Apple Refreshes The MacBook Pro Line Discussion

Engaget seems to find the battery Life bloated in the MBP17" sofar

http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/14/macbook-pro-core-i7-review/

guess i will have to abuse mine in 3 or 4 days time

 

Weird, they're normally pretty good about the battery life estimate being accurate. So if it's only getting 4-5 hours in OSX...I hate to think what it'll get in W7.

 

that was the FIRST thing through my mind as well

 

I cannot see how mentioning how much money a company is making off of its consumers is a positive thing for a consumer-based forum. I always wonder what kind of people see the quarterly reports for Apple and the profit margins and say "Yay Apple"? The object should be to increase sales and achieve the same GP at lower margins, not the few consumers you have.

One thing the PC vs Mac people will never see eye to eye on is the specs and this refresh is making it worse.

PC People: Accept that there are many good reasons to buy a Mac despite it not having all the latest and greatest technology. They work well and there is a dollar figure that can be placed on that.

Mac People: Accept that some people like to choices. This is not a scifi movie where everyone is walking around in a silver jumpsuit and sporting a bald head. If Lenovo can come out with a Thinkpad Edge I am sure you can loosen your tie a little too.

 

Oh I know there are reasons to buy a Mac. It's how horribly overpriced they are that eliminates it as a choice for us. When it's an 800+ dollar premium for the Apple logo, better battery life, and OSX, then it gets nuts. But they are nice machines.

 

I agree with Amy, a premium for OSX and perhaps a few extra build quirks is difficult to justify for lots of people, even IF there are good reasons to get an Apple machine.

 

And I dont even want that logo!!

 

But they give 2 extra white apple stickers to put on random stuff when you buy one!

 

Got to be an Optimus bug. Should be fixed soon - Apple's battery estimates are usually about 20% over 'max wifi-on ekeing non-fanboi-stupid-test' runtimes in real life.

 

What I'll accept is that when it comes to Apple fans, the saying "a fool and his money is soon parted" tends to be true more often than not.

Macs aren't more expensive because of their design. That's just silly. Macs are more expensive because Apple tends to take full advantage of their monopolistic business practices.

You want a more apples to apples comparison?

http://store.apple.com/us/product/M...fnode=MTY1NDA5OQ&mco=MTA4MzU2NTc&s=topSellers

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4161292&cm_re=ATI_4870-_-14-161-292-_-Product

And note...the 4870 video card sold on Newegg is the 1 GB version...the model that Apple is charging more than double for is only the 512 MB version.

 

I only have experience with Seagate's notebook drives; I personally can't vouch for Seagate's desktop drives, friends of mine with them have not experienced many issues sans some firmware issues.

On the notebook side, I find Seagate's 7200.4 drives to be inferior to Western Digital's Scorpio Black and Hitachi's 7K500 line in a number of ways; see here:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=473941
They are not bad drives by any means, but there are better ways to spend money. I have links to benchmarks if you want them (you have to PM me for the link because it is on an outside site I am affiliated with).

 

Except I've yet to see the cheaper laptop that surpasses the specs that doesn't weigh a ton. And I'm honestly interested in seeing one.

 

Have you looked at any business laptops such as Dell Latitude/Precision, Lenovo X/T/W, or HP Elitebook?

 

not well enough apparently - off to do so.

 

I think you think you're talking to a novice. I've been buying laptops for 15 years. Right now now of what is out there is corner cutting. They fe who come close to producing decent units seem hell bent on botching it eg
- crappy alps touchpash (Dell and HP)
- poor cooling/loud operation (HP)
- crap screens in anything below 6lbs and 15" (Lenovo)
- poor battery life without a lump sticking out the back (Lenovo, Dell, HP)
- abysmal delivery reliability (name your pick)
- gargantuan power cords
- butt-ugly design (name your pick)

At the end of the day I cant even find a like-for-like replacement for a Panny Y5 that I bought 3 years ago? None. Even Panny has bailed out too.That's just poor across the board. They are not competing.

And its why I believe that apple is making the profits it is on laptops. It's easy to make excuses but at the end of the day the others are not trying hard enough. In particular Lenovo, which talks big but seems hell bent on stuffing mediocre screens in "premium laptops".

