Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MacBook Pro Speed Bump
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Mole
I'm telling you , there is a new designer for Apple who is obviously from a PC background. Ever since the 100+ dpi displays in the Powerbooks I have noticed some really really stupid design decisions. Higher rez screens at the cost of viewing angle and uniformity. Screen tilt angle. Less ports. Glossy screens. Just wait, the next MBPs will have right mouse buttons.
RIP Apple.
terkans said:
I'm telling you , there is a new designer for Apple who is obviously from a PC background. Ever since the 100+ dpi displays in the Powerbooks I have noticed some really really stupid design decisions. Higher rez screens at the cost of viewing angle and uniformity. Screen tilt angle. Less ports. Glossy screens. Just wait, the next MBPs will have right mouse buttons.
RIP Apple.
The LCD's Apple is using now are much better overall. I might actually like a second button on the trackpad also.slffl said:
Just got back from shopping and admiring the new macbooks and MBPs. I think they may not let me in there again unless I buy something. I'm starting to get recognized.
Anyway, the glossy screens are impressive. After playing on the new macbooks for awhile, the MBP with the matte screen (they didn't have the glossy ones yet) looked washed out. There were already a bunch of fingerprints on the macbook screens. I found my brain getting very dizzy while I was trying everyday tasks like typing in word. my eyes kept changing focus between the words on the screen and my reflection/the slight glare. I'm guessing one gets used to it or my mind is too ADHD to focus on one particular visual cue. Eh, I could live with either but since I have no plans to work outdoors or only watch dvds, it seems the matte screen may be better for me because I would be the type of person to get po'ed when a scratch appears on the glossy screen.
oh, I don't know if I'm a fan of the new keyboard design of the macbooks but since I'm not buying one, I guess it doesn't really matter. And the black ones are nice. They aren't glossy like the white ones. I've gotten so used to the metallic look of the powerbooks that I forgot that I too once owned a black powerbook.
Anyway, the glossy screens are impressive. After playing on the new macbooks for awhile, the MBP with the matte screen (they didn't have the glossy ones yet) looked washed out. There were already a bunch of fingerprints on the macbook screens. I found my brain getting very dizzy while I was trying everyday tasks like typing in word. my eyes kept changing focus between the words on the screen and my reflection/the slight glare. I'm guessing one gets used to it or my mind is too ADHD to focus on one particular visual cue. Eh, I could live with either but since I have no plans to work outdoors or only watch dvds, it seems the matte screen may be better for me because I would be the type of person to get po'ed when a scratch appears on the glossy screen.
oh, I don't know if I'm a fan of the new keyboard design of the macbooks but since I'm not buying one, I guess it doesn't really matter. And the black ones are nice. They aren't glossy like the white ones. I've gotten so used to the metallic look of the powerbooks that I forgot that I too once owned a black powerbook.
(emphasis added)
Exactly the problem I have with this stupid "design feature". I honestly cannot see any reason for it other than markerteers singing "brighter must equal better!"
When I try to look at an image on my colleagues Dell, I'm forever bobbing my head around to see the whole thing. It's downright ridiculous!
caralck said:
Exactly the problem I have with this stupid "design feature". I honestly cannot see any reason for it other than markerteers singing "brighter must equal better!"
When I try to look at an image on my colleagues Dell, I'm forever bobbing my head around to see the whole thing. It's downright ridiculous!
Well I have a friend who owns a MBP and he uses this site too, so I thought I could ask for some help on a decision. I truly cannot decide between a macbook pro and a macbook. The money part isn't an issue but I've been reading the posts and it appears that this glossy screen is quite the pain in the butt. However the macbook has the portibility and possibly longer batterly life as well is what I've read. However I really like the larger size on the MBP and also the better graphics card. What should I do?
I'm also a bit torn... I would like to switch to a MBP, but there are a lot of features of this new MB that I believe Apple will incorporate into the MBP lineup in the future.
I recommend that if you can wait, just wait a few months.
