Apple Bumps Up Processor Speed on the MacBook Pro

Get back to me when Apple releases a computer that runs Windows. Then, and only then, would I even so much as touch one with a 10 foot pole.

Well this one does :)

Ladiesman - you'd be an idiot to buy or expect a Mac just for Windows when you can buy a cheaper, albeit vastly inferior, laptop from Dell or someone else made specifically for Windows. Buy a Mac for OSX and occasional Windows use (through emulation). Don't buy it to run Windows. That's not what's for. So... I don't expect anyone will be getting back to you anytime soon.

well i suppose only a lady like you would say that. Every PC site almost aknowledges the fact that Mac OS X is superior to Windows in many ways. If i could get a mac to dual boot windows and OS X, i would be very happy. bettery yet would be to run OS X on my computer. anyway, these speeds of the Core Duo, are as i recall, the highes so far so it's nice. wonder what other changes there are. Look out Lenevo!

I can't see how not having a modem for the Mac Book Pro is a bad thing. The people that would by a Mac Book Pro probably stopped using dial up at least a year ago. If an iBook, more for the average consumer, didn't have a modem, then that would be a problem at this day and age.

One would think a Ladiesman would be a better judge of style, performance and sex appeal... ; )

Ladiesman:

I would use a toaster running apple before I touched a Windows computer with a 10 foot pole

Leave it to everyone to turn this article's comment field into yet another PC vs. Mac debate. Way too go... how original.

yeah uh... OSX is a leaky UNIX. XP Pro has its problems but for compatibility, Microsoft Wins. I love teh 4X dvd burner Yeah... my emachines came with a 16X DVDBURNER and I bought it at walmart. Mac is exspensive incompatible, and has been inferior in speed for years. Now theyve finaly got a processer worthy of their high prices.

why does everyone have to respond to a troll? why?

I have some feedback on the MacBook Pro. I want one. Right now! But I can't afford it. Argh!

I've been a PC user my entire life and quite honestly I've had it with them. I want to switch over to Apple but I am leary of this new chip. Isn't OSX designed specifically for the Power PC chip? I think I'll feel more comfortable when MAC releases a new OS built from the ground up to accomodate the new chip. Furhtermore, I believe intel is experimenting with new production techniques on this chip. Sounds like a quality disaster for the first run of the chips. What do you think?

I love all the gripers about the win/mac debate. I think a mac running on intel is the ideal time to have this debate, is begging for it in fact. Maybe it was stupid to have the debate every week for the last decade, but right now, it would be silly not to discuss the trade-offs.

i am requesting some expert to ponder if i can run MATLAB 7.0 on mac book pro. there has been lot of discussions and i am not sure yet. i am thinking to switch to mac from windows so kinda novice. Rosetta will help

if not mac book pro doesnt serve any purpose for me so i am requesting opinions

as for anything apple wait for version 2.0.

Also, cant say ive had it with the power, performance, compatilibitlity, supply of spare parts, and the loads of software available for the pc.
I jsut dont see any of this with MAC, all I see is exspensive, lac of software, Macs are well mac, not home made clones, with cool Mod Cases. Nope, just yucky Mac, with yucky mac, on top of gross mac. I used to bag apples, and I can remeber Novemeber when the apples in the orchard turn to mush. Yeah thats what I think of when I think of Mac. also that 4X dvd burner come on, an exspensive high quality machine, and a crappy output device?????? what gives?????????

This is my first Apple computer. This thing better rock my world or I'm through with them. $2499 ain't cheap and after upgrading the hard drive and getting Apple Care it ends up being 3 grand.

My friggin' $400 iPod broke and getting it fixed has proved to be way more of a pain in the ass than I was led to believe it would be when I got it. Not to mention the fact that it was completely outdated within a couple of months.

OS X is not specifically designed for the PPC chip -- NeXT Openstep, the forebear of OS X, ran on x86 and Motorola 680x0 chips. It is a mach kernel based usnix system and is chip agnostic. By most accounts OS X runs as well or better on Intel as it does on PPC

Happy go Chuckie, OS X is built from the ground up for Intel. Always has been. OS X originated at NeXT. Ever since 2000, Apple has compiled every major build of OS X to run natively on both PowerPC and Intel. In addition, all of the Apple applications that come with the computer are native for Intel.

