What's your opinion on the MacBook Pro not being a professional's computer?

[marivaux]

I've looked over a few pages of this thread and seriously, MacSumo you're a troll.

That said, OS X does have it's flaws. It's a PITA to get a lot of FOSS software working on Mac OS X, and most of the time it's like Linux From Scratch, since you have to hack the configuration files yourself, but once you have something, it works, and continues working.

Also, the extra money that you spend on Apple hardware is worth it considering how many OS X versions that hardware will support. Apple ensures that the proper drivers ships with the OS for several years, and they don't suddenly decide to change the entire GUI (see Windows 8).

Yeah, that's the main reason to buy an Apple--who wants to use Windows 8? I do think it's funny that people are so engaged by these threads. If someone is really a troll, the best thing to do is not to have the argument--the threads could just die. I'll leave that attribution up to others, but I'll say that the "evidence" provided is usually dubious. (FWIW, I'll say that I've been waiting for my old Powerbook to die for several years ever since the fan broke [not worth the cost of repair]--I assumed this would eventually damage the computer in some way, but it keeps working even though the computer gets ridiculously hot now.)

That said, I'm not sure why people are so defensive. Honestly, Asus and Toshiba make good laptops, and I've had mixed luck with Apple reliability. There's always a trade-off, and Apple's not perfect. Frankly, if I didn't have to use proprietary software, I'd probably buy an Asus or Toshiba laptop, save some dough, and run some version of Linux.

 

[UBS28]

For a professional machine, you'd expect 24/7 hours on-site support while offering a replacement machine to minimise downtime. Yet, Apple laptops have only 1 year support and offering none of this.

Based on my experience with Applecare, I classify the Macbook Pro as a consumer devices.

 

[applegeek25]

That said, I'm not sure why people are so defensive. Honestly, Asus and Toshiba make good laptops, and I've had mixed luck with Apple reliability. There's always a trade-off, and Apple's not perfect. Frankly, if I didn't have to use proprietary software, I'd probably buy an Asus or Toshiba laptop, save some dough, and run some version of Linux.

Exactly. As many others have said, laptops are just tools for productivity. There will never be a perfect solution for everyone, and honestly I doubt the differences in performance between them will matter to most professionals.

 

[cirus]

Unless you say my sensors are buggy (in which case, that means I'm not getting 100C under load), I think it's clear that 100C still allows the rMBP to operate perfectly fine, and 105C won't cause the computer to shut down. In which case, core temperature reading is not reliable.

As an aside, someone just posted a link above as to why reading core temperature is not reliable, so I think that should make a good read.

Plus you just proved our (john123's and my) point with that screenshot there. See how different programs report different temperature numbers?

Programs can go weird when pushed or configured differently. Don't mistake minor deviations as something unheard of. There are minor differences on different CPU's and multiple instances where the CPU hits TJmax and does not shut down. This has to do with the way the temperature sensor calculates the temperature and how in software it is interpreted. Expect some minor deviation between temperature reading programs and the actual result. A good example of this is with people who OC and find out that the bios and an overclocking utility under windows report similar though slightly different voltages. Hooking directly to the motherboard a different voltage can be recorded. These are not 100% accurate numbers, rather they are numbers with some amount of error.

Since I think we concurred that there's common ground, I'm only going to respond to a small part of your post, because I think it sheds some light on the entire debate. I highlighted the important part. My gimmick experiment back in post #89 suggests that that impact actually isn't that big of a deal. At low CPU loads, my heat sink temperature is around 36 degrees. At 100% load with 8 threads (4 cores x 2 HT), I hit 46 degrees. So regardless of how hot the CPU and its cores themselves are, the rMBP is dissipating the vast majority of that heat.

The highest temperatures around that heat sink were obtained by kicking the 650M GPU up and (interestingly) not kicking the CPU up. (This was because the fans weren't going to their 6000 rpm max when I wasn't hitting the CPU, although perhaps the temperature readings suggest that they should). But here, proper application of Arctic Silver to the CPU won't actually make much difference. We could have a separate debate about cooling around the GPU, I suppose, but I'd rather not get off track.

