Do you like your macbook?

[zarly]

Well do ya? I've been pondering making my next PC a Mac of some description. I've always used PC's. But most of my needs are simple, and pictures and music take up most of my hard drive. Mostly use utility type software like google earth and picasa2. I don't do any gaming really. Can anyone tell me if the macbook is a good solution for portability and user friendliness?

Thank you very much.

[bluepoof]

I love my MacBook.  But I'm biased.  

[zarly]

I love my MacBook.  But I'm biased.  

Why are you biased? Tell me how great you think it is. When did you get it? Is it a macbook pro?

[bluepoof]

I'm biased because I've never owned anything but an Apple Computer and have never used Windows in my life for anything other than scheduling meetings on the shared engineering floor laptop.  Plus my sweetie has been an Apple employee for almost 10 years.  

I got it about a week ago after determining that I should not have poured water into my old PowerBook G4.  It is, in fact, a MacBook Pro.

[Thunder7]

I'm biased as well but based on experience. My primary occupation is I.T. I have been dealing with PCs and WinDOZE for the past 12 years and that in itself is why I own a Mac.

Why? The simplest explanation is that if you want a computer that isnt going to up and crap itself without warning, or go down harder and more often than an experienced White House intern- Get a Mac.

[bizarro]

My Powerbook G4 has been great and I see no reason to updgrade anytime soon. iPhoto is stupid easy. iTunes is stupid easy. It came with Photoshop Elements which is pretty easy. OX10 Tiger is awesome and I dig the dashboard for calendar and calculator functions (also gives you a weather update). I use .Macmail. I browse with Safari. It's intuitive, functional, solid, and it just plain works. Also, photos look better on a Mac due to resolution or something (which you can change on a PC but Macs are typically already optimized for it).

[bluedogok]

The only Apple product that I have is an iPod, but if you have no need to run Windows only software like I do then get whichever one feels better to you. Go to a store a few times and try out a Mac, if you like the interface then go for it. They are great computers, you can dual boot to XP on the newer Intel based boxes if you have Garmin or some other Windows only software.

I have 2 desktops and 2 laptops at home that run Windows XP and manage the 10 computers in my office running XP (and a server still on 2000 Server) and have had very few problems with it. Most of the problems that I have had to deal with are user generated issues. I will stick with the Windows side for me since Autodesk/Discreet doesn't have Mac compatible software anymore.

[zarly]

The only Apple product that I have is an iPod, but if you have no need to run Windows only software like I do then get whichever one feels better to you. Go to a store a few times and try out a Mac, if you like the interface then go for it. They are great computers, you can dual boot to XP on the newer Intel based boxes if you have Garmin or some other Windows only software.

I have 2 desktops and 2 laptops at home that run Windows XP and manage the 10 computers in my office running XP (and a server still on 2000 Server) and have had very few problems with it. Most of the problems that I have had to deal with are user generated issues. I will stick with the Windows side for me since Autodesk/Discreet doesn't have Mac compatible software anymore.

Do Garmin products not work on a Mac? That seems crappy.

[RBEmerson]

It's not that I don't like Macs.  Heck, back in the bad old days of the "toaster" Macs, I was a certified Apple developer.  I wrote a controller for a water treatment plant.  A Mac SE ran the show, using radio links to pass commands to and collect data from pumps, towers, etc.  I wrote a couple of other apps, too  (a v. cool LORAN-C fix error plotter comes to mind).  And, heck, MacOS is basically Unix, disguised for the nervous, as MacOS.  I've got a Linux box sitting here with a paltry 53 days of non-stop uptime on it (IIRC, it came down for a re-boot to load a new kernel, otherwise uptime would be closer to 6-7 months).  But...

Price a Macbook.  Price a Windows/Vista-using laptop.  Oh, you want to use Garmin's MapSource to feed your GPS, too?  Macbook?  Macbook?  I see no Macbook.  

Sorry.  I wish it were otherwise.  Honest.  

[mr. coffee]

I did price them and I bought a black macbook with core duo 2, 120GB hard, 2GBRam for 1400 out the door (after rebate and no sales tax). Best thing I've done. What's the hoopla over Vista? it's OSX. If you're going to make such a fuss over new software that's been in development for what five-ten years it should be cutting edge. Vista's not. Case in point...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y_Jp6PxsSQ&eurl

[zarly]

Well how do you run your GPS if you use a Mac then? Bummer.

[Thunder7]

First off- If you have a new Mac, it can run Windows. Once Garmin follows through on its promise to start supporting Macs, then the point becomes moot.

The fact that the Mac OS is UNIX wearing a pretty dress only means that it is far more stable, secure and useable than WinDOZE.

Me? Year 3 with my Powerbook G4- 1.5Ghz w/1 gig of RAM and it does all my important stuff, even used on site at my client's.

Oh, and no anti virus software, no anti spyware. Why? for those of you who dont know- You dont need it with a Mac. That may change, but it hasnt since OSX has been out there.

Wait- No insecure piece of crap called Internet Explorer. Yet another bonus.

Yes, I also own two PCs. One 5 year old Dell Laptop and my Frankenbox that I use for various crap. My Dell streams Itunes to my audio system.

[vitaminC]

My G4 Powerbook will be 5 this summer!   Someday I will upgrade... but it still works fine.

What do you do with your GPS software? I've got a large memory card in my Garmin and just used a crappy PC to load in all the maps. No more PC needed... at least until I get some newer/better maps  

[Thunder7]

My G4 Powerbook will be 5 this summer!   Someday I will upgrade... but it still works fine.

What do you do with your GPS software? I've got a large memory card in my Garmin and just used a crappy PC to load in all the maps. No more PC needed... at least until I get some newer/better maps  

I forgot to mention- I use my FrankenPC for the Garmin stuff. I need at least one PC for my business anyways so its not an inconvenience.

[bluedogok]

Well how do you run your GPS if you use a Mac then? Bummer.

You can set up the new Intel based Macs to dual-boot with either the Mac OS or Windows OS. I think it is something called Boot Camp, I read about it some when it was first introduced. Maybe some more of the Mac savvy people can explain this product better.

I considered a Mac book when I bought my laptop last year, I went with an HP instead for quite a bit less. The Intel-Macs had only been out about a month at that point and I am not an early adopter. I just wasn't ready to jump to something different but the dual boot functionality had me interested, if the price would have been comparable at that time ($1,700 vs. $2,500), I might have one now.

[vitaminC]

You can set up the new Intel based Macs to dual-boot with either the Mac OS or Windows OS. I think it is something called Boot Camp, I read about it some when it was first introduced. Maybe some more of the Mac savvy people can explain this product better.

You can choose from BootCamp, which is provided by Apple and is an either/or option when booting up, or use Parallels to run OSX and Windows simultaneously. The downside to both is that it requires the purchase (or other means of acquisition) of a copy of the Windows OS.

