My first mac: an Apple hater reviews a Macbook

pojut

Gawd
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
541
This is a repost of an article I just posted on my site, Living With a Nerd. In the original article, I spent the first three paragraphs ranting about Apple. I've removed these paragraphs in the interest of space here on the [H] forums. If you want to read the original article (with the rants intact), just Google Living With a Nerd, and you'll see the article on my site.

I am keeping in mind that this is an older Apple device, and isn’t necessarily indicative of their current hardware. Let’s do this!

The Hardware

There’s no denying that, even with a couple of scratches and a slightly creaky hinge, this is a great looking laptop. The overall shape and design of the laptop itself is simple and functional, with a comfortable keyboard, an adequate array of ports, a decent (if not slightly washed-out) screen, and a responsive trackpad. While it took me a couple of days to get used to the keyboard (everything felt “shifted” slightly to the right), I’m typing away on it with no problems now. The keys have just the right amount of pressure, and sound pretty good (although the spacebar is a bit clicky-sounding, when compared to the rest of the keyboard…admittedly, that’s nit-picking, but it’s noticeable enough to mention.) The trackpad works quite well, and I definitely like having the two-fingers-to-scroll gesture rather than having to move my hand over to a separate scrolling section on the trackpad. The single mouse button feels good and isn’t too loud, and the texture of the trackpad itself feels comfortable enough.

I would love to comment on battery life, but unfortunately the battery in this one is pretty much dead (which is part of the reason the price was right :)). When fully charged, it only lasts for about 30 minutes, and the battery indicator in the upper right-hand portion of the screen is off (it jumps from 10 hours down to 50 minutes, up to 3 hours back down to 15 minutes…it’s useless. I've tried calibrating the battery and resetting the SMC, but neither the battery life or the battery indicator have improved at all.) The battery is only at 158 cycles, so this is a bit surprising…in all fairness though, the models from 2006 commonly had battery problems, AND the battery sat completely discharged for over a year, so I can’t really mark it as a negative. From my understanding, the expected battery life on this particular model is 3-4 hours (which sounds about right for a 2006 laptop), and the time is closer to 6-7+ hours in the recent Macbooks. I’ll likely pick up a new battery for it eventually, but for now, it’s Good Enough®, since it will keep the laptop running when the power adapter accidentally gets knocked out of place.

The original power adapter suffered from the dreaded burn-out and fraying that afflicted the old straight-style MagSafe connectors, but after buying a brand new one with the redesigned “L” shape, it works perfectly without issue. It’s worth noting that I didn't have to upgrade the firmware, as you apparently have to do with some older Macbooks when coupled with the newer L-shaped MagSafe power adapters. It's also worth noting that the physical dimensions are really great...the screen (13.3") and the size of the laptop (1.08" thick x 12.78" wide x 8.92" deep) provide an excellent blend of portability and usability, while the weight (5.2 pounds) is heavy enough to feel solid, yet light enough to transport easily. Beyond anything else, I think the size of the laptop is my favorite part.

This particular Macbook is one of the early-2006 models, which means it has a Core Duo CPU instead of a Core 2 Duo CPU. Still, it’s the 2GHz model, and it already has 1 GB of RAM in it (which I’m going to bump up to 2 gigs for pocket change. On a side note, RAM prices are INSNAELY cheap at the moment…if you’re looking to upgrade the memory in your desktop or laptop, now’s the time!) The Intel GMA 950 integrated video card makes it pretty much useless for newer games, but it handles older DOS games with no problems (yay DOSbox!) It can even play some more recent titles, like Morrowind and Deus Ex! I wasn’t really looking for a modern gaming laptop, and I was fully aware of what I was buying before I bought it, so this isn’t a big deal; again, it’s Good Enough® for what I wanted, and that’s what matters. Besides, with the lower screen resolution of 1280 x 800, older games look much better than they do on the 1920 x 1080 monitor hooked up to my gaming desktop. With that in mind, this will likely become my “classic” gaming computer.

That's the other thing, though: yes, this Macbook is asthetically pleasing, and yes, the system itself is well-built...but it doesn't really provide me with anything that I can't find elsewhere for cheaper. It's a five-year-old model, and five years in the tech industry is a lifetime, but even taking that into account, I still haven't found the "magic"...nothing about it seems all that particularly special, although the newer Macbooks and Macbook Pros do indeed have impressive battery life, especially when you consider the potent hardware they contain.