But thanks, yeah, I've looked. It's not random that I've concluded that Apple is all that's left.

 

Well the Dell Precision M4500 quickly hits the 2K mark when it's a similar spec to the i7 MBP 15" (though it's graphics card might be better) and it's about half a pound heavier.

The Latitudes don't come with any aceptable graphics card.

The Lenovo IdeaPad Y560 really looks nice, a bit low on the screen resolution for a 15" for my tastes, but other than that it looks very good value.

The Lenovo W range look awesome, but they don't come cheap, the W510 looks pretty competitive though.

Didn't get as far as the HP yet. But yes, there does seem to be some interesting competition around. I'll have to bear that in mind come upgrade time.

 

This is another review
http://www.laptopmag.com/review/laptops/apple-macbook-pro-15-inch-core-i7.aspx?page=1
Those are some pretty high temps.

It is quite easy to boost the Sony Z battery life just by playing around with the settings in the Vaio control centre and vaio power management. Changing to silent mode boosted my battery life considerably on my Vaio. Also, the issue of the keyboard marking the display looks like it has been resolved with the newly released Vaio Z.

My Sony TT can pull up the type of battery life i cannot even run down. A true 10hrs battery life over wifi easily equates to 7-8hrs to me over wwan and that is where the beauty of having long battery life comes in. I really wish Apple would tackle their very limited connectivity options.
It is pretty bad that a laptop of this calibre doesn't even have an expresscard slot.

Its good at least though you can get sound now over HDMI out. Well Apple claim this anyway.

Each to their own because i don't think i like the MBP trackpad. I've tried it a few times and have never taken to it. I'm also not really interested in the extreme side of multitouch lol.

 

My SXPS 16 weight is: 2.87kg
MBP: 2.54kg (and thats the 15' inch). 17'inch MBP weights 2.99kg.

wow, BIG difference.

 

Actually it's big enough, another half a pound on something that I already think is as heavy as I want to carry all day. There's always something that's a bit better but heavier, you've got to draw the line somewhere.

That said, it really does look pretty nice.

 

Apple even got nVidia to insist that they aren't using Optimus though....that it's a homegrown graphics switching technology Apple made.

In all, like always, Apple's hardware design is some of the best in the world. It's just that for a lot of people the "value" (real or perceived) isn't there when one compares to the competition.

 

My MSI GX640 for 2.7kg. 0.3lb more than MBP, but with 9 cell battery.

 

Really? The Toshiba Satellite E205 weighs less, is about even in size and cost a $1000 less than the cheapest of the new Macbooks.

The HP dv6t is also a decent size laptop with a lot of power, but without the high price. It's only 1 pound heavier.

 

But only has Intel graphics which means it doesn't compare (for me).

 

some one here was saying the HP elitebooks had bad bat life? doesn't the new ones hit 6hours off a single charge? oh and if you need more slap on an extra 12 cells and watch that little HP more than double the battery life of the MBP 15

I still don't see why apple couldn't do better with the graphics, usually when apple refreshed I think "maybe", but this time around the first thing that came into mind was "oh I can't wait to read the threads about this".

but even still Apple's biggest weakness right now isn't there hardware, really it may be a little under powered but it is decent. the biggest issue is the software they put on it IMHO.

 

Way to totally ignore my post. My MSI cost me $1160, weighs 0.3lb more than the MBP, and totally, absolutely, unquestionably, DESTROYS the MBP in terms of performance. It walks over the MBP and doesn't even notice it walked over something.

 

Told you using a Alumium chassis means burning yourself stupid idea from the very start.

 

I figured people weren't buying the Macs for games. But if gaming is your primary concern, there's the excellent Alienware M11x, which is small and pretty powerful for a small laptop. It also has excellent battery-life.

There's also the New version of the Sony 14' Viao CW series, which is lighter than the 15 inch Macbook, and can be upgraded to a 2.93 i5 (turbo mode), with 6gb ram, 640gb HD , a blu-ray player, with Geforce 310m; all for $1174.

 

Then why not just get a business laptop with GMA graphics card since you are not doing anything 3D intensive at all? The business laptop will be cheaper, have better support, faster CPU, on par battery life if not more, just as light and thin, and much better build quality than the Mac, on top of the fact that it will be probably 20-30% cheaper.

