MacBook Pro. Professional or consumer laptop?

[richinaus]

In the Windows world 'pro' laptops are normally defined as those equipped with Xeon processors and Quadro graphics cards. They also must have passed at least 8 (and often up to 15) military specifications re: resistance to shock, dust, water, drops, temperature extremes etc. HP mobile workstations also have upgraded capacitors and pc tracings to ensure longevity. Mobile workstations are also certified by software vendors to run certain software packages optimally. Finally, 'pro' workstations come with 3-year onsite business support as standard. By these definitions, the MacBook Pro is a consumer machine, but a good machine anyway, or at least it used to be.

What you describe is a workstation laptop. The macbookpro has never in its existence pretended to be a workstation and I have no idea why you are comparing them.

Regarding the definition of 'pro' laptops and what they should be is down to pure marketing. I know plenty of professional people using these laptops to earn money, so they are 'pro'. But they are certainly not workstations, which are for a specific and very small section of the population [I am one of them].

I will say my usual argument that Apple is a consumer company who makes higher end computers. They are not in the business to compete with HP / Lenovo / Dell on workstation PC's. Why would they, it is a tiny market of a tiny market, in comparison to the tablet / phone / services business.

You guys really need to understand what Apple is as a business. They do not focus at all on workstation level computers. Look at the imac pro [which I have] - they couldnt even be bothered to give it a new case. And the mac pro - waited ages for this. They are the lowest of low priorities as they will barely sell none of these.
Whereas a reasonably specced thin laptop that looks great will sell plenty. Just because it is called 'pro' due to the marketing team doesnt mean it is a workstation, or should have replaceable parts etc.

 

[H2SO4]

Yes, you clearly don’t care if you look ridiculous. I get it.

What's ridiculous is deflection. That's how strong your argument really is.
[doublepost=1555914966][/doublepost]

Marketing.

Frankly, the whole concept of pro vs consumer laptops is just marketing rubbish. The only thing that matters is whether it does what you want for as long as you want it to.

Pretty much, but sometimes companies use the Pro/Enterprise/commercial moniker to overcharge customers. This is wrong.

 

[leman]

What you describe is a workstation laptop. The macbookpro has never in its existence pretended to be a workstation and I have no idea why you are comparing them.

At the same time many features of the MBP are typical for PC workstations: hardware GPU multiplexers (instead of software GPU switching implementation such as Optimus), improved surge protection, more robust power subsystems. It's more than a match for comparable workstation laptops such as Dell Precision 5530.

 

[SnoFlo]

What you describe is a workstation laptop. The macbookpro has never in its existence pretended to be a workstation and I have no idea why you are comparing them.

Regarding the definition of 'pro' laptops and what they should be is down to pure marketing. I know plenty of professional people using these laptops to earn money, so they are 'pro'. But they are certainly not workstations, which are for a specific and very small section of the population [I am one of them].

I will say my usual argument that Apple is a consumer company who makes higher end computers. They are not in the business to compete with HP / Lenovo / Dell on workstation PC's. Why would they, it is a tiny market of a tiny market, in comparison to the tablet / phone / services business.

You guys really need to understand what Apple is as a business. They do not focus at all on workstation level computers. Look at the imac pro [which I have] - they couldnt even be bothered to give it a new case. And the mac pro - waited ages for this. They are the lowest of low priorities as they will barely sell none of these.
Whereas a reasonably specced thin laptop that looks great will sell plenty. Just because it is called 'pro' due to the marketing team doesnt mean it is a workstation, or should have replaceable parts etc.

I described what are normally understood as 'pro' laptops on the Windows side, as stated in my first sentence. I thought that would have helped the discussion. Sorry if it didn't.

 

[dfgddikf]

In my mind a typical "pro" notebook is the one I'm being issued: A Dell Latitude 7480. It's just a no-fun, non-gimmicky, solid, good notebook. The body is made of some kind of abuse resistant plastic for people who didn't pay for their equipment. If I need a larger SSD, the IT department just swaps it.

MBPs, like every other Apple product, are certainly consumer oriented. MBPs are nicer machines with subtle details like the Force Touch trackpad and the fancy Touch Bar. The slender body made of fair traded, 100% eco, recycled aluminum. Those details are important for consumers to open their purses but don't matter to the vast majority of companies. Non upgradable SSD storage is probably a no-go as well.

 

[richinaus]

I described what are normally understood as 'pro' laptops on the Windows side, as stated in my first sentence. I thought that would have helped the discussion. Sorry if it didn't.

Yes, but my answer was saying ‘pro’ is simply a marketing term, and they are not comparable to the workstation laptops you mention. What may be understood as a pro machine does not translate accross. I would say the MBP is closer to the Surface book [which has a lower spec CPU] or a Razer.

I actually believe Apple at present have a really good balance in the specifications. Just a few things to sort out and it will be great. For ‘workstation’ tasks I would much prefer a desktop over any laptop, because if I can make the fans blast on an imac pro, the experience on a laptop would be awful.

