same here, I was looking for decent performance but a key role is battery life...thats why my research lead me to the MBP lines but the recent update was less than what was expected of the 13. Which now is making me go 15 b/c of anti glare and 330m because I do photoshop and want to get into minor HD video editing this is/was/will be my first MBP(mac) or it will be the envy 14. Hopefully heat and battery life is good if not it will help me solidate my choice in the 15" MBP. Besides hardware I like the sleekness and the prestige look of the Aluminum body vs. plastic but now HP came with Envy which was too expensive but the new 14 will be portable and affordable
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.
NEW! Hp Envy 14"/17" Make buying a macbook pro decision harder?
- Thread starter aibo82
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
I really don't want to go above 14". I've messed with some 14" laptops at Best Buy, such as the Sony CW, and they're all barely bigger than my Macbook. However, a 15" laptop does seem to be a substantial increase in footprint. I really think 14" is a sweet spot, with the power of a 15" and mobility of a 13".
They said 7 hours (assumably on Intel graphics). Should get at least 5 hours on internet then, and maybe 3 hours gaming. Gonna wait for the reviews, but the combo of screen res, killer specs, and cheap price are gonna make me have to work extra hard to justify getting a 13" MBP.
I read something that breifly said the new envys will have a unibody. Is this true? Did HP really start cnc'ing aluminum bodies for the envy? It looks just like the older magnesium/ aluminum sheet metal envy. If HP is not making a true unibody, then the build quality will almost never match the MacBook pros. The laptopreview.com said without placing the MacBook pro in a vise and bending it, the chassis has zero flex. Good luck HP. I doubt there are any break throughs with the envy just fixing old mistakes such as working graphic switching and hopefully eliminating the overheating issues with the quad core i7.
And since there seems to be confusion about processors and wattage.
i7 comes in both quad core and dual core variants for use in laptops.
i5 is dual core only in laptops.
If apple used a 35w i3 or i5 and the intel igp on the 13" model, the wattage use wouldbe the same as the current MacBook pro 13" because while the processor only uses 25w, the nvidia 320 uses about 10w.
And while the i3 are generally not faster than the better core2 duos, apple could have used the i3 330 in the MacBook, i3 350 in base macbook pro and i5 430 in the upgraded 13" in order to aviod overlap with 15".
Or use the i3 350 in the MacBook, i5 430 in the base MacBook pro 13" and the i5 520 in the upgraded 13" so the overlap was like the previous years models.
So more than likely there would have been an i5 13" but at the cost of using an intel igp again.
And since there seems to be confusion about processors and wattage.
i7 comes in both quad core and dual core variants for use in laptops.
i5 is dual core only in laptops.
If apple used a 35w i3 or i5 and the intel igp on the 13" model, the wattage use wouldbe the same as the current MacBook pro 13" because while the processor only uses 25w, the nvidia 320 uses about 10w.
And while the i3 are generally not faster than the better core2 duos, apple could have used the i3 330 in the MacBook, i3 350 in base macbook pro and i5 430 in the upgraded 13" in order to aviod overlap with 15".
Or use the i3 350 in the MacBook, i5 430 in the base MacBook pro 13" and the i5 520 in the upgraded 13" so the overlap was like the previous years models.
So more than likely there would have been an i5 13" but at the cost of using an intel igp again.
Only thing that makes this not a easy decision is the lack of a glass multitouch pad like MBP and also was in a way looking forward to a new operating system and new software to play with lol...but the other side I have something familiar (Win. 7), well priced...HEAT and BATTERY LIFE are two factors on everyone's mind.
are you some sort of professional working in the media industry? If you are, then explain to me why creative professionals use computers with crappy hardware, especially in the GFX department?