Usually, only people that have never used a Mac say that it is inferior. Try it out for yourself for a month and then speak. I've used both since the 386 days and since Motorola first started making chips for Macs, and from experience, the Mac has always been a dream to work with. The PC however... well I can't even count the number of times I've wanted to toss it out of a window.

I guess I am just sketchy about going out for the first run on anything. Knowing that OSX was designed with the Intel chip in mind is comforting. Ahhhh. I dunno.

All I know is I am sick of Windows and my MAC would be just for my own personal enjoyment.

Running Windows on a Mac? Why!? I do not have vast experience with a Mac, been a PC guy my entire life. Honestly, I go to the Mac store once a month or so just to use it. Each time I go I am so stoked on the experience. The OS makes me smile ear to ear. I work on a PC all day the last thing I want to do is go home and try to enjoy casual web browsing, music, and video editing on one. Yuck!

I'm tempted... but being a supply chain management guy the new production method for the Intel chip has got me sketched.

I appreciate the correction though. Oh and you see that double post... yeah my PC is being a piece these days.

Mac inferior?

Honestly what do you people do with these things? Most people I would guess are concerned with internet, word processing/spreadsheets, music, pictures, and some video. Mac dominates in everything except Office which there is a Mac version for so I'm fine then.

Like I said I'm a PC guy since the dark ages and from what I can tell, Macs are vastly superior. When I use one and I'm just trolling about the OS I find myself going "oh that's smart" about once a minute. On a PC, I rely on going "Go Chuckie! You tricked it into doing what you wanted this time!"

"Usually, only people that have never used a Mac say that it is inferior. "

well I guess you like to wait. because the times ive used Macs ive had nothing but impatience. Nothing like my speedy PC expieriences. and yes ive used both over the years. as for casual browsing, MY PC is firefox has always been fast as fast can be. My brother in law has a G5, and he is on the same broadband service. Surfing on his mac makes me impatient. I love my emachines, tht I pay
<$500, and they crank away. MUWAHAHAHAHAA PC BABY, Penitum, and beyond. you macheads will know the power now that Mac finaly has a good processer.

You are not just getting OS X (a stable, fun, UNIX based operating system) when you buy a MAC. Consumer Reports consistantly rates Apple the best for reliability and customer service (some of this is due to no virus or spyware problems and good hardware). You also get free applications for media that are absolutely incredible with no comparison in the PC world. You get iPhoto (a fantastic digital photo program), iDVD (for professional looking DVDs), music and movie editing programs that simply work well and are easy to use.

I would just like to say:

Most of the hardware/software out there is made for windows based PCs.

All of the mac vs PC stats that come out of steve jobs mouth range from misleading to flat out lies.

The people who have the most issues with PCs usually have the least knowledge on how to use and maintain them.

No Mac/PC component is made by Apple/Dell, they just buy the parts from Asia or Mexico. And Apple charges you more when they resell these parts to consumers.

Some people might benefit switching to a mac, just do your research and don't trust 90% of the things these homers say.

Well, I suppose that if all you do with your computer is surf the net, then a $500 paperweight with a processor is enough. Since the stone-age of electronics you get what you pay for. You could pay $12000 for a Hyundai and you could pay $80000 for a Lexus, of course they will both get you from work to home and home to work but which one would you rather be stuck in traffic in?

I can only believe that those posting messages must be using them to make cartoons. I use a Mac professionally and I on my third G4 box is just a little over a year. Our ITS department can't keep them running. I would think a long time before I would switch from a PC. PC's are faster, cheaper and half the problems of Macs.

I would't have one in my house. Oh and by the way for the gentleman who would rather use a toster, you are! Try typing with a Powerbook on you lap.

Just for you D-Unit: Are you a product of the Americna Educational System, or are do you come by your illiteracy naturally?