I recommend that if you can wait, just wait a few months.
lietsche said:a lot of features? what features?
this bloody magnetic latch??? what else???
pff. ye-ah. And a mandatory glossy screen. Obvi.
bbrosemer said:
bbrosemer said:
I had an old Compaq Armada that did all of that and at 133MHz, I think you'd disagree. Well, it might not have had USB because it was 1996 and I think USB was coming out on systems in '97, I don't remember anymore
Basically any system from '97 will fit your definition, and I really don't agree with that.As far as definitions go, I'll stick with Oxford. The original reason this discussion started was because some guy used the word to correctly describe his MBP and people got on his case. He felt his MBP was obsolete, and Oxford agreed.
matticus008 said:
By my argument a car that only goes 35 mph would be obsolete. I was pointing out the error in your original logic. While you're still not paying attention, you are good at changing what I originally said to suit your needs.
matticus008 said:
You again misquote me. The quote you supplied had nothing to do with me responding to your above assertion. I agreed that outdating was only half of your supplied definition:
matticus008 said:
And pleas do not belittle me with what != means, any person who has even looked into a programming book understands what that little comparison operator means, thank you very much.
Also, I never said that you said cardinal and crimson were the same. You said the dictionary implies that they could be, and I pointed out that Oxford, at least, did not agree with that. Even though according to the dictionary scarlet and cardinal are interchangeable, they are both still different from the definition of crimson. That was just a little humorous section on my part to liven the mood, I'm sorry it failed (as with the Mustang example).
Parts supplier changes on a car do not change it from it's original production, the product is still considered the same if the parts function to the exact same specification. Also, an option for a different engine is different than replacing an engine completely. They still produce my exact same Mustang with the exact same specifications.
That's what happened with the MBP, the processors were replaced and no longer produced. That's what the original poster was implying. Anyone who understands English also understands that context plays a huge role in how connotation is understood. The original poster implied in context that his MBP was no longer produced via the word obsolete, and I was only trying to defend him when people obviously come up with "it still works doesn't it?" even though no definition of obsolete that is written in any book, anywhere states or implies that the object is broken. That is all I was trying to do.
I'm not trying to get your goat or anything, I was trying to help a fellow macrumors member from people thinking Obsolete == Brokenor even Obsolete === Broken.
BTW:
matticus008 said:
For clarification, I stated that makers like ATI provide cards or chipsets. I did not, however, use the term embedded. Also, at least on desktop systems, you are able to plug in an AGP card to override the integrated chipset, though it would not be upgrading the existing chipset. Unless you mean that since they are built into the motherboard you can't have an upgrade because it would need to be a different motherboard because you can't remove them to upgrade them, which is obviously correct.
generik said:
Haha! Couldn't have said it better myself!
The MBP is not obselete come on be realistic... Yes a system from 97 is not obselete there are people in this country you not being one of them who can't afford a comptuer anywhere near new so a computer from 97 could fit there needs and hence would not be obselete.
bbrosemer said:
I didn't say it, first of all. I just stated what obsolete means. Also, I don't care what you say, a computer from '97 is obsolete. It doesn't matter what the standards are to the individual. The definition isn't:
What you consider to be old and no longer useful.
The definition is:
No longer produced or used; out of date.
So actually outdated does equal obsolete
ZYNC,
Its difficult to get too much mileage out of a faulty definition. "Obsolete" does not pertain at all to production, only to usage. As you can see from the pasted Merriam-Webster definition below, no mention is made of production. Nor is production referred to in any other online dictionary (such as yourdictionary.com or dictionary.com, etc.) The Latin root literally means "to fall into disuse", NOT "to no longer be made". I'm afraid everyone elses sense of how the word should be used is spot on.
"Main Entry: 1ob·so·lete
Pronunciation: "äb-s&-'lEt, 'äb-s&-"
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin obsoletus, from past participle of obsolescere to grow old, become disused, perhaps from ob- toward + solEre to be accustomed
1 a : no longer in use or no longer useful b : of a kind or style no longer current : OLD-FASHIONED
2 of a plant or animal part : indistinct or imperfect as compared with a corresponding part in related organisms : VESTIGIAL"
Its difficult to get too much mileage out of a faulty definition. "Obsolete" does not pertain at all to production, only to usage. As you can see from the pasted Merriam-Webster definition below, no mention is made of production. Nor is production referred to in any other online dictionary (such as yourdictionary.com or dictionary.com, etc.) The Latin root literally means "to fall into disuse", NOT "to no longer be made". I'm afraid everyone elses sense of how the word should be used is spot on.
