You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

selecting a new laptop...

Posted: Thu, 7th Jun 2007, 6:11am

Post 1 of 29

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Hey guys,

I have had my home build rig for several years now and it is starting to fry and such...

I am looking for a high-end laptop for editing, school and maybe even a'lil gaming.


I was looking at the dell's, but they don't seem to have firewire...
The thinkpad is nice, but the graphics card seems weak...


any suggestions?
Posted: Thu, 7th Jun 2007, 8:20am

Post 2 of 29

jaxrox1

Force: 0 | Joined: 6th Jun 2007 | Posts: 32

Member

I highly recommend having seperate computers for video and gaming/school/mundane activities etc. If that's not at all possible, I would suggest getting an external hard drive which most of your school and other stuff or video editing stuff can go on to.

What editing program are you looking at running?
What OS are you looking at getting? (MAC or PC?)
How much money have you got/willing to spend?
Posted: Thu, 7th Jun 2007, 6:50pm

Post 3 of 29

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

jaxrox1 wrote:

I highly recommend having seperate computers for video and gaming/school/mundane activities etc. If that's not at all possible, I would suggest getting an external hard drive which most of your school and other stuff or video editing stuff can go on to.

What editing program are you looking at running?
What OS are you looking at getting? (MAC or PC?)
How much money have you got/willing to spend?
No offense, but splitting them is about the most pointless idea I have EVER heard. Video editing and gaming are activities that both require a high-end computer, why not merge them?

Godfather, I made a post on another thread where I highlighted a bunch of new PC laptops currently available. Some of them have pros and cons relative to others. Also, the new MacBook Pro's are... actually pretty damn good. Are you used to Vista? Just boot camp it and run Vista on your MBP. biggrin

Link to my post. Which got rated down for some odd reason. *sigh*
Posted: Thu, 7th Jun 2007, 8:40pm

Post 4 of 29

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

A Pickle wrote:


No offense, but splitting them is about the most pointless idea I have EVER heard. Video editing and gaming are activities that both require a high-end computer, why not merge them?
Sorry, pickle, have to disagree - there's a lot of value in running separate systems to my mind. Different requirements optimise differently.
Video editing benefits from as much memory as possible, decent graphics configuration, etc, true, but they also can depend on versions of codecs, be sensitive to automatic updates for the OS, drivers, etc.
Games/general domestic use/internet all introduce (or are likely vectors for) BHO's, services, etc which are not important for writing a Word doc, but chew cycles and memory and i/o which can be rather precious for editing.
Ideally, you'd have separate systems - it's not cost-effective, but is a good idea.
Posted: Thu, 7th Jun 2007, 9:32pm

Post 5 of 29

NuttyBanana

Force: 730 | Joined: 23rd Nov 2004 | Posts: 711

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

pdrg wrote:

A Pickle wrote:


No offense, but splitting them is about the most pointless idea I have EVER heard. Video editing and gaming are activities that both require a high-end computer, why not merge them?
Sorry, pickle, have to disagree - there's a lot of value in running separate systems to my mind. Different requirements optimise differently.
Video editing benefits from as much memory as possible, decent graphics configuration, etc, true, but they also can depend on versions of codecs, be sensitive to automatic updates for the OS, drivers, etc.
Games/general domestic use/internet all introduce (or are likely vectors for) BHO's, services, etc which are not important for writing a Word doc, but chew cycles and memory and i/o which can be rather precious for editing.
Ideally, you'd have separate systems - it's not cost-effective, but is a good idea.
Stick 3gb memory in the MBP and all your points go unoticed twisted
Posted: Thu, 7th Jun 2007, 9:48pm

Post 6 of 29

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

NuttyBanana wrote:


Stick 3gb memory in the MBP and all your points go unoticed twisted
All except the
*autoupdates
*BHO's
*i/o
*other cycle-hogs

But otherwise, yes, memory is splendidly helpful
Posted: Thu, 7th Jun 2007, 9:51pm

Post 7 of 29

Rafal

Force: 420 | Joined: 30th Apr 2006 | Posts: 57

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

yeah, or get a mac pro with 16GB of ram... i wish i could afford that smile
Posted: Fri, 8th Jun 2007, 12:06am

Post 8 of 29

tyguy2021

Force: 291 | Joined: 1st Jun 2006 | Posts: 74

MacOS User

Member

Or a macbook pro with 4gs of memory, just becase he wants a laptop. There are lots of benifits with that setup.

You can load OSX and XP (don't bother with Vista, it sucks) and have a mac and a pc in the same box. Can't do that on a pc.

Built in camera and mic. A remote control.

It also has magnetic power cord so your laptop dosn't get knocked off a table.

