New Dell Inspiron 1520 and the new MBP

Well I don't know why Creative's site is not listing that info anymore, but historically they always published the audio specs. This is strange. I say this because I have owned a number of Creative DAPs and this info was easily available, whether on the box of the product itself or online.

Take the iriver clix. It is considered to be a revolution in terms of the UI, both in functionality and easy of use. Cnet is typically hot for iPod, but not this time: http://reviews.cnet.com/mp3-players/iriver-clix-4gb-second/4505-6490_7-32327766.html?tag=prod.txt.2.

Sorry that I cannot document some complaints from consumers off-hand, but again I was pointing to the closed nature of Apple. Just wondering, but why are there no user-accessible ports or covers on the MBP? Except of course the surprising ability for an Apple product of being able to remove the battery? haha.

Oh and if you go with a number of other OEMs (i.e. Sager, Asus, etc) you can typically select what brand hard drive and RAM you want in your computer.

Here is an example from GenTech PC:
http://1toppc.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=F3SV-B1

Another from ProPortable:
http://www.proportable.com/detail.aspx?ID=183

Or Xotic PC:
http://www.xoticpc.com/product_info.php/cPath/95_51_163/products_id/1820

There were others that gave you more info and choices on RAM and HDD but I cannot remember at this moment which notebooks they are.

 

I warned you.. I feel a singularity forming... My face is peeling off as I read this.

Anyhow, I've never totally understood why Apple is seen to have deceptive marketing. If you spend some time in a CompUSA or similar chain, you'll hear over an over, people trying to understand what a "spec" really is as a sometimes knowledgable salesman talks binary...yet the buyer can quickly latch on to..."Oh, that has a centrino..that must be good" It's just marketing, and Apple's very good at it. Most people don't want to be bothered with the specs us tech heads babble over.. they just want something that works, and works well for them. Of course, specs are on their site, and more in the computer should you need them.

As for Apple allowing different brands of ram, you are welcome to upgrade it with anything you choose, but they don't offer multiple brands because that's their choice.. simple as that. Plus it would really confuse the average buyer. They aren't a botique barebones company like xoticpc which you or I would stare at for hours comparing configurations, so that's why these guys offer gratuitous upgrade options.. different market segment.

When it comes to upgrading anything else you can do that.. it will invalidate any warranty. Seems unfair? Well, apple doesn't want the tech help headache. There are fortunately real people you can talk to, and authorized centers who can perform the service work, dedicated to Apple. Every company has their own policies, even botiques. I almost bought a computer till I learned the botique required their techs to do "any" upgrades. So I went with HP because I could upgrade, but the warranty was crap. oh well, that's life

Anyhow, The differences are simple. Mac has OSX..Dell doesn't. Almost no one buys a mac for just windows. If you're thinking that there is "technically" too little spec difference to justify the price..then you need to sit infront of a mac for a day and evaluate it.

 

You're talking about smaller retailers and resellers with a high degree of customization however. Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. - none of these offer you any choice in what brand or type of HDD or RAM goes into your system. Some of them might go so far as to tell you what brand it is if you dig deep enough in their website, while others will try to convince you that their own relabelled branded products are the only ones compatible with their machines (Dell). So I think you're unfairly singling Apple out here.

As for the smaller retailers - not all of them offer that sort of customization on all their machines. A few of them offer a specific brand of RAM or HDD as an marketing aid - i.e. "all our RAM will be Corsair RAM". Others offer the choice of a name brand at a slightly elevated cost. You'll notice yet others charge a small fee just to let you choose a specific brand - regardless of the brand's reputation. So in a sense, you're not getting a "black box", but you're also paying for the ability to know ahead of time what's in that box as well. And in any event, such customization is a definite minority in the laptop market, unfortunately.

 

I just don't want to be told by Apple fans that no other company does it differently. This is simply not the case. And sorry if this is rude, but no one can rightly argue that Apple is NOT a closed system sort of company. They won't even allow their operating system on non-Apple products.

Saying that because Dell does not have OSX (which by the way they would like to implement if Jobs ever gets off his high horse) is hardly a valid reason for saying Apple does this better. And quite frankly it is bothersome to throw down that amount of cash on a MBP and not have the flexibility or "right" to access the hardware I paid for. Why is it that the base warranty is so awful? That surely is not across the board for notebooks.

 

I'm not sure where OSX popped up...someone else can address that.

Apple is a closed system sort of company...but this is the case for most OEMs.

For hardware, you do not have the flexibility or right to change the much of the inside of any laptop no matter where it came from without voiding the warranty. This applies for Dell, Lenovo, HP, Asus, Compal...all of them. RAM and HDD have always been the only things that are typically allowed to be changed by the user - the rest only if you can get away with it without leaving evidence of your changes. This is the case for Apple as well, although there's some grey area about the HDD.

As for warranty - the standard warranty for consumer-level notebooks has usually been only about 1-year. This applies to Dell's non-business lines. This applies even to Lenovo's Thinkpad lines. HP offers only a 1-year limited warranty as well for its consumer lines. Sager only offers 1-year as well. Yes there are some exceptions (Asus, some small retailers), but the majority of consumer laptops across the board offer only some sort of limited warranty for only 1 year without you paying extra.

