Deciding between T61 and Macbook Pro

[deeptii]

Hi all,

I have read a lot of reviews of T61, and here are my 2 cents. I am also thinking of converting from PC to Mac. Here is my story:

Today I went to the digital mall to check out both T61 and Macbook Pro.

For T61, my impressions are these:

1. The touchpad is too small, it's so small that my finger has to actually go back and forth almost 3~4 times to get the mouse to go across the screen. Using such small touchpad is difficult for me unless mouse sensitivity is adjusted.

2. If you get the Intel X3100 graphics chip, on the configuration that I saw (T7300, 1GB RAM, 120 GB HD), the Vista score is only 2.x (really shows ~2.0)

3. If you get the nVidia (same build as in 2.), the Vista score is 4.x (really shows ~4.0)

4. The USB port is not designed properly. I doubt if there are any devices that can both plugin into the ports.

5. The monitor light (the light on top of the screen) is very dim, and I wonder if it's useful at all - didn't really test it in darkness.

6. The machine is very quiet.

7. The machine is very solid.

8. The keyboard feels softer than X60's. I think X60's is better at my personal preference.

9. There is no more IBM on the lid.

10. The brochure tells a big lie that 6-cell battery can run for 6 hours on this.

11. The headphone and mic are in the front... err this is not a good idea if you want to plugin speakers. (firewire port also at front)

For Macbook Pro:

1. The machine is elegant, and many of its designs are thought for the users. Such as location of USB ports, existence of DVI, etc.

2. Slim and thin

3. Couldn't have more to say about the Macbook Pro as the design is so simple and universal.

4. The configuration (2.2 Ghz, 2 GB Ram, 128 MB video) has a Vista score of 4.8/4.9!! (using bootcamp to run)

5. Screen is nice

OS Comparison
Everyone knows that Mac runs Mac OS X and blah blah blah... after a colleague showed me the features of Mac OS X on his Macbook compared with a desktop running Vista (2 GB ram) side by side, I am convinced that Vista is crap.

Vista is copying so many features of Mac OS X, and at the same time being cumbersome at many levels. My colleague showed me some ads at Mac (http://www.apple.com/getamac/) and I recommend you to watch them as the videos are so funny

Mac OS is so advanced ahead of Vista and includes more features. It's faster and more reliable as I saw.

Personally I am already very tired of Microsoft Windows. As a MS Windows user I have to worry about so many things. Besides, Vista is so memory hungry and inefficient. With Vista, I can't find the things that I want to find easily. I am disgusted at Windows after using it for 13+ years (ever since the DOS version).

So it's beginning to come to my mind to look for something else.

Price
The price of T61 compared with Macbook pro with the same configurations are about the same in the mall (Singapore).

Conclusion
I canceled my T61 order today (ordered on 5/22) as it has been delayed for so long, and with the design I saw today and the deep dissatisfaction of MS Windows. I decided to switch to Mac for a change. But I am not about to buy now as the new Mac OS comes out in October.

I hope this little review is helpful to those who are still deciding.

[madcow]

I would probably go for macbook pro if they both are the same price. A lot of people pay for the design. I was at the store playing with a macbook pro and sometimes I feel like returning my thinkpad.

[ryengineer]

4. The USB port is not designed properly. I doubt if there are any devices that can both plugin into the ports.

I agree, however if you go with T61 15.4'', it corrects this design flaw.

11. The headphone and mic are in the front... err this is not a good idea if you want to plugin speakers. (firewire port also at front)

Again 15.4'' model has it on left end however firewire is still on the front but few models of R61 has it on left end as well.

[Volker]

If the Mac book pro only had a trackpoint ("nipple") then I'd seriously think about getting one. The OS is not an issue for me since I'm using linux, but I agree that MacOSX is the best choice for any non-programmer/nerd

The only "advantage" of Windows would be that many are locked into the data formats / 3rd party software.

