in this section of the forums run OS X most of the time with their Macs.

 

Yes, gaming is definitely a concern, but it's not all I use my computer for. As I've said, I'm interested in developing for iOS, which is an exclusive Mac feature. And despite possibly faulty drivers, I've seen videos of Battlefield 3 being ran on high settings pretty smoothly.

I can say that I would switch to Windows when I choose to game. But I always stay plugged in as I game, and I feel like I would spend more time in OSX than in Windows. And I always have been attracted to the battery life of the MBP, but my current m14 doesn't get to shabby battery life. The 4-5 hour mark isn't very difficult to achieve if I switch to power saver settings.

EDIT: And yes, I know the replies will be pretty one sided. But I figure who would know better about Macs than those who actually own them?

 

Macs do allow one to choose between two OS universes, I guess they can be considered kind of neutral. I think spending the majority of the time in OS X warrants purchasing a Mac.

There are various other benefits and, aside from Apple's hardware design, they are all pretty much due to OS X. I have had far fewer OS problems with Lion than I have with Windows 7. For example, I haven't had to restart my MBA since owning it (purchased back in January) other than to install a few updates. My Windows desktop at work has to be restarted about once every 3-4 days, the same holds true for my Windows 7 nettop. I know some people have never had to restart their Windows systems (other than to install updates) but that hasn't been my case.

Thunderbolt is another nice feature that will hopefully get used more in the future. Right now there aren't very many products that use it (and they are expensive) but it holds a high amount of potential especially considering you can daisy chain it to other Thunderbolt devices. The Mac App store is also pretty solid if you want to get your software fix. The prices aren't always the lowest but it offers a convenient one stop shop for software.

Not everything is nice though. Just like any other piece of software, OS X can experience problems. Right now there is a wi-fi bug in OS X that some people, including myself, experience from time to time. I have also had to restart my MBA due to OS hangs a few times. Again, not nearly on the same level as with Windows but OS X can still hang nonetheless. Lastly, every single Mac notebook requires the purchase of additional dongles/cables for VGA and HDMI output. Also, Thunderbolt accessories do not come with Thunderbolt cables and those are currently set at $50 a piece.

I switched from using Windows explosively back in 2011 and haven't looked back. I find Apple's combination between hardware and software design to be unbeatable and my overall experiences with OS X have been smoother than in Windows. My MBA is competitively priced with other Windows only ultrabooks and it offers real world battery life that beats them. Before I had an early 2011 13" MBP and I sold that for the MBA. My experiences with the MBP were the same though I think I overpaid for that model. It was still very nice but I went with the dual-core Core i7 version instead of the Core i5 edition and I don't think I got my extra ~$300 worth.

 

In my opinion, the battery life is not the same as you'd find in a Lenovo ThinkPad. The battery is good, but the ThinkPad's I've used are better for battery life.

I love the simplicity. Everything just works. The hardware and OS are so intertwined that you don't have the compatibility issues as you do with Windows machines and drivers. Things just... work.

 

Isn't the loud fan an issue with m14x? I use one and even the flash makes the fan go louder than the 13 inch Vaio Z's which I thought were worse than anything. I have all the bells and whistles like an SSD and 6 gb of RAM, but you really have to put up the machine on your legs so the bottom vents are "open". I only had lower fan rmps at that time, though the back side power connection is annoying in between your legs.

 

This is the same piece of advice I give to everyone considering a switch: If you're not going to use OS X a minimum of 60-70% of the time, do not buy a Mac. If you want to play games or use Windows primarily, there are plenty of other choices with better to comparable specs for a whole lot less money.

 

I love not having windows explorer or my display driver crashing all the time... Since apple knows what the hardware is, they can better test and fine tune the drivers....

I also love the track pad... It is a cut above everything else out there... Speakers are pretty good also... Much better than most business class machines like ones from lenovo..

Displays look better than all but the pro pc laptops... great contrast rations so everything doesnt look grey....

Thin and lite design is nice... I like not having my vents on the back of my machine because I am less likely to block the air flow...