WHY are you downplaying HP for window's problems? You think if HP had a choice they would willingly run Windows 7? If HP could run OSX you think apple can still make any money from hardware? Apple may have the upper hand when it comes to stability, but it is quickly loosing its edge as well. Microsoft is doing alot to catch up you have to give them props for that at least. Can't you see the number of people on this forum advocating the stability of Windows 7? Ask the security professionals which OS is more secure, they will say Windows. Don't agree? Read: http://blogs.lubbockonline.com/glasshouses/2010/03/23/os-x-safer-but-less-secure-than-windows-2/
Do you know the OP personally? How do you know that he is a kid who plays games all day? Save your personal attacks for someone you actually know personally.
Battery life should be ok if graphics switching works and the buyer does not opt for the quad core.
If you enjoy a mediocre trackpad with a snap on battery then go with the HP Envy.
Trackpad and snap on battery are deal sealers for mac users? They must be dumber than I thought.
If HP thinks their customers are dumb, then Apple must have dumber customers then? You must be sad cause your HI DEF 17" Mac cant play bluray movies.
No, No Apple did not drop the ball. It's still not running Mac OS X. Therefore, nice try, HP. You'll only catch the in-duh-viduals who are attracted by flashing lights and pretty colors.FTW
What are you attracted by? Glowing Apples? Subpar hardware? polished aluminium? Paying more for less?
Cheers for apple and OSX, but most of us are even looking at windows machines because we KNOW that Apple can do so much better, they just dont want to.
Just like OSX, that is exclusive to Macs, so also macrumors exclusive to apple fanboys?
Get a freaking clue mate.
Are you some sort of Apple engineer? How are you in any way related to Apple's engineering team? Why do you keep talking as if you know that apple has done absolutely everything they could to give you the best they can? Apple can't redesign, and make a product better, is that what you are trying to say? all this talk about its impossible for apple to make a 13" with an i3 processor, or god forbid, an i5 with a reasonable battery life, have you even seen sony's new z series?
Seriously, who are you? what qualifies you to boast about apple the way you do and talk trash about HP and everyone else who disagrees with you? Do you even own a 2010 macbook pro and the yet released HP Envy to make a valid comparison and then talk?
mmmm this makes things even harder for me. I have been doubting between a MBP13 and a MBP15 ever since the mid2010 refresh.
I was planning on getting the 13" which i liked for its size and price, but i hated the crappy upgrade (don't give me excuses/reasons, they're just not valid) and the 1280 resolution.
The 15 has gotten a decent upgrade and a great (high) resolution, but it is somewhat expensive for me and i fear it might be too big to use comfortably on the couch/bed/vacation.
So the envy14 does seem like a serious contender for me. Win7 is *almost* as decent as OSX and i am not a fanboy either, so i could probably live with that. it has a fairly good keyboard, aluminium body, specs i wanted to see in the MBP13 and supposedly it is $1000 (which i would hope means 850 or so). I guess the only thing it has going against it is the touchpad.
Maybe i'll wait for the reviews to come in. Just too bad I can get a 20% eductional discount on a MBP and none whatsoever on an Envy, that'd make the decision a lot easier for me.
I was planning on getting the 13" which i liked for its size and price, but i hated the crappy upgrade (don't give me excuses/reasons, they're just not valid) and the 1280 resolution.
The 15 has gotten a decent upgrade and a great (high) resolution, but it is somewhat expensive for me and i fear it might be too big to use comfortably on the couch/bed/vacation.
So the envy14 does seem like a serious contender for me. Win7 is *almost* as decent as OSX and i am not a fanboy either, so i could probably live with that. it has a fairly good keyboard, aluminium body, specs i wanted to see in the MBP13 and supposedly it is $1000 (which i would hope means 850 or so). I guess the only thing it has going against it is the touchpad.
Maybe i'll wait for the reviews to come in. Just too bad I can get a 20% eductional discount on a MBP and none whatsoever on an Envy, that'd make the decision a lot easier for me.
There's nothing wrong with HP coming out with a new laptop. They do it all the time.
The hostility comes when the question is framed in a way such as "gee, don't you mac fanboys feel sooooo stupid buying a macbook pro, when the envy is soooo much better? Clearly you can't deny that Apple products are inferior because their specs are lower, right? Isn't Apple stupid?"
When the discussion is steered this way from the start, what kind of response do you expect??