How many times do you scan your system for spy/adware? Trojans? I was a Windows user till 2000. I got tired of buying a new computer every two years just to run the OS. THAT's why PC's are so cheap. They have to be replaced every two (2) years or so. with my mac, I only had to buy a new one when my Audio Apps choked the processor - which was last year.

Don't click that link for free Pr?n - that there is spyware....

I would wait until all of Apples computers phase over to the new procs. By then I'm sure all of the new software will be taking full advantage of the new architecture. As for the Mac vs Win debate, I use both, and have likes and dislikes for both. Where one wins for me, the other is weaker. I do a lot of animation and graphics intensive work and would never part with my G5.

Chuckie - OS X's Darwin (in lamens terms the core technology behind OS X) runs on the PowerPC and x86 platforms. What's more, it is even possible to build a "fat" kernel, containing both platform executables in a single file (to answer the previous posts on Mac is better, no pc is better crap). The only issues people will have is the actual programs on OS X, some will just need a quick update to run smoothly on the new x86 chip, some however will have to utilize Rosetta translation software, almost like a legacy mode for all you who run System 9 programs in OS X. So, in short, software issues will rage on... but such is the life of a computer user in BOTH Windows and OS X.

To quickly address the PC vs. Mac debate - Please people put it into perspective, if a car company sells 10 billion of car A, and 1 billion of car B, the chances of more screw ups and issues occuring are 10 - 1 in favor of car A. Of course you will see more issues on a windows based PC just because of numbers. It doesn't mean the MAC will never have issues... just less reported on, and Apple will capitalize on that.
In essence you are paying more for something that will have less virus', less hackers, less stress (HOPEFULLY), but you are buying something that will have less programs, less hardware choices, and less compatibility. It's your choice, I for one, choose both, and Linux for when I get pissed at both systems. :-)

The Unix kernel used by OSX runs on many different platforms. For the underlying OS, switching processors is very common.

For the laptop, from G4 to Dual Core, the speed is 6x faster and 4x more power efficient with a 60 AH instead of a 50 AH battery. Going by those numbers, the battery life should be 20% less, unless there is better power management. Don't be too surprised to find with good management, battery use remains similar with this assounding speed.

The PCI-Express card adapter versus PCMCIA is cutting edge. This is what makes Apple, Apple.

Save us from Bill Gates, please. We are not fond of viruses, and mal functioning computers. AND: Does apple still deliver 17" PowerBooks based on G4s or G5s?

Were can I get one in mid March. I'll be flying to Calif. then!

Still using the old but great WORPERFECT, by COREL.
What a pity WORD dominates the world...

LET THE BEST ONE WIN, NOT MERELY THE ONE WHOSE MARKETING SYSTEM IS STRONGER!

(I thought that this an American slogan, but it seems the in the days when a vice President shoots men, not birds, and HALLIBURTON does what it does, American gave in to the $ POWER

Viruses are a fact of life. A unstable os is not whether it be windows or mac. If you know how to maintain your system then it will run fine. There are people who hate windows because they do not think they need antivirus or other such tools and then wonder why the computer keeps crashing. Each sytem has their own value, it all depends on what you are doing with it.

Hey Happy Go Chuckie:

Apple has already been rewriting OS X for Intel chips for quite some time, under the radar, according to what I've read. So getting a MacBook Pro should be OK from that standpoint.

PC vrs. Mac is like Republicans vr. Demoncrats

Guess which one is the Republican.

