Mac or PC

Frank Black · 07-03-2013 4:50pm #1

Our current laptop is starting to show it's age. It's about 5 years old at this stage and myself and the OH are thinking of upgrading shortly.
We've always previously bought Dell laptops, as I was able to purchase them through my workplace and it always worked out quite cheap. I've moved jobs since though and now will be just buying direct from a shop/online.

The OH is quite into photography and has suiggested going for a Mac as apparently the photo-editing functions are good on these.

Other than photoediting the laptop would be mostly used for internet browsing/streaming, some gaming (though I wouldn't describe myself as a hardcore-gamer) and general work stuff (mostly word/excel based).

Our budget would be around €1.5K - €2K.
We'd like it to last for at least 4 years and maybe a bit longer without requiring an upgrade.

Given our budget and requirements, is a macbook the option to go for or would you get more 'bang for your buck' with a windows pc?

Thanks in advance.

Torqay · 07-03-2013 5:39pm

black francis wrote: »

would you get more 'bang for your buck' with a windows pc?

Always.

SmithG · 07-03-2013 5:42pm

I am interested in a MAC but have always used a Windows PC laptop so think I would stuggle to switch now!

Plutonium Kun · 07-03-2013 5:48pm

I'm in the same position as you, I've been reading up as much as I can the past few weeks. My instinct is that a Windows based laptop offers more bang for the buck, but every review website/magazine seem to have the consensus view that while individual Windows based laptops may be better for one thing or another, when it comes to the balanced package, Apple just can't be beaten (much to the annoyance of many).

So my reading of it is that if you have the money for a quality laptop, but don't have a specific use in mind as priority over all else (e.g. gaming), then a macbook air should be your choice.

It should also be pointed out that with a budget of up to 2k, you could maybe buy two laptops as you are a couple - a decent Dell or Asus with lots of power for editing and photo-work, and a chromebook for casual browsing.

Torqay · 07-03-2013 7:08pm

Plutonium Kun wrote: »

when it comes to the balanced package, Apple just can't be beaten (much to the annoyance of many).

Is that so?

Lets have a look at the MBP for 1850 yoyos then (which would meet the OP's budget):

15" Display (1440x900)

2.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 3610QM
Turbo Boost up to 3.3GHz
4GB 1600MHz memory
500GB 5400-rpm hard drive
Intel HD Graphics 4000
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 512MB of GDDR5 memory

For the same price, I'd rather buy the PCS Vortex III in the following configuration:

15,6" display, 1920x1080
Core i7 3740QM
16 GB RAM
240 GB Intel SSD
Nvidia Geforce GTX 680M (4GB GDDR5)

Now, there's one "balanced package" for you.

Plutonium Kun · 07-03-2013 7:24pm

Torqay wrote: »

Is that so?

Lets have a look at the MBP for 1850 yoyos then (which would meet the OP's budget):

15" Display (1440x900)
2.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 3610QM

Turbo Boost up to 3.3GHz

4GB 1600MHz memory

500GB 5400-rpm hard drive

Intel HD Graphics 4000

NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 512MB of GDDR5 memory

For the same price, I'd rather buy the PCS Vortex III in the following configuration:

15,6" display, 1920x1080
Core i7 3740QM
16 GB RAM
240 GB Intel SSD
Nvidia Geforce GTX 680M (4GB GDDR5)

Now, there's one "balanced package" for you.

A 'balanced package' also includes things like user experience (ergonomics, design), and the integration of software and hardware, along with after sales service. All the numbercrunching power in the world is no use if you've a bad screen, a lousy keyboard, and software that keeps crashing.

Torqay · 07-03-2013 7:47pm

Oh, so because it ain't Apple it's a bad screen, lousy keyboard and keeps crashing? Right, I hear ya...

And as for Apple's "after sales services", their repair fees are sheer rip-off (of course, it's an Apple and doesn't go kaputt).

avalon68 · 08-03-2013 1:38am

i have a mbp (over 3 yrs old) as my personal computer, and at work have a reasonably high spec Toshiba portege business laptop. On paper, the toshiba beats the mac in almost every respect....better processor, more ram....2 years newer than the mac. In reality the mac beats it in every way. Its much faster, hardly ever requires a restart, could count on one hand the number of blue screen events since I got it, software works seamlessly, itunes works great/fast. The toshiba on the other hand - have to restart everytime anything updates, usually crashes at least every second day when I do anything taxing on it, the screen is just horrible and flexes so much when you apply even slight pressure while its closed that it is now warped, the keyboard is truly awful - the feedback is terrible, and its basically black on black with no backlight, the fans sound like a jet engine when I do anything other than type in word or check email and the trackpad just drives me insane.....so for me, its not just the specs on paper that matter - mbp build quality is great and I feel I get a much better user experience from the macbook pro than the toshiba.

