…and this is a 
Another major religious question
Category: Technology
Posted on: October 15, 2007 3:50 PM, by PZ Myers
Prepare yourself for the true religious wars: I'm asking for advice on a new laptop.
I usually stretch out the usefulness of my computers for four or five years, and it is now time for me to invest in a new laptop. I'm planning to purchase the new tool sometime around the end of this month, when the Leopard OS X version is released. It will be a MacBook Pro; don't even think of suggesting some Windows piece of crap, heretics, and although I can sympathize with the Linux crowd a little more, there's no way I'm going to go back to tinkering obsessively with gadgets again. I like my BSD.
What I'm fussing over now is the glorious details to the One True Mac, and anyone's experience will be useful.
15" vs 17"? I'm currently using a 15" laptop, and the form factor is nice and portable. I keep finding myself scrabbling for more screen space, though — last night, for instance, I'm putting together a lecture in Keynote, and I'm juggling windows from my pdf viewer, my text editor, Photoshop, the web browser, and Keynote itself, and every centimeter helps. I'm leaning towards the 17", but it is an extra pound of weight…
Glossy vs matte? I'm used to the matte anti-glare finish, and I like it. On the other hand, I do notice that what I'm used to seeing on my screen is sometimes very different from what others see on theirs — that glossy screen seems to be ubiquitous in the rest of the universe. Anyone out there have strong preferences? Why?
I also need a new laptop bag, the old one is a bit frayed. Any recommendations? I like the messenger bag or briefcase styles, and I also like them roomy — if I'm making an overnight trip somewhere, I travel light and want to be able to throw in a change of clothes and my toothbrush with the laptop and take off with just the one bag. I've been hearing good things about the Brenthaven line…
Now I mainly want to hear from the enlightened Mac users, but if the PC weenies want to rhapsodize over their clumsy machines, I will tolerate it for the edification of other readers…but I guarantee you that I will not be swayed.
Technology
Comments
No question Myers -- get a MacBook Pro with Parallels (and WinXP) preinstalled, and 3 gigs of memory.
You will never regret it.
Posted by: wnelson | October 15, 2007 4:21 PM
I love the 17", but you're right: it's heavier, and unless you find yourself routinely away from home juggling screenfulls of data, why not get the lighter 15" and a second monitor? That way you'll have all the screen you can use for Keynote work, along with the smaller form factor and lightness of the 15", and while the difference in cost between the 15" and the 17" won't quite pay for a decent monitor, it'll subsidize it!
As for screens, I prefer glossy, just because it cuts down reflections if I have to work off-angle (when I'm showing something to someone else).
Posted by: Rod | October 15, 2007 4:25 PM
MacBook Pro 15", top it up with as much RAM as you can afford. I have one with
4GB RAM and it is a wonder to behold. As for screen real estate, I'm a long term user
of CodeTek's Vritual Desktop (there are other similar free programs). I always
have used such things on my Linux boxes and so it's natural to use them on the Mac
as well. Leopard will have "Spaces" which will be Apples' version of the same thing. This
means you should have little problem with screen real estate (I've even used a 12 inch
MacBook quite happily using a virtual desktop program set up for 8 desktops).
Hope this helps.
Posted by: Adrian | October 15, 2007 4:28 PM
Matte finish! You see too much reflection in the
glossy finish screens, especially under reasonable
lighting conditions. I found it far too disctracting.
Posted by: Adrian | October 15, 2007 4:29 PM
I have a 15" and I really prefer it over the 17" because of size. The latter is just too large. I think Spaces will solve your screen clutter issues, but I also use command-tab a lot.
I don't really care too much about glossy vs matte. I have a laptop backpack that is awesome.
Posted by: Eric | October 15, 2007 4:34 PM
I am a PC user, but also versed in Mac. If you are a PC user then there will be an associated learning curve, but not too bad. As far as raw computing power and capabilities (leaving personal emotions out of the equation) they really are about equal.
17" are very heavy and if you travel a lot, moving through train and air terminals can be onerous. A pound may not sound like much, but it can really make a difference. I use the 15" wide screens and am very happy with the resolution and capability.
Which comes to your point #3. I liked the messenger bags until I started getting aches from one-sided "lugging". Also was a pain when it falls off your shoulders while your trying to juggle other bags. I switched to one of the Tarus backpacks, lots of room, pockets and storage. Glad I made the switch!
As far a screen size, if you use projection, I have to keep in mind that most projectors I use for my science presentations are 1024x768 or 1280x1024 so it will "scrunch" your screen icons if you are using PCs. Apple doesn't have that same kind of issue.
Posted by: rwhite | October 15, 2007 4:34 PM
Leopard's new Spaces feature promises to make more of your screen real estate which means the 15" might work. You could get a feel now for what this will be like by checking out any of the third party virtual desktops listed at VersionTracker.
Posted by: Frank Midgley | October 15, 2007 4:35 PM
Seriously, the screen size is not a problem if you use Exposé wisely, (I programmed the "hot corners" for this) and with "Spaces" on Leopard, a bigger screen is quite unnecessary. For a laptop bag I'd go with the STM Medium Loft 15" shoulder bag... it looks like a regular bag, and I just throw it in a weekend bag when I need to travel.
But why a MacBook Pro? I have a PowerBook now, and I'm opting for a regular MacBook in the near future. The Pro is just too expensive, especially since I am not sponsored by my work.