I like the backlit keyboard, mission control for switching to a clean desktop without having to minimize everything... (I want my windows to stay where they are at and not move them around all the time and you can do that with a mac!)

I like the power adapter design... much smaller and better designed than the lenovo ones that I shoot through every 6 months or so...

 

If all you are looking for with OSX is iOS development, why don't you buy a second-hand Mac Mini for cheap and keep the m14x? Seething that everything else you plan on doing is either OS-agnostic or Windows only (gaming), it'll be to your benefit to keep some flavor of a Wintel box with you.

 

As a non-gamer, my MBP works like a dream for me. No viruses, no spyware slowing things down, quick as a whip, and OS X Lion is soooo much better with a whole bunch of new features (like swiping to go back and forth online).

 

Disclaimer:

OSX does in fact have out-in-the-open malware, so don't assume that it's 100% safe (nothing is). There's enough malware in the wild that "OSX is invincible" is invalid.

"Better" is subjective. I can do the same gestures on my W520 (though Internet back/forward are dedicated keys near the arrow keys). Every laptop has its own merits, be it Apple or one of the many Wintel OEMs.

 

If Macs get a refresh soon (along with downpricing haha) I'd definitively buy one. What keeps me away from the change is the lack of more common interfaces, like USB 3.0, besides their goldlike price.

 

For what it sounds like you want from the notebook, I say no. I made the switch from Mac to PC last year, and I am loving it on the dark side. Each person has different experiences so take mine with a grain of salt, but I do think that the difference between OS X and Windows 7 is marginal at best. In a few ways, OS X is better, and in others, Windows 7 is better. I haven't tried out Win 8 yet, but I am excited about it. Personally, I also find that Mac's durability has waned quite a bit over the years. I went through quite a few MBPs like candy. A lot of it has to do with the luck of the draw so I was likely unlucky with a few of them (I now use a x220, and I know a recent batch has had a spate of motherboard failures, which I was lucky to avoid). Not trying to start a flame...just voicing my own experiences as a longtime former Mac user.

If you are interested in OS X which is very nice, I would suggest what previous poster offered up by getting a Mac Mini so you that you can continue playing games on your current laptop, and at the same time, using the Mac Mini to see if you enjoy the OS X ecosystem.

 

As my previous post already indicated, I made the switch from Mac to PC last year. I have not experienced any viruses, spyware or any slowdown. I think those arguments are pretty much bunk. Almost all of the malware that actually causes harm is due to social engineering/user error. All I use is MSE and scan with MalwareBytes (both of which are free) once a week, which takes a grand total of less than two minutes. My x220 has been faster and more reliable than any recent MBP that I have owned and generated a lot less heat while doing so.

Admittedly, the x220's trackpad sucks compared to the MBP, but I actually prefer the trackpoint now when I type for a long time. There are times though when I do miss the trackpad.

One other thing that I prefer with Mac is the 16:10 rather than 16:9 panels. I think Macs will eventually go to 16:9 as well, but it is nice to see Apple resist this change. The IPS on my x220 rocks, however, and I do plan on getting a larger second laptop as a desktop replacement.

 

No, I don't think they are bunk especially since your experiences don't mirror those of other Windows users. Yes, someone who plays the field smart enough shouldn't have to worry about virus, spyware, malware, trojans, etc. I haven't worried about that type of stuff on my Windows PCs for a while now because they are well protected. In fact, the last virus incident I had was back during the Windows 98 days.

Both your and my experiences aren't very common though. The average Windows user isn't going to take the time to read pop-ups and actually close them. These are the people that, whenever they saw a pop-up in internet explorer and fake "scan" was being run on their computer, they believed the results that it was infected only to have that "anti-virus" software turn out to be nothing more than a way to get people's money.

So there are still plenty of people being infected running Windows simply because they don't know any better and/or they lack that certain level of what we would call "common sense." For the most part, you don't have to worry about that with OS X. There was that Mac Keeper scare a while back but Apple squashed it. Other than that, the average pop-up that comes up for an internet browser saying your computer is infected, someone is watching you and wants to be friends, etc. isn't going to do anything on OS X yet those can completely kill a Windows system.