OSX

My first week with OSX has been relatively successful (this Macbook is currently running version 10.5.8) It’s taken some time to learn the ins and outs of where everything is and what to do with it, but I’m pretty confident in navigating and using OSX at this point. It’s easy to learn, and easy to use…and for me, that’s part of the problem. It’s a little bit TOO simplified.

There are certain things that I really like: not having to install or uninstall software since every program acts as a mountable image, the ease of navigation from screen to screen and program to program, how quickly the system copies files to and from external drives, the overall layout of the GUI, the functionality of the dock…it’s all very easy to figure out at a glance, easy to maintain, and easy to just jump in and start using. But as I said before, it’s a bit TOO simplified; I’m used to being able to dig real deep into the operating system, to change and modify every little thing about how it functions, looks, and feels. Not so with OSX: most of those things are either completely absent, or accessible only through a command line. While I recognize they are trying to make the software as easy to use as possible, I think they should at least provide the option of getting down to the nitty-gritty without forcing people to resort to a command line. I realize they spend a lot of time and money on the interface, but what works best for them doesn't necessarily work best for me. On more than one occasion, I found myself trying to figure out how to do something, only to Google it and learn that I couldn't. (EDIT: some users on Reddit pointed me towards this a few utilities, which certainly expand on what you can tweak. Thanks all!)

The oversimplification is my main gripe with it (which extends into iOS as well, for whatever that’s worth.) Aside from that though, I like it well enough. I couldn’t see myself making my main computer an OSX-based one, but I likely won’t be dual-booting this laptop with Windows XP as I had originally planned.

Conclusion

I like this little Macbook well enough to keep it and use it on a fairly regular basis, but considering it doesn't provide me with anything unique or worth the artifically-inflated price tag, I certainly couldn’t picture paying full price for it. Who knows, that may change in the future, but as of now, I think my own personal investment in Apple started with a new power adapter and will end with a new battery.

If nothing else, I'm no longer opposed to personally owning used Apple products...so there's that.
 
Last edited:
One thing I don't like about OSX, and it may be silly, but if I drag and drop some folders from on dir to another and want the contents added to the folder, it overwrites them. Like when you download vim plugins, you typically just copy past them into your vim folder, but OSX overwrote the existing files.
It's a small thing, I know, but threw me off at first.
 
Would that more people would actually use something hands-on before speaking good or ill of the product. Well done, sir. Now, onto some feedback:

But as I said before, it’s a bit TOO simplified; I’m used to being able to dig real deep into the operating system, to change and modify every little thing about how it functions, looks, and feels. Not so with OSX: most of those things are either completely absent, or accessible only through a command line. While I recognize they are trying to make the software as easy to use as possible, I think they should at least provide the option of getting down to the nitty-gritty without forcing people to resort to a command line.

Not sure this makes much sense. Abstracting away the inner workings of a computer makes for a better, not a worse, experience. Exactly what were you attempting to do that led you to desire finer grain control? Or were you simply expecting or used to having multiple nested preferences menus and found them generally absent in OS X (not OSX)?

No OS with features as powerful and fine grained as Automator, Services, and Applescript should ever be described as excessively simplistic. Apple simply abstracted away the power user features to segments where power users are more likely to discover, use, and desire them.

the artifically-inflated price tag

Try to assemble a quote for a computer with equivalent specs—not just CPU type and speed and GPU type—and you’ll quickly discover this is a false impression.
 
Not sure this makes much sense. Abstracting away the inner workings of a computer makes for a better, not a worse, experience. Exactly what were you attempting to do that led you to desire finer grain control? Or were you simply expecting or used to having multiple nested preferences menus and found them generally absent in OS X (not OSX)?

I'll give you an example of what I mean:
On a fresh install of Windows XP, Vista, or 7, when you go into the control panel, you're given a short list of options...things like keyboard, sound, mouse settings. You know, the standard stuff. However, there's an unobtrusive bit of text that, upon clicking it, expands the number of things you're able to tweak by quite a lot. In this way, you're allowed to dig a bit deeper into the various system settings right within the GUI, without having to use a command line to do so.