Posted by: Rienk | October 15, 2007 4:36 PM
Get the big screen. I'm telling ya', you stare at these things for how many hours a day? You might as well make it as easy on your eyeballs as you can. Sure it's a few pounds more, but just think how heavy a 12" laptop was even 6 years ago compared to these 17" screens are now. Also, I would go for the glossy screen. I don't have one myself, but I've enjoyed it while using other peoples macbooks.
Posted by: drunksci | October 15, 2007 4:40 PM
I love my Timbuk2 laptop messenger bag. You can fit a laptop, a change of clothes, a toothbrush, etc. and a few books. They last for years, and keep your belongings dry in all sorts of weather.
Posted by: Bryan Carstens | October 15, 2007 4:41 PM
I am a die hard Linux user (running Fedora 7 on a 20" iMac as I type this). With the new MacTel processors in the Macs it is trivial to run both Mac OS X, Linux, and Windows(ugh) should you decide to. Linux is not the hassle it used to be to install and run and "just works" (as the Maccies like to say.) I don't know about running it on the MacBook-Pro nad supporting all the bells and whistles as I don't have one.
If I were to buy a laptop it would be a Mac. I have an old iBook which runs Mac OS X 10.4 and Linux-PPC (Fedora 7 also.) When I get a new Macc laptop it will be dual boot with Mac OS X and Linux.
Strange as it may seem I find hardware support to be better in Linux than in Mac OS X. Cameras, phones, iPods, Powermates, whatever all seem to work just fine.
Best thing about the Macs laptops is their power management. My laptop runs for hours and hours on a full charge with my style of use.
I would go with the 15" MacBook Pro or even the 13.3" MacBoook. I like small and light and use a laptop like a satellite system. I think PZ uses it as his main and only system in which case perhaps the 15" MacBook or even the 17" would be better. Even then I would consider getting the smaller of the two and if screen real estate is important have an external monitor on the desk at home and at work. I can't stand lugging around huge bits of machinery regardless of who makes it or what runs on it.
-DU-
Posted by: David Utidjian | October 15, 2007 4:41 PM
I second the MacBook suggestion. I'm annoyed by the premium Jobs puts on the black plastic case, but the 15" glossy screen is nice. Spend the twelve hundred dollar difference on RAM, software and romantic dinners with the trophy wife.
Posted by: Bert Chadick | October 15, 2007 4:49 PM
I've been partial to the Tom Bihn bags ever since the production run that included washing instructions which included, in the French translation:
NOUS SOMMES DESOLES QUE NOTRE PRESIDENT SOIT UN IDIOT. NOUS N'AVONS PAS VOTE POUR LUI.
As Tom Bihn said (paraphrasing), "I figured it was a joke on me, since I'm president of the company, but when you put the words 'president' and 'idiot' in a sentence, people just jump to conclusions".
Plus they have bags sized specifically for Macs.
Posted by: Johnny Vector | October 15, 2007 4:50 PM
I went through the same 15" vs 17" (at that time PowerBook G4) analysis almost 3 years ago. I ended up with a 17" PowerBook and a 30" Cinema Display. Never regretted it for a second. When I'm on the road, the 17" is a bit heavier but I can give presentations to a small group without projector and have the desktop real-estate that I always miss with the smaller laptops.
Posted by: Guido Arnout | October 15, 2007 4:50 PM
For a bag, you could try getting a laptop sleeve, rather than a separate bag. One place to look (where I got mine, actually) is etsy.com. It's a direct ordering from the maker place.
I like the glossy myself, and plan on getting that when my current beast craps out.
Posted by: thelogos | October 15, 2007 4:52 PM
Buy a refurbished model of last year's power-hungry monster. Use the $500-$1000 you'll save to take your trophy wife out to dinner.
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | October 15, 2007 4:54 PM
Here's one from left field, get a top spec MacBook (not Pro) and with the money left over, get a nice big cinema display to go with it. Best of both worlds, you get supreme portability, a very capable machine, and the screen real estate when you need it. Oh, and unless you are in areas of particularly high glare, the glossy finish produces far nicer results.
For me, the 17 inch just isn't portable enough, you might as well carry round an iMac.
Posted by: Simon | October 15, 2007 4:56 PM
The glossy screen looks better, unless you're actually using it. Go for matte and as much RAM as you can squeeze in to it.
Posted by: Samuel | October 15, 2007 5:00 PM
This means you have no idea how to use, maintain, enhance, or service electronic digital computers, either hardware or software.
I suggest an abacus. They last thousands of years.
Posted by: blf | October 15, 2007 5:00 PM
I'm a windows user, but my experiences can still somewhat apply. I went with a 17 inch laptop, but I mainly use it around the home. The screen size borders on excessive, but I like it. On the road it's too big. Not too heavy, too big. It's ludicrous to pull this thing out, say, on a restaurant table. It would equally be a bit unwieldy to whip out while riding on the train. It's more like a "lap and a half-top".
Also, go for matte. Glossy is a stupid trend. It messes up the color accuracy of the screen to make it look snappier and makes reflections a huge problem. I almost can't stand to use my laptop anywhere where I'll have lighting behind me that can reflect on the screen.
Posted by: Nomad | October 15, 2007 5:00 PM
I'm a Microsoft fan. I almost never jump into religious discussions of technology because people are impossible to convince and I prefer to just do my work, solve problems, try to make the world of software better. I know I posted here once before, if anyone remembers that, I may have lost my cool a bit and I apologize for that, but I have a great deal of respect for the people here and it's disappointing to see a blind spot on this topic.
