<p>
[quote]
Also, the spin speed of the drive is a big factor in overall performance.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think this is more important than the hard drive space. When you access the boot drive, OS, cache, the 7200RPM HD will evidently perform better than a 5400RPM HD.</p>
<p>^^ When hitting cache the drive spin speed isn't a factor which is the point of cache. Otherwise, a faster spin rate will usually result in higher performance but could also use more power depending on the drive - not a factor when plugged in but could affect battery time. If you want higher performance sometimes the money is better spent on a faster drive rather than a bit faster processing speed (depends on what you do with the laptop). </p>
<p>Most of your time will probably be spent staring at the screen (while the pc virtually idles) so it becomes probably one of the most important factors for most people. Shoot for the higher resolution, best looking displays. A lot of laptops have options on the display resolution - shoot for the best offered in the particular laptop.</p>
<p>7200rpm drives will create more heat and use more power...it's the massive 4200rpm drives people should be avoiding, not the normal 5400. in addition, there aren't many people using massive files (other than .avi...but it's not like it takes forever to load as it is) or big apps like photoshop regularly, and i don't think saving 10 seconds of boot time is worth the extra cost to get 7200rpm on a laptop.</p>
<p>and no, pc/mac doesn't matter for engineering if you have a copy of Windows. or you could probably just buy a cheap old computer off ebay and run linux on it....</p>
<p>forget 5400 vs 7200, just get a mac. if youve been a pc user all your life and unless you have some top of the line current $5000 laptop or are running linux or using one of those new ssd hard drives, the speed of a macbook or macbook pro will blow your mind... its literally like a tortoise vs a hare... except the rabbit actually wins and remains reliable while the old fart turtle flashes blue screens of death every 5 min and gets bogged down with ****</p>
<p>hahaha nice analogy</p>
<p>I doubt silly101 is such a huge power user that he/she will notice the difference between the speed of a macbook/macbook pro and a Windows PC. I own two laptops, one Macbook and one Dell. The two have pretty much the same specs (the Macbook has 2ghz while the dell is 1.83), and I can't tell much of a difference between the two. I don't think the majority of UCLA students use their computers for anything other than Surfing, chatting, researching. So the difference in speed is something that won't really be seen between the two OS's.</p>
<p>I also don't see this BSOD every 5 minutes. At least for me, BSODs are really rare. My XP desktop never gets bogged down. My Vista laptop does, but it's Vista and I only have a gig of ram on that thing :(.</p>
<p>you dont even have to be a huge power user to notice the difference. i can literally go through at least 3 start/shut down cycles on my 2.0 ghz macbook in the time it takes my friend's recently purchased dell xps 1330 2.2 ghz to start up with vista (event though processor speed isnt everything)</p>
<p>The only drawback for getting a Mac I guess is that it's pretty obsolete compared to the PC when it comes to gaming. That and the price difference.</p>
<p>I really wouldn't use the shutdown/start cycles as an indicator of how fast the system is. That's such a small point when deciding which computer to get. Now if you compare the two in terms of encoding a video and you find out the macbook encodes the same video 10x quicker, then that's a pretty big difference. Shutting off and turning on faster is not that big of a deal. </p>
<p>If the only difference in power you can notice is the shutdown/bootup speed, there is not much difference between the two in terms of power.</p>
<p>jfk,</p>
<p>Actually, the "price difference" is a myth. If you compare the Mac to other similar computers, there is almost no price difference anymore. That vanished along with PowerPC processors. That, and a Macbook Pro is pretty decent for gaming.</p>
<p>When I purchased my macbook last year, it was still more expensive with the student discount than the Dell (849ish after shipping and everything) I purchased a month or so later. The only difference between the two laptops was that the Macbook had 2.0 ghz (vs 1.8 on the dell) and the Dell had a graphics card & extended battery while the Macbook did not. If I were a normal consumer, the macbook would have cost 1299. Then again, I am comparing Dell to Apple. Dell has such good deals on laptops so it might be unfair to make such a comparison. The prices are probably the same if compared to a Lenovo or a Sony. But I just gave you my price comparison.</p>
<p>Considering the major components of CPU, GPU, RAM, screen size/resolution, and HDD you can get can a laptop that's some $500 cheaper than the retail price of the base MBP. It'd also come with a 3 year warranty which Apple would charge an extra $349(retail) for. Educational discounts help but you'd still pay extra $200-$300 overall if you want the warranty.</p>
<p>There are some other niceties the MBP has over other laptops like iLife, size, battery life, FW, MagSafe connector, LED backlight, and ability to use OS X legally but you are paying a bit extra for them.</p>
<p>apples MBP price (the $2499 retail one) was somewhat more reasonable when its components were all top of the line. but now that theres a 2.6 ghz C2D, and 2GB ram and 160gb drive is becoming commonplace in multimedia PC laptops, the $2499 price tag seems outrageously overprices (and it is). even the UCLA store's discounted price of $1999 is still overpriced compared to a similar configuration in a ThinkPad T61 or Dell XPS (which is not usually discounted).</p>
<p>IMO apple should drop the $2499 MBP down to the $1999 price tag, and the $2499 should be a 2.6ghz, 3 or 4gb ram, 200-250 gb drive.</p>
<p>i love apple's hardware designs, but they would gain a lot more market share if they get off of their elitist pricing high horse. i'd consider a macbook pro only because the UCLA store brings the price down to a much more justifiable level. i'd definitely wont consider it at the $2499 retail price tag. an almost $900 premium over a comparable PC just for a nice design and the 'privilege' to run OS X? get real.</p>
<p>VTECaddict,</p>
<p>Do you think that Apple really cares about market share?</p>
<p>Trust me, Apple makes more money doing what they do now than if they scrambled for market share. Like Steve Jobs said, "GM has more market share than BMW, but would you rather be GM?"</p>
<p>Market share is too often touted as a metric of success when PROFITABILITY and liquidity should be looked at first. By those metrics, Apple is sitting pretty. Very very pretty.</p>
<p>On getting a Macbook:</p>
<p>Pros:
-Good warranties and customer support.
-Free iPod.
-Can access the Mac OS, which is more stable than Windows.
-Mac OS is also better for publishing and coding, pending on the circumstances.
-It's a piece of art.</p>
<p>Cons:
-Expensive for their specs.
-Requires tech-savvy.
-Sizes and features are standardized, so no ultra-light tablet for you.</p>
<p>I personally went with a PC. 4 lb Sony VAIO.</p>
<p>I'd get a VAIO over a mac any day...</p>
<p>but i got a dell instead :/</p>
<p>i'd take anything not madeinchina.. jk :P lol</p>
<p>You think getting a MacBook "Requires tech-savvy?" I converted platforms a few years ago and I always found the UI of OSX to be more intuitive than Windows.</p>
<p>When I was using OSX, I did not find it any more intuitive than Windows. Maybe I was just TOO used to Windows or something.</p>
<p>Different strokes for different folks, I guess :-)</p>