NEW! Hp Envy 14"/17" Make buying a macbook pro decision harder?

Man, shouldn't you call them HP Clone 14"/17"?

Let Apple do the design than grab everything possibile... nice try HP!

Look dude, this is a Mac forum. Don't compare OSX to Windoze machines because for most of us, there is nothing on the market right now that can make a decision of buying a Mac harder. "Did Apple drop the ball" ? HP is flat out knocking the MBP's design to boost sales.

Oh hey, look. It's Mini Displayport.

And if you're referring to the 13" model as far as Apple dropping the ball, the internal battery takes up a lot of space inside the computer and restricts the size of the board. This is one of the moments where Apple's obsession with sleek is a problem; HP's well-designed slice battery is a good workaround that lets there be plenty of space for the motherboard to hold all the components.

How can anyone compare OS X with...that other?

aibo82 said:

Hi

Just seen that the new hp envy line of notebook have been annouced HP have done a good job copying the MBP line even more now with slot loading blurays and glowing logos on the back!

And they cramed in a radeon 5830 and 3g into them!

And the 14" is an i5!

Did apple drop the ball?


http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/05/hp-envy-14-and-17-officially-official-envy-13-slowly-waves-good/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpq8hPs6ElM

Click to expand...

I don't think apple dropped the ball at all. I actually am going to go out on a limb and say most mac (any kind) owners do not care about an optical drive. I don't like mine and get rid of it given the option. Plus, my MBP has a much better trackpad, OS X, and better battery life (lb for lb) . I am going to get an Ipad for my 3G service that is unlimited, for half the monthly price, and with no contract.

Why should I get an HP again?

There is nothing in an HP Envy (that I want) that I don't have in my new MBP (i7).

I still think my MBP is prettier

aibo82 said:

Yeah they did copied it made far more advanced internal spec bumps and did a 13hour! battery! in the same dimentions and still kicked it out at less then £1000 for 14"

As much as I love apple I think they did drop the ball a little with the update even!

The envy can do 3 screens at full res gameing and is DDR5! at sub £1000 in aluminum , what really is the extra £900 giving me from apple now other than Mac OSX?

Click to expand...

Apple --> Mac OS X.
HP --> Windows.

If you understand just this much, you'd know what I mean, because there is a significant difference between them. It is relative to most people, to me its heaven and hell. Hell being Windows ofcourse. I've had to live with it for 12 years before I got a Mac and I know the misery I had to go through.

The end user experience comes from SOFTWARE. NOT from hardware. You can run Windows on a NASA supercomputer that eats babies and still won't be as satisfied as you would be owning a Mac. You're a kid. You like games. Your Mac can run Windows. Can your HP run OSX ? If you want to just play games, I'm telling you, go for a Windows computer. You'll be far more satisfied with it.

However, for most of us here, life is not playing computer games. Many of us are professionals in creative industries or are interested in Macs because of what its capable of from the software side. My point is that your thread doesn't belong here in the first place. This is a dedicated Mac forum. If you took this to the forums of Asus or MSI or whatever crap you can name, it would make sense.

If you enjoy a mediocre trackpad with a snap on battery then go with the HP Envy.

I love how watching blu-ray in 1080p on a 17" screen is touted as a feature. HP must think their customers are idiots. Oh wait.

I just bought a 15" Macbook Pro and it was much more expensive than this. I do love OSX but windows 7 isn't that bad. It definitely makes it a tougher decision because of the price/features.

This release really shows how subpar the 13" MacBook Pro really is (if you can call it a Pro machine with a 2 year old chip)

aibo82 said:

Windows 7 have supprised me I was about to give up till 7 was annouced but I have to say I aint had one single crash since installed on the release date! and now all I see is snow leopard bug fixes! im sure if apple guys tried it for a month you'd be suprised to!

I really was considering mac again right up untill the point of seeing them envy's but £900 less is far more apealing then a fruit logo on the back because windows 7 has caught up very well!

Even the i5s are quad cores! its DDR5 runs 3 screens appently more solid then unibody as some reports that it dont flex like macbook pros do when you press them in the center!

HP are doing what apple started years ago are takeing a product and improveing on it something that no company had done befor and dell have done it with the adamo line! its seriously giving apple competition and uncovering just how much less you get for having that apple logo on the back!

Click to expand...

They can do all they want but they still can't run Final Cut Pro.

drew0020 said:

I just bought a 15" Macbook Pro and it was much more expensive than this. I do love OSX but windows 7 isn't that bad. It definitely makes it a tougher decision because of the price/features.

This release really shows how subpar the 13" MacBook Pro really is (if you can call it a Pro machine with a 2 year old chip)

Click to expand...

That "2 year old chip" has the same performance as an Arrandale i3.
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/899572/

And if these HP Envy's are truly using the Clarksfield quad cores you can bet the thing is going to be overheating like crazy. Although I doubt it considering the fact that there is no mobile quad core i5.

aiqw9182 said:

That "2 year old chip" has the same performance as an Arrandale i3.
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/899572/

And if these HP Envy's are truly using the Clarksfield quad cores you can bet the thing is going to be overheating like crazy. Although I doubt it considering the fact that there is no mobile quad core i5.

