No it doesn't. You can open it back up and resume where you left off. Closing the lid on a PC or Mac is the same, it just sleeps. Hibernate is different because it stores all the ram info onto the hard drive.
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.
MBP 13inch VS Other OEM's 13inch
- Thread starter lostinspace2012
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No it doesn't. You can open it back up and resume where you left off. Closing the lid on a PC or Mac is the same, it just sleeps. Hibernate is different because it stores all the ram info onto the hard drive.
I always find it funny when people compare PCs and Macs based simply on the hardware. The operating system is the key here and my 4 year old MacBook Pro is running just fine with Snow Leopard and doesn't feel slow. The specs only matter when it comes to what you're going to run on the thing. If you're going to run Windows on the Mac exclusively then yes, the specs matter but if you're running OS X take it from me, the hardware is more than good enough.
I have a question, and I am not joking. I just wanted to know how old you people are. I want to see who use mb pros.
No. If all you do is check email, browse the web, and look at an occasional spreadsheet or word doc, then sure. If you actually use your computer to process substantial amounts of data (image rendering, video encoding, etc) hardware specs from 4 years ago are not even remotely sufficient.
Gamers feel the burn as well. Anyone who goes out and buys a 13" MBP today, is buying GPU technology that is already a year and a half old. 15" & 17" MBP owners have it even worse, as the 9600M GT was introduced in April of 2008.
I'm not trying to say that Apple needs to stay on the absolute bleeding edge of technology, but selling computers with 2 year old technology shouldn't be okay in anyones book.
I don't see that age really has anything to do with it. If you want a well made laptop that can take a few knocks (I feel off my motorbike with my MBP in the backpack, dented but still works) and will last for years then they are good value for money.
I'm an old UNIX guy who switched with OS X since I could have UNIX on the go on a supported platform. I've been working professionally as a software developer for nearly 20 years and learned to program in the late 70's while at school so that will give you some idea.
Apple has the best operating system which covers my requirements and their pro hardware is streets above the other companies.
Thinkpads > magnesium or carbon fiber, not titanium
Well I compared the Macbook Pro to Lenovo Thinkpad T400, Lenovo Thinkpad X301(could not find a X200), the Sony Z series, Sony SR series, and a friend's one generation old Dell Latitude (cannot remember the model) before buying my MacBook Pro, and the MacBook Pro feels more solid and rigid than any of these models. Apple CNCs the unibody from solid blocks of billet aluminum which is much stronger and more precise than cast aluminum or stamped sheets. I realize aluminum is softer than many metals and not as strong as many composites, yet billet aluminum is still very strong and is used in applications which require tensile strength such as professional automobile racing parts and aircraft parts. Also Aluminum is not brittle like magnesium or carbon fiber, it dents rather than cracks or breaks.
As far as the glass screen, it actually makes the notebook feel more solid as well, but I agree it seems to be an almost bad idea in something meant to traveled with.
Furthermore the Elitebook and Z series prices make the 13" MacBook Pro look inexpensive, so I was probably a bit bias by that fact (at least when I got to check out the Z series).
Heh heh, funny. I work in an environment that is computationally intensive (bioinformatics since you didn't ask) and if I want to do serious computing, I chuck the job at another machine (specifically a 64 bit Opteron based Linux box). The network is the computer. Running heavy jobs on my machine is so....... PC. This is UNIX, grab a bunch of nodes on the nearest cluster and fire away.
Gamers get everything they deserve. I've been there and it is just plain stupid to keep pumping ridiculous amounts of money on building a collection of obsolete parts you've removed from your machine. PCs are rotten machines for gaming. Ask anyone who got burned trying to play Crisis. Frankly, if I can't buy the game for my Xbox 360, I'm not interested. I admit that a console controller isn't as precise as a keyboard and mouse combination but I can fire up the Xbox on my 100" HD projection system and have a great time and a joypad is perfect for that.
If the processor and graphics cards are fully capable of running the latest OS and software then I see no problem. If you care more about numbers than having a solid reliable machine then you're welcome to your choice. I quit messing with the bleeding edge years back (yes, I'm old enough to have built my own PCs 20 years ago) and I simply don't care about the latest and greatest in computing. The joy of a Mac is that even an old one is still a much more pleasant place to work than the latest from HP. I would sooner use my old iBook G4 for daily work (the 933Mhz one) than use a brand-new PC. Heck, I would even use my old 20 Mhz SPARCStation 1. I miss that old beast. 19" Trinitron monitor and 8MB of RAM. Awesome machine. As long as I can run X11 and get a remote terminal it really doesn't matter. The *ONLY* reason I use Macs is because of OS X. The nice hardware is an added bonus.
Very less specs:
1) 160 GB, If v bootcamp then v need at least 250GB.
2) Graphics 9400m, as all know that there are very less games natively built for Mac os so after bootcamp with windows xp we can play very less new titles.
3) It is claimed that 7 hours of battery, but getting only 5:30 h.
4) Very less usb's ports , needed other card reader also.
Reply Now
1) Upgrading HD is very easy and very cheap.
2) The 13 inch MBP is not meant for gaming and the 9400M is a very good gfx for it's power consumption and it does aso play some games.
3) That's the industry standard. The rated battery life is usually under no load.
4) I agree to some extent. My MBP only have two ports too, but when I'm on the road I never use more than one and when I'm home I have a hub, I would have bought a hub if the computer had 10 USB ports too, just because I don't wanna have to plug in more than one USB port when I'm coming home from work.
My 13" Pro replaced a 1 year old Dell XPS m1330. The 1330 was falling apart despite being little used. Similar spec to the Pro (both 2.5GHz, both 4GB RAM, the XPS had the 8400M), but the XPS ran so hot you couldn't keep it on your lap, and the fan was noisy. The Macbook Pro is a far better machine.
The XPS only got 2 hours at most out of a battery, and the Pro I've managed a little over 8 hours (display very dim, keyboard lighting off, using wireless for browsing the web).
It's like comparing a Mercedes to a Ford. The Ford may have more equipment, be faster, and cheaper, but the Merc will still be in use long after the Ford has been scrapped.
The XPS only got 2 hours at most out of a battery, and the Pro I've managed a little over 8 hours (display very dim, keyboard lighting off, using wireless for browsing the web).
It's like comparing a Mercedes to a Ford. The Ford may have more equipment, be faster, and cheaper, but the Merc will still be in use long after the Ford has been scrapped.