To all posters:

1 Can't spell? Don't post. And it's 'fewer' not 'less'.
2. Various folks have claimed to 'hack' a Mac to run Windows, but other bloggers have said it isn't possible, due to issues with the BIOS and the new chips, etc, in very technically detailed blogs.
3. If you can afford a $2000 Mac, you can afford a $50, big PC desk at a yard sale, so stop whining about wanting to be able to run Windows on your Mac. There is no shortage of virusy Pentium III's to be had for a song.
4. There is plenty of real software on the Mac for real professionals who actually want to do work. Gamers in basements with allowances and part-time jobs are not exactly Apple's dream customers.
5. Nobody cares if you feel one's faster than the other, because you can't prove it, and it won't matter in 6 months anyway when the new models come out.
6. Rick, poor soul, is misguided. Compatibility? Apple invented Firewire, and pushed the PC world kicking and screaming into the world of USB, which had languished unused for years. That takes care of printers, drives, scanners, keyboards, mice, etc. As long as Bill Gates draws breath, there will never be 100% compatibility with Windows from any hardware or software, anywhere inside or outside of Microsoft. Compatibility makes him no money. "[L]ess (sic) hardware choices" is another way of saying "I have no money and would rather build my own if I can't dumpster dive for it", which makes Apple no money; see point 4 above. And oddly enough, the reason you hear about fewer virus infections and hack attacks on Macs is because there really are fewer attacks, about a handful or two versus the more-than-65,000 on the PC side in the past few years.

Switched from PC to Mac about a year ago and couldn't be happier. Worked on a PC recently and felt like i had regressed to a very uninspired environment. If you feel creative you are.

I run both, custom built PC for games. Apple powerbook 12.1 inch for work, writting, internet reserch, Pro tools in a friend's studio. I never have problems with the Apple breaking. Apple creates a very elegant machine. The gaming machine crashes all the time. I have to deal with buggy hardware drivers; however, there are still too many games I play in my free time that need a PC. i am waiting on the Macbook for a couple of generations to let let them work the kinks out. I prefer Mac to PC
Patrick

I have used pc computers for most of my life, but when it came time to attend graduate school I knew from personal experience that a Mac was the obvious choice. My friends that own macs are very happy with them and do not report having any problems with them whatsoever. On the other hand my experience with pc computers is that you have to tinker with them constantly in order to get them to work properly. This results in much valuable time lost and the unacceptable possiblity of data loss, somthing you cannot afford as a graduate student. I will not say that a Mac beats a Pc hands down in all aspects but I will say that so far I am much happier with my Mac and I would probably be even happier with a speedy Macbook Pro.

I have helped several people who have PCs running Windows to update the OS, update virus protection, and install anti-spyware/-adware software ? so that their computers would start working again. In short, Windows is a royal pain-in-the-ass. If you want a state-of-the-art operating system, with style and class, which is easy to use, buy a Mac! Mac OS X is virtually immune to viruses, thanks in large part to its UNIX-like foundations.

Windows is simply brutal. That's it. End of discussion.

silly minions of insane apple marketting.

Give me any mac, and I can configure a far more powerful windows-based computer for the same price.

Not that I hate OSX. I've used both XP and OSX quite a lot now. It seems like the only argument nowadays is the fact that "everything is so integrated in a mac".

I'd beg to differ. I do graphics work with photoshop and maya, and I can't see any differences in my workflow. Not to mention, my windows-based machine is leaps and bounds more powerful for what I'm doing than the G5 tower I'm using at work.

Additionally, windows is not that bad.

I haven't had spyware, viruses, or blue screens for over a year now.

I don't run any antivirus software either. I don't understand what people are talking about when they complain about instability. My apple at work has crashed more than my windows machine at home has.

From my experience, instability in windows machines come from lousy power supplies and fluctuating voltages in the +/-12V and 3.3V rails, and NOT the operating system. Simple remedy: get an Enermax.

I run both systems, XP for games and OSX for everything else, I will not even touch my PC to surf the net or to do actual work.

The only reason I use XP for games is because well I don't have a fast enough mac, but with the new intel macs coming out that has all changed, I am happy to say that I will never be buying another PC again. OSX is just to powerful, and now with being on a Intel platform its downright brilliant.

Seriously the only thing that XP could do better than OSX was run games at a higher framerate, but now that we have a Intel partnership I can say that is history.

For the people still not sure about a mac but are curious to what it has to offer, I recommend you go to a Apple store and experience there systems first hand, ask the Apple experts as much as you can. See how everything works seamlessly together as Apple has built everything from scratch, the technology, the software and the hardware all work together to get the best possible experience out of a computer.

