I've heard scattered comments about wanting a 12" MacBook Pro and some snide remarks about the 13" screen in general. So what's the problem here? And why would you want a slightly SMALLER screen? And does anybody think Apple would make a Pro model smaller than the smallest non-pro model?
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.
What's people's beef with the 13.3" screen?
- Thread starter somevelvet
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I've got no problem with it personally.
However there are a lot of people who need something a little more portable than the MacBook (it is, afterall, quite a bit bigger than the old 12" PowerBook) and would be suited best to something akin to those tiny 11" widescreen laptops you see around.
I like the new screen though, makes my iBook's screen look like the dull, dingy POS I always knew it was.
However there are a lot of people who need something a little more portable than the MacBook (it is, afterall, quite a bit bigger than the old 12" PowerBook) and would be suited best to something akin to those tiny 11" widescreen laptops you see around.
I like the new screen though, makes my iBook's screen look like the dull, dingy POS I always knew it was.
People are whingers. When there was no small wide screen notebook people used to complain about that, now that there is 1 it isn't small enough, or they want a 4:3 display like on the 12" PowerBook / iBook so I say it once again people are whingers.
Also no I don't think we'll ever see a mini MacBook Pro.
Also no I don't think we'll ever see a mini MacBook Pro.
Chundles said:
I just wanted to look up the numbers:
Macbook: 1.08 x 12.78 x 8.92 = 123.12 (5.2lbs)
iBook: 1.35 x 11.2 x 9.06 = 136.99 (4.9lbs)
P'book: 1.18 x 10.9 x 8.6 = 110.61 (4.6lbs)
It's not really a huge amount larger than the Powerbook though. It's about 10% bgger and is more than 10% heavier. Certainly people willing to pay the premium would want something a little smaller. Still, it's a nice bit smaller than the iBook (excepting width) which it replaced. The real problem is there's no replacement in the lineup specifically for the 12" Powerbook.
I like the display but I wouldn't want to work on it because of the reflections. I'm sure it's quite good when you want to watch a movie but for me to sit there and edit photos, it would be difficult with the lights reflecting off the display.
If they would put more contrast into the not so glossy displays or reduce the gloss so that it didn't reflect, I'd be happier. The size of the machine is great, though.
If they would put more contrast into the not so glossy displays or reduce the gloss so that it didn't reflect, I'd be happier. The size of the machine is great, though.
Stampyhead said:
whinge |(h)winj| Brit., informal
verb ( whinge.ing ) [ intrans. ]
complain persistently and in a peevish or irritating way : stop whingeing and get on with it!
noun
an act of complaining in such a way.
DERIVATIVES
whinge.ing.ly adverb
whing.er noun
whing.y |-je'| adjective
I'm honestly not sure if you're being sarcastic, but I think Stampyhead was pointing out that it's spelled "whiner"... in the USA at least.Chundles said:
Interestingly, Dictionary.app gives similar but different definitions for both spelling. EDIT: Looks like risc beat me to it.
The MacBook really isn't much bigger than the 12" PB. I compared them side to side before I bought my MacBook.
The MB is thinner, and when you open up the laptops, the MacBook's height is noticeably lower than the 12" PB with it's screen up. The MB is better for airplanes and stuff, although it's wider. The wideness isn't a big deal, though.
And if people had a 12" screen with a 1280 x 800 resolution, they'd be complaining about how small the text is. My friend's 12" widescreen Dell is fantastic, but things look noticeably smaller on his laptop. Pixel density on the 13.3" MB is the same as it is on the 15" MacBook Pros, which seems to work well and is probably why Apple went with 13" rather than 12" screens.
No, it's spelt whinge in America as well. Trust me, I'm from Canada, where we spell things like the Brits but speak like you.
It's just a different word that means the same thing.
The MB is thinner, and when you open up the laptops, the MacBook's height is noticeably lower than the 12" PB with it's screen up. The MB is better for airplanes and stuff, although it's wider. The wideness isn't a big deal, though.
And if people had a 12" screen with a 1280 x 800 resolution, they'd be complaining about how small the text is. My friend's 12" widescreen Dell is fantastic, but things look noticeably smaller on his laptop. Pixel density on the 13.3" MB is the same as it is on the 15" MacBook Pros, which seems to work well and is probably why Apple went with 13" rather than 12" screens.
apfhex said:I'm honestly not sure if you're being sarcastic, but I think Stampyhead was pointing out that it's spelled "whiner"... in the USA at least.
No, it's spelt whinge in America as well. Trust me, I'm from Canada, where we spell things like the Brits but speak like you.
It's just a different word that means the same thing.
Love the 13" here too.
1280 is a very nice width, and necessary these days. Makes your chat window fit next to your browser
If you would cram 1280 on 12" it would not be readable. On 13" it's already pretty small, but because the MB's display is so sharp and nice and glossy it works perfectly for me.
We have a MBP and a MB here in the house and I prefer the MB's glossy screen to the MBP's matte screen. And the reflection whining is just bollocks, you only see a tad bit reflection when the computer is off.
1280 is a very nice width, and necessary these days. Makes your chat window fit next to your browser
If you would cram 1280 on 12" it would not be readable. On 13" it's already pretty small, but because the MB's display is so sharp and nice and glossy it works perfectly for me.
We have a MBP and a MB here in the house and I prefer the MB's glossy screen to the MBP's matte screen. And the reflection whining is just bollocks, you only see a tad bit reflection when the computer is off.
The display is a bit small considering the weight of the notebook. My gateway has a 14" widescreen display and is lighter than my bf's macbook.
erikamsterdam said:
Wait till 10.5 brings resolution independence - you'd get 1920x1200 on a 13.3" screen and it would look exactly the same as the MacBook screen does now, only far clearer because more pixels would be used to render the text and images.
It's gonna be awesome, full text legibility of a 1280x800 screen but able to show 1080p content natively.
Sutekidane said:
In your signature you say you have a Gateway MX3225 (or some such easy-to-remember name
) that has 'no issues, unlike the macbooks'. You realize how silly this makes you sound, right? I'm sure that among the thousands of notebooks that Gateway has sold there are plenty of problems, like there have been with the macs. Similarly there are many people here who've reported having impeccable machines from Apple. Start up a gatewayrumors.com site and see who comes complaining....
bousozoku said:
Yeah, I'm also under the impression that most complaints about the MacBook screen have to do with the glossy finish. On the pro models you have the choice between glossy or matte finish, so having a smaller pro model would (presumably) allow people to choose the matte finish, an option not available on the MacBook.
Chundles said:
I don't know how that is going to work out. The MB screen has 1280x800 pixels, period. Any other resolution you are going to put on there is going to look fuzzy, unless its 2560x1600. But even then you just will see the average between 2 pixels in 1.
Unless of course you use a 1920x1200 13" screen and use 1,5 times the amount of pixels for a letter, so you get the same font size. But that would make the MB unaffordable
Related question: are the MBP matte screens as bright as the MBP glossy screens, only less shiny? Or do you need the glossiness if you want a brighter display?
somevelvet said:
To me the MB screen here seems brighter than the MBP, sharper too. Maybe it's just an impression, but it looks brighter.
erikamsterdam said:Unless of course you use a 1920x1200 13" screen and use 1,5 times the amount of pixels for a letter, so you get the same font size. But that would make the MB unaffordable
That's what I said - a 1920x1200 13.3" screen. As the OS moves to res. independent operation screens will gain density rapidly to keep up. It's only a matter of time.
My only problem with the 13.3" screen on the MacBooks is how it's glossy. For me, it's way too reflective to use. I prefer my matte screen on my iBook and those on the MacBook Pro.
I love the 13" MacBook. Upgraded from a 12" iBook and the extra screen real estate is wonderful.
The glossy screen is a personal preference. I go to school in Florida. I use my MacBook outside all the time. The sun can be beating down on it and the glare does not bother me one bit. I just move the display forward or backward a tiny bit and it goes away. Using it in large lecture halls with lots of overhead lights is not a problem either. I personally love the glossy screen and if I ever bought a MBP, I'd go with the glossy screen on it as well. As I've suggested in other threads, go to a store that sells both models and compare them for yourself.
The glossy screen is a personal preference. I go to school in Florida. I use my MacBook outside all the time. The sun can be beating down on it and the glare does not bother me one bit. I just move the display forward or backward a tiny bit and it goes away. Using it in large lecture halls with lots of overhead lights is not a problem either. I personally love the glossy screen and if I ever bought a MBP, I'd go with the glossy screen on it as well. As I've suggested in other threads, go to a store that sells both models and compare them for yourself.