"Main Entry: 1ob·so·lete
Pronunciation: "äb-s&-'lEt, 'äb-s&-"
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin obsoletus, from past participle of obsolescere to grow old, become disused, perhaps from ob- toward + solEre to be accustomed
1 a : no longer in use or no longer useful b : of a kind or style no longer current : OLD-FASHIONED
2 of a plant or animal part : indistinct or imperfect as compared with a corresponding part in related organisms : VESTIGIAL"
snmcrae said:
SNMCRAE,
IT IS difficult to get too much mileage out of a faulty definition isn't it? I was using the Oxford English Dictionary included with Mac OS X, as I stated. I don't care what Webster's says, as I've never liked Webster's anyway—it's not very comprehensive. So how about we find a good, full source?
The full version of the Oxford English Dictionary states:
1.No longer used or practised; outmoded, out of date.
HOWEVER the verb form of the word applies to production:
trans. To render obsolete. Formerly (also): to consider obsolete; to discard as being out of date, to cease to produce or use (obs.).
Maybe no other online dictionary agrees, and that's because they're just for quick lookups. Always check for better sources. Oxford is the most comprehensive dictionary, thus giving an actual definition for the transitive verb form of obsolete, instead of just to render obsolete.
It was first used in 1640.
It also has a subtext:
Now rarely with a person as subject and usually with reference to the replacement of one technology by another.
Hmmm, I wonder what that could mean?
generik said:Let's just stop playing games, perhaps we should just say the 1.83Ghz MBP has been deprecated, and let it rest at that shall we?
Makes more sense than "obsolete".
zync said:
The 1.8 MPB's no longer used? No way, I'm sure 100% of them are still in use. So that would mean they're not obsolete.
To me, it is obsolete if you can no longer use it for what it was designed to do. When the manufacturer stops supporting the product it moves closer to death. I have a computer I bought in 2000 and it still works for me, somewhat slower and in a few more years the OS will not be supported, but that is OK. It is obsolete in some meanings of the word, but I can and do still use it.
Unfortunately, you've made a big mess of the whole thing, Zync. Even your own post contradicts you. As you say, the adjectival form deals exclusively with use, not production. The original poster was using it as an adjective. Secondly, as your boldfaced definition clearly states, the transitive verbal form is both outdated and, lo and behold, obsolete. Thus the use of the qualifiers "formerly" and "(obs.)"
In addition, I am the proud owner of an unabridged, hardbound OED. Here is the unabridged first and second definitions for the word:
adjective
1. That is no longer practiced or used; fallen into disuse; of a discarded type or fashion; disused, out of date.
2. worn out, effaced through wearing down, atrophy or degeneration.
3. Biol. Indistinct. Not clearly or sharply marked; very imperfectly developed, hardly perceptible.
verb (cheifly N Amer)
1. trans To render or account obsolete; to discard, or practise no longer, as being out of date; to disuse.
That's it! No mention of production for either form. I trust my OED is not a misprint. You will be quite unable to corroborate your definition, I'm afraid. Please endeavor to provide a single URL that does not require some type of membership that might back-up your definition which, thus far, has been refuted by every single source I've checked (including the OED).
In addition, I am the proud owner of an unabridged, hardbound OED. Here is the unabridged first and second definitions for the word:
adjective
1. That is no longer practiced or used; fallen into disuse; of a discarded type or fashion; disused, out of date.
2. worn out, effaced through wearing down, atrophy or degeneration.
3. Biol. Indistinct. Not clearly or sharply marked; very imperfectly developed, hardly perceptible.
verb (cheifly N Amer)
1. trans To render or account obsolete; to discard, or practise no longer, as being out of date; to disuse.