 

Sony calls theirs Motion-Eye, Acer uses OrbiCam, HP calls it the "Pavilion WebCam" (kinda generic, but still), Lenovo had a special name for it on the Y series (forgot what it was) but do not otherwise use a specific name. So others do it, just they don't market it effectively. (Lenovo did do the Y series pretty well in India, but the Y was never available here...)

 

The iRiver interface is interesting, but I'm not so sure that it's revolutionary compared to any other DAP out there. It seems like the main innovation there is essentially doing away with the typical front "buttons"/navigation and letting the entire top/side/bottom edges act as "soft" buttons that correspond with the function or navigation described next to them. Interesting to be sure, but I'm not sure that this is amazingly better than the iPod or many other DAPs (even other iRiver products for that matter). And anyway, that's basically the input method; the actual software UI itself essentially is the same standard UI that has basically become used across the board on most music players.

Not sure that I'd point to the iRiver Clix as a revolution, personally, but that's also a matter of opinion, so it's not really worth discussing further.

You keep saying you're pointing to the closed nature of Apple, but so far I think I've shown you in numerous ways that they aren't really any more "closed" than anyone else, and that most of the examples you've brought up so far have been either a) incorrect or b) not that different from most other companies.

As for the MacBook Pro; first, you're incorrect that there are no user accessible ports/covers on the MBP. The RAM cover is easily user accessible (and I'd say it's actually easier to replace the RAM than in, say, the Dell D630 which requires removing the keyboard, etc.).

The main part that isn't easily user accessible in a MBP would clearly be the hard drive, but this isn't because Apple is some "closed" company that doesn't want to let users replace the hard drive. It is because the MacBook Pro chassis is an older design (it's essentially identical to the previous PowerBook G4 chassis). If you look at an opened MacBook Pro, you will see that the layout of the internals are such that there would be no easy way to provide a door/cover on the bottom of the machine to access it.

This is just a sort of weakness/limitation of the current MBP chassis design. It's not because Apple doesn't want people to be able to change the hard drive though.

The evidence for this can be seen in the regular MacBook. The MacBook chassis design actually is entirely new (although it still resembles the iBook, the internal design was completely new). The MacBook has an updated internal design that allows for an easily user replaceable hard drive as well as memory.

When Apple does do an update for the MacBook Pro chassis, it is very likely it will adopt something similar to the MacBook as far as this goes.

---

As to your last point; yes, Apple does not offer barebones systems that companies like XoticPC, etc. can use to sell customized systems off of.

Again though, I think you're singling out Apple as if they were significantly different than most other mainstream notebook companies. Yes, they don't offer barebones kits, and you couldn't order a heavily customized MBP from a store that lets you specific the exact hard drive and RAM manufacturers, etc.

 

You have every right to access the hardware you paid for; I'm not sure what makes you think you don't. In the case of the MBP chassis design it's just slightly more difficult to get at some of the components (just as it is with some laptops Dell sells, like the D630 and it's RAM access). You of course will risk voiding your warranty if you do so (that is, completely disassemble the MBP), but you will also void the warranty of many other computers as well....... if I disassembled a Sony TZ, for example, I'd risk voiding my warranty as well.

As for OS X on a Dell, it doesn't have to do with Jobs being on a "high horse". It's because Apple is a hardware/software company, and as a company they have made a decision to focus on selling complete systems. Apple's business frankly depends on selling their own hardware; the volume they would have to sell if they became a software-only company would completely change, and it's unlikely Apple could sell enough Mac OS X licenses for the loss in hardware sales to balance out.

Really, we get the idea, you seem to have a real beef with Apple. But you seem to be using a lot of examples that really aren't that accurate or true.

Certainly Apple is closed in the sense that they sell a complete computer with OS X, and do not sell OS X for other x86 machines, but that's just their approach.

-Zadillo

 

Bill Gates or Michael Dell would kill to be able to get the sort of vertical integration that Apple has with its OS, Macs, and distribution centers (although if Microsoft does it, it'd be called a monopoly by then)

All OEMs are the same when it comes to business - they're all in the same business competing for the same markets after all. Apple's no more closed than anyone else.

 

I popped the OSX bit.. but I didn't say they were better for it..It's a choice. If you want OSX where else will you go? that's what is being said. Anyhow, I think the real comparison here is to Sony, not Dell..

The base warranty for apple isn't aweful.. it's good. Most problems that occur happen in the first year anyways. Ya, it voids the warranty if you tinker.. Apple didn't invent that first by the way. But more over, if you don't like the companies policies..then why fret over it. I just don't get this

 

Yeah, that's the thing, it's just another business model - Apple has used it twice, with the Mac and with the iPod.

Sometimes there ARE benefits to a "closed" system. Look at Microsoft; they realized that their various attempts at approaching the music player market like Windows (PlaysForSure, PMP's) weren't going anywhere, so they essentially mimicked the iPod/iTunes "system" with the Zune (a bit too far in my opinion; I don't see the harm in allowing Zunes to play music from PlaysForSure stores..... and in ignoring them, MS basically makes PlaysForSure even more ridiculous as a concept than it was before).

