Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I simply 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.
You stated pointless options that serve no purpose other than crippling the computer.

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.
35 watts to 25 watts, and I was talking in the context if Apple would have enough space to fit a discrete GPU which WOULD affect battery life.

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.
The 13" is not a gaming machine? It's Apple's most popular notebook and when people go and download Steam to casually play some games and they get the message "Intel IGP is not supported" you think that's a good customer experience? Oh and you really need to get your facts straight Here it is playing Arkham Asylum on max at 40 FPS. Check out more of that guys videos to see more performance of the card before you start talking out of your ass.

Then you state the upgrade from Core 2 Duos to Core iX is a "piddly squat" upgrade. Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about. 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.
The performance difference IS piddly squat when talking i3. You really wanted Apple to go i5 with Intel's terrible graphics? Cool, I'm sure the average consumer would love having a crippled graphics card. :rolleyes:

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?
I was just about to ask you the same thing.
 
I personally think that the i5 and the 330M never made it into the 13" is mainly because of the size and vent/airflow issues with the 13" unibody!

This is were design over function lets the macbook pro down!

The 15" you have to remember has a larger internal space, more heat absorbing aluminum and I'm pretty sure them speaker grills act as good vents even though allot of users don't like them!

To make this possible in the 13" I'm guessing some vents would have to be added at the cost of a streamlined design, but it could be done by just lasering mesh holes into the bottom faceplate like on the 15" speaker grills!

At the end of the day they added a core i5 with 330 to the MBP 15" it was possible with the 13" but at the cost of some vents!

I think apple need to drop the obsession with vent free unibody as pretty as it is as it holds back core performance! I mean the two large fans are pushing against the internals inside there's no airflow apart from the piddly gap in the hinge!

Its just one sealed hot box! Apple needs to work on airflow heat-sink design first, then build around that there doing it the other-way and your left with performance cuts because of heat issues with little airflow!
 
I personally think that the i5 and the 330M never made it into the 13" is mainly because of the size and vent/airflow issues with the 13" unibody!

This is were design over function lets the macbook pro down!

The 15" you have to remember has a larger internal space, more heat absorbing aluminum and I'm pretty sure them speaker grills act as good vents even though allot of users don't like them!

To make this possible in the 13" I'm guessing some vents would have to be added at the cost of a streamlined design, but it could be done by just lasering mesh holes into the bottom faceplate like on the 15" speaker grills!

At the end of the day they added a core i5 with 330 to the MBP 15" it was possible with the 13" but at the cost of some vents!

I think apple need to drop the obsession with vent free unibody as pretty as it is as it holds back core performance! I mean the two large fans are pushing against the internals inside there's no airflow apart from the piddly gap in the hinge!

Its just one sealed hot box! Apple needs to work on airflow heat-sink design first, then build around that there doing it the other-way and your left with performance cuts because of heat issues with little airflow!
Wrong.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/why-the-13-macbook-pro-didnt-get-a-core-i5-upgrade.ars
 
can't wait til the HP dv6 touchscreen notebook comes out.

now that one would be a 13" MBP killer.
 
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.

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.

Magicians I think not...look at numerous other companies that have put discrete graphics inside their laptops. POINTLESS not at all...even if it did come with the i3 and there was an upgrade I am SURE that it will be substantially cheaper then the 15 MBP. Its funny that individuals are selective when comparing such as hey MBP 15 has a higher res. screen true but you have to pay extra for it while the 14.5 Envy its a standard option also you get the sweet spot for those that have slight difficulty read small txt yet want something of higher resolution so they could enjoy High Definition films and also have more real estate to work on (PS/editing wise).

Again two factor that will help me make my decision is HEAT and BATTERY POWER

I know that I will be happy with either decision just trying to weigh out my options and price/performance ratio is a big factor too. My definition of performance is not just hardware but also software and its fluidity.

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.

Its called a monopoly. It true and what makes them successful, I think if :apple: had competition then they would loose a significant MARKET that they control

can't wait til the HP dv6 touchscreen notebook comes out.

now that one would be a 13" MBP killer.

My sister has a small touchscreen HP I h8 the screen quality and despise the battery life. Look at the new model and is HP's new decision all look similar to the MBPs line or is it just me. Well seems like a lot of good products are coming out over this sumer
 
Magicians I think not...look at numerous other companies that have put discrete graphics inside their laptops. POINTLESS not at all...even if it did come with the i3 and there was an upgrade I am SURE that it will be substantially cheaper then the 15 MBP. Its funny that individuals are selective when comparing such as hey MBP 15 has a higher res. screen true but you have to pay extra for it while the 14.5 Envy its a standard option also you get the sweet spot for those that have slight difficulty read small txt yet want something of higher resolution so they could enjoy High Definition films and also have more real estate to work on (PS/editing wise).

