Apples to Apples...err Dell Comparison

[Looney]

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune
Still cant really compare it because one notebook will use Mac software and the other will use Windows.

Sure we will. Since it's all based on the same hardware now, we'll really know which OS is more efficient (better) by how well software runs on it.

 

[BFG10K]

knowing that they can always install Windows if they want to.

To my knowledge this is not currently possible.

 

[halfadder]

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune
Still cant really compare it because one notebook will use Mac software and the other will use Windows.

Sure we will. Since it's all based on the same hardware now, we'll really know which OS is more efficient (better) by how well software runs on it.

Mac OS X might boot faster than XP, but in many cases it runs end-user software slower than XP. This is because of the hardware abstraction used by Mac OS X. Software must travel through more layers of OS before finally reaching the hardware. This was great for portability, it made the transition from PowerPC to Intel fairly simple, but it hurts performance somewhat.

This is not a hard and fast rule, there have been some demonstrations with simple programs like zip/unzip which run faster on the developer X86 Macs than it does on XP on the same machine using the same Intel compiler core. And drivers, such as OpenGL drivers, can always access the hardware directly. But if you're going to compare a simple crossplatform app, I would bet money that it'll run a little bit slower on OS X.

This may change with Vista and with future versions of Mac OS X. I expect Vista will be slightly slower and I expect future versions of OS X to be slightly faster, narrowing the gap.

Let the endless, mindless, worthless benchmark wars begin!

 

[ninjit]

Originally posted by: Looney
That's why the comparisons aren't quite fair... it has nothing to do with the categories, the X1600 performs only half as well as the 7800Go... as well as a larger and better screen.

Agreed, which is why I mentioned them above as pros for the Dell, vs the build quality of the Apple.

I've been looking for some comparisons between the 7800 go and the X1600 mobility, but haven't found much yet - it appears the MacBook will be one of the first out with that ATI chip.

 

[ponyo]

Originally posted by: halfadder
The new Macs use Intel EFI instead of a traditional BIOS. It's better than a BIOS, more like the OpenFirmware of a Sun workstation or PowerPC Mac, but it's not currently supported by the 32-bit version of Windows XP. So it's not currently possible to boot into Windows. Give it a week or two and I'm sure someone will have a hack/workaround. There are also rumors of a new version of VirtualPC from Microsoft to run Windows from within Mac OS X.

As for battery life, the MacBookPro has a 60 watt-hour battery and uses a standard Intel chipset, so it should be comparable to similar Windows-running notebooks. The ATI X1600 CPU might draw more power than integrated graphics or X600 or X300 graphics, so we'll have to wait for a full review to be sure.

So current answer is no, it can't run Windows. OP and couple other people are making it sound like you can run Windows right now.

So waiting continues.

 

[halfadder]

Originally posted by: Naustica

Originally posted by: halfadder
The new Macs use Intel EFI instead of a traditional BIOS. It's better than a BIOS, more like the OpenFirmware of a Sun workstation or PowerPC Mac, but it's not currently supported by the 32-bit version of Windows XP. So it's not currently possible to boot into Windows. Give it a week or two and I'm sure someone will have a hack/workaround. There are also rumors of a new version of VirtualPC from Microsoft to run Windows from within Mac OS X.

As for battery life, the MacBookPro has a 60 watt-hour battery and uses a standard Intel chipset, so it should be comparable to similar Windows-running notebooks. The ATI X1600 CPU might draw more power than integrated graphics or X600 or X300 graphics, so we'll have to wait for a full review to be sure.

So current answer is no, it can't run Windows. OP and couple other people are making it sound like you can run Windows right now.

Not XP anyway. But the last I heard, the Longhorn/Vista developer builds support EFI.

 

[Markbnj]

Don't need some fancy dumbed-down GUI if you actually use a computer to get things done.

Yeah! Like making a Powerpoint Presentation!

 

[ninjit]

Originally posted by: halfadder

Originally posted by: ninjit
Categories are bogus labels put on the machines by the companies for marketing purposes

There are differences in case construction. Compare the Dell Latitude D810 to the Dell Inspiron 6000. They can be ordered with the same exact specs, right down to the same LCD and battery. However the Latitude has much better, much more sturdy construction as it's a "business model". The cooresponding Inspiron model has flimsy plastic and feels more like a junker HP you'd find at Walmart. In that example the Latitude was worth the few extra bucks. (Much less preinstalled "bonus" software / malware / cruft too).

yes I know, that was going to be my next point. Latitudes vs Inspirons. When some prof comes to us saying he wants to buy the latest/greatest Inspiron, we always look for the equivalent latitude.

But you can't say that for the XPS vs 9300 example I gave above (They are both Inspirons). As far as I can tell they are even built on the same chassis, yet one costs ridiculously more than the other because it's called a "gaming" machine.

As for the E1750, I wondered whether it was a business model because of the E designation, but I found it on the Home/Home Office site, it's labeled as an inspiron, looks like one, and comes with all the bloatware you already mentioned.

 

[ninjit]

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune
Still cant really compare it because one notebook will use Mac software and the other will use Windows.

That's what I'm hoping groups like Anandtech can start to settle once and for all.
When/if anyone can get Windows and Linux running on the new x86 macs, you can performance of apps on the different platforms, essentially benchmarking the efficiency of the OS and App implementation on the OS, with little regard for the underlying hardware - because it's the same machine.

 

[halfadder]

I think the big Mac OS X86 performance push will be after the first crop of games for the platform. Once people compare Doom3/Quake4 on OS X and XP running on the same hardware (probably already going on inside Apple) they'll be able to zero in on problem areas with the OS and drivers.

I have a feeling Mac OS X 10.5 will be another "must have" performance upgrade, this time for Intel-based-Mac users.

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: ninjit

Originally posted by: halfadder

Originally posted by: ninjit
Categories are bogus labels put on the machines by the companies for marketing purposes

There are differences in case construction. Compare the Dell Latitude D810 to the Dell Inspiron 6000. They can be ordered with the same exact specs, right down to the same LCD and battery. However the Latitude has much better, much more sturdy construction as it's a "business model". The cooresponding Inspiron model has flimsy plastic and feels more like a junker HP you'd find at Walmart. In that example the Latitude was worth the few extra bucks. (Much less preinstalled "bonus" software / malware / cruft too).

yes I know, that was going to be my next point. Latitudes vs Inspirons. When some prof comes to us saying he wants to buy the latest/greatest Inspiron, we always look for the equivalent latitude.

But you can't say that for the XPS vs 9300 example I gave above (They are both Inspirons). As far as I can tell they are even built on the same chassis, yet one costs ridiculously more than the other because it's called a "gaming" machine.

They weren't the same thing. The iXPS2 had the 6800Go ULTRA, whereas the 9300 only had a 6800Go (about 30% less in performance). The iXPS2 also came default with WUXGA. And the iXPS2 had a higher default CPU, and a higher max CPU. The chassis is slightly different as well. You are paying a little extra for the fancy shell and lights. And supposedly iXPS2 has better technical support, since there's supposedly a special iXPS only tech support. I don't know about the tech support, since i haven't needed to contact them yet.