I can't agree with that statement. About a year ago I upgraded from WIN 2000 to WIN XP (Home). The Win2000 was far better than any of the prior versions of Win but it still crashed more than it should have, esp. as I don't run anything complex on my system. WIN XP Home isn't the worst but it is much worse the 2000 in terms of reliability and operational issues. And the file organization is just bizarro, particularly when you do an upgrade install of the OS. Without Picassa I would be completely lost in terms of finding my photos which are filed all over the system. I don't know if Vista is worth buying but I'll bet it is a nonissue for most people as most of the older systems have insufficient memory for the "upgrade".

You never hear Mac users complain about random crashes when browsing the net, editing docs, etc., not to mention the ease of setting things up.

Repeating that old maxim (with my best Scottish accent ): Fool me once, jokes on you. Fool me twice...

It doesn't sound like you've done work with complex spreadsheets, which often use embedded data from other spreadsheets or documents. I've seen lots of documents, for example, lose the formatting and/or presentation of embedded data from other sources that work fine in Office.

Again, for basic things, you are correct that math is math -- but don't fool yourself into thinking that complex documents will work all the time -- because they won't.

Steve

I really dont want to draw this out...but the insinuation that I've made "laughable comments" and that "I'm fooling myself" warrants justifying my comments.

I work with some extremely complex documents, I know what I'm talking about. Like I said, with the exception of VB script, you can accomplish the same things with solutions other than Microsoft Office (often, if not always with free opensource solutions). The suggestion that MS Office is the only capable solution is frankly demonstrative of a lack of experience or familiarity with anything outside of MS Office.

I'll admit to being somewhat fanatical about opensource software, but I also admit to being an MCSE and working (though in a capacity very different from an MCSE-like role) on a major software development for a fortune 15 company that is deeply in bed with Microsoft. I also have friends and family that are not geeks. In other words, I have a high level exposure to both sides of the fence and I know when an OS solution is a valid replacement for a typical end user and when its not. I'm not sitting here suggesting that anyone downloads opendarwin, but I am saying that (again with the exception of VB Script) there are plenty open solutions that even advanced users would find compelling in comparison to MS Office.

On the Dell Site for that model, it costs $375 to go up to 2.16 ghz (from 1.73ghz). If you could increase your 2.0ghz processor to 2.33ghz to match the MBP, I'm guessing that that is how much it would cost. Just from that alone, your cost argument goes out the window.

The MBP also has 256mb of video memory, but unlike the Dell, all of that is dedicated video memory. On the Dell 128 is video memory and the other half is shared with system memory (ATI Mobility Radeon X1400 HyperMemory). In other tests I've read, the ATI X1600 on the MPB is suppose to be about twice as fast as the ATI X1400.

Part of the price difference can be made up by purchasing from Amazon with the $150 rebate, free shipping (same as Dell) and no tax (for most places).

Not to pick nits, but your Dell also doesn't have a Backlit Keyboard, Magsafe power connector, remote control and 10ft media interface. How much is that worth?

The dimensions on the E1705 are approx 15.5" x 11.3" x 1.6" = 280 cubic inches, the MBP is 15.4" x 10.4" x 1.0" = 160 cubic inches. The Dell is more than 40% bigger.

The Dell weighs approx. 8lbs, the MBP approx. 7lbs (6.8), ~13% heavier.

In addition, the Dell E1705 has aped some design elements and color scheme from the Powerbook G4 (Titanium Powerbook).

I wouldn't pay that much since I have the 2.0 Ghz (T7200) not the 1.73 Ghz.
That's something I need to find more about. I don't know if the 128 is shared or dedicated. I need to look it up. I couldn't find the MBP info in the Apple Store to see what it has inside.

Dell sends me all kinds of discounts that lower the price too, so I don't see anything being made up.

A bluetooth remote control was included in our purchase. Works great! The rest of that doesn't matter to us.
That's nice to know but is irrelevant to my point.

Going through your post the only differences I see is 1. the processor is slightly less Ghz than the MBP (Dell's site says $175 to upgrade to 2.3 Ghz). 2. the video card (which I am unaware of the difference in price between x1400 and x 1600). These may or may not be equal to the $449 difference I noted, but I'm still doubting that, and the other $300 difference in price we paid for this laptop several months ago. That's a big difference to overcome with two small changes. Regardless, this computer is capable of doing just about anything the MBP can, and do it for a bit less.

Even if they cost the same there's still the cost of getting Mac versions of all our expensive software and learning how to use them. There's still no reason to do that when everything is working fine with what we have.

I had both Win 2000 and XP on fresh installs and I have not had any problems like yours on either platform. They have been rock solid for me. They fundamentally the same OS, better known as Win NT 5.0 and 5.1. That is all they are. XP is Win 2K with a few doo dads and some additionss, many of them visual.

I do remember having a similar issue on upgrading Win XP Home to Pro. I suspect your issues are to go with upgrading the OS, which is generally not a recommended path to begin with. You're kind of asking for trouble doing that.

But XP and Mac - nothing between them in terms of fundamental stability on a consumer. Its just a matter which one you find prettier or which hardware you like. I dont buy into these cult of MS or cult of Apple stuff anymore. Its all hype.

The Mac just works correctly, another example:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=665597

I have had my MacBook Pro for right at 8 months now and though there were some up and down times, it has overall served me very well.

I suggest reading this if you are serious about switching. It gives a realistic view of what it is like to switch and some hurdles you will have to overcome.

For me, the reason to switch was simple, ease of use and ease of travel. My laptop bag is extreme small and fits the MBP like a glove, which is perfect since most of my flights are day trips to clients. The battery lasts an entire meeting, even under heavy use, and I can run all of my essential applications at the same time without worrying about memory (granted, I upgraded the RAM).

When I plug it into an external monitor I have no problems, it hooks directly up to a projector with no problem, and for the most part, it just works.

What experiences have people had using Citrix on a Mac OS machine.

My Thinkpad died the other day and I'm considering returning to Apple...

I've used it for a couple of years for remote working on a Powerbook G4. No real issues except that the display is sometimes slightly distorted (not in a serious way but may be an issue if you're using design applications and the like). Otherwise the speed and performance have always been more than acceptable.

Consider looking at Asus...

http://usa.asus.com/

Their machines won't run OS X very well.

depends on how you want to look at it.....they are the "odm" for apple

small hair to split. They're one of about ten manufacturers Apple uses.

its funny. Mac PC debates always get so heated! I won both. And love them both equally. :-)