Again two factor that will help me make my decision is HEAT and BATTERY POWER

I know that I will be happy with either decision just trying to weigh out my options and price/performance ratio is a big factor too. My definition of performance is not just hardware but also software and its fluidity.
You are wasting my time and have no idea what you're talking about. Read this before you bother spouting your random crap again. http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/why-the-13-macbook-pro-didnt-get-a-core-i5-upgrade.ars

Its called a monopoly. It true and what makes them successful, I think if :apple: had competition then they would loose a significant MARKET that they control
Apple, OSX and monopoly in the same context? LMAO!

can't wait til the HP dv6 touchscreen notebook comes out.

now that one would be a 13" MBP killer.

Yeah, because we all know a touch interface works so well on a desktop OS right... right? :rolleyes:
 

You keep going back to old news but apple HAVE shot themselves in the foot with the unibody!

You can sell it to me with bells on it that the i5 was not included in the macbook pro 13" because the i3 weren't up-to the job there a large company that don't need protecting they could of pulled a deal with AMD over delay it toke to refresh the things!

The Vaio Z crammed in a 2.66 i7 and a 330 1gb into a tiny frame! with a few vents! at half the weight of a MBP 13" and that came out just after christmas yet its stylish so that site is talking rubbish!

Cost is mentioned again about the i5 on that site i mean really would it put up the price that much? when you can by an i5 notebook for less then £600

Most notebook manufactures get there CPU's for next to nothing anyway! its the cost of design and marketing they need to make a profit on and they do it very well!

You can cram anything into a small space and call it magical but there are limits and the unibody is beyond its limit to offer the bang for buck performance/style ratio!

I could go by a porsche tomorrow stick a crappy engine in it it gets me from A-B but its looks nice so it will do even though i have paid the same price no i want my power i paid for under the hood!

This is another case of the engine don't match the body work! the 13" is well well well overpriced on a 3 year old unibody design that could of been improved or altered to make room for new cpus for that price!!

They had the time frame all they done is stuck to there guns with excuses again and called it faster better more empowering marketing bull! yet what is it?

A core 2 due you probably brought in a windows notebook about 2yr ago for £1000 why should users have to pay that again now for one because of a pretty case?

The 13" for specs and the old design should be around £700 tops

I mean there that lazy the imac are using core duos still and there massive!
 
You have a unibody 2008 MacBook? Guess what, that wasn't the multitouch trackpad. And you sure are in for a surprise when you use that HP trackpad. That scrolling functionality? Good luck with that on the HP.

Guess what? It is. I have all of the three finger swipe motions as well as pinch to zoom. The 2008 aluminum unibody MacBook has the same touchpad as the current MacBook "Pro". It's the same freaking design minus the SD card slot and Firewire port.

http://www.everymac.com/systems/app...-2.0-aluminum-13-late-2008-unibody-specs.html

There's nothing special about a computer being made out of a single block of aluminum? Ok, buddy.

Yeah, the process is neat. But as far as build quality goes, it's only better than previous generation Apple products. Not the rest of the industry. Compare the MacBook "Pro" to actual "professional" offerings from HP and Dell and others and you'll see that Apple's lineup is still very far behind.

Second have you heard of Gateway or HP? Their failure rates are off the charts.

Got proof? Gateway (Acer) and HP use the same manufacturer as Apple after all.

If you have a cracked screen you walk into the Apple store and get it replaced

Have you actually read the MacBook forum threads where people are having these problems? Apple is replacing it as a "courtesy" but specifically blaming the user for "abusing" their system. As soon as those warranties start to end I can guarantee you it won't be such an easy replacement.

And what about people who don't live near an Apple Store? I live in southern California and the closest Apple Store is an hour away.

I'd really love to see what kind of battery life those amazing lower clocked quad core CPU's produce.