If you actually care about the graphics card, do know that those on the MBPs are not much better than those intel graphics, you do know that the 330M in the MBP is underclocked and crippled to the 230M level right.



I think I'll just stop here because I don't like being trolled.

This is my general view of Mac fanboys:

"Because a Mac fan will always find all sorts of unsupported excuses to justify in getting a Mac. eg. "Intel makes special and high quality CPU for Macs only", "My macbook's special plastic made in the forge of Mars > your thinkpad's magnisium alloy", "A mac with 2 years old C2D technology feels faster than your i7 920XM PC notebook" etc. "

Ok, let's see, so far they've already used the excuse of "My macbook's special plastic made in the forge of Mars > your thinkpad's (sony's in this case) magnisium alloy", and "A mac with 2 years old C2D technology feels faster(marginal improvement in this case) than your i7 920XM PC notebook", ok, so what's next?

If you want to get a Mac just get it, we don't want to hear what are your excuses for yourself.

 

Your CPU is inferior
Your PSU is much bigger
Your 640 lacks an LED screen
Ergonomically speaking, you have an obtusive 9-cell battery poking out the back (albeit you can swap in a 6 cell thank goodness)
Battery life is superior on the Macbook
Your build quality is nowhere near that of the MBP

Outside of the 5850, the MBP whups that 640 day and night.

This is coming from a major MSI fan btw....

 

For CPU, not really, you can customise the laptop to i7-620 which is on par with MBP's highest CPU, or i7 720 which >MBP's best CPU, and even then the cost will be lower. So... actually, the performance of the GX640 in both CPU and GPU whups any model of MBP day and night.

 

can upgrade to the 820qm... they did really great on the screen (MBP has yellow tint ) ALSO, lets see apple beat the stock 3 year warranty + 1 year accidental damage...

 

If you really want the best screen, why not just get a HP EliteBook 8740w, with i5 (choice of i7), Firepro graphics card (ATI workstation lineup, something Apple will never put into their MBP as it will great dimish their profit margin), HD resolution LED backlit IPS display panel (simply destroys MBP's screen), much better build quality (workstation lineup) for the same price as a MBP 17.

 

I'm still on the fence in regards to the 720/620 depending on tasks at hand, as outside of full 4 core threaded apps, the 620 is better. Two threads, it thrashes the 720. But that's neither here nor there.

The system is sold and ships with a 430. Albeit for you and I, I'm sure we'd wait and scurry out and pick up the barebones version with the 5850 (heh).

The temps on the GPU with a 430 are pretty toasty as is which gives strong reason why it ships with a 430.

In addition, all my other points still stand.

Want to compare an Envy? Ok, now we're in the ball park at least. But there's more to laptops than, "Zomg! CPU! Zomg! GPU!" and the 640 (1656) is nowhere near in the class of the 15" Macbook Pro.

For example, your NP8690 is pretty much a thick monstrosity with a chunky PSU and terrible battery life compared to the Macbook Pro. Does it beat the Macbook in raw power? Sure, but I grow weary of the, "short guy; big truck" mantra that seems to only lock in on "CPU, GPU, Price."

I say this as someone who will skip these Macbooks on price alone and knowing my Dell SXPS in my sig dusts the Macbooks (while the 5850/5870 just decimates the GPU in the Macbooks) at a much lower total price even factoring in the 920XM and RGBLED screen.

But there's more to an enjoyable computing experience than raw CPU/GPU power.

 

Go ahead and upgrade to an 820QM. Run Prime95 + Furmark and come back and post. Then again, the Macbooks get pretty toasty too. I agree with the laptop mag when they say playing WoW the fans even on the 17" T9800 (2.93ghz) model were pretty audible and the unit got rather toasty especially on the upper left side.

And sitting here playing with a 1656 w/ 250M, there is no comparison. Trying to compare the 640/1656 WSXGA+ screen to the Macbook's LEDs is just, well, funny actually hehe.

I will say the 1656 does have less bleed and a better picture than the 17" panel on the 1727, though, but still not even in the same league.