And more
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/
Posted: Fri, 8th Jun 2007, 12:18am

Post 9 of 29

BlueSmudge

Force: 808 | Joined: 30th Dec 2004 | Posts: 401

CompositeLab Pro User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

I have a macbook pro, and its great for OSX and windows.
Buy one of the new ones (they are even faster now, and have really nice high def displays.) and install vista via bootcamp. Use OSX for video editing, web, mail, music, videos. Use vista (or XP, no reason to go Vista) for any game that isn't released for mac.

Plus you can get the 17" macbook pro with a 1920-by-1200 display. Thats equivelent to most 22-24" desktop displays.

Probably the best bet right now in the $2000 to $3500 laptop price range
Posted: Fri, 8th Jun 2007, 5:01am

Post 10 of 29

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

I am looking to spend under 2000. Preferably PC.

It seems like there is no one "winner" for doing it all (editing, gaming, work, power using, etc."


O and one more question.... is xp really better/faster than vista?
Posted: Fri, 8th Jun 2007, 5:52am

Post 11 of 29

tyguy2021

Force: 291 | Joined: 1st Jun 2006 | Posts: 74

MacOS User

Member

Vista has a lot of problems, security is bad (same with xp) and it takes a ton of memory. And its pricy. Way over priced.

If you want to get a computer under $2000 get a macbook (start at $949) You can run a windows OS of you choice with bootcamp, and it will be a pc, and a Mac, and also Linix machine if you like. If you get a program called parallels you can run all three at once.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jun 2007, 6:09am

Post 12 of 29

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

pdrg wrote:

Video editing benefits from as much memory as possible, decent graphics configuration, etc, true, but they also can depend on versions of codecs, be sensitive to automatic updates for the OS, drivers, etc.
I have been doing video editing, playing games, and doing 3D animation on the same computer for years. As a matter of fact, I can't honestly recall a time when I used multiple computers for separate things, because when I once tried doing that, I immediately regretted it due to file synchronization -- or lack thereof.

Games, domestic/regular applications and internet rarely, if ever, introduce any new services. I cannot recall any examples of the above categories that added a new service, save for security software (which, obviously, needs to run at all times in order to be effective). None of those add any "BHO's" (Browser Helper Objects -- such as the Alexa or Yahoo! toolbars for Internet Explorer), at all. I don't even know why you brought that up -- the last time a program ever tried to install a BHO was CCleaner trying to install the Yahoo! toolbar for Internet Explorer.

As for autoupdates, updates to Windows generally don't break applications. When they do, it's very, very rare, and they're almost immediately recalled or patched by Microsoft. Updates for application software shouldn't break any other programs, because... well... it shouldn't patch anything that isn't that specific program, which isn't a global system factor. Properly-coded programs will not break neighboring programs on the same system. Stupidly-coded programs will -- and most games and video editing applications don't fit well into that category.

I'm sorry, but having one computer for video editing and gaming makes tremendous sense unless you're a video studio with workstation nodes connected to renderfarms. Since godfather here is an example of the former and not the latter, he should be just fine with... one computer. Any machine with a modern processor, 1 or 2 GB of RAM and some sort of graphics card.

tyguy2021 wrote:

You can load OSX and XP (don't bother with Vista, it sucks) and have a mac and a pc in the same box. Can't do that on a pc.
Or you can load OS X and Vista. I highly recommend he gets Vista, because it's a fantastic operating system. Naysayers be damned, every damn negative point about Vista carries little, if any, weight.

I feel inclined to add, Vista is installable on anything that runs it. Mac OS X is, too... there's nothing technically preventing you from running Mac OS X on a PC -- except for Apple's licensing terms. Take it as a word of knowledge -- I've installed Mac OS X on a PC before.

tyguy2021 wrote:

Built in camera and mic. A remote control.
A lot of PC's these days come with a... built-in camera and mic. And you can even get remote controls for Windows' built-in and more feature-filled Media Center, and you can get simple ones that even slide into the ExpressCard slot on the PC. I happen to have owned one myself, it worked very well over Bluetooth.

tyguy2021 wrote:

It also has magnetic power cord so your laptop dosn't get knocked off a table.
And it also has only one hard drive... and no numeric keypad.

the new godfather wrote:

I am looking to spend under 2000. Preferably PC.

It seems like there is no one "winner" for doing it all (editing, gaming, work, power using, etc."
There are. Quite frankly, I'd consider my laptop a "winner" in that area. Plays games, does video editing, and does 3D animation just great. This notebook, for example, would probably do all of that just fine. It uses a member of the Nvidia Geforce 8-series cards, so it isn't really affected by Nvidia's dismal driver situation. It should power through games and OpenGL just great.

