laptop suggestions

[shadowgrin]

I doubt the statistic.
"People can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that"

[puttincomputers]

the marketshare stat comes from http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/04/22/ ... index.html which just happens to be from the same link posted above. lol

Only about 7.4 percent of computer users work on Macs, according to Gartner, a technology research firm.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12537279/

Macs no longer immune to viruses, experts say
4/30/2006

http://www.wholly-mac.com/mac-virus.html
History of Mac Viruses

[George7]

If you like to have a change from macs maybe try an alienware laptop for gaming. Otherwise sticking into a top mac and having dual OS will be the best for you

[Doobie]

Well I have 4,000 songs and counting.
I have been downloading shows and movies.
I'd like a laptop that can play WOW and starcraft 2, maybe nba 2k11 and Diablo 3 when they come out.

I guess a 200 gb hard drive? Not sure.

multi-tasking, sometimes this laptop freezes up while I'm listening to music on itunes, using Ichat and have 3/4 tabs open in Safari. My current macbook also slows down tremendously when I open itunes and do other things.

[George7]

For a Mac, MacBook Pro 15" should be then great for you.
With the 2,53 i5 processor it costs 2.000$(in your limits)

As for a pc,alienware m15x would be great,with around the same money,but with better specifications

[Oznogrd]

the reason macs dont get hit with as many viruses is because there are fewer macs around. which systems would a bad guy go after? Microsoft pcs with 92.6% of marketshare or Apple with 7.4%?

Exactly my point. The reason there's really only a few documented mac viruses is there's not enough Macs to attack. Yes they can still get them, but the odds are slim if you're a semi intelligent computer user. Mac did make a mistake saying they were immune (since they're not as long the virus is programmed in language to get Macs), but it is much less likely you will be targeted.

Its sorta like a condom: It helps but its not a guarantee and most people dont wanna use them anyway.

Good god i just compared a mac to a condom, i need a life

[Laxation]

If you aren't a designer, save your $ and get a PC. Macs are fucking retarded.
But if you feel ok paying an extra thousand bucks to have a laptop that looks good, then go right ahead.

[shadowgrin]

But a Mac will make Doobie look cool!
And a Big Mac will make Doobie full.

[Doobie]

Lax I'll look at all options, depends on what happens from now till then. I am going to take a photography class in college so I might need to learn to edit things...

Anyways I still have this mac, so I might just keep this and use it for certain things, and my other laptop for everything else. That's always an option.

[Andrew]

Exactly my point. The reason there's really only a few documented mac viruses is there's not enough Macs to attack. Yes they can still get them, but the odds are slim if you're a semi intelligent computer user. Mac did make a mistake saying they were immune (since they're not as long the virus is programmed in language to get Macs), but it is much less likely you will be targeted.

Agreed. That last line is something Mac users seem to like to trumpet though, throwing a fanboy fit when you bring up the market share because it dares to suggest that Macs aren't a completely perfect and flawless perfect, like anything else a human being has invented.

[benji]

Macs' were notorious for horrific viruses before they switched to that Unix base with OS X.

Frankly the security bonus on a Mac isn't worth the cost of the overpriced hardware when Linux is free and offers even better security. And especially since you can run Windows without ever getting a virus if you aren't an idiot. More so with 7 and Vista where they started punishing you for not being an idiot. At this point it's choosing between 96%, 98% and 99% bulletproofness and shouldn't be why people are choosing OSes.

And all of those are not reasons to choose certain hardware.

[Andrew]

For the computer literate, absolutely. For others, "Don't click on that, it's a scam" is too taxing to learn and employ.

[J@3]

I think Ben's drastically underestimating the magic of Apple.

[benji]

[cyanide]

If you aren't a designer, save your $ and get a PC. Macs are fucking retarded.

It's not limited to designers as PCs provide the exact same tools and applications. Macs are overpriced, but they're excellent products and software.

the marketshare stat comes from http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/04/22/ ... index.html which just happens to be from the same link posted above. lol

...