I think that is where OS X pulls ahead but it has little to do with the actual OS itself. Had Apple become a big hardware and software giant back in the 80's and early 90's, Windows would be the "underdog" in this case and I am sure things would be switched around. The mass use of Windows XP, Vista (I guess), and 7 make them far better targets to go after than ~12% of the rest of the computing world. So I am not particularly blaming Windows for it having those issues. I do think MS could act a little faster with certain updates to stop those viruses, spyware, etc.

 

Right, this is true. If you leave your system unpatched you can be susceptible to malicious software that can take over your system without any input from you.

If you are susceptible to social engineering tricks, you might be fooled into handing the keys over to someone who you should not have trusted, but that doesn't have much to do with the operating system.

 

While I have not received any viruses, I've had plenty of people at my company get infected with viruses while using MSE. This is without admin rights on the computer.

 

Completely true. I was just trying address any sort of misconception that OSX == secure-and-will-always-be.

Sounds like those people are either not letting MSE do its job, or those people keep browsing sketchy websites. For my own example, I've ran MSE on both my old Satellite (when MSE was released and I was tried of AVG) and currently on my W520 and I have yet to experience any sort of malware attack, even though I'm administrator all the time (yesh, it's bad practice, I know). Yet again, I also never received any baddies when using AVG or Webroot either. It's all a matter of how educated a user is and what they know about avoiding that sort of thing. Even some NBR users run their machines without any sort of protection at all (even UAC, which I think everyone should have) and still have no problem while browsing the web.

 

We also run Barracuda Web Filters between our router and our network which block sketchy websites and update several times a day.

STUFF (since my original word was cut out) will happen regardless of how many ways you try to stop it.

 

Let me bolster privatejarhead's point...

Our company is more than 90% wintel and less than 10% mac users.
ALL users have corporate antivirus.

Last month:
-Macs made up almost 35% of the attacks
-Macs made up almost 55% of the compromised systems (successful attack)

Last month's numbers were high, but over the past year the attacks and compromised systems are ALWAYS disproportionately high for the Macs.

That's right... our massive <10% mac users are being bombarded and make up the majority of the compromised systems!

No, I do not believe this is as much about a flaw in OSX as much as it is users who believe they are immune...

Truth be told, malware and PCs is nowhere near the nightmare Apple's marketing department wants you to think it is when the computer is maintained and has up-to-date anti-malware.


As for the OP, it will all come down to your love and usage of OSX.

If you absolutely must have OSX, then you have no choice.

In any other situation (especially someone for whom gaming is a higher priority) I cannot recommend a macbook.

If you do buy a macbook and intend to game on it, get an external cooler.

 

KernalPanic: What AV do you use for your Mac users? Just curious what options there are for centrally managed AV on Mac.

 

what on earth are the mac users in your company doing to get massively disproportionately high security breaches?

 

not trying to make anyone mad here.. but with those numbers, I'd be looking less at the users and more at the admins/IT/IS.

 

Kind of a valid point. I mean I only manage 500 computers, not a lot by any means, small company, but we only get maybe 1 or 2 virus hits every other month.

Our China users are the ones who normally get them as well. Very rare in the U.S. or Europe for us.

 

err yeah. i just meant that the situation sounds insane. if your software is up to date and you don't give administrator rights to unknown software, which requires typing in your password, it's pretty farfetched to get a compromised system. I didn't mean to imply that I was blaming the users.

 

First of all, our number of attacks is fairly high. Note, I am NOT counting the number of individual malware programs, but the attacks. A single infection of certain types usually results in attacks against multiple computers.

Our users, due to their job, are frequently exposed to web-based attacks.
Mac users, by their very trusting and inquisitive nature, usually tend to get in trouble.
One of the problems is indeed the marketing they believe whole-heartedly and they act as if it were gospel.

One of the things that isn't getting through I believe is the LOW number of PC infections. Simply put, most of our PC users KNOW when they are infected and will literally tell us "I think I got a bug" and disconnect the computer and bring it to us simlutaneously with our software telling us of the infection. In short, they know the drill and know what to do which minimizes any impact very quickly.