So you'd rather have a CPU thats slower and a system that cost you $1,300 more just to get a little bit extra battery life? If CPU power is important to me for what I'm doing, I'm going to be plugged in. I'd rather have something done faster. And realistically, when I do take my notebook somewhere, it's carried in a backpack. So the weight of an extra battery means nothing. I've been doing that for a couple of years now with my HP and one 6 high capacity 6 cell battery and one double capacity 12 cell battery. I've had 10 hours of battery life since Apple only had 4.5. Kind of funny that my older HP with dedicated graphics gets better battery life with a user replaceable battery than my MacBook does ;)

What is it more capable of? My Mac can run every application on the planet. Any PC can't.

Your Mac can only do that through virtualization or by having multiple OSes installed. Guess what? PCs can virtualize too. PCs can have multiple OSes installed as well.

Another thing to think about is how many more apps there are for Windows. For every one app that exists in OS X to do a specific task, there are 10 in Windows. I know you'll bring up the "quality" argument and try to say that OS X apps are better in some way, but the simple truth is they are not. There are freeware alternatives in Windows to OS X apps that generally do more for free, or the paid alternatives are complete software suites, while the OS X app does only one task.

And of course, you say "My Mac can run every application on the planet". Sure, you can think that. But heres the reality of that. That $2,200 MacBook Pro isn't anywhere near as powerful as a $900 notebook "PC". That $1,500 iMac will get slaughtered by an $800 desktop PC. Even the Mac Pro has NO real world advantage over a Core i7 PC desktop other than ECC memory, which has higher latency and slower speed as a result. You CAN build a desktop PC with dual Core i7 processors for significantly less than a dual core Xeon Mac Pro. But anyway, back to my point. Sure, your Mac can run "every application on the planet", as can a PC. But your Mac will do it significantly slower than a PC will that costs less than half as much as that Mac did because Apple charges such a high premium. Your Mac's CPU and GPU will be outdated and unable to run the latest software and games well before a high end PC will be outdated.

And the best part? Let's say I build a desktop PC thats several times faster than the $1,499 iMac. I could do that with a larger and better display for about $600 less total. If both the iMac and that desktop are kept for 4 years, I could upgrade that PC and keep it top end over time. And the best part is that, when those 4 years are up, I will still have spent less money on that PC than on that iMac and I will have had a faster system that entire time.

8 hours? LMAO! You apparently haven't read reviews on HP laptops. Enjoy your snap on battery. Just more **** for you to carry around.

You apparently didn't read the links I posted ;) HP's upcoming Pavilion line will sport high battery life. And from my real world experience owning a few HPs for a few years now, including one of their double capacity batteries that gets nearly 7 hours real world battery life, I have no reason to believe they won't reach their stated specs.

All while doing it with MODERN CPUs and MODERN GPUs as well ;) Not rebadged several generation old technology like Apple continues to use, all for the sake of anorexic computers.

That's great, the user of this thread was talking about the 14"

Actually, if you read the topic and topic headline, you'll see it was 14" and 17". Don't try to dismiss facts just because it kills your argument ;)

Again, the user was talking about the 14".

Again, don't dismiss reality just because it kills your argument. Might want to try reading the topic as well.

Touch screen using a desktop OS? LOL!

Uh… wow, that says a lot right there. It's a laptop. You really want iPhone OS on a fully functioning laptop computer? No. That's just stupid. Windows 7 has "multi-touch" capabilities and HP has their "TouchSmart" UI/layer. While it will NOT work on an iPad competitor, it WILL work on a fully functional laptop. Which is exactly what it is.

Yeah, thats why it's called the "Envy" right? It's a shameless design ripoff with terribly placed ports.

Go back and look up the dv6000 series and dv5 series. Then you can thank HP for Apple's current design ;)

At least HP uses modern ports. Wheres HDMI and eSATA on my MacBook?

If all you plan on doing is watching movies then great. For the rest of us who do actual work on our computers, 16:10 is the superior aspect ratio on tinier screens.

False. I've killed this argument many times over. 16:10 offers no real world benefit, other than making things all screwed up. OS X is inefficient with desktop space anyway, when you take into account the always there menubar and the inefficient and bloated dock. With Windows you can at least gain your full desktop space back by having a disappearing taskbar and PROPER window switching using keyboard shortcuts.

So you just happened to know someone who had that problem? I'll believe that when I see it. It still stands that Apple has the highest rated customer service in tech.

Yes I do know someone who had that problem.

I've also killed that "highest rated" argument on multiple occasions. You see, Apple gets such high ratings from its dedicated fanbase. There are people here who have had a single Mac go through half a dozen motherboard replacements and other repairs. Yet those same people still give Apple glowing ratings in those after service emails. With any other manufacturer, a regular person would give them the worst ratings popular. Apple gets such high ratings because the fans, despite the poorly built products and multiple repairs and spending weeks without their system that cost 2x more than it should, still somehow think they're being treated better than they would be if they had bought a PC. But in the real world, where brand loyalty means nothing, if someone even goes through one major repair, that company gets a negative review.

