Corporate Perks - MacBook or MacBook Pro?

[Dave245]

Earlier today I went into the Apple store in Covent Garden London as I’m down here for work, so I had some time, i looked at the 12” MacBook and I was surprised by its retina screen it looks much better than my 15” 2011 MacBook Pro screen but also there is a screen setting that lets you create more space and I tested out multitasking (having pages open with the webrowser) and I was very surprised at how much detail and stuff I could fit on the 12” screen.

I will be waiting until WWDC to see what updates take place but I’m sold on the 12” MacBook! If there are updates at WWDC are they likely to be significant?

 

[SpitUK]

I wouldn’t say significant but MacBook updates are always worth it IMO.

 

[Dave245]

I wouldn’t say significant but MacBook updates are always worth it IMO.

I think the biggest update was when they added 16GB ram, I’m not sure what they will do this year or even if they will update at all this year.

The reason I ask is because if they don’t update this year is it just worth getting what’s out now or waiting until they do update? if it’s a case of waiting until 2019 the update would need to be worth it.

 

[SpitUK]

Wel this year the CPU, keyboard and the 16Gb were all worthy.

 

[Dave245]

Wel this year the CPU, keyboard and the 16Gb were all worthy.

I wonder what the jump will be this year, are we talking a jump like from 2015 to 2017?

 

[EugW]

Earlier today I went into the Apple store in Covent Garden London as I’m down here for work, so I had some time, i looked at the 12” MacBook and I was surprised by its retina screen it looks much better than my 15” 2011 MacBook Pro screen but also there is a screen setting that lets you create more space and I tested out multitasking (having pages open with the webrowser) and I was very surprised at how much detail and stuff I could fit on the 12” screen.

I will be waiting until WWDC to see what updates take place but I’m sold on the 12” MacBook! If there are updates at WWDC are they likely to be significant?

IMO, the ideal text size for my old eyes are with the effective resolution set at an exact pixel quadrupled 1152x720. However, that is a bit too tight in 2018 with current websites, so I agree with Apple's choice to set it at 1280x800. Quality is still excellent, and it provides additional screen space. I can't go any higher because I find it hard to read.

Wel this year the CPU, keyboard and the 16Gb were all worthy.

I was going to say the same thing, but you beat me to it. Those were three key updates. The fourth is the updated iGPU, which provided hardware 4K 10-bit HEVC decode and 4K DRM support. The former we can use right now, and the latter I think may be utilized in 10.14.

What would make it perfect though would be five more updates:

1) 2nd USB-C port
2) ThunderBolt 3
3) USB-C Gen 2 10 Mbps
4) Better trackpad
5) Better iSight camera

I don't see 1, 4, or 5 happening any time soon but I could see 2 and 3 happening 2019-2020, along with quad-core. However, that's 2+ years after I bought in 2017, so I figure I bought at the right time.

I wonder what the jump will be this year, are we talking a jump like from 2015 to 2017?

13" model? I'm still wondering if they'll update the 12" model at all.

 

[Dave245]

IMO, the ideal text size for my old eyes are with the effective resolution set at an exact pixel quadrupled 1152x720. However, that is a bit too tight in 2018 with current websites, so I agree with Apple's choice to set it at 1280x800. Quality is still excellent, and it provides additional screen space. I can't go any higher because I find it hard to read.

13" model? I'm still wondering if they'll update the 12" model at all.

I’m not sure what the resolution was I just know that when I tried out the 12” in the Apple store I was pleasantly surprised, I was able to alter it to “more space” setting under the display toggle. The screen looked really good even compared to my 15” 2011 MacBook Pro it looked soooo much better.

Yea the 13” has been rumoured for this year but it’s not 100% that it will even be a MacBook, some have said it’s a 13” version of the MacBook while others think it’s an updated Air with a Retina display.

 

[EugW]

I’m not sure what the resolution was I just know that when I tried out the 12” in the Apple store I was pleasantly surprised, I was able to alter it to “more space” setting under the display toggle. The screen looked really good even compared to my 15” 2011 MacBook Pro it looked soooo much better.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202471

There are four resolution settings:

1024x640 - Larger Text
1152x720 - (native divided by 4)
1280x800 - Default
1440x900 - More Space

I find Larger Text difficult to use because of the limited space.

