You are wrong, because that laptop was the best/fastest at the time released. Just like long before that a desktop mac was the fastest windows computer for a little. Your hardware argument makes no sense. In an equal hardware spec comparison they would be the same speed. It doesn't matter if its a Mac or a "PC". The point was that with the fresh install without all the bloatware that manufactures put on windows computers, the computer will run faster then it even did new. It wasn't a windows mac argument.
Your joking right? Never seen a mac outspec a PC? Somebody is deff a PC fanboy. The desktop Mac pros are crazy spec'd. Those are the ones that I referred to earlier that were the fastest windows computer for a little. They go up to 12 core. You don't see many computers made by anybody that high.
I know I'm jumping in here, and that this is a bit off-topic... but I'd just like to point out that marketing gimmicks like extra cores and high clock rates really are not good measures of any piece of hardware's actual ability to perform. The best way to measure performance is, well, to measure performance (such as with benchmarks). It may interest you to do some reading about an idea known as the Megahertz myth.
I'm already aware that higher clockspeed or more cores isn't a good way to measure speed. Especially clock speeds. I agree benchmarking is better. Still doesn't change the fact, that I find it hard to believe that he had never seen a mac be faster then a pc. Considering the large amout of budget PC's out there.