I guess that's that's why HP calls it the "Envy", right?

Like I said, look up the dv6000 and dv5 series. HP had the design first. Including the glass screens.

Right, because Sony TOTALLY invented the chiclet keyboard

No but they did try to take it mainstream first ;)
 
Well Apple may not have the *BEST* reliability as some may like to believe, their customer service makes up for it. HP has THE WORST reliability of any notebook manufacturer and they top that off with some of the worst customer service imaginable. Don't just take my word for it, take a look at Engadgets report. The title alone says it all. ;)
 
The 14" Envy looks very nice.

I may not have to wait until Apphole releases an Actual update to the 13" MBP. I think the current 13" MBP doesn't deserve to be called Pro.

But I wonder how heavy the 14" Envy is. I'm tired of carrying around my 15" PB.

Anyone know an approximate release date for the Envy? But of course, like always, I would wait until a thorough review is done for the Envy.

Even though I'm a Mac user, I believe in criticism towards Apphole's shortcomings. I criticize any company's products if I feel they have shortcomings. With enough constructive criticism, improvements will occur.

You have a freaking POWERBOOK from 2003 and you're complaining about the 13" MACBOOK PRO line not being updated?! Have you even USED a MacBook Pro before? ANYTHING would be a step up from your current computer! Which, I might add, is SEVEN YEARS OLD! That just tells you right there that these machines will last you several years! If you upgraded to the current 15" MacBook Pro with the i7 processor right now, I am sure you'd get another seven years out of that computer!
 
I mean there that lazy the imac are using core duos still and there massive!
It took them a while to put desktop CPUs in the iMac.

You CAN build a desktop PC with dual Core i7 processors for significantly less than a dual core Xeon Mac Pro.
Also note that the Mac Pro's RAM slot capacity was crippled to 2/3 of what it could have been.

OS X is inefficient with desktop space anyway, when you take into account the always there menubar and the inefficient and bloated dock.
Same with icon space…although Leopard (I think it was Leopard) makes it much better.
 
Guess what? It is. I have all of the three finger swipe motions as well as pinch to zoom. The 2008 aluminum unibody MacBook has the same touchpad as the current MacBook "Pro". It's the same freaking design minus the SD card slot and Firewire port.

http://www.everymac.com/systems/app...-2.0-aluminum-13-late-2008-unibody-specs.html
But you don't like it just... because? ;)

Yeah, the process is neat. But as far as build quality goes, it's only better than previous generation Apple products. Not the rest of the industry. Compare the MacBook "Pro" to actual "professional" offerings from HP and Dell and others and you'll see that Apple's lineup is still very far behind.
Still very far behind in what? Processor? Nope. Apple is using the latest Arrandale chips. GPU? Just look at all Dell's offerings and their graphics aren't much different. Battery life? Good luck finding anything that actually bests the MacBook Pro. So how exactly is the MacBook Pro behind again?


Got proof? Gateway (Acer) and HP use the same manufacturer as Apple after all.
Enjoy.
laptopfailurerates.png

http://www.squaretrade.com/htm/pdf/SquareTrade_laptop_reliability_1109.pdf

Have you actually read the MacBook forum threads where people are having these problems? Apple is replacing it as a "courtesy" but specifically blaming the user for "abusing" their system. As soon as those warranties start to end I can guarantee you it won't be such an easy replacement.

And what about people who don't live near an Apple Store? I live in southern California and the closest Apple Store is an hour away.
Doesn't change the fact that Apple's customer service is the highest rated in the business whether a couple of threads of people complaining or not. If you want to go to the Apple store it's an hour away. If you want HP to service your product you call their Indian support team, ship it and wait for weeks.

So you'd rather have a CPU thats slower and a system that cost you $1,300 more just to get a little bit extra battery life? If CPU power is important to me for what I'm doing, I'm going to be plugged in. I'd rather have something done faster. And realistically, when I do take my notebook somewhere, it's carried in a backpack. So the weight of an extra battery means nothing. I've been doing that for a couple of years now with my HP and one 6 high capacity 6 cell battery and one double capacity 12 cell battery. I've had 10 hours of battery life since Apple only had 4.5. Kind of funny that my older HP with dedicated graphics gets better battery life with a user replaceable battery than my MacBook does ;)
CPU power is important to me too, but not what my laptop is being set on fire. ;)

The extra weight means nothing? Yeah, because everyone is like you and takes their high school backpack around with them. :rolleyes:
It's kind of funny you expect to me to believe your ******** battery 'statistics' when reviews on HP's own damn website have proven that the battery life is mediocre.