Did you get a chance to take a look at my post?



the new godfather wrote:

O and one more question.... is xp really better/faster than vista?
No. Not at all. It is a little bit more resource intensive, and drivers are still immature, so some programs/devices can end up being slower barring a patch or a driver update... but not many. Vista is just nicer, much easier to use, and much more modern and intelligent than Windows XP. I was eager as hell to get rid of Windows XP. It wasn't a bad OS... it was an old one. Vista's new, it's fresh, and it's relatively free of XP's shortcomings.

Of course, it's not perfect, but... games play just fine on it (unless you have an Nvidia card...)

tyguy2021 wrote:

Vista has a lot of problems, security is bad (same with xp) and it takes a ton of memory. And its pricy. Way over priced.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Vista is the exact same price of Windows XP -- at retail, Windows Vista Business is $200, the same price as Windows XP Professional (and Vista Business offers... more functionality).

And security... Windows XP doesn't come close. As a matter of fact, some people reckon that nothing comes close. There's User Account Control (and with it, Protected Mode for Internet Explorer 7), the Address Space Layout Randomizer (which effectively breaks thousands of remote attack viruses), Windows Defender (built-in), BitLocker Drive Encryption and a ton of other security tweaks built-in to the NT kernel. In 64-bit versions of Vista, you get PatchGuard which denies third-party access to the kernel entirely (a fantastic feature) and it requires digitally-signed device drivers.

Some say it's even more secure than Mac OS X, architecturally. I'm... inclined to agree.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jun 2007, 7:17am

Post 13 of 29

cooldude

Force: 600 | Joined: 21st Mar 2005 | Posts: 132

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

hey, i have always been hardcore PC until someone forced me into a Apple store, and i have never looked back... being that im young and dont have money i always liked dell and stuff cause it was cheap.... and that was stupid. if you wanna do video, go mac. its amazing. im running a macbook (the second level white one) and it rocks. right around 1,500 USD. all my video is on externals, and it works like a charm. i know youve heard it be4 but mac is worth every penny. DO IT!!!

Cool Dude
Posted: Fri, 8th Jun 2007, 7:21am

Post 14 of 29

jaxrox1

Force: 0 | Joined: 6th Jun 2007 | Posts: 32

Member

I don't want to start an argument, but...

Games, domestic/regular applications and internet rarely, if ever, introduce any new services.
Never had a virus? Ever had to call your client and say 'I'm sorry, but I can't have the video you payed me hundreds of dollars to make by the opening of your event tomorrow because my copmuter's got a virus...'

(Browser Helper Objects -- such as the Alexa or Yahoo! toolbars for Internet Explorer)
Actually, Browser Helper Objects include things such as Norton AntiVirus (I think you'd probably want that running), Java and Adobe Reader to name a few.


I'm sorry, but having one computer for video editing and gaming makes tremendous sense unless you're a video studio with workstation nodes connected to renderfarms.
Makes tremendous sense if you're a student or just doing stuff for fun. However, if you have a proper prodco (even something as simple as a weddings video company), then a seperate computer is much more feasible. Especially if you're running Avid. My point was that it was an ideal setup.

every damn negative point about Vista carries little, if any, weight.
My problem with Vista is the constant security alerts for every single thing you do. I'm going to wait at least 6 months (or until the first service pack is released) before changing properly to Vista; Microsoft has never gotten it right when they first release something (XP had 2 service packs, 2000 had a bazillion, and 98 had a bazillion more). It seems to have a lot of things which could be useful to some, but for video just get in the way, and I'm also wary of the fact that when Vista came out here (Oz), Microsoft Oz ordered its workers to change back to XP within days of them first changing to Vista because of the problems.

I do agree with your points on MAC vs PC; The PC equivalent of each MAC is much cheaper, and you can get a much more powerful PC than top of the range MAC for the money. And they're about as stable as each other.
And yes there are laptops which are good at gaming and video editing, just dont try running Avid on them.


And security... Windows XP doesn't come close. As a matter of fact, some people reckon that nothing comes close. There's User Account Control (and with it, Protected Mode for Internet Explorer 7)
I would go with Firefox over IE anyday; IE7 is basically a copy of Firefox anyway. Also the big problem with the security is the alerts. Its good that its there, but I don't need to be reminded every time i click the mouse.
The only problem with Vista for video at the moment is compatability with some programs. But in 6 months (or when the first Vista service pack is released) everything will be sorted out and Vista will be running a lot more smoothly.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jun 2007, 4:30pm

Post 15 of 29

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

cooldude wrote:

hey, i have always been hardcore PC until someone forced me into a Apple store, and i have never looked back... being that im young and dont have money i always liked dell and stuff cause it was cheap.... and that was stupid. if you wanna do video, go mac. its amazing. im running a macbook (the second level white one) and it rocks. right around 1,500 USD. all my video is on externals, and it works like a charm. i know youve heard it be4 but mac is worth every penny. DO IT!!!
Aaand... you have a notebook with no graphics card for the price of a PC notebook that could not only have a graphics card, but have a very good one. PC's can do video editing very well.

jaxrox1 wrote:

Never had a virus? Ever had to call your client and say 'I'm sorry, but I can't have the video you payed me hundreds of dollars to make by the opening of your event tomorrow because my copmuter's got a virus...'
In all honesty, I've had few viruses. Like, two in my time. Most PC's are sold with pre-installed security software suites, which is a fantastic practice (even if Norton does suck CPU cycles like 3D Studio Max). Viruses happen, and they can happen on the Mac just as easily. That they haven't is merely a byproduct of the fact that Macs are roughly 4-5% of the overall personal computing market share.