I'm pragmatic with technology. In some cases I've suggested people buy Macs, and I'm helping a friend run Linux now. I'm well versed in a great deal of technology - it's my passion and my job, and the more I know the better I am at it - but I do prefer Microsoft.
PZ, why do you start from the position that this will be a religious debate? I know you didn't explicitly say what the nature of the debate would be, but you implied it could be a Windows vs. Mac vs. Linux debate. I rarely see Windows/Microsoft fans starting debates - but when a Mirosoft article is published somewhere, Microsoft instantly gets pummeled. It's disheartening to me because this shouldn't be an "us vs. them" debate with technology. We have choice, and whether your opinion that Windows is a piece of crap resolves with reality or not doesn't matter, because Macs work well for you. Anyhow, if a religious debate starts here regarding Windows vs. Mac, I'll be truly surprised, but I certainly won't feed that fire.
Please, no flames in response to this! :) I'll respond to well thought out comments, otherwise I will remain silent.
I'll defer to the Mac fans for your Mac advice. They can offer you far better advice than I can. Good luck on selecting your new Mac!
Posted by: Jeff | October 15, 2007 5:01 PM
In June I got the 15" MacBook Pro, matte screen. Perfectly fine if you ask me. I'd second the suggestion to use the cash not spent on the larger screen on maxing out the memory. The 15" is heavy enough in my opinion, and there are other ways to maximize use of the 15" screen.
Posted by: makita | October 15, 2007 5:02 PM
I got the 12" Powerbook over 4 years ago, and I couldn't have been happier. I don't know if the current MacBooks (pro or otherwise) still do this, but I could close my powered-on laptop, plug in a monitor, keyboard, and mouse, and the laptop would instantly act like a desktop machine. Extreme portability when I needed it, full desktop when I was home; best of both worlds.
With that in mind, I'd also vote for a top-spec MacBook. The RAM will be more expensive if you buy it from Apple w/ the machine, so I'd suggest getting the bare minimum on your order and hit Newegg to max out your RAM. Even if you're not well-versed in installation it is 1) not too difficult and 2) quite likely that someone at the college is skilled enough to do it for you.
Posted by: Michael LoPrete | October 15, 2007 5:12 PM
Can't help you with any technical knowledge or experience, but, from my own interests in nutritional biochemistry and the obesity epidemic, a knock on benefit of an extra pound in weight is that it's not *that* much heavier, and would slightly up your physical activity which would have benefit to your health.
Lots of little things can add up!
Posted by: Big Dave | October 15, 2007 5:12 PM
I would also recommend the 15"/external monitor idea. I have a 15.4" widescreen laptop and a 19" widescreen external monitor. It is great. I use a docking station and stand to make disconnecting all my peripherals easier, but I don't think they have those for macs.
I am personally using Linux, but I would honestly advise against it unless you really want complete control over your computer. It "just works" almost all of the time, but when it doesn't it can be pretty tough to fix it.
It is kind of funny, when I replaced my old laptop I got one with the same size screen but much higher resolution. Originally I almost always worked on my external monitor and put other stuff (like toolbars, thumbnails, and such) on the laptop screen. Now, despite the fact that the screen is much smaller, I find I put everything on the laptop screen because the total resolution is much higher.
Posted by: TheBlackCat | October 15, 2007 5:12 PM
I take offense. I'm only a PC user because they are cheaper. Unlike you, I don't have a Trophy Wife and fancy cars and a big mansion ;-)
From my experience and personal opinion:
*For screen-size, I would look at what resolutions they give. If they are equivalent resolutions, then you aren't really getting more real estate, just an extra pound and "bigger" icons/text. Higher resolutions mean more desktop space. So, if the 17" gives you a significant boost in resolution, then go with it (especially if you're always scrambling for screen real estate). Get the 15" if there isn't a significant boost.
* Who cares what other people see when you present? Get what you prefer to look at. You can always invest in a cheap CRT or LCD from the used computer store to hook up to your lappy if you really want to test drive presentations.
* I know crap about laptop bags. I use a booksack with a laptop sleeve and put an extra case around my lappy. Probably not what you want, though, since I "do the college campus" while you "do the traveling". I like your suggestion for the traveling scientist though.
Posted by: Shawn Wilkinson | October 15, 2007 5:12 PM
We just got a Dell Vostro 1500 (which means you won't consider it), but with the 15.4" widescreen monitor.
Don't get the 17"; too large and heavy.
I imagine this comment pertains to pretty much any notebook, too: Upgrade the battery. The standard one is usually just not good enough on these things. We get about 7 hours out of the upgraded battery I ordered for ours. Best $50 you'll ever spend. If you wait until later, I bet it'll cost at least $100 to get the one you could have bought for $50 when you ordered the computer in the first place.
And get Kaspersky Internet Security 7.0.
On the Vostro, I said, "Sure, go ahead and throw in Norton Freeware (90 days)." Don't make the same mistake I did.
Posted by: MikeM | October 15, 2007 5:17 PM
I have the 15" MBP with the glossy screen and I love it. I never have a problem with glare and the colors are perfectly saturated. Graphics look great and movies are super. When I go back to my wife's 15" titanium matte I cringe at how much better the gloss looks. I highly recommend the glossy screen. It is really easy to clean also. I have friends who work in photoshop alot and they say that glossy screens are not good for color accuracy though because they tend to be oversaturated. If you really want good color accuracy you need to go matte and also you must calibrate your display with an external device to get the pallate correct.