[zarly]

Oh my gosh, I was just over at London Drugs, they have a mac with a huge HUGE 24 inch screen. Beautiful colour. I brought up STN on it, and my blog and looked at some of my pictures. God, I could just put it in screen saver mode and look at it forever. HUGE I tell you.

Still, I'm looking for something portable... I think. ;l

[bluepoof]

What do you do with your GPS software? I've got a large memory card in my Garmin and just used a crappy PC to load in all the maps. No more PC needed... at least until I get some newer/better maps  

+1.  I borrowed a PC at work once to load in all of the detailed maps for all of the USA and Canada.  Someday, I'll probably pirate acquire Windows and run Parallels to use MS Streets and Trips, but honestly, I've never really felt like I was missing anything on any of my trips.

[zarly]

Is there some other type of software that can be used by Mac for maps etc? I suppose I could google this stuff.

[denny]

Here are some MAC gps resources.

http://forum.routebuddy.com/
http:// http://groups.yahoo.com/group/macmap/

You should be able to find out everything you need to know between those two.
There are probably others.  I still need to use winDOZE to plan routes.
I don't own routebuddy.  If Garmin comes through with their promise then that will fix that and I won't need
MS software anymore.  I have a G4 Powerbook and I use Virtual PC to run MS Streets and trips to plan routes for printing.  I don't have a GPS yet either so that serves my needs for now.  Go for the MAC book pro if possible.  You get a slot that accepts memory card readers so you can easily copy pics, MP3's, and other files onto memory cards without cables.  Also the standard MAC Book uses shared memory for the video, meaning the main memory for your machine is used by the video card. The MAC Book pro has dedicated video memory.

Many of the newer Garmins do support transferring files between MAC and GPS via USB. So you can transfer saved routes and .gpx files as well as .mp3's, etc.
Still shopping for a GPS.

I worked in computer networking department for about 9 years and always used a MAC for my personal workstation, even though I had to support the MS boxes as part of my duties there.  The lack of viruses is the bigest thing for me.  Yes there are a few applications that are MS only, but most things can be done on the MAC.

Cheers, Denny

[Thunder7]

..........You get Memory card slots so you can easily copy pics, MP3's, and other files onto memory cards without cables...... 

The Mac Book Pro doesnt have the memory card slots you mention. The only slot it has is for the new Express Card interface, in which you can plug in a card reader. Beyond that it has the usual compliment of USB 2.0 and Firewire connections.

[denny]

oops yep that's right it has a slot that will accept card readers, sorry.
That is more convenient than cables IMO.  I leave the card reader in the PC card slot on my powerbook all the time. That makes it very easy to remove the card from my camera and transfer pics very easily and usually alot quicker than a usb cable.

[Thunder7]

oops yep that's right it has a slot that will accept card readers, sorry.
That is more convenient than cables IMO.  I leave the card reader in the PC card slot on my powerbook all the time. That makes it very easy to remove the card from my camera and transfer pics very easily and usually alot quicker than a usb cable.

The slot in the G4 Powerbook is actually a Cardbus (32bit) slot that is also backwards compatible with PCMCIA type II. There are many cards that can be used in it besides what you mentioned. For example, certain wireless network sniffer aplications are not written to use the built in Airport system, but need a card running a specific chipset. This type of card can only fit in that slot.

[RBEmerson]

I did price them and I bought a black macbook with core duo 2, 120GB hard, 2GBRam for 1400 out the door (after rebate and no sales tax). Best thing I've done. What's the hoopla over Vista? it's OSX. If you're going to make such a fuss over new software that's been in development for what five-ten years it should be cutting edge. Vista's not. Case in point...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y_Jp6PxsSQ&eurl

To be as clear as possible: I do not like Vista.  I'm not very happy with Win(anything).  But when I can get a WinXP machine that's a near duplicate (smaller drive) for $900 and avoid some very specific Windows/MacOS compatibility issues, the choice for me is pretty clear.  

Doubling back to Vista, a good friend has been running Vista betas for quite a while and even he refuses to put the production release on any of his machines.  'Nuff said.  

[mr. coffee]

To each his/her own. My previous experience with these "$900" pc's has not been a good one (compaq presario, HP, Dell) and they all ended up in the trash or on Ebay. In fact if I add up all the needed software for the PC it's not much difference in price. Well some, but I'd rather pay for quality up front than have to replace my PC's every two years.

[bluedogok]

Those Mac screens are nice, dual 30" Cinema displays would be great

Just not clicking on everything without looking will go a long way towards keeping viruses and spyware off of any system. If people didn't "punch every flashing monkey" or every piece of freeware (malware) they run across they might not have much trouble with those things. I run AVG on my computers (home and office) and have had it catch a few viruses in email attachments that were spam, and that is with an email address that is 10 years old.

I have been running this desktop on the on the same install for 3 years now (since I built it) and I have not had problems with it. I replaced my wifes desktop last year, she was using an old Athlon-1200 until then. I tend to use them for 4-5 years before upgrading. Although, I need to build a rendering computer for Accurender/3D Studio processing which is what this one was used for in the past, now I just need a faster one for that.

[rselin]

Oh my gosh, I was just over at London Drugs, they have a mac with a huge HUGE 24 inch screen. Beautiful colour. I brought up STN on it, and my blog and looked at some of my pictures. God, I could just put it in screen saver mode and look at it forever. HUGE I tell you.

Still, I'm looking for something portable... I think. ;l

Too weird!  I had the identical experience last night at London Drugs (in Calgary)!  I have a G4 Powerbook and was looking at upgrading to a Macbook Pro and wanted to compare glossy/matte screen options.  I also pulled up my home page and used my photos to judge screen quality.  And then - what's this - a 24" iMac!  Absolutely gorgeous and much wider view angle than on the Macbook Pro, especially vertical.  All of a sudden I was thinking I really did need both a desktop and a laptop and I had to run out of there before my credit card came out...

I will never go back to a PC and Windows.  I curse my Windows PC at work every single day and my co-workers are tired of me saying "this kind of shit never happens with my Mac - it just works!"

Macbook is a good (cheaper) option, it's a little smaller which makes it easier to pack on a bike, and if you don't game the cheaper video card won't make a difference.

RBEmerson,

But when I can get a WinXP machine that's a near duplicate (smaller drive) for $900 and avoid some very specific Windows/MacOS compatibility issues, the choice for me is pretty clear.  

You may get a cheaper "near duplicate" in terms of hardware, but Windows is no near duplicate of the Mac OS X operating system!  Windows has been trying to play catch up since the 80's and just keeps falling further and further behind.  I don't care if a Mac is $5,000 and an equivalent Windows machine is $500, I'd still buy the Mac just for the OS and the great applications that Apple bundles into its machines.