Been there, done that with both HP and Windows. When you get disappointed over and over again, "give them a chance" starts to be less appealing over time.
Threads like this ignore common sense. There are going to be people who obsess over clock speeds and figures on a spec sheet, and they will go after the system that has the highest and best numbers because it somehow makes them feel good about themselves. Even if the reality turns out not to be what the specs promised.
Then there are those of us who have been there one too many times, and know that the spec sheet doesn't tell the whole story and that ultimately, the best computer is the one that works for you. For many of us here, Macs work well for us, so much so that we pay a premium because we know it works well for us. We arent buying the latest MacBook Pros because we're going to ditch it the moment something shinier comes out. We buy the latest because we intend to keep it for a few years.
The good news is that, for better or for worse, the market supports both types of people quite well. The "spec-whores" can buy their souped-up machine and feel smug about their purchase, and then not care that the machine might turn out to be crap because they'll likely lose interest and buy something newer and shinier before it becomes a problem anyway. And in between purchase cycles, they'll troll the forums to get a rise out of people and further affirm their feeling of dominance and superiority.
And the "mac fanboys" will pay their premium, buy Applecare, hang on to their purchase for a while, and then sell it on eBay because even after a few years, their old laptop will still retain some resale value. They they can use the cash to upgrade to the latest mac model and start the cycle again. And they can feel smug when a spec-whore decides to troll their forum for a while.
There are of course, the in-between folks too. You have your self-loathing mac users who bash Apple and the decisions made by its engineers from behind the keyboards of the systems they claim to abhor so much. And you have the people who bought a windows based system but wish they had done otherwise. They contribute appropriately to the side they wish they were on.
No one's opinion changes, each side comes away with a bigger ego, and outsiders to the conversion, whose lives aren't defined by the logo emblazoned to the lid of their laptop, realize how incredibly silly both sides look for even taking part in it. Everybody wins.
What's the matter? Don't like having a computer that's useable without having a mouse plugged in or a 5 pound battery snapped on?
Enjoy paying up the ass for that added Blu-ray functionality.
Here we go, another person talking out of their ass. Why do I keep talking as if I know that Apple has done absolutely everything they could for the best product this go around? I've been over this. Looks like I'll have to repeat myself AGAIN. Apple NEVER puts their higher end processors in their lower end machines. Only on very rare occasions like the current iMacs, which is subject to change with the next update. You really want an i3 processor? I'm sure you really would've loved your zero processor performance gains and Intel integrated graphics.
Oh and I have seen the Sony Z series. It not only starts at $1899 and has a "claimed" 6.5 hour battery life, but it's internal layout is completely different than the 13" MacBook Pro. The Sony case is larger, the motherboard is larger and has ICs mounted on both sides of the board.
I don't need to own a product to state my opinion and facts about it. It makes it even more fun when the people I'm replying to have no idea what they are talking about.
To quote this site!
http://www.unbeatable.co.uk/news/HP-Envy-14-Laptop-Price/284210.html
The new HP Envy 14 laptop is a fantastic model, and although it may look very similar to the MacBook Pro it has plenty of its own fantastic features. These include a 14.5 inch screen, Intel Core i5 processor, ATI Mobility Radeon graphics, six hour battery, integrated 3G connectivity.
HP have now released a price for the HP Envy 14 of $999 which equates to approximately £660 which comes in considerably less than the 15" MacBook Pro. However, there are some favoured features on the MacBook Pro such as a longer battery life and slightly bigger screen.
And!
http://techpinger.com/2010/05/hp-quad-core-envy-14-and-17/
Where as HP Envy 14 Powered by Windows 7, the HP Envy 14 can be configured with Intel Dual Core i5, i3 or Quad Core i7 processors, up to 640GB HDD or 256GB SSD, as well as up to 8GB DDR3-1333 memory. Furthermore, the HP Envy 14 incorporates a 14.5″ 900p screen (350nit brightness), DVD drive, Wi-Fi 802.11a/b/g/n and an integrated Web camera. The HP Envy 14 also sports a Qualcomm Gobi chip, meaning that wireless broadband with GPS can be enabled when signing up for a wireless plan.