With that in mind, my question was why not give the user a similar capability in OS X? I appreciate that Apple wants to create as streamlined of an experience as possible, but let's face it: a HUGE number of people that use Macs are geeks. Why make them use an archaic system like a command line in a product that's supposed to be as user-friendly as possible? I realize there are third-party programs out there that enable you to tweak things further using the GUI, but Apple has nothing to do with that.

Not all users are the same...treating them like they are is just really weird. In the end it doesn't really matter...I mean, I wrote the dang article ON the Macbook...so...yeah...that should give you an idea of my final thoughts on it :)

Try to assemble a quote for a computer with equivalent specs—not just CPU type and speed and GPU type—and you’ll quickly discover this is a false impression.

Done. For $2,469, you can get an Alienware that has a 2.3 GHz Intel Core i7, 8 gigs of 1333MHz DDR3 RAM, a 2GB Radeon 6970, a 750GB 7200 RPM hard drive, and a 17.3" 1920x1080 screen.

Compare that to the BASE 17" Macbook Pro at $2,499, which has a 2.2 i7, 4 gigs of ram, a 5400 RPM 750 gig hard drive, and a Radeon 6750.

If you bump the CPU, RAM, and Hard Drive (although at 7200, the hard drive size dips down to 500 gigs, and you can't upgrade the video card at all) for the Macbook up to the same as in the Alienware mentioned above, the price jumps to $2,949.

You could even bump the Alienware up to 16 gigs of ram, and it STILL comes in under the Macbook Pro ($2,709). The 6970 vs the 6750 is a BIG difference (although if you don't do any gaming, that won't really matter much), as is the extra RAM and the 7200 RPM hard drive.

Where the MBP makes up the difference is in weight and battery life...it's up to the consumer if the difference is worth it. For me personally, I don't see the extra $500 being worth it when you compare the difference in power and capabilities between the two...but again, that's just me.
 
Last edited:
With that in mind, my question was why not give the user a similar capability in OS X?

Because hiding half the functions in a system control pane makes little sense from a UI design perspective. On Windows XP, the function you describe is a compromise design: Microsoft wanted to add a more accessible UI that would the average user where to go in the Control Panel to solve their specific problem or configure their desired protocol. But they didn’t want to (or couldn’t) make the Control Panel less functional as a result. So they allowed the user to toggle how the Control Panel presented its options.

There was no gain or loss of functionality. The Control Panel still did exactly the same thing in either view mode.

I appreciate that Apple wants to create as streamlined of an experience as possible, but let's face it: a HUGE number of people that use Macs are geeks. Why make them use an archaic system like a command line in a product that's supposed to be as user-friendly as possible?

You haven’t explained what you were trying to accomplish that forced you to resort to the Terminal. And aren’t geeks and power users supposed to love CLI?

Done. For $2,469, you can get an Alienware that has a 2.3 GHz Intel Core i7, 8 gigs of 1333MHz DDR3 RAM, a 2GB Radeon 6970, a 750GB 7200 RPM hard drive, and a 17.3" 1920x1080 screen.

Compare that to the BASE 17" Macbook Pro at $2,499, which has a 2.2 i7, 4 gigs of ram, a 5400 RPM 750 gig hard drive, and a Radeon 6750.

If you bump the CPU, RAM, and Hard Drive (although at 7200, the hard drive size dips down to 500 gigs, and you can't upgrade the video card at all) for the Macbook up to the same as in the Alienware mentioned above, the price jumps to $2,949.

You could even bump the Alienware up to 16 gigs of ram, and it STILL comes in under the Macbook Pro ($2,709). The 6970 vs the 6750 is a BIG difference (although if you don't do any gaming, that won't really matter much), as is the extra RAM and the 7200 RPM hard drive.

The primary differences are weight and battery life...it's up to the consumer if the difference is worth it. For me personally, I don't see the extra $500 being worth it...but again, that's just me.

I bolded the important part, because it highlights that you didn’t really accomplish the goal of finding an equivalent computer for equal or less money. You had to add weight and decrease battery life to get something marginally better on paper. In fact, you had to go to a specialty vendor to find something marginally better on paper. Then you disregarded weight, battery life, secondary hardware like availability and number of expansion ports, optical drive type and speed, SSD options, backlit keyboard, trackpad differences, and so on.