[Grad]

I have a MacBook Pro which I LOVE and I run Parallels on it for those few times when I have to use Winblows. Get the Macbook and enjoy it, you will never go back to a PC.

[RBEmerson]

Sigh... one last time.  I have some apps that are known to not be MacOS compatible.  For lots of people MacOS is really easier to live with.  

OTOH, I think Apple is suffering from issues of economy of scale when it comes to laptop screen sizes.  I do not care for the widescreen formats showing up on the (mainly Windows) market (my marine nav software, for example, is much better off with a "standard" 15" screen as opposed to the 17" widescreen format which has displaced these screens).  But getting comparable screen area in the Apple world is, AFAIK, pretty spendy.  

[ST1300Rider]

Just to be clear. When you run Window$ on a dual core Macbook in dual boot mode you're running Window$....period. In my case XP. Mapsource, Streets and Trips, and Quicken all run just as well as they do on my PC desktop. There is no compatability issue with the dual boot system. I've been told that the same is true for Parallels, but I haven't any first hand knowledge of that. I'll never buy another PC.  

[RBEmerson]

Just to be clear. When you run Window$ on a dual core Macbook in dual boot mode you're running Window$....period. In my case XP. Mapsource, Streets and Trips, and Quicken all run just as well as they do on my PC desktop. There is no compatability issue with the dual boot system. I've been told that the same is true for Parallels, but I haven't any first hand knowledge of that. I'll never buy another PC.  

Fair enough.  

[mr. coffee]

Here;s a good site as it lists the lowest prices for all of the mac models. I bought mine from MacConnection (HIGHLY recomend them as their customer service is the best I've seen).

http://pbcentral.com/

[vitaminC]

Here;s a good site as it lists the lowest prices for all of the mac models. I bought mine from MacConnection (HIGHLY recomend them as their customer service is the best I've seen).

http://pbcentral.com/

I love getting the education discount!  

[mr. coffee]

The claim that mac's are so much more expensive is really not vaild as there's quite a few new models (white mac book 1.83ghz, 80HD) for under a grand.

[Thunder7]

The claim that mac's are so much more expensive is really not vaild as there's quite a few new models (white mac book 1.83ghz, 80HD) for under a grand.

Most people also dont take into consideration what is known in the industry as TCO (Total Cost of Ownership). Time lost for hardware/software/OS failures and problems and such. It was proven years ago that the Macs had a far lower TCO and still does.

[freecatSV]

To add a data point: I loved my PowerBook G4. I only sold it because my employer bought me a new white MacBook (2 Ghz Core 2 Duo), which is even better. I guess what really surprised me is how much I use the built-in iSight and how good the video quality is.

[bizarro]

Whenever I have the money (2012?) I'm going to get a desktop Mac with a pair of giant monitors. Nothing makes home recording easier than a Mac and a couple of big monitors and decent speaker system. Firewire ins...... yeah baby.

And I'll still have my Powerbook G4 for everything else.

[spinalator]

Stop it, you are making me consider buying a mac! Nerds, miscreants, infidels! I used mac SE and classic boxes back in the early 90's but have not used them since.

One neat thing on my employees mac was the magnetic power cord, that has a high groove factor.

My current road warrior is a Dell latitude C640 2.0 GHz P4 with 1.0 GHz of RAM and many batteries. The machine is likely worth 300 on EBay if I part it out. It is stable running Xp, but is hot, and has crappy battery life when compared to my PIII notebooks. It also does not seem a hell of a lot faster even though it has three times the processor speed. I do like the machine though, those are my only quibbles.

What Mac would be comparable in performance and what price point would I be looking at? I may do some traveling and sell my home system and my laptop and buy a nice notebook with ~2 year shelf life left. I like the idea of the intel chipped ones but am not sure if the duo thing is necessary or not.

[mr. coffee]

Stop it, you are making me consider buying a mac! Nerds, miscreants, infidels! I used mac SE and classic boxes back in the early 90's but have not used them since.

One neat thing on my employees mac was the magnetic power cord, that has a high groove factor.

My current road warrior is a Dell latitude C640 2.0 GHz P4 with 1.0 GHz of RAM and many batteries. The machine is likely worth 300 on EBay if I part it out. It is stable running Xp, but is hot, and has crappy battery life when compared to my PIII notebooks. It also does not seem a hell of a lot faster even though it has three times the processor speed. I do like the machine though, those are my only quibbles.

What Mac would be comparable in performance and what price point would I be looking at? I may do some traveling and sell my home system and my laptop and buy a nice notebook with ~2 year shelf life left. I like the idea of the intel chipped ones but am not sure if the duo thing is necessary or not.

Not sure that I can compare the two, but I would guess that a Macbook with core duo 2, and a 1.83GHZ processor, 80GB HD and 1GB ram would be 1100-1200. With 512MB Ram instead, 100 or so less. With only a core duo, 900 to 1000. Increase to 2GHZ and more HD it'd jump several hundred. My GF has the 1.83GHZ and 512ram with the core duo and I don't notice any difference between hers and my 2GHZ, 1GB ram MacBook with core duo 2. Except mine's black. The computer that is.

[zarly]

I've been looking at the MacBook White or Black. The black is about 400 bucks (canadian dollars, that is) more because of a couple of minor upgrades and because it's black I think. The thing that I am attracted to about them is their small size with glossy wide screen and their reputation for being designed around media type stuff. Anyone correct me if I'm wrong. But then I looked at the great big iMac's over at LD, and man oh man, those displays are pretty damn sweet. I'd never considered owning a 24 inch television let alone a 24 inch computer screen. And the computer is built right into the screen, it's a pretty cool design, though I imagine future upgrades are pretty much out of the question because of the design. Still, assuming that it would be up to snuff for about 5 years (?) it's worth consideration for my needs.

So the question is, great big glossy orgasmic display or super slim portability with the same OS and tools. Yep.

Love Zarly.

[zarly]

Except mine's black. The computer that is.

I like the black, is it a matte finish or glossy black. I haven't seen one in town anywhere here in Vic. Also, is it true they hiked the price because it's black?

[mr. coffee]

I like the black, is it a matte finish or glossy black. I haven't seen one in town anywhere here in Vic. Also, is it true they hiked the price because it's black?

I think it is a tad higher. If I recall the same model in white was a $100 less. It's matte, very nice. Does attract finger prints, but they clean easily with a soft damp cloth.

[zarly]

I think it is a tad higher. If I recall the same model in white was a $100 less. It's matte, very nice. Does attract finger prints, but they clean easily with a soft damp cloth.

Probably very similar then to the IBM T41 Thinkpad work gave me. It gets messed up from my grimy hands but I wipe it with the same stuff I use to clean the screen and it looks like new again.