Our mac users deny its even possible even while we disinfect their computer... and seem to feel its an insult to every mac user for one to even admit they got malware.

I really think its time for Apple to just stop kidding their users. Malware is not just a Wintel problem.

 

I think its clear you need to do some research on the methodology of how most mac malware works.

Furthurmore, mac users tend to buck administrative control worse than any other group I have ever worked with.

Apparently because I don't agree with Apple gospel, I don't know anything at all about a mac... even when I am the one cleaning their computer and even when I am the one who has to recover everything when it stops working. /shrug

 

If you're working in some type of specialized environment where users are frequently exposed to web attacks, how does that relate to a stereotypical mac user?

What exactly are they doing? Are they accidentally running anonymous software and giving it administrative control by typing in their passwords en masse? I'm truly confused.

 

Likewise. Even though OSX is a bit more susceptible to attack than Windows (due to lack of security experience), those numbers seem why too high. It really sounds like an IT problem or something else.

 

I also fail to see anything in Apple's marketing or OS X documentation that states it is virus, trojan, malware, adware, etc. free. They do say that OS X won't become infected from PC viruses and malware but there is a big difference between all malware and malware just for Windows. Apple isn't lying when they make that statement as it is 100% true. Malware made for Windows simply won't run on OS X and vice versa. Nowhere is Apple saying "everything is completely safe and OS X doesn't get anything whosoever." It all might be clever wording by their marketing team but that doesn't stop if from being correct.

Apple can't be held accountable if people misread what they are saying and interpret it to mean that OS X doesn't get anything, ever.

 

Actually, when you approach it this way, it actually makes Apple look pretty bad. Is your position really that Apple shouldn't have any responsibility for making bold leading statements which have no substance?

Obviously Macs don't get PC viruses. They also don't run any software unless it's compiled for the operating system that it is. Macs only get mac viruses and only run mac software. But, if we're really going to analyse this, we have to dive a little bit deeper. The unbiased truth is that macs only run software built for the mac. This means that all software, good or bad, will have to be build for the mac in order to operate.

If you want to assess the logical validity of their statement, it's nearly a tautology. It means nothing. But then, why would they bother making a meaningless statement in an advertisement?

English isn't formal propositional logic. There are aspects of a spoken, interactive language which are necessary for it to succeed which are not helpful in formal logic. One of those traits is that concept density must be reasonably high in a spoken language. Formal logic is extremely explicit. English is often comparatively ambiguous and implicative.

One of the materializations of this is that English doesn't follow the semantics of formal logic strictly. They are separate languages. If you tell a child that he can have dessert if he finishes his dinner, the implication is not only that finishing dinner -> dessert, but also that dessert -> finishing dinner. In other words, if he doesn't finish his dinner, he won't get dessert. This isn't an unfair inference on the part of the child due to being uneducated. You actually made that implication with the statement because of the semantic rules of English. The same is true of a structurally similar exchange with an adult. "I will hire you if my boss approves."

By making the statement that macs don't get PC viruses, you are making a variety of implications in English (but not formal logic). A good method of detecting these necessary differences which arise between a formal language and a language like English is by using what I like to call the "Why did I bother to tell you this?" principle.

To explain: the reason that the example above with the child's dinner and dessert had the implications that it did is that English language statements have intrinsic implications of relevancy which do not exist in formal logic. Why would you bother telling a child that finishing his dinner will earn him dessert? The subtext is that you are offering a reward for finishing the dinner. By the nature of a reward, the child won't get the reward unless he earns it by completing the requirement. This complex interaction can't exist in so few words in formal logic and it doesn't need to. The point of the languages are different. One is for communication between people, where brevity is important. The other is geared towards precision of meaning through formality, where lengthiness is more than acceptable.

The point of the ad is clearly to give people the idea of a safety net which really isn't there. The implication in English is that PC viruses are the only type of viruses, or at the very least, that they are only type you should be concerned about. Otherwise, what is the point of them telling you this?

So, Apple might (might) not be accountable in a courtroom if this were ever brought up, but the ad itself is certainly misleading, even if true.

