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.
The 13" MBP Is Not A Pro Machine - UPDATED TOPIC
- Thread starter shambo
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Let Apple Know How You Feel!!!
Here is the link for MacbookPro feedback. Give them a piece of your mind about the piss-poor update to the 13" and lack of anything placing it in a "Pro" category". I did.
http://www.apple.com/feedback/macbookpro.html
Let your voices be heard. Who knows, someone at Apple may even forward some of the feedback to Steve on his iPad (meaning there's a good chance he'd read it. lol
)
Here is the link for MacbookPro feedback. Give them a piece of your mind about the piss-poor update to the 13" and lack of anything placing it in a "Pro" category". I did.
http://www.apple.com/feedback/macbookpro.html
Let your voices be heard. Who knows, someone at Apple may even forward some of the feedback to Steve on his iPad (meaning there's a good chance he'd read it. lol
)Then buy what you need. If the 13" doesn't satisfy your needs, get one that does.
It's that simple.
Ignorant reply
50% of my photography work I have to travel. When I'm editing in my own place I have a 27 inch to edit on so my laptop could have a 1" monitor at those times for all I care. But when i'm out carrying a smaller lighter laptop makes a huge difference. I mean why get a laptop for the road if it's not for extra portability?
BTW Engadget is saying the new i7 is about 50% faster for macs...
What crime is there for NEEDING both power and portability? It's not like it's impossible for apple to do.
What a truly ignorant post. You are in no position to even fathom what most buyers need. So, take two steps back, place the cup with the Apple kool-aid in it on the floor, and just walk away.
Really.... Walk AWAY.
I'm not saying it is impossible.
But making what you say would definitely increase the price of the 13" MacBook Pro's. And Apple wants to keep the price down, because, accept it, you are a small percentage of the market who wants 13" laptops.
Many say Apple could at least offer the option to put a faster processor, keeping the C2D option for the ones who prefer to save the money difference. But doing this also increments the cost in the C2D ones.
What a truly ignorant post. You are in no position to even fathom what most buyers need. So, take two steps back, place the cup with the Apple kool-aid in it on the floor, and just walk away.
Really.... Walk AWAY.
We are in a forum. As far as I know, I'm entitled to expressing my opinion.
Considering how many 13" and smaller powerful laptop lines are out there right now by Dell ,HP, Sony, Asus, Acer (oh wait that's pretty much MOST of them) there definitely is a market. Just you aren't one of them. If you want a lower power 13 inch buy the macbook non pro.
you're guess about the price control is just that, a guess. Just i5 options of the 13 shouldn't raise the price much. The 17" lowered in price.
Power and portability is called a 15" or a 17", i still have to laugh when people say that a 15 is too big.
So things like having a smaller footprint + being lighter doesn't make it more portable?
I thought that was how you defined portability.What a truly ignorant post. You are in no position to even fathom what most buyers need. So, take two steps back, place the cup with the Apple kool-aid in it on the floor, and just walk away.
Really.... Walk AWAY.
I think he has a legitimate point. Most of the people that buy the mbp, the C2D is more than able to meet the demands. From what I've been reading, they had only a few options on the mbp without drastically redesigning everything.
1 - i3 with only intel integrated graphics --> increase in processor performance with a decrease in graphic performance
2 - update with higher spec C2D --> small increase in processor performance with a increase in graphics performance & better battery life
If they could have gone the route of the i3, with the nvidia graphics card, without increasing the size of the laptop, and maintaining the battery life, I'm all for it. But it sounds like it wasn't reasonable.
Also, your Kool-aid saying is terrible and annoying. I know you can post whatever you want, but not a lot of people are going to "like it."
I had some misgivings about not waiting for the new MBP 13" and pushing the button on my new 13" Sony Z. The one with the i5, HDMI port, Express card slot, 330M GPU, 3G module and 1600x900 screen comparable to Apple's "Hi Res" upgrade screen option on their 15" models. I guess I shouldn't rub in the part where it weighs as much as the Macbook air (at 3 lbs compared to the 4.5 lbs of the MBP 13"), but can include DVD or Blu-Ray drive. Or the fact that if it were not for the fact that if the battery did not drop down with attached feet, the laptop would be about 1" thick compared to the MPB's .95 inches. So no, there is no excuse IMO for them not putting in a better GPU. None at all.
I admit I had some misgivings about Windows 7 until I replaced the included Norton Antivirus with Avast free edition. Now, since I have my older 15" MBP serving as a desktop replacement I can use the Z as my mobile companion.
I had some misgivings, but not any more. The 13" MBP was IMO certainly not worth waiting for. And the 15" MBP is pretty much at the same price point as my $2349 Metal Mosaic Sony Z if you include the Apple "Hi-Res" screen upgrade. That 5400 RPM HD makes it a few hundred cheaper though. It should since the Z has a 192 GB SSD. So if the 13" MBP is still not any where near the hardware specs of the Z what is it? Certainly not professional grade.
Sony is expensive, but Apple is besting Sony this time around at price gouging IMO.