JEEZE!!!!!
£660 with integrated 3g and an i5! this thing is a steal! I'm all for apple but your cant ignore thats a fantastic spec for a £660 laptop! With a solid build quality! Ok the battery life have a go at it all you like but you could put up with that at that price!
You could buy two for the price of a macbook pro i5 2.4 base machine!
http://www.unbeatable.co.uk/news/HP-Envy-14-Laptop-Price/284210.html
The new HP Envy 14 laptop is a fantastic model, and although it may look very similar to the MacBook Pro it has plenty of its own fantastic features. These include a 14.5 inch screen, Intel Core i5 processor, ATI Mobility Radeon graphics, six hour battery, integrated 3G connectivity.
HP have now released a price for the HP Envy 14 of $999 which equates to approximately £660 which comes in considerably less than the 15" MacBook Pro. However, there are some favoured features on the MacBook Pro such as a longer battery life and slightly bigger screen.
And!
http://techpinger.com/2010/05/hp-quad-core-envy-14-and-17/
Where as HP Envy 14 Powered by Windows 7, the HP Envy 14 can be configured with Intel Dual Core i5, i3 or Quad Core i7 processors, up to 640GB HDD or 256GB SSD, as well as up to 8GB DDR3-1333 memory. Furthermore, the HP Envy 14 incorporates a 14.5″ 900p screen (350nit brightness), DVD drive, Wi-Fi 802.11a/b/g/n and an integrated Web camera. The HP Envy 14 also sports a Qualcomm Gobi chip, meaning that wireless broadband with GPS can be enabled when signing up for a wireless plan.
JEEZE!!!!!
£660 with integrated 3g and an i5! this thing is a steal! I'm all for apple but your cant ignore thats a fantastic spec for a £660 laptop! With a solid build quality! Ok the battery life have a go at it all you like but you could put up with that at that price!
You could buy two for the price of a macbook pro i5 2.4 base machine!
More people talking about prices that are unannounced. It's already been said that it will use an i3 processor as well. You think they will put the i5 in the $999 model if they are also using an i3? No way in hell. I'd like to know how a 6 hour battery life is better than the MacBook Pro. Don't even mention that mediocre splice feature that adds double the weight to the notebook. The screen isn't bigger either. 14" 16:9 with a 1600x900 resolution to 15" 16:10 with a resolution that goes up to 1680x1050.To quote this site!
http://www.unbeatable.co.uk/news/HP-Envy-14-Laptop-Price/284210.html
The new HP Envy 14 laptop is a fantastic model, and although it may look very similar to the MacBook Pro it has plenty of its own fantastic features. These include a 14.5 inch screen, Intel Core i5 processor, ATI Mobility Radeon graphics, six hour battery, integrated 3G connectivity.
HP have now released a price for the HP Envy 14 of $999 which equates to approximately £660 which comes in considerably less than the 15" MacBook Pro. However, there are some favoured features on the MacBook Pro such as a longer battery life and slightly bigger screen.
£660 with integrated 3g and an i5! this thing is a steal! I'm all for apple but your cant ignore thats a fantastic spec for a £600 laptop! With a solid build quality! Ok the battery life have a go at it all you like but you could put up with that at that price!
You could buy two for the price of a macbook pro i5 2.4 base machine
Solid build quality? LOL!
And again, the $999 model is almost GUARANTEED to have an i3 processor which is no different than the Core 2 Duo in the current 13". You are comparing lower specs to higher specs.
You're misinterpreting my post. There's no difference between watching 1080p and 720p on a screen that size. So to market "watch blu-ray movies in full 1080p on your laptop screen!" is pretty silly.
I doubt anyone could even tell the difference between a 1080p movie and the DVD version on a 17" screen.
FYI! The internal battery is also removable like the old unibody macbook pros!
Just watch the youtube video here!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMl7KqCg4hY
There really having a good stab at apple with this envy 14! Were they watching behind a curtain in apples in house team!
