$799 White 13" Macbook with 9400m graphics

[Kaido]

via Gizmodo

Microcenter link

Rebate PDF

 

[ivan2]

LOL @ the Lauren comments.

 

[zerogear]

I hate Gawker.

 

[Hacp]

Is the 13.3 inch macbook really 5 pounds?

 

[ivan2]

^^, yes, that shit is heavy, i no longer carry mine, got a netbook instead.

 

[Stas]

idk, I've used both a 17" macbook pro and 13.3 macbook. with OS X, WinXP 64-bit and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I've also used a dual G5 desktop and a single G4 (both with MacOS). From my overall experience, a Mac would have to be priced lower (yes, lower, as in cheaper) than an equivalent PC, for me to consider purchasing it. And it's not because i'm too much of an enthusiast to bother with an overpriced "black box" (or white? lol), it's usability also.

 

[skillyho]

OOS.

 

[Raider1284]

Originally posted by: Stas
idk, I've used both a 17" macbook pro and 13.3 macbook. with OS X, WinXP 64-bit and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I've also used a dual G5 desktop and a single G4 (both with MacOS). From my overall experience, a Mac would have to be priced lower (yes, lower, as in cheaper) than an equivalent PC, for me to consider purchasing it. And it's not because i'm too much of an enthusiast to bother with an overpriced "black box" (or white? lol), it's usability also.

Please point out an "equivalent" machine both spec wise and build wise compared to the new macbook and macbook pro for less money; I dare you. And no, you cannot post a pc with a worthless plastic shell and say its equivalent. Plastic shell is not equivalent compared to a solid aluminum shell with respect to build quality.

Until you can do this you cannot say that the mac is overpriced.

 

[ivan2]

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: Stas
idk, I've used both a 17" macbook pro and 13.3 macbook. with OS X, WinXP 64-bit and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I've also used a dual G5 desktop and a single G4 (both with MacOS). From my overall experience, a Mac would have to be priced lower (yes, lower, as in cheaper) than an equivalent PC, for me to consider purchasing it. And it's not because i'm too much of an enthusiast to bother with an overpriced "black box" (or white? lol), it's usability also.

Please point out an "equivalent" machine both spec wise and build wise compared to the new macbook and macbook pro for less money; I dare you. And no, you cannot post a pc with a worthless plastic shell and say its equivalent. Plastic shell is not equivalent compared to a solid aluminum shell with respect to build quality.

Until you can do this you cannot say that the mac is overpriced.

the macbook in this thread is the plastic shell white one.

 

[Raider1284]

Originally posted by: ivan2

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: Stas
idk, I've used both a 17" macbook pro and 13.3 macbook. with OS X, WinXP 64-bit and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I've also used a dual G5 desktop and a single G4 (both with MacOS). From my overall experience, a Mac would have to be priced lower (yes, lower, as in cheaper) than an equivalent PC, for me to consider purchasing it. And it's not because i'm too much of an enthusiast to bother with an overpriced "black box" (or white? lol), it's usability also.

Please point out an "equivalent" machine both spec wise and build wise compared to the new macbook and macbook pro for less money; I dare you. And no, you cannot post a pc with a worthless plastic shell and say its equivalent. Plastic shell is not equivalent compared to a solid aluminum shell with respect to build quality.

Until you can do this you cannot say that the mac is overpriced.

the macbook in this thread is the plastic shell white one.

which is why i specified the new macbook not the one in the OP that uses the plastic shell. Stas also said "a mac", as in, macs in general, not "this mac with the white shell".

 

[ivan2]

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: ivan2

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: Stas
idk, I've used both a 17" macbook pro and 13.3 macbook. with OS X, WinXP 64-bit and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I've also used a dual G5 desktop and a single G4 (both with MacOS). From my overall experience, a Mac would have to be priced lower (yes, lower, as in cheaper) than an equivalent PC, for me to consider purchasing it. And it's not because i'm too much of an enthusiast to bother with an overpriced "black box" (or white? lol), it's usability also.

Please point out an "equivalent" machine both spec wise and build wise compared to the new macbook and macbook pro for less money; I dare you. And no, you cannot post a pc with a worthless plastic shell and say its equivalent. Plastic shell is not equivalent compared to a solid aluminum shell with respect to build quality.