Go 15' and use the cash to buy a cheep external flat-pannel for the office
Posted by: Valinore | October 15, 2007 5:17 PM
Slightly tangential comment: What is it with biologists and Macs? Based on friends and colleagues , it seems like at least 70% of biologists have Macs, with maybe 25% Windows and 5% Linux. Is that just my perception, or does this suggest a tighter connection between the biological sciences and graphic designers than one might otherwise suspect? (I'm one of the 5% running Linux, if my perspective is to be questioned.)
Posted by: Randall | October 15, 2007 5:17 PM
Well I'm a PC user, at least until I get a new computer next year. I'll probably buy a PC and, uh, purchase Leopard and then install a "special" version that works on it.
I have a 17" screen myself but it's really not necessary. Go with the 15", it's more than acceptable.
I don't really know enough about how the visuals are affected by glossy v. matte to comment, so listen to the professionals for that.
Posted by: themann1086 | October 15, 2007 5:19 PM
The Hell with a laptop, get a lapdance as "advertised" over at Young & Contreary's blog:
http://tinyurl.com/2cx6ja
You'll get much more satisfaction from it....
Posted by: Ian | October 15, 2007 5:20 PM
"I love the 17", but you're right: it's heavier, and unless you find yourself routinely away from home juggling screenfulls of data, why not get the lighter 15" and a second monitor? "
I second this guy. I spend hours at a computer screen and even a high-res 17 inch is way too small. So travel with the light 15 inch screen and get yourself a big high-res screen fo your office. I just got a 24 inch Dell, prices are very reasonable now. 24 inch does it, its big enough, especially as it runs the laptop screen as well so you can park some of your junk over there.
Posted by: sailor | October 15, 2007 5:20 PM
One thing no one seems to have mentioned yet is that Apple has put higher resolution displays in the later PowerBooks and MacBook Pros for the last couple of years. For example, my four year old PowerBook has (roughly) the same resolution as the 13" MacBook, but the current MacBook Pro is more analogous to the old 17" PowerBook. So if that's your frame of reference, the 15" MacBook Pro might have plenty of screen space for you.
I also agree with others' sentiments that Spaces will obviate the need for those extra inches at the end of the month.
Posted by: Alex | October 15, 2007 5:24 PM
Rod #2: I prefer glossy, just because it cuts down reflections if I have to work off-angle
Really? Seems the other way round to me, and it's the one major obstacle stopping me buying a new notebook--it's all but impossible to find anything now without a glossy screen.
Posted by: AlanWCan | October 15, 2007 5:24 PM
Validate that the glossy screen would work for you. I found it too ... well "glossy" and it ended up hurting my eyes especially outside.
So I opted for a non-glossy 15" MacBook Pro. The 15" is a nice compromised between light and the need for power/screen real estate. For a external monitor - take a look at Dell LCD display. Cheaper than Apples but the more the decent for the job.
Posted by: yoshi | October 15, 2007 5:28 PM
As for laptop bag, LLBean makes a very comfortable one that comes in a couple of sizes. You can customize the colors on the Heatwave Messenger Bag. Less pricey than Timbuk2 and the strap is very comfortable. I like having a separate sleeve for a laptop and you can usually find one for $10 if you look around. (I got a bag at Staples for $15 that included a padded sleeve and had a rebate so I have an extra bag plus a sleeve for like $7.)
I would not go larger than 15". The larger screen is nice but not essential so a MacBook is ok unless you have need for the separate graphics card.
Posted by: jonathank@mac.com | October 15, 2007 5:29 PM
I envy the audio re-routing that macs are capable of, but I've been quite happy with my Windoze computer - Dell E1705. I could give a little advice on the non-mac-specific specs you asked about.
17" screen - I'm very happy with it - there's nothing like having enough pixels and space to display two sizable programs at once, or two full-resolution websites. One more pound is easily handled by developing an ounce or two more arm muscle. Just don't go for a heavy "desktop-replacement" laptop - something middle-of-the-road is good. 17" is also great for watching movies in bed.
Go for Glossy. Real Colors are nifty.
As for a bag to carry my computer in, I have all three basic types - the over-the-shoulder kind that I originally wanted, the backpack with the padded laptop slot that I got for free, and the roll-around case with zippered pockets, organizers, and telescoping handle that my folks got me. I generally use the backpack when taking my computer to and from work and class, but when I'm traveling I'm more likely to take the roll-around bag. The shoulder-bag has proven not only uncomfortable, but also cumbersome. This may not be as much of an issue with a lighter laptop.
On the technology-vendor as religion issue - I have noticed that Mac users tend to have a certain "Installed Again" Zeal when talking about the alleged superiority of their theology technology-of-choice, when I tend to have a more practical approach. If it works for you, get it. I might add a Mac desktop computer to my repertoire in the future because you can route audio from program-to-program, which could be very useful, however, I like having two buttons. It just seems more evolved. ;)
Posted by: Inoculated Mind | October 15, 2007 5:30 PM
No contest: the MacBook Pro 15" if you lug it around, the 17" if it stays put most of the time. The 13" screen on the MacBook will get old very quickly. You will love the best of both worlds (Mac/Win) running Parallels. If you will be playing movies and using the iPhoto the glossy screen is the way to go... but if you use it mostly for writing I can see how some might prefer the matte. I have the glossy for both and have no problem.
