the fastest vista laptop you can buy

lol, oh tlarkin, you and your macbooks, lol, what the hell, check out the price it's $2949.
the cpu and the display is ok but the hd space cud have been better, at least 200gb ?
they say battrey life is bad, but here, my thinkpad last only 7 hours on battery lame
 
What does that tell you about hardware quality of a Mac. Obviously there is limited driver support for the mac hardware and it still out performs machines that are designed to run windows...

The gaming bench mark was lame, they ran everything at 1024 x 768 with AA off, so yeah it was kind of a fluff article. But it was from a PC magazine...
 
tlarkin said:
What does that tell you about hardware quality of a Mac. Obviously there is limited driver support for the mac hardware and it still out performs machines that are designed to run windows...

The gaming bench mark was lame, they ran everything at 1024 x 768 with AA off, so yeah it was kind of a fluff article. But it was from a PC magazine...
Click to expand...

lol, no i got you confused, i actually meant lame for my thinkpad not the Macbook, i stinking love macs too bad i can't own a real one otherwise i would.
And i have to agree with you about the review, probably there are other reviews about macbooks that have better score but one thing i know, nevern trust pc world they know sh*t
 
speedyink said:
Limited driver support? PCs and Macs have pretty much the same internals now.
Click to expand...

You don't see nvidia writing super awesome OS X drivers. So, don't see intel writing all kinds of advanced driver options for their products for mac. You don't see third party apps that can do things like access the kernel like they can in windows. It is a two way street in may perspectives, and they are the exact same in others. Asus designs their hardware to be ran on windows because it has like a 85% market share. Apple designs their hardware them self, and they design it to run on OS X, and still manage to make it run very well with vista. That is an accomplishment with in itself right there.
 
I have a Macbook Pro, And if you are going to run Windows, Get a PC. Sure, It runs windows, but you don't get full functionality, it's good for office and business apps, but not games or other intensive apps. Trust Me.

Plus that review is somewhat biased. The author is probably one of those yuppies who praise apple for everything they do. They installed a fresh copy of Vista no bloatware, and for 3,000 USD, I can almost guarantee that I can find plenty of notebooks that will run Vista better. Keep in mind that macbook pro is using the best hardware available in laptops at the moment, the t7700 is santa rosa platform which are great processors, max ram you can find on a laptop, best graphics card, etc. etc. Those specs can be had on a PC for about 1,000 less if you shop around and will run vista just as well, It's not the mac that runs vista well, its that hardware, itll run pretty much anything well. Also keep in mind that it is unfair to test these systems dead stock, before doing any sort of benchmarks, the drive should be formatted and the same software should be installed on each pc, getting the drives to be as equally matched as possible.

The M7950 Alienware would tear the mac a new one.

"Apple pegs it at 5.7 hours on one charge, but in our tests we got less than 2 hours, 45 minutes."

No kidding, running two operating systems and playing games is going to reduce battery life. 2 hours 45 minutes is good for industry standards. My Vaio barely gets 2 hours. My Macbook Pro - About 5 or 6 hours.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top