Talk about paranoia over rare worms.

the reason macs dont get hit with as many viruses is because there are fewer macs around. which systems would a bad guy go after? Microsoft pcs with 92.6% of marketshare or Apple with 7.4%?

I don't buy the security through obscurity argument. Isn't a 7.4% share enough to merit at least one dangerously malicious virus? I can't be arsed to pull up the article, but the guy who wrote a Mac worm admitted that it was difficult to penetrate through that Unix layer.

[Andrew]

I was waiting for your post, cy.

I wouldn't say that's the only reason Macs are safer when it comes to infections, but if you're going for widespread damage, wouldn't it make sense to target the systems with a large share of their market? It may be oversimplifying things to say "Macs don't get viruses because not enough people use them for people to go to the trouble", but it's a factor nevertheless.

[shadowgrin]

It's not limited to designers as PCs provide the exact same tools and applications. Macs are overpriced, but they're excellent products and software.

Same software that can be installed in a PC or be similar to other software that does the same thing effectively in a PC?

[Laxation]

If you aren't a designer, save your $ and get a PC. Macs are fucking retarded.

It's not limited to designers as PCs provide the exact same tools and applications. Macs are overpriced, but they're excellent products and software.

I am very aware Macs might have good programs, and they also do things other run Adobe. But so does a PC. For $1000 less..

[NovU]

Bill Gates vs Steven Jobs? Typical debate.

My personal preferance... Always been PC it is. Macs are for the girls that are willing to overpay for the looks. Why not grab a PC with nicer video card and specs instead.

[shadowgrin]

omg you just called cyanide gay!

CANUCK FIGHT!!!

[NovU]

PROOF?

phpBB [video]

[benji]

I don't get it. Macs also have porn.

[cyanide]

I was waiting for your post, cy.

Aw shucks, how thoughtful

I wouldn't say that's the only reason Macs are safer when it comes to infections, but if you're going for widespread damage, wouldn't it make sense to target the systems with a large share of their market?

Sure it does make sense. But there were over 700 000 Windows viruses last year alone and somehow, given the number of Mac bashers and growing popularity of Macs, there's only a single rare worm out in the wild?

Same software that can be installed in a PC or be similar to other software that does the same thing effectively in a PC?

You mean superior software, many of which are free?

I am very aware Macs might have good programs, and they also do things other run Adobe. But so does a PC. For $1000 less..

I'm aware of the price differences. I work on both environments and I find OS X to be significantly better for productivity, and I'll gladly pay the premium. Each to his own.

[Andrew]

Sure it does make sense. But there were over 700 000 Windows viruses last year alone and somehow, given the number of Mac bashers and growing popularity of Macs, there's only a single rare worm out in the wild?

They are growing in popularity but they still make up less than 10% of the market, so anyone going for widespread chaos is still going to target PCs. Like I said, that's not to say Macs don't have security advantages on top of that, that's just a contributing factor and one worth noting since Mac users do seem to trumpet the "Macs are immune" line, which isn't entirely true.

Although it's better than the argument I once saw from a Mac user that claimed they preferred Macs as they didn't want to support a big heartless corporation like Microsoft (as opposed to Apple who are apparently a struggling little backyard business; here's hoping they make it).

[cyanide]

They are growing in popularity but they still make up less than 10% of the market, so anyone going for widespread chaos is still going to target PCs. Like I said, that's not to say Macs don't have security advantages on top of that, that's just a contributing factor and one worth noting since Mac users do seem to trumpet the "Macs are immune" line, which isn't entirely true.

Sorry, the less than 10% argument is still weak: Even at a lower market share, they're past the "security through obscurity" point. Again, over 700 000 viruses for Windows the past year, and let's take 10% of that and give it to Apple, which would be 70 000 viruses. Instead, there's 0.00001% of that. Wouldn't it be nice to shut the fanboys up with some more viruses?!

OS X isn't immune, but it's nice to not have any spyware, malware, or antivirus programs running/updating and still surf the web with reckless abandon.