Until you can do this you cannot say that the mac is overpriced.

the macbook in this thread is the plastic shell white one.

which is why i specified the new macbook not the one in the OP that uses the plastic shell. Stas also said "a mac", as in, macs in general, not "this mac with the white shell".

i donno man, it seems to me that you are asking for ownage. now I will invite you to point out a macbook that's comparable to any Thinkpads. and then justify that cost to me.

 

[VinylxScratches]

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: Stas
idk, I've used both a 17" macbook pro and 13.3 macbook. with OS X, WinXP 64-bit and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I've also used a dual G5 desktop and a single G4 (both with MacOS). From my overall experience, a Mac would have to be priced lower (yes, lower, as in cheaper) than an equivalent PC, for me to consider purchasing it. And it's not because i'm too much of an enthusiast to bother with an overpriced "black box" (or white? lol), it's usability also.

Please point out an "equivalent" machine both spec wise and build wise compared to the new macbook and macbook pro for less money; I dare you. And no, you cannot post a pc with a worthless plastic shell and say its equivalent. Plastic shell is not equivalent compared to a solid aluminum shell with respect to build quality.

Until you can do this you cannot say that the mac is overpriced.

No one will be able to. IBMs are pretty good but if I had a choice between the two I would get a Apple laptop. It doesn't matter what OS I'm gonna use. I prefer the quality and feel of a Mac.

 

[boomhower]

It never ceases to amaze me to what lengths some people with go to to prove that all mac's are overpriced crap and how far the next person will go to try and prove mac's are God's gift to humanity. Use what floats your boat and quite bitching.

 

[hans007]

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: Stas
idk, I've used both a 17" macbook pro and 13.3 macbook. with OS X, WinXP 64-bit and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I've also used a dual G5 desktop and a single G4 (both with MacOS). From my overall experience, a Mac would have to be priced lower (yes, lower, as in cheaper) than an equivalent PC, for me to consider purchasing it. And it's not because i'm too much of an enthusiast to bother with an overpriced "black box" (or white? lol), it's usability also.

Please point out an "equivalent" machine both spec wise and build wise compared to the new macbook and macbook pro for less money; I dare you. And no, you cannot post a pc with a worthless plastic shell and say its equivalent. Plastic shell is not equivalent compared to a solid aluminum shell with respect to build quality.

Until you can do this you cannot say that the mac is overpriced.

this particular one isnt THAT overpriced.


of course this is not the full aluminum macbook that IS over priced at like $1500. this is the white one.

 

[Raider1284]

Originally posted by: hans007

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: Stas
idk, I've used both a 17" macbook pro and 13.3 macbook. with OS X, WinXP 64-bit and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I've also used a dual G5 desktop and a single G4 (both with MacOS). From my overall experience, a Mac would have to be priced lower (yes, lower, as in cheaper) than an equivalent PC, for me to consider purchasing it. And it's not because i'm too much of an enthusiast to bother with an overpriced "black box" (or white? lol), it's usability also.

Please point out an "equivalent" machine both spec wise and build wise compared to the new macbook and macbook pro for less money; I dare you. And no, you cannot post a pc with a worthless plastic shell and say its equivalent. Plastic shell is not equivalent compared to a solid aluminum shell with respect to build quality.

Until you can do this you cannot say that the mac is overpriced.

this particular one isnt THAT overpriced.

of course this is not the full aluminum macbook that IS over priced at like $1500. this is the white one.

aluminum macbook is $1300 http://store.apple.com/us/brow...ly/macbook?mco=MTE3MzM

Unless you can post a pc with similar specs and build quality you CANNOT say that it is overpriced.

 

[blckgrffn]

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: hans007

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: Stas
idk, I've used both a 17" macbook pro and 13.3 macbook. with OS X, WinXP 64-bit and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I've also used a dual G5 desktop and a single G4 (both with MacOS). From my overall experience, a Mac would have to be priced lower (yes, lower, as in cheaper) than an equivalent PC, for me to consider purchasing it. And it's not because i'm too much of an enthusiast to bother with an overpriced "black box" (or white? lol), it's usability also.

Please point out an "equivalent" machine both spec wise and build wise compared to the new macbook and macbook pro for less money; I dare you. And no, you cannot post a pc with a worthless plastic shell and say its equivalent. Plastic shell is not equivalent compared to a solid aluminum shell with respect to build quality.