Hey I love Apple. If I didn't already own an older 15" MBP, to be honest the new 15" MBP would be at the top of my list. Can't say that about the 13".
Not that there is a lot wrong with the 13". If you do not need the dedicated GPU, and can handle the extra weight, lower resolution, lack of 3G, one less USB port, no Express card slot, no HDMI out, then I say go for it. It does have virus free OSX, it's more sturdily built and its software is superb.
But hardware wise the new 13" MBP IMO seems out of place and out of date; It's just a Macbook internally for Pete's sake and it looks like that's all it will ever be. It would have been so much better to just drop it from the line and present the Macbook Air with some significant improvements or cut the Macbook from the line up and give the 13" a real GPU. I really just don't get it but at this point why should I even care? My main concern now is the OS 4.0 for my iPhone and it's future jailbreakability. Love that iPhone 3gs!
I admit I had some misgivings about Windows 7 until I replaced the included Norton Antivirus with Avast free edition. Now, since I have my older 15" MBP serving as a desktop replacement I can use the Z as my mobile companion.
I had some misgivings, but not any more. The 13" MBP was IMO certainly not worth waiting for. And the 15" MBP is pretty much at the same price point as my $2349 Metal Mosaic Sony Z if you include the Apple "Hi-Res" screen upgrade. That 5400 RPM HD makes it a few hundred cheaper though. It should since the Z has a 192 GB SSD. So if the 13" MBP is still not any where near the hardware specs of the Z what is it? Certainly not professional grade.
Sony is expensive, but Apple is besting Sony this time around at price gouging IMO.
Hey I love Apple. If I didn't already own an older 15" MBP, to be honest the new 15" MBP would be at the top of my list. Can't say that about the 13".
Not that there is a lot wrong with the 13". If you do not need the dedicated GPU, and can handle the extra weight, lower resolution, lack of 3G, one less USB port, no Express card slot, no HDMI out, then I say go for it. It does have virus free OSX, it's more sturdily built and its software is superb.
But hardware wise the new 13" MBP IMO seems out of place and out of date; It's just a Macbook internally for Pete's sake and it looks like that's all it will ever be. It would have been so much better to just drop it from the line and present the Macbook Air with some significant improvements or cut the Macbook from the line up and give the 13" a real GPU. I really just don't get it but at this point why should I even care? My main concern now is the OS 4.0 for my iPhone and it's future jailbreakability. Love that iPhone 3gs!
Well I'll give you a very simple answer, though by no means the only one. I'm probably not the normal mac user since my "profession" is on the finance side, but nevertheless I prefer using Macs and my company has OS X versions of a lot of our software, and when they don't there's always VMWare. Some of our software is heavily CPU dependent when compiling finance models, and I'm constantly running them during the day. If a normal compile runs me, for arguments sake, 1min. And a hyper-threaded i5 or even i3 can do it in 50 seconds. If I do 100 of them a day, that's saving me almost 17 minutes a day alone.
Ignoring the cpu, probably the most productive change would be a boost to resolution. I don't think people really realize how much time they spend scrolling pages. Now when I'm home, I can hook my laptop to an external, but I do travel alot and I can't tell you how much I would have appreciated a 1400x900 res option on the 13". Yea, I can get the 15"...but then there's trade-off with the PITA traveling and lugging it around through airports. I actually would have preferred more than anything else a resolution change. I'd probably buy a 13" today if that were the only change they made....as it stands now, I'm on the fence on whether or not the grand or so it worth the cost. Simple economic equation...over the life of the MBP, will I recoup the value of it or not?
Hope that answered your question.
What I think is that most users that buy those Dells, HPs, etc., don't use all the power their laptops offers them. What there's a market for is low prices.
Maybe those companies can get lower prices because they save on other departments, like build quality. Apple apparently believes build quality and good looks aport much more than a faster processor, so Macs don't always get the latest technology.
Like a stopped clock, Shambo has been stuck saying precisely the same thing for God knows how long. However, like a stopped clock, he is at least sometimes right. This is one of those times.
they had to redesign everything to put i5-i7 on the 15 and 17 too.. why not the 13? We aren't talking about a small company that doesn't know how to engineer things here. The disappointment comes in knowing that apple can do this and more but they chose not to.
Sorry to respectfully disagree, but I think it surely deserves the Pro title if only for editing video, which I've done for a number of years. But that's just my opinion. You are entitled to yours of course.
First of all? Who is talking about low prices here?
It's apple. You don't buy an apple because it's the lowest price. I'm pretty sure most people agree with that statement. The fact that there is 2 types of 13 inch laptops (mb and mpb) in the lineup in the first place shows that there is a market for a "better" 13 inch. If it's just lowest price then you buy a MB.
I do recording engineering, I use macs and PC's. Desktops of course. Now If i want to edit on the road or use a Protools session for a live show... If im running 24 tracks with 3 plugins per track(total of 72 plugins) My mac(late 2008 unibody) would cry mercy.
I used a Hp Envy 15in W7 (Higher speced than new 15in) for that same job... it just laughed and did its thing...
To me, 15in is only a PRO in apples world... in the real world.. it is just an expensive consumer laptop.