The best bag I have ever had for commuting and traveling, and I've gone through many, is the Swiss Gear SYNERGY Computer Backpack. It travels with me between North an South America regularly.
It has a riveted carrying handle and shock absorber (elastic) backstraps, is well padded, stands upright when placed on the ground, and includes multiple sized pouches for files, cords, change of clothes, pens, etc. It also has a great top pouch for iPods, glasses and other quick grabs. They sell for $90 in the online Apple stores http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wa/RSLID?mco=7E4F2D7D&nplm=TF765LL/A
and $42 at Amazon http://www.amazon.com/SYNERGY-SwissGear-Wenger-Computer-Backpack/dp/B0007CIX1O/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-0327571-9121437?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1192483123&sr=8-1.
Make sure it is the SYNERGY and not other Swiss Gear and Army models that are not near as strong and versatile.
Posted by: mayhempix@aim.com | October 15, 2007 5:31 PM
My computer is an IBM PC called Langmuir and it runs Linux. It's got a 15" screen with a 1400x1050 resolution and I can recommend that to anybody. I think it is matt; it certainly doesn't look glossy.
I'd also recommend getting a year old laptop from ebay or somewhere, the performance is great and the price is very reasonable.
Sadly, I will never buy a Mac. I love the operating system and it would really be a shame to wipe it and replace it with Linux. With Windows, this is a real pleasure.
Posted by: hinschelwood | October 15, 2007 5:31 PM
I used to have a 17" Powerbook, and now I'm on my second 15" MBP. The 17" is fine as a desktop replacement, if you never intend to carry it outside the house. For traveling, the additional weight and bulk is just too much. As for needing a lot of screen space: use an external screen when you need it.
Glossy vs matte: I used to rabidly hate glossy, but now that I have a glossy iMac... I'm still rabidly anti-glossy. Sure, on a glossy screen the colors are deeper and more vibrant, but you have that constant glare and reflection of the lights around you.
Posted by: Hans | October 15, 2007 5:31 PM
I prefer the 17" screen myself. An extra pound is not a big deal to me for the screen space. Honestly, even w/o the screen space a lb is not a big deal. My wife feels differently. My wife is wrong. And so long as she never reads this I will continue to hold that opinion.
I have a matte screen and like it, but really don't have an overriding preference. As for the bag, I like a slim version myself, so I can't offer much help with that.
Posted by: Chris Simeur | October 15, 2007 5:35 PM
I have a three-year-old 14-inch IBM (Lenovo) Thinkpad which I use all the time for writing and surfing. It has a high resolution screen (1400x1050) and is small, light and perfect for my travel needs.
I look at all the new 17-inch laptops on sale today with dismay. They're simply too big, so when it comes to replacing my current machine, the most I will upgrade to is 15-inches, and that may be only if the 14-inch Thinkpads are no longer available.
If you must have more screen space, why not invest in a couple of external 22-inch monitors (plus keyboards) and put then in the two places where you most use your system (i.e. at home and in the office)? That way you can travel light, but still have access to the benefits of a large screen most of the time.
Cheap (but perfectly fine) wide screen 22-inch monitor come in at around $200. Even the odd 1080p 24-inch monitor is within a reasonable budget these days.
Posted by: tacitus | October 15, 2007 5:37 PM
I'd be considering the 15" with an external display, unless you do a lot of work on the road. I can't think of any preference of matte over glossy. If your considering a high end MacBook (not Pro) and an external display, http://www.thinksecret.com is currently saying that there is a new revision of the MacBook due soon (about the same time as Leopard or early next month), but it will probably be minor.
Posted by: Cat's Staff | October 15, 2007 5:38 PM
I like having two buttons. It just seems more evolved. ;)
Posted by: Inoculated Mind | October 15, 2007 5:30 PM
..........................
On the Mac pad you use 1 finger to left click, 2 fingers to right click. You can also scroll with 2 fingers... it is more evolved ;^ )
Posted by: mayhempix | October 15, 2007 5:41 PM
Go for 15in for the reasons stated by so many people previously. Bigger than that and it's not so portable.
My glossy screen is nice under reasonable lighting conditions, but I haven't used it enough under fluorescent glare to know how it does there. Took some getting used to. I find it easier to keep clean than my previous matte finish screens.
D'you really need a giant bag for carrying the thing? I like tossing mine in a backback because it saves my shoulder/neck/back. What about a sleeve from the likes of mac-case.com and then you can use whatever larger bag you like? Mine is a top-loader since it's easier to get at for the security circus at airports.
Good luck!
Posted by: Heather | October 15, 2007 5:42 PM
http://www.comp.dit.ie/dgordon/Albion/Annotations/Albion5/speak-n-spell.jpg
Posted by: Rich | October 15, 2007 5:43 PM
You are mostly confirming my preference for sticking with matte (although the glossy would probably be better for watching movies in bed), and I'm also almost convinced that 15" will be good enough.
One catch though: the suggestion that I get an external display just won't work for me. I don't nail myself down much when working, and I'll work at home about as much as I do the office, and when I'm traveling, I'm not going to bring a monitor with me. I really do rely on having everything all in one package.