Even before intel macs came out we did have a program called Virtual PC that could boot up any Microsoft operating system, it was pretty slow but it still aloud you to do basic tasks like run your accounting software thru the emulation program (Virtual PC). But this just goes to show that Apple was trying to mend the bridge between oranges and apples for some time now. With the new intel transistion I think they have just completed that bridge.

In the near future I am betting you will be able to run anything windows on a mac, but the real question is why would you want to drive a Kia when the Lexus is sitting in the driveway?

what about gaming compatibility?

About the kia/lexus comparison

it's more of a souped up toyota supra/stock lexus comparison

When I buy my PCs, they will ALWAYS be faster than your macs.

l bought an 20" Imac G5 just before Christmas running OS X (a front end over Unix) because l thought it would renew my interest in PC ownership. l have owned MS Dos and Windows PCs for 15 years. In that time l have written many commercial software packages.
When l bought this PC Apple were promising a 30 day money back guarantee 10 days later they refused to honour that saying it was only valid if l bought it directly from them not from one of their main dealers.
l have 10 Mb Broadband connection. The Apple is around 10 times slower than my 4 year old 1.2Ghz Athlon PC. The cost of Peripherals is extortionate. The supplied software is simplistic and overated. Their is very little choice of good quality commercial software.
Do l regret my purchase ? give me ?900 and its yours including MS Office ( which is the only thing that stopped me pushing the whole thing where Apple wouldn't want it.

As long as Rosetta is part of the equation, all the hype is meaningless. Apps running on Rosetta (and that's most of them at this point) run about half the speed of normal apps. Only Apple could figure out a way to make an Intel-based computer appear to run *slower* than normal.

Take heart, Appleheads. Once those native apps become available, you can all run right out to the Apple Store and lay out the cash for the all-new version of Photoshop. Again. Spending money--it's what you live for.

Bob. Nice name!

Yes! Apple is the commercialization of the computer. We, as prosumers and not mindless goons of blind consumerism produced by apple marketting, have no business around here.

Some people choose to waste their money on subpar equipment, and are too lazy or foolish to realize that there is a much better PC to be bought at the same prices.
Those too thick to realize this, will likely never change, and will add to the statistic of people with negative bank accounts who buy stuff that looks great and works like junk.

Apple computer will become the BMW of the computer world(they kinda already are). I would guess that the new intel macs will run windows eventually. Apple will lead the way in new stuff like thye have with firewire and usb. Afterall, MS could have burried them but it made more sense to keep them alive so they could do the r&d for the whole industry. Apple engineers are creative... no doubt. Windows machines are boring in comparison. However, Windows machines rule the world... no doubt. Some have made comparisons like a mac=lexus, and a pc=ford escort. That statement would be true on the consumer level.. Howerver, these folks have never driven a dual 3.6 Xeon workstation. Well, anyways Apple is going to fix the "slow" stigma and rock on. For me... and I am a power user... when the new G5's or G6's role out with dual and quad core intel processors I may buy an Apple... for the first time in 30 years.

Bob,

You are mistaken. Rosetta is a lot faster than you think. It doesn't just run a PPC emulator, it re-compiles PPC code into x86 code.

you guys are n00bs, Windows Vista will install on the macbook, it supports efi, so you can dual boot natively without some emulator, you just need to wait until the end of the year when Vista is released

Furthermore, to "J", you said "Various folks have claimed to 'hack' a Mac to run Windows, but other bloggers have said it isn't possible, due to issues with the BIOS and the new chips, etc, in very technically detailed blogs."

The new intel macs do not even use BIOS, they use EFI. WinXP does not support EFI, but Vista does, so does Windows XP 64-bit, the only problem with 64-bit windows is that the apple hardware is currently only 32-bit. So like I said, Vista can run on it.

I have had a powerbook 17inch (my work laptop) for about 2 1/2 years. I also have a MS XP box at work. At home I have a linux box.