Anyway, my point is that contrary to what you stated, the impact on other components doesn't seem likely to be large, even if the on-core temperature is staying around the Tjunction value. 46 degrees on the heat sink doesn't strike me as problematic. You might counter with, "But if they did it better, it might go down a few degrees, and those extra degrees might lead to X% more units failing," and I won't disagree with that. But then we're back in the semantic debate about what is and is not a "problem."

And maybe there is some variation between models because a lot of these exist on the web.

CPU + CPU heatsink is clearly more than 46 degrees.

Notebookcheck measured over 50 degrees above the keyboard during their prime run. There is another recent thread on this forum showing again, 45+ degree temperatures on the surface of the notebook.

Note also that if that really is the heatsink temperature (which I doubt, I don't know where that sensor is but if its accurate its not close to the CPU) then apple really needs to work on its cooling. Such a low delta between heatsink and ambient indicates a really poor cooler.

I think as far as temperature measurements go, Apple's utilities are measuring a sensor apple placed in the notebook, which 3rd party utilities are measuring using intel's on chip sensors.

I also disagree with the idea that "Oh different utilities are showing different value so lets use the one with the lowest value".

 

[john123]

And maybe there is some variation between models because a lot of these exist on the web.

Quite possible. I sure would love to unravel that mystery. If correct, though, it does speak poorly to Apple's QC.

I also disagree with the idea that "Oh different utilities are showing different value so lets use the one with the lowest value".

Did someone suggest that? If anything I wrote implied it, I certainly didn't intend that.

 

[cirus]

Quite possible. I sure would love to unravel that mystery. If correct, though, it does speak poorly to Apple's QC.

Did someone suggest that? If anything I wrote implied it, I certainly didn't intend that.

It was more this quote

Plus you just proved our (john123's and my) point with that screenshot there. See how different programs report different temperature numbers?

And your use of 46 degrees as the CPU temperature.

Sorry for taking it out of context.

As for that supposed 'intel rep'.... he's not an intel rep. Only thing I can see is 'community member' which doesn't mean anything as anyone can register.

 

[MacSumo]

Did you know those gaming notebooks also throttled in those tests? Here are some notes:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Alienware-18-Notebook.102566.0.html



And talking about which, they reported no throttling for the rMBP under the same condition:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Apple-MacBook-Pro-15-Retina-2-3-GHz-Mid-2012.78959.0.html



Again, it's safe to note that different programs report different temperature readings.

And since no one else can replicate what the OP is experiencing, the logical conclusion is that this is not a widespread problem. Unless you have data that points to otherwise.



Read back above and tell me why it's okay for... say... Alienware (Dell) to throttle but it's not okay for Apple to do the same? And just to note, once again, that no one can replicate what the OP is doing.

Just for a data point, my rMBP doesn't throttle. It runs so well that I can overclock the GPU further and take the hit with increased temperature.



I'm just pointing to a possible explanation as to why some have seen the decreasing battery.

However, there is another explanation given that notebookcheck above has noted that the rMBP they measured never exceeded the maximum power supply: the battery started discharging after a while to prevent itself from overcharging.

That is also a possible cause for an explosion, and it's just not safe.

And personally, again, I have never ever seen this scenario with any of my rMBP. I have left the machine plugged in overnight running an algorithm the whole night... pegging the CPU at 100% (800% under Mac OSX because there are 8 virtual threads). The next morning, there is still 100% on the battery.

That's very representative of a rendering project as well, and if you're saying that you can somehow realistically peg the computer even more than that (more than what notebookcheck does even) to make it throttle and causing the power supply to throttle, then something is wrong with the computer... or your usage (why are you using a laptop for that?)

I think a lot of what the OP is saying can't be verified as truth... and there have been many evidences pointing to otherwise. So... why are you supporting his position?

And just as an aside, have you actually owned and used a rMBP for any period of time and experienced any of the issues here?

----------

I've looked over a few pages of this thread and seriously, MacSumo you're a troll.

For <insert PC here>, even the best ones, you will run into driver issues as soon as you try to install another OS or even reinstall the OS the computer came with, unless you want to use the built in recovery partition which typically puts all that OEM spyware back.

