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

Somebody needs to wake Apple up, WE WANT 1440*900 ON THE 13'' MBP !

S

Sarngate

macrumors regular
Original poster
May 15, 2010
220
61
Now don't get me wrong, i don't hate 1280*800 on a screen that size by any means. However, i used the 1440*900 on the MBA in-store yesterday and it was a lot crisper. Even if it was only a BTO option i would happily pay an extra £50 or so to get the increased screen resolution.

Oh, and to anybody has made this ridiculous statement about the Intel 3000 not being able to power a 1440*900 screen:

DONT BE CRAZY.
 
torbjoern said:
Vote with your wallet and get the Air then
Click to expand...

Thing is, the Air will end up costing me more for a worse machine :(

-Inferior screen in every way but resolution
-Significantly slower CPU
-2GB of RAM

The reason i say it will cost more is i require at least 250GB of storage on my notebook, something which only the top end 256GB SSD option can provide. I'm also against the idea of spending money on something which in processing terms is a downgrade from my last machine.
 
Sarngate said:
Now don't get me wrong, i don't hate 1280*800 on a screen that size by any means. However, i used the 1440*900 on the MBA in-store yesterday and it was a lot crisper. Even if it was only a BTO option i would happily pay an extra £50 or so to get the increased screen resolution.

Oh, and to anybody has made this ridiculous statement about the Intel 3000 not being able to power a 1440*900 screen:

DONT BE CRAZY.
Click to expand...

You do realize that 13 MBA and 13 MBP are not in same price range right?

13 MBP costs only 1199 dollars and 13 MBA start with 1299 dollars with juts 2GB ram. If you upgrade the ram, it goes up to 1399 dollars. There is 200 dollars difference already.

Shame that apple didn't offer 13 MBP higher display as BTO, but apple wanted to save the money and decided to stay in 1280X800.

What is wrong with that display anyway or are you just one of those people who care nothing, but numbers?

It's a lot crisper? Is it? MBA doesn't even have a edge to edge glass on the display. I have both 13 MBP and 13 MBA and 13 MBP has a lot more vivid colors. Take out the resolution out of your mind for a second. Or pay more money and go for real 15 inch pro machine with higher resolution.

update: I read your comment. Now, you are talking about MBA will cost more than MBP. Well, there you go. And you are now whining about 2GB ram. No, it can be upgraded to 4GB.

Basically, you want to have a MBP with the best things inside, but you are not willing to pay more money for that privilege. Sorry, but that's not going to work.
 
Sarngate said:
Thing is, the Air will end up costing me more for a worse machine :(

-Inferior screen in every way but resolution
-Significantly slower CPU
-2GB of RAM

The reason i say it will cost more is i require at least 250GB of storage on my notebook, something which only the top end 256GB SSD option can provide. I'm also against the idea of spending money on something which in processing terms is a downgrade from my last machine.
Click to expand...
The MBA has a more narrow colour gamut and not as good viewing angle - but on the other hand, it's less glossy (not like a mirror).

How about the 15" MBP then? I would say you get more bang for the buck with that one than with the 13" MBP anyway. With the 15" you can even have 1680x1050 in addition to getting quad-core and 4 GB RAM (which also will be upgradeable).
 
You might also want to leave a feedback and say, "I will pay more than 1199 dollars, please raise the price and give us 1440X900 resolution."

Then, they might listen. If you want more options, you pay more. That's how it works.
 
Davichi said:
You do realize that 13 MBA and 13 MBP are not in same price range right?
Click to expand...

Hence why i said it could be included as a BTO option, thus negating any price increase. Unless you're going to try and tell me that the actual cost difference between a 1280*800 display and a 1440*900 one is anywhere close to £60 :rolleyes:

Davichi said:
Shame that apple didn't offer 13 MBP higher display as BTO, but apple wanted to save the money and decided to stay in 1280X800.
Click to expand...

As i said, adding it as a BTO option would have almost certainly increase profit per machine, not resulted in a loss.

Davichi said:
What is wrong with that display anyway or are you just one of those people who care nothing, but numbers?
Click to expand...

Not at all, i used a 1280*800 13'' MBP happily. However, a 1440*900 would be useful for me in situations where i like to have chat windows open while browsing. For example with the extra horizontal space i would have just enough to view an IRC chat on the right side of the screen while browsing a full-sized web page, something which i can't quite do on the current display. It may not sound like much, but i spend a LOT of time in IRC !