[snessiram]

@deeptii:

T61:
1) Agree, but I always use the trackpoint and when working on my macbook (non-pro) I really miss it. However, I'm glad the macbook's touchpad is so big as it's indeed impractical with most notebooks.
Please also note that if you want to run windows on the macbook (pro), right click and scrolling won't be simple (as far as I know it doesn't work like it does in OS X).
5) Did you compare with the matt screen macbook pro? (just personal interest)

Macbook pro:
6) It runs VERY hot. My macbook can go to 70° on load and goes up till 60° with normal work (surfing etc), although mostly I can keep it around 50°. On the bottom of the machine there's a spot that becomes very hot and I wouldn't put it on my lap for too long. Notice that these temperatures are with Fan control installed, without it the fans run slow for some time and then suddenly burst to max speed for some time, kind of annoying (and the temperatures where higher). Once on a hot day (30° max), it was so hot I put a ventilator next to it (I think fan control wasn't installed yet).
I know this is a macbook but I heard similar experiences from friends with a macbook pro.
7) The screen flips open for max 120° if I'm right and for me it would be nice to go further.

If I where you I'd go with the macbook pro.

[wallybear]

For what it's worth to anybody reading this thread, I have these comments to make:

1- I've been a Mac user since 1988. I've run a Macintosh-IT support business since 1991. I had to do other things (write, etc.) as many of my clients (artists, graphic shops, home users, etc.) moved from the Mac to Windows machines over the past 7 years. The reason most have moved to Windows are these: a) Apple charges a ridiculous premium for its hardware, b) Windows is "just as good" and/or "is what everyone else uses" and/or "is what my kids need for school" (all of these defections happend during the 3 long years when Apple struggled to get its OS X working for real users---let's not forget that it wasn't until 10.4 that OS X was genuinely stable and "complete"), c) Apple's hardware and operating system has JUST AS MANY issues/problems/frustrating design elements for the average user as Windows XP has, if not more.

2- Apple's been the victim of its own success, so to speak, as well as a victim of the fact that it lost the battle for a "standard desktop OS" a long time ago. Long-time Mac users like me know that older Macs (such as the G4s and G5s made since 2001) can run OS 10.4 more than adequately--making the purchase of a new Macintosh (such as the Intel-based models) less compelling or even unreasonable compared to the purchase of a new and much cheaper PC. Therefore, many people who used to run just Macs now have a PC, too. This means that "The Truth" about the Mac (all the items I've listed in #1, above) are well-known. These people (and I'm one of them) love Apple and its Macintosh line of computers for being the innovators and trend-setters that this industry has always needed. Microsoft knows that Apple will take the risks and then later (much later in some cases) Microsoft can deliver a product that is very similar to Apple's but at a lower cost. In other words, don't under-estimate the power of the cost factor in people's choices of computers. (By the way, people on this site, a dedicated forum for ThinkPad users, not Macintosh users) are more likely to ignore cost than the average PC buyer. That's why when I see comments like those made by the original poster here that the cost of a T61 is "close" to that of a MacBook Pro I have to laugh. Both Lenovo and Apple are struggling to make sales....Lenovo has premium products that compete against inferior, but much cheaper products, just as Apple does.

3- I love Apple's "Mac vs. PC" ads, too. But I've also "written" in my mind just as many scenarios where the PC wins, not the Mac. Of course, any advertising that convinces someone to buy something (because of or--more to the point--in spite of its attributes) is effective advertising. This has always been Apple's strong suit: making it appear that their products are hipper, better, and more "valuable" than others and so are worth a higher price. Sadly, however, that philosophy has almost led to Apple's demise as a computer maker more than once in its history (witness the effect that the emergent market for the iPod has had on Apple's business and bottom line....and its recent name change: Apple may not be financially able to remain a computer builder in the long run, and Steve Jobs knows it).