 

Yeah, I agree. People choose iPods over other mp3 players because they're well-designed and easy-to-use, not because their DRM is incompatible with other companies' DRM.

 

People also choose iPods because most don't realize the better options out there. I'm not going to argue with you over this and that. I do have "beef" with Apple as a company, especially for their increasingly divisive marketing strategies and that first and foremost, they are a marketing company. Afterall, you each seem to agree that this is what Apple does best. They present an image over anything else. With that said, I do like some of the things they've done with the MBP. No I have not used one before, but from what everyone has said on this website and the pictures people have posted, I suppose I assumed that you could not get into the laptop without unscrewing all the screws and pulling it apart. Is there a door underneath where the battery sits?

iPods are just another example of the closed nature of Apple. You can't even remove the battery yourself and replace it. Of course every company wants to market their product as the best in the biz, but the superior nature of Apple's image campaign is frustrating when you consider all the other options that are a) less expensive and b) have many more options. Most other DAPs in the same market segment as each of the iPods offer so many more features.

But this is not about iPods. What is the 90 day parts and labor warranty of the MBP? Dell and the rest of the PC makers you mention only offer 90 days of parts and labor warranty as a base? Well for one, the Dell Latitude line, yes business, comes standard with 3 year warranty.

And no you have not refuted all of my statements. If you or Apple itself want to claim their OS is so vastly superior to Windows, then let's see it run on a PC. Oh right, you're not allowed to. You can however run Windows on a Mac and Microsoft has no issue with this. Apple picks and chooses what to open up based on how they can present it in a Mac vs PC commercial with soft nursery music in the background. It sure seems to me that Apple has done a lot more to create a closed system than an open, all-encompassing one with their marketing strategies. This is the culture they have presented, not PC users. This is why people find their commercials so infuriating.

But since all of this is rather irrelevant to the thread we're speaking on, say what you will, but in the comparison of an Inspiron 1520 vs a MBP, I guarantee that you will have many more customizable options on the Dell system than on the MBP. So there, Dell wins in that one category alone. haha!

 

Regarding the MBP; the RAM access door is directly on the bottom of the laptop. You do need to remove the battery to properly unscrew it though, but it is directly there. The area that requires the MBP to be unscrewed and disassembled is to gain access to the hard drive (the MacBook does not have this limitation, and the hard drive and memory are both easily removable, by simply removing a little door/cover within the battery bay).

This is one of the most common misconceptions I think people have. This idea that Apple is solely about marketing, or that people only buy iPods and Macs because of the marketing.

The iPod hasn't been successfuly SOLELY because of marketing; it's also been successful precisely because the iPod itself is well designed, easy to use, and provided an excellent integrated experience with the iTunes music library management software and the iTunes Store. This was something that most other players didn't do well, and until the Zune, no-one else really mimicked this exactly. Sony also tried to do this with the Connect store and their own app, but both the Connect store and Sony's custom app kind of sucked. MS has come much closer with the Zune stuff.

Again, people get really hung up on features, and think that the iPod must be inferior because it doesn't have some of the more esoteric features of various players. But the iPod does what it does very well, and that is play music, and that's what most people use music players for, which is why the lack of additional features hasn't really been a big deal. So yes, some DAPs offer fully customizable equalizer controls, but a lot of people also don't use them.

The MacBook Pro does not have a 90 day parts and labor warranty. The 90 day thing I think you might be referring to is for free technical support. A Mac by default comes with 90 days of phone tech support, and 1 year parts and labor warranty. AppleCare extends phone support and parts and labor to 3 years.

I don't think anyone here said that OS X was vastly superior to Windows. That is another discussion, and I'm not sure why you brought it up now.

You seem really hung up on this issue that Apple makes a complete computer and designs both the OS and the hardware it runs on.

No-one is saying this makes them SUPERIOR. It does however make them unique. They are not a company that focuses solely on their OS like Microsoft, nor are they a company like Dell which focuses more on building the hardware and using other OS's (Windows, Linux, etc.).

It's just another model, one that has worked well for Apple as a company. Does this make them closed? Sure, relatively. Apple makes their money by selling and designing entire computers. It's an alternative method of making a computer.

I'm not sure exactly why this should upset you so much though. They aren't trying to be Microsoft, nor are they trying to be Dell.

-Zadillo

 

The MBP is not a business laptop...why are we comparing its warranty to business warranties? Of course most business warranties will trump it there. That's like saying the Thinkpad is more durable than the MBP...of course it is, it's supposed to be. If you'll notice, the HP business lines offer 3/3/0 warranty as well. That's just how business laptops are - with the exception of Lenovo, which is a bit stingy there.

And if you go to some Asus ensemble retailer or LG retailer, there's a good chance that you won't have ANY customizable options on it at all. I'm not saying this is a good thing--in fact I'd love for Apple and LG to be more customizable. However, for the scope of this argument, Apple is not the only company that does everything you're accusing it of.

I don't think anyone needs reminders of how badly Microsoft tried to make software packages exclusive to Windows and how they tried to bundle their branded software into Windows....or the series of anti-trust lawsuits that have been filed against it. As mentioned above, if Microsoft could get away with such monopolization tactics, they would. They have certainly tried. I also don't think that limiting OSX to Apples is great for consumers in general (although it certainly is good for Apple), but Apple isn't the only one who's tried this tactic. It's just the most notable, and arguably the most successful.