I also see you have a zbook 17 G5 - a true mobile workstation. Can you recall the time when Apple ever was competing against a laptop like that? Apple laptops have always been thin and light compared to the competition, have always throttled for me, and are still exactly what I expect them to be. You bought the right computer for the specs you needed - the MBP would have been a disappointment [as it apparently is to many, without changing what it actually is].

 

[Falhófnir]

You only really have to look at the lineup as a whole to see the Pros must to a certain extent be aimed at consumers (as well) because there's very little choice outside, and it certainly doesn't make significantly better financial sense to buy the MacBook or MacBook Air than the MacBook Pro. They more/less stated the whole point of the non touchbar model was to make a unit that would appeal to consumers that had become used to buying the retina Pro over the Air previously. So we know for certain Apple considers the Pro brand at least partially applicable to consumer products as well.

Whether or not they should rectify this along the lines of the desktops, where there is a clear distinction between the consumer iMac, and the professional iMac Pro, the consumer Mac mini and the professional Mac Pro is up for debate, but it could make for a significantly cleaner lineup:

Macbook - basic, good value go-to computers for the masses.
13/15" sizes using old retina generation Pro chassis for cost savings.
$999 and $1399 starting prices/ 128GB and 256GB starting capacities.
U series chips.
Solid all rounders, useful mix of ports, nice, solid old design.

Macbook Air - slight premium for extra portability.
12/13" sizes using current MacBook and MacBook Air designs rolled into one line.
$1,099 and $1,199 starting prices/ 256GB starting capacities.
Low power Y chips (or ARM chips?).
Best portability and battery, TB 3 only, prettiest design, lots of colours.

Macbook Pro - high power, enterprise components.
16" size offering best of the 15 and 17 inch form factors.
$sky's the limit/ 512GB starting capacity.
Mobile Xeon.
Power oriented, chunkier design to facilitate better cooling and focused on robustness and reliability.

 

[bobbie424242]

In the Windows world 'pro' laptops are normally defined as those equipped with Xeon processors and Quadro graphics cards. They also must have passed at least 8 (and often up to 15) military specifications re: resistance to shock, dust, water, drops, temperature extremes etc. HP mobile workstations also have upgraded capacitors and pc tracings to ensure longevity. Mobile workstations are also certified by software vendors to run certain software packages optimally. Finally, 'pro' workstations come with 3-year onsite business support as standard. By these definitions, the MacBook Pro is a consumer machine, but a good machine anyway, or at least it used to be.

The Macbook Pro sure looks like a toy compared to the mobile workstation in your signature (maxed out HP ZBook 17 G5).

 

[currahee2100]

The Macbook Pro sure looks like a toy compared to the mobile workstation in your signature (maxed out HP ZBook 17 G5).

My work laptop is a Zbook 15v and they suck ass. The build quality is really bad. Xeon is just a name. I'm sure that they're just i7s with more cache and a higher clockspeed.

 

[mavericks7913]

You only really have to look at the lineup as a whole to see the Pros must to a certain extent be aimed at consumers (as well) because there's very little choice outside, and it certainly doesn't make significantly better financial sense to buy the MacBook or MacBook Air than the MacBook Pro. They more/less stated the whole point of the non touchbar model was to make a unit that would appeal to consumers that had become used to buying the retina Pro over the Air previously. So we know for certain Apple considers the Pro brand at least partially applicable to consumer products as well.

Whether or not they should rectify this along the lines of the desktops, where there is a clear distinction between the consumer iMac, and the professional iMac Pro, the consumer Mac mini and the professional Mac Pro is up for debate, but it could make for a significantly cleaner lineup:

Macbook - basic, good value go-to computers for the masses.
13/15" sizes using old retina generation Pro chassis for cost savings.
$999 and $1399 starting prices/ 128GB and 256GB starting capacities.
U series chips.
Solid all rounders, useful mix of ports, nice, solid old design.

Macbook Air - slight premium for extra portability.
12/13" sizes using current MacBook and MacBook Air designs rolled into one line.
$1,099 and $1,199 starting prices/ 256GB starting capacities.
Low power Y chips (or ARM chips?).
Best portability and battery, TB 3 only, prettiest design, lots of colours.

Macbook Pro - high power, enterprise components.
16" size offering best of the 15 and 17 inch form factors.
$sky's the limit/ 512GB starting capacity.
Mobile Xeon.
Power oriented, chunkier design to facilitate better cooling and focused on robustness and reliability.

Yup, Apple failed to clean up its lineup like Macbook series.

 

[pshufd]

https://www.hidevolution.com/evoc-h...0k-i7-9700k-i9-9900k-rtx-2070-2080.html?ref=1

This is what I call a desktop workstation. Up to 128 GB of RAM, 2 m.2 slots, multiple 2.5 inch HDD bays, 17.3 inch 4K screen. It's not sleek or thin and it looks kind of ugly but that would be great for trading as a Hackintosh. Or even if I could just run a macOS VM in it.