Plowman · 09-03-2013 1:57pm

This post has been deleted.

Torqay · 09-03-2013 4:20pm

Plowman wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Unfortunately, for €1,550 will only get you a MBP Retina with a dual Core i5 processor, which will be outdated in 2 or 3 years time. If you want something rather future proof (which I would want if I was about to spend so much money), you'll buy a quad Core i7, which costs €1,850 with the 1440x900 display (or €2,250 with Retina). Of course, if you want a 256 GB solid state drive, you'll have to cough up another 600 yoyos.

Plowman · 09-03-2013 5:07pm

This post has been deleted.

avalon68 · 09-03-2013 5:26pm

Torqay wrote: »

Unfortunately, for €1,550 will only get you a MBP Retina with a dual Core i5 processor, which will be outdated in 2 or 3 years time. If you want something rather future proof (which I would want if I was about to spend so much money), you'll buy a quad Core i7, which costs €1,850 with the 1440x900 display (or €2,250 with Retina). Of course, if you want a 256 GB solid state drive, you'll have to cough up another 600 yoyos.

It wont be outdated - It will still be a very powerful computer and will do probably everything the OP will need it to do for many years to come. Very few people push a machine to the limits of its capacity - most people will never need 16GB ram, the fastest processor as they wont be doing anything that requires it.

joetoad · 09-03-2013 5:32pm

With Macs your paying an extra 600 or 700 just for the operating system. I like Mac's but its so much easier to get applications for windows.

Torqay · 09-03-2013 5:48pm

Plowman wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

That's what I'd be telling myself too, if I spent 1,200 yoyos on a Mac.

But let's face it, a 3 yr old MBP with a Core 2 Duo processor is not up to the more challenging tasks anymore (and yet Apple is asking insane prices for such refurbs, which goes to show they still sell as a life style object).

It's the nature of the beast that operating systems and software are getting more and more demanding.

joetoad · 09-03-2013 5:50pm

Torqay wrote: »

That's what I'd be telling myself too, if I spent 1,200 yoyos on a Mac.

But let's face it, a 3 yr old MBP with a Core 2 Duo processor is not up to the more challenging tasks anymore (and yet Apple is asking insane prices for such refurbs, which goes to show they still sell as a life style object).

It's the nature of the beast that operating systems and software are getting more and more demanding.

A core 2 duo processor would definitly still be grand for challenging applications on a Mac not much so on a windows laptop. New Macs with i7 and i5 will be grand for 5 years or longer. Newer updated technology won't be outdated as fast

Amirani · 09-03-2013 5:51pm

If value is in any way a consideration, I think you'd be crazy to go Mac over Windows.

marco_polo · 09-03-2013 5:59pm

If I had 2K I'd be dropping 1K on a custom i7 work powerhouse from PCS and 1K on a pretty decent ultrabook from saveonlaptops.co.uk. :P

Amirani · 09-03-2013 6:00pm

marco_polo wrote: »

If I had 2K I'd be dropping 1K on a custom i7 work powerhouse from PCS and 1K on a pretty decent ultrabook from saveonlaptops.co.uk. :P

I'd probably do similar.

joetoad · 09-03-2013 6:20pm

I have to say a lot of new windows laptops out today have class cases and look better than Macs. Long gone are the days of the big black bulky laptops

ironclaw · 09-03-2013 6:31pm

My oldest computer memory is booting DOS and Windows 95 when I was 5. Was always a Windows fan and wouldn't use anything else. Gradually got into music and needed a Mac for various music reasons.

I've had the 13 and 15" MacBook Pro and recently bought a 15" Retina. If you actually used a Retina you would never use another computer. I mean that. The speed is unparalleled and the screen is incredible. I get headaches in work when I'm using standard displays. Waiting for a computer to do something is a thing of the past for me. Boot time is about 15s. And yes, I have a Windows PC on an SSD and its no where near as fast. Why? The OS is rubbish.