4- Speaking of Apple's future, don't under-estimate the effect that a fear of what Apple's future might be has had on its present (and its future) market share. No one wants an "orphan" so they tend to go with the pack. Recent rumors that OS 10.5 may be "the last" operating system sold by Apple (due both to market share and financal opportunities in cell phones and music players) has not helped bolster the confidence of long-time Mac users. What is true is that Apple has gambled everything by switching to Intel processors. What this means is that it's no small thing that Apple has tacitly supported (and will soon openly support) running Windows on all its Intel-based hardware. However, the "hack" that is currently needed to run OS X on non-Apple PCs could very easily be extended (by Apple) such that it would open up a big market for Apple's OS....that is if there actually were a bigger market for it. Sadly, there apparently isn't a huge untapped market for Mac OS X. It's true (believe me, I feel this way) that OS X is "elegant, better, wonderful, marvelous, etc., etc." BUT it is not so much more all those things than Microsoft's new Vista is that Apple can afford to smugly gamble its future solely on its sales of computers and Unix-based operating system. This is the not-so-hidden secret that Apple (meaning Steve Jobs) has had to face: Apple's computer products will ALWAYS be niche products, not mainstream. That battle was lost long, long ago. There is, however, money to be made and careers to be lived out in making new computers and better operating systems. Hence Apple's abrupt introduction of Intel-based machines--which had the effect of gouging thousands of faithful G5 buyers who paid a crazy premium for those G5s only to find them "obsolete" overnight. All of my current Macintosh clients (and they've all been using my services for over a decade) tell me that they are afraid to buy new Apple hardware now--at least as long as their very expensive G4s and G5s will still suit their needs. It will be very interesting to see Apple's next move with 10.5 (or whatever it will be called): what will be the "cutoff" as far as it running on older hardware? G4 above 1GHz? G5? I'm not so sure that Apple will still be making computers when it comes time to introduce an Intel-only version of its OS (effectively dead-ending all PowerPC machines). I AM sure that any of the Mac users I've known for years will take that opportunity to look at Vista (or whatever it will be called) with the hope that it supports all the Adobe applications they need for their work. Oh, whoops, Vista already runs all Adobe's apps. Interesting.

5- The original poster's (deeptii) "comparison" sounded more like an advertisement of his/her own for the MacBook Pro. I find it strange that he/she's posting it on a ThinkPad site. Or is it that strange? When Apple's advertising has been effective in the past it's been when Apple's made the claim that its operating system (not its hardware) is superior...and thereby have gotten buyers to overlook the high cost of the hardware that is required to run Apple's OS. And the fact that Apple has always had to outright bash Microsoft in order to make a sale is getting very tiresome to me. [Deeptii said: "Personally I am already very tired of Microsoft Windows. As a MS Windows user I have to worry about so many things. Besides, Vista is so memory hungry and inefficient. With Vista, I can't find the things that I want to find easily. I am disgusted at Windows after using it for 13+ years (ever since the DOS version)." Interesting use of words, wasn't it? Personally, I am very afraid for Apple with the advent of Vista. It not only offers most (if not all) of the Mac OS's advantages but it also runs on very cheap hardware. And "memory hungry" is a joke. Have you tried to run OSX with less than 1GB? Kinda like running Vista with less than 1GB. It's not strange to me that deeptii has had to make sweeping generalizations that aren't borne out by facts. It's Apple's way to do the same thing in all its advertisements.

6- Deeptii concludes by saying he/she has "deep dissatisfaction of MS Windows". So! The comparison is not really about a ThinkPad T61 versus a MacBook Pro. It's about Vista versus Tiger! Oh, OK. I think I've already made the point that that battle (i.e., the "battle for the standard desktop OS") was won a long, long time ago. And what "comparison" would be needed to make someone switch from a "standard OS" like Windows (that's arguably just as good as--and runs on much cheaper hardware than--the Mac OS) but one that concludes that "MS Windows deeply dissatisfies" (my paraphrase)? Oh, but that's just "Apple's way" being demonstrated again.

In closing, I want to add that it is clear to me (as someone who's been very close to Apple's products for nearly 20 years) that Apple is the industry innovator (almost everything we value in terms of hardware and software elements in today's computers was either first introduced by or heavily promoted by Apple). The industry needs Apple to keep making computers and a modern operating system to go along with that hardware. Microsoft needs a healthy Apple (and Gates and friends know that very well, too). But, what we DO need on this forum is some more balanced information, not just another advertisement where the Mac valiantly (and hipply) "wins" over the fat, older, "lame" PC. Those arguements are as old and tired to me as anything could possibly be in this industry. And so I've labored here to provide some "more balanced information" in response to this posting which I had to conclude is just a thinly veiled advertisement for Apple.