Malicious software today is organized crime of sorts, it's made for financial gain. For example, spyware collects your personal information, and reports it back to the mother company which then sells it to it's clients.

jaxrox1 wrote:

Actually, Browser Helper Objects include things such as Norton AntiVirus (I think you'd probably want that running), Java and Adobe Reader to name a few.
Yes, those are as well... but they cause no known problems with games, video editing software or 3D animation software. If they do, they'll be patched. Program incompatibility is unacceptable on systems, computers would be utterly useless... but it can occasionally happen. That said, it seldom does.

jaxrox1 wrote:

My problem with Vista is the constant security alerts for every single thing you do.
You... DO realize UAC can be disabled? As long as you have a firewall, an anti-virus and an anti-spyware, you should be just fine. Additionally, there shouldn't be MANY UAC alerts, once you get all of your programs and settings pretty well where you want them.

jaxrox1 wrote:

I'm going to wait at least 6 months (or until the first service pack is released) before changing properly to Vista; Microsoft has never gotten it right when they first release something (XP had 2 service packs, 2000 had a bazillion, and 98 had a bazillion more).
I'm hard pressed to blame Microsoft for that. What people are essentially asking for is an operating system release that remains compatible with all of their programs, and all of their hardware. What they don't begin to realize is just how inconceivable and even outright impossible a feat like that is with the software/hardware infrastructure that Windows has. You have processors from FOUR different companies that Windows can run on (Intel, AMD, Via, Transmeta), coupled with motherboard chipsets from several companies (Intel, AMD, Nvidia, SiS, Via) with different graphics processor options (Intel, AMD, Nvidia, S3, Via) from different manufacturers (Sapphire, BFG, XFX, EVGA, ASUS) just as an example. There are thousands of other factors (memory module type, module manufacturer, DIMM manufacturer...) to consider for just hardware.

Software-wise, Microsoft focuses tremendously on backwards compatibility such that Windows Vista is the first Windows operating system that does NOT directly support 16-bit code emulation, despite the fact that 16-bit systems haven't existed for perhaps... 20 years. There are thousands of pieces of software that not only have to work on Windows, but also have to work on Windows on every one of those hardware configurations.

jaxrox1 wrote:

And yes there are laptops which are good at gaming and video editing, just dont try running Avid on them.
Why not? Honestly, I'm almost positive I could install Avid and it'd work just fine...

jaxrox1 wrote:

I would go with Firefox over IE anyday; IE7 is basically a copy of Firefox anyway.
So would... er... so do I, but I'd consider Internet Explorer 7 on Vista to be a more secure browser option over Firefox 2. Firefox 2, to the best of my knowledge, does not use Protected Mode or an equivalent. It should, because it's a fantastic security feature.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jun 2007, 7:59pm

Post 16 of 29

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

A Pickle wrote:


Yes, those are as well... but they cause no known problems with games, video editing software or 3D animation software. If they do, they'll be patched. Program incompatibility is unacceptable on systems, computers would be utterly useless... but it can occasionally happen. That said, it seldom does.
Not wanting to undermine your message, for this, home user it's probably fine for them to get something ballsy and run something like premiere...but as for autoupdates causing problems, they have done and certainly do. Upgrades of quicktime lose compatibility (and damage functionality) of Avid Xpress, other win updates are known to cause problems to other flavours of Avid too. I wish they didn't, but they do, case closed. Because of this, there are some videos I can't play as it's a choice between my Avid working and watching (until a resolution or workaround is published). Browsing the web is less fun that way.

Now, you may throw dirt at Avid and say windows and driver versions shouldn't break their software (yup, it's annoying having to rebuild your computer after an autoupdate kills your revenue-stream), but as their software is the de-facto standard for pro editing (not just DV, but the heavy-shifting stuff too), and it works close to the technical limits of the hardware. It's tested on a particular build and version of OS, but that's an unstable base, the updates change that base, and sometimes kill £130,000 of software/system.