This is what’s annoying about the claim that Apple products somehow cost more on the same hardware: it’s not the same hardware. Case in point, the 27’’ iMac: no one sells a 27’’ S-IPS 2560x1440 display WITH a full-spec computer built in WITH the ability to use the display with an external device. Dell finally got around to offering a 27’’ S-IPS 2560x1440 display in December or so… for $1100 dollars. That’s $600 less than the 27’’ iMac!

It’s not the same hardware, despite having the same or similar CPU, the same or similar GPU, and the same or similar amount of RAM.
 
Because hiding half the functions in a system control pane makes little sense from a UI design perspective. On Windows XP, the function you describe is a compromise design: Microsoft wanted to add a more accessible UI that would the average user where to go in the Control Panel to solve their specific problem or configure their desired protocol. But they didn’t want to (or couldn’t) make the Control Panel less functional as a result. So they allowed the user to toggle how the Control Panel presented its options.

There was no gain or loss of functionality. The Control Panel still did exactly the same thing in either view mode.

But it allowed both regular users and advanced users a way to modify the system based on their abilities, rather than being forced into doing it only one way. That's my point.



You haven’t explained what you were trying to accomplish that forced you to resort to the Terminal. And aren’t geeks and power users supposed to love CLI?

The Windows equivalent of Task Scheduler, Memory Diagnostic, Services, Component Services, Device Manager...things like that. It's entirely possible that, seeing as I'm a new user, I just missed all of those things (it's also possible that, since it's running only 10.5.8, they aren't selectable, but I didn't see them.)

The rail against having to use the CLI is a comment on the "ease of use" that OS X is supposed to provide...nothing more.

This particular point is moot, as far as I'm concerned. While I mentioned it, in the grand scheme of things it wasn't really a knock against the laptop or the operating system, and the topic only constituted a couple of sentences in an 1846 word article (1846 if you include the original rant)...so I didn't really make a big deal about it in the first place :)



I bolded the important part, because it highlights that you didn’t really accomplish the goal of finding an equivalent computer for equal or less money. You had to add weight and decrease battery life to get something marginally better on paper. In fact, you had to go to a specialty vendor to find something marginally better on paper. Then you disregarded weight, battery life, secondary hardware like availability and number of expansion ports, optical drive type and speed, SSD options, backlit keyboard, trackpad differences, and so on.

I wouldn't call Dell a "specialty vendor", but whatever.

As far as factory options, whether it be Apple or non-Apple, most of the options are way overpriced (as far as hard drives, ram, etc. are concerned) It's really only worth getting the factory upgrades that you can't do after purchase.

As far as differences in weight and battery life, I addressed that. It comes down to whether that's important to the user or not. As I said, for me personally, I'm quite willing to give up battery life and weight for sheer power, especially when that power can be had for less money.

It comes down to the cheap, fast, and small problem. You only get to choose two!

This is what’s annoying about the claim that Apple products somehow cost more on the same hardware: it’s not the same hardware. Case in point, the 27’’ iMac: no one sells a 27’’ S-IPS 2560x1440 display WITH a full-spec computer built in WITH the ability to use the display with an external device. Dell finally got around to offering a 27’’ S-IPS 2560x1440 display in December or so… for $1100 dollars. That’s $600 less than the 27’’ iMac!

It’s not the same hardware, despite having the same or similar CPU, the same or similar GPU, and the same or similar amount of RAM.

That's just it...to me, it is the same hardware. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the work that Apple puts into making their laptops as light as possible while retaining as much power as possible, but as I said before, I'll gladly trade more powerful internal hardware for aesthetics or form factor.

I think this is going to have to be an "agree to disagree" type of thing, otherwise we're just going to keep going in this circle all day :cool:
 
Yay. A new PC user that won't /rant when I say I prefer Mac. lol.

+1 for you!
 
So because Dell bought Alienware a couple years ago, Alienware becomes as mundane as Dell? Interesting stretch, there.

No. When Alienware is exclusively sold through a mainstream company that isn't a specialty vendor, then Alienware can't be considered a specialty vendor.
 
