A developer's review of the new Macbook 1.3GHz

[elithrar]

That said, I find x1050 a tiny bit too small. While I don't have any problems reading it, it's tiring to the eyes even at daytime and I'd rather much lean back a bit more and switch back to x960, or x900. You definitely get used to it and work around the limitations.

My experiences exactly (which I posted about in other threads). 1680x1050 is just that bit too fuzzy to work with day-to-day in a text editor.

Two column tmux at 1536x960 w/ smoothing on and 12pt Monaco is about perfect for me.

* Pillars of Eternity: Playable. Ish. Mostly held back by 3D effects. If you turn those down it runs, but it's not smooth by any means.

This worked well for me at 1440x900 + low settings—which still look good due to the painted backgrounds. Didn't experience any lengthy pauses though. Running the latest 1.5.xxx patch.

Your other comments about the new SSD plus the burst-friendly nature of the CPU ring true for me as well. Compiling Go (which is fast on any machine, mind), running local HTTP servers and Docker (boot2docker + VirtualBox until VMWare Fusion support is fixed) work flawlessly.

 

[iscajal]

This worked well for me at 1440x900 + low settings—which still look good due to the painted backgrounds. Didn't experience any lengthy pauses though. Running the latest 1.5.xxx patch.

Just tested it again. Feels like .. 12, 15fps in the opening scene at x900 with low details. I guess it will bog down more in larger fights. Definitely playable, but not a smooth experience.

It's funny how I always expect the fan to ramp up, and my ears are perking for the noise, but it just never comes.

 

[recoil80]

When at a desk, you need to adjust your sitting/working posture as well. While working on a 15" one was okay with regard to angle of neck, arm positions, seating height and so on, it's a definite drawback for the 12" one. Your neck tilts forward more and you need to watch out to avoid hunching over it. Yes, it's that much smaller.

I'm looking forward to getting the AV adapter and using it docked in clamshell mode, which I suspect is the best usecase for this thing while at a desk.

Now I own a MBA 11'' and is a real pain if I need to work on this think at a desk.
80% of the time I use my MBA in clamshell mode with a good 23'' display since I really can't use xcode with small resolutions. That's why I went for the 11, extra portability when I need to carry the laptop around and clamshell mode when it comes to serious work

The question is: if most of the time the laptop has to be used in clamshell mode this Macbook is a good choice?
Maybe the MBP 13'' is better since you have the HDMI port and you don't need another adapter connect the screen to the display.

I'm tempted by this new macbook, but at the same time I guess it is not the best choice.
Performances are not a real problem for me, even when I compile my project since the bottleneck is the hard drive and both machines have SSD. But working on a 12'' display is impossible in my opinion

 

[uczmeg]

Great thread.

I currently use a Macbook Air (Mid 2012 2GHz i7 8GB Ram) as my main machine as I need to be able to work anywhere at a given moment.

Daily work is docked at my desk running a Dell 24" Monitor at 1920x1200 and a second 19" monitor at 1280 x1024 (via a USB displaylink dock). Most work is web browser, text editor and MS office based. But I do VMWare VMs: Win 8 (with SQL server/IIS to test stuff and do demos of a web system) and Win XP (for some legacy VB work).

Even with both VMs running it's not often the system will fire up the fan or show any slowness and I never need both VMs together, I just get lazy.

When travelling/at home the above use is also likely (but just on laptop screen) but I often need the win8 VM and then I'll be connecting to a client's projector/screen and mirroring the laptop screen.

I'm REALLY hoping the 1.3 MacBook can replace the Air. Always looking to shave some weight off what I have to lug around and would love a retina screen.

I probably should wait until next year's version, but I couldn't resist. So a return is possible or one of my staff may get lucky!

Can't wait to try it. My video adaptor just turned up, but my Macbook is still at least 3 weeks away....

----------

My experiences exactly (which I posted about in other threads). 1680x1050 is just that bit too fuzzy to work with day-to-day in a text editor.

I use SwitchResX to run my 13" Air to run at 1680x1050 as i need more space for a few apps I have to use.

It's obviously not perfect, but I find it fine for daily use so I'm hoping the retina screen of the MB will be better than that...

