10 Reasons I Spent $3,000 on a MacBook Pro

[ohim]

[citation][nom]cadder[/nom]I did a quick check on Dell.com- I configured their M6400 similarly to the iFruit and got $2869 for the Dell. I picked the M6400 because it should be Dell's highest quality line, and it has a metal exterior case. In Dell's case you pay a lot more to go from 15" to 17". I'm sure you could spec a Lenovo and it would cost even more. So yeah the author spent a lot of money, but he picked expensive features.[/citation]
well if your prices are correct then this should be included into the story to hold it up for what was posted to compare the fruit with the dell .

 

[fpsgamingsa]

Good point. If you want a gaming notebook the Dell is very hard to beat. But it is heavy. I have done this before recommending a notebook for someone doing lots of Adobe on the run. Apple prices their 17" pro about the same or a little under top quality notebooks from IBM and Sony. It isn't all about what is under the hood for some customers. It is what they value. I will probably never own an Apple desktop, but I am on my 5th Macbook. Everytime I buy a new one I always look at other products. So far I get the Apple. Have the last 8 years.

 

[michaelahess]

I can assure everyone here, ok really only v8venom, that I own more macs than everyone reading this article combined. I literally own 178 macs at last count. They all work and have been restored, from my apple II to my WOZ edition IIGS to my eMac's and iMac's and all the classics in between. Don't ever place me in the wintel fanboy group. It's just too bad Apple has lost their way. They have always been overpriced though. Hence me never buying one new.

 

[Guest]

No specific models, but yes, there are Win based laptops with 9 cell batteries and they should hold charge for 6-7 hours. Also it would be interesting to know if MacBookPro could hold the charge for 7 hours with Vista when playing Crysis (or other demanding game) or transcoding video. I tried MacBookPro, but could not do any battery tests. I would love to see such metric from manufacturers: 2-3 hours under 100% CPU/GPU/HDD load (gaming), 7-8 hours under 30% CPU/GPU/HDD load (browsing)...

 

[Tomsguiderachel]

[citation][nom]V8VENOM[/nom]Ahh, the Micro-humpers are at it again. Talking about a computer they don't own, and have never own -- yet they envy it. Why else would you Micro-humpers post about comments on something you don't have?Where do you go when your PC doesn't work? Or for that matter, where do you go if you have a question about it? Would that be no where? Oh wait, that's right you can call Microsoft's India hot-line and be told to "wipe everything, re-install, and pray to Ala"Oh that's right, you Micro-humpers don't value your time, you enjoy the pain that is Windows. Let me whip you with another user context ignorant security prompt, just in case you didn't get enough. Go add up the amount of time you spend trying to resolve your PC problems vs. time you spend resolving Mac problems ... what's the REAL cost of ownership of that Microslop based PC? Time is money -- at least it is for me.I bet 90% of you didn't even know you can get an ATI 4870 video card for a MacPro. Oh that's right, "Mac's can't be upgraded" myth that most of you die hard Micro-humpers cling to. One of these days you'll understand and might actually become multi-platform so can have a meaningful qualified opinion rather than diarrhea of the keyboard.[/citation]
V8VENOM,
I appreciate your perspective, but your response isn't about the economics of whether the MacBook Pro 17-inch is priced correctly per the features. You're just a bit off topic. Let me know if you have any thoughts about whether similarly-featured/priced PCs exist, rather than name-calling. Thanks.

 

[Tomsguiderachel]

[citation][nom]AK47LT1[/nom]No specific models, but yes, there are Win based laptops with 9 cell batteries and they should hold charge for 6-7 hours. Also it would be interesting to know if MacBookPro could hold the charge for 7 hours with Vista when playing Crysis (or other demanding game) or transcoding video. I tried MacBookPro, but could not do any battery tests. I would love to see such metric from manufacturers: 2-3 hours under 100% CPU/GPU/HDD load (gaming), 7-8 hours under 30% CPU/GPU/HDD load (browsing)...[/citation]
Hmm. I'll keep a lookout for those machines with batteries rated at 6/7 hours (not quite as big a claim as 8 hours), but honestly I'm not so interested in how these machines perform under 100% load. Who uses laptops for those purposes while not plugged in? Talk about impractical. The real question is how long these machines last while performing comparable average tasks like browsing, watching video, etc.

 

[grifonik]

Bill, good luck finding love for this! 🙂

Performance oriented people are not going to see eye-to-eye with looks oriented people. There is a reason why engineers are not fashion models and vice versa.