Last edited:
Not sure this makes much sense. Abstracting away the inner workings of a computer makes for a better, not a worse, experience. Exactly what were you attempting to do that led you to desire finer grain control? Or were you simply expecting or used to having multiple nested preferences menus and found them generally absent in OS X (not OSX)?

No OS with features as powerful and fine grained as Automator, Services, and Applescript should ever be described as excessively simplistic. Apple simply abstracted away the power user features to segments where power users are more likely to discover, use, and desire them.

The problem I've run into with OS X is the lack of options. It is why I stopped using opera. If it works like you want out of the box, it is great. If there are one or two things you want to tweaks, you are shit out of luck. Even if the are minor. For example, I navigate through folders with the keyboard. On windows and gnome this works great - start typing the folder/file name, hit enter, repeat. On OS X, the first part works, but hitting enter causes it to rename, wtf? Renaming is something I do very rarely, why is the most accessible keyboard shortcut something I almost never do and why can't I change that? Put rename in the right click menu where it belongs.

Or for one of those deep down windows options, you can configure the system to hibernate after xx minutes of sleep. I love that option, and haven't found anything similar in OS X. This means after leaving my laptop alone for a week my MPB's battery is almost dead whereas my win 7 laptop is almost fully charged. I'm kind of surpised OS X doesn't do that by default to be honest.

That is the sort of stuff I think the OP is talking about. Windows gives you a GUI to do advanced stuff, OS X gives you a scripting language and tells you to fuck off. Even the CLI it has isn't that great, most of the *nix tools are out of date and not supported. As a developer, the appeal of an easy to use Unix OS is damped by the fact that the first step of most development guides is repacing the unix tools it uses because the versions in OS X are too old or were compiled with features disabled.
 
Last edited:
For example, I navigate through folders with the keyboard. On windows and gnome this works great - start typing the folder/file name, hit enter, repeat. On OS X, the first part works, but hitting enter causes it to rename, wtf? Renaming is something I do very rarely, why is the most accessible keyboard shortcut something I almost never do and why can't I change that? Put rename in the right click menu where it belongs.


This seems hard just because you dont know the right keyboard commands. You should learn them before rantin!

You can use your up/down arrows to go up and down on the directories/files and then go INTO a subfolder pressing cmd+down arrow, and back up one directory level with cmd+up arrow. Also, if you use cmd+down arrow on a file, it executes it!

VERY SIMPLE. Just give it a try.
 
If there are one or two things you want to tweaks, you are shit out of luck. Even if the are minor. For example, I navigate through folders with the keyboard. On windows and gnome this works great - start typing the folder/file name, hit enter, repeat. On OS X, the first part works, but hitting enter causes it to rename, wtf? Renaming is something I do very rarely, why is the most accessible keyboard shortcut something I almost never do and why can't I change that? Put rename in the right click menu where it belongs.

The substance of your complaint here is not that OS X doesn’t let you tweak anything, but that OS X’s keyboard shortcuts are different from Windows and Linux. Official response to that: Duh.

Or for one of those deep down windows options, you can configure the system to hibernate after xx minutes of sleep. I love that option, and haven't found anything similar in OS X.

That’s because sleep modes work differently on OS X. You can sleep, hibernate, or Safe Sleep, which is basically a hybrid of the two: it writes the contents of your RAM to disk like hibernate, but otherwise sleeps normally. But it sounds like you want something more like this, which took about five seconds to find on Google.

That is the sort of stuff I think the OP is talking about.

The closest he came to specifying his meaning was to cite a UI redesign of Control Panel.

Windows gives you a GUI to do advanced stuff, OS X gives you a scripting language and tells you to fuck off.

Hilariously untrue.

Even the CLI it has isn't that great, most of the *nix tools are out of date and not supported.

Terminal is Terminal.

As a developer, the appeal of an easy to use Unix OS is damped by the fact that the first step of most development guides is repacing the unix tools it uses because the versions in OS X are too old or were compiled with features disabled.

That’s because Apple is hitching their train to Xcode and Objective C. Don’t like it, don’t use it. Apple doesn’t sell OS X to put an effective GUI on Unix for developers’ enjoyment, they sell OS X to compete with Windows.

Look on the bright side. You aren’t developing for the PlayBook.
 