Why use Avid, then? Well it's arguably the best out there, or if it isn't, it at least has a consistent interface right up to Nitris, and an EDL from one will work with all workflows with the other versions, etc. So, the ideal setup is a ringfenced machine off the internet, with no other tat chewing cycles, and then a play and web machine. It's true. Maybe not what you or this user want to hear, but true. And I do know what I'm talking about, for once, honest wink
Posted: Fri, 8th Jun 2007, 8:51pm

Post 17 of 29

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

the asus laptops look pretty well rounded for the stuff I want to do...
Posted: Fri, 8th Jun 2007, 9:00pm

Post 18 of 29

FreeZ

Force: 20 | Joined: 26th Apr 2007 | Posts: 82

Windows User MacOS User

Member

I just copied and pasted this, because i agree with it. And I'd go with a macbook

1. The Out-of-Box Experience
Apple has this one hands-down. Sure PCs have gotten easier to set up, but nothing comes close to the ease-of-setup for an iMac or iBook. From the clear printed instructions to the clever setup wizard, Macs provide a better OOBE (Out Of Box Experience) than most PCs.

2. User Interface
You can argue with me all you like but I still think the Mac user interface is more elegant than any Windows version yet, not to mention more precise and more logical. And, from what I've seen of Mac OS X, due later this year, Mac OS will maintain its lead for a long time to come.

3. Hardware Performance
PowerPC outperforms Pentium. It's that simple. A G4 running Photoshop or even Microsoft Excel, is a beautiful thing to behold. It doesn't get much faster.

4. Standards
Macs have it all over Windows here, too. All Macs include sound. All Macs include video. All Macs include Ethernet. All Macs include USB. And finally, most Macs now include FireWire. While many PCs come with those things these days, most of them are not "on the motherboard" and are not integrated into your hardware and software as seamlessly as they are on the Mac.

5. Multimedia
QuickTime. Built in. For free with your OS. Need I say more?

6. Networking
Just about any Mac made can be connected to almost any other Mac for sharing files. All you need is a proper cable or, for recent versions of Mac OS, an Internet connection.

7. Cost of Ownership
Some say PCs are cheaper but I say "no way." Don't forget that you have to add stuff like a better sound or video card, plus a SCSI and/or Ethernet card, to obtain parity with off-the-shelf Macs. And I would venture that Mac people keep their Macs longer than PC people keep their PCs.

8. Plug-and-Play
What can I say? All of my recent Macs have been absolutely flawless with FireWire and USB peripherals. Most of these devices include a 1-click software installer; after that, the thing just works. All but one device I've plugged in over the past few months -- cameras, PDAs, printers, storage systems, tablets, mice, and more -- has worked the first time and every time thereafter. And the one device that didn't work was cured almost instantly by an easily-located (and easily installed) software driver update.

9. Upgrading
If you believe the future of expansion is in FireWire and USB devices, as I do, you'll understand why I believe Macs have all the expandability you need. If you require more expandability you can get a G4 minitower, with an upgradeable processor, lots of internal storage bays, and 3 PCI slots. If you have modest expansion needs, an iMac or iBook will suit you just fine. In any event you should have no problem finding expansion solutions for whichever Macintosh you choose.

10. Coolness Factor
Macs are just cooler. I've seen kids come over to our house and ooh and aah over our two iMacs and our flat-screen Apple Studio Display. No offense, but kids don't usually ooh and aah over a Gateway or a Compaq.

I'd like to point out that these are my opinions. Please don't feel obligated to write and tell me I'm wrong. An opinion is never wrong and everyone is entitled to theirs. These are mine.
Posted: Sat, 9th Jun 2007, 8:57pm

Post 19 of 29

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

FreeZ wrote:

You can argue with me all you like but I still think the Mac user interface is more elegant than any Windows version yet, not to mention more precise and more logical.
And, so, what you think must CLEARLY be what everyone else (except the guy you're debating with) thinks? Yeah... about that.

FreeZ wrote:

And, from what I've seen of Mac OS X, due later this year, Mac OS will maintain its lead for a long time to come.
Mac OS X lost it's lead when Windows Vista launched. From what I've seen of Leopard, it's going to be playing catch-up as every one of the features from the Leopard Sneak Peek is either available for Windows, or built right in.

FreeZ wrote:

3. Hardware Performance
PowerPC outperforms Pentium. It's that simple. A G4 running Photoshop or even Microsoft Excel, is a beautiful thing to behold. It doesn't get much faster.
Hah! That's laughable. TWO PowerPC G4's couldn't outperform a SINGLE OLD Pentium 4 in a number of benchmarks. It gets much, much faster. Apple realized this, which is why they moved to Intel processors. That said, Apple doesn't give you options... you're stuck with an Intel. No AMD, no Via.