I see that cost/performance of that Crapple iFruit product and I think this: http/www.toshibadirect.com/td/b2c/pdet.to?seg=HHO&poid=432325

That is TWO more cores, a better video card, and an SSD! This laptop would spank that crapple up and down aisles and make it crap out little silicone logic bricks. Oh, and it costs less.

Items like this are just going to make Crapple buyers look ridiculously low brow to the engineer/performance crowd (probably, most viewers of this site).

This article is probably better suited to an industrial design site or something like that where those types of features are a priority.

 

[Tomsguiderachel]

[citation][nom]cadder[/nom]I did a quick check on Dell.com- I configured their M6400 similarly to the iFruit and got $2869 for the Dell. I picked the M6400 because it should be Dell's highest quality line, and it has a metal exterior case. In Dell's case you pay a lot more to go from 15" to 17". I'm sure you could spec a Lenovo and it would cost even more. So yeah the author spent a lot of money, but he picked expensive features.[/citation]
Thanks, this is very useful info.

 

[Tomsguiderachel]

[citation][nom]grifonik[/nom]Bill, good luck finding love for this! 🙂Performance oriented people are not going to see eye-to-eye with looks oriented people. There is a reason why engineers are not fashion models and vice versa.I see that cost/performance of that Crapple iFruit product and I think this: http/www.toshibadirect.com/td/b2 [...] oid=432325That is TWO more cores, a better video card, and an SSD! This laptop would spank that crapple up and down aisles and make it crap out little silicone logic bricks. Oh, and it costs less.Items like this are just going to make Crapple buyers look ridiculously low brow to the engineer/performance crowd (probably, most viewers of this site).This article is probably better suited to an industrial design site or something like that where those types of features are a priority.[/citation]
Grifonik,

Reminder: You're not reading Tom's Hardware. This article was published on Tom's Guide where I, for one, and many of our readers, care quite a bit about design.

Thanks for the link--this is a machine that may be more powerful than the 17-inch Macbook Pro but it starts out at 9 pounds (and as you configured it, it is probably more than that). Is "weight" a design issue? Not really. I think you're giving engineers a bad name right now by suggesting that they can't create a machine with the specs of this computer, but lighted. I say they can, and I call that innovation. So, get to it, engineers!

 

[RiotSniperX]

[citation][nom]V8VENOM[/nom]Ahh, the Micro-humpers are at it again. Talking about a computer they don't own, and have never own -- yet they envy it. Why else would you Micro-humpers post about comments on something you don't have?Where do you go when your PC doesn't work? Or for that matter, where do you go if you have a question about it? Would that be no where? Oh wait, that's right you can call Microsoft's India hot-line and be told to "wipe everything, re-install, and pray to Ala"Oh that's right, you Micro-humpers don't value your time, you enjoy the pain that is Windows. Let me whip you with another user context ignorant security prompt, just in case you didn't get enough. Go add up the amount of time you spend trying to resolve your PC problems vs. time you spend resolving Mac problems ... what's the REAL cost of ownership of that Microslop based PC? Time is money -- at least it is for me.I bet 90% of you didn't even know you can get an ATI 4870 video card for a MacPro. Oh that's right, "Mac's can't be upgraded" myth that most of you die hard Micro-humpers cling to. One of these days you'll understand and might actually become multi-platform so can have a meaningful qualified opinion rather than diarrhea of the keyboard.[/citation]

Woah...a vanilla 4870...please...show me the awesomeness! And all you do is worship apple, im not bashing apple here, i want an iMac, but you claim other people to be "micro-humpers" whilst you worship steve jobs. All you do is look at your mac, think about the money you spent, and try to forget the cons because of all that money. And another fact, the MacPro starts at like, what, $2500? They price the 4870 at $350! Because the default is $150+the $200 for your 4870, Not to mention PC can play games. (No offense to any Apple users who dont worship steve jobs)

 

[jojesa]

Some folks do not comprehend the experience and peace of mind of purchasing a quality product. Furthermore, having a company that will give you real customer support.
The price does not include just the system but the company behind it.
Just walk or call Dell, HP, Gateway, etc support center and see the kind of support you will stumble upon, if you can label that customer support.

 

[kyeana]

FLAME ON!

 

[cadder]

Hmm. I'll keep a lookout for those machines with batteries rated at 6/7 hours (not quite as big a claim as 8 hours)

Dell offers 9 cell batteries for lots of their machines. The 15" machines can supposedly get 5 or 6 hours of battery life, but a 17" machine is a lot hungrier. If the iFruit gets the battery life that they claim, then nothing else can touch it.