 

[porterusaf]

Author of this thread, any updated thoughts? Anyone manage to get visual studio at least running 1/2 way decently in a vm?

 

[iscajal]

Author of this thread, any updated thoughts? Anyone manage to get visual studio at least running 1/2 way decently cin a vm?

Hi!

I've meanwhile tried a Parallel trial, and it runs _much_ better than VMWare Fusion.

I've been able to run VS2015 CE "ok". Performance-wise, it's still slower than native, but not prohibitively so. I've also tried VS2010 Express (for unrelated reasons) and performance-wise it ran OK. Not spectacular, but workable in a pinch. It's not really _fun_ to use, not by any stretch of the definition, and I was soon wishing for headless building and switched to working on my code in Sublime Text instead, just switching to the VM to build.


The downsides of running Windows apps under OSX remain. The biggest jarring factor is that the UI behaves differently to input than in OSX. Popups take just a bit longer; scrolling is in discrete steps and janky; horiz. scrolling doesn't work at all. The mouse doesn't feel as smooth, even though it translates perfecty. Everything takes longer, you fiddle with context menus and sometimes the UI just hangs for half a second. This is all something I've noticed on a MBP as well, so it's not exactly a raw performance issue; it appears to be something VS exhibits pronouncedly when running inside a VM.

I've tried things other than VS and they ran really well, with the caveat of a mental disconnect mentioned above when switching input between windows. I don't mind using other apps this way.

Desktop integration though works incredibly well (Parallels calls this Coherence). Especially nice is auto-pause once all Windows-hosted windows are closed. Windows windows (hah) feel as native as they possibly could be given the contstraints, with only small niggles here and there.

Aside: I managed to run Neverwinter Nights with ~15-40fps depending on the scene, with no visual artifacts. It ran in it's own window and was definitely useable to run around etc, even if not smooth. 3D support in parallels is really well done.

Running a Linux (headless) VM in Parallels is quite a bit slower. Compilation times take a hit, up to 2x in some corner cases. Power efficiency goes down too (but not in any BAD way - the core M is amazingly efficient and a slight load barely makes a difference in battery runtime even if it runs a tiny bit warmer). It's perfectly workable. Parallels definitely optimises against Windows, not Linux.

If I were to buy anew, I'd pick Parallels.

Hope this helps a bit. Let me know if you have more questions.

 

[porterusaf]

Hi!

I've meanwhile tried a Parallel trial, and it runs _much_ better than VMWare Fusion.

I've been able to run VS2015 CE "ok". Performance-wise, it's still slower than native, but not prohibitively so. I've also tried VS2010 Express (for unrelated reasons) and performance-wise it ran OK. Not spectacular, but workable in a pinch. It's not really _fun_ to use, not by any stretch of the definition, and I was soon wishing for headless building and switched to working on my code in Sublime Text instead, just switching to the VM to build.


The downsides of running Windows apps under OSX remain. The biggest jarring factor is that the UI behaves differently to input than in OSX. Popups take just a bit longer; scrolling is in discrete steps and janky; horiz. scrolling doesn't work at all. The mouse doesn't feel as smooth, even though it translates perfecty. Everything takes longer, you fiddle with context menus and sometimes the UI just hangs for half a second. This is all something I've noticed on a MBP as well, so it's not exactly a raw performance issue; it appears to be something VS exhibits pronouncedly when running inside a VM.

I've tried things other than VS and they ran really well, with the caveat of a mental disconnect mentioned above when switching input between windows. I don't mind using other apps this way.

Desktop integration though works incredibly well (Parallels calls this Coherence). Especially nice is auto-pause once all Windows-hosted windows are closed. Windows windows (hah) feel as native as they possibly could be given the contstraints, with only small niggles here and there.

Aside: I managed to run Neverwinter Nights with ~15-40fps depending on the scene, with no visual artifacts. It ran in it's own window and was definitely useable to run around etc, even if not smooth. 3D support in parallels is really well done.

Running a Linux (headless) VM in Parallels is quite a bit slower. Compilation times take a hit, up to 2x in some corner cases. Power efficiency goes down too (but not in any BAD way - the core M is amazingly efficient and a slight load barely makes a difference in battery runtime even if it runs a tiny bit warmer). It's perfectly workable. Parallels definitely optimises against Windows, not Linux.