 

I don't think it is misleading. The point of bringing up PC viruses and malware is that the majority of computer users out there still run Windows and everyone is familiar with a Windows system getting something. Everyone has heard of some story regarding a Windows virus, malware, spyware, whatever. All Apple is saying is that OS X is invulnerable to the PC content that is floating around out there.

Is it a little underhanded? Sure. Still, if one were to take the extra 2 seconds to think about what Apple is saying, they would see that Apple isn't really saying that OS X is virus-free and there really is no security blanket. However, this is the common public we are talking about and I can easily understand how they can read that statement to say "OS X doesn't get anything! <3!!11!!one!!"

There is also common word of mouth misconceptions regarding OS X. I helped a friend pick a desktop last year and he went for the Mac Mini. I had to explain to him that Macs can get malicious content, it just that the amount of said content for OS X isn't as much as it is for Windows given that Windows it he majority computing OS. He believed that OS X wouldn't be able to get anything despite never reading or hearing anything from Apple, it was a simple word of mouth transfer of information down a long misinformed line of sources (similar to how news spreads in high schools).

 

I absolutely love it when people use that expression. It doesn't just work and osx is no less or no more perfect than Windows. Just have a browse through some of the Mac forums to understand the many issues.

At the end of the day Apple sell nice machines. It doesn't matter what operating system you use as that's the platform. What does matter is the applications you use.

As for battery life... HP Elitebook and x220 beat ANY and all macs (with the additional batteries like the BB09 on HP or slice on x220)

P.s. You could always install Windows 8 on the mac anyway
P.P.s As nearly EVERYONE runs as full admin under windows I'm not wondering why so many get infected. Run as a standard user and have a separate admin account for those UAC moments

 

Or Windows 7, whatever your flavor is

Even my power-hungry W520 will beat my friend's MBPs in real life usage (I've never seen an Apple machine go for the advertised 10 hours, more like 6-8).

 

Apple doesn't advertise 10 hours, at least not any more.

MacBook Pro - Shop Apple Laptop & Notebook Computers - Apple Store (U.S.)

 

I think it is completely misleading as most people I know of, consider a PC to be a computer and a computer to be a PC (personal computer). That would include an Apple computer too.

 

Ah, I stand corrected then. It's been awhile since I've ventured on Apple's website.

The only problem I see with this comparison is the "computer to be a PC part", since that might imply that a server rack or a mainframe is also a PC, in formal logic. I would agree with your statement if you stopped there, but then you add the part I put in bold.

As I read it, you're trying to say that a Windows computer != a OSX computer, which is untrue hardware-wise. Both platforms have the same...

• ...form factor (laptop, desktop, all-in-one)
  
• ...x86-based hardware (Intel or AMD). Later, this will include ARM-based chips if Apple decides to compete with ARM-based Windows 8 computers.
  
• ...types of internal components (SATA storage, DDR-type RAM, nVidia/AMD/integrated GPUs, even unnoticed stuff like the CMOS battery and flashable BIOS/UEFI chip),
  
• ...low-level software (BIOS and/or UEFI)
  
• ...same suppliers (Foxconn, Intel, Samsung, Asus, to name a few)
  
• ...same target audience (us regular folk). Humans with money in general, really (computing-wise, there isn't much difference between a "normal user", graphical artist, engineer, gamer, or video producer) --> as in, they all use the same platform (x86, at the moment), with the only difference being that amount of performance said platform can provide (eg, all GPUs are basically the same, just a different number of shaders, VRAM, etc).

In truth, the only hard difference between a Mac and a "PC" (by the definition I believe you're implying) is in the higher-level, abstract software (OSX v Windows, and their respective applications). Everything else is purely subjective, and mostly touted by fanboys of either camp.

In conclusion, it's perfectly valid to say that a Mac is a PC, and there should be no confusion as to why that is true.

 

This is something I've always said. A Mac is, by definition, a Personal Computer.

 

No, what I'm saying is that the logic being used by other posters above is that Apple != PC. So their marketing is accurate.

However, in general terms and to the average person, PC means any computer. So that advertising about not having PC viruses to worry about is completely misleading to the general public.