Your Mac can only do that through virtualization or by having multiple OSes installed. Guess what? PCs can virtualize too. PCs can have multiple OSes installed as well.
So your PC can run the entire Final Cut Suite flawlessly? Nope... didn't think so. I can set my Mac up running Windows and Linux in less than an hour.

Another thing to think about is how many more apps there are for Windows. For every one app that exists in OS X to do a specific task, there are 10 in Windows. I know you'll bring up the "quality" argument and try to say that OS X apps are better in some way, but the simple truth is they are not. There are freeware alternatives in Windows to OS X apps that generally do more for free, or the paid alternatives are complete software suites, while the OS X app does only one task.
Find me a free alternative to iLife on Windows that doesn't blow monkey chunks. I can get every industry standard application on my Mac. Your PC can't.

And of course, you say "My Mac can run every application on the planet". Sure, you can think that. But heres the reality of that. That $2,200 MacBook Pro isn't anywhere near as powerful as a $900 notebook "PC". That $1,500 iMac will get slaughtered by an $800 desktop PC. Even the Mac Pro has NO real world advantage over a Core i7 PC desktop other than ECC memory, which has higher latency and slower speed as a result. You CAN build a desktop PC with dual Core i7 processors for significantly less than a dual core Xeon Mac Pro. But anyway, back to my point. Sure, your Mac can run "every application on the planet", as can a PC. But your Mac will do it significantly slower than a PC will that costs less than half as much as that Mac did because Apple charges such a high premium. Your Mac's CPU and GPU will be outdated and unable to run the latest software and games well before a high end PC will be outdated.
That $1500 iMac also won't be raping my electricity bill. But I guess that's not a concern to you because mommy and daddy pay for the bills, right? ;)

That $1500 iMac is backed up by some of the best customer service in the business.

That $2200 MacBook Pro has the best battery life, trackpad and build quality in the business.

And the best part? Let's say I build a desktop PC thats several times faster than the $1,499 iMac. I could do that with a larger and better display for about $600 less total. If both the iMac and that desktop are kept for 4 years, I could upgrade that PC and keep it top end over time. And the best part is that, when those 4 years are up, I will still have spent less money on that PC than on that iMac and I will have had a faster system that entire time.
Ahh, the age old argument of being able to build something better. If you can get something better then why did you buy a MacBook? Why? Because it works. Take it from long time Windows fans.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_xDOO8ZJjU

You are comparing an all-in-one to a desktop PC. How about you compare that iMac to some PC all-in-ones? The iMac will leave them in their waste.

You apparently didn't read the links I posted ;) HP's upcoming Pavilion line will sport high battery life. And from my real world experience owning a few HPs for a few years now, including one of their double capacity batteries that gets nearly 7 hours real world battery life, I have no reason to believe they won't reach their stated specs.
7 hours? I thought it was 10? Which one is it? Your story sure is falling apart. ;) Enjoy your high failure rate, crap customer support, and mediocre battery life that is no where near what is stated.

All while doing it with MODERN CPUs and MODERN GPUs as well ;) Not rebadged several generation old technology like Apple continues to use, all for the sake of anorexic computers.
Lynnfield and Arrandale aren't new enough for you? The 330m is superior to what I've seen in Dell's offerings so what's the problem again?


Actually, if you read the topic and topic headline, you'll see it was 14" and 17". Don't try to dismiss facts just because it kills your argument ;)
Actually if you read the rest of the topic you'll see the user was solely talking about the 14". ;) If you want to talk about i7-QM 17" toaster HP has conjured up then i'll gladly talk about.

Again, don't dismiss reality just because it kills your argument. Might want to try reading the topic as well.
But if you read the headline the user was talking about the 14" and 17" right... so then why did you mention the 15"... oh wait ;)

Uh… wow, that says a lot right there. It's a laptop. You really want iPhone OS on a fully functioning laptop computer? No. That's just stupid. Windows 7 has "multi-touch" capabilities and HP has their "TouchSmart" UI/layer. While it will NOT work on an iPad competitor, it WILL work on a fully functional laptop. Which is exactly what it is.
Yeah it will work. It will work poorly. Windows 7 might have a touch interface added on but it was made primarily for mouse and keyboard input no matter what way you try to twist it. None of these touch screen PC's have caught on for a reason.