FreeZ wrote:

4. Standards
Macs have it all over Windows here, too. All Macs include sound. All Macs include video. All Macs include Ethernet. All Macs include USB. And finally, most Macs now include FireWire. While many PCs come with those things these days, most of them are not "on the motherboard" and are not integrated into your hardware and software as seamlessly as they are on the Mac.
This is amazingly incorrect. Macs are un-standard, because they aren't... the de facto standard. The PC is. Macs give you USB and Firewire in the same manner that PC's give you USB and Firewire, with devices attached to the motherboard or sometimes, with native motherboard support. I can point you to several motherboards, right now, that have native Firewire and USB support. Some PC motherboards come with dual Gigabit Ethernet built in, with hardware firewalls also integrated into the motherboard. Those same PC motherboards even have built-in RAID support, for having backup fault-tolerant hard drive arrays. My laptop has one of these.

You can't overclock a Mac, nor can you have a hand in deciding it's internal componentry, where, with a PC, you can lovingly select it's every internal component and build it yourself -- or easily customize one from Dell or Compaq or whoever else.

FreeZ wrote:

7. Cost of Ownership
Some say PCs are cheaper but I say "no way." Don't forget that you have to add stuff like a better sound or video card, plus a SCSI and/or Ethernet card, to obtain parity with off-the-shelf Macs. And I would venture that Mac people keep their Macs longer than PC people keep their PCs.
A SCSI card? What are you trying to run, a personal computer or a home frigging server? Do you have any idea what you're talking about? I just got done explaining that some PC's come with two Gigabit Ethernet ports, most of them CERTAINLY come with one (meaning, you DON'T NEED AN ETHERNET CARD). Graphics cards? You can get PC's with good graphics for much more cheaply than you can get Macs with gimpy graphics.

The area where Macs excel in cost of ownership is in the areas of security software, or lack thereof. PC's must have a security suite that they (usually) need to subscribe to in order to be kept malware-free and operating at tip-top shape. That said, these tend to be not terribly expensive, perhaps costing a grand total of ~$200 over the course of five years.

FreeZ wrote:

8. Plug-and-Play
What can I say? All of my recent Macs have been absolutely flawless with FireWire and USB peripherals. Most of these devices include a 1-click software installer; after that, the thing just works. All but one device I've plugged in over the past few months -- cameras, PDAs, printers, storage systems, tablets, mice, and more -- has worked the first time and every time thereafter. And the one device that didn't work was cured almost instantly by an easily-located (and easily installed) software driver update.
Crazy. I can say the same thing about Windows. Vista.

FreeZ wrote:

9. Upgrading
If you believe the future of expansion is in FireWire and USB devices, as I do, you'll understand why I believe Macs have all the expandability you need. If you require more expandability you can get a G4 minitower, with an upgradeable processor, lots of internal storage bays, and 3 PCI slots. If you have modest expansion needs, an iMac or iBook will suit you just fine. In any event you should have no problem finding expansion solutions for whichever Macintosh you choose.
Expansion is not anywhere near Firewire and USB ports. Those ports may add functionality, but they will never add speed. Since Macs are proprietary from the start, you can pretty much count on never upgrading your G4. Intel-based Macs are a little better, but the only really "upgradeable" Mac is the Mac Pro.

Most PC's follow this upgrade path, even your bottom-line eMachines. So, I can get basic upgradeability in a PC for $499 or the same upgradeability on a Mac for... $1,999. Hmm.

FreeZ wrote:

10. Coolness Factor
Macs are just cooler. I've seen kids come over to our house and ooh and aah over our two iMacs and our flat-screen Apple Studio Display. No offense, but kids don't usually ooh and aah over a Gateway or a Compaq.
When you pick two unstellar manufacturers of PC's like those two, you're right. See, that's the beauty of PC's, though -- you're not limited to ONE manufacturer (as you are with Apple). You've got thousands of manufacturers, including Alienware, Dell, VoodooPC and HP... all of which make some pretty amazing PC's. I "ooh" and "ahh" at Dell's 20-inch XPS notebook. Or at HP's 20-inch notebook. Or at my own Alienware. smile
Posted: Sun, 10th Jun 2007, 4:13am

Post 20 of 29

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

well said A Pickle.

What are your thoughts on the high-end dell 1705; it has firewire and a good video card (Geforce 7900GS)... both of which are things i am looking for.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jun 2007, 8:38am

Post 21 of 29

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

The E1705 is a good laptop, godfather, I owned one myself. It was fast, had a very nice screen. That was the first desktop replacement-class notebook I owned. It wasn't bad, but there was a lack of features for a workstation.

The cons... it lacked an integrated numpad and the screen was somewhat dim. I ordered mine with far too small a hard drive, I opted for the 80 GB 7200 RPM hard drive because I wanted performance. I was stupid, don't do that. Go for a 5400 RPM hard drive that's around 120-160 GB, that should give you some more room.

