Early Impressions of T500 from a Macbook Pro User

I'm not surprised at all. I own a T400 and a MacBook Pro, and while they feel very different, they are both extremely good keyboards. My only MBP typing complaint involves the rather sharp front edge of the aluminum case that can cut into your wrists if you have bad typing position like I do. The keys themselves are fabulous, though funny-looking.

The ThinkPad keyboard is legendary, and rightly so, but Apple's new generation keyboards are right up there, better for those who like a light touch, not as good for those who like longer travel.

I prefer the ThinkPad keyboard myself, but I have no trouble understanding someone preferring that of the MacBook Pro.

Other than keyboard, the MacBook Pro, in my opinion, is a better machine in most respects than the T400. I haven't played with a T500, but the T400 wasn't any lighter, was only a tiny bit smaller and was quite a bit thicker than the MacBook Pro, with a smaller, vastly inferior screen (LED 1440X900).

That said, my MacBook Pro is matte screen, which I love.

 

but the MBP hinge design doesn't allow 180 degrees opening nor does it have dock connectors.......

 

Apple= for students, chicks, artsy, writers, Hollywood, wannabees etc. More focused on style than substance. Used to look like money but hang out at Starbucks.
Thinkpad = CEO, Enterpreneur, Wall Street, Fortune 500, International, serious students, heterosexual. Used at airport and in boardroom. Used to make money.
Sony Vaio = sort of in between

 

Also, the above holds true for iPhone versus Blackberry.
Apple=iTunes professional
Thinkpad/Blackberry=IT professional

lol

You know its all true bra. Shaka.

 

lol heterosexual, ya got a good point there

 

LOL... I agree with what you wrote about the ThinkPad.

 

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=apple+fag

 

I have a TP and a MBP...does that make a tranny? lol

 

that is stupid. you are trying to pitch people basing only on brand they are using.

it is evident that technically apple (unibody, not prev. generation, unibody is bug fix around prev. generation) is create laptop, with the best screen (to me it is very important) on the market. T500 is another create laptop with crappy screen. Even legendary Flexview had never satisfied me. It was really dim, I could not stand it.

let's discuss something measurable instead of sticking people with labels.


PS: I am far from apple lounge

 

I'm only writing what I see.

 

That is the most shallow thing i have ever heard. You obviously have no idea what talking about. In fact, i work at Microsoft Redmond as a security guard and i see ton of macs in peoples offices, and a lot of Microsoft employees using iphones.

So, teenage girls that use Blackberries, are IT professionals? Nonsense posts like that make you look like a blind fanboy. Look at OP very balanced and comprehensive write up.

 

Wow....you said what I've been thinking all along.

Well said.


hang loose!

 

Insecure much?
My guess how you will categorize Acer, and Asus customers:
Acer = Cheap sods
Asus = Cheap sods that wants to game.

So my friend that goes to UC Berkley that uses his 15" Uni 2009 Macbook Pro for his Java programming classes is not a serious student? right.

You know Apple's Macbooks are pretty full featured. Bluetooth, Webcam, IR, DVD Burner, LED Backlit Display + Higher Res screen than ordinary laptops, Backlit Keyboard, Great Battery life...
It's a good notebook for a lot of people

And I see you put "wannabes" in the Apple categories. So people who don't fit in your categories are wannabes as well? Of course not right? Because they're using a Thinkpad.

right.

 

this discussion is senseless. u get what u want. if they were such bad machines nobody would buy them. this goes even for Acer. as long as u don't game or use it 24/7 carry it around all day, it does the job. nobody in here i think spends more than $1k without reading any reviews ^^

 

Some people have no sense of humour. They are generallized observations though with statistical validity IMO.

 

Nope, it's REALLY OLD and tiring to hear when someone even mentions Apple vs whatever, or categorizing their users.

 

I have also noticed glossy screen look far better than a matte screen. Mainly a matte screen needs a far brighter back light to look as good as a glossy screen. Compare the outdoor viewable screens to the glossy screens. Or a desktop monitor, which feature far more powerful back lighting.