Go back and look up the dv6000 series and dv5 series. Then you can thank HP for Apple's current design ;)
I think you are mistaking design for a couple of color choices. ;)

At least HP uses modern ports. Wheres HDMI and eSATA on my MacBook?
HDMI? Mini-Display port out with audio. ;)
eSATA? Firewire 800. ;)


False. I've killed this argument many times over. 16:10 offers no real world benefit, other than making things all screwed up. OS X is inefficient with desktop space anyway, when you take into account the always there menubar and the inefficient and bloated dock. With Windows you can at least gain your full desktop space back by having a disappearing taskbar and PROPER window switching using keyboard shortcuts.
You've said you proved it yet you didn't here. OSX is inefficient with desktop space? You can put your dock on the right or left side of the screen and make it hide. With Windows you have a cluttered mess of tiny windows jammed at the bottom of your screen with that disgusting tray. 16:10 offers more vertical pixels while still offering a wide enough viewing angle. You can't change this.


Yes I do know someone who had that problem.

I've also killed that "highest rated" argument on multiple occasions. You see, Apple gets such high ratings from its dedicated fanbase. There are people here who have had a single Mac go through half a dozen motherboard replacements and other repairs. Yet those same people still give Apple glowing ratings in those after service emails. With any other manufacturer, a regular person would give them the worst ratings popular. Apple gets such high ratings because the fans, despite the poorly built products and multiple repairs and spending weeks without their system that cost 2x more than it should, still somehow think they're being treated better than they would be if they had bought a PC. But in the real world, where brand loyalty means nothing, if someone even goes through one major repair, that company gets a negative review.
What a joke. The majority of Apple customers are not loyal to Apple. The majority of Apple's customers are people who just walk into the store and like to buy a product without looking up information online beforehand. You really think a fanbase can turn the tide of ratings that much? What a joke and a pathetic argument.


Like I said, look up the dv6000 and dv5 series. HP had the design first. Including the glass screens.
Like I said, a couple of colors is laughable and the fact that HP calls it the ENVY is even funnier.

No but they did try to take it mainstream first ;)
They made it mainstream? I'd like to see the report on this. ;)

You keep going back to old news but apple HAVE shot themselves in the foot with the unibody!
Really? They shot themselves in the foot with the best manufacturing process in the business that provides exceptional quality? Ok. :rolleyes:

You can sell it to me with bells on it that the i5 was not included in the macbook pro 13" because the i3 weren't up-to the job there a large company that don't need protecting they could of pulled a deal with AMD over delay it toke to refresh the things!
AMD's mobile chips are garbage. It's pretty clear you are just responding because you can. You have no real grasp on the actual conversation going on.

The Vaio Z crammed in a 2.66 i7 and a 330 1gb into a tiny frame! with a few vents! at half the weight of a MBP 13" and that came out just after christmas yet its stylish so that site is talking rubbish!
That VAIO Z also a 6.5 claimed hour battery life, is $1899, and has a completely different internal layout than the MacBook Pro. It's also thicker and has ICs mounted on both sides.

Cost is mentioned again about the i5 on that site i mean really would it put up the price that much? when you can by an i5 notebook for less then £600
Those plastic notebooks also take less money to manufacture.

Most notebook manufactures get there CPU's for next to nothing anyway! its the cost of design and marketing they need to make a profit on and they do it very well!
Show me where you pulled this statistic out of your ass from please.

You can cram anything into a small space and call it magical but there are limits and the unibody is beyond its limit to offer the bang for buck performance/style ratio!
The unibody is beyond its limits? Apple's sales figures say otherwise.

I could go by a porsche tomorrow stick a crappy engine in it it gets me from A-B but its looks nice so it will do even though i have paid the same price no i want my power i paid for under the hood!
You can also stick a V8 in a go-kart but it won't be like driving in a Ferrari. Two can play at the car game.

This is another case of the engine don't match the body work! the 13" is well well well overpriced on a 3 year old unibody design that could of been improved or altered to make room for new cpus for that price!!
3 year old design? The unibody was introduced in late 2008 and is still the best in the business.

They had the time frame all they done is stuck to there guns with excuses again and called it faster better more empowering marketing bull! yet what is it?
It IS faster. It has higher clocked processors than before, faster graphics than before, more HDD space than before and more battery life than before.