I agree with you.

 

I don't think that is the case though. In general, to most people, PC = some desktop/notebook running Windows as they don't know any better. This is something that even dates back to the 80's and 90's, the use of PC by Apple has been a long running practice. Technically speaking, yes, a Mac can be a PC. However, in order to differentiate itself, Apple didn't go with the PC moniker. Fast forward to the Windows era and PC itself becomes a term often used to describe systems running Windows.

Apple still sticks with those definitions to this day. It would be like the majority of the population owning and driving a Honda Civic and everyone calling them "cars." Then Toyota releases a Camry and doesn't call it a car but rather sticks with the Camry name so that it differentiates itself from the majority of cars (which are Civics) already out there.

Either way, the term PC has long been used to describe systems running Windows. It is a practice that has gone on longer than I have been alive and it will continue to do so. MS (and others) touted the PC term to get away from Apple and Apple sticks with "Mac" to get away from the standard PC term. Neither side wants you to think that their products are the same.

 

Even then, it's still correct to call a Camry a car (and Mac a PC), the only legitimate reason for this so-called differentiation is for marketing purposes only. That doesn't mean that we have to recognize that difference though. Same thing applies to any other commodity substance: what's the difference between Deer Park, Great Value, and Aquafina? To the average person, it's "just water", but these companies (well, probably not Walmart) want you to care about the "differences" and will heavily advertise to make themselves look unique. Likewise, a Camry is basically nothing more than a slightly larger Civic with a Toyota badge on it; so long as it has 4 wheels, a steering wheel, and it runs, people generally don't care about the details.

With the exception of the Apple community, the majority of customers don't actually care about the details of a computer other than "will it run X?"; I would even bet that a lot of NBR people wouldn't care in their day-to-day lives as well.

 

Bootcamp backup considerations - If you plan to use bootcamp and require frequent backups of that environment... For example, if you are a professional developer and require the use of bootcamp and a reliable backup/recovery method... read on:

I'm not into laptop gaming so I can't answer that part of the question. But I myself would buy another Mac. The only thing that would make me think twice is if I require using bootcamp then I would want to be sure that I can make fast backups of that partition. Winclone no longer works for this purpose since Lion was released.

Other backup/imaging software that runs in OSX to backup a bootcamp partition will either not do block level backups or it forces you to make a backup of the entire partition (even the unused space), which takes forever.

So then you resort to using backup software that runs in the bootcamp windows environment itself or from a bootable lilo or winp CD. Then you don't have to make images of the entire partition, only the used disk space in that partition. But when you do that the expansion slot for an eSata card isn't recognized (it might be recognized in 2010+ 17" MBPs but not 2009 and earlier unless you are in OSX). Then you are forced to use slower firewire or usb... ugh but at least you aren't making backup images of entire partitions (only the used space).

basically, it requires about 2 hrs for me to backup my current bootcamp partition and my OSX partition (a two step process... Paragon bootable USB for bootcamp... CCC for OSX). And consequently, I don't make backups as often as I should of bootcamp.

BUT fortunately... 2010+ 17" MBPs expansion card slots do accept eSATA and they are recognized by windows. Although a bootable lilo or winp recovery disk may not recognize the card.

I'm not sure yet if Windows in bootcamp (or if in a Linux or Winp boot disk environment) can recognizes the thunderbolt port on a mbp. If it can then any 2011+ MBP can make fast backups to an external drive of their bootcamp partitions. Otherwise, I would only get a 17" MBP because of the expansion card slot for using eSata.

but if you don't plan on using bootcamp or don't care about making fast backups of bootcamp on a regular basis... or if you find a fast solution to making bootcamp image backups somehow... then YEAH, I'd definitely get another MBP. Lately, I've not had to use bootcamp much at all. Instead I remote desktop to another dedicated windows machine from inside of OSX. I love that solution because I get to stay in OSX and get to take advantage of it's lovely drivers. Bootcamp drivers (particularly the trackpad driver in bootcamp) STINK and the trackpad is always jumping around in bootcamp because my hand accidentally grazes the trackpad... that doesn't happen in the OSX environment when I'm remoted in to the other workstation (better drivers in OSX by far).