If I were to buy anew, I'd pick Parallels.

Hope this helps a bit. Let me know if you have more questions.

Thanks a ton for the quick reply.

It sounds like we both have similar situations (developing some Windows and Linux applications). I've found Parallels to be optimal vs Fusion for almost the exact reasons you've mentioned. On my 2014 15' MPBr (maxed out) Visual Studio 2012 runs ok, but you really have to give the VM a TON of resource to get it to run fine. Even then it's still not perfect.

My plan was to drop the 15' MPBr (it's still not "great" at running a ton of VMs mostly due to only 16GB ram) and get a used Mac Pro 2013 for most of my development and get a 12' MBr for my on the go development.

So I guess what I'm saying is, is the performance 'good enough' that you don't mind doing some Visual Studio dev on the 12' MBr from time to time?

Also with your linux performance issue -- I found that installing Parallels tools on Linux (though it doesn't work with every kernel version) increases the linux VM performance exponentially -- especially in terms of usability, battery, and overall performance.

 

[darngooddesign]

Now I own a MBA 11'' and is a real pain if I need to work on this think at a desk.
80% of the time I use my MBA in clamshell mode with a good 23'' display since I really can't use xcode with small resolutions. That's why I went for the 11, extra portability when I need to carry the laptop around and clamshell mode when it comes to serious work

The question is: if most of the time the laptop has to be used in clamshell mode this Macbook is a good choice?
Maybe the MBP 13'' is better since you have the HDMI port and you don't need another adapter connect the screen to the display.

I'm tempted by this new macbook, but at the same time I guess it is not the best choice.
Performances are not a real problem for me, even when I compile my project since the bottleneck is the hard drive and both machines have SSD. But working on a 12'' display is impossible in my opinion

Since you work in clamshell 80%, power is your main consideration. Only you can decide if it is fast enough.

The other 20% of the time, are the weight, screen, and speakers enough of a draw over the less powerful CPU?

 

[palmwangja]

How about Wine if you really need VS?
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Wine...isual-Studio-2013-and-Watch-Dogs-465049.shtml

 

[porterusaf]

How about Wine if you really need VS?
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Wine...isual-Studio-2013-and-Watch-Dogs-465049.shtml

Have you ever tried Wine w/ VS 2013? I'd be curious about it's usability.

 

[palmwangja]

Have you ever tried Wine w/ VS 2013? I'd be curious about it's usability.

not with VS yet, but generally if I only need a couple of windows app on Mac, I'd go with Wine. Wine is usually much lighter and battery-friendly compared to VMs.

 

[headcase]

I'm sorry to say that based on my testing of Wine, its betaware, at best. More like crude alphaware, when the desired Windows application even runs. Hence why I ended up going back to Parallels and VMware when needing to occasionally run even just basic Office & IE.

 

[porterusaf]

not with VS yet, but generally if I only need a couple of windows app on Mac, I'd go with Wine. Wine is usually much lighter and battery-friendly compared to VMs.

Even on wines comparability list it lists visual studio as garbage.... Lol

 

[headcase]

Even on wines comparability list it lists visual studio as garbage.... Lol

Exactly.

 

[dyn]

How about using VSCode instead of the normal VS? Missing any features?

 

[porterusaf]

How about using VSCode instead of the normal VS? Missing any features?

Vscode is a glorified text editor. VS is an IDE that helps with the tons of crazy windows Apis and invented data types. Plus it allows you to compile and debug your code. I wish vscode was that good.

 

[kviksilver]

Will add my 2c without starting new post:

Use case: using for iOS development with small set of tools - Xcode, iTerm
no need for any VMs.

Speed: Slooooooooow
Medium sized iOS swift project: time xcodebuild … clean test
Core i7 4.0 Retina iMac, 16GB, 512GB SSD - 0m38.711s
Core M 1.3 MacBook, 8GB, 256GB SSD - 3m42.039s

Screen: great, using it on more space option and not seeing fuzziness. Enough space for xcode assistant window.

Keyboard: not so good but usable. Feel is good, like the click sound, like size of the keys, but travel is too short.

