Mac or PC? The Big Decision

Sometimes it is not the answer to the question, but rather, the question itself, that determines or destiny.

Actually, it is now possible to get the best of both the Windows and Mac worlds as software is available to run both of them at the same time on the new Intel Macs, with very little loss in efficiency on the Windows side (provided one has enough memory). In fact, Windows may actually run better on a Mac because there is less chance of hardware incompatibilities.

Having used (and supported) both, I'd have to say this:

I hate PCs, but I hate Macs more.

"We wants it, Precious. We needs it. Yes we does."

Wow - I want one! I don't need it but I want it.

Sure it is small, but will it do what you need it to do? It doesn't have an optical drive. It's an extra $100 for an external drive. The 80 GB drive is fairly slow. If physical size is not an issue the MacBook Pro will give you a bigger screen, as well as a larger, faster hard drive.

The 64 GB solid state drive will be lots faster but is rather expensive. Plus with a drive that small you'd almost need the Time Capsule.

1 USB port, no ethernet, can't upgrade any of the hardware = overpriced form-over-function device.

Seriously? Saved? Their strategy seemed to be remove what's unnecessary, then remove a few necessary things. No need for speed? No need for a HD bigger than 80GB? No need for a CD/DVD drive? I guess if your needs are minimal and you keep an external optical drive handy for installations (or rely only on downloaded software)... Sure.

Only get the Air if your primary concern is size.

You can easily install Windows on an Intel mac, but on an 80GB hard drive you may get a little squeezed for space with full installs of both--but then I'm a bit of a space hog.

The Air is very small, but you'll need an external DVD/CD drive for installing certain software. Also, it has no firewire port, so you won't be able to use it with certain DV cameras (well, again, that's an issue for me.)

On the other hand, the air is very, very small, sexy, light.

Never buy anything with a version ending in .0
TMOT.

I've had Macs since the 512ke "fat Mac" -- just saw one of those sitting by the curb waiting for the trash pickup today (sigh). Probably still worked. But that was when they had a Zero Defects policy, long gone.

Wait. Watch.

As an unashamed mac-junkie and mac-fan, I have to say that i was a little stumped by this until I did the inevitable day-creaming of how i would use it.

Everywhere where i wasn't at my desktop on the bigger projects.
and
Doing everything.

I think this might be the first time (in a while) that a mac laptop is sold as a supplement to an already wired/wireless household - definitely a step forward.
It's time to start keeping up.
Also, the new wireless router/external HD/backup device is brilliant. And cheap if you consider piecing one together with an ugly slew of products.

I am dangerously close to ranting.
I lerrrrv mac.

sorry. day-*Dreaming.
[embarassed]

This is exactly why I posted...

These comments, suggestions, and perspectives are very helpful and greatly appreciated. I'll be following this thread as I consider which Mac to order over the coming weeks, so please continue to share personal experiences with Mac and advice on specs here.

Thanks!

holy crap! my MacBook Pro just felt like a brick. i'm not worthy! i they solved the battery and heating problem on MacBook Air.

~C

Here's some pretty pictures:

http://tinyurl.com/2j4tgt

Well, as of next year I will be a 25-year Mac user, I would not recommend the Macbook Air as a primary computer. It is definitely meant to used as a second or travel-specific machine. But if your needs don't go beyond word processing, internet browsing and Keynote (Apple's powerpoint app), the Air should work for you. Anything else, even just watching a DVD (no cd or dvd drive, you see) on the plane, I would go with the less expensive and more flexible Macbook.

The Macbook Air:

I only have macs.

But, the MacbookAir:
*non user-replaceable battery
*no built in DVD/CD drive, no built in ethernet (!!!), no built in firewire
*version 1.0--bound to have some 1.0 hardware flaws

However:
Really, cool, portable, sexy.

justawriter is correct, Air has the specs of a nice travel companion (though a bit big...), but that's it.

My next question would be why in the world would anyone pay that much money for a travel companion? There are many sublaptops and UMPCs out there that can do anything you would need when on the road for a LOT less money. It's just another overpriced marketing gimick.

No ethernet? No optical drive?

Remember the reaction when Apple eliminated the floppy drive from the first generation of iMacs? We got along just fine.

I was waiting for today to make a decision. I think I'll go with a Macbook Pro because it fits my needs better, but for someone who travels a lot, the Macbook Air certain seems very cool.

LOL.

overpriced form-over-function device

From Apple? Surely not!

Greg Laden had it on his blog too. It looks like a very impressive machine!
Dave Briggs :~)

to deal with the "no-optical drive" troubles, they have software that links the Mac Air up to an optical drive on ANY machine in your house, Mac or PC. That technology alone is something I've been wishing for.

I still think i would settle for a macbook, since I'm not the traveling professional type. for my out-and-abouts an iPhone fits better.

Get a tablet PC and install ubuntu. I have been made to switch to OS X from Linux and OS X is horrible (as an OS, which while based on Unix is not case sensitive, this is a f***ing shame).

I'm not a computer expert, but compare the specs. It looks like the AIR costs more and gives you less. The speed seems slower and the peripherals are missing. I would consider the Macbook for significantly less money or the Pro for more power and screen. The AIR may cute and about 1.5-2 lbs less, but the weight loss is because you lost the peripherals. Also, if your plan to use that feature to connect with another computer (your workhorse computer), do you already have that other computer sitting on your desk?

The MacBook Air is certainly an excellent--quite possibly the best--option for people looking for exactly that kind of computer, so if you're wanting to stress light weight and portability without making other compromises...