 

[LogicalApex]

https://www.hidevolution.com/evoc-h...0k-i7-9700k-i9-9900k-rtx-2070-2080.html?ref=1

This is what I call a desktop workstation. Up to 128 GB of RAM, 2 m.2 slots, multiple 2.5 inch HDD bays, 17.3 inch 4K screen. It's not sleek or thin and it looks kind of ugly but that would be great for trading as a Hackintosh. Or even if I could just run a macOS VM in it.

You can keep that monstrosity. The thing is over 12lbs and nearly 2" thick... Why would anyone want this over an actual desktop who needed these sort of specs?

I also love their Apple Care equal price of $1500 for 3 years... And their charges for bizarre extras like an uncharge for a Dead Pixel Warranty or paying to have them check your machine for backlight bleed. At those prices you'd expect these things would be standard...

 

[pshufd]

You can keep that monstrosity. The thing is over 12lbs and nearly 2" thick... Why would anyone want this over an actual desktop who needed these sort of specs?

I also love their Apple Care equal price of $1500 for 3 years... And their charges for bizarre extras like an uncharge for a Dead Pixel Warranty or paying to have them check your machine for backlight bleed. At those prices you'd expect these things would be standard...

It's a bit of work hauling a desktop to Starbucks. Or a medical office waiting room. Or in an airport lobby.

It is a lot lighter than the original Compaq portable computer.

 

[LogicalApex]

It's a bit of work hauling a desktop to Starbucks. Or a medical office waiting room. Or in an airport lobby.

It is a lot lighter than the original Compaq portable computer.

This thing weighs as much as an iMac...

https://www.apple.com/imac/specs/

I'm not sure I would consider either of these very portable...

 

[pshufd]

This thing weighs as much as an iMac...

https://www.apple.com/imac/specs/

I'm not sure I would consider either of these very portable...

I used to carry two Dell Inspiron 4000s around in my backpack and those were eight pounds each. Nobody hits the gym around here? You'd have to add keyboard and mouse and power cord to the iMac 21.5 and it would be awkward to haul because of the size. Those laptops are far more capable than the iMac and may even have better airflow.

 

[alongdingdong]

I consider this.

If you are video/photo editor that is frequently on the go for his/her work. Then you buy a laptop that allows you to do your profession, it has a bit more features to do so hence you pay more for it.

The Macbook Pro 13 2018 has the right bells to sort of speak, its a tool, one that you replace every few years as you will use it a lot and everywhere in lots of different environments.

That is how i see the Macbook pro 2018 13 inch. You are a professional that want to work specifically with MAC OS.

But majority buys this laptop to have it hooked up to a external monitor with keyboard and mouse 90% of the time. They buy it for the extra specs they dont need or use with the promise that they might need it to travel once on a blue moon.

Its a machine with compromises for professional use, its light its mobile it can do the job. But it has plenty of trade-offs.. Its not a desktop replacement machine, none of the laptops are in my opinion due heat, form factor and its screen size.

it`s a tool for a certain type of people in particular people that edit videos and pictures hence the more beefy specs and higher costs.

You dont need a pro model for your papers, homework that does not require the extra power that the pro model has, its a choice to spend that much money on a pro model laptop.

Dont justify buying a laptop that is not really fitting your needs if its glued to your desk for 95% of the time and you miss-use it as a desktop replacement. Because its not, its a portable trade off device for people that travel a lot and work on the go in particular professional use in the video edit/photo edit scene.

If you travel alot and only work on documents and spreadsheets, i much stronger recommend a air instead, Pro is not specifically just for the working crowd in general but a specific group of users.

But since so many people buy these pro laptops for none pro use or what they are designed for we are now in the 16 inch realm soon for those people.

Its your money off course but if you dont work frequently in video editing/ photo editing and move around alot, you really do not need a macbook pro but rather a imac or macbook air, but its those people complaining about the macbook pro not being good enough as they thread it too much as a desktop replacer instead of a mobile worktool that is a trade off.

But yeah that`s why the macbook pro is a consumer laptop now, because people just need to have a pro model for their personal reasons, but in most cases just dont make sense.

PS i am not a entitled person, i am just seeing so many people finding all kinds of reasons to need to have a pro mode whilst they really dont need it for what they do with it, the intend is one, the outcome is most of the cases the same.

In all fairness apple has tooo many Pro versions.... they should narrow it down again.... just the high end Pro version and none of those lower end specced ones... it makes no sense to water down a pro model but there is apple to blame for.

Before anyone asks FCPX will run fine for most youtube type of video making, Adobe premiere will make those pro models sweat alot more. And pro film makers are not going to mess around on low hardware specced stuff like the pro models.

So i have to admit not every video editor professional is off the same caliber. But that being said, i still feel its a tool for a specific group of people.