A core 2 due you probably brought in a windows notebook about 2yr ago for £1000 why should users have to pay that again now for one because of a pretty case?
That Core 2 Duo has the same performance as an i3 has now, buddy. Do a little research.

The 13" for specs and the old design should be around £700 tops
Old design? LMAO!

I mean there that lazy the imac are using core duos still and there massive!
Apple was using the best processors they could at the time. Clarkdale was not out. Again, do some research or stop wasting my time.
 
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.

Proper fanboi response. Of course it is possible. My vaio does exactly that, sports an i5 (i7 available), quad SSD, discrete graphic, 8GB RAM, low res screen (1680 res, normal res is 1920 one), 7 hour battery life which is enough for nearly everything, and weighs a pound less than the 13'' MBP. Oh, and it is actually cheaper than the 13'' MBP too if you compare it on an even spec level (SSD, bigger screen res, 3 years apple care program on the MBP).

I wish apple had done a better job on the MBP upgrade, especially as it is supposedly "Pro" since i like working on MacOS a lot more than on Windows, but alas they haven't.
 
Proper fanboi response. Of course it is possible. My vaio does exactly that, sports an i5 (i7 available), quad SSD, discrete graphic, 8GB RAM, low res screen (1680 res, normal res is 1920 one), 7 hour battery life which is enough for nearly everything, and weighs a pound less than the 13'' MBP. Oh, and it is actually cheaper than the 13'' MBP too if you compare it on an even spec level (SSD, bigger screen res, 3 years apple care program on the MBP).

I wish apple had done a better job on the MBP upgrade, especially as it is supposedly "Pro" since i like working on MacOS a lot more than on Windows, but alas they haven't.
What kind of an idiot upgrades everything from Apples store? I'd really love to know how much that VAIO ended up costing you considering the fact that it STARTS at $1899. God knows how much you ended paying for a laptop that you can't even read the text on.
 
You keep going back to old news but apple HAVE shot themselves in the foot with the unibody!

You can sell it to me with bells on it that the i5 was not included in the macbook pro 13" because the i3 weren't up-to the job there a large company that don't need protecting they could of pulled a deal with AMD over delay it toke to refresh the things!

The Vaio Z crammed in a 2.66 i7 and a 330 1gb into a tiny frame! with a few vents! at half the weight of a MBP 13" and that came out just after christmas yet its stylish so that site is talking rubbish!

Cost is mentioned again about the i5 on that site i mean really would it put up the price that much? when you can by an i5 notebook for less then £600

Most notebook manufactures get there CPU's for next to nothing anyway! its the cost of design and marketing they need to make a profit on and they do it very well!

You can cram anything into a small space and call it magical but there are limits and the unibody is beyond its limit to offer the bang for buck performance/style ratio!

I could go by a porsche tomorrow stick a crappy engine in it it gets me from A-B but its looks nice so it will do even though i have paid the same price no i want my power i paid for under the hood!

This is another case of the engine don't match the body work! the 13" is well well well overpriced on a 3 year old unibody design that could of been improved or altered to make room for new cpus for that price!!

They had the time frame all they done is stuck to there guns with excuses again and called it faster better more empowering marketing bull! yet what is it?

A core 2 due you probably brought in a windows notebook about 2yr ago for £1000 why should users have to pay that again now for one because of a pretty case?

The 13" for specs and the old design should be around £700 tops

I mean there that lazy the imac are using core duos still and there massive!

Again, Apple's decision to have a high-capacity, non-protruding battery intrudes on space for the motherboard. Which is why PCs are able to have a discrete chip on the board. Because their boards are larger (and their bodies are a tad thicker, too).

At any rate, I'm perfectly content with my 13" MBP. I don't care about the Core 2 Duo; the 320M and the 10 hour battery make up for the lack of an i3 or an i5. It doesn't satisfy the gadget geek in me, but it satisfies the user in me, and in the end, that's far more important.
 
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.

Oh really, then what's this?. 13" screen, 1920x1080 resolution, Intel i5 - 540M, NVIDIA® GeForce® GT 330M GPU (1GB of dedicated video RAM).

You shouldn't say something is impossible when you can actually buy it right now. Stop talking above everyone when you don't know your facts.
 
Oh really, then what's this?. 13" screen, 1920x1080 resolution, Intel i5 - 540M, NVIDIA® GeForce® GT 330M GPU (1GB of dedicated video RAM).

