Originally Posted by Vox

So Apple fail to adjust to the market properly, most PC manufacturers that survive tend to adjust properly.

Originally Posted by Vox

With reference to discs; don't assume you hold the one true opinion on this:
http://www.1up.com/news/study-sugges...refer-physical
If people really thought DVD and Blue-Ray were dead, they wouldn't be used as much as they are. I can understand wanting to lead people into the future by declaring them dead, personally I prefer a digital storage medium my self, but it's not like I don't use them if my computer suddenly bricks its self and it needs to be fixed, and 'going for the future' isn't the same as observing the market as it is today. Overall, people use discs, they are helpful, get over it :P

Originally Posted by Vox

I'm a PC fan boy? So basically everything other than Apple? I mean, it's not like I dislike C64's or ye olde acorn computers. This is a dead argument, it makes no sense and never has, so what if I'm a fan boy of PC's? Macs underlying architecture is the same as PC's, what I'm talking about is business practices. The most you can say here is that I'm biased, at which point I can provide sources to back my assertions up, go for the substance of my points, not this work around.

Originally Posted by Vox

OK I have a plan, I don't know enough about mobile hardware, that's why I said it was off topic, so if you believe a Mac Pro will beat a competitors offer, please demonstrate this, I don't find my self to be knowledgeable to do it my self. If you do this please post it here or link me to it, I'll read it and respond to the best of my ability, given the comparisons you draw to demonstrate your own points. If you find your self in the same position as I am in, and can't do it your self, please stop asking me to do it and move on. (oh, and posting a link to someone else who has done it is also fine, just realise I'll assume you agree with any points you link, and don't state that you don't agree with.)

Originally Posted by Gorman

You use such an umbrella statement, Apple is great at adjusting to the market, which is why they have such an immense market share in tablets and smartphones.

Originally Posted by Gorman

They are unnecessary and inconvinent. I can't remember the last time I used one, and even among family and friends they are hardly used.

If people thought it is 'better' to have a floppy drie, that doesn't mean it would be.

Originally Posted by Gorman

So you admit you are biased huh?

That explains your arguments and your inability to understand how Macs fit in...

Originally Posted by Gorman

Huh, now I am asked to prove a negative huh?

But sure, I will bite :)

Not going to bother with the Macbook pro 13" because it is brutally obvious that nothing else in the category can compete with it.

M15x vs Macbook pro 15"
i7-840QM 4x1.86GHz | Intel Core i7 4x2.0GHz
8GB (4GBx2) 1333MHz DDR3 | 8GB (4GBx2) 1333MHz DDR3
256GB SSD | 256GB SSD
Slot Load 8X DVD+/-RW Drive with DVD+R double layer write capability | Slot Load 8X DVD+/-RW Drive with DVD+R double layer write capability
1GB DDR3 ATI Radeon HD 5730 | The Core i7 is sandybridge
$3,434.20 | $3,089.00

Do I really need to outline which one is better? Dell actually had worse pricing than Apple, so if I had max speced them then it would have been crazier...

Originally Posted by Vox

Not what I mean, I was referring to what you had said, so the context was desktops and specifically their 'old desktops', not the whole market.

Originally Posted by Vox

Ad hominem attacks wont persuade me at all, I can only assume your using this because you either want to show off or just don't like me, either way keep it less personal.

Originally Posted by Vox

All right, I'm surprised you responded to the challenge but I'll bite, before I do however remember I'm not asking you to prove a negative in the sense you are alluding to, a quick explanation of the logic here involved:
The way I assume you see it:
I provide evidence mac's are over priced, you say it's inadequate, I ask for evidence mac is not overpriced.
Now, that is a negative, however this can also be stated as:
I provide evidence mac's are over priced compared to Dell, you say it's inadequate, I ask for evidence that dells (or any other major PC manufacturer of your choice) are over priced compared to macs. In my words: "...if you believe a Mac Pro will beat a competitors offer, please demonstrate this..."
It's not the same as saying; 'prove the non existence of x', it's just show that 'y>x' not 'x>y'.

Originally Posted by Vox

Onto the actual argument: (I'll be using the dell/apple UK stores so expect prices in GBP.) (Also, you didn't really analyse this, so I'll do it for you.)

(NOTE:
I can't find the M15x with the quoted GPU, so I've re run the whole thing based on what I found on Dell's website, the options where a .5GB and a 1.5GB, and you said that maxing it out would be worse so I went for the 1,5GB)

Price:
We'll start with price and see if it's justified:
Ѓ2,188.99 compared to Ѓ2,453.99 is a difference of Ѓ265, so what are the hardware differences?

Screen:
First, you'd think they are both simply 15" notebooks, right? Well, Apple have different screen resolution sizes, the Dell by default has 1600x900, while apple by default uses a 1440x900 screen, they offer a 1680x1050 for Ѓ80, or Ѓ120 with antiglare, they are both LED backlit, so good screens, we'll say this is a Ѓ65 difference, since the ratio from 1600x900:1680x1050 multiplied by 80 is around 65. Ѓ200 left.

CPU:
Mobile CPU's are one thing I don't know, so I'll be leaning on review websites largely for this, first the mac book pro uses an intel core i7 2635QM, and this is a current generation processor, by all accounts this is better than the 840QM the Dell uses, however the price difference is the other way around, that is to say, the Alienware M15x uses an older more expensive CPU, probably because it was designed a while ago iirc. Based on cinebench the difference from the Macell is 3696:3426 (single), or 13504:9316 (multi), which is around 35% better (averaged), I can't reasonably estimate the cost of this, so for now, we will say the mac is Ѓ200 cheaper and 35% better.

GPU:
Now, to avoid being mean, I'll assume you either just don't care about GPU's or didn't notice the difference here. A 1GB dedicated GPU is not comparable to intels integrated sandybridge GPU's which at best compare to a passive GPU such as the 5450, I'm actually reviewing this with a 1.5GB GTX 460M, even brining up spec tables doesn't demonstrate how wide the gap is here, but simply put what this means is Dell values this component difference at Ѓ200, (and this more than makes up for that %35 difference, this makes the mac much less desirable in comparison).

Summary
They are different classes of mobile computers, one is a gaming PC (the Dell) and one is a media PC (the mac), the 460M costs more than the price difference between them, and makes up for the performance difference of the CPU's, considering the Mac used an integrated GPU this is eventually a whole components difference, the Mac is basically one component short, so no wonder it's cheaper. Oh and on a last note if your defence is "GPU doesn't matter" then I know I'm right about this ;P. I'd consider them both well priced decent notebooks, this is certainly a tighter competition than the desktop market, but I'd say Dell won despite your sarcastic suggestion otherwise.


(This will be my last response on line of argument, so you can consider this a closing argument, feel free to make one your self.)