By saying that deeptii's posting was an "advertisement" I don't mean to negate all that was said or the facts that were pointed out about hardware differences between these machines. But let's be realistic...the MacBook Pro does NOT compete with the ThinkPad T6x series in any meaningful (i.e., marketshare-related) way. I guess one could make the claim that people who really want and love the ThinkPad line of PCs might be persuaded to compare it with (as though it were a meaningful comparison) a product which is similar in terms of cost and overall abilities in running one operating system (meaning Windows Vista, not the MacOS as Apple does not license its OS to run on other Intel-based computers). But that's not the comparison that we (and deeptii) are forced to make in the end. The comparison is between VISTA and TIGER. And deeptii is so "deeply disappointed" in Microsoft that he/she is willing to cancel an order for a T61 in favor of a MacBook Pro. What?!?!? Is that the point of this posting? Ah, no...at closer inspection the point appears to have been to persuade and convince and to advertise operating systems. And need I repeat that historically Apple's only effective model of advertising in order to increase sales of its products has been to bash Microsoft's products. Oh, gawd but that's old news.

Perhaps deeptii is "as smart as a fox" after all.....

[deeptii]

Thanks to you all for the useful info.

I must admit that the little review that I wrote is not that comprehensive and I didn't intend to write a full comparison between Mac and PC at all. I must say that most of this review is based on 1 day's impression from a merely 13+ years of computer user experience.

Thanks to wallybear for the long Apple history.

Besides, I also read review about MBP being quite hot. Hopefully I am not that urgent to get a laptop now as I currently have a X60, and I still get time to know more about a Mac.

[axiom]

When I was deciding between the 2, my criterion is simple:
if you use Linux, take the thinkpad, if you use windows, take the mac. period.

[mgo]

For what it's worth to anybody reading this thread, I have these comments to make:
>snipped the article for brevity>
...

You brought up some really good points, and your findings about how more suitable a Windows based machine is vs. a Mac machine makes sense to me. I've given some thought to making to jump to Mac, but just can't justify the time and money to get a Mac to do the things I want to do with my XP and Vista Thinkpads. I can also say that about making the transition to Linux.

The questions I always ask myself are, "can I do the things I need to do with a computer, and not have a bunch of problems and steep learning curves to do those things?

Both Xp and Vista let me mix and match my favorite applications like Office and Money, etc. I can run 90s vintage programs or brand new programs interchangeably on XP or Vista. Migrating to Linux or Mac would require too many conversions and changes to make it worth while, in my view.

Right now, I'm running XP. I don't care about Vista's Aero or Flip or other things. Vista is on the back shelf, to be used only if XP becomes too outdated to be useful. By then, Vista should be improved and patched and adjusted to make it more inviting to average users like me.

[Dead1nside]

Woah, don't diss the ThinkLight... how can you comment on it if you haven't used it in a dark room, where there are no light sources. The darker the better.

[cj3209]

Here are my two cents as a prior powerbook user (15" AL-1.67 G4) for over four years and a PC user since Windows 98:

THE CONS:
- the aluminum outer casing is a design defect IMHO; it CONDUCTS heat and my PB regularly became so hot I swear I could fry an egg on it - no joke; apple has not solved the heat dissipation issue with their notebooks, IMHO; but then, many PC vendors have the same issues as well;

- my logic board became defective after a year and I found out that many of my colleagues also had logic board issues; but then many pc notebooks also have defective mobos too;

- battery life was poor at around 2.5 hours; this was even after the battery refreshing discharge-fully recharge-discharge as slowly as possible-and then fully recharge method that became the rage;

- my LCD started having white spots which I found was the 'norm' on many of my colleague's powerbooks; but then, many pc notebook LCDs also have this issue;

THE PROS:
- the fiber-optic keyboard light really works and is superior to the Thinkpad Night Light;

- the Mac OS X is a little more stable than Win XP Pro; although I did routinely crash the Mac OS;

- I liked not having to install an anti-virus / spysweeper program;

- 'coolness' factor of the powerbook.