You shouldn't say something is impossible when you can actually buy it right now. Stop talking above everyone when you don't know your facts.

What's that? That's $2300, has a resolution so high that you can't even read text on it, has a claimed 6.5 hour battery, is thicker and has different internal layout than the MacBook Pro that would not work. Keep trying.
 
What's that? That's $2300, has a resolution so high that you can't even read text on it, has a claimed 6.5 hour battery, is thicker and has different internal layout than the MacBook Pro that would not work. Keep trying.

Actually the rez is 1600 x 900. I was reading the maximum external resolution over HDMI. So it's comparable to the MBP in that respect.
 
Actually the rez is 1600 x 900. I was reading the maximum external resolution over HDMI. So it's comparable to the MBP in that respect.

Oh? But a couple of minutes I thought the largest resolution was obviously the best thing? ;)
 
What's that? That's $2300, has a resolution so high that you can't even read text on it, has a claimed 6.5 hour battery, is thicker and has different internal layout than the MacBook Pro that would not work. Keep trying.

why do you feel you need to counter every word anybody writes in this thread against the new MBP's. Yes they are great computers, yes OSX is great and in some ways superior to Win7, yes the MBP design is awesome and the envy borrowed it pretty well, yes applecare is great but the local pc shop around the corner also always solves every pc problem i ever had.

is there not a slight possibility that there might be windows machines that do things well too. as good as or maybe even in some areas better then the worshipped MBP line?

I have respect for both, of course this is a Mac forum so i can understand there might be a tad more proMac arguments in this discussion, but do we really need to burn half decent windows machines or take everything SJ claims for blind truth?

Apple is in the multi kazillion $$ computer business and employs smart engineers because they came up with all this good MBP stuff, so i am sure they could have fitted anything they wanted in the MBP13 but purposely decided not to for reasons of their own, maybe they had a stock of C2D's lying around, a deal with intel, maybe they were busy with the iPad and didnt have enough interest in redesigning the MBP line to fit 2010 tech, maybe they wanted to milk the current design for one more generation and redesign for sandy bridge in 2011 or any other reason.

but to just claim magic, impossibilities or talk down the envy's and vaio's in this world is just overstating it a bit imho. It is a free world fortunately and everybody can buy the laptop that suits him/her best. I for one haven't made up my mind yet, wanting a MBP13 but i cannot justify its $1500 for 2007 tech. so i will either wait for the 2011 refresh, think about the $2500 15" pricetag or just get me a 14"envy which apart from OSX has everything i wanted in the MBP refresh in the first place ...

either way everybody enjoy their new laptop whatever brand it is, they all have unique advantages. long live diversity!
stefan
 
Guys you can also just write @someone if you want to reply. This 30 line quotes are ridiculous.

The whole discussion is somewhat pointless now I think. Wait until the reviews are out and then we can continue this. By that time we can actually know if those new Notebooks deliver what they promise.
A lot of people I know have the HP 6530p which are really good in built quality and battery life is as usual quite good with around 4-5h. They are boring office notebooks with crappy screens though. But HP can build some decent notebooks.
The whole support issue will stay but the lower price and better features might make it still worth it. Again we have to wait to know how expensive the Envy 14 really is. $999 starting price sounds good but a batt. slice is extra for $125 and who knows what upgrades one wants and where you end up with a good support plan.

The Envy 14 also has one more potential portability benefit over the Unibody MBP. The bottom is not metal and conducts less heat and if used with the slice it is probably much better if used on a lap. It does not look as good but some people prefer function over form.

With the (IMO useless) integrated optical drive they might not have gained all that much space for cooling. It will be interesting how good the cooling is. If the cooling system can take it a 5650 can easily become a 5730. And real world battery life will be interesting but at least you can choose yourself and are not forced to use dedicated when you don't need it as the case with Apple.
 
The 14" is very nice, the 17" has a misplaced trackpad though. Why couldn't they put it in the middle where it belongs?

It's relative to the centre of the keyboard discluding the numeric key pad I think.

Plastic bottom sounds not so good :[
 
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.

this IS THE BEST POST in this thread. Solution?

Macbook Pro Elite series, with one or 2 comps in a division seperate than mbp, like dell and dell xps or now alienware. Still the same things from MBP but just offer bleeding edge tech and that apple tax price ;)

Charge a 300-500 premium for base models over the corresponding MBP and offer better discrete graphics, better cpu's same apple quality. maybe a little less batt life
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.