Until you can do this you cannot say that the mac is overpriced.

this particular one isnt THAT overpriced.

of course this is not the full aluminum macbook that IS over priced at like $1500. this is the white one.

aluminum macbook is $1300 http://store.apple.com/us/brow...ly/macbook?mco=MTE3MzM

Unless you can post a pc with similar specs and build quality you CANNOT say that it is overpriced.

Dell XPS? I think it would be at least close and probably ~15% cheaper.

 

[Raider1284]

Originally posted by: blckgrffn

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: hans007

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: Stas
idk, I've used both a 17" macbook pro and 13.3 macbook. with OS X, WinXP 64-bit and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I've also used a dual G5 desktop and a single G4 (both with MacOS). From my overall experience, a Mac would have to be priced lower (yes, lower, as in cheaper) than an equivalent PC, for me to consider purchasing it. And it's not because i'm too much of an enthusiast to bother with an overpriced "black box" (or white? lol), it's usability also.

Please point out an "equivalent" machine both spec wise and build wise compared to the new macbook and macbook pro for less money; I dare you. And no, you cannot post a pc with a worthless plastic shell and say its equivalent. Plastic shell is not equivalent compared to a solid aluminum shell with respect to build quality.

Until you can do this you cannot say that the mac is overpriced.

this particular one isnt THAT overpriced.

of course this is not the full aluminum macbook that IS over priced at like $1500. this is the white one.

aluminum macbook is $1300 http://store.apple.com/us/brow...ly/macbook?mco=MTE3MzM

Unless you can post a pc with similar specs and build quality you CANNOT say that it is overpriced.

Dell XPS? I think it would be at least close and probably ~15% cheaper.

wrong. http://configure.us.dell.com/d...uctdetails~xpsnb_m1330 after adding the LED display and dedicated video card it is $1000. But the xps comes with a much weaker video card, 12mb 8400 versus 256mb 9400 and the xps comes with a plastic shell which is inferior to the solid aluminum shell. The xps also comes with ddr2 ram which is slower then the ddr3 ram in the mac.

 

[krylon]

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: blckgrffn

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: hans007

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: Stas
idk, I've used both a 17" macbook pro and 13.3 macbook. with OS X, WinXP 64-bit and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I've also used a dual G5 desktop and a single G4 (both with MacOS). From my overall experience, a Mac would have to be priced lower (yes, lower, as in cheaper) than an equivalent PC, for me to consider purchasing it. And it's not because i'm too much of an enthusiast to bother with an overpriced "black box" (or white? lol), it's usability also.

Please point out an "equivalent" machine both spec wise and build wise compared to the new macbook and macbook pro for less money; I dare you. And no, you cannot post a pc with a worthless plastic shell and say its equivalent. Plastic shell is not equivalent compared to a solid aluminum shell with respect to build quality.

Until you can do this you cannot say that the mac is overpriced.

this particular one isnt THAT overpriced.

of course this is not the full aluminum macbook that IS over priced at like $1500. this is the white one.

aluminum macbook is $1300 http://store.apple.com/us/brow...ly/macbook?mco=MTE3MzM

Unless you can post a pc with similar specs and build quality you CANNOT say that it is overpriced.

Dell XPS? I think it would be at least close and probably ~15% cheaper.

wrong. http://configure.us.dell.com/d...uctdetails~xpsnb_m1330 after adding the LED display and dedicated video card it is $1000. But the xps comes with a much weaker video card, 12mb 8400 versus 256mb 9400 and the xps comes with a plastic shell which is inferior to the solid aluminum shell. The xps also comes with ddr2 ram which is slower then the ddr3 ram in the mac.

wait, wat.

 

[Raider1284]

Originally posted by: krylon

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: blckgrffn

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: hans007

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: Stas
idk, I've used both a 17" macbook pro and 13.3 macbook. with OS X, WinXP 64-bit and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I've also used a dual G5 desktop and a single G4 (both with MacOS). From my overall experience, a Mac would have to be priced lower (yes, lower, as in cheaper) than an equivalent PC, for me to consider purchasing it. And it's not because i'm too much of an enthusiast to bother with an overpriced "black box" (or white? lol), it's usability also.

Please point out an "equivalent" machine both spec wise and build wise compared to the new macbook and macbook pro for less money; I dare you. And no, you cannot post a pc with a worthless plastic shell and say its equivalent. Plastic shell is not equivalent compared to a solid aluminum shell with respect to build quality.