My linux box is incredibly stable (far more so than my xp and mac). However, it doesn't have any of the standard applications -- which unfortunately are MS monopolies. I use it for surfing the web and conducting personal research on software development and things of this nature. By the way, I have never ever had a virus on this machine and don't need to worry about it either since 99% of the viruses out there are written for MS XP etc.

My XP box has been pretty good and over time I have begun to appreciate it more and more just because I don't need to worry whether or not I can run application xyz ( as everyone already know nearly all applications run on XP). However, I have a very big corporate structure that supports this machine. They are constantly updating and patching the thing against all the worms, and viruses out there. I personally would not have one of these machines as my home machine as they are far too vunerable to viruses, worms, etc... Difficult to maintain in my opinion.

My mac has also been pretty good. Its not as fast but generally speaking most of the applications that I need to run also run on the mac (MS office, Matlab, Mathematica, LaTex,eclipse,...). As I saw someone mention above, the G4 does get hot now and then. Its pretty stable overall. Because the OS is basically unix, it is less vunerable to viruses, worms, etc -- fortunately for us unix geeks, just like many common applications, viruses are not written for unix.

Here is my recommendation:
If you only need to surf the web and love to tinker around with the OS and your desktop, then linux is for you. By the way, I use my home linux box to save my digital pictures and edit them.

If you want a relatively trouble free box where you don't have worry about installations, versions, etc, and you need to run MS office and other common applications, and you don't mind constantly worrying about protecting the machine against viruses, ... then use an XP box.

If however you want a really cool (look and feel) operating system that can run most common apps albeit a little slower, then the mac is the way to go. Coming from the Linux side (RH), I have found the mac to be less customizable. That is probably because I don't know how they have things layed out that well.

I'm waiting for the new Intel iBook - as an undergraduate student, the price is excellent, as well as the battery life.

My dad has ordered the new Macbook Pro - so I'll be playing with that.

I currently have a HP laptop that is just too heavy to lug around all day, and at most the battery life is only about 3.5 hours (sure, it has got a beautiful screen though!)

Viruses Viruses.

First off let me say that I have not a single thing against mac. My brother-in-law is an avid mac fan and it seems fine to me.

I am a pc user, always have been and always will be. I would like to say that I would be willing to bet a whole lot of money that if Apple gains 85% of the market share and Microsoft only has 5% in the computer OS field that the whole virus debate will be swapped. Why write something to attack or steal info from 5% of the systems when you can hit 85% instead.

To D-UNIT and several others.
Your posts are borderline illiterate.
You write as if you are in a chat room of teenagers.
Your points are lost to most.

I find it humorous that apple is telling creative pros to not use the MacBook Pro but use the old PowerPC notebook. Thats gotta hurt as nearly 95% of all mac users are creative pros. LOL!!!!

The MAC is highly compatable... out of the box it plays well with micro$oft. I didn't have to configure anything in my network to use my PC file servers... MAC works with windows but windows won't play with MAC well...I am switching my whole network to MAC soon. Even MS Office works better on a MAC... I am MS certified and I'm not looking back. Try MAC and then tell me it isn't compatible etc.

Ladiesman...fully agree with points you made. Others with dissenting views will prop up their biased and unbalanced views with heresay and probably drive yugos to this day! Here's a laugh you probably already know of. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7148748849652085555&q=MAC

Apple computers are for the masses.

Hmmm. I'll do MAC. Not the hardware mind you. That's all the same. Quailty is qualtiy. Period. But the OS interests me.

To the rich, loaded IT admins: Some people, like the ones just out of college, don't have the money to buy TWO computers. Yes, we like to have fun...umm, like maybe play some games. But we have work to do: like photoshop, dreamweaver, Access, and DTP.

So, I have a PC. I will be buying OSX when it is sold at retail, which will probably happen in the next year or two.

There may be lots of nice things about Apple. I'm not going to slam them. But has anyone checked the core markets: graphics, video, DTP? Apple is losing marketshare due to cost, and the fact that the playing field is leveling.