The native resolution is the best text size for my eyes but is also a bit limited for space.

Default is the best compromise. Text is a little small but acceptable and it gives a decent amount of space. The space is the same as the old non-Retina 13” MacBook Pros.

More Space has even more space, the same as the 13” Air, but the text is too small for me.

 

[Dave245]

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202471

There are four resolution settings:

View attachment 760001

1024x640 - Larger Text
1152x720 - (native divided by 4)
1280x800 - Default
1440x900 - More Space

I find Larger Text difficult to use because of the limited space.

The native resolution is the best text size for my eyes but is also a bit limited for space.

Default is the best compromise. Text is a little small but acceptable and it gives a decent amount of space. The space is the same as the old non-Retina 13” MacBook Pros.

More Space has even more space, the same as the 13” Air, but the text is too small for me.

I didn’t know that before Friday when I tried out the 12” Mac at the Apple store. I was pleasantly surprised to be honest with the whole thing, the screen was sharp and crisp. I think there is a difference in the screen between the MacBook Pro and the MacBook but I couldn’t tell looking at them.

Cost wise there isn’t much difference once upgraded to the 16GB Ram, do you think there is much difference with the i7 processor on the MacBook?

 

[EugW]

I didn’t know that before Friday when I tried out the 12” Mac at the Apple store. I was pleasantly surprised to be honest with the whole thing, the screen was sharp and crisp. I think there is a difference in the screen between the MacBook Pro and the MacBook but I couldn’t tell looking at them.

Cost wise there isn’t much difference once upgraded to the 16GB Ram, do you think there is much difference with the i7 processor on the MacBook?

The MacBook i7 is usually only mildly faster than the m3 in sustained loads, and neither is even in the same league as the Pros.

Whether that matters to you or not is up to you.

 

[Dave245]

The MacBook i7 is usually only mildly faster than the m3 in sustained loads, and neither is even in the same league as the Pros.

Whether that matters to you or not is up to you.

I was thinking about get i5 version simply because of the 512 storage, but if the i7 isn’t worth it I would probably stick with the i5 or whatever Apple upgrade it to this year. If they don’t do any upgrades to it I’m going to have to decide if I should get the current model or wait until 2019

The only reason I ask about the top specs and so on is because I plan on keeping which ever Mac I pick up for a few years (much like I did with my 2011 MacBook Pro). I want the upgrade to be worth it spec wise as well as the screen and design.

 

[SpitUK]

Yes forgot about the iGPU which I use with my external 4k monitor.

I have had the 2015,2016 and now the 2017. When they update this time I’m maxing it out as I love this machine so much and it’s my desktop when hooked up to the 4k.

My wish list is:

13” but same form factor.
2 ports
Quad core

That’s it for me.

 

[EugW]

Yes forgot about the iGPU which I use with my external 4k monitor.

I have had the 2015,2016 and now the 2017. When they update this time I’m maxing it out as I love this machine so much and it’s my desktop when hooked up to the 4k.

My wish list is:

13” but same form factor.
2 ports
Quad core

Did you notice any difference in 4k monitor performance with the three model years?

You won't get quad core (or probably not 2 ports for that matter) this year. At the earliest I see quad core coming 2019 H2. That's 1.5 years from now.

I was thinking about get i5 version simply because of the 512 storage, but if the i7 isn’t worth it I would probably stick with the i5 or whatever Apple upgrade it to this year. If they don’t do any upgrades to it I’m going to have to decide if I should get the current model or wait until 2019

The only reason I ask about the top specs and so on is because I plan on keeping which ever Mac I pick up for a few years (much like I did with my 2011 MacBook Pro). I want the upgrade to be worth it spec wise as well as the screen and design.

The i5 and m3 are very similar in performance it seems within a few %. The difference in performance is probably not noticeable to most people. Maybe there is a noticeable performance with the i7 vs the m3, but it's usually not a huge performance difference either.

As you suggest, the main reason to get the i5 is for 512 GB storage. If you want a significant increase in performance, get i7 +/- 16 GB.

My usage patterns for my laptops emphasize longevity but with relatively low performance applications, so I went with m3 + 16 GB.

 

[SpitUK]

No I've only used the 2017 with an external monitor. Yes it’s just a wish list for now.