Until you can do this you cannot say that the mac is overpriced.

this particular one isnt THAT overpriced.

of course this is not the full aluminum macbook that IS over priced at like $1500. this is the white one.

aluminum macbook is $1300 http://store.apple.com/us/brow...ly/macbook?mco=MTE3MzM

Unless you can post a pc with similar specs and build quality you CANNOT say that it is overpriced.

Dell XPS? I think it would be at least close and probably ~15% cheaper.

wrong. http://configure.us.dell.com/d...uctdetails~xpsnb_m1330 after adding the LED display and dedicated video card it is $1000. But the xps comes with a much weaker video card, 12mb 8400 versus 256mb 9400 and the xps comes with a plastic shell which is inferior to the solid aluminum shell. The xps also comes with ddr2 ram which is slower then the ddr3 ram in the mac.

wait, wat.

the newer macbooks use ddr3 memory not ddr2 memory.

"2GB (two 1GB) of 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM" http://store.apple.com/us/brow...ly/macbook?mco=MTE3MzM

 

[krylon]

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: krylon

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: blckgrffn

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: hans007

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: Stas
idk, I've used both a 17" macbook pro and 13.3 macbook. with OS X, WinXP 64-bit and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I've also used a dual G5 desktop and a single G4 (both with MacOS). From my overall experience, a Mac would have to be priced lower (yes, lower, as in cheaper) than an equivalent PC, for me to consider purchasing it. And it's not because i'm too much of an enthusiast to bother with an overpriced "black box" (or white? lol), it's usability also.

Please point out an "equivalent" machine both spec wise and build wise compared to the new macbook and macbook pro for less money; I dare you. And no, you cannot post a pc with a worthless plastic shell and say its equivalent. Plastic shell is not equivalent compared to a solid aluminum shell with respect to build quality.

Until you can do this you cannot say that the mac is overpriced.

this particular one isnt THAT overpriced.

of course this is not the full aluminum macbook that IS over priced at like $1500. this is the white one.

aluminum macbook is $1300 http://store.apple.com/us/brow...ly/macbook?mco=MTE3MzM

Unless you can post a pc with similar specs and build quality you CANNOT say that it is overpriced.

Dell XPS? I think it would be at least close and probably ~15% cheaper.

wrong. http://configure.us.dell.com/d...uctdetails~xpsnb_m1330 after adding the LED display and dedicated video card it is $1000. But the xps comes with a much weaker video card, 12mb 8400 versus 256mb 9400 and the xps comes with a plastic shell which is inferior to the solid aluminum shell. The xps also comes with ddr2 ram which is slower then the ddr3 ram in the mac.

wait, wat.

the newer macbooks use ddr3 memory not ddr2 memory.

"2GB (two 1GB) of 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM" http://store.apple.com/us/brow...ly/macbook?mco=MTE3MzM

And the bigger number makes it faster?

 

[mugs]

Jesus tap-dancing Christ people, this is Hot Deals. Take the Mac vs PC arguments to comp.sys.nobody.cares

 

[Jules]

Originally posted by: ivan2

Originally posted by: Raider1284

Originally posted by: Stas
idk, I've used both a 17" macbook pro and 13.3 macbook. with OS X, WinXP 64-bit and Vista Ultimate 64-bit. I've also used a dual G5 desktop and a single G4 (both with MacOS). From my overall experience, a Mac would have to be priced lower (yes, lower, as in cheaper) than an equivalent PC, for me to consider purchasing it. And it's not because i'm too much of an enthusiast to bother with an overpriced "black box" (or white? lol), it's usability also.

Please point out an "equivalent" machine both spec wise and build wise compared to the new macbook and macbook pro for less money; I dare you. And no, you cannot post a pc with a worthless plastic shell and say its equivalent. Plastic shell is not equivalent compared to a solid aluminum shell with respect to build quality.

Until you can do this you cannot say that the mac is overpriced.

the macbook in this thread is the plastic shell white one.

lol.

Great deal but don't have any use for another laptop.

 

[Hacp]

It was pretty cheap for a 9400m laptop. I wish ATI would support Cuda.

 

[gucio69]

Computer Holy Wars

 

[blckgrffn]

I meant the new xps - you know the one that is basically the same hardware in the chassis as this macbook? Yeah, that one. Jeepers - at least know what the current models are if you are going to be angry about these things.

Nat