This Mac vs PC business is very tedious. When a user is within an application, provided it is stable who cares whether that application is running within Windows or OSX? It just isn't an issue. However, it is an annoyance that some software, and especially that required for e-banking, is usually simply XP-specific. Not even Virtual PC will solve that but I hope the Vista system running on Intel Macs will, later in the year, solve this issue.

In my business, I run about 140 Apple workstations across seven physical sites, coupled up to 5 servers and various back-up servers. We only have two XP machines, which we keep switched off except when they are needed for their very specific applications.

The reason for staying so predominantly Apple is simple. The workstations and the servers are pretty reliable and speeds are good. As a consequence, the entire architecture is maintained with only 8-12 hours manitenance a week. So it boils down to money: instead of hiring two or three computer service engineers for the entire year to keep an XP and NT server show on the road without the wheels falling off, we buy in 0.2 of an engineer. Yes, Apple hardware is more expensive: but it pales into insignificance compared with the costs of IT engineering support.

I am also involved with other businesses using the Windows platform attached to NT servers and the like. The users at these companies are using the machines 99% of the time for MS Office applications and internet access. I am always astonished at how much IT support these companies need to stay up and running.

Ask any IT Department that supports both platforms and they will tell you that, even after taking into account the number of each type they support, they nevertheless spend proportionately far more time on the Windows set-ups thant they do on the Apple platform. Ask any IT engineer familiar with both platforms which machine he or she would rather have at home for their family to use: most will say an Apple. It's just a matter of ease of use with less hassle.

Those of you that talk about cost and the costs of Apple hardware must factor in the whole cost of ownership: IT support is very expensive and for my group of companies I estimate we are saving about $50k - $70k by staying on a very stable platform that just happens to be called Apple.

As for me, I don't care in terms of Apple-zealotry. I hope the Apple platform expands its share, because increased competition can only be to the benefit of all consumers on both platforms. So roll on Vista and OS10.5, and their successors, let battle continue. Indeed, I also hope open architectures increase their penetration.

Yet at the end of the day none of us should be bothered that much: we all simply want trouble free machines that work. The fact that, on either platform, we are prepared to put up with the occasional system failures we encounter, is a sorry indicator of our excessive tolerance as consumers.

Someone said Apple is like the BMW of computers. I TOTALLY agree. Sure, an Apple looks cool, and it's "in" to say you have one. The PC, on the other hand, is more like the Honda of computers. You get the same performance, if not better, for a lot less money and perhaps not in such a nice package.

I don't buy a computer because it looks cool. I buy it for functionality, and i'm sorry but Apple just hasn't shown me enough compatibility with software to get me interested, nor can I justify buy a hugely overpriced computer because it looks like a giant iPod.....

Oh, and i've been a PC user forever. I've had an NEC, a Gateway, an HP, and a Dell. Never had a problem with any of them.

The supposed "instability" of the C world is what keeps us IT techs in business, adn the debate is not really MAC vs PC, it's home-assembled ve brand-name computers. Get yourself a high-end HP or Fujitsu with Windows and you'll have as little instability problems as with a MAC.

noooooooooo marriage of convenience!! will only produce sterile children and miscarriages. You cant mix a mac with a pc... you just cant :'(

I have been a PC user for a very long time. When the time came to buy a brand new laptop, I took the risk and bought a Powerbook G4 (12 incher). I am very satisfied with my Mac. However, in my excitement, I convinced a few colleagues to by powerbooks. Some had issues with gremlins. Now that was surprising given that the powerbook line was an established line. Nevertheless a few bad "apples" (no pun) can escape quality control. Given that the Macbook Pro line is entirely new for Apple, I would expect a greater frequency of gremlin encounters. My advice is to see how generation 1 performs (ask some people who have it) and wait for generation 2.

Hey Suelu_reacocard!

Guess what? Apple will be selling OSX retail pretty soon. They'll have to. You can already download hacked versions and install them and run them on amd/intel computers.

Quite true, if we pay for IT support, then we need to factor costs for that it. However, some of us are "geeks" and are paying for more important things like families, cars, phones, food, etc. We'd rather save $1000 on a powerful Windows computer, than a comparable Mac.