That's it! No mention of production for either form. I trust my OED is not a misprint. You will be quite unable to corroborate your definition, I'm afraid. Please endeavor to provide a single URL that does not require some type of membership that might back-up your definition which, thus far, has been refuted by every single source I've checked (including the OED).
Here's an idea - how about we all get back on topic discussing the MacBook Pro speed bump and quit quibbling over semantics.
Otherwise, might as well have the thread closed...
Otherwise, might as well have the thread closed...
snmcrae said:
I am quite aware that the original poster had used it as an adjective. It's not just a verb, however, it is a transitive verb which means it requires a direct object. If something can be obsoleted, then that something will be obsolete, won't it?
Fortunately, I'm a student of a University which gives me a free subscription to the online version of the Oxford English Dictionary, which I'm quite sure is more current than either your first or second edition. Even the version internal to OSX has that part of the definition actually.
ALso, I have made no mess of anything. The definition says "Formerly" because under that line it mentions the line about obsolete now being related to technology, which you seem to somehow overlooked.
This is really annoying to have to log on to outside the university, but I'll run through a proxy to fetch you your valuable proof. And I must ask, if you own an OED, why the hell would you ever quote Webster's?
For some reason that file wouldn't show, maybe it will now?
I have only removed the details of the proxy from the URL. Please don't argue that the replacing of one technology with another has to be immense in order to count, that will really be splitting hairs. I hope you didn't think I was just making up these quotes and ascribing them to Oxford because that would be incredibly stupid and a larger waste of my time than even this is.
Exactly. It is obsolete in some meanings of the word and not to you, and that is fine. As I've said, I was just trying to stop people from heckling a guy who called his computer obsolete. They asked him if it no longer functioned, which is far from what the term obsolete means. Originally, all I was trying to say is that the word obsolete in no way implies that the object has ceased to work.
I have only removed the details of the proxy from the URL. Please don't argue that the replacing of one technology with another has to be immense in order to count, that will really be splitting hairs. I hope you didn't think I was just making up these quotes and ascribing them to Oxford because that would be incredibly stupid and a larger waste of my time than even this is.
YunusEmre said:
Exactly. It is obsolete in some meanings of the word and not to you, and that is fine. As I've said, I was just trying to stop people from heckling a guy who called his computer obsolete. They asked him if it no longer functioned, which is far from what the term obsolete means. Originally, all I was trying to say is that the word obsolete in no way implies that the object has ceased to work.
Attachments
aayres3 said:The money part isn't an issue but I've been reading the posts and it appears that this glossy screen is quite the pain in the butt. However the macbook has the portibility and possibly longer batterly life as well is what I've read. However I really like the larger size on the MBP and also the better graphics card. What should I do?
Same situation, answer:
ThinkPad 14.1 T60p
Love Apple, but this upgrade cycle, there is just not that perfect mix of power and portability, the reason why I own a 12"PB. Plus, glossy screen....no thank you.
So, two things have been cleared up by your post.
One: Obsolete, as an adjective (which is how it is being used here and really is the only way it is used in modern speech) does not mean "no longer produced or made". Your post offers no evidence that the adjective carries this meaning.
Two: The arcane verb "to obsolete (something)" has the once-used *tertiary* meaning of "to cease production", though this is "former" and now obsolete usage.
So, to get it straight. You jumped down all these peoples throats because they did not consider an archaic verbal form of a word which is being used here as an adjective and for which they very much in their rights uphold the STANDARD DEFINITION AND MODERN USAGE. I just don't get it.
One: Obsolete, as an adjective (which is how it is being used here and really is the only way it is used in modern speech) does not mean "no longer produced or made". Your post offers no evidence that the adjective carries this meaning.
Two: The arcane verb "to obsolete (something)" has the once-used *tertiary* meaning of "to cease production", though this is "former" and now obsolete usage.
So, to get it straight. You jumped down all these peoples throats because they did not consider an archaic verbal form of a word which is being used here as an adjective and for which they very much in their rights uphold the STANDARD DEFINITION AND MODERN USAGE. I just don't get it.