One thing I don't like about OSX, and it may be silly, but if I drag and drop some folders from on dir to another and want the contents added to the folder, it overwrites them. Like when you download vim plugins, you typically just copy past them into your vim folder, but OSX overwrote the existing files.
It's a small thing, I know, but threw me off at first.
I would imagine every Windows user goes through that upon using a Mac. I'm of the opinion that it should work the way it does in Windows, but it's also one of those things where it's just one of those things that works differently and you have to adjust to it.

Or for one of those deep down windows options, you can configure the system to hibernate after xx minutes of sleep. I love that option, and haven't found anything similar in OS X.
That would be a nice option, sure, but it's not as if Windows doesn't have its own unique set of similar shortcomings. Just as an example, there's no keyboard shortcut to sleep/turn off the display in Windows, yet not only is there a shortcut available to do so in OS X, but you can also enable Hot Corners to achieve the same effect (a feature Windows 7 lacks entirely).

Given this example, you could certainly make the argument that Windows is lacking in options that OS X provides out of the box just as you made the argument that OS X is lacking in options Windows provides out of the box. Usually, though, additional capabilities can be exposed via third-party applications. I use a little tray app that gives me a shortcut to turn off the display and lock the system in Windows; you'd need to use an app that does what you want OS X to do. No big deal.

VERY SIMPLE. Just give it a try.
Yep. Use these shortcuts all the time. OS X is designed to be fairly straightforward and at least reasonably intuitive, but reading documentation is still necessary in some cases. I can recall several occasions in which I had to look through Windows documentation to figure something out — it's not an 'issue' in any way unique to OS X.
 
Yep. Use these shortcuts all the time. OS X is designed to be fairly straightforward and at least reasonably intuitive, but reading documentation is still necessary in some cases. I can recall several occasions in which I had to look through Windows documentation to figure something out — it's not an 'issue' in any way unique to OS X.

It could just be that I'm used to something more technical in presentation, but I find OS X to not be intuitive at all. I dunno, it just feels "off". Hell, I find Linux easier to use than OS X.

The hardware is pretty nice, though :)
 
Simply put, that's because it's different.

If you are in a left hand drive country (The US for example), if you go to the UK, the cars have all of the exact same controls, but they are "on the wrong side". This leads to confusion, not just with the major operations (like shifting, which is ok cause most American's can't drive a stick anymore anyways) but even operating the radio is backwards.

It "feels off" until you get used to it. Depending on how adaptable your brain is, that can take minutes to weeks, but it still "feels off".
 
Still unsure how the price is artificially inflated. You went on and on about the build quality of the now 5 year old laptop. You can out-spec an Apple laptop dollar for dollar in the PC realm, but I've never felt a laptop more solid than a macbook.

JMHO, and I don't own any apple computers.
 
not having to install or uninstall software since every program acts as a mountable image
You aren't keeping DMG's around and mounting them to use the Apps are you? That's a common newbie mistake. That's what it sounds like you are doing here.
 
Still unsure how the price is artificially inflated. You went on and on about the build quality of the now 5 year old laptop. You can out-spec an Apple laptop dollar for dollar in the PC realm, but I've never felt a laptop more solid than a macbook.

JMHO, and I don't own any apple computers.

I don't really travel too much, so raw power is more important to me than aesthetics or the ability to survive a drop. Considering the hardware you get in a modern Macbook Pro and the hardware you get in other laptops...

Should have used the qualifier "in my opinion", though I figured since I was already presenting my opinion, I wouldn't have to :)

Also, in my own defense, I said multiple times that I actually like the Macbook I reviewed, five years old or not. I just said that I didn't personally feel it was worth the price premium it commanded, whether comparing the 2006 Macbook to a comparable 2006 laptop, or a modern MBP with a modern non-Apple laptop.



Zumino pretty much hit the nail on the head in his post.


You aren't keeping DMG's around and mounting them to use the Apps are you? That's a common newbie mistake. That's what it sounds like you are doing here.