Davichi said:
It's a lot crisper? Is it? MBA doesn't even have a edge to edge glass on the display. I have both 13 MBP and 13 MBA and 13 MBP has a lot more vivid colors. Take out the resolution out of your mind for a second.
Click to expand...

Well yes, it is. Resolution is the only thing which comes into play when discussing Pixel density or sharpness. I'm aware that the MBA screen is inferior in other ways, but i don't see any reason why Apple cannot manufacturer a 1440*900 13'' screen to the same quality levels as the current MBP displays. Especially if it was a BTO option.

Davichi said:
Now, you are talking about MBA will cost more than MBP. Well, there you go. And you are now whining about 2GB ram. No, it can be upgraded to 4GB. Basically, you want to have a MBP with the best things inside, but you are not willing to pay more money for that privilege. Sorry, but that's not going to work.
Click to expand...

*sigh*

I'm not whining about 2GB of RAM, but it's not enough for my needs hence why i'd rather not buy a MBA. I wish you would stop jumping to Apple's defence so eagerly and actually read my posts properly, it's rather annoying.

The whole point of the damn topic is that i would be HAPPY to pay MORE for a 1400*900 display, hence the BTO ACRONYM BEING USED EVERYWHERE. :mad:
 
torbjoern said:
The MBA has a more narrow colour gamut and not as good viewing angle - but on the other hand, it's less glossy (not like a mirror).

How about the 15" MBP then? I would say you get more bang for the buck with that one than with the 13" MBP anyway. With the 15" you can even have 1680x1050 in addition to getting quad-core and 4 GB RAM (which also will be upgradeable).
Click to expand...

Yeah, i could definitely tell the difference between the MBA and the Pro in terms of general picture quality yesterday.

I actually think the 15'' is a brilliant machine in terms of what Apple has given for the price, i just don't know if i want to spend the extra money on it. I also have concerns about portability. If anybody has any experience with the portability difference between a 13'' and 15'' MBP i'd be grateful for your input.

Davichi said:
You might also want to leave a feedback and say, "I will pay more than 1199 dollars, please raise the price and give us 1440X900 resolution."

Then, they might listen. If you want more options, you pay more. That's how it works.
Click to expand...

I just did precisely that. :) Thanks for the actually helpful posts guys.
 
Sarngate said:
Yeah, i could definitely tell the difference between the MBA and the Pro in terms of general picture quality yesterday.

I actually think the 15'' is a brilliant machine in terms of what Apple has given for the price, i just don't know if i want to spend the extra money on it. I also have concerns about portability. If anybody has any experience with the portability difference between a 13'' and 15'' MBP i'd be grateful for your input.
Click to expand...
The 15" weighs 5.6 lbs, which is around 25 % more than the 13" MBP. It's also 25 % larger in physical size. The upside is that with the hi-res option, you get up to 72 % more screen real estate on the 15" than the 13" MBP. If the MBA is not an option, I would surely go for the 15" MBP if I were you.
 
SIGNED!

It's the only thing that kept me from buying the top 13" model yesterday.

I dont understand why they didnt allow the upsell for extra $$ like they did with the 15". 1280x800 in a 13" is so 2006 !!!!
 
torbjoern said:
The 15" weighs 5.6 lbs, which is around 25 % more than the 13" MBP. It's also 25 % larger in physical size. The upside is that with the hi-res option, you get up to 72 % more screen real estate on the 15" than the 13" MBP. If the MBA is not an option, I would surely go for the 15" MBP if I were you.
Click to expand...

The 15" is not really a mobility device. I tried it and it's too bulky to carry around. The 13" with its new Sandy Bridge processors could have been the ultimate power mobility laptop, but they messed it up with the resolution BIG TIME. Was it too difficult to offer an upgrade for, say, $150 extra?
 
torbjoern said:
If the MBA is not an option, I would surely go for the 15" MBP if I were you.
Click to expand...

If you add the cost for the high-res anti-glare, a SSD (so booting and launching apps isn't slower than in the Air) and the Apple Care Protection Plan, the 15" will hit a pretty steep price tag.
 