This isn't really relevant to whether or not Apples sell their computers as an unopenable "black box" is it?

There certainly are problems with the way Apple does business, but it's in the nature of the business itself, and it's echoed by most, if not all, OEMs in some degree. Sure, these practices may be infuriating, but to single Apple out among all those OEMs is a bit unfair. After all, the same accusations could be made against LG, Dell, HP, Lenovo, Asus...

 

It's easy to have "beef" with apple..they actually put a burger between their bun. Those 3 old ladies were stunned. If you want to disassemble the burger though, it takes only a few moments (screws on the side) for the current generation. From a business model stand point though, it makes more sense to offer a few different burgers, plain/cheese/bacon+cheese/whopper..than to say.. "what would you like on your burger" and then watch you put it together take it apart and put the tomato under the beef patty.. insanity

 

...

Junk food is bad for you.

Carry on.

 

I wouldn't call it certain. We don't really know if they would make more or less money by licensing their OS to other hardware vendors, such as Dell and HP. I personally think they would make more money by licensing their OS this way (and still selling their own hardware too), but I can't prove it or anything.

Yeah they did try Mac clones in the '90s, but their OS wasn't as good then, and it didn't work on the same hardware as Windows then, either.

 

True.

Here's an interesting question and one that's completely off-topic...
If Apple did expand the usage license for OSX and even modified it so it could be used with BIOS and distributed it like Microsoft, how many people here on PCs would pay the $129 to buy it as either a replacement or additional OS to Windows simply because of its features as an OS...and assuming (a very big assumption) that any software incompatibilities would be eventually resolved?

 

Depends which company you buy the burger from. Some only sell them with bacon and cheese, while others offer endless possibilities. Moreover, one has to take into account the quality of the beef itself. This is the "beef" that is of utmost importance to me in such a debate.

And to Zadillo, look man, this thread was started by someone asking for positions on an Inspiron vs MBP debate. I did not mean to get it so off tangent. I think I started by asking why Apple seems to push the name or image of a product over its useful specifications in response to the iSight having less megapixels than others.

In response to iTunes, you may not believe it but many people don't like iTunes or the closed nature of the iTunes/iPod integration and prefer to have more freedom in transferring their music between their players and their various computers. Not to mention the whole DRM issue, though some points are in order for Jobs speaking out against DRM - took long enough though, and even still, DRM-free tracks have a surcharge. Whatev...

And as far as Microsoft is concerned, last I checked their OS seems a bit more open in the sense that there is no limitation to the hardware you use with Windows (assuming there are proper drivers) and the 3rd party programs and games that are constantly being developed for it. I know some point to this as to why there are less hardware/software conflicts with Apple but we were speaking about openness afterall. This is for another thread I know, but why until now (with Bootcamp and Intel Macs), was the word "gaming" antithetical to the word Mac?

But yes, indeed programs like Bootcamp make it easier for a PC user to consider buying a Mac for the first time. Honestly, if I can figure out the financial burden of it, I may want to take the plunge on the MBP as well. But this is not for the ability to use OSX but because the combination of hardware components and such make the MBP appealing and because I know I'll be able to still use Windows.

And just to finish, clearly this discussion does not upset me as much as you, Zadillo, since you've been so quick to retort any issues I've raised in the Inspiron/MBP debate as if it's a personal attack on you. Now I could be imagining things, but didn't you have a nasty little post against the Engadget team claiming they were anti-Apple in their most recent Meizu MiniOne (M8) coverage? Well at least the person went by the name Zadillo and is strangely absent from the posts now (I apologize if it was not you):

http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/18/meizus-latest-minione-m8-incarnation/

PS
Yeah, so I'm not a fan of Apple and the way they do things. However, if someone wants to help me buy a new MBP or gift it to me, and I end up liking it, I'll give you all lots of rep points and write a stellar review. Thanks in advance, lol!

PPS
taelrak - Does your question regarding OSX include the possibility of downloading a torrent of said operation system?

 

Since my question is purely hypothetical, to keep extraneous variables constant, let's assume that distribution of OSX via torrents would not be a viable method, since Microsoft does not allow Windows to be distributed that way. If Apple already allows OSX to be distributed this way on Macs however, that's a different story--in that case, we'll simply refer to it as a feature/advantage of the OS.

Either way though, we're only talking about legitimate distribution of licenses, no piracy.

I dislike DRMs in general, but I blame that more on the decadent major record companies and MPAA than Microsoft or Apple.

 

I was purely joking of course. I suppose for the forseeable future, Linux will be the only OS that can tout free distribution as a feature/advantage as well as it being open source. I've never used Linux and its open source nature could be viewed as a disadvantage in terms of lack of hardware and software compatibility compared to, say, Windows. It's wishful thinking for the time being, but wouldn't it be lovely to have a world in which software and artistic media was of and for the people and not all about market share and profits?