Ummm... I'm currently on a 2008 Macbook 13 Unibody and it does have a multitouch trackpad. In fact, other than the addition of inertial scrolling, my 2008 macbook 13 has the same trackpad as my 2010 i7 15.
Hay guise!! My windoze 7 ain't got no none there crashes no more!! Aint not one single one!!! OMG!
I was so "supprised"!!
---------------------------------
Before you make stupid comments, please try to look over what you type. Maybe read it back to yourself and think, "hmmm does this sound right?"
That thing looks absolutely disgusting and since the battery life sucks so horribly I'm sure you really need to get to the batter often. I wouldn't be surprised if that thing only has 300 recharges. Welcome to 2006, HP.
You're right, my mistake. Either this guy has no idea how to use or configure it or has the hands of a monkey. Or maybe he's just talking out of his ass and doesn't actually own a 2008 MacBook.
What's the matter? Don't like having a computer that's useable without having a mouse plugged in or a 5 pound battery snapped on?
Enjoy paying up the ass for that added Blu-ray functionality.
Here we go, another person talking out of their ass. Why do I keep talking as if I know that Apple has done absolutely everything they could for the best product this go around? I've been over this. Looks like I'll have to repeat myself AGAIN. Apple NEVER puts their higher end processors in their lower end machines. Only on very rare occasions like the current iMacs, which is subject to change with the next update. You really want an i3 processor? I'm sure you really would've loved your zero processor performance gains and Intel integrated graphics.
Oh and I have seen the Sony Z series. It not only starts at $1899 and has a "claimed" 6.5 hour battery life, but it's internal layout is completely different than the 13" MacBook Pro. The Sony case is larger, the motherboard is larger and has ICs mounted on both sides of the board.
I don't need to own a product to state my opinion and facts about it. It makes it even more fun when the people I'm replying to have no idea what they are talking about.
Honestly I was NEVER expecting a i3 processor in the 13 MBP my expectations was its a PRO and therefore high end and hoping for the i5 and the other models with the option of i5 or i7. Other things I was hoping for was discrete graphics but dissapointed there and therefore I looked towards the 15 not only for the specs but also for the HR AG screen cuz I do PS often besides the screen I enjoy battery life and so one more reason I am looking into
's MBP. Finally...If the Envy 14 was priced at 1500-1800 base model (like the MBP 15 1799) than my decision would be a lot easier to choose the MBP. I have never owned a Mac and currently satisfied by Windows 7 but want to explore the Mac World and why they're so popular. Finally the price is at nearly half the price of the MBP at $999. Therefore I really was looking here to find some other views but as of now. Mobility, Performance, and Battery Power. I have breifly used the trackpad on the MBP. I am not harassing either sides just being a curious consumer that was to be satisfied by this or her purchase which includes the price factor. Thanks and have a nice day
Here we go, another person talking out of their ass. Why do I keep talking as if I know that Apple has done absolutely everything they could for the best product this go around? I've been over this. Looks like I'll have to repeat myself AGAIN. Apple NEVER puts their higher end processors in their lower end machines. Only on very rare occasions like the current iMacs, which is subject to change with the next update. You really want an i3 processor?[/URL] I'm sure you really would've loved your zero processor performance gains and Intel integrated graphics.
Did you miss my post?
This is absolutely ridiculous. I've already stated that Apple doesn't stick the same processors it does in it's high end that it does in the low end. Apple constitutes "Pro" as being Firewire 800, SSD Option, 8GB RAM ceiling and an SD Card Slot. So you want discrete graphics, and an i5/i7 in the 13"? Maybe if Apple had some magicians that would be possible. But it isn't.Honestly I was NEVER expecting a i3 processor in the 13 MBP my expectations was its a PRO and therefore high end and hoping for the i5 and the other models with the option of i5 or i7. Other things I was hoping for was discrete graphics but dissapointed there and therefore I looked towards the 15 not only for the specs but also for the HR AG screen cuz I do PS often besides the screen I enjoy battery life and so one more reason I am looking into
I've already stated that the Envy 14 will be using an i3 processor. That's going to be the 999 model no matter what so your comparison is pointless. Again, I love how you always leave out customer support. HP's is absolute garbage so when you have a problem enjoy talking with their 'amazing' tech support in India.