Obviously, you can build one yourself, but umm... good luck doing that with a laptop. If you do build a desktop yourself, you probably wouldn't be answering this thread.

I don't know how valuable your time is for you, but personally, the 10 hours that I have to spend hunting down each and every driver, especially for those OEMs who don't even offer them (HP I'm looking at you) could be spent doing something more productive, like coding.

That said, OS X does have it's flaws. It's a PITA to get a lot of FOSS software working on Mac OS X, and most of the time it's like Linux From Scratch, since you have to hack the configuration files yourself, but once you have something, it works, and continues working.

Also, the extra money that you spend on Apple hardware is worth it considering how many OS X versions that hardware will support. Apple ensures that the proper drivers ships with the OS for several years, and they don't suddenly decide to change the entire GUI (see Windows 8).

There is no computer that's 100% perfect, because perfection is in the eye of the beholder, and in Apple's case, the beholders consist of the entire planet. As far as coming close to perfection though, well, don't take my word for it, but Apple isn't one of the most profitable companies in the word for nothing, and no, it's not only because of their marketing department.

FOSS and Apple never go hand in hand. Apple is the anithesis of FOSS. As for the best general computing experience, that would be any suitable FOSS GNU/Linux distro.

 

[ScottishDuck]

Image

----------



FOSS and Apple never go hand in hand. Apple is the anithesis of FOSS. As for the best general computing experience, that would be any suitable FOSS GNU/Linux distro.

The majority of OSX is open source.

 

[priitv8]

The majority of OSX is open source.

The Darwin part. I'd imagine, it's still the minority of the whole OS X bundle.

 

[phsphoenix]

Image

----------



FOSS and Apple never go hand in hand. Apple is the anithesis of FOSS. As for the best general computing experience, that would be any suitable FOSS GNU/Linux distro.

Let's make something very clear first troll. You don't know anything about my background, and I probably forgotten more about Linux than you will ever learn. Unless you can go from 0 linux n00b to compiling your own kernel for Debian GNU/Linux Woody in less than two weeks, you should be lecturing me on what OS to use for FOSS. Also, you might have some credibilty if you manage to setup a Xen Server and host multiple Guest systems on top of it, all without using any of the official distributions that make it somewhat easy to do it.

 

[Giuly]

The display size is far too small for practical high resolution uses. Apple needs to REALLY innovate this time by manufacturing a sub 5 pound 19" laptop that offers a true 2k usable resolution. Heck, for the BILLIONS of dollars Apple has, they should push it further and make a sub 5 pound 20" laptop.

 

[john123]

Anandtech checked in the review of the 2012 rmbp 15" and saw that turbo was not performing optimally on a short cinebench run.

Image

That score is about right for a 3630qm at 3.2 ghz turbo. Not a chip with turbo to 3.4 ghz on all cores.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Apple-MacBook-Pro-15-Retina-2-3-GHz-Mid-2012.78959.0.html

Notebookcheck which did a pretty good and possibly less biased review (HL 2 is not a stress/throttling test game) found that the cinebench score was 5.52 on the 2.3 ghz model, indentical to the 2011 model.

By the way, going back to this, I went hunting for a little information on it. I found this a nugget by a third-party developer who makes a little app that lets you turn Turbo Boosting on or off (http://www.rugarciap.com/turbo-boost-switcher-for-os-x/). I'll quote the relevant part, because it bears directly on the discussion above:

Turbo Boost is enabled by default on all Macs that support it, but why anyone should want to disable it?

Ok, here are some reasons:

CPU Overheat: When Turbo Boost is activated, prepare to experiment high temperatures on your CPU, since it pushes till it reaches almost the Junction Tº, usually 100 ºC. This is controlled by hardware, but if you want your computer to live long, better keep it as low as possible. With Turbo Boost disabled I’ve been able to get up to 20 ºC degrees less!!!, that’s a value worth considering.

Parallel Processing: Turbo Boost is enabled when one of the CPU cores reaches 100%, increasing the core Mhz, but It won’t do it if all or your cores are 100%, since that will create a lot of overheat. This will reduce your parallel processing performance so, in some situations, you better disable it.