Perhaps the release of Safari 3 will give us some insight into your question. Vulnerabilities were found right away, though they were at least quickly patched. I would venture to posit that Apple would be wary of ever marketing OSX as a software-based solution, rather than the current Mac+OSX situation. The usual rallying cries of "it just works" and "no viruses" simply does not hold water when you put it all in perspective.

 

I think you're thinking of someone else regarding any post on the Meizu one. I did post a little comment in a more recent Engadget post where they took a dig at Apple in a story about Dell's recent PR issue with Consumerist (I was basically criticizing Engadget for dragging Apple into a story that had nothing to do with them).

Regarding why I have been responding to all of your posts; it's because generally I have a problem with misinformation, etc. I would post the same thing if this was a Sony or Dell thread and someone was making untrue statements about their products.

As far as why "gaming" was antithetical to the word "Mac"; it actually wasn't always so. Especially when the Mac first came out, it was actually a very healthy gaming platform (companies like EA, Maxis, etc. started out mainly as Mac developers). But Apple as a corporation actually really wanted to avoid games, etc. on the Mac.

The reason for this was that Apple had a tough time as it was getting people to take the Mac seriously; back when it debuted, it was seen as a toy or not a "serious" computer because it had a mouse, GUI, etc. and was not "serious" like an IBM PC. For that matter, Apple even had this problem with the Apple II, although in that case it was seen more as an educational computer, and many businesses wouldn't officially buy them. Famously, many people had to "sneak in" orders for Apple II's to run VisiCalc, for example.

I agree though, this thread shouldn't have gone off on a tangent like it did. I simply tried to respond to your original question (about why Apple uses brand-names), and since then I've been trying to point out that many of the things you have criticized Apple for weren't necessarily true or at least unique to Apple.

I'm not saying Apple's above criticism; there's plenty of things to criticize them for. Same with many other companies. But I do take it seriously when there is some sort of misinformation; lest you think I'm an Apple fanboy, as I said, I have done the same thing in threads where people have attacked Microsoft, Dell, Sony, etc. with incorrect or incomplete information.

-Zadillo

 

You might want to take a look at Ubuntu, frankly. One of the nicest and easiest to use Linux distributions right now, and you can easily test it out with a LiveCD without ever even having to install anything.

Frankly, Ubuntu is actually better in some ways in the hardware front. I was actually impressed when I installed it on my Sony Vaio S360; everything just worked automatically, and it was quicker to install than Windows was.

 

That's really the million dollar question when it comes to OS X licensing.

First, I wouldn't say that Steve Jobs or Apple are inherently opposed to the concept of selling OS X for installation on a regular PC (when Jobs first came back to Apple, he actually used NeXTStep on a ThinkPad). NeXT actually did make NeXTStep for x86 available to purchase, although this was at a different time (and NeXTStep of course never had the chance to achieve the kind of mainstream distribution OS X does with Macs). One issue at the time was that the Intel version of NeXTStep was VERY picky about what hardware it could run on. You needed really specific components to do an install properly.

From a technical standpoint, Apple would need to get MS-like resources though to be able to support Mac OS X on the wide range of PC hardware, develop proper drives for the vast array of possible hardware people could be running it on. The other option of course would be to do what they did back in the NeXT days, and say "OK, here's a copy of OS X, and here are the specific PC hardware components that work with it" but this would be problematic on all sorts of levels.

In terms of making it available as an OS for OEMs to install on their machines, like Dell, there really would be a ton of business factors to deal with. How much would they make from each OEM? What sort of terms would they lay out? Would they let Dell, HP, etc. install the same kind of trialware and custom software that they do on Windows-based PC's (frankly, if MS can't seem to prevent them from doing this, even though they have complained about how these "craplets" interfere with the core Windows experience, I'm not sure Apple would have much leverage to do it either)? Would they restrict what kind of hardware the OEMs could install it on? That is, if Dell wants to sell a $399 Celeron desktop PC with OS X, even though OS X might not run very well, could Apple stop them from doing that?

And then there are the general business factors. The biggest question has always been, how many OS X licenses (to OEMs and retail copies) would Apple need to sell to make up for the loss in hardware? This is something I don't know. But back from the PowerPC clone days, even they had an impact on Apple, and those were fairly small numbers.

And of course, the other big issue would be how Apple would deal with being a software-only company, or at least a company that only controlled the software side of things for many of their customers?

Another question would be how would Microsoft respond? Would they still continue developing Microsoft Office for OS X, if Apple went head to head with them on the OS front? On one hand, one suspects they would keep doing it anyway (since they do make money from Office for the Mac, and it helps ensure that the Office file formats are the standard), if for no other reason than to avoid any antitrust concerns.

These are all big questions, and I am sure that Apple has plenty of MBA's and so forth that ponder all these things, and probably have detailed spreadsheets worked out with numbers that probably answer these questions.

But somehow, I suspect that Apple is going to continue with the OS X/Mac combination for a while to come..........

Of course, as some people have complained, they feel like Apple is actually sort of abandoning the computer market anyway, not putting quite as much focus on OS's and computer hardware as they used to. I'm not sure I agree with this, but if that is the path Apple is going down, the whole question could become moot anyway.