Ultimately, I stuck with the Thinkpad (using a Z61T and X60s from work) because I was more productive with it and it fit my needs better.

BOTH the PB and TP are at the top in notebook designs and you really can't go wrong getting either one, at this point.


CJ

[Dead1nside]

cj3209, sounds like you just want a different OS to XP. Apple Max OS X is based on.. BSD, I think. Linux - BSD, they're all UNIX derivatives. You would get more stable operation and not need anti virus.

[jagged]

I'm just a regular business/gaming computer user and and I got a Macbook. I don't really remember why but maybe I was "swayed" by tons of Mac adverts that shows how cool it is to be a Mac user.

Actually, I was wowed initially by its features like fast startup, cool GUI, nice integration with the Ipod, among others. Also got Parallels to run my Windows only apps like Quickbooks Enterprise & POS for the office.

However, sold it after a few months and went back to my year trusty old uncool T60. .

The lesson I learned was sure, Win XP is not perfect, but Mac OS is nowhere near perfect either. So why replace something with another thing that will surely cause new problems.

[wallybear]

I'm just a regular business/gaming computer user and and I got a Macbook. I don't really remember why but maybe I was "swayed" by tons of Mac adverts that shows how cool it is to be a Mac user.

Actually, I was wowed initially by its features like fast startup, cool GUI, nice integration with the Ipod, among others. Also got Parallels to run my Windows only apps like Quickbooks Enterprise & POS for the office.

However, sold it after a few months and went back to my year trusty old uncool T60. .

The lesson I learned was sure, Win XP is not perfect, but Mac OS is nowhere near perfect either. So why replace something with another thing that will surely cause new problems.

Now why didn't I just saw something so clear and simple as that?
<grin>

I will say here, though, that my experience has shown me how poorly all the "solutions" for PC virtualization on the Mac which have been sold over the years have "solved" the problem of running Windows applications on an Apple computer. Even Apple's own Boot Camp feature has been (up to this date, at least) an unconvincing "attraction" to those people who might consider having the "best of both worlds". And I'm not so sure that Apple's attempt to support Windows on its Intel-based hardware isn't a sign of absolute desperation. (That is, if they can't sell very expensive computers based on how good the OS is, perhaps they can sell them by making the $2500 boxes just another PC clone.)

On the other hand, I've still got the old (circa 1996) "RealPC" product running under Classic on my G4 (with Win95) as well as the latest VirtualPC 7 (with Win2000 because it's not fast enough for XP). Of course, both are essentially useless in terms of doing any real work in the emulated Windows environments but they are both impressive pieces of coding work and fun to show to friends.

It might interest some of you to know that I have helped a few of my clients get WinXP running on their Intel Macs under both Boot Camp and Parallels (for comparison). Although these "solutions" are more impressive in terms of their performance--because of the lack of processor emulation that the Intel CPU offers--I always think to myself "wow, now that was an expensive way to 'create' a $500 Windows laptop"--because that's essentially what you get: a $2500 MacBook running Windows about as well (albient with some issues) as Windows running on a $500 Toshiba or HP laptop. In this case, the issue of how "superior and elegant" the Mac OS is in comparison to Windows isn't the question. The question is: how well does the Apple hardware support Windows? And the answer is: not as well, or any better than, a machine that costs 1/5 as much as Apple's.

When two of my clients balked at the cost when I described the above "solution" (a MacBook running Windows because they both had only desktop Macs but wanted a laptop, too) they both decided to skip the pricey MacBook and instead bought a ThinkPad (lower-end, $1200 T60s). These clients both reported within a week to tell me that "Windows wasn't bad at all; in fact, we have had no problems or troubles understanding how to use it". And so far, neither of them have had to report to me any "nightmares" and/or "disappointments" with their ThinkPads that Apple would have you believe is part and parcel with the use of Windows.

Interesting, huh?

(At least I hope it is to someone out there.)