So, if this guy knows what he's talking about, it would appear those slightly sub-optimal benchmarks are entirely by design.

 

[sonyisawesome]

I'm not a fan of the rMBP either, but, yeah, this is a troll. That's pretty much how the good ones operate. They include a lot of valid arguments and have a sort of "if only everyone was as smart as me attitude." That's how they generate a dozen pages of replies in only a few days.

This one is good, but not so good that s/he didn't get sockpuppets confused in the first hour:

More like fanboys responded to his thread multiple times in anger. That's how this topic generated so many pages within few days.

 

[john123]

More like fanboys responded to his thread multiple times in anger. That's how this topic generated so many pages within few days.

Interesting opinion, but it isn't entirely true. There are plenty of objective people who simply aren't alarmists, and who understand when something is and isn't a "problem."

----------

Did you know those gaming notebooks also throttled in those tests? Here are some notes:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Alienware-18-Notebook.102566.0.html

I'd like to quote something out of this article here in the thread, because I think it's especially salient (and illustrates pretty clearly that the OP's point of view is his own and definitely not a "fact"):

On the one hand, it is very positive that neither the GPU nor the CPU exceeds 90 °C (194 °F) even under maximum load and level off at around 80 °C (176 °F). However, this is only possible because of the automatic throttling of the components. While the processor dropped to 2.7 GHz (- 300 MHz compared to the nominal clock), the core clock of the GeForce GTX 780M SLI dropped to 614-666 MHz. That is a deficit of 25 and 19%, respectively.

Similar to many other manufacturers, Alienware pays a little too much attention to the temperatures and does not allow a lot of headroom. At least the benchmark results do not suggest continuous throttling. Our stress test simulates a very impractical scenario, but it is still annoying because the throttling is not really necessary.

Throttling too early is a bad thing. There's no reason to penalize performance. If the CPU is being hit hard and hovering around the Tjunction value, that's what it's supposed to do. It isn't a problem. Different manufacturers clearly have different standards, but to imply that what Apple's doing is incorrect is, well, wrong.

 

[MacSumo]

Let's make something very clear first troll. You don't know anything about my background, and I probably forgotten more about Linux than you will ever learn. Unless you can go from 0 linux n00b to compiling your own kernel for Debian GNU/Linux Woody in less than two weeks, you should be lecturing me on what OS to use for FOSS. Also, you might have some credibilty if you manage to setup a Xen Server and host multiple Guest systems on top of it, all without using any of the official distributions that make it somewhat easy to do it.

I've compiled and patched custom kernels, as well as including pax and grsecurity, multiple times.

Apple is no where near FOSS. Apple is anti FOSS, and the majority of their source code is closed, so you cannot see the backdoors they put it through.

As for Xen server setup and being a troll, I'll just assume you're saying that because you feel threatened.

----------

Image

oh man - thank you for this. lol!

 

[john123]

As for Xen server setup and being a troll, I'll just assume you're saying that because you feel threatened.

I love how the OP shucks and jives any time anyone brings up facts that contradict his opinions.

 

[phsphoenix]

I've compiled and patched custom kernels, as well as including pax and grsecurity, multiple times.

Apple is no where near FOSS. Apple is anti FOSS, and the majority of their source code is closed, so you cannot see the backdoors they put it through.

As for Xen server setup and being a troll, I'll just assume you're saying that because you feel threatened.

----------



oh man - thank you for this. lol!

Ok then, prove it, how do you exactly go about to compile a custom kernel?

 

[phsphoenix]

Interesting opinion, but it isn't entirely true. There are plenty of objective people who simply aren't alarmists, and who understand when something is and isn't a "problem."

----------



I'd like to quote something out of this article here in the thread, because I think it's especially salient (and illustrates pretty clearly that the OP's point of view is his own and definitely not a "fact"):



Throttling too early is a bad thing. There's no reason to penalize performance. If the CPU is being hit hard and hovering around the Tjunction value, that's what it's supposed to do. It isn't a problem. Different manufacturers clearly have different standards, but to imply that what Apple's doing is incorrect is, well, wrong.

