If you were wondering how good Apple’s MacBook line of portable computers are, the answer is simple — they are the top computer in every category on Consumer Reports.
[ad#Google Adsense 300×250 in story]Apple’s 11-inch MacBook Air scored a 62 out of 100 taking the top spot in the small laptop section. Scoring a 56, Gateway came in second while HP came in third with a 49.
The 13-inch model category was even worse for Apple’s competition. Apple’s 13-inch MacBook Pro took the top five of seven spots with Sony and Asus taking the final two.
The 15-inch category was much closer with Apple MacBook Pro taking the top three spots, but the competition did come in at just three points behind.
The 17-inch category was another big win for Apple. The MacBook Pro took the top two spots with the competition sharing the other six.
I just set up a new 11-inch MacBook Air for my boss. What a beautiful piece of hardware. I tried to talk him into a 13-inch MacBook because he would get more computer for his money, but now I think he made the right choice. Another case of “less is more.”
I love my 11-inch.
I’ll bet you say that to all the girls
ZING!!
I think it’s interesting that these reviews are so much more measured than the iPhone reviews. I am a fanboy, but their non-recommendation of the Verizon iPhone, which seemed to have the antenna problem solved, seemed petty, given all the things the phone does well. And given similar antenna issues on other phones.
I wonder why Consumer Reports reviewed the mid-2010 MacBook Pros and not the 2011 models. Does anyone know if the other laptops are from a similar time?
Might not have had time to do their “extensive” testing on them yet.
aka pr0n torrents
With apologies to Bill Gates, 11″ really SHOULD be enough for anyone..
I don’t think there would have been enough time to gather customer satisfaction data on the brand new models.
Bingo!
Even although I had two of three 11″ MBAs fail due to what I assume was faulty SSD, it is a superb machine in every way. Fast. Fits in same bags as iPad. Lovely to behold. Ergonomic. Fits perfectly on a train or airplane chair table thanks to wide aspect ratio display.
How hard would it have been to actually link to the source? Your little Consumer Reports link is just for your own site. It’s bad enough that I had to read AROUND adverts, but not even allowing us to click through to the original information is just bad form.
I think it’s because you have to have subscription to consumer reports to read the original content. If they linked to it, it would only be useful for those with subscriptions (who likely already read the original article) or for those that would like to purchase a subscriptions.
Nonetheless, here’s the link: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/electronics-computers/computers-internet/computers/laptop-ratings/ratings-overview.htm
“How hard would it have been to actually link to the source?”
CR is a subscription service, so the original source is behind a paywall. Would you prefer a link to consumerreports.com that most people can’t access anyways?
The Loop tags topics all the time. How hard is it for you to find Consumer Reports online? The article’s behind a subscriber paywall anyway.
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/electronics-computers/computers-internet/computers/laptop-ratings/ratings-overview.htm
It’s nice to see these ratings, but Consumer Reports tech editors have a long way to go before I consider them consistently rigorous enough to give credence to.
Remember, this is the magazine that downrated an early Mac because it didn’t have a PCI slot to add a network card. The reviewer had somehow failed to notice the built-in Ethernet.
How hard it is to find has nothing to do with it. Failing to link to the source of an article is just rude, especially when you are using the source as the primary point of the article. All they had to do was just put
Source: Consumer Reports [subscription required]
as a link at the end of the article.
Fair enough.
Somtimes you want alternatives to the limitations of the onboard hardware… just sayin’…
Reread that first sentence a few times to see how ridiculous it sounds.
My gf’s Mac Book Pro is a great machine (although I HATE the keyboard), but if I had to replace it twice before it would work correctly, I doubt I’d be singing its praises. In fact, I doubt I’d bother with another Apple product.
If they’d written it up like that, I might have respected them more. But their review ignored what was right in front of them. My guess was much of it had been pre-written.
You’ve obviously never met an Xbox gamer.
I must be the one Xbox owner who has never had it RROD on me.
Watch it self destruct next time I turn it on now.
Yeah, because you have to PAY to how crappy that magazine is.
Yeah, I like Apple, like Apple devices…actually not only Consumer like Apple, many app developers(also one of consumer) like it more! such as iFunia, as they live on Apple, and flourish with Apple!
Yeah, I personally like the 17″ MBP myself. It is so powerful. It is like having a desktop computer will all the portability of a laptop. Definitely the best laptop in its class.
MacBook Air’s are really cool, but the only thing that stops me from getting one right now is that it doesn’t have a built in CD/DVD drive. I think once they include this, I will definitely purchase the 11″ model.
I personally like the smaller MacBook Pro. It is powerful yet lightweight. I take mine everywhere I go. I just love it!
All of Apple’s laptops are beautiful, but I am partial to the 17″ MacBook Pro. It is just so powerful, yet so lightweight. I think next in line would be the MacBook Air. One things’ for sure, if you get a Mac, you can’t go wrong.
I occasionally enjoy gaming on my PC, but when I play my more graphic intensive games on my MBP, it is just like night and day. Hands down, Macs are the best when it comes to my entertainment needs.
I was thinking of getting a MacBook Pro with a smaller display size for better portability, but was having a hard time justifying the price over a PC. I guess Macs costs what they do for a reason. They are simply better and last much longer.