Ah, one final thought: I've often wondered what Apple could do for its market share (it not its bottomline in terms of profits) if it were to price its hardware more competitively (say, cut the prices by 1/3). If they could subsidize their margins on computers with their wild profits from their pricey (but truely superior and elegant iPod products) perhaps they might finally establish a reliable foothold in the market in terms of desktops/laptops sold each year. But then I think that such a bold move would require that someone much different than Steve Jobs was at the helm at Apple. And like it or not, Jobs and Apple are one and will always be one. And Jobs doesn't like anyone telling him how to sell computers (or music players or phones). He has always done his own thing and succeeded eventually by reinventing himself or his products....and that's something to take note of in the history of Apple Computers (now just Apple, Inc.). As I said yesterday, I fear for the future of any computers made by Apple, Inc. Why? Because the numbers don't "add up". Too few sold for too much equals too little too late no matter how "superior" the product is.

[chem]

When I was deciding between the 2, my criterion is simple:
if you use Linux, take the thinkpad, if you use windows, take the mac. period.

I will be making the same decision soon: new MBP vs T61 (or T61p). I must be able to have everything working in linux. I've been looking around on ubuntu forums, and I haven't seen that the new Thinkpads are supported any better than the new MBPs.

Both have issues with sound, needing recompilation of alsa drivers from dev tree source. I haven't seen anyone reporting a properly working suspend / suspend2disk on either platform. I will be getting NVidia video either way. Wireless works on both machines.

So why, exactly, should I get a T61 (or T61p) instead of a MBP for linux?

My big decision seems to be coming down to these factors:
1. The MBP runs hot. Real hot. As in, it's probably worth taking it apart and re-applying the thermal paste (Apple does a crappy job) to get a 15C cooldown under load.
2. The MBP is much prettier in design and 1" form factor is nice.
3. The MBP gets better battery life due to the LED backlit screen.
4. Mac OS X is kinda neat.
5. Keynote (OS X only) is really neat.
6. Windows is better than OS X for gaming (and Apple's NVidia driver in Boot Camp sucks).
7. The T61 or T61p will probably be cheaper; hard to tell until a comparable T61p (better vid card than T61!) is released with price.


If anyone could convince me on the linux front, or anything else I mentioned, I'd love to hear it. I have seen basically no reports of the T61 CPU temperature under full dual-core load. Need more data.

[axiom]

right. That could be a problem.

My choice came simple because I was deciding between T60p and MBP

sorry for the off topic :p

When I was deciding between the 2, my criterion is simple:
if you use Linux, take the thinkpad, if you use windows, take the mac. period.

I will be making the same decision soon: new MBP vs T61 (or T61p). I must be able to have everything working in linux. I've been looking around on ubuntu forums, and I haven't seen that the new Thinkpads are supported any better than the new MBPs.

Both have issues with sound, needing recompilation of alsa drivers from dev tree source. I haven't seen anyone reporting a properly working suspend / suspend2disk on either platform. I will be getting NVidia video either way. Wireless works on both machines.

So why, exactly, should I get a T61 (or T61p) instead of a MBP for linux?

My big decision seems to be coming down to these factors:
1. The MBP runs hot. Real hot. As in, it's probably worth taking it apart and re-applying the thermal paste (Apple does a crappy job) to get a 15C cooldown under load.
2. The MBP is much prettier in design and 1" form factor is nice.
3. The MBP gets better battery life due to the LED backlit screen.
4. Mac OS X is kinda neat.
5. Keynote (OS X only) is really neat.
6. Windows is better than OS X for gaming (and Apple's NVidia driver in Boot Camp sucks).
7. The T61 or T61p will probably be cheaper; hard to tell until a comparable T61p (better vid card than T61!) is released with price.


If anyone could convince me on the linux front, or anything else I mentioned, I'd love to hear it. I have seen basically no reports of the T61 CPU temperature under full dual-core load. Need more data.

[boyAfraid]

the sooner that apple realizes it's a software company and not a hardware company, the better chance it has at survival.