Uh...no. Of course not! I would never do something so foolish! ::deletes DMGs, then backs away slowly while whistling::
 
Uh...no. Of course not! I would never do something so foolish! ::deletes DMGs, then backs away slowly while whistling::


;)

Glad to help. Open the DMG, drag to desktop/application folder/wherever. Eject DMG and trash it. In the rare case you get an app in a pkg, double click it to install. These usually have some sort of agent that runs in the background to pick up when devices are plugged in or they add hooks to the OS for certain applications. That IS a bit confusing, but it's pretty obvious when you get the dmg open which type you are dealing with.
 
Not bad coming from a mac hater. Well the hate didn't go deep enough to resist buying one, eh? These are still great machines, i guess you can only bitch about the price tag anyways, otherwise definitely awesome laptops.
 
Or for one of those deep down windows options, you can configure the system to hibernate after xx minutes of sleep. I love that option, and haven't found anything similar in OS X. This means after leaving my laptop alone for a week my MPB's battery is almost dead whereas my win 7 laptop is almost fully charged. I'm kind of surpised OS X doesn't do that by default to be honest.

I'm not going to get into the debate, but just FYI for this part: System Preferences -> Energy Saver is where these options live. The labels may not be the same, but the functionality is what you describe.
 
Just wanted to point out a couple of things that the OP was having trouble finding

Component services do not exist in OS X, so there is no method of managing them.

Services are managed through Launchd, which you can edit through the terminal, or purchase a $5 utility called Lingon for a GUI.

Memory diagnostics are best done with memtest86+ anyway, so I don't know why you would be using Windows Memory Diagnostic

Device Manager is the Apple System Profiler, the ability to edit IRQs does not exist, because OS X handles IRQs automatically

Task Scheduler is handled by iCal and Applescripts or Automator.

And there are a lot of tools that help you uncover the harder to reach utilities to modify the system, and almost any command-line too that will run in Linux can be compiled and ported to OS X. Also, look into MacPorts if your interested in running *nix tools on OS X, it maintains a bunch of source code with OS X specific installation methods that functions like Apt-get
 
Just wanted to point out a couple of things that the OP was having trouble finding

Component services do not exist in OS X, so there is no method of managing them.

Services are managed through Launchd, which you can edit through the terminal, or purchase a $5 utility called Lingon for a GUI.

Memory diagnostics are best done with memtest86+ anyway, so I don't know why you would be using Windows Memory Diagnostic

Device Manager is the Apple System Profiler, the ability to edit IRQs does not exist, because OS X handles IRQs automatically

Task Scheduler is handled by iCal and Applescripts or Automator.

And there are a lot of tools that help you uncover the harder to reach utilities to modify the system, and almost any command-line too that will run in Linux can be compiled and ported to OS X. Also, look into MacPorts if your interested in running *nix tools on OS X, it maintains a bunch of source code with OS X specific installation methods that functions like Apt-get

Awesome, thanks for the tips!
 
Not bad coming from a mac hater. Well the hate didn't go deep enough to resist buying one, eh? These are still great machines, i guess you can only bitch about the price tag anyways, otherwise definitely awesome laptops.

While the price tag may be a serious issue, I do have to say that the form factor of almost all mac products in the last 6 years have been amazing. I don't personally care for OS X or the EFI present on Apple hardware (OS X uses this), but considering the quality of the hardware is top notch I do have to say that there really isn't a 'PC' equivalent in terms of quality.

Also, considering OS X is a Unix-like OS, you can definitely run similar (if not the same) commands in CLI that are done in all Linux distros.

OP, if you get a chance, test out a Mac Book Pro, the back-lit keyboard is the best I have ever seen on a laptop and it is the most solid design I have seen yet.
 
Because hiding half the functions in a system control pane makes little sense from a UI design perspective. On Windows XP, the function you describe is a compromise design: Microsoft wanted to add a more accessible UI that would the average user where to go in the Control Panel to solve their specific problem or configure their desired protocol. But they didn’t want to (or couldn’t) make the Control Panel less functional as a result. So they allowed the user to toggle how the Control Panel presented its options.

There was no gain or loss of functionality. The Control Panel still did exactly the same thing in either view mode.



You haven’t explained what you were trying to accomplish that forced you to resort to the Terminal. And aren’t geeks and power users supposed to love CLI?