Click to expand...

Please don't defend Apple on this. The 13" MacBook Pro is a joke. Who said anything about an i3 anyway? It should have an i5. This is coming from someone who just bought a MacBook Pro but I'm fair enough not to defend Apple when they make poor decisions unlike many apologists on these boards.

drew0020 said:

Please don't defend Apple on this. The 13" MacBook Pro is a joke. Who said anything about an i3 anyway? It should have an i5. This is coming from someone who just bought a MacBook Pro but I'm fair enough not to defend Apple when they make poor decisions unlike many apologists on these boards.

Click to expand...

Lol? I didn't buy a MacBook Pro and I don't plan on buying one because I don't need one.

For one the i5 chip uses 35 watts and the 13" uses 25 watt chips. For two the i5 is what Apple uses in their 15" and they wouldn't also put it in their lower end. That's not how they work. Maybe you should do a little research next time.

Why do people act like comparing the Envy to the Macbook pro that it's going to make steve jobs create a new Portable?

Honestly if you have one of the newer core 2 Duo's like the 2.8 it doesn't matter unless your running SW that's going to take advantage of the Multi Cores.

And if you wan't a HP envy so much then buy one. But by posting this thread this shows that you started a topic just to get a reaction from people and Albeit not a good reaction either.

aibo82 said:

Im mearly stateing my opinion why do users feel the need to attack! I was weighing up the benifits of mac-pc as the mac's look very apealing till the HP envy came along!

I love apple style design and the there service but then again not stupid with money! If windows 7 on a £900 less machine can do the task better or on par with a macbook pro then it seems a hard choice!!

Click to expand...

Great, then get an HP Envy and enjoy your mediocre trackpad and snap on battery. The i5 is a dual-core CPU by the way.

drew0020 said:

Please don't defend Apple on this. The 13" MacBook Pro is a joke. Who said anything about an i3 anyway? It should have an i5. This is coming from someone who just bought a MacBook Pro but I'm fair enough not to defend Apple when they make poor decisions unlike many apologists on these boards.

Click to expand...

Apple went with Core ix chips on the Macbook Pro "when" they could also stick in a discrete GPU because Intel's IGP sucks.

The Macbook 13" motherboard was so cramped they had no way of adding an external GPU to match IGP so they stuck with a C2D and had intel craft the 320m.

They couldn't have gone with a Core i3 because then the laptop would be stuck with crappy IGP only for graphics.

drew0020 said:

Please don't defend Apple on this. The 13" MacBook Pro is a joke. Who said anything about an i3 anyway? It should have an i5. This is coming from someone who just bought a MacBook Pro but I'm fair enough not to defend Apple when they make poor decisions unlike many apologists on these boards.

Click to expand...

Maybe you should look into the MBP13 current situation:

No room for discrete GPU (No 13" laptop under 1" has a discreet GPU).

Could theoretically reduce size of battery or remove superdrive to fit one, but then we run into 5 hour battery life (unacceptable).

Make the MBP13 thicker (and heavier). Price would increase either way.

What do we get out of all that? Most of the users won't even see the benefits of the i5/GPU.

aibo82 said:

Hi

Just seen that the new hp envy line of notebook have been annouced HP have done a good job copying the MBP line even more now with slot loading blurays and glowing logos on the back!

And they cramed in a radeon 5830 and 3g into them!

And the 14" is an i5!

Did apple drop the ball?


http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/05/hp-envy-14-and-17-officially-official-envy-13-slowly-waves-good/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpq8hPs6ElM

Click to expand...

No, No Apple did not drop the ball. It's still not running Mac OS X. Therefore, nice try, HP. You'll only catch the in-duh-viduals who are attracted by flashing lights and pretty colors. FTW

nuckinfutz said:

Apple went with Core ix chips on the Macbook Pro "when" they could also stick in a discrete GPU because Intel's IGP sucks.

The Macbook 13" motherboard was so cramped they had no way of adding an external GPU to match IGP so they stuck with a C2D and had intel craft the 320m.

They couldn't have gone with a Core i3 because then the laptop would be stuck with crappy IGP only for graphics.

Click to expand...

That i3 trade-off also would've provided zero CPU gains. All you would be getting is a worse GPU. You made a mistake about Intel crafting the 320m though, it's nVidia that crafted it specifically for Apple.

aibo82 said:

Im mearly stateing my opinion why do users feel the need to attack! I was weighing up the benifits of mac-pc as the mac's look very apealing till the HP envy came along!

I love apple style design and the there service but then again not stupid with money! If windows 7 on a £900 less machine can do the task better or on par with a macbook pro then it seems a hard choice!!

Click to expand...

We don't care about your opinion and the fact that its wrapped in nonsensical English doesn't help your point.

If it's not a hard choice then vote with your money and spare us your banal postings. I don't see why you guys want to come on Macrumors and start talking about crappy PC running crappy Windows 7 and expect us to sit and pat you on the back.

Get a freaking clue mate.

Buy the Envy and leave us be.