Did you notice any difference in 4k monitor performance with the three model years?

You won't get quad core (or probably not 2 ports for that matter) this year. At the earliest I see quad core coming 2019 H2. That's 1.5 years from now.


The i5 and m3 are very similar in performance it seems within a few %. The difference in performance is probably not noticeable to most people. Maybe there is a noticeable performance with the i7 vs the m3, but it's usually not a huge performance difference either.

As you suggest, the main reason to get the i5 is for 512 GB storage. If you want a significant increase in performance, get i7 +/- 16 GB.

My usage patterns for my laptops emphasize longevity but with relatively low performance applications, so I went with m3 + 16 GB.

 

[BeatCrazy]

I have both the 13" MBP (for work) and the 12" MB (m3, 16GB) for home.

While both are nice, the 12" MB is brilliant. It's almost impossibly light! The 13 MBP is literally 50% heavier, and it's noticeable. I really don't notice any difference in processing power, though obviously the 12" will strain after 30+ minutes doing heavy video editing.

 

[Dave245]

I have both the 13" MBP (for work) and the 12" MB (m3, 16GB) for home.

While both are nice, the 12" MB is brilliant. It's almost impossibly light! The 13 MBP is literally 50% heavier, and it's noticeable. I really don't notice any difference in processing power, though obviously the 12" will strain after 30+ minutes doing heavy video editing.

That’s great to know! I think I’m going to go with the 12” MacBook if they don’t release a 13” version anytime soon. I’d love to see an updated 12” or the rumoured 13” at some point this year! My MacBook Pro 2011 has served me very well over the years but after seeing that retina screen on the 12” in the Apple store Friday it blows my 15” MBP out the water! Plus the speeds are a lot faster compared to my HDD MBP so it seems in every way the 12” is much better.

 

[EugW]

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202471

There are four resolution settings:

View attachment 760001

1024x640 - Larger Text
1152x720 - (native divided by 4)
1280x800 - Default
1440x900 - More Space

I find Larger Text difficult to use because of the limited space.

The native resolution is the best text size for my eyes but is also a bit limited for space.

Default is the best compromise. Text is a little small but acceptable and it gives a decent amount of space. The space is the same as the old non-Retina 13” MacBook Pros.

More Space has even more space, the same as the 13” Air, but the text is too small for me.

The more I use the 12" MacBook, the more I am liking the native/4 resolution. Text quality of Default is good, and the text quality of even More Space is good too, but my old eyes work best with the native/4 rez. 1440x900 More Space is unusable for me, and 1280x800 Default is more tiring because of the small text. 1280x800 Default is fine for short surfing sessions on the couch but for actual work it depends on what I am doing. If a lot of text and screen width isn't a big issue, then 1152x720 native/4 is often best for me. If other stuff, then 1280x800 Default may be best.

This is not a surprise though, since I always thought the non-Retina 13" MacBook Pro has the best default text size, and that thing is 1280x800 on a 13.3" screen or 113 ppi. The 12" MacBook has the same 226/113 ppi so its native/4 resolution gives the same text size.

 

[Dave245]

The more I use the 12" MacBook, the more I am liking the native/4 resolution. Text quality of Default is good, and the text quality of even More Space is good too, but my old eyes work best with the native/4 rez. 1440x900 More Space is unusable for me, and 1280x800 Default is more tiring because of the small text. 1280x800 Default is fine for short surfing sessions on the couch but for actual work it depends on what I am doing. If a lot of text and screen width isn't a big issue, then 1152x720 native/4 is often best for me. If other stuff, then 1280x800 Default may be best.

This is not a surprise though, since I always thought the non-Retina 13" MacBook Pro has the best default text size, and that thing is 1280x800 on a 13.3" screen or 113 ppi. The 12" MacBook has the same 226/113 ppi so its native/4 resolution gives the same text size.

The more space option was small when I had a play around in the Apple store on Friday but it wasn’t so bad I couldn’t see it. I was more surprised at how crisp and bright the screen was compared to what I have now ie a 2011 MacBook Pro and an iMac 2012. After playing around at the Apple store it also made me realise that the screen on the 12” MacBook looked even better than my 2012 iMac that’s when I realised I should probably upgrade my iMac to a 5K iMac at some point as well.