I've met people that are very good in one area of computing but still insist on using some obscure terminal app from 1981 (I'm not kidding) to read their mail, and won't switch come hell or high water. I get the feeling that MacSumo thinks he has a valid point, and he probably does in his circle where he works, but he doesn't realize that the world has moved on.

I don't know what's worse, the fact that people don't realize that the world doesn't revolve around what they do or the fact that they refuse to listen to the majority.

Also, the ironic part, most of the people who are responding to this post defending Apple are probably professionals using Apple machines, the very people Apple isn't catering for as much any more with their new line of products.

 

[john123]

I've met people that are very good in one area of computing but still insist on using some obscure terminal app from 1981 (I'm not kidding) to read their mail, and won't switch come hell or high water. I get the feeling that MacSumo thinks he has a valid point, and he probably does in his circle where he works, but he doesn't realize that the world has moved on.

I don't know what's worse, the fact that people don't realize that the world doesn't revolve around what they do or the fact that they refuse to listen to the majority.

Also, the ironic part, most of the people who are responding to this post defending Apple are probably professionals using Apple machines, the very people Apple isn't catering for as much any more with their new line of products.

I agree with you on all counts. The unfortunate thing is that we can never put this debate to rest because no manufacturer wants to to on record regarding their intended thermal profile for liability reasons. C'est la vie, I suppose.

 

[thundersteele]

Ok then, prove it, how do you exactly go about to compile a custom kernel?

It's not particularly complicated... at least it wasn't when I was playing around with linux many years ago. Back then the only chance to use the Wifi card on most laptops was to patch and compile your own kernel.

Also I really don't see what this has to do with the topic!

Oh right, because we have to argue what is and what is not a professional

 

[phsphoenix]

I agree with you on all counts. The unfortunate thing is that we can never put this debate to rest because no manufacturer wants to to on record regarding their intended thermal profile for liability reasons. C'est la vie, I suppose.

The short story: don't expect any laptop to run properly for extended periods on 100% load. Long story, if you think your laptop is a bit too hot for your liking, go buy a laptop cooler. That's what I did. Now I can run encoding sessions for hours on end without having to worry about hardware problems.

----------

It's not particularly complicated... at least it wasn't when I was playing around with linux many years ago. Back then the only chance to use the Wifi card on most laptops was to patch and compile your own kernel.

Also I really don't see what this has to do with the topic!

Oh right, because we have to argue what is and what is not a professional

Debian Woody and Intel Centrino Pentium-M, first generation, 801.11b wifi cards with custom firmware. Those were the days. But it isn't quite so straight forward to actually compile a working kernel. It's very easy to screw it up if you don't know which modules should go into the kernel proper.

 

[MacSumo]

I love how the OP shucks and jives any time anyone brings up facts that contradict his opinions.

John,

Perhaps you had trouble reading. This topic is not about discussing Xen server setups, so your post appears to be "trolling" in regards to making superfluous remarks.

----------

It's not particularly complicated... at least it wasn't when I was playing around with linux many years ago. Back then the only chance to use the Wifi card on most laptops was to patch and compile your own kernel.

Also I really don't see what this has to do with the topic!

Oh right, because we have to argue what is and what is not a professional

It has nothing to do with this topic. He just feels threatened, like others who have called me a "troll"

 

[sixrom]

It either comes equipped to suit you're needs or it doesn't. BTO models take it a step further. If neither work for you there's other brands... It's simple.

 

[8CoreWhore]

Guys, don't worry about these things. If an photographer is editing on a MBP, is that not satisfying a professional? It either does what you need it to do or it doesn't. You know who doesn't worry about these things? Professionals. They're too busy using the thing and not on forums playing with semantics.

 

[john123]

The short story: don't expect any laptop to run properly for extended periods on 100% load. Long story, if you think your laptop is a bit too hot for your liking, go buy a laptop cooler. That's what I did. Now I can run encoding sessions for hours on end without having to worry about hardware problems.

Yeah, I'm 100% with you on this comment, too. There are tons of options at a user's disposal. I'm not sure where the utility of complaining comes in, though. Perhaps it's cathartic?