Frankly, I'm not concerned about battery life in a 17" machine because I don't think people buy it to be portable, not like they do smaller machines. I don't worry so much about weight, my old Inspiron 8600 probably weighs almost as much as that 17" iFruit. I do carry my 15" machines around a lot and rely on battery power with them. I couldn't buy a bigger machine because it wouldn't fit in any of my existing cases.

 

[ravenware]

Apple products give you the ability to run any operating system that you prefer.

This is pretty much bs. The only reason you can not run the Apple OSX on a PC is the fact the Apple prevents it. Microsoft developed a ridiculously robust operating system that can run on just about anything and an Apple user want's to give credit to a mac book for being able to run windows?

 

[grifonik]

[citation][nom]TomsGuideRachel[/nom]Grifonik,Reminder: You're not reading Tom's Hardware. This article was published on Tom's Guide where I, for one, and many of our readers, care quite a bit about design.Thanks for the link--this is a machine that may be more powerful than the 17-inch Macbook Pro but it starts out at 9 pounds (and as you configured it, it is probably more than that). Is "weight" a design issue? Not really. I think you're giving engineers a bad name right now by suggesting that they can't create a machine with the specs of this computer, but lighted. I say they can, and I call that innovation. So, get to it, engineers![/citation]

No maybe... Definitely. And, that is the base configuration. It only gets better. ;-)

And, I don't think I said they can't! Use titanium and drill lots of holes in it. Done. If Steve is reading, he can steal this idea. However, I do think they've targeted a very niche market as 17" and "light" are not generally considered in the same segment. So, even if they could, would it profit?

If weight is a highly valued performance metric (top 3), the product would probably find no competitors. I'll grant them that. Maybe they should sell a drilled titanium one for about $1K more? Call it the MacDaddy Warbucks edition! ;-)

 

[Tomsguiderachel]

[citation][nom]grifonik[/nom]No maybe... Definitely. And, that is the base configuration. It only gets better. ;-)And, I don't think I said they can't! Use titanium and drill lots of holes in it. Done. If Steve is reading, he can steal this idea. However, I do think they've targeted a very niche market as 17" and "light" are not generally considered in the same segment. So, even if they could, would it profit?If weight is a highly valued performance metric (top 3), the product would probably find no competitors. I'll grant them that. Maybe they should sell a drilled titanium one for about $1K more? Call it the MacDaddy Warbucks edition! ;-)[/citation]
Lol. Okay okay, call me a dummy but what's the point of a non-mobile laptop? I think it is fabulous that there is such thing as a 17-inch light laptop. People who need big screens (ie anyone in web design, graphics, video editing) who also needs portability would kill for that (big screen and light).

 

[BillLake]

[citation][nom]LeJay[/nom]I know... I just heard a starving town in Africa just skipped water for the next ten years just to get a macbook pro.Don't brag about wasting money, dude.[/citation]

Well you can do what we did and send cows, we paid for several last year, I think you can use http/www.sendacow.org.uk/

Since I use my laptop 10-12 hours a day for my job, I think that paying less than $3 a day for the laptop I will use for the next 3 years is not to bad a plan.

 

[BillLake]

Well I guess you could overpay for anything, but how about finding me a laptop with the following things that cost way less than this MacBook Pro.

1) Backlit keyboard
2) Dedicated graphics card
3) T9000 class CPU
4) has local support when I have a problem so I do not have to send it off.

[citation][nom]one-shot[/nom]Is this a blog just to announce you spend money foolishly? Again, Apple successfully appeals to those who want to feel "special" by overpaying for a Mac.[/citation]

 

[BillLake]

can you send us the link? Maybe it is exactly the same reasons, which means I am not alone out there.

[citation][nom]curnel_d[/nom]Nice blog... (And I'm almost serious. A friend of mine just wrote a blog very similar to this about 2 weeks ago.)[/citation]

 

[BillLake]

Thanks, I challenge anyone to find me a laptop with close to these features. I did find the Alienware was pretty close but weighed way more, the Dell HDX units have the resolution but again weigh more and no backlit keys. Yes they are cheaper but the USB lights just don't work as well as the backlit keyboards.

[citation][nom]gannon[/nom]One-shot feels left out? What has the man overpaid for? I think he got pretty much what he wanted. Am I wrong?[/citation]