 

Well I never did compare my 8690 to a MBP because I know they are not in the same class, as a clevo has the ideology that is direct polar opposite of a mac, which is minimum mobility and extreme performance. However, IMO a MSI 640 is quite close of a comparison in terms of form factor and weight, though maybe there is some difference in battery life. Envy and vaio z are even closer comparisons and still win out.

 

That's apple's favourite tatic.. bloat everything to make it look better even though its crap.. look at the ipad...

That's just proves why u shouldn't buy apple..

LOL these fanboys are beyond hopeless... only enlightenment will save them... we smart ppl who won't buy apple can just sigh at the stupid money cows for apple will apple milks them empty..

 

It also chugs along 20-30 degrees cooler when the comparable Apple's CPU is threatening to be able to boil water It depends on how serious you are about a machine that genuinely 'just works'

 

- Inferior cooling and noise
- Inferior touchpad
- heavier
- worse battery life
- uglier

"Quality" is not about adding up specs. That sort of thing would lead you to buy a Corvette V8 over over a far better engineered Porsche 6-cylinder car. Which would be an awful mistake.

 

"Quality" is also not just about thinking with your eyes. Balance is available - just not from Apple.

 

And it also cost me ONE HALF of the MBP, thank you. People keep ignoring this doubling price deal as though money's the least important factor in the equation.

LED screen is a bad argument. It can be seen that a CCFL screen can be just as good as a LED screen, just excelling in different areas. Going with CCFL trades away the weight savings and maximum brightness (which people don't use anyway) for truer blacks that don't look like grays.

And I'm not sure what is wrong "ergonomically" with a [sic] obtusive battery. I don't ever touch it do I?


And so when a notebook that costs TWICE as much has some reasonable competition with one that costs ONE HALF, then there is something seriously wrong.

 

Well anyways it's a workstation laptop, so battery life and weight is another story altogether. About touchpad, again, it's a workstation laptop for graphics design (much like what MBP was meant for), and you don't use touchpad for graphics design. Ugly or not is subjective, I find Macs look too common and ugly as well. For cooling... well, sorry but I never thought a macbook that is overheating left and right would be saying that other notebooks have inferior cooling.

Yes, it's not just about the specs, the workstation laptop definitely have superior build quality compared to the MBP.

 

Macbook touchpads aren't so great idk what people are talking about >.>

Also, funny fact but the USB ports on Macbooks are typically on the left side right? Well the mighty mouse(Apple's typical mouse) has a cord that's like 5 inches long i.e. it doesn't even reach the right side when you wanna plug it in the USB ports unless you pass it over the keyboard(and even then, it reaches the right of the touchpad).

Conclusion: Macbooks were made for lefties

Btw let's not mention build quality and Macbooks, they scratch quite easily and not to mention the interior isn't that well designed.

 

it is true, macbooks have one of the worst cooling systems to date. the HP elitebook while being nosier on idle is just as noisy when it is 'working' hard. and doesn't suffer from known heating issues.

really? I still hate them(I'm a lefty).

 

I should've said "made for" lol

And that's hardly a reason to like them, but it's a good reason to dislike them for righties >_>

Well that and the fact that there's only 2 USB ports for the 13" and 15" models.

 

You do realize that the current generation of Corvettes approaches supercar territory in terms of performance? The Z06 is probably the best sports car you could possibly buy right now for the money.

You want a car analogy that REALLY fits the whole Apple vs PC discussion? Apple is like a crappy FWD Volkswagen that people buy for the hipster image, when they could be buying a Lancer EVO that would destroy the Volkswagen in any performance test you could imagine.

 

Car analogies kinda fail considering Apple uses a different OS than most PCs. Unless there's a lot of cars out there that cost a lot, under-perform and don't use steering wheels to drive >_>

 

I think they have a steering wheel, but only one pedal.
Um in all seriousness, I don't get the car analogies anyway...I mean is that stuff really appropriate?

 

So how is OS X so much different from Linux?
Looks prettier?
Only thing is that Linux always comes with something missing out of box due to licensing issues (non compatbility with GPL to be pre include but you can always install it maually)

 

My post said "most PCs", and unless the demographics have changed, most PCs still run on Windows, which is quite different from *nix OSes like Linux, Unix or OSX.

 

A lot of people have picked up Ubuntu in recent years.
It is great but I hate the name and found an equally good OS OpenSUSE.