 

For goodness sake dude relax. Take a chill pill. Rants like that aren't going to get people to join you in your bad feelings about Apple. It's only one company that sells products that you have a "Choice" to buy. I don't like Ford cars based on their history of quality control but rather than ranting very abruptly I just don't buy from Ford.
Rather you agree or not Apple doesn't create a superiority with their products, the customers do. A company can tout all day how great their products are over the competition but it's up to the customer to buy them and that's how it's been. The iPod sold itself, not Apple. Remember we have a "Choice". It's not a law requirement.
The iPod was not the first on the market so if other products had a chance they would have outsold the iPod a long while ago.
The topic was about the Dell vs. the MBP in features. Your opinion in the end was biased towards the Dell. I'm sure most people in the forum are fine with that but based on your highly abrupt rant it shows you have bias for the Dell because you hate Apple and your opinion loses credibility. Sorry.

 

I just realized with all of my posts in this thread, I don't think I ever actually discussed the actual topic.

Personally I think it is valid to compare the two machines (based on the leaked specs of the 1520 especially). I think for many people, the Inspiron 1520 will be a pretty logical choice; if it means saving $500-1000, and getting at least somewhat similar specs, Vista, etc. I don't think people would care so much about the weight or thickness, for example.

Of course, any way you slice it, Dell (nor any one else) is sweating losing sales to MBP's. Dell is going to sell a bucketload of Inspirons no matter what.

I think the more interesting point is how the Inspiron 1520 compares to previous Inspirons. First, it looks to me like they've improved the styling a fair bit, and I think I'd go so far as to say the new Dell laptops are some of the finer looking PC laptops out there.

And I'd say that it is nice to see Dell offering the 8600M GT as an option for the Inspiron 1520. I always thought it was kind of bizarre that they didn't offer anything better than an X1400 or whatever on the previous 15" Inspirons. And at that, that Dell didn't even offer anything in the XPS line to fill that niche; it never made much sense to me that Dell never did a 15" XPS machine.... something for people who wanted more power/size than the XPSM1210 but didn't want the big and expensive XPS 17" notebooks.

So, I think the Inspiron 1520 is a really nice improvement. I don't think it's a straight competitor to the MBP, but I can see plenty of people who might have been looking at an MBP for the specs going with an Inspiron instead.

It will be interesting to see how the pricing works out.

I think the other company that should be more directly worried about an Inspiron 1520 with an 8600M GT would be Asus, as it would be an even stronger competitor to the Asus G1S.

 

I didn't know about the NeXTStep thing there... but I do seem to remember seeing some quote from Jobs to the effect of: "I'm interested in making integrated hardware/software solutions. If people want to buy them, great. If they don't, fine." I wish I could remember where that was. So, correctly or not, I've always seen the hardware/software integration thing more as Jobs' personal mission rather than as a carefully-weighed-out business decision. And if that's the case, I can certainly understand it. A "mission" is more important than money... especially when you're already as rich as Jobs.

I wouldn't expect them to support all the hardware Windows supports. I don't see why it's problematic to support only a subset of PC hardware. The OS is usually installed by OEMs. If you wanted to install it after purchase, you could check with your OEM to see if they have drivers for OS X. That said, my impression is that people do seem to get osx86 running on quite a range of hardware right now.

I think OS X would run quite well on a $399 Celeron desktop, if it has 1 GB of RAM. It would probably perform better than on a Mac Mini, which has a better processor, but half the RAM and a much slower 2.5" hard drive.

I think that Apple would have more opportunity to restrict crapware than MS does, since MS is bound by antitrust concerns and settlements.

I do agree that that's the big question. It depends a lot on how much they decide to charge for licenses too. However, with people paying OEMs $30-$150 extra for Premium, Business, and Ultimate editions of Windows, I bet they could get quite a few people to pay an extra $100 or so more than Vista Basic to get OS X.

I like Apple's hardware and I hope they wouldn't stop selling it, for those that wanted tighter hardware/software integration, elegant designs, and Apple's customer service. However, Apple doesn't make the right hardware for everyone, and there are big gaps in Apple's product lines.

Yep, I think you've hit on all the main points around MS Office here. I don't really know the answers... but if MS did kill Office for Mac, I bet Apple would finish the iWork suite in a hurry.

I wouldn't bet on it, but who knows... I'm sure they've at least examined it before.

Me too.

I don't know that they're abandoning computers, but they do seem a slight bit less focused on them, as evidenced by the Leopard delay.

 

Agreed, the only is that the Mac is really for a different audience. Most people that want the MBP are buying it to use as either a Mac or both a Mac and Windows machine. You don't have that option on the Dell. So if someone is just going to use Windows without question I would recommend them to get the Dell.
Dell's real competitors are other Windows machines because they all can run only Windows.

 

Not true. Linux runs fine on most Dells, and Dell even sells machines with Linux preinstalled. Other OSes such as FreeBSD will also run on some Dells as well as other computers you're calling "Windows machines". OS X will run on many Dells too, if you want to download a version that circumvents Apple's lockout mechanism.

 

Okay however I was generalizing (I'm sure you knew that). When you go into any retail store (Best Buy, Fry's, CompUSA) you find only 2 preinstalled OS's, Windows and the Mac OS. My point was anything outside of a Mac would be Dell's competitors because most people considering a MBP is looking to use it for Mac or Mac and Windows use.