 

[EugW]

The more space option was small when I had a play around in the Apple store on Friday but it wasn’t so bad I couldn’t see it. I was more surprised at how crisp and bright the screen was compared to what I have now ie a 2011 MacBook Pro and an iMac 2012. After playing around at the Apple store it also made me realise that the screen on the 12” MacBook looked even better than my 2012 iMac that’s when I realised I should probably upgrade my iMac to a 5K iMac at some point as well.

Yes, the 5K iMac is in a totally different league for text quality as compared to my 2010 27" iMac. I always complained about the text size for a desktop with the 2010 iMac, partially because it wasn't good quality. (I prefer larger text size on a desktop than I do with a laptop.) With the 2017 iMac, text at the same size is more easily readable so the size is more acceptable. I'd still consider increasing the text size by changing the resolution, but I can't because I'm using the 2.5K 2010 iMac as a tethered external monitor. Using non-native resolutions on a 2.5K iMac is a disaster, so I just leave both machines as is, to keep everything consistent. The 2.5K at that resolution is OK for some usage and I'm too cheap at the moment to buy an external 5K monitor which would probably cost me a thousand bucks. Plus, the native resolution of the 5K 27" is just enough to have two web pages side-by-side with no compromises.

On my Windows desktop, I use a 24" 1920x1200 screen. That's about 94 ppi. I like that a lot and 95-100 is my preference. Well, actually more like 190-200 (pixel quadrupled Retina).

The 21.5" iMac is 102/204, which is decent.
The 27" iMac is 109/218, which is just a tad high for a desktop IMO, but acceptable with Retina.

The 13" MacBook Pro is 113/227, which is decent for laptop, but the current default resolution is similar to the 13" MacBook Air, which means the equivalent of 128 ppi which is a tad high for me.
[doublepost=1525186552][/doublepost]Can you charge a MacBook Pro with an iPad charger? Just wondering, cuz I can charge my 12" MacBook with my 12 W iPad charger. I carry a USB-A to USB-C cable everywhere with my MacBook and at work I have left an iPad charger there to charge my iPhone and iPad. Therefore I usually don't carry my MacBook 29 W USB-C charger with me.

I suppose I could just buy a 29 W USB-C charger to leave at work, but I already have many 10-12 W iPad USB-A chargers and other USB-A chargers that charge the MacBook fine, so I don't have to pay the CAD$60 for the MacBook charger. Plus, I'd have to buy USB-C to Lightning cables to be able to charge a phone and iPad with a USB-C charger. I already own numerous USB-A to Lightning cables, so USB-A chargers are better for me. I even traveled with an iPad charger that could charge both the MacBook and my iPhone.

What I've noticed though is while the airplane USB plugs could charge my iPhone, they couldn't charge the MacBook, presumably because those are only 5 Watts.

 

[mj_]

You can charge both the MacBook and the MacBook through on any USB port even the ones at the the airport you've mentioned as long as you're not using the device while trying to charge it. As soon as you use it power consumption will be higher than power supply, and the battery will slowly discharge albeit at a slower rate than if you weren't plugged in. However, if your MacBook/MacBook Pro is in Standby it will slowly charge even when plugged into a 5W USB port.

 

[EugW]

You can charge both the MacBook and the MacBook through on any USB port even the ones at the the airport you've mentioned as long as you're not using the device while trying to charge it. As soon as you use it power consumption will be higher than power supply, and the battery will slowly discharge albeit at a slower rate than if you weren't plugged in. However, if your MacBook/MacBook Pro is in Standby it will slowly charge even when plugged into a 5W USB port.

No. Even when I plugged in the MacBook to a 5 W USB port on the plane, nothing happened, even when it was sleeping. Worked fine for the iPhone.

 

[Dave245]

Yes, the 5K iMac is in a totally different league for text quality as compared to my 2010 27" iMac. I always complained about the text size for a desktop with the 2010 iMac, partially because it wasn't good quality. (I prefer larger text size on a desktop than I do with a laptop.) With the 2017 iMac, text at the same size is more easily readable so the size is more acceptable. I'd still consider increasing the text size by changing the resolution, but I can't because I'm using the 2.5K 2010 iMac as a tethered external monitor. Using non-native resolutions on a 2.5K iMac is a disaster, so I just leave both machines as is, to keep everything consistent. The 2.5K at that resolution is OK for some usage and I'm too cheap at the moment to buy an external 5K monitor which would probably cost me a thousand bucks. Plus, the native resolution of the 5K 27" is just enough to have two web pages side-by-side with no compromises.