No, I didn't miss your post. I didn't bother responding because you have no idea what you're talking about. You think Apple wanted to use Intel's integrated graphics for a piddly squat processor trade off when Steam for Mac is right around the corner? LOL!
When the original Unibody Macbooks came out everyone posted pictures of the HP Envy and complained that Apple "copied" them. HP had the black and silver design first.
From a hardware perspective, it is difficult to compare laptops to each other. It is similar to comparing an Audi R8 to a Toyota Prius. Which is a better car? On the one hand, the Prius is by far the more fuel efficient machine, but the Audi has sex-appeal and is fast.
Apple in many ways trends toward different types of innovation than many users are interested in. Longer battery life, better build quality, nifty things like magnetized power cords, and multi-touch trackpads.
The frustration stems from the fact that Apple has an iron grip on OSX and the only way to get OSX is to buy Apple hardware, which only satisfies one type of user. People who want bleeding edge hardware (or even relatively new hardware), but could care less about battery life or trackpads need to be able to get a machine that runs OSX and does the things they want. Without the diversity of the market developing different types of machines that run OSX, consumers will always end up being a bit disgruntled by Apple hardware because they have no options.
The problem is not that Apple's machines are not as good as HP's, Dell's or Sony's, they are different. The problem is that if a consumer wants OSX, they have no other choice than to buy Apple hardware.
It seems perfectly natural for people to be bothered by this. Apple needs to partner with someone who wants to do the research and dev to create a new line of native OSX machines that cater to a different user base. It would be very interesting to see what happened.
From a hardware perspective, it is difficult to compare laptops to each other. It is similar to comparing an Audi R8 to a Toyota Prius. Which is a better car? On the one hand, the Prius is by far the more fuel efficient machine, but the Audi has sex-appeal and is fast.
Apple in many ways trends toward different types of innovation than many users are interested in. Longer battery life, better build quality, nifty things like magnetized power cords, and multi-touch trackpads.
The frustration stems from the fact that Apple has an iron grip on OSX and the only way to get OSX is to buy Apple hardware, which only satisfies one type of user. People who want bleeding edge hardware (or even relatively new hardware), but could care less about battery life or trackpads need to be able to get a machine that runs OSX and does the things they want. Without the diversity of the market developing different types of machines that run OSX, consumers will always end up being a bit disgruntled by Apple hardware because they have no options.
The problem is not that Apple's machines are not as good as HP's, Dell's or Sony's, they are different. The problem is that if a consumer wants OSX, they have no other choice than to buy Apple hardware.
It seems perfectly natural for people to be bothered by this. Apple needs to partner with someone who wants to do the research and dev to create a new line of native OSX machines that cater to a different user base. It would be very interesting to see what happened.
Well my post is in direct contention of many of your posts. So I rather than dismiss my ideas, how about you try to convince me.
I stated what options apple had if they wanted to move the 13" to the core ix platform. I furthermore did state this would be at the cost of intel integrated graphics versus staying with the core 2 duos and having the option of nvidia IGP.
I think you have no idea what you are talking about, personally. You state certain things such as the core ix platform would shorten battery life in the 13", when there is no proof this is so. Then the 13" MBP is not a gaming machine; its just too small of a screen besides the fact the nvidia IGP is only suited for older and maybe current games at best.
Then you state the upgrade from Core 2 Duos to Core iX is a "piddly squat" upgrade. The Core iX platform are the first intel processors to get an integrated memory controllers on the processor. This is huge in terms of latency versus the older Northbridge design. Then you are just so certain that the 13" would have only the i3, which I do not believe would have been the case and which I outlined in my previous post.
Finally is there any reason why I feel you are coming off as a little rude? Is it in my head or is this your intention?
- Status