I've always equated build quality to how long will the machine last and how much abuse it will take. Maybe that's technically durability, but in today's reviews, build quality is synonymous with durability. I don't see how one machine can feature better build quality but have lower durability than a comparable machine. I think that is a misinformed rating.

 

I disagree. Suppose it's well built but made out of cheap plastic that falls apart. Or say it's built out of stainless steel but put together poorly. You can't lump it all together. Something shows up at your door, it's put together well, feels solid in your hands, not loose parts, etc, it's got good build quality. Doesn't mean it won't fall apart tomorrow because the materials are cheap, and vice versa.

 

I agree.

The apple tax was worth it for me 5 years ago when I bought my Powerbook G4. I had no qualms whatsoever about putting that in a bag along with books and what have you, and after 5 years, a few dents, and a charred vent, it hasn't given me any problems. Back then OS X was also miles ahead of Windows in terms of usability and stability.

Nowadays Windows 7 is a fine OS, and I have no reason to prefer Snow Leopard. I'm typing this on a unibody MBP and I just don't have the same confidence in it's build. My own view is that Apple slid the form vs. function slider a little too far towards the former for this generation. They've been aggressively trying to increase their market share (fair enough, they're a business) and I feel like a lot of their design is focused on making OTHER people like this computer.

Function over form is why I opted to switch over to Thinkpads. They're the last bastion of practicality in a market that has too much emphasis on how sleek and new something is, for my liking.

I don't know I think when you consider that the whole purpose of a laptop compared to a desktop is that it can be carried around, any judgment of build quality should depend on how well it fulfills that main purpose.

Your argument may hold for a piece of origami--that can be very well made yet not be durable. However, if something that's meant to be carried around can't hold up to that, I think that is poor quality.

 

Which further drives my point home. Consumers derive durability from the build quality section of a review.

Then what's the point of rating how it feels in your hand when it has no correlation with how long it will last. It's like equating the color of the chassis to the quality of the display. It sounds irresponsible to me to improperly further a trend that has nothing to do with the durability of the machine.

Like keyboard flex. I've never understood why that deserves more space in a review than say the buttons on the bezel of a machine. Reviews devote entire sections to chassis flex which is read as equating to the durability of the machine. Yet only two sentences may be devoted to the buttons on the bezel. It just sounds irresponsible.

 

I agree with you, its like blackberry vs iphone, people who are practical get a blackberry, people who want to 'fit in' get an iphone thinking its really 'cool'...

 

Lol, nope buddy, it's just that i can't picture a programmer ever using a MacBook but whatever floats yer boat i guess. Sure they have alot of good points, and i acknowledge that, but they also have alot of bad points, for example the sheer assumption Apple has that their customers are too stupid to ever upgrade anything on them (cause in many cases you can't, even RAM), so they make it unservicable, like the MacBook Air, you couldn't even replace the battery. So basically some of the things they do when designing their laptops makes us think about the demographics that use them.


Also i find it annoying that you couldn't just take his comment as a joke... which it kinda was.

 

Do you relate the build quality to the gap width between different exterior panel components, how shiny the exterior is and what exotic materials they can employ for the exterior casings?

Durability -> i think relates to the quality of the component design, how things are put together within the entire structure, how components are placed within the structure.....

case in point.... the AK-47 (not so great build quality but high durability) and M16 (great build quality but not so great durability in real combat situation)...

 

The components could look like a gapped tooth grin, but if it could take a friggin missile, I'm all for it.

 

If I'm spending my money on a laptop I want both durability and good initial build quality. That's why I object to lumping the two together. I think something can show up on your door and have fine build quality only to fall apart, or look like it was put together by a two year old, yet maintain that form and condition for 25 years. Why lump it? The more Information the better. I want to hear what the build (putting it together) quality is as well as the durability (can it withstand time) is. Both factors are important in choosing a laptop. Ultimately however I think we both are looking for the same things, we just both see the phrasing of things a little different.

 

Sorry, but the reality would indicate otherwise. Mac laptops' share among my classmates and professors at CMU SCS was about 15%, about double of Apple's PC market share then. And this was in the PowerMac era. During my stint in SCS Facilities, the in-department IT support group, I learned from the Mac support group that the percentage was actually higher around 20%.