On my Windows desktop, I use a 24" 1920x1200 screen. That's about 94 ppi. I like that a lot and 95-100 is my preference. Well, actually more like 190-200 (pixel quadrupled Retina).

The 21.5" iMac is 102/204, which is decent.
The 27" iMac is 109/218, which is just a tad high for a desktop IMO, but acceptable with Retina.

The 13" MacBook Pro is 113/227, which is decent for laptop, but the current default resolution is similar to the 13" MacBook Air, which means the equivalent of 128 ppi which is a tad high for me.
[doublepost=1525186552][/doublepost]Can you charge a MacBook Pro with an iPad charger? Just wondering, cuz I can charge my 12" MacBook with my 12 W iPad charger. I carry a USB-A to USB-C cable everywhere with my MacBook and at work I have left an iPad charger there to charge my iPhone and iPad. Therefore I usually don't carry my MacBook 29 W USB-C charger with me.

I suppose I could just buy a 29 W USB-C charger to leave at work, but I already have many 10-12 W iPad USB-A chargers and other USB-A chargers that charge the MacBook fine, so I don't have to pay the CAD$60 for the MacBook charger. Plus, I'd have to buy USB-C to Lightning cables to be able to charge a phone and iPad with a USB-C charger. I already own numerous USB-A to Lightning cables, so USB-A chargers are better for me. I even traveled with an iPad charger that could charge both the MacBook and my iPhone.

What I've noticed though is while the airplane USB plugs could charge my iPhone, they couldn't charge the MacBook, presumably because those are only 5 Watts.

Is there a big noticeable difference with the 5K iMac when coming from say a 2012 iMac? I’m just wondering because i know that Netflix don’t stream 4K on the 5K iMac’s and I don’t think they support HDR so if I buy one will I really notice a difference? My currrent plan is to buy a 12” MacBook for portability and then upgrade my iMac to a 5K iMac at some point. I do use my iPad Pro for certain things, drawing, note taking and so on but I still prefer to use a Mac as well.

 

[mj_]

No. Even when I plugged in the MacBook to a 5 W USB port on the plane, nothing happened, even when it was sleeping. Worked fine for the iPhone.

Interesting.... I remember charging my 2016 13" MacBook Pro (nTB) at the airport with one of those USB ports.
I'll be traveling again shortly, this time with a 12" MacBook, and I'll make sure to run some more tests.

 

[EugW]

Interesting.... I remember charging my 2016 13" MacBook Pro (nTB) at the airport with one of those USB ports.
I'll be traveling again shortly, this time with a 12" MacBook, and I'll make sure to run some more tests.

Some of the airport USB plugs are 2.1 amps, which is over 10 Watts.

I believe the plane one I tried was 5 Watts, but it could also be an incompatibility too.

Plus I suspect it'd take a long time to try to charge a MacBook Pro with a 10 Watt supply. It's actually reasonably quick for a 12" MacBook.
[doublepost=1525208737][/doublepost]

Is there a big noticeable difference with the 5K iMac when coming from say a 2012 iMac? I’m just wondering because i know that Netflix don’t stream 4K on the 5K iMac’s and I don’t think they support HDR so if I buy one will I really notice a difference? My currrent plan is to buy a 12” MacBook for portability and then upgrade my iMac to a 5K iMac at some point. I do use my iPad Pro for certain things, drawing, note taking and so on but I still prefer to use a Mac as well.

Huge difference for text, not so much for 1080p Netflix. I'll reserve judgement for 4K HDR since the players are still pretty young. Some have issues dithering the colours properly.

As far as Netflix 4K is concerned, maybe we will find out when 10.14 is out.

 

[Dave245]

Huge difference for text, not so much for 1080p Netflix. I'll reserve judgement for 4K HDR since the players are still pretty young. Some have issues dithering the colours properly.

As far as Netflix 4K is concerned, maybe we will find out when 10.14 is out.

Ok thanks, with regards to the 12" MacBook or the iMac 5K really if there is no update at WWDC do you think it's worth just getting this years version?