Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

NEW! Hp Envy 14"/17" Make buying a macbook pro decision harder?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Whats up with people on hear its a open forum about mac products! I have simply asked a question with a few opinions why such a personal threat!

I admit I braged about some features the MBP is lacking but apple users do this back so whos in the wrong?

I am gettin advice to buy yes I know you love your products but the harshness over them is something I dont intend to get into! there computers not your children!

Im makeing an informed choice!
 
aibo82 said:
Whats up with people on hear its a open forum about mac products! I have simply asked a question with a few opinions why such a personal threat!

I admit I braged about some features the MBP is lacking but apple users do this back so whos in the wrong?

I am gettin advice to buy yes I know you love your products but the harshness over them is something I dont intend to get over! there computers not your children!

Im makeing an informed choice!
Click to expand...
If you want a computer with a better GPU, then go with the Envy.

If you want a computer with a useable trackpad, unibody enclosure, OS X, non-snap on battery, larger screen, larger resolution, more vertical space, and amazing customer support then go with the MacBook Pro.
 
vant said:
Maybe you should look into the MBP13 current situation:

No room for discrete GPU (No 13" laptop under 1" has a discreet GPU).

Could theoretically reduce size of battery or remove superdrive to fit one, but then we run into 5 hour battery life (unacceptable).

Make the MBP13 thicker (and heavier). Price would increase either way.

What do we get out of all that? Most of the users won't even see the benefits of the i5/GPU.
Click to expand...
I believe Apple could have retooled the innards of the 13". I think they were more worried about their GM's so they did nothing but stick in a C2D and of course blame intel. It's never Apple's fault, never!
 
aiqw9182 said:
If you want a computer with a better GPU, then go with the Envy.

If you want a computer with a useable trackpad, unibody enclosure, OS X, non-snap on battery, larger screen, larger resolution, more vertical space, and amazing customer support then go with the MacBook Pro.
Click to expand...

Thank you! what an adult reply! :)
 
drew0020 said:
I believe Apple could ave retooled the innards of the 14". I think they were more worried about their GM's so they did nothing but stick in a C2D and of course blame intel. It's never Apple's fault, never!
Click to expand...

I've been over this already. The i5 uses 35 watts. The 13" uses 25 watt CPU's. Apple NEVER puts the same CPU that is in their higher end model in the lower end model even if it was physically possible. The only option would've been the i3 which also uses 35 watt CPU's and has the same performance as the aforementioned Core 2 Duo's. Apple's ONLY choice was to use the the Core 2 Duo. Until Sandy Bridge is out in 2011, you won't be seeing any i processors in the 13". The same goes for the MacBook and Mac Mini.
 
Mobile Eyefinity is interesting.

aiqw9182 said:
I've been over this already. The i5 uses 35 watts. The 13" uses 25 watt CPU's. Apple NEVER puts the same CPU that is in their higher end model in the lower end model even if it was physically possible. The only option would've been the i3 which also uses 35 watt CPU's and has the same performance as the aforementioned Core 2 Duo's. Apple's ONLY choice was to use the the Core 2 Duo. Until they redesign it completely and until Sandy Bridge is out in 2011, you won't be seeing any i processors in the 13". The same goes for the MacBook and Mac Mini.
Click to expand...
What is the GPU solution for Sandy Bridge?
 
Eidorian said:
They didn't have enough time before? 14" MacBook Pros coming soon?
Click to expand...
It's getting really annoying repeating myself. Apple never uses same CPU's they use in their higher-end models that they do in their lower end. Only on VERY rare occasions like the current iMac's. Apple didn't have to redesign anything because it wasn't worth it this go around. The i3 isn't impressive and they wouldn't have used the i5 because that's in the 15".
 
aiqw9182 said:
It's getting really annoying repeating myself. Apple never uses same CPU's they use in their higher-end models that they do in their lower end. Only on VERY rare occasions like the current iMac's.
Click to expand...
I doubt that a single clock speed multiplier is something dramatic. Vague and gray product differentiation around. You have to get people to spend more somehow.
 
the ports down the side of the laptop look horrible, some tacky crappy plastic thing externally on them :thdn:, specs are nice but design wise still doesn't look anywhere near as nice as a MBP
 
Eidorian said:
I doubt that a single clock speed multiplier is something dramatic. Vague and gray product differentiation around. You have to get people to spend more somehow.
Click to expand...
You get people to spend more by increasing what matters on such a portable device, battery.

dudulang said:
Don't you know the i7 in laptop(32nm) is also a dual-core CPU? sigh :eek:
Click to expand...
The i7 in the 17" Envy? No, because I didn't see any spec sheet. I was just going by the fact that there in no mobile quad core i5.
 
aiqw9182 said:
You get people to spend more by increasing what matters on such a portable device, battery.
Click to expand...
I don't believe Apple has perfected a technology that converts battery life into increased performance of the CPU or GPU.

It's depressingly predictable.
 
also look at where the fan is. I think I saw one on the right hand side of the Envy. If you use a mouse, you may end up cooking your hand.
 
aiqw9182 said:
The i7 in the 17" Envy? No, because I didn't see any spec sheet. I was just going by the fact that there in no mobile quad core i5.
Click to expand...

The i5 and i7 for notebook(not only hp) is 32nm technology and they are all dual-core CPUs, but i5 and i7 for desktop is 45nm and they are Quad-core. :apple:
 
Eidorian said:
I don't believe Apple has perfected a technology that converts battery life into increased performance of the CPU or GPU.

It's depressingly predictable.
Click to expand...

The average consumer cares more about battery life than they do having an "i" in their About This Mac. If you are still bitter about Apple not using an i3 then be my guest and be bitter. For everyone else, increased GPU performance and great battery life is enough to buy over what could've been a zero processor performance difference, less battery life due to higher watt usage and Intel's integrated graphics.
 
Eidorian said:
Do you have any proof that the higher voltage Westmere part will adversely reduce battery life in normal operations?
Click to expand...
This is really ridiculous. You are just arguing to try and keep this going for no reason other than to backpeddle yourself out of what you've been trying to say. But to answer your question, 10 more watts does have an effect on battery life. It's not rocket science.

dudulang said:
The i5 and i7 for notebook(not only hp) is 32nm technology and they are all dual-core CPUs, but i5 and i7 for desktop is 45nm and they are Quad-core. :apple:
Click to expand...
Actually there are 45nm quad core mobile processors as well. Their watt usage and CPU clock are much worse than the dual-core i5/i7 processors though.
 
aiqw9182 said:
But to answer your question, 10 more watts does have an effect on battery life.
Click to expand...
I don't agree. The bigger problems are the fixation with the processor and Apple's usage of nVidia's MCP solutions.

We already know that Intel's TDP ratings include the CPU & IGP. It's not possible to compare a non-existent MCP99 to a MCP89 sibling.
 
Eidorian said:
I don't agree. The bigger problems are the fixation with the processor and Apple's usage of nVidia's MCP solutions.

We already know that Intel's TDP ratings include the CPU & IGP. It's not possible to compare a non-existent MCP99 to a MCP89 sibling.
Click to expand...

My previous statement that you so kindly ignored still stands.

If you are still bitter about Apple not using an i3 then be my guest and be bitter. For everyone else, increased GPU performance and great battery life is enough to buy over what could've been a zero processor performance difference, less battery life due to higher watt usage and Intel's integrated graphics.
Click to expand...
 
You never offered any proof of the battery life differences between a Penryn P Series processor and a standard voltage Arrandale. I'm going to have to disagree with you given what I've seen otherwise.

Sadly, we won't have a MCP99 and MCP89 based Macs for the best comparison.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back