Posted by: PZ Myers | October 15, 2007 5:44 PM
I have a Brenthaven backpack with my 17"PB, both are 3y old and the PB is to be replaced. I'll be going for a new 17"MBP extraHiRes Glossy machine with Max Mem and Max HD.
The backpack is another matter though. The latest Brenthavens are smaller than the one I have now, and I can just fit what I need for two days from home in this one, already leaving out my very small beamer. When this backpack is to be replaced, it will not be a Brenthaven unless they come up with a roomier model.......
Posted by: skblllzzzz | October 15, 2007 5:45 PM
PZ:
As to the computer bag problem, follow these instructions:
1. Find a long time Powerbook user.
2. Ask if he/she still has the original bag for their oldest machine.
3. Offer a hefty sum for it.
4. Live happily ever after.
I got an old Powerbook (the second version!) from a friend of mine many years ago. The machine still boots! And it had one of the original Apple Powerbook bags as an extra. It is, quite simply, the best laptop bag ever produced by anyone anywhere.
Posted by: Tracy Lightcap | October 15, 2007 5:46 PM
"Buy a refurbished model of last year's power-hungry monster. Use the $500-$1000 you'll save to take your trophy wife out to dinner."
I second that. I got the 17" refurb at less than the price of a "new" 15". That was about a year and a half ago and it's been a dream to work with. The extra sized screen is nice. Just get a light bag to offset the weight.
Posted by: Dahan | October 15, 2007 5:48 PM
Does Mac make a tablet yet? Because I got one in April and the thing is practically hanging around my neck from a lanyard at all times. (Figuratively speaking, of course.) My Portege RULES, man. I am so in love with the tablet.
Posted by: Carlie | October 15, 2007 5:50 PM
How much time do you spend working at home *and* in the office as opposed to when traveling? Wide screen 22-inch displays are less than $250 these days (20-inch are $180). Just check Newegg.com. If you can afford a high-end Mac, then it is worth considering buying two displays to go with a cheaper, smaller system if most of your time is spent in one of two locations.
Posted by: tacitus | October 15, 2007 5:57 PM
I'm a die-hard Mac user, always have been, but I'm very demoralized by the poor quality of hard drives (and hardware in general) going into their laptops these days. I've had two Powerbook and two Macbook hard drives go down in the last couple years. I'm nice to them, keep them cool etc. and I'd never had a drive die before my powerbook's died. Does anyone replace their stock internal drive right out of the box? If so, what's the most reliable make of drive to install?
Posted by: Heterocronie | October 15, 2007 5:57 PM
Concerning the question of 15" versus 17", it totally depends how you use the machine. I recently upgraded a 3 year old 15" powerbook to a 17" glossy MBP and I am very happy with it. It is a bit heavier and sometimes a bit more awkward to use (in coach class it's a tight fit to open, but I manage ;-) ). However, I am a consultant who has no fixed desk. I am usually at a desk that I have no control over and haven't been at for more than a week or two. I LOVE the real estate that the high-res 17" (same resolution as the 24" iMac!) gives me (even before spaces in Leopard). the glossy is very nice as well, giving very rich colors.
However, if you are moving a lot between two places (your office and home for instance) where you can add another monitor, I'd suggest the 15" and invest in some used monitors for those desktops. In addition, the 15" monitor will already increase the screenspace that you will have because the newer 15" MBPs have a higher resolution than the 15" powerbooks.
If however, you use the machine in a lot of unknown destinations, like me, then going for the 17" might be worth it. In any case, put as much RAM in as you can afford and get the 160 GB faseter drive - disk speed will be critical for MOST applications (not all though).
Anyway, I'm sure you'll enjoy the new machine - I know I do!!!
Posted by: Scott Little | October 15, 2007 6:06 PM
Question for the Mac fans out there:
I've been using a Toshiba M200 Tablet PC (screen with a built-in digitizer and a pen to write on it) for some months now for teaching. I currently run Ubuntu Linux on it (can't stand Windows XP or Vista), and I've come to rely on the "tablet" part of the machine - not only for presentations and graphics work, but for simply using the machine.
After using the digitizer/pen on my laptop, there's no way I'd even consider going back to a laptop *without* one. Are there any Mac tablets? (A quick glance at the Apple site doesn't seem to indicate that there are, but I thought I'd ask.)
Posted by: Rick @ shrimp and grits | October 15, 2007 6:08 PM
Opposing opinion:
I've got the 17" and love it. Why? Real estate. I routinely work with both the built-in and an external monitor, and I still can't get enough. The space on the 17" works great, especially if you put the Dock on the side of the screen. It's also got marginally better specs than the 15".
Do NOT go with the glossy screen. If you're staring at it all day long, go with matte; it's much easier to read small fonts (which you use because you like lots of real estate, remember?).
Yes, it's heavier.. but only a pound or so. To compensate, I bought a second power brick. One at work, one at home: I never carry one unless I'm traveling. Yes, it's bigger. But I don't mind using a big hard-shell ASIO backpack. I'm a big guy.
The main reason not to buy it is cost: you're paying several hundred dollars for nothing more than the extra screen.
But, by God, I know own The Top Of The Line. I have reached, in the words of Scott Adams, Nerdvana.
---Nathaniel
Posted by: Nathaniel | October 15, 2007 6:10 PM
Rick #55:
No, there are no Mac tablets, although this may change with the new lines of iPhone-like devices, which are basically finger-tablets.
You can of course hook up tablet peripherals; Macs commune well with graphic-design stuff, I'm told.