As has been said, its not about number crunching or raw specs. I've never, ever met anyone who's bought a Mac and gone back to Windows (Granted thats my experience there obviously would be people who would go back. Each to their own) I've never been able to find a piece of software that I couldn't get or similar for Mac. And they never, ever slow down.

Windows is not a good operating system at the moment. Its heavy, clunky and drivers are the bane of your life if you have anything to use with it. I've never download a driver for anything on Mac. And thats working with various music systems and even as obscure as RFID interfaces for testing.

Finally, they are a dream to type on. If you typed a Thesis on one you'd know what I mean.

Yes, they are overpriced when you purely look at specs. But its the whole package your paying for. Anyone's opinion who hasn't used both (And I mean seriously used in a work / dev environment) is mute in my opinion.

avalon68 · 09-03-2013 6:57pm

Torqay wrote: »

That's what I'd be telling myself too, if I spent 1,200 yoyos on a Mac.

But let's face it, a 3 yr old MBP with a Core 2 Duo processor is not up to the more challenging tasks anymore (and yet Apple is asking insane prices for such refurbs, which goes to show they still sell as a life style object).

It's the nature of the beast that operating systems and software are getting more and more demanding.

Mine is core 2 duo - outperforms the i5 on my work pc easily. Almost every program is more responsive on the mac. I dont game on either though, so you might see improvements if you are a big gamer.

5uspect · 09-03-2013 6:58pm

I switched to a Mac a few years ago and I don't regret it. (I saved a few bucks with the Education discount). Here are a mixture of my thoughts on the matter.

Yes, you get more horsepower on a similarly priced generic laptop but this ignores a lot of what make the Mac a solid computing platform.

The UX is significantly better on OS X (and on typically more polished Linux distros) compared to Windows. The trackpad and gestures are better than anything you'll find on most other systems. Apple hardware and software is very consistent, the keyboard I use on my 13" MBP is identical to the one I use on my work iMac. It's very hard to find that level of consistency across any other system. I don't have to deal with bloatware or poorly designed custom OS modifications - I'm looking at you Samsung and your ****ty wifi interface.

3D performance is better on Windows compared to OS X with to more mature drivers due Windows being the historical gaming platform (I still game on a PC and will probably continue to).
Battery Life is much better on OS X on the same Apple hardware.
You can run Windows on a Mac if you must. You can get Office (or one of the many fine free alternatives) for OS X.

As an Academic, OS X provides a great middle ground between the Windows and the Linux environments - out of the box. I can deal with MS Exchange Server, with Office files and Windows shares easily. I can connect to Linux clusters through SSH or Telnet without having to install third party terminal emulators since OS X is UNIX based and therefore a fully POSIX compliant system. I have basic compilers installed by default. LaTeXit for OS X is fecking awesome.

Finally there is attention to detail. You can open a MacBook with a single finger since it's perfectly balanced. Most other laptops you have to prise open with both hands or risk clattering it off your desk. My magsafe charger is ingenious, the little light below the highres dock icons showing me which apps are running is simple yet effective, the flashy windows management (Expose and Mission Control) is designed to be instantly useful unlike the 3D silliness in Windows 7. Then there is the integrated dictionary, the powerful native PDF support, video support, quick look, multiple desktops...

So yes, a Mac is initially more expensive but OS updates are cheap and incremental compared to windows - you won't get that Win8 jarring UI change. , They are less prone to the dreaded slowdown Windows can suffer from. The OS is snappy and well designed; I found my productivity increasing with OS X. I've found that they last longer and are more robust I expect a generic laptop to last about 3 years - I would think my Mac will give me six years with an SSD upgrade.

Finally Macs are not immune from viruses. After a long fight with malware modern versions of Windows has come out pretty secure. Apple on the other hand are looking down the barrel of a fresh onslaught, due to increasing market share, so it should be interesting to see how it pans out.

Torqay · 09-03-2013 10:17pm

avalon68 wrote: »

Mine is core 2 duo - outperforms the i5 on my work pc easily.

Care posting some benchmarks to substantiate your claims? Perhaps Geekbench results, which is available for Windows and Mac OSX.