I bolded the important part, because it highlights that you didn’t really accomplish the goal of finding an equivalent computer for equal or less money. You had to add weight and decrease battery life to get something marginally better on paper. In fact, you had to go to a specialty vendor to find something marginally better on paper. Then you disregarded weight, battery life, secondary hardware like availability and number of expansion ports, optical drive type and speed, SSD options, backlit keyboard, trackpad differences, and so on.

This is what’s annoying about the claim that Apple products somehow cost more on the same hardware: it’s not the same hardware. Case in point, the 27’’ iMac: no one sells a 27’’ S-IPS 2560x1440 display WITH a full-spec computer built in WITH the ability to use the display with an external device. Dell finally got around to offering a 27’’ S-IPS 2560x1440 display in December or so… for $1100 dollars. That’s $600 less than the 27’’ iMac!

It’s not the same hardware, despite having the same or similar CPU, the same or similar GPU, and the same or similar amount of RAM.

Terpfen:

In your opinion would you equate Apple's MBP build quality/overall quality with Dell's or Hp's business line? These aren't your run of the mill pavillion or inspirion laptops. A lot of these are aluminum chasis that have good (from what I hear, I have not done ANY research) build/overall quality.

The reason I ask this is, like you, I too am tired of people saying that Apple is overpriced, when it really isn't. However, I have heard from a few people that the business line laptops of dell and hp are comparable (and their prices are even higher than Apples).

Whats your opinion on HP's ENVY line of laptops? These are suppose to be a direct competitor to the MBP. I personally think MBP > ENVY, but I'm curious on your opinion.

Lastly, whats your opinion on Lenovo? They also cost almost (if not more) as much as a MBP and have been rated to have good build quality.

Thanks
 
I don't understand why you even bother...sounds like you'd get an infinite amount of pleasure from an Ubuntu install coupled with Macbuntu.

Unless you start pirating copies of OS X you'll just be paying for an OS you apparently aren't appreciating (the equivalent of "service packs" aren't free).
 
You aren't keeping DMG's around and mounting them to use the Apps are you? That's a common newbie mistake. That's what it sounds like you are doing here.

One of my favorite features of OS X compared to windows is the ability to natively mount disk images. Makes life so much easier is so many situations.
 
In your opinion would you equate Apple's MBP build quality/overall quality with Dell's or Hp's business line? These aren't your run of the mill pavillion or inspirion laptops. A lot of these are aluminum chasis that have good (from what I hear, I have not done ANY research) build/overall quality.

My general opinion is that Apple’s build quality hasn’t been equaled or surpassed, but there are some specific models that clearly take cues from what Apple’s doing, and they pull it off reasonably well. You mention the Envy, and that’s a good example. It’s not as good as the MBP, but it’s very good relative to the rest of the Windows world, which just slaps a plastic shell together and ships to big box stores.

Nothing from Dell grabs my interest, either on the business or consumer side. Not counting their displays, anyway.

The reason I ask this is, like you, I too am tired of people saying that Apple is overpriced, when it really isn't. However, I have heard from a few people that the business line laptops of dell and hp are comparable (and their prices are even higher than Apples).

I think the tendency of most people is to make a Mac-to-whatever comparison based on a limited spec sheet. It’s easy to compare CPU, GPU, and RAM, because not only is it regarded as an apples-to-apples comparison, but the people who do that come from an environment where those three things are really the only differentiators between a bunch of brands.

I don’t see many people factoring in things like the trackpad (which is superior to anything I’ve ever used on the Windows side), the backlit keyboard, Thunderbolt, Applecare, etc.

Whats your opinion on HP's ENVY line of laptops? These are suppose to be a direct competitor to the MBP. I personally think MBP > ENVY, but I'm curious on your opinion.

I agree with you, the MBP is better. But if I had to buy a Windows notebook, I’d look at the Envy first. At least they’re honest with the name. ;)

Lastly, whats your opinion on Lenovo? They also cost almost (if not more) as much as a MBP and have been rated to have good build quality.

General impression is that Lenovo retains IBM’s ability to build solid business notebooks, but they don’t quite stand up to abuse the way they used to. IBM made some genuinely rugged notebooks that Lenovo seems to have scaled back. They also still use some of IBM’s design quirks, from what I’ve seen, like that stupid rubber nipple in the middle of the keyboard.
 
Back
Top