One of my biggest complaints was the graphics card. It was fast, but MAN the drivers sucked. I couldn't ever change my in-game settings in Valve's Source-based games, for some reason -- and then when I tried to use the Nvidia Control Panel (in the Windows Control Panel) to externally force settings, a multitude of bugs prevented me. Then there was all of the bloatware, as well as the irritating 5 GB of my hard drive allocated towards a recovery partition.

That said, the laptop was extraordinarily sturdy. You won't find a more well-assembled consumer home office notebook. I was quite pleased with quality of build when I got it. Battery life wasn't bad, at all, for a 17" desktop replacement. It ran pre-release builds of Vista very nicely (even with the crappy Nvidia drivers). The touchpad was very deep, so I didn't often accidentally hit it when typing up something in a word processor, and the mouse buttons were more like a keyboard button rather than clicky mouse buttons. Also, Dell's mouse drivers gave me the option of pushing both buttons at once for a middle click.

Also, the sound was out of this world for notebook speakers (as far as music goes). I didn't appreciate them enough 'til I got this notebook which, while it isn't bad as far as sound processing, the speaker output is pretty dim. In addition, it's crackly when I try playing stuff at full volume. Dell's speakers were considerably better.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jun 2007, 1:19pm

Post 22 of 29

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

A Pickle wrote:

FreeZ wrote:

You can argue with me all you like but I still think the Mac user interface is more elegant than any Windows version yet, not to mention more precise and more logical.
And, so, what you think must CLEARLY be what everyone else (except the guy you're debating with) thinks? Yeah... about that.

<snip>

Dell's 20-inch XPS notebook. Or at HP's 20-inch notebook. Or at my own Alienware. smile
Nice refutement, I hadn't the energy, so appreciatred smile
Posted: Sun, 10th Jun 2007, 4:28pm

Post 23 of 29

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Thanks

This is the dilemma:

The 1705 is nice because its a great deal and has a better graphics card than the 1505, but I'm not sure if i want a 17 in. I want to be able to take this to class and the library etc.

So I'm looking for a 15 in. that is first and foremost FAST for rendering video and power using, is able to play todays games, and is a good deal.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jun 2007, 8:07pm

Post 24 of 29

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Ah, in that case, I wouldn't go for Dell's E1505. For one, Dell has very nice 15.4" notebooks in the form of Latitude business notebooks and Precision mobile workstations that are much better than the Inspiron E1505. Also, the E1505 comes with, at best, a Mobility Radeon X1400 or a Geforce Go 7300. Given that Nvidia's drivers are nerfed real bad in Vista, I don't think you want it.

This notebook is perhaps the best deal I could find. And it's a great deal. For under $1,500, you're getting an Intel Core 2 Duo (which will offer better battery life and performance than comparable AMD processors). You get not 100 GB, not 120 GB, but 160 GB of 5400 RPM hard drive space. You will also get an integrated webcam/microphone, which... while not super-useful, might be fun to play with (and if you have a broadband internet connection, you can video chat). It has a DVD+/-RW Dual-Layer burner, and a 4-in-1 card reader. Those media readers can be AMAZING for you, if you have a digital camera that uses a storage format that it can read (like SD Cards or Compact Flash).

And finally, it has graphics. Graphics, graphics, graphics. The screen is not a typical 1280x800, no... it's 1440x900 which, while not tremendously large, is still vastly better than 1280x800. Powering it is the Mobility Radeon X1700, which doesn't suck. It's like the Mobility Radeon X1600, only it's manufactured using a smaller process technology (each of the transistors on the X1700 is smaller than those on the X1600) allowing for faster performance and lower power consumption. Also, ATI's drivers for Windows Vista (and Windows in general) don't suck anymore, I'd even venture as far as to say they're better than Nvidia's (especially on Windows Vista). Since the Mobility Radeon X1700 is a member of the Radeon X1000-series graphics card family, it can do things like anti-aliasing and high dynamic range lighting in the same pass. The Radeon X1000-series architecture offers much better image quality than the Nvidia Geforce 7-series, and it comes with ATI's GPU-accelerated AVIVO video enhancement engine (Nvidia's competing PureVideo video GPU-accelerator costs another $50).

For $1,300 -- this choice is a non issue. You could even add another year or two to the extended warranty. If you can finagle a three-year warranty, I highly recommend doing so. Warranties are almost gimmicks on desktops -- but laptops are a totally diffeent different animal. You can easily take apart a desktop and fix it but... a laptop is an entirely proprietary architecture... so...
Posted: Sun, 10th Jun 2007, 9:44pm

Post 25 of 29

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8246999&type=product&id=1168045345063


what do you think?
Posted: Sun, 10th Jun 2007, 10:50pm

Post 26 of 29

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Well, the only flaw I could find was that it came with the Geforce Go 7700 for graphics. I've heard of some people who've had no problems with their Nvidia cards, and I've heard of some other people (more people) who've had Nvidia cards wrought with problems -- in Windows Vista. A friend of mine uses an HP dv9000t-series notebook, and it has a Geforce Go 7600... and the Geforce Go 7700 is just a lower-power, slightly higher performance version of the same card.