Peregrine · 09-03-2013 10:42pm

No no no! Not another one of these threads

For 2k you can buy not one but 2 Windows computers that are better than a Macbook

joetoad · 09-03-2013 11:10pm

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

No no no! Not another one of these threads

For 2k you can buy not one but 2 Windows computers that are better than a Macbook

No your slightly wrong, Macbooks integrate better with the processor and rest if the hardware so you will see a much better performance with the same processor in a macbook maybe twice(well not quite twice) than that of the same processor in a windows machine.

Plowman · 09-03-2013 11:12pm

This post has been deleted.

Torqay · 10-03-2013 3:10pm

joetoad wrote: »

Macbooks integrate better with the processor and rest if the hardware so you will see a much better performance with the same processor in a macbook maybe twice(well not quite twice) than that of the same processor in a windows machine.

This is just not true, I just did a quick search in the Geekbench result browser for the Core i5 3210M (which is used in the current MacBook Pro) and compared the results between Windows and Mac OSX. While the MacBooks fare better on average, the fastest laptop I could find was a Lenovo Z580 with Windows 8 (score 8010) while the fastest MBP was a fair bit slower (score 7403).

Geekbench doesn't test the graphics performance (the 512 MB GT 650M in the MBP is nothing to write home about anyway), only CPU and memory performance, but it should be sufficient evidence to debunk your myth of the "better hardware integration".

5uspect · 10-03-2013 3:36pm

Torqay wrote: »

This is just not true, I just did a quick search in the Geekbench result browser for the Core i5 3210M (which is used in the current MacBook Pro) and compared the results between Windows and Mac OSX. While the MacBooks fare better on average, the fastest laptop I could find was a Lenovo Z580 with Windows 8 (score 8010) while the fastest MBP was a fair bit slower (score 7403).

Geekbench doesn't test the graphics performance (the 512 MB GT 650M in the MBP is nothing to write home about anyway), only CPU and memory performance, but it should be sufficient evidence to debunk your myth of the "better hardware integration".

The claim by joetoad that a Mac is nearly twice as good as Windows with the same hardware is just silly. I would guess that raw performance is about the same on average. I would say the OS X interface is snappier from a UX perspective but not computationally faster. A good way to check is to look at bootcamp performance on Apple hardware, for example
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/07/windows-and-os-x-boot-camp-running-redmond-at-retina-resolution/

There is a point to be made that the hardware, on a whole, is better integrated in a Mac since the hardware is build and controlled by Apple. This may not be to everyone's taste - but you get a well designed total package.

Can I ask you if you've ever used a Mac for any extended period of time? Your insistence on hardware component specs as a measure of a machine limits the discussion on why a Mac is an excellent platform. Of course an American muscle car with a 12 litre V8 engine will be cheaper and more powerful than a German engineered saloon but which one will be more refined? As you note MacBooks fair better on average.

ironclaw · 10-03-2013 3:37pm

Torqay wrote: »

This is just not true, I just did a quick search in the Geekbench result browser for the Core i5 3210M (which is used in the current MacBook Pro) and compared the results between Windows and Mac OSX. While the MacBooks fare better on average, the fastest laptop I could find was a Lenovo Z580 with Windows 8 (score 8010) while the fastest MBP was a fair bit slower (score 7403).

Geekbench doesn't test the graphics performance (the 512 MB GT 650M in the MBP is nothing to write home about anyway), only CPU and memory performance, but it should be sufficient evidence to debunk your myth of the "better hardware integration".

With respect, you can't compare purely on raw numbers. In reality both platforms at a hardware level are the exact same. And even then its a bad comparison because its not like for like. And I understand your a Windows fan

But your hardware comparison is completely mute. You can't compare cars on its engine. For instance the Nissan GTR is faster that some Ferrari's but pretty much half the price. However most Ferrari's are a vastly more comfortable to drive (At least the one's I've had the pleasure of being in) You have to view the entire package as a whole.

Torqay · 10-03-2013 4:06pm

Your car comparison doesn't wash, unlike the Nissan and the Ferrari (which, you must admit, are vastly different under the hood) the hardware in a Mac is pretty much the same as used in a comparable PC: Intel processor, Nvidia GPU, Realtek soundchip, Seagate HDD or SanDisk SSD, Foxconn motherboard, etc. All off-the-rails components as used by many other PC OEMs. Some are even assembled in the same Chinese sweatshops, just on different production lines.

ironclaw wrote: »

And I understand your a Windows fan

And I understand, one can run Windows on a Mac.

Mac or PC

Comments