 

Just switched to a MBP 15" (2.4, 8gb ram, seagate 750xt) last month and love it. I'd wanted one a few years back (2009) but the fact they couldn't go over 8gb ram (at the time) stopped me and I got a Dell m4400. I spent the next 3 years regretting it. And I didn't end up even upgrading the RAM in that to 8gb until 6mo before I dumped it.

Loving the MBP now. I don't game much, but I installed boot camp for the few games I do play and a few Windows only apps that I need to run. I sync between windows/mac/and clients with dropbox and that works well - and it's backed up too.

The ONLY issue that I have with it is - under heavy load, while plugged in, the BATTERY DRAINS. the 85w (biggest apple makes) adapter can't keep this thing powered and the battery goes down. While ripping DVDs in OSX or playing Skyrim in Windows, I'll loose a few %age points of power. Not a big deal, but if you're going in for hours of gaming, be aware that you may need to stop and recharge. Apple really needs to address this issue.

Other than that, I'm learning Objective-C and having a grand time with it.

 

Mac was worth the switch for me. It gave me:

1.) A smoother, more predictable experience
2.) Little worry over online viruses and malware
3.) A far superior trackpad to anything available on Windows
4.) The ability to run Windows for when I need it.
5.) Build quality and a solid feel largely unavailable on Winlaptops
6.) Thinness and weight I can't find on other 17" laptops with similar specs
7.) Silent operation most of the time
8.) Multitouch gesture features that made me retire my mouse (until I boot into Windows again).
9.) An high-quality matte screen at 1920x1200!
10.) A *real* 7-8 hours of battery life. On an i7 quad core computer with 2 HDDs and a quality mid-level GPU. 7-8 hours.
11.) Multiple desktops allow me to manage work, play, whatever with just a swipe.


It's a combination of features that WinLaptop's just can't offer at the moment. It's the combination of features (specifically, the power in a 17" with long battery lief) that pushed me to Mac. I had been a life-long buyer of 17"-18.4" WinLaptops that would give me no more than an hour or so of battery life, while weighing more and being thicker/larger. I got tired of it and found out what Apple was offering. Made the switch in 2010 after a decade of WinLaptops. Never looked back.

My primary desktop is still a PC. I still love my TabletPC. But my Mac laptop is the most useful computing device I've ever had. It's smoother, faster, more user friendly, and safer while being physically thinner and lighter than my alternatives. And again...7-8 hours of battery life.

If these things appeal to you, I encourage anyone to switch. After all, if you want Windows (may need some weening off the teet), you can just run it in Bootcamp and get performance equivalent to a similarly spec'd WinLaptop.

The only way I buy another WinLaptop is if someone makes one with similar specs to my Mac + DreamColor2-grade display + 6 or more hours of battery life. Then and only then will I buy another Windows laptop. That would be the only combination I'd say is worth going back for. If Apple updates their screens with an IPS screen, I'll probably be here for life.

 

So a little history on the "is a Mac a PC" thing, as I'm actually old enough to remember it.

The original computers in this class were called "micros", short for micro-computers. So the Apple II was a micro.

The term "micro" carried a hobbiest/DIY flavour to it, since many of the original micros were kits that you assembled yourself. To appeal to a broader crowd, when IBM released its offering in 1981, it called it an "IBM Personal Computer", or just "IBM PC". Other manufacturers picked up on the moniker, also calling their IBM-compatible computers PC's. E.g., Texas Instruments had a "TI PC". The term "PC-compatible" was used to describe cheaper IBM PC-compatible computers.

So "PC" literally was a short form for "IBM PC". The use of PC to refer solely to DOS/Windows-based computers came much later, once the alternative operating systems had been beaten in the marketplace. E.g., in the late 80's/early 90's, IBM sold "IBM PC's" running OS/2. Macs were never called PC's, because they were not PC-compatible machines.

It seems fair to refer to the Mac as a "personal computer" in a very generic sense. But the usage will always seem strange to me given the origin of the term.