[Nny]

Up until 2 years ago I hadn't touched a mac except in the labs at a local community college (I hated Mac os up to 9).  Then I started working at a school that runs all macs (with a few random PC's here and there).  Mac OS X is ridiculously better than XP for everything other than gaming.  I don't have to worry about viruses, installers, adware, spyware, defragging, or the effin' registry getting messed up on Macs.  Gaming-wise PC's are still better for the upgradability of the graphics and DirectX (not to mention the amount of games that come out).  As far as running windows on an intel based mac, it's really easy, provided you haven't partitioned your HD with more than one partition previous to using boot camp (If you don't know what that means, you probably haven't ).  All you do is download boot camp beta from the apple website and it guides you through the install.  Afterwards you just hold down the option key when you turn the computer on to pick windows or mac os.  You can also run windows from within Mac OS as people have said using parallels.

I still have a PC at home, but I have 2 iBook's and I have a G4 Powermac at work.  If I didn't enjoy computer games so much I'd have gotten a mac desktop computer already.  Apple just needs to put out a computer with a PCI express x16 slot that doesn't cost $2500..

[Thunder7]

Stop it, you are making me consider buying a mac! Nerds, miscreants, infidels! I used mac SE and classic boxes back in the early 90's but have not used them since.

One neat thing on my employees mac was the magnetic power cord, that has a high groove factor.

My current road warrior is a Dell latitude C640 2.0 GHz P4 with 1.0 GHz of RAM and many batteries. The machine is likely worth 300 on EBay if I part it out. It is stable running Xp, but is hot, and has crappy battery life when compared to my PIII notebooks. It also does not seem a hell of a lot faster even though it has three times the processor speed. I do like the machine though, those are my only quibbles.

What Mac would be comparable in performance and what price point would I be looking at? I may do some traveling and sell my home system and my laptop and buy a nice notebook with ~2 year shelf life left. I like the idea of the intel chipped ones but am not sure if the duo thing is necessary or not.

Most people never knew that the P4 (Not the P4m) processor was never, ever intended to be used in laptops. The reason why the manufacturers did it was because the desktop P4 processor was far cheaper (At the time) than the P4m (Mobile) chip. The desktop P4 processor is about 1"x1" around yet requires a heat sink at the minimum of about 4 inches around and about 3 inches high. Yes, its a real heater. Desktop power supplies have an extra connector to plug into the system board in order to supply enough voltage to drive the processor. The standard AT-X power supplies werent enough.

You'd be lucky to get an hour of operation when running on the battery and many people wondered why the hell the power supply was such a brick along with being able to boil water on the computer itself.

So- The question is- Why did Dell, IBM, HP, Compaq (And many others) do this? Simple-To save a buck.

[spinalator]

Most people never knew that the P4 (Not the P4m) processor was never, ever intended to be used in laptops.

I did not know that but it makes sense. It seemed weird that the laptops were 2.0 GHz and then they were coming out with 1.4 GHz centrino chips that seemed cooler and run the machine faster/more efficiently  than my 2.0GHz. I attributed it to memory speed or other hardware black magic.

[DredheadV2.0]

Let me reiterate what others have said:  On an Intel Mac, it's no great feat to run Windows for apps that aren't ported to Mac OS.  I have a Boot Camp installation of XP on my MacBook Pro which I used for my Garmin stuff.  I've also had to use it once for initializing my EVDO card (setup software was only made for Windows, but once set runs fine on the MacOS side of things).  I can browse the Windows directory from the Mac side, enabling me to have a shortcut on the Mac desktop to my Windows desktop.  This means I can d/l anything I need on the Windows side from the Mac side (drivers, etc.) without having to ever go online with Windows (saving me the annoyance of having to run anti-spyware or -virus software).

I have a copy of AutoCAD I'm going to install one of these days, just to see how well it runs.  Since it's gonna run on an Intel Core Duo @ 2.33Ghz, I'm sure it'll do just fine.

[Thunder7]

I did not know that but it makes sense. It seemed weird that the laptops were 2.0 GHz and then they were coming out with 1.4 GHz centrino chips that seemed cooler and run the machine faster/more efficiently  than my 2.0GHz. I attributed it to memory speed or other hardware black magic.

Glad to have cleared it up. When I have a client who has one of those portable stoves and its having hardware issues I generallly tell them its time to consider junking it. It will eventually cook itself if it hasnt by now.

[MontanaNinja]

My fiance got a Gateway laptop last summer and I'd been considering a laptop to replace my old Dell Desktop(still have it but never use it for anything but music storage).  I was so unimpressed with her laptop that I ended up buying a MacBook.

So far I've had no problems with it.  I don't game anymore so I didn't lose anything by switching to OSX.  I'm running Firefox as my primary browser and I use Safari for the couple sites I frequent that Firefox has issues with (mostly ones written for Internet Explorer).  It comes with a lot of useful software, like iPhoto, iDVD, etc.  Networking it with my PC and my fiances laptop was super simple and it works flawlessly with our printer and my Digicam.  I think I'm going to pick up an external harddrive and then ditch my Dell completely.

Talked a friend into switching from a Dell desktop to a Black MacBook.  Got his network all set up today, installed Office for Mac (what can I say, it runs even better on a Mac than a PC ) and he's lovin it.

My vote is a Mac with parallels for those Windows programs you can't live without.  Ya just can't beat it.

[chornbe]

Well do ya? I've been pondering making my next PC a Mac of some description. I've always used PC's. But most of my needs are simple, and pictures and music take up most of my hard drive. Mostly use utility type software like google earth and picasa2. I don't do any gaming really. Can anyone tell me if the macbook is a good solution for portability and user friendliness?

Thank you very much.

I have a MacBook Pro and the wife has a brand new MacBook and I have two G5 iMacs. I never looked back.

I'm a programmer on Windows by trade, and recently delved into coding on the Mac. Fan-freakin-Tastic!!

It's like a programmer's night club. My learning is going well, and I'm keeping a journal on it:

http://learntomac.blogspot.com

[kevin_stevens]

Just to be clear. When you run Window$ on a dual core Macbook in dual boot mode you're running Window$....period. In my case XP. Mapsource, Streets and Trips, and Quicken all run just as well as they do on my PC desktop. There is no compatability issue with the dual boot system. I've been told that the same is true for Parallels, but I haven't any first hand knowledge of that. I'll never buy another PC.  

And the *really* nifty configuration - now with Parallels recent release, you can run the virtual machine from the BootCamp partition instead of a disk image.  In non-geek (relatively!) terms:

You can start up the MacBook running pure Windows XP just like a Dell laptop.

OR

You can start up the MacBook in OS X, and then run "Windows in a box", at practically full speed, with all the applications, data, etc. you have installed in the "pure Windows" mode.

