Why do people rag on the 13"MBP?

[throAU]

the 13" Pro is fine if you don't play intensive games or do other intensive 3d work - or Xcode or similar on the go.

the only reason i went for the 15" pro is so i can use Xcode on the couch (i went 1680x1050). 1280x800 isn't enough for that.

 

[Blues003]

You do NOT get less on the MBA. You simply get different things (which I personally value). You get SSD, you get a machine that much lighter, you get better screen resolution (that was my main reason for not getting the pro).

The MBP 13" is by far Apple's laptop that needs the upcoming update the most.

You do get less. You get lower storage space, Ultra-low voltage CPUs/GPUs which lack performance in comparison to the MBP's LVs, less ports, lower battery life, a lack of a superdrive, lack of RAM upgradeability, higher price, and also a widely-acknowledged poorer-quality screen despite the higher resolution. As you said, how much one values each one of these points is a personal preference. I personally don't value the Superdrive that much, but value everything else.

It's okay to prefer one to the other. Different people want different things. What's not okay is to shove one's opinions down others' throats. If people want 13" MBPs over MBAs, they have their reasons, and most of them are pretty legitimate.

In my case, I need more than 128GB of space, and not only am I unwilling to pay the premium for 256GB, I am also not looking foward to having to carry an external HDD with me at all times which would easily offset the weight advantage - the only thing I would actually value over the MBP. In the end, the net result would be a more expensive laptop with less ports, worse CPU/GPU, lower screen quality and battery life, and RAM unupgradeability.

As a small bonus