 

I know, but it still irks me when Mac users (or anyone, for that matter) go around saying that the only OS that PCs can run is Windows. It's just not true. I mean sure, I know that, but not everyone does, and some people less knowledgeable than me might actually believe it. It bugs me even more with regard to Dell, because Dell actually offers PCs with Linux preinstalled instead of Windows.

If you wanted to say that most Mac users probably wouldn't be considering the Dell due to lack of support for Mac OS X, I would agree with that.

 

hldan - if you were actually keeping track on my posts in this thread, I believe I started off by saying I'm quite biased against the new Inspiron line and have lost some respect for Dell's design decisions. I was actually sounding off FOR the MBP. Though as some have eluded to, in some ways you can't exactly compare the two. However, I disagree with people who state you can't compare a MBP to a Latitude. The Latitude line may be "geared" toward business users, but its price range and build quality is closer to that of the MBP than the Inspiron is. Perhaps a more appropriate comparison is a MBP to an XPS - but even that line is largely based on the Inspirons (or at least the 17" one).

The issues I raised with Apple were tangential to the topic at hand, though to a potential MBP buyer these are things to consider, just as you may take issue with certain of Dell's practices. Note - this is an Inspiron vs MBP thread so it's just as fair for users to "bash" Apple as many tend to with Dell. I hope you all don't think I was blindly targeting Apple; afterall I have applauded the MBP numerous times here.

From all my reading on the NotebookReview forums, I have learned a lot about the current crop of Mac notebooks. I must say, there is a lot to be interested in, concerning the MBP line.

haha - I was actually thinking of the Consumerist article post on Engadget, my mistake and scratch that section of my post about the Meizu. What that article had to do about Apple, albeit in only a small way, was Dell's wish to bring OS X onto their systems. I think you unfairly assumed that Engadget was wholly targeting Apple. And thank you for the Ubuntu suggestion. As soon as I buy a laptop, whatever that may be, I hope to give it a try. Another reason the MBP would be a pleasant choice - ability to try out OS X, Vista (haven't used it yet), and Linux. I kind of do feel like a change in my life. Again though, while the Inspiron line would undoubtedly be cheaper, I believe the Latitude D830 would be another nice compromise and is what I'm currently leaning toward.

Ahh, too much debating, too much hot humid weather.

 

I just can't let this one slide. Can we not all agree here, especially concerning the legality of the matter, that the lack of OS X availability on a Dell is the fault of Apple and NOT Dell?

 

I'm kind of in your boat Rowen, I'm stuck between choosing a MBP or a D830 and can't make up my mind. It's driving me nuts

 

I wouldn't use the word "fault", but yes, obviously it is Apple's decision to not license OS X to Dell or other OEM's.

The one area where would potentially might find fault with Dell would be Michael Dell's suggestion back in the late 90's that Apple should basically close up shop and give whatever money they had back to their shareholders. Dell was basically taking a pretty big slap at Apple saying they were irrelevant.

I somehow suspect that even in the off chance that Apple somehow did decide to license OS X to PC vendors, given Michael Dell's previous statements about Apple as a company, it might be enough for them to skip Dell over.

I am sure of course that Michael Dell regrets what he had said. Having said that, I'm not sure whether Dell would really want to bother with selling OS X on their machines or not - to some degree I think it is one of those things that Michael Dell says precisely because he knows it wouldn't really ever be anything but a hypothetical.

Who knows though, stranger things have happened. Frankly, with Dell offering Ubuntu installed as an option, I think the issue of selling OS X on Dell machines is probably less of a desire than it would have been before.

-Zadillo

 

Try to see one in person if possible. The screens are truly underwhelming.

 

The Latitudes have crappy LCD screens (dim, poor view angles) and crappy video cards. Yes the build quality is better on the Latitudes, but, the Inspiron has better LCD screens and better video cards. Ram, CPU and so forth are similar on any of these laptops since they are all Intel based.

So, ok, the inspirons are not built as well as the Latitudes, and the styling is kind of stupid, but performance wise, and especially performance per buck, the Inspiron is the more apt comparison.

The LCD screen quality and video card options make the Latitudes a non-factor in this space.

 

Thing is, I'm on an inspiron 9300 right now, which is supposedly rated at 200 nits (said that on a review around here), and the D830 screen is supposedly also 200 nits. I find my 9300 screen to be perfectly fine.

Unless you're also referring to contrast ratio and other characteristics, not just brightness?

 

All I know is my friend's Latitude, and the ones we have at the place where I work seem kinda crappy all the way around. Not that sharp, kinda dim, poor viewing angles.

 

I've seen the crappy Latitude D620 screens, so I know what you're talking about. Apparently, they have improved the brightness and viewing angles a lot since then... you can see that from the D630 review here on NBR. The reviewer says the contrast still isn't too great, but I don't think the screens are anywhere near as bad as they used to be. I'm not sure about the D830 screen.