Whichever is convenient or appropriate at the time.  Basically, if you want games or other hardware-direct apps, you may choose to start up in Windows.  Otherwise Parallels works fine for most all typical business apps.  It itself can run full-screen, while you toggle back and forth between the Windows session and your OS X apps.  Or you can run individual Windows apps in OS X windows as if they were native Apple programs (think Windows without the desktop). Any changes or updates you make will be available in either mode.

Really, it's hard to find a downside at this point.

KeS

[DredheadV2.0]

Oh, Snap?

I missed that bit about Parallels off the BootCamp partition last time.  That is teh r0xor.  I must have it.

[spinalator]

So the parallels thing, is that similar to how the early windows was running in DOS? More of an enviroment, and not so much a complete OS? I thought those were glitchy, and twitchy?

[kevin_stevens]

So the parallels thing, is that similar to how the early windows was running in DOS? More of an enviroment, and not so much a complete OS? I thought those were glitchy, and twitchy?

No, it's similar to how VMWare and other virtual machine software works on many Windows and Unix servers today.  In fact, VMWare also has a free product for OS X, but it's still in beta, and Parallels has some better features for casual desktop use now.

Essentially it uses the capabilities of the Intel processor to create virtual machine states, and the software provides emulation of the rest of an actual computer (screen IO, keyboard, drives, etc.). You can then install any OS onto that "virtual" machine that you wish.  VMWare servers are nothing but a minimal OS (hypervisor) and multiple VM sessions.

The downside is that virtual machines emulated are generally pretty vanilla boxes, without hardware acceleration for video, and obviously without direct hardware access.  That makes them poor choices for gaming and some other high-end graphics apps like dedicated CAD.  But for standard office automation stuff they're great.  The Parallels VM under OS X, running XP, actually benchmarks FASTER than XP booted natively, simply because it emulates a simpler Pentium chip rather than the native Duo.  The other downside is that you're obviously sharing memory/CPU with whatever other OS' you're running at the time (OS X at a minimum), so you can run into memory constraints if you don't plan for it.

There is a great antipathy to VM in the Mac world, because previous products had to deal with actually translating CPU instructions from the native PowerPC processor to emulate an Intel chip.  This is *always* going to be horribly slow, no matter what they tell you, and it was just barely tolerable.  That was my great interest in the Intel Macs, that the VM performance would improve tenfold.

The very neat feature of Parallels is this ability to boot the BootCamp partition - you don't have to set up a separate disk image to run it, and all your applications and data are in one place.  I don't know how they do it without running into the Windows anti-piracy authentication, since the hardware in the virtual machine is quite different than the actual MacBook, but it does in fact work (I suspect they are using hardware profiles, but haven't delved into it).

KeS

[MontanaNinja]

Any idea how much disk space parallels and XP takes up?  BootCamp claims 10GB of free hard drive space is needed.  I'm guessing parallels takes up about the same?  

Bootcamp may win out because its free and the only reason I'm thinking of doing this is to run Microsoft Streets/Trips and possibly one or two windows only programs.

[kevin_stevens]

Any idea how much disk space parallels and XP takes up?  BootCamp claims 10GB of free hard drive space is needed.  I'm guessing parallels takes up about the same?  

Bootcamp may win out because its free and the only reason I'm thinking of doing this is to run Microsoft Streets/Trips and possibly one or two windows only programs.

The VM capability itself takes almost no space.  It's the disk partitions or images needed to host the guest OS - so that is dependent on what you want to run.  BootCamp saying 10GB is a number that guarantees a successful installation of XP (its targeted guest OS).

That's why the Parallels ability to share the BootCamp partition is great - you don't have to dedicated another 6-10GB to a disk image for another copy of XP.

To more directly answer your question, when a disk partition is used, it's whatever size you make it.  Most of the disk images (soft partitions) are sparse; that is, you can set them up as 10GB or so, but they only actually occupy the amount of space of the data stored in them.

VMware has a free beta of their product, if price is critical to you (remember you have to buy a Windows license if you want to run that OS).  Your application is actually better suited for a VM product, as for light occasional use you generally would prefer not to reboot to use it.

Note that my MacBook (and the PowerBook before it) never shuts down, so a reboot is a significant imposition on my workflow.  Apple laptops actually sleep and wake reliably and quickly, and stay asleep for days on minimal power.  It can change the way you use a computer - I laugh at the guys at work (I'm one of them) carrying open Windows laptops around because we're afraid to shut them down without losing data or failing to wake.

KeS

[DredheadV2.0]

The VM capability itself takes almost no space.  It's the disk partitions or images needed to host the guest OS - so that is dependent on what you want to run.  BootCamp saying 10GB is a number that guarantees a successful installation of XP (its targeted guest OS).

That's why the Parallels ability to share the BootCamp partition is great - you don't have to dedicated another 6-10GB to a disk image for another copy of XP.

To more directly answer your question, when a disk partition is used, it's whatever size you make it.  Most of the disk images (soft partitions) are sparse; that is, you can set them up as 10GB or so, but they only actually occupy the amount of space of the data stored in them.

VMware has a free beta of their product, if price is critical to you (remember you have to buy a Windows license if you want to run that OS).  Your application is actually better suited for a VM product, as for light occasional use you generally would prefer not to reboot to use it.

Note that my MacBook (and the PowerBook before it) never shuts down, so a reboot is a significant imposition on my workflow.  Apple laptops actually sleep and wake reliably and quickly, and stay asleep for days on minimal power.  It can change the way you use a computer - I laugh at the guys at work (I'm one of them) carrying open Windows laptops around because we're afraid to shut them down without losing data or failing to wake.

KeS

My macbook pro often fails to wake properly.  I think it has something to do with going to sleep while connected to a network, while Firefox is open, or both.  Hard restart (power button for 5 seconds) is the only cure.  It may also have something to do with requiring a password to wake, as sometimes I get the password box briefly in the center of the screen, then it disappears.  Striking any key only produces a beep.

Any suggestions on this are welcome, but hopefully I can track it down myself, soon.

[kevin_stevens]

Mine requires password, always has Firefox running (so I can refresh ST.N, SB.N, and Gixxer.com!), and almost always has either wireless or wired networking active.  Hope that helps.

KeS

[Thunder7]

So the parallels thing, is that similar to how the early windows was running in DOS? More of an enviroment, and not so much a complete OS? I thought those were glitchy, and twitchy?

The early versions of WinDOZE were nothing more than a graphical shell placed "over" DOS.

[ST1300Rider]

And the *really* nifty configuration - now with Parallels recent release, you can run the virtual machine from the BootCamp partition instead of a disk image.