Looks: Awesome

Verdict: So slow... I think it is not to be used as a primary dev machine, although possible, it is too slow for anything serious...
I use it when on the move, and in bed because it would be hard to take iMac with me there... Combination of the two is probably best option for iOS developer money can buy right now.

Happy

 

[dyn]

Vscode is a glorified text editor. VS is an IDE that helps with the tons of crazy windows Apis and invented data types. Plus it allows you to compile and debug your code. I wish vscode was that good.

Any IDE is just as much a glorified text editor as any advanced text editor is That wasn't why I asked. VSCode is available for OS X, Windows and Linux and uses the core functionality of its bigger brother: Visual Studio. This tool is meant for a lot of developers not wanting a full fledged IDE but just the basics for editing and debugging code. You can use it for web development and also for .NET development.

In other words: do you really need the full fledged IDE due to some features or is the simplified version (VSCode) good enough?

 

[porterusaf]

Any IDE is just as much a glorified text editor as any advanced text editor is That wasn't why I asked. VSCode is available for OS X, Windows and Linux and uses the core functionality of its bigger brother: Visual Studio. This tool is meant for a lot of developers not wanting a full fledged IDE but just the basics for editing and debugging code. You can use it for web development and also for .NET development.

In other words: do you really need the full fledged IDE due to some features or is the simplified version (VSCode) good enough?

I write low level Windows code (Assembly/C/C++) so it's a must for me.

 

[moshen]

I think you'll find it to be much faster in practice with incremental compiles. I have your exact same setup with Retina iMac & 1.3ghz Macbook and work in Xcode as well.

Will add my 2c without starting new post:

Use case: using for iOS development with small set of tools - Xcode, iTerm
no need for any VMs.

Speed: Slooooooooow
Medium sized iOS swift project: time xcodebuild … clean test
Core i7 4.0 Retina iMac, 16GB, 512GB SSD - 0m38.711s
Core M 1.3 MacBook, 8GB, 256GB SSD - 3m42.039s

Screen: great, using it on more space option and not seeing fuzziness. Enough space for xcode assistant window.

Keyboard: not so good but usable. Feel is good, like the click sound, like size of the keys, but travel is too short.

Looks: Awesome

Verdict: So slow... I think it is not to be used as a primary dev machine, although possible, it is too slow for anything serious...
I use it when on the move, and in bed because it would be hard to take iMac with me there... Combination of the two is probably best option for iOS developer money can buy right now.

Happy

 

[porterusaf]

I think you'll find it to be much faster in practice with incremental compiles. I have your exact same setup with Retina iMac & 1.3ghz Macbook and work in Xcode as well.

Would you recommend your setup?

 

[bcaslis]

...
Verdict: So slow... I think it is not to be used as a primary dev machine, although possible, it is too slow for anything serious...
I use it when on the move, and in bed because it would be hard to take iMac with me there... Combination of the two is probably best option for iOS developer money can buy right now.

Happy

Let's be far though. You are comparing the MacBook to fastest desktop machine (except for serious multi-thread work). If the comparison was to another laptop the difference would not be as much. Even the 15" rMBP would be slow compared to that iMac.

 

[kviksilver]

Let's be far though. You are comparing the MacBook to fastest desktop machine (except for serious multi-thread work). If the comparison was to another laptop the difference would not be as much. Even the 15" rMBP would be slow compared to that iMac.

Yes lets be fair: I find it slow, but again as I said, not unusable... I also find it not good enough to be my main machine Don't want to trash little guy, it is amazing piece of hardware, just giving out numbers that I have access to and allowing people who have similar setups to judge if it is good enough for them... I hope this helps...

Actual numbers for Core i7 2.7 GHz rMBP on same project are 0m47.537s
Dont have access to any Core i5 machine, one more I can do C2D 2.3 if it actually turns on, but I am pretty sure nobody is interested in that.

@moshen Yes incremental builds help. numbers here are just for benchmark sake, definitely wouldn't wait for almost 4 minutes every time i press cmd+U. Actual time then are different, it is right on the edge to kick you out of the flow while waiting for test feedback...

 

[Ka Tec]

First of all thanks for this thread, I've been contemplating to buy a mb1.3 ghz. I develop html web apps using mysql, php and angulas Js. My question is has anyone used Windows bootcamp on the system? If yes how does it perform?? Is the battery life any good?