-bA

[taob]

These days, it is becoming more of a decision based solely on hardware features, now that the laptop industry has consolidated on the Intel x86 32-bit and 64-bit hardware platform. You can run OS X on a Thinkpad, or you can run Vista on a MacBook Pro.

Rather, I should say that your choice of OS is less dependent on your choice of hardware. Sure, OS X still runs best (and is only supported) on Apple hardware. But I have Tiger running very nicely and smoothly on my T60p.

But since this is a Thinkpad forum, we should be focusing on the hardware. That's where Apple fails, IMHO. The styling, keyboard, hardware options, trackpoint, mouse buttons, display and ruggedness all favour the Thinkpad. The ridiculous and outdated notion of having just a single mouse button is a showstopper for me. Not having a trackpoint is another. No equivalent of a hot-swap Ultrabay (and thus no option for a second hard drive) is a third. Lack of a 15" 1600x1200 IPS option is a fourth.

As a laptop hardware vendor, Apple might be better than the Dells, Sonys and HPs out there... but it still comes in second to a good ol' Thinkpad.

[foodle]

You can run OS X on a Thinkpad, or you can run Vista on a MacBook Pro.

Sadly, running OS X on a non-Apple machine still requires a reasonble amount of work and requires the download of some not-so-legal software (in addition to not being supported). I would never run my mission-critical work on a Thinkpad running OS X. So for those of us unwilling to install OS X on a Thinkpad, we have to make a choice between the better hardware (Thinkpad) and the arguably better OS (OS X). As for Linux, once it's as easy to install/maintain as OS X, I'll give it a look. Maybe the newer releases of Ubuntu are getting close ...

[stylinexpat]

I want to get a new Apple in October when they release the new Leopord and bythen surely they must have a new model as well. I just saw the new Dells too and they look really good with the new LED Screens with the built in Webcams. I think with a new Apple and either a new Thinkpad or Dell I will be happy. I do remember something though, when staying at a hotel in Singapore I found two people sitting outside of their rooms next to the Check in counter with their Thinkpads. I asked them why they were sitting here and they told me that they couldn't get wifi reception in their rooms. With my Fujitsu Laptop I had great Wifi reception in my room Not one but two different people with two different Thinkpad T series laptops were sitting outside aiming to be closer to the router because they couldn't connect from their rooms.

[corsac]

And don't forget that:

* 15.4" MBP uses 1440x900
* 14.1" T61 uses 1440x900
* 15.4" T61 uses 1680x1050

There are T61 with smaller resolutions, but no MBP with larger one. So if resolution is important for you, you may reconsider this. And there will be no 4:3 MBP while there should be 4:3 T61.

Regards,

[foodle]

I do remember something though, when staying at a hotel in Singapore I found two people sitting outside of their rooms next to the Check in counter with their Thinkpads. I asked them why they were sitting here and they told me that they couldn't get wifi reception in their rooms. With my Fujitsu Laptop I had great Wifi reception in my room Not one but two different people with two different Thinkpad T series laptops were sitting outside aiming to be closer to the router because they couldn't connect from their rooms.

It's a long way from your story to the conclusion that the Thinkpads somehow have bad WiFi reception. They could have simply had rooms farther from the access point than you. Or maybe they were using the Intel chipset which has poorer reception than the Atheros one.

[tomh009]

cj3209, sounds like you just want a different OS to XP. Apple Max OS X is based on.. BSD, I think. Linux - BSD, they're all UNIX derivatives. You would get more stable operation and not need anti virus.

OS X uses the Mach kernel, and is very BSD-like. On the other hand, the Vista kernel is an evolution of the Windows NT one. Both are very stable.

Where instability comes in is with drivers and applications. Good drivers rarely crash the OS (I think my X31 has bluescreened once or twice in the last 12 months) while bad ones make life excruciatingly painful, regardless of the OS. And badly written applications can crash on any OS.

As for the antivirus, Windows needs it more just because of its popularity. Any OS where you sit at the keyboard running with administrator privileges is vulnerable. If Linux and/or OS X continues to increase in popularity, the number of viruses targeted at those platforms will also increase.