Which is not to say, of course, that the Air is entirely without compromises, but I believe they are negligent. Expandability is less than normal, but the specs aren't really lacking (2GB of RAM is fine, and the hard drive is spacious for anyone who isn't trying to store 10,000 CD's or a few years worth of TV shows), so it's not especially necessary. (And, of course, when you can "plug in" you can get access to most anything else you need.) The battery is indeed enclosed, but that's how they can get bigger and better batteries and more lifespan to begin with; and certainly "companion, plug in batteries" will be (probably "are") available for extra, carry-along power. (You just have to tether something else to the power port and lose your form factor--but more enhanced batteries muck up the form factor.)

The only real annoyances would be if you wanted a SMALLER form factor. Keeping the full size keyboard and full-size screen is great, but if you wanted a smaller machine that could fit more easily on airline tray tables and the like...? And if you want to attach a cell card from Verizon or any of the other carriers; you can still do it, but then it becomes a flappy unit to the side, instead of built in. (Most cell cards do stick out a bit, but are still firmly connected and don't get in the way much.)

The big other question mark is "stability." This is an excessively thin device--and new--so there might be unforseen issues relating to its thermal package, flexibility AND ruggedness... I have a lot of faith with Apple engineers most of the time, so I don't consider it a HUGE risk, but... there is still risk.

Ultimately, though, you're the only one who knows your habits and needs. Myself, I'm a "regular MacBook is good enough for me" kind of person, so I'm not really interested in the Air. (And I am more interested in the money savings. ;-) ) It might be just the thing for you, though.

I still recommend OSX overall for a no nonsense, little-worry laptop that does everything you need it to.

Why waste the money on the Air, you get a better, more versatile value out of one of the Macbook Pro's...plus changing the battery, and actually being able to upgrade the RAM is a nice feature.

Sometimes new and sexy isn't everything.

"New and sexy" really has nothing to do with it. It's "if you really want to stress light and ultra-portable and non-cumbersome, then it's what you want. If not, don't bother."

I'm going to be blunt -- the MacBook Air is a slap in the face to 24 years of Mac power users. The DVD drive is extra, and there's no FireWire port, both of which pretty much eliminate it from my wish list. I'd rather have a black MacBook instead. I do believe Steve let his Reality Distortion Field get the better of him on this one, because this is the same underimplemented crap that the Mac development team had to go behind Steve's back not to ship way back in 1984.

If nothing else, it's an incentive for the developers of programs like Cinelerra, GIMP, and Scribus to bust their asses to clean up all the rough edges on their software. If the Linux world ever did set aside all their holy wars, Apple would be in serious trouble.

A few further thoughts:

Sheril: Go for a MacBook Pro if you've got the budget. Yes, heavier and less elegant. But it's uncompromised.

And this is a perfect example of Apple missing the point. Yes, I like the idea of a lighter MacBook. (Though, frankly, I'd rather have it smaller than thinner, maybe with an IBM Cell processor rather than an Intel.) But Apple has a habit of not quite pulling it off when it really counts -- banishing DMA from 680x0 motherboards even as it was becoming increasingly necessary, for example, or repeating the mistakes of the overslicked interface of the Newton on the iPod Touch, especially after getting it right for so long on the regular iPod line.

If nothing else, Apple is proof that no one in the industry really gets it right. Linux is like the auxiliary language movement -- everyone has a different idea of what to do, but no one wants to compromise, so the market is a patchwork of hacks and loyalty wars. Windows is sort of like building a hospital -- rather than design from the ground up with expansion in mind, glom on another building every time you need more patient rooms. (You should see St. Elizabeth's in Brighton, MA -- it's one of the blobbiest buildings I've ever seen. It's so poorly laid out that you need a map just to find the first floor.) Apple tends to build for whiz-bang coolness, but doesn't seem to stop and see what anyone needs. Four times out of five, that's not a problem, as someone finds a use for it. But the MacBook Thin seems like a blunder, like PowerTalk or the G4 Cube. I'd go so far as to say it's their biggest blunder since the 20th Anniversary Mac.

(Seriously -- even a 4-pin FireWire port isn't too much to ask, is it? I don't care what else it has -- without at least that to hook up my camcorder, it's useless to me.)

I can't suggest the MacBook Pro, myself, unless you travel a lot and are prone to setting up camp for days/weeks at a time and need a computing platform with you while you do so. If you're using this as your prime machine, you're apt to want the 17" model, which puts you at a $2800 investment. The entry MacBook Pro, meanwhile, is barely faster than the lowest-end MacBook, and adding enough RAM to catch the MacBook is a trivial extra purchase. You'd basically be spending an extra ~850 on a 10% CPU boost, a bit (but not a lot) more hard drive space (and chances are if 80GB isn't good enough for you, 120GB won't be either; something you'd want to enhance through NewEgg for a lot cheaper than Apple's upgrades, too, if you want a LOT of space. Personally, I think 80GB is plenty for a laptop that is not devoted to the power user or--as I said in the beginning--someone who needs a full platform when they're away on travel for weeks), a video card they're unlikely to notice/need, and the only substantial difference... 2" of extra screen room.

And if you're tempted to shell out for the 17" PowerBook, I'd suggest getting TWO machine instead: the entry level MacBook, which is plenty enough for most portable users to begin with, and the entry level 24" iMac, which would deliver you a better computing platform than the PowerBook would anyway--on a much bigger screen. You'd be spending basically the SAME amount of money (a bit extra to add RAM to both machines) but have TWO machines, a better computing platform for home/work, and an excellent portable machine for taking on the road.

IMHO, you have to have very serious portable computing needs to warrant the extra expense of the MacBook Pro, just as the MacBook Air has to be exactly what you're looking for to go that route as well. It's far too easy to say "why not save a lot of money?" or "holy crap, I could get the best of BOTH worlds for the same price?!" otherwise.