My classmate who later went on to work at Google ca. 2006 relayed that MacBooks are widely used in the company.

There are many reasons that developers prefer MacOS X (and Linux). In academia, professors and students usually cut their teeth on Sun and Digital workstations, therefore the Unix underpinning of (Darwin) OS X and Linux is instantly familiar. Additionally, Darwin and Linux are open source, such that if the developer encounters an unexpected behavior, he or she can immediately investigate and fix the source of the problem, instead of waiting for weeks for a vendor to acknowledge the problem and months to provide a fix or workaround.

However in the business world, indemnity is the name of the game. To the managers, it's far more important to be able to pin the failure on another party.

 

So how about something looks good but never works properly?

 

The Apple is all asthetics and image. Sure its sleek but most Mac users these days are dual booting a Windows OS. Why do you think they prefer Windows?

I've never seen a businessman use an Apple.

 

Can we just drop it? You made your point, i'll stick with PC's, you'll go for Macs, great i understand completely. I didn't expect a response that had thought put into it.

 

@msb0b

i don't think all the faculty in university use the Sun workstations or Unix as an operating system. There are many programs are just simply unavailable on the Mac OS. Some departments within the university use Mac OS due to the simplicity and intuitive nature of the Mac OS, and it is less prone to crashing.

Also, many faculty choose Apple computers, because the design of the machine blends in with their new avante garde office design/setup, not because they know more about the underpinning of the Mac OS than the Windows OS.

 

I was once told by a MAC faculty "MAC never crashes." And a iMAC in his lab crashed shortly after.

 

thanks for posting. i have just one little thing to correct though.

currently the MBP maxes out at 8gig.

 

Mac OS crashes less, but it still crashes.

 

Macs also have a cure cancer button—Windows does not.

 

obviously Steve Job forgot to use that...

 

This comeback has so much WIN in it, I'm surprised it can be contained by the servers.

 

I dont see any Apples being used at Fortune 500 companies, just maybe a small minority of employees in the graphics departments. It's just an overhyped toy.

 

Hey, I just wanted to share my experience in the real world. What kind of response were you expecting if not a thoughtful one?

And for the record, I own and use a T60 daily for work or else I would not be in this forum. I have no interest in owning a Mac. It has its merits, but it's not the right tool for what I need it to do. Regardless, I don't need to badmouth it to justify my decision.

Not all schools are created equal. Once there was an interviewer who told me about a candidate describing his CS curriculum taught on DOS...

I can only speak of my experience at CMU SCS. (That's Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science for those who are wondering.) Through the 90's, UNIX was the main platform at the elite CS research schools: MITs, CMUs, Stanfords and Caltechs of the world. Sun SparcStations, Digital DECstations and Alphas, HP-PA, SGI etc. were the standard workstations. Windows prior to NT4.0 (1996) and MacOS prior to OS X (2001) just didn't have the same robustness that the researchers demand.

Today, UNIX still has a stronghold due to the open source nature of Linux, OpenSolaris, etc. The benefits of an open source platform is enormous to the developer. Sometimes it can even outweigh the lack of tools.

A developer should be able to create tools to solve the problems at hand if nothing is readily available.

Again, I can only speak for the situation at SCS. The researchers couldn't care less how their office looked. Their job was to conduct experiments on their algorithms and publish papers. It was all about choosing the right tool for the job.

 

Researchers may not care since they are not buying the equipment, but the head of department would care depending on the situation. Architecture and Design departments are case in Points.

Also, what you mentioned in your example relates to the Computer Science department, which is hardly representative of the entire university.

 

in my experience Apple are super popular with alot of faculty simply because they are easy as hell to get (and are always stocked) in campus book stores. Simply write up a campus order and go grab one, while ordering equipment from other vendors is a pretty involved process that usually takes a while and sometimes requires extra approvals depending where your equipment money is coming from.

For a longest time the PCs we had in the lab all came as a part of another package such as bundled with microscope or another piece of equipment.