[citation][nom]ssr[/nom]@resonance451Oh wait, you're just another idiot consumer.again you are going out of the track dear.what masses are buying depends on the personal choice of the masses, their taste, their purchasing power, their carrying capacity.we are here to just provide the facts not to force the masses to buy this or that.[/citation]
I'm not here to force the masses to buy anything. In fact I'm against consumerism. My interest is in forcing people to look at the facts and make their choices based upon that. It doesn't mean I require all to draw the same conclusions, just to draw only valid conclusions.
[citation][nom]ssr[/nom]My mantra is always price/performance ratio.you have mentioned sony vaio again and again and if i am not wrong they are also considered second apple. this is mass opinion not the subjective BS.[/citation]
...aaand the difference is..?
Also, the reason I reference Vaio so much is exactly for that fact: because they emulate Apple and provide what I feel is the closest Windows equivalent in aesthetics and build. I personally despise Sony, but I feel that I must look objectively at what products they have. Is this also difficult to comprehend?
[citation][nom]ssr[/nom]the price performance ratio of vaio is not that you generalize this for the masses. and one more thing u said gap b/w desktop and laptop performance is decreasing i am not agree with you on this point. you just cant beat ATX or eATX form factor with crippled space.there are i7 machines available from the European vendors in laptop chassis but again we talking here for the masses and our limit is 2k.[/citation]
What I'm referencing is the price/performance ratio on a laptop vs. a desktop, and it has indeed decreased. Aside from that, the expandability and pound-for-pound power on laptops has also increased. You can build your own laptop and do many things with it that used to be exclusive to desktops. Even two years ago it was difficult customize hardware and use laptops for what desktops can be used for. I'd call that a gap that's closing.
[citation][nom]Yoder54[/nom]You should read the article instead of looking at the pictures and charts. He stated that we pulled the computers based on screen size...so he went with the 16.4" screen Vaio...that is closer to 17" than the 18.4. He also commented on how the Vaio got hit with poor quality as a result of its price. Go with the 18.4" Vaio and you come in at close to $2800, but you do not get DDR3. This is $100 dollars less than what I paid for my 17" MBP with the same specs. I was willing to go either way prior to my purchase, but all things being equal the Mac came out on top and so I purchased it and I love it.[/citation]
As a result of its price? Wow, you really are fucking dense. The Vaio is configurable, and the only way to compare the two properly is through price/performance ratio. To do that, the products have to have a control in addition to the variables. Comparing a $1600 Vaio a $2800 Mac and wondering why the latter has better performance is ridiculous when for $2800 using the 16.4 inch screen you can get far better than that $2800 Mac. In fact, I'm going to go on Sony's website and custom configure an FW series laptop.
Here's what I came back with:
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor T9800 (2.93GHz)
8GB DDR2-SDRAM (DDR2-800, 4GBx2)
500GB SATA Hard Disk Drive [5400 rpm]
Blu-ray Disc™ Read and Write Drive
ATI Mobility Radeon™ HD 3650 with 512MB vRAM
LCD 16.4" (XBRITE-FullHD™) 1920x1080
Price tag? $2549.99. Clocks in at 6.7 pounds.
The Mac?
2.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
4GB (two 2GB SO-DIMMs) of 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM
320GB Serial ATA; 5400 rpm
NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT w/512mb
Price tag? $2799. Weighs in at 6.6 pounds.
So, as I see it, these are the most important specifications. All the other little specs might be important to the individual user, but these are the core of things and what matters most. In this area, I see that the Mac is superior in only these fashions, and wish qualifications:
17 inch vs. 16.4
A tenth of a pound lighter
1066MHz DDR3, though with caveat: 4gb, not 8gb.
And that just about does it. I'd say that's a fair and even comparison of both models. Here's what Sony has, however, that Apple doesn't:
2.93GHz dual core vs. 2.66
500gb HDD vs. 320gb HDD
Blu-ray BURNER, vs standard optical drive
Sources? Here you go, neatly packaged just for the consumer at heart:
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/specs.html
http://tinyurl.com/d78xzl (This is the Sony one. You'll have to configure it yourself and look at the price. It'll end up as $2549.99)
Did I mention that it's $250 cheaper at this configuration? If you don't believe me, go to Sony.com and configure an FW series laptop. I just went and looked at both websites and pulled official specs. I looked at the custom configuration I made using Sony's official prices vs. Apple's standard specs for the $2800 model. I'd say that's a fairly objective comparison. Oh, and all the upgrades you can have on a Mac, like the SDD and processor, etc? They're available for the Vaio. And the nice Wireless N and Bluetooth integrated support? Also standard on the FW series laptop. Say what you want, but you're wrong. The Vaio is more powerful for the price, and in actuality better for cheaper. You failed to make an objective comparison, so that's your loss.
If you're wondering why I left out the video card, it's because I won't argue what I haven't seen benchmarks for. If you prefer Apple's Nvidia card, show me specs to prove it, and not just for gaming, but for editing, and objective, quality specs, not some stupid garbage site that compares the Apple's performance at 800x600 while using Paint vs. the Vaio's performance at 1920x1080 on an intense 3D render.
[citation][nom]Yoder54[/nom]Pure bullshit...I am a logician with a MS in Applied Math and I own a 17" MBP. Emotions have nothing to do with it...if it did, then all of these frustrated Windows users would have jumped ship years ago. Why is everyone so concerned with what others buy? Last I checked free commerce allows us that freedom. To go around saying how stupid Mac users are, etc., is merely a reflection of the name callers lack of maturity. Buy what you want and enjoy it.[/citation]
Everybody seems to conveniently gloss over Apple's way of handling its own mistakes, like all the monitor failures and other widespread problems that they wash their forums clean of. That's right, they delete topics full of complaints and try to quietly fix things before anyone notices how big they fucked up. Unbelievable.
And you phrased a stupid question. Why should I be concerned with what others buy? In today's consumerist society and government, what we collectively choose to buy or not to buy decides the fate of the world. So yeah, I'd say I have a vested interest in things. Aside from that, I'm not against Apple, nor have I called Mac users stupid for having used an Apple computer. I'm against the Mac Myth where Apple purports to have a magical piece of hardware that somehow mystically operates better, and I'm against those that believe it. If you acknowledge that Apple charges a premium and spring for a Mac even because of aesthetics, I have no problem with that. If you like the casing, that much, you're free to buy it and I have no qualms with you. But if you follow the propaganda and swallow the Mac dong, I think you should be thrown into a meat grinder. Why do I pressure you all so hard on what you buy? Because Apple is a marketing machine. That's what they do. That's what this whole thing is about, how it's a "free market" yet the whole economy is built upon marketing, which is systematic manipulation, the science of figuring out how to twist and manipulate our most basic impulse to get us to buy something. Isn't that worth fighting? Does truth even matter anymore, or has that been bought and paid for as well?
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram