Razer makes a 14" laptop that's about the thickness of a rMBP and has a 675GT in it, or something along those lines. When not gaming, it also gets great battery life, but I was purposely avoiding gaming machines as that's not Apple's niche.
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.
uh.. what happened to Apple? [underwhelmed by MBP]
- Thread starter Pandamic
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Razer makes a 14" laptop that's about the thickness of a rMBP and has a 675GT in it, or something along those lines. When not gaming, it also gets great battery life, but I was purposely avoiding gaming machines as that's not Apple's niche.
Well, for this and another poster...can I point out that a lot of people who are complaining about "hipsters" really seem to want an awesome gaming machine? Not that there is anything wrong with that, but I don't think it justifies the 'tude about "real professionals," etc. If what you really want is an awesome gaming machine, buy one.
Some people buy Macs for stupid or frivolous reasons, and some people also buy various PCs for stupid or frivolous reasons. When you are buying any computer, you are weighing a variety of factors. I have to use Windows at work and dislike it, and especially hate wasting time with various Windows-related problems.
But I certainly wouldn't insult someone for preferring a Windows machine, and most people do prefer one. However, you are not a "hipster" for preferring OS X, a light laptop, and a hi-res screen over gaming power--if you're me, you mostly want to get your work done in the least annoying, most pleasant way possible. If I wanted to spend, well, more money than I spent on my rmpb on an "ultra thin gaming laptop," I would, but I wouldn't consider myself to be smarter or more "professional" because I, um, decided to spend a lot of money to play games.
Like I said before, I agree that Macs are too expensive nowadays and I wish Apple had made some different choices, especially around upgradeability. But there are actually quite a lot of ways to spend more money than is ideal for something you happen to want--that is not limited to buying a rmbp.
Last edited:
Lol at branding people with money "hipsters" versus the gaming "nerds". It's no secret, if you want a gaming machine, buying apple just doesn't make sense. If you want a reliable machine than you've come to the right place.
Yeah, but on the money thing...you ALSO need to spend a lot of money to buy a really good gaming machine (most of the links posted above are for laptops that cost over $2000). It's incredibly obnoxious to sneer at someone for not being able to afford a Mac--they are expensive, and most people can get along fine with with a cheaper laptop.
But if you're the kind of person who can spend $2000 on a laptop designed for gaming, it is just as obnoxious to sneer at OSX users as "stupid, rich hipsters."
But if you're the kind of person who can spend $2000 on a laptop designed for gaming, it is just as obnoxious to sneer at OSX users as "stupid, rich hipsters."
If you actually went to Dell, HP, or Lenovo's sites and tried to spec up a pro machine anywhere near what a Retina 15" has inside, you'll end up with a thick, heavy, loud, creaky, and far more expensive machine that will get a fraction of the battery life and won't even be as powerful. I did that just the other day. All were far more expensive. In one case, even $5k+ didn't get to the same level of spec that you get in a Retina 15, to say nothing of the form factor. If you want to complain about the price of these things, it's clear you don't know what things actually cost.
I guess I'm confused. I thought you were trying to convey that I meant 512GB was enough for everyone.
If so, that's decidedly not what I said. Apple doesn't make products and/or give configuration options that'll satisfy everyone. That wouldn't be profitable enough. What they do is try to satisfy most of their target demographic while maximizing profitability. Any consumer product manufacturer/seller that makes money year over year does the same.
If not, then you'll have to explain more clearly because I don't follow.
Last edited:
If you want a reliable machine get a Panasonic ToughBook. The US military prefers them over those cheap Apple laptops.
----------
I think you forgot about the Precision M3800. It's basically a MacBook Retina Pro made for professional users.
YES! Totally agree.
Apple doesn't make laptops for the low paying consumer. There isn't a fair comparison to be made because even if the chips are the same as some $400 Dell laptop the motherboard isn't as custom (if it's custom at all) lending to slimmer, lighter weight designs and the build quality isn't anywhere near as good.
I'm typing this on an '07 white plastic MacBook, that's 7 years old for the math challenged, that doesn't creak and everything still works as normal with the exception of the battery needing to be replaced ($35 on eBay and any other laptop would have had the same problem). It's a little slow loading apps because of the aging hardware and it won't play 1080p video at all or 720p without stuttering but it still works for 90% of what I need it for (finances/word processing, I usually use an iOS device for everything else). There is no way any other manufacturer could come close to that longevity without hitting around the same price point. It was $1200, IIRC, when I bought it and it was worth every penny. Is it time to replace it with a modern machine? You bet, but it got me very far and provided minimal maintenance/aggravation for the money.
...and everyone needs to drive Humvees too???
People overrate Macs. They aren't the most reliable but I guess the marketing makes you think that.
There are several lines of laptops that tend to be more reliable than Macs.
The high end ThinkPads (e.g. W series) , some Dell Precisions , etc. are some examples.
Some people are still using their 10 year old ThinkPads.
Wouldn't you consider a 10 year old laptop to be reliable if it lasted that long?
----------
So your sample size of 1 is supposed to convince us that Mac laptops are more reliable than every other laptop at the same price or less?
He didn't say they were, he just said if you want "a" reliable machine he had come to the right place.
You then chimed in with a nonsense reference to military-spec environment product lines and changed it into a "most reliable" discussion, hence the
Mac's are <a> reliable product within their market sector. Of course some may be "more" just as some will be "less", Mac models are made of different components with differing failure rates so even "Macs" don't have a single reliability figure - yet you straight away start to compare a specific Thinkpad series and "some Dell Precisions" with "Macs" generally.....are you just desperate to try and make the point??
No, take it for what it is, just one more example. Do you think I'm going to sink all my time on one topic?
Last edited:
He didn't say they were, he just said if you want "a" reliable machine he had come to the right place.
You then chimed in with a nonsense reference to military-spec environment product lines and changed it into a "most reliable" discussion, hence the
Mac's are <a> reliable product within their market sector. Of course some may be "more" just as some will be "less", Mac models are made of different components with differing failure rates so even "Macs" don't have a single reliability figure - yet you straight away start to compare a specific Thinkpad series and "some Dell Precisions" with "Macs" generally.....are you just desperate to try and make the point??
Yes. And also--it's not that Apple doesn't have good marketing, but it's also a little insulting to assume that everyone who buys a Macbook is being misled by a marketing campaign. Most people who use Macs have had experience with both Windows computers and Mac computers and have chosen OSX for a variety of reasons--personally, I have used Windows going back to my laptop that ran Windows 3.1 (that was actually a good version!) and have since used Windows 95 (shudder), XP, 7, and 8 in a variety of work settings.
It is actually a drawback of OSX that you only have one company's choice for hardware, unless you get into Hackintosh. But people also judge through their own experience and word of mouth. Apple hardware has its ups and downs, but it's generally pretty solid and nice--that's not to say that there's anything wrong with a Thinkpad running Linux. Personally, I'd say that the big advantage is that Apple built the least troublesome front end for Unix (OS X=Unix, remember) that also runs a bunch of proprietary productivity software a lot of people use for work. I actually wish those companies would create Linux versions of their software and people could ditch both Windows and OSX if they wanted to, but that's not where the $$$ is.
So yeah--if you don't like, want, or need a Mac, don't use one. Not sure why you would be on a Macuser forum just to insist that no one should use a Mac and, if they do, they are stupid or ignorant or a hipster or a marketing victim.
He didn't say they were, he just said if you want "a" reliable machine he had come to the right place.
You then chimed in with a nonsense reference to military-spec environment product lines and changed it into a "most reliable" discussion, hence the
Mac's are <a> reliable product within their market sector. Of course some may be "more" just as some will be "less", Mac models are made of different components with differing failure rates so even "Macs" don't have a single reliability figure - yet you straight away start to compare a specific Thinkpad series and "some Dell Precisions" with "Macs" generally.....are you just desperate to try and make the point??
No , reliable can mean different things to different people.
I wouldn't call Mac laptops reliable , that's what I meant to say.
Most people don't do any heavy stuff (e.g. heavy computation work or gaming for long periods of time) on their computers so their definition of reliable is not the same. Most people do basic stuff like type papers and that type of work barely utilization the CPU , GPU , etc. If you load your computer to 99% most of the time , of course it would last as long if you instead loaded it to around 5% most of the time.
If a person treats their Mac laptop like a baby , there is a much better chance of that person calling it "reliable" since they weren't doing anything intensive enough for something like thermal stress to be a big concern.
Last edited:
Uh, I think when people say "reliable" with regard to their computers, they generally mean "they tend not to break down." Or, possibly, they mean, "there aren't a lot of stupid software problems." They don't usually mean "have the capacity to do a lot of gaming." I think there have been a bunch of heat arguments on this forum that I don't really want to get into, but I've personally put a lot of Apple laptops through quite a lot of computing stress (including a Powerbook that has worked for years with a broken fan).
None of my business class laptops have broken down or given me "stupid" software problems. My oldest business class laptop is over 5 years old for reference although I do have consumer class machines which are over 7 years old and still work fine.
The more freedom software gives the user , the more potential trouble the user can get into if they don't know what they are doing.
Windows 7 hasn't given me any problems in the few years that I've used it but Windows 8 has given some issues. I can talk about other operating systems as well but most people don't care that some Linux distro is more reliable than any Windows or Mac OS.
Last edited:
The problem with most Mac users is that they don't understand the alternatives.
You really should read some Mac laptop reviews after you spend some time working with a variety of high end hardware/software combos.
I see some people on this forum saying that all laptop others than Apple ones are made of plastic. That's a huge misconception. I could go on and on about the misconceptions that are posted not only on this forum but all over the place.
I know rich engineers who mostly use a Windows OS. I wonder why? When I say rich , I mean making at least $200k a year.
Last edited:
Well, that laptop is as heavy as the 15" MBP and also almost twice as thick. I don't really see it as a valid argument to prove your point. Its clear what happens here: compromised battery size and lots of space for the cooling system. Its a neat 13" gaming laptop, but not really interesting from the engineering perspective.
I dunno, they prefer it, it meets their needs? Who gives a **** how much money they make? If they are an engineer, there is probably some Windows-only software that they need. A lot of other people have needs that cause them to buy a Mac.
And yeah, a lot of people say stupid **** on the internet, generally speaking, but it's not limited to Mac users. For instance, I could compare the reliability of a high-priced computer designed for the military that very few people need or use to the reliability of a laptop most people use for their work--that would create a huge misconception about the relative quality of Apple laptops.
And also: Never mind.
I'm always amazed when people equate plastic with junk. If you're less concerned about esthetics than you are performance for games or just want the best value for your money a Mac is hard to justify.
I went through a period where I only used a Mac and ran Windows exclusively in a VM. However the current Mac laptops are way to expensive. This used Mini handles all my work and a plastic dedicated gaming laptop handles my games. Both machines combined were significantly less than a 750m equipped (about $1000 less) rMBP.
I take care of my systems. They don't need to be built like tanks or be extremely skinny to be worthwhile. Nor am I overly concerned with esthetics so the style of an Apple computer is NOT worth $1000 extra to me. What I do like is OS X. However, once this mini dies I may move completely to Windows if I can't find a Mac that is acceptable to me financially.
Apple is not concerned with people when don't value their cachet and those people are welcome to buy something else and sometimes they (I) do. It doesn't mean we will do so without complaining on the way out.
Cheers,
That's exactly what I was talking about actually. Spec'd up, it's no better (and in some ways worse) than a 2013 Retina, all while being much bigger and heavier, likely with worse battery life, and without the ability to run OS X. All this while being more expensive. I'd rather have the MBP.
In brazil a m3800 costs the same as a rmbp with dgpu. It doesn't get pcie but it comes with igzo display and quadro gpu. If doesn't come with screen lottery issues to me it's a way better deal than a rmbp and also comes with in-place repair service.