The earlier version of Parallels I demo'd didn't do this. I just downloaded the latest demo and it works as advertised......Sweet. Any idea on how to get around the Windows re-activation issues? I figure there must be a way...Window is only installed on a single piece of hardware.

[kevin_stevens]

The earlier version of Parallels I demo'd didn't do this. I just downloaded the latest demo and it works as advertised......Sweet. Any idea on how to get around the Windows re-activation issues? I figure there must be a way...Window is only installed on a single piece of hardware.

You only have to reactivate the first time you run it.  If M$ locks you out just call and complain, they'll renew it.  This is about the fifth machine I've had this XP license on (no, not concurrently).

KeS

[ST1300Rider]

I figured that...but will the boot camp version still work as well, with the new Parallels activation?

[kevin_stevens]

Yes.

KeS

[spinalator]

Well as much as I hate to admit it, I bought a macbook pro. I had to sell 4 windows machines to pay for it, and had sell myself for buttsex. I almost always have regrets when i do that, but it was worth it. Running parallels and XP, I am happy. So there.

[mr. coffee]

Where do guys get your copies of Windows OS for Parallaels? I just got Parallels but forgot the most important part - you need Windows OS to run inside Parallels to use Windows apps. Doh! Of course.

[Nny]

I have an OEM copy my grandpa gave me.  You can get them for pretty cheap from places like Frys and Newegg.  The trick with buying at Fry's is that you have to go into the hardware components section and buy a piece of hardware (could be just a few screws or something) and ask the person at the podium there for an OEM copy of Windows.  The OEM copies don't have a box, but they have everything else pretty much.  I don't know about you, but I throw the boxes away anyhow.  

[vitaminC]

I have an OEM copy my grandpa gave me.  You can get them for pretty cheap from places like Frys and Newegg.  The trick with buying at Fry's is that you have to go into the hardware components section and buy a piece of hardware (could be just a few screws or something) and ask the person at the podium there for an OEM copy of Windows.  The OEM copies don't have a box, but they have everything else pretty much.  I don't know about you, but I throw the boxes away anyhow.  

Thanks for the tip! I need to pick that up soon...

[kevin_stevens]

I work in the IT field, and have several personal licenses floating around.  Note that for the *media* to do the install, you need XP Service Pack 2, you can't use an original XP CD.  And, valid license keys for the original XP media won't work with the SP2 media version, which *should* be @$%#$^% illegal but Microsoft gets away with somehow.  So be careful that you have what you need before beginning the install.

KeS

[mr. coffee]

I work in the IT field, and have several personal licenses floating around.  Note that for the *media* to do the install, you need XP Service Pack 2, you can't use an original XP CD.  And, valid license keys for the original XP media won't work with the SP2 media version, which *should* be @$%#$^% illegal but Microsoft gets away with somehow.  So be careful that you have what you need before beginning the install.

KeS

Not sure I follow. What is media in reference to?

[Nny]

Not sure I follow. What is media in reference to?

When he says "Media" he's talking about the install CD / DVD.

Basically it goes like this:

If you have an original XP disc it won't work when trying to install it on the Apple computers.  Don't know why myself, but I have found it to be true.  You need one that is XP SP2.  There are ways to slipstream SP2 though from an original XP disc so if you have an old XP disc lying around do a google search for Windows slip streaming and you should be able to come up with instructions somewhere on how to make one.

[kevin_stevens]

When he says "Media" he's talking about the install CD / DVD.

Basically it goes like this:

If you have an original XP disc it won't work when trying to install it on the Apple computers.  Don't know why myself, but I have found it to be true.  You need one that is XP SP2.  There are ways to slipstream SP2 though from an original XP disc so if you have an old XP disc lying around do a google search for Windows slip streaming and you should be able to come up with instructions somewhere on how to make one.

Thanks for clarifying.  The reason, BTW, is that some of the newer components in the MacBooks require drivers that weren't included in XP until SP2.  There are some other newer non-Apple machines that have the same constraint.

KeS

[spinalator]

I slipstreamed my legit copy of 2002 sp1 in to SP2 and the stupid thing would not take the lic key, so I am using my not as legit install and it works fine. I will phone and get Microsoft to help me switch it over later when I dont hate them anymore.

[kevin_stevens]

I slipstreamed my legit copy of 2002 sp1 in to SP2 and the stupid thing would not take the lic key, so I am using my not as legit install and it works fine. I will phone and get Microsoft to help me switch it over later when I dont hate them anymore.

Good luck with that.  

That was my complaint, too.  I have a perfectly legal XP Pro license key that came with my original XP CD.  Just because the product is so damned broken that they had to re-release a patched version on CD (SP2) is no reason to invalidate my license!  It's the same product (Windows XP Professional).

KeS

[Nny]

Hmm..  That's odd I could have sworn I've used an original CD and slip streamed and the key worked.   Sorry about that.

[mr. coffee]

Hey one Parallels question...

I have a windows app that designs websites and uploads them via a built in FTP. Will I have any issues using the internet in Parallels with windows apps?

[ST1300Rider]

Hey one Parallels question...

I have a windows app that designs websites and uploads them via a built in FTP. Will I have any issues using the internet in Parallels with windows apps?

Shouldn't have any issues. I've accessed the 'net multiple times with a Parallels/WinXP setup. Your FTP client just has to be connected. Running in Parallels, Windows doesn't even know it's a "kept OS".  

[Mastros2]

I'm on my sister-in-law's macbook now.  It will be my next computer.

While looking at them in CompUSA (I think), I fell in love with how easy all the applications were to operate.  My wife and I were amazed how easy the mac OS was to navigate through.  I was a long time PC owner (just out of convienance really) and now won't buy another pc.  Not to say that the Mac os is trouble-free but less troubling than the pc's I've owned.

Also, the keyboard is set up perfectly for me.  It might not make be a better speller but the keys are spaced just right, not too close.  Also, the screen is crisp/clear.  Start-up is fast, good memory and it's great for windows now with the boot.

With all the programs that are standard, the Macbook is a better buy than a PC with similar programs/software.  Just my $.02

[quagmire]

I'm looking at the 13" white macbook for lightweight and small size perfect for bike travel.  My only concern is with the small size is the keyboard built for tiny little hands, or can it be used by sausage fingered people like me?  

[kevin_stevens]

It's normal sized but has an odd action to it.  Stop by an Apple store and check it out.  Didn't bother me but some people have commented/complained about it.

KeS

[spinalator]

I did not like it, and like the 15 inch one better, but my stupid space bar squeaks and that irritates me. so i become sad inside where my heart is and stuff.

