Possibility of 13" Macbook Pro this Tuesday?

[bektravels]

QFT.

One of Apple's biggest mistakes ever was killing off the 12" MBP. If they released a 12" MBP with the same dimensions as my 12" Powerbook but thinner, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. Until that day, my trusty 12" Powerbook will keep on chugging.

^ Totally agree, I'm in the same boat.

 

[Balty]

That'd be great having a 13 inch MBP. I'd still probably prefer 15 inch though...

 

[NRose8989]

Really? A 13.3 in. screen? That sounds awful to me.

Besides playing games, would any of you actually cut footage in final cut studio or work on a 15 megapixel image in photoshop on a 13.3 in. screen?

Just get a macbook and a PS3..... boom problem solved.

 

[Beric]

Really? A 13.3 in. screen? That sounds awful to me.

Besides playing games, would any of you actually cut footage in final cut studio or work on a 15 megapixel image in photoshop on a 13.3 in. screen?

Just get a macbook and a PS3..... boom problem solved.

Just hook up an external monitor when you're doing serious work. And carry it around when you need portability. The only computer you'll ever need.

 

[Eddyisgreat]

Really? A 13.3 in. screen? That sounds awful to me.

Besides playing games, would any of you actually cut footage in final cut studio or work on a 15 megapixel image in photoshop on a 13.3 in. screen?

Just get a macbook and a PS3..... boom problem solved.

Hi. I'm an IT Professional (we are all more or less )

In my Professional line of work I often find myself between needing on the go portability for meetings and accessing critical data but can tether back to my desk and connect to dual monitor for serious business.

I have a 15" MBP but my 12" G4 serves this well. Perfect footprint, great performance...

If I can recall the max reso of each machine:
1920 by 1200 - macbook (latest rev)
2048 x 1536 - G4 (last rev)
2560 by 1600 pixels (latest rev)

Yes, the puny graphics capability of the train-wreck that is the 5200 graphics processor of four years ago can drive a larger monitor in a smaller package than the macbook, which, for this reason, won't serve my needs.

This is why I would purchase a 12"/13" inch Macbook Pro.

 

[NRose8989]

Hi. I'm an IT Professional (we are all more or less )

In my Professional line of work I often find myself between needing on the go portability for meetings and accessing critical data but can tether back to my desk and connect to dual monitor for serious business.

I have a 15" MBP but my 12" G4 serves this well. Perfect footprint, great performance...

If I can recall the max reso of each machine:
1920 by 1200 - macbook (latest rev)
2048 x 1536 - G4 (last rev)
2560 by 1600 pixels (latest rev)

Yes, the puny graphics capability of the train-wreck that is the 5200 graphics processor of four years ago can drive a larger monitor in a smaller package than the macbook, which, for this reason, won't serve my needs.

This is why I would purchase a 12"/13" inch Macbook Pro.

So tell me Mr. Professional, How much of this "critical data" actually tax the GPU of your G4? Because if your getting by just fine with your G4, there's nothing you could throw at a MB or even a MBA that it couldn't handle.

Yes, So at first glance your G4 does push a higher perceived resolution, 2048 x 1536 > 1920 x 1200 BUT after closer examination the only monitors that support 2048 x 1536 resolution are OLD 22' max CRT displays, now considering that a standard 24' LCD display has a resolution of 1920 x 1200. thus making the extra 841,728 pixels completely worthless. So in short, no your G4 cannot drive a "larger display" than a MB or MBA.

I imagine you can't possibly be doing any heavy lifting with your G4, now are you? Because I'm pretty sure even intel's X3100 has more than twice the memory as the 5200 and it's ddr2. Now obviously i shouldn't be comparing technology from 3-4 years ago to current tech BUT if you seem to be getting by just fine with your G4, there's no need for a 13.3 MBP when a MBA can do everything you ask and be smaller at the same time.