It's just that the driver situation (for Nvidia cards) is pretty dismal in Windows Vista right now. I'd hate to recommend a laptop only to have you spend your laptop shot on one laptop that wouldn't work. I have a friend who's had nothing but trouble with his Best Buy-bought notebooks, and his cases have not been handled well by Best Buy.

The notebook I linked above is about $400 cheaper, for a notebook that would perform better. The one you chose at Best Buy has a higher resolution screen -- that's it. That's not a deal... at all. I guarantee you, if you spend $1,799 at Best Buy versus $1,799 at Newegg, Newegg will get you a faster computer.

For example, this notebook. That notebook has a Geforce Go 8600 in it, so you could probably play games just fine -- and it could play those new, shiny DirectX 10 games. Unlike the Geforce Go 7-series cards, the Geforce Go 8-series cards have GREAT performance AND image quality, and they can do fullscreen anti-aliasing and high-dynamic range lighting in the same frame. It's rather fantastic.
Posted: Mon, 11th Jun 2007, 4:14pm

Post 27 of 29

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Looks great, but only 1gb of ram... Would this hurt video rendering performance?


I may just opt for the E1705, my father bought one a few years ago and loves it. We can also get a 10% (maybe more) discount with dell.

Do you think that the nVidia driver problem will be fixed in the near future?
Posted: Mon, 11th Jun 2007, 6:58pm

Post 28 of 29

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

the new godfather wrote:

Looks great, but only 1gb of ram... Would this hurt video rendering performance?
A little bit (it's less memory, obviously), but if you're worried about video rendering performance, you can upgrade to 2 GB DDR2-667 for not much more, pricewise. It's cheap and easy to upgrade memory -- even laptop memory is cheap as free these days.

Take the notebook I linked you to in my last post, the ASUS F3SV-B1. It comes with 1 GB of DDR2-667 memory which, contrary to the naysayers, will run Windows Vista and any of your games and applications just fine. And it does that, with a 2-year warranty for about $1,600.00. And for another $85.00, you could have 2 GB of high-quality DDR2-667 memory.

the new godfather wrote:

I may just opt for the E1705, my father bought one a few years ago and loves it. We can also get a 10% (maybe more) discount with dell.
I would honestly recommend the ASUS notebook with the ATI Mobility Radeon X1700. It's close to the Dell's 7900 GS in terms of performance, and as I said before, Radeon X1000-series cards have much better video/image quality than Nvidia Geforce 7000-series cards, and they don't begin to suffer the driver issues. Of course, I'd be willing to bet that the ASUS notebook with the Geforce Go 8600M GS is faster than the Inspiron E1705 and the Geforce Go 8-series cards have much better image quality than either the Radeon X1000-series cards and the Geforce Go 7-series cards... but of course... it's an Nvidia, so it's currently suffering from the Nvidia drivers.

You expressed a desire to use this notebook in college, carrying it around to classes etc. I owned the Inspiron E1705 while I was attending college. It wasn't a bad computer... but you couldn't very well bring it to classes. It was much larger/heavier than an ordinary textbook... it was definitely a good computer... but not necessarily a college computer. The 15.4" ASUS will be much more manageable.

the new godfather wrote:

Do you think that the nVidia driver problem will be fixed in the near future?
Honestly, the Nvidia driver "issue" isn't so bad, I know of someone who's running his games (WoW, LotR: O) on an Nvidia Geforce Go 7300 GS. So the Nvidia driver issue isn't such a bad thing... but ATI's drivers are CONSIDERABLY better (games run in Vista vs XP generally suffer something of a performance decrease, but ATI cards suffer less of a performance decrease than Nvidia's).

That, and the Dell is just... I mean, from a bargain perspective, the ASUS is an obvious choice.
Posted: Tue, 12th Jun 2007, 11:22pm

Post 29 of 29

EVW2K

Force: 20 | Joined: 16th May 2006 | Posts: 121

Windows User

Member

i know this might be late, but to end the dispute between a pickle and jaxrox; there is a site, http://www.tweakguides.com/TGTC.html, where they have tweak guides for vista and xp. i don't have vista, but i used this for xp. it helps you get rid of all the crap on your pc you don't need like norton, mcafe, background running programs like itunes helper, and java reader etc. it also helps you turn off all the stupid security stuff and install some better, free programs like a-squared, avg, and ad-aware. With all the tweaks and tips in there i am sure you can disable all of the bad parts of vista and make it work smooth. The guide optimizes your pc without sacrificing important things.