[quagmire]

Took a look at the macbook tonight.  It looks decent and I could use the keyboard decently.  One question I forgot to ask the saleskid, can you hook up a full size keyboard to it when at home.  My wifes laptop has a plug (ps2 I think) on the back that I just plug in my keyboard.  I think I'm gonna pull the trigger on one soon.  Still flip-flopping between this at $1k and the Dell 1501 for $550. Both have about the same hardware, but the mac is smaller and lighter, which is what I am looking for, but the $450 price difference is hard to miss.  I currently only have windoze software, but I guess I can run that on the mac by using bootcamp, or from within mac os.  Decisions, decisions...  

[kevin_stevens]

Took a look at the macbook tonight.  It looks decent and I could use the keyboard decently.  One question I forgot to ask the saleskid, can you hook up a full size keyboard to it when at home.  My wifes laptop has a plug (ps2 I think) on the back that I just plug in my keyboard.  I think I'm gonna pull the trigger on one soon.  Still flip-flopping between this at $1k and the Dell 1501 for $550. Both have about the same hardware, but the mac is smaller and lighter, which is what I am looking for, but the $450 price difference is hard to miss.  I currently only have windoze software, but I guess I can run that on the mac by using bootcamp, or from within mac os.  Decisions, decisions...  

Sure, any USB keyboard or mouse works fine.  Be sure you're comparing apples to, er, Apples spec-wise, the MacBook shouldn't be nearly that much of a premium for equivalent hardware.  That Dell comes with 802.11n, webcam, same speed optical drive, etc.?

KeS

[quagmire]

They are not apples to apples.  The Macbook is smaller and does have a webcam which I can't see using right now, but I might in the future.  The Dell is cheaper and heavier/larger, but they both have about the same hardware profiles.  The Dell is also $300 less than usual right now, so at regular prices the money is similar as well.  Going to also compare the macbook to the smaller more $$$ 1405 dell before I make my final decision.  

[nanbil]

I have a powerbook pro and love it.  Best computer on the market.

[quagmire]

Hmmn, everyone I talk to keeps crapping on the mac.  I have never owned a mac and the last one I used was in 1988/89 so it's been awhile.  I also don't really have any issues with Win XP.  I have now found comparable PC/windoze based machines in price/size/weight and hardware, why would I go with a mac when the rest of the world seems to think another PC is the way to go?  I'm not bashing them, I actually want to get one, but not knowing a great deal about macs I'm not convinced of the huge advantage.  Sell me!  

[ST1300Rider]

I'm not bashing them, I actually want to get one, but not knowing a great deal about macs I'm not convinced of the huge advantage.  Sell me!  

OS X blows XP out of the water in terms of performance and security. To me, not having to run Norton or it's ilk monthly to maintain system standards/security is worth any downsides. And then there's the whole virus/spyware thing. But, most office apps run better in XP on a PC than under Parallels. However if you dual boot XP, there are some benchmark tests out there that show Win. apps (some) running faster under the stripped down XP install Boot Camp delivers. The big thing is, after a couple of decades of PC ownership I find that the Mac works more like I think. I'll never go back......

[quagmire]

Hmmn... Interesting.  

[Nny]

Quag, what are you planning on using it for?  What kind of apps do you need to run?

[denny]

Sell me!  

I've never had any problem with my Powerbook.    Well except the time I spilled a glass of wine on it.
The result of that was inability to access all of the data on the drive.  I was able to boot from an external firewire drive
(something windows can't do easily)  and use some command line Unix utilities to completely recover everything.

I am very lazy about any routine maintenance etc. But still it just keeps on going.  My other half uses a PC.
I still spend time maintaining her machine, but I just use mine, unless I spill something on it.

[quagmire]

Quag, what are you planning on using it for?  What kind of apps do you need to run?

Well, right now I'm using my new macbook for typing this!    What I "intend" to do with it is access the web for info/email while traveling (by bike or other) storing photos, music and general low-end use.  I just wanted something small, light and with decent battery life for taking along on bike trips.  Now I will have some access to email and maps, weather conditions etc. while on the road.  I can also upload photos from my camera and shitcan the junk.   It will also be nice to keep a more detailed log than I usually do with my written journal.  I usually can't read half of what I write in my journal when I get home and by then I have no idea what took place.  

Loving my new mac!  

[DredheadV2.0]

 I just wanted something small, light and with decent battery life for taking along on bike trips.  Now I will have some access to email and maps, weather conditions etc. while on the road.

Hah!  Good.

Now, take ye the Next Step, if you truly want to post from the road.

[quagmire]

Ha, ha, ha...  Using free hotel wireless will be an "adventure" for me for now.  

[vitaminC]

Since I plan to keep mine for a while, and don't want it to get beat up like the last one, I just picked up one of these cases tonight. Very nicely made and doesn't interfere with the functionality at all.  

[quagmire]

I actually saw that case when I was at the apple store.  If it came in purple I would be all over it!  Besides, I figure scratches will give it "character" just like my travel bike.  

[MontanaNinja]

I use a Neoprene case, by InCase IIRC, when I'm transporting the MacBook.  The only thing protecting it during use is the UM-Grizzlies Sticker and Big Sky Brewing Decal  

[quagmire]

I haven't tried bootcamp yet as I am still getting to know mac osx, and was wondering about mapping software.  I currently use MS streets and trips, and I like it a lot.  Is there anything similar out there for mac, or should I just get bootcamp up and running and install all my windows based applications?  Thanks.

[mr. coffee]

I haven't tried bootcamp yet as I am still getting to know mac osx, and was wondering about mapping software.  I currently use MS streets and trips, and I like it a lot.  Is there anything similar out there for mac, or should I just get bootcamp up and running and install all my windows based applications?  Thanks.

If you're on a Intel Mac you'd want Parallels not Bootcamp. But you'll need a full versoin copy of Windows OS with SP2 as well to run windows apps. I'm in the market for a copy of Windows OS. Anyone want to go in on it?

[vitaminC]

If you're on a Intel Mac you'd want Parallels not Bootcamp. But you'll need a full versoin copy of Windows OS with SP2 as well to run windows apps. I'm in the market for a copy of Windows OS. Anyone want to go in on it?

From reading the manual ( ) it seems that Parallels will work with any flavor of XP, but you will need SP2 in order to get bootcamp going. There is much discussion around the web about "slip streaming" SP0 or SP1 up to SP2.

[mr. coffee]

From reading the manual ( ) it seems that Parallels will work with any flavor of XP, but you will need SP2 in order to get bootcamp going. There is much discussion around the web about "slip streaming" SP0 or SP1 up to SP2.

Yup. A full version of XP OS with SP2 is required to run parallels. Not cheap either, by the time you pay for parallels and XP OS.

[Sorthum]

All right-- I've gotten this question a lot, given the nature of what I do for a living, so I figure I'll write something up.

My computing background:  I'm a systems administrator for a university.  Until about a year ago I was a strictly Windows user, then started using a MacBook for my mobile machine, and running FreeBSD on my desktop, to the point where I don't touch Windows boxes anymore-- for the sake of argument, we're going to pretend the last machine doesn't really exist and restrict this to Mac versus Windows.