KohPhiPhi said:
The 15" is not really a mobility device. I tried it and it's too bulky to carry around. The 13" with its new Sandy Bridge processors could have been the ultimate power mobility laptop, but they messed it up with the resolution BIG TIME. Was it too difficult to offer an upgrade for, say, $150 extra?
Click to expand...
I agree with you about the 15" being too bulky to carry around. There's a reason why I picked the 13" MBA over the 15" MBP even though the latter is a real work-horse.
alexandero said:
If you add the cost for the high-res anti-glare, a SSD (so booting and launching apps isn't slower than in the Air) and the Apple Care Protection Plan, the 15" will hit a pretty steep price tag.
Click to expand...
Of course it will hit a steep price tag. But also better screen, better (and discrete) graphics, better CPU, more disk space... I would say it's far better value than the 13" MBP even though the price is higher too.
Seems the Air is not an option in the first place, so I don't understand why you mention the SSD.
 
High res would have killed the already bad graphics performance. Still, the option would've been nice for those who prefer it over graphics performance.

I expect when Apple can put in a better GPU in there, the res will increase.
 
torbjoern said:
Of course it will hit a steep price tag. But also better screen, better (and discrete) graphics, better CPU, more disk space... I would say it's far better value than the 13" MBP even though the price is higher too.
Seems the Air is not an option in the first place, so I don't understand why you mention the SSD.
Click to expand...

you're mistaking me for someone else. Personally, I prefer a 256GB SDD over any HDD, as I've never needed more than 140GB plus a Time Capsule. And if I'd find an easy way to host my iTunes library and photos on the Time Capsule, even a 128GB SDD would be sufficient. So no, my next computer will not have a ancient HDD. The problem boils down to:

Apple does not offer a lightweight computer without moving parts, an anti-glare screen, and a CPU that's not slower than the CPUs Apple used in the MBP series four years ago.
 
arcite said:
Man, you guys whine alot. ;)

Just buy a 15' and be done with it already.
Click to expand...

Yea, because spending an extra $600 and overlooking portability needs should be considered whining. Let's all just start buying things we don't actually want to satisfy Apple's bottom line!
 
dnkbro said:
Yea, because spending an extra $600 and overlooking portability needs should be considered whining. Let's all just start buying things we don't actually want to satisfy Apple's bottom line!
Click to expand...

this

So stupid to say, go just with the 15". Yaeh i like the higher res and GPU, but there is the weight, which is just a bit too heavy in the daily routine, so that's why a lot of people stuck with the 13"...
 
I must say that I'm very disappointed by the 2011 update. I feel sorry for the consumers who are wowed by the statements on the Mac homepage that the new models have GPU's with 'up to 3x the performance of the previous models', when the reality is that this is only true for the 6750, the HD3000 in the 13" and the 6490m in the standard 15" are less powerful than their corresponding GPU predecessors.

Also, I'm sure there are many people like me who love the portability of the 13" form factor but are gagging for a screen res bump. With the MBA getting a 1440*900 screen and screen resolutions higher than 1280*800 becoming commonplace in netbooks costing a third of the price of the 13" MBP it's something of a joke to stick with a screen res that's been standard in Apple notebooks since 2006.

Personally I'd happily pay another £100 for an uprated panel, I guess (as many people on here have already said) the Intel IGP may well show just how weak it is when matched with a higher res panel so that could by why Apple omitted to have it even as a BTO option.

I'd already taken product shots of my MacBook (ready to sell it on eBay) and be a day one buyer but it looks like I'll be keeping it instead :(
 
I'm with the OP. The screen is the single reason why I haven't already placed my 13" MBP order.

The funny thing is their supposed "Pro" line is bested by the chic Air line with regards to screen res.

And no, I'm not going to buy a bigger laptop that I don't want to carry around. It's like somebody suggesting you just buy a 42" TV for a space that warrants a 32".
 
I am guessing it is the mainstream notebook (13"MBP) and they just cannot get the HD screen in the right quality for the price they want. The MBA screen has worse colors and only higher res.
With Lion and its res independence there will probably be a Res change across the board with the next refresh in a year.

The GPU even the HD 3000 is more than capable to power pretty much any resolution. That really is no limitation like someone posted.
 
The glossy Air's display seems like a matt screen in most circumstances. It's anti-reflective properties are really amazing. When there are reflections, only the brightest lit areas like windows show up as reflections and they only show up as a deep, deep purple colour which greatly reduces their impact. I'm finding the Air's 13" screen for my uses ideal, and I'm a pro photographer.

I was surprised Apple chose not upping the 13" MBP resolution because in real world use the difference is like going from the iPhone 3G to the iPhone 4 retina display. At normal viewing distances is seems very "retina".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back