 

The fault of Apple? More like a choice. Apple doesn't want to license their OS. It's not Dell that they are choosing not to deal with, they just choose not to license the system. Now while I agree to some degree that Apple should have long ago and maybe still should license the system. So many people want to use OS X but not at the expense of buying a whole new computer. Switchers have that advantage because they are buying a new computer anyway.
I like the fact that Apple keeps OS X in a closed system because it keeps the quality high. It was terrible when I had my HP's and when I had issues with Windows I could call HP and then they would send me to Microsoft. Then I would call MS and they would say," It's an OEM, you have to deal with HP.
With Apple making the hardware and the OS I can deal with one person on the phone and one company.

 

This may be true, and possibly an asset as you claim. But with people on here pointing at Dell and insinuating that it's somehow their doing or a disadvantage that they do not have OS X as an option on their systems is unwarranted. This is the decision, or "fault" (in the case of anyone wanting to point a finger at or to consider it a disadvantage of Dell) of Apple and no one else. No one has presented any proof of Michael Dell telling Apple to close up shop. But then again, even if it was the case, Apple (Jobs) has been rather antagonistic towards Microsoft and PC users as of late.

 

http://news.com.com/Dell+Apple+should+close+shop/2100-1001_3-203937.html

To be fair to Michael Dell though, Apple was kind of in a shambles at the time, and at that point in 1997 no-one knew really what Jobs and the NeXT people had in store for Apple (note that article from 97 includes the speculation that Apple was going to adopt Windows NT to run its servers, since Mac OS X Server wasn't even known about at the time).

Anyway though, I agree with you - whoever is saying that it is Dell's "fault" that OS X is not available, that is silly of course. Dell has no control over Apple's decisions to license or not license OS X. I don't think I've seen that many people actually make this claim though (that it is Dell's "fault" or decision that OS X isn't available).

-Zadillo

 

I'm really not understanding the concern at this point. If it's between a Dell machine and the Apple Macintosh then that's sort of the clash of the titans. Out of the box the Apple is a "Mac". Installing bootcamp, parallels or other forms of virtualization doesn't turn the Mac into a physical Windows PC nor Linux for that matter. It still has the Mac OS keyboard and trackpad. It's still a phyiscal Macintosh. If your plan is to remove the Mac OS entirely it's not worth trying. So my point is if you are even considering the Dell then you have no intention of using the Mac OS so why consider the MBP at all?
I'm a Mac user and of course it's always cool to see more people buying Macs but it seems like some people here are buying them for the wrong reasons and why waste the time and money?

 

And what would be the right reason? Not sure how useful that illuminated white apple on the lid is....

 

Well, I guess a "wrong" reason would be because they like only the hardware and care nothing for OSX and plan to use it as only a Windows PC...

It's true that the MBP has features no other laptop, including PCs have, such as the screen, the thin chassis, etc., but even with all those, it's still a waste if you buy a MBP and decide not to use the OS in it.

First, you're losing a bit of HDD space on an already small notebook HDD for OSX if you never use it. Even if you do manage to eliminate OSX entirely after you get the boot camp drivers, it's a waste of a really good OS. Boot camp compatibility with drivers, at least for now, is still sketchy, especially for 64-bit versions of Vista, so you wouldn't even be getting as much functionality out of it as you would on a PC.

Also, as hidan mentioned, you're still using the Mac touchpad and the keyboard.

Finally, the MBP is a hefty investment - if you're only getting it for the hardware and not the OS, you're not making full use of your purchase and letting some of your money go to waste.

 

Unfortunately though, the combination of all the hardware components is hard if not impossible to find in a PC laptop. The thin, light, and durable aluminum casing is a definite plus sorely lacking in the PC notebook segment.

 

Wow, what's with arguments on the Apple forums lately?

I agree with Rowen...none of the laptops in the PC market have all the benefits hardware-wise of the MacBook Pro.

As for taelrak, I understand you point. Using a Mac for Windows only isn't really taking full advantage of what you paid for. But, I don't think there really is a "wrong" way to use a computer; its personal preference. Some people only play music on their video iPods; is that a "wrong" way to use the iPod? Not necessarily, but its not using it to its full potential, but it still isn't "wrong". Its just the person doesn't want to watch videos on it but likes its storage size.

I understand your argument, taelrak, but I also understand those that love the design of the MacBook Pro, but only want to run Windows. Its absolutely awesome in every way, the design is brilliant, the specs are awesome, the built-in features (iSight, illuminated keyboard, MagSafe, two-finger scrolling) are awesome. Many would rather get the MacBook Pro to run Windows than a Sony VAIO, which although is very cool and sleek looking, still isn't as nice as the MacBook Pro. So I don't think its a "waste" to use a Mac only for Windows...to many its still worth more to run Windows on a MBP than on a Sony. But I feel they haven't used the MacBook Pro to its full potential.

 

Well there are PC laptops nearly as thin, light and durable. The thinkpad's only barely thicker and heavier but it can be run over more times by a car probably (or so they claim!). But you're right in that with the specific combination of thinness, the GPU, and the screen, the MBP is pretty unique.

I don't consider it "wrong"...sorry if I gave that impression. But I do feel it a bit of a waste to not take advantage of its full potential. You're still crippling yourself a bit if you just plan to run only Windows on it...and paying a premium to do so.

Still, no one uses any computer to its full potential in every area as it is, so it's not that big a deal.