Politics of it aside, on technical merit the best advice I can give to someone without any driving urge to make a change is "go with what you're used to."  Mac has really come a long way over the years, and for my purposes, it serves admirably.

Mac Pros: They're slick, stable, and polished.  At the moment, Windows Vista is nowhere near ready for daily use (and likely won't be until at least Service Pack 1), while Windows XP is almost eight years old, so as technology has marched on, XP has failed to really capitalize on recent advances.  Net result, the Windows world is in a bit of limbo at the moment.  Meanwhile, MacOS has been updated repeatedly since its inception, and I don't have too many complaints about it.  Mac also has a certain aesthetic value that I've found hard to match with any other vendor-- they have a very organic look to them, and they're elegantly designed.  They have a solid feel to them that most vendors miss the mark on.  Their battery life is awesome, they tend to work out of the box, and they come with a lot of software-- you don't have to run around purchasing all kinds of stuff to write letters, edit photos or video, or surf the web.

Mac Cons: Compatibility-- they're still less than 10% of the market, so a lot of companies (Garmin, I'm looking at you) haven't gotten around to supporting MacOS.  The commercial factor:  On Windows, there's almost always a free utility to do what you need to get done.  On MacOS, the way they tend to view the world is "Yes, buy this program."  There are free utilities in MacLand, but they often require a working knowledge of Unix to get going, which needless to say, doesn't apply to most people who are asking this question!  Unfortunately, this boils down to "you can expect to pay more for software on a Mac."  The lack of a right mouse button can be annoying as well.  Finally, MacOS as a whole is fantastic if you want to browse the web, send email, upload photos, or write the Great American Novel.  For applications past this (GPS syncing, doing network diagnostics, filesharing, or anything else that's a bit off the beaten path for your average front-office secretary), prepare to encounter frustrations.

As far as price for the system itself goes, they're about even.  You CAN get budget laptops for $500, but when you do an apples-to-apples comparison (Bluetooth, drive size, processor type, various ports) Mac has finally become cost competitive.  Their market is not now, nor has it ever been the bargain-basement shopper.  

A lot of hype has been made about the ability to dual boot Windows with MacOS, but technically the feature is still in beta, which means "Don't blame us if it completely pooches your system," so I'm not going to consider it an option at the moment.

Anyone have anything further?   I'll gladly answer further questions, or shut up and go away if y'all would prefer. ;-)

[ST1300Rider]

While the oem Apple mouse does not have a right button, the functionality is there. My Logitech bluetooth travel mouse has all the functionality on my Macbook as it does on an Windows unit. The right mouse button function is there on the track pad as well, just tap with two fingers.  

[bizarro]

While the oem Apple mouse does not have a right button, the functionality is there. My Logitech bluetooth travel mouse has all the functionality on my Macbook as it does on an Windows unit. The right mouse button function is there on the track pad as well, just tap with two fingers.  

Yep, I've been using a two-button mouse for several years.  

[hobbes]

While the oem Apple mouse does not have a right button, the functionality is there. My Logitech bluetooth travel mouse has all the functionality on my Macbook as it does on an Windows unit. The right mouse button function is there on the track pad as well, just tap with two fingers.  

All OEM external mice with Macs have left and rich click, 360 degree scroll ball with center click, and a side click system that is programmable.

Only their laptops dont have the right click, and that feature is accessable via option+click.

[kevin_stevens]

All OEM external mice with Macs have left and rich click, 360 degree scroll ball with center click, and a side click system that is programmable.

Only their laptops dont have the right click, and that feature is accessable via option+click.

All the recent laptops (original MacBook and later) have a trackpad right-click option as well - if you have two fingers on the pad a click is interpreted as right-click.  Works very well, under Windows, too.  This was one of my big complaints with earlier laptops.

KeS

[ST1300Rider]

All the recent laptops (original MacBook and later) have a trackpad right-click option as well - if you have two fingers on the pad a click is interpreted as right-click.  Works very well, under Windows, too.  This was one of my big complaints with earlier laptops.

KeS

You don't even need to use the click bar....for anything. One tap = left click, tap with two fingers = right click, slide two fingers = scroll, tap twice and hold on the second tap, slide finger to select text or drag item, tap once more to release.

[bizarro]

I just like attaching a USB two-button mouse.

Speaking of weird things, does anyone here use mouse gestures? A good friend of mine works at Amazon in webdev and she uses them all the time. I watched her using them once and all I kept thinking of was Johnny Mnemonic. That's some voodoo right there.  

[kevin_stevens]

You don't even need to use the click bar....for anything. One tap = left click, tap with two fingers = right click, slide two fingers = scroll, tap twice and hold on the second tap, slide finger to select text or drag item, tap once more to release.

Yes, you're right - but I absolutely loathe "tap to click" on all computers/OSes, so it didn't enter my mind.  Sorry.

KeS

[Sorthum]

I also have issue with the idea of "Here's a laptop that, fully tricked out, can cost upwards of 3K.  Now, you're going to have to go out and buy an external mouse to use it comfortably."

[DredheadV2.0]

I also have issue with the idea of "Here's a laptop that, fully tricked out, can cost upwards of 3K.  Now, you're going to have to go out and buy an external mouse to use it comfortably."

Hrm.  I like the two-finger trackpad approach, myself.  Having to use my GF's Thinkpad with all the damn buttons or even that damn joystick is far more irritating than the two-week learning curve to get comfortable with the Mac's approach.  Now it's second nature, and I don't miss having a second button at all.  In fact, I don't use the button 90% of the time.  If I'm doing something that requires precision cursor work - graphics or music editing - then I'm not using the trackpad on a laptop regardless of manufacture.  I'm gonna use the trackball.

[Nny]

I guess I have an advantage on the left click stuff because I'm left handed.  Cntrl + click is really easy for me on my iBook.  I just hit it with my index finger and use my thumb for the button.  Playing with the trackpad with my right hand, I can do the same thing pretty comfortably, but it would take some getting used to.  

I hate tap to click as well because a lot of the time I move too quickly and it thinks I'm tapping instead of moving.

[DredheadV2.0]

I hate tap to click as well because a lot of the time I move too quickly and it thinks I'm tapping instead of moving.

That's coz you're like half my age or something, and still have youth's Ninja-Like Reflexes(tm) whereas I sometimes get distracted by the wee pointy cursor and just wiggle it back and forth across the screen and laugh quietly to myself.

[Thunder7]

*snip*

Anyone have anything further?   I'll gladly answer further questions, or shut up and go away if y'all would prefer. ;-)

Short version- been doing various kinds of PC/WinDOZE support for about 13 years. Thats why I own a MAC.