Posted by: Nathaniel | October 15, 2007 6:12 PM
The one thing I want to reinforce. Get a 15 inch screen, and then get a 24 inch widescreen to attach to it wherever you use it most. If you get a laptop with a 17 inch screen you might as well get a desktop - it is a real pain to lug around. But a 15 inch screen, even when your OS supports is hard on your eyes. So get a full sized screen for the majority of your use.
Posted by: Gar Lipow | October 15, 2007 6:22 PM
For bags go with any of these (all excellent):
Brenthaven, Timbuk2, or Tom Bihn. I prefer Tom Bihn's.
http://www.brenthaven.com
http://www.timbuk2.com
http://www.tombihn.com
Posted by: Terry | October 15, 2007 6:22 PM
Get the 15", I don't regret it all. Probably matte. If you can get to a store that sells them (I'm assuming you're mail ordering), see if you can play with both and see what you like.
I also second the calls to get as much memory as you can stuff in it, but don't buy it from Apple. They way overcharge for it. Buy it and put it in, or take it to an apple store on your travels and have them put it in for you.
Posted by: patrick | October 15, 2007 6:26 PM
Long time Mac person here: Last year, I was _convinced_ by a bioinformaticist at a conference on the glory of the Tablet PC: being able to create slide graphics on the fly, scribbling down doodles, etc. I went ahead and traded in my very long in the tooth Pismo for the HP4200. I wanted to use it as a digital notebook/scribble pad and PDF reader. It worked--sort of, but trying to keep Win XP Table Edition up and running drove me batty. Even as one of the lightest Tablet PCs, it got cumbersome and tiresome holding it in my arm and if using it on a table I might as well have fully open and use the keyboard. I never made the conversion to using Acrobat to mark up PDFs. After 4 months, I sold it for a loss.
Since then I got a MacBook, but since my new job is a PC office, I installed Parallels/XP/Office to maintain maximum compatability (Yeah, most software is 95-99% compatable, but try explaining that to a screaming technophobic boss why his Powerpoint presentation "doesn't look right".)
Posted by: madbard | October 15, 2007 6:27 PM
I have a Macbook 13" and it is the nicest laptop I have owned. 17" sounds way too big to me; at that size it is more like a portable desktop than a laptop.
I was doubtful about the glossy screen at first (no choice with the MacBook) but am very impressed. It looks sexier for a start (makes my old PC laptop look faded), and there is better contrast since light is not diffused at all by the screen. Reflections aren't as distracting as I expected because they're at a different focal distance (less distracting than reflections on a tv screen, since you sit much closer to a laptop screen)
Posted by: markp | October 15, 2007 6:29 PM
I'm not a biologist #29, but probably because Winsnores have a tendency to slow way down over time (If I recall, it has to do with how Windows decides to manage the registry and arbitrarily caches the RAM onto stored disks). And since most Linux packages aren't "user-friendly" unless you desire to do much tweaking, Mac seems to be the ultimate winner of the anti-windows war.
Also, I personally haven't heard much about laptops coming with Linux packages. Usually, of the laptops I see with Linux, it's because the user installed the OS (like my Ubuntu machine). Maybe if linux users convinced corporate types at Dell and HP to produce Linux machines, you'd see a slight increase in Linux users in biology.
Just my seat-of-my-pants response.
Posted by: Shawn Wilkinson | October 15, 2007 6:34 PM
No one has yet mentioned Crumpler bags for laptop transport. I have two Crumplers (one laptop and one camera bag) and love them dearly. They are spacious, comfy and very strongly built. I think they look better than the ubiquitous, though sturdy, Timbuk2 bags.
Crumpler make two types of laptop bags - one is padded all over, with a laptop sleeve inside and the other has just the padded sleeve. The second type offers more room and are easier to find. They have all sorts of crazy model names that I can't remember, but I have the "Part and Parcel" that takes a 15" notebook and is all-over padded. They also make a number of backpack solutions too.
Posted by: Alan | October 15, 2007 6:37 PM
btw, the 15" Pro is 1440 x 900 pixels, which is as high as a lot of 19" monitors out there. 13" macbook is 1280 x 800 which I find satisfactory.
Posted by: markp | October 15, 2007 6:40 PM
My feeling on the 15" vs. 17" is that unless you absolutely need the screen real estate (i.e. you use Photoshop a lot or something else with panels which clutter up even a 15" screen) you should go for the 15". The difference isn't so much the weight, it's just, well, the size. It's easier to find a place to put a 15" and when you're carrying it around, 17" is more unwieldy.
You're going to get used to either one, so if the 15" seems small at first, it isn't going to bother you after a few weeks. And after a month on a 17", you'll feel cramped on a smaller screen in the future.
As for the glossy vs. matte: it's largely personal preference. The colors look more vivid on a glossy and it's easier to clean, but if you work outside a lot, or just under a lot of light, the reflections might bother you.
This is the advice I gave people when I worked at one of the Apple Stores: position one of the glossy screens so that it has a significant light reflection on it and then try to use the machine. If you find your eyes tend to focus on the reflections rather than on the screen itself, you should probably go with the matte screen. Otherwise, I'd go with the glossy. I found people were divided about 50/50 using this test.
Posted by: mcow | October 15, 2007 6:41 PM
1. Get the 15". The 17" is only if you want a laptop that doesn't move. Far too much hassle to lug around the country.
2. I would get the glossy, but it is personal preference. Most people find the glossy screen too glossy to begin with, but gradually get used to it. Beware that strong overhead lights where your laptop is sitting or afternoon sun can make the glossy screen unreadable.
3. http://www.crumplerbags.com/Cart/index.php?catId=5
http://www.stmbags.com.au/ - site seems to be down at the moment
Both companies make Mac friendly bags that look good and are functional.
Here are some other examples
http://www.productdose.com/article.php?article_id=1386
Posted by: LK | October 15, 2007 6:43 PM
Oh yeah and in addition to my last post. If you find you need more screen space on your 15 inch, then get another monitor rather than get the 17 inch.
Posted by: LK | October 15, 2007 6:45 PM
Using a computer for years reveals nothing about anybody's ability to maintain or enhance software. PZ's statement about stretching out the usefulness of his computers says nothing about his capacity to maintain or enhance computers either. It's PZ's platform choice that severely limits anybody's capacity to do that. As the parody of the Mac Switch ads has it, it's easy to upgrade a Mac. Just throw the old one away, and buy a new one at the Apple Store. Opening up a Mac doesn't necessarily void one's warranty, but tinkerers are not Apple's target market.
I'm mostly platform agnostic. My first question is, what is it that I need to do? Primarily, I need fast 3D interaction for apps like Maya, Softimage XSI, and ZBrush (and the Steam game engine from Valve). All of these products are available for the Mac (aren't they?), but the newest features, for the most part, showed up first on the PC platforms, then later on for Mac and Linux. Once the Mac began to be seriously competitive in terms of its capacity to do 3D, releases have tended toward being simultaneous, but not always.
Another hardware issue is, who provides the graphics board and drivers? For the longest time, Apple released ATI graphics boards, with notoriously poor driver updates contrasted with the support available from NVidia. Apple has obviated much of that difficulty. At school I'm using a fast, dual core Intel CPU with a PCI-Express Nvidia card on a Mac, but the apps I'm running on it are entirely Adobe suite tools, 2D and video. Using Photoshop and Illustrator and Flash on Mac's OS is an elegant and simple affair. My primary frustration is remembering to use the "command" key instead of the control key I reach for first, and a one button mouse (but then I set my Wacom stylus so its side toggles between a middle and right button). I might someday seriously consider buying a Mac that also booted WinXP. I'm not interested yet in Vista, I'll wait for a service pack and a price drop and a budget before I'll think about it.
I'm still using a desk machine I put together 5 years ago, when I got a new case, power supply, MB, CPU, RAM and graphics card. For 2002, Windows 2000 with a 2Gb CPU and a GeForce 4 for graphics was fairly competitive. Recently, I cheaped out and maxed out the capacity of the old (Asus) MB by installing a new power supply, 3 gigs of RAM, a 3Gb CPU, and the lastest fastest AGP card from the end of that era. It's a pretty good system for 2005. It's only fairly recently that things have changed enough for me to start lusting after a completely new box, which would probably run a quad-core CPU and serial graphics boards, primarily for the 3D apps I use to develop mods for the game engines so widely available these days. Mail ordering kits and parts for a render-farm is ridiculously inexpensive these days.
But that's just me. I bought an Apple IIe and baked it by filling all its slots, including a CPM card for Wordstar. Our Quadro 950 survived the Northridge quake. The Power Tower Pro was the last Apple product I bought. I had one of the first NT boxes in 1996 ("NT is the price we pay for cheap hardware." -- Jim Blinn), and have had fun with Linux too. Mac is "still the prettiest" GUI on top of Unix, but as for its hardware, I can get way more bang for my buck elsewhere.
Posted by: Ken Cope | October 15, 2007 6:49 PM
I note that your Mac preference is confirmed by Coulton's _A Laptop Like You_, which makes it clear that this is not religion: it's romance.
(Does your wife know? But perhaps she has a laptop of her own...)
(`You make my lap hot / Underneath your aluminum case / There's love')
Posted by: Nix | October 15, 2007 6:51 PM
15, the 17 really isn't much bigger. Until you try and open it on a plane ;)
Matte, cuz glare sux.
Bag? Now there is a religious battle...
Posted by: Richard | October 15, 2007 6:52 PM
Don't be too quick to commit to Parallels if you need to run Windows. VMWare (which is an older and larger company in virtualization) has now released a product for the Mac.
I don't know how VMWare Fusion (the Mac product) compares to Parallels. (In fact, judging by what the two companies' marketing materials have to say about it, it looks like Parallels will be significantly better for gaming, at least for the time being, since it does accelerated video.) But if you're not using any programs in Windows which use 3D video, remember that Parallels is being updated a lot and that SWsoft doesn't always seem to offer discounts when they release a paid upgrade. (VMWare may not, either -- they haven't had one yet -- but VMWare also has a rebate right now, so it's $20 less.)
Posted by: The Vicar | October 15, 2007 6:53 PM
As an aside, if you're keen on a five-year lifespan a laptop might not be ideal due to the lower performance than desktops, lack of easily upgradeable/replaceable parts, lack of expansion slots and so forth.
Posted by: Barry | October 15, 2007 6:58 PM
I got a 17" MacBook Pro last month, with the upgraded 1920x1200 screen and boosted to 4GB (Kingston RAM, not Apple's overpriced BTO upgrade). I love it, and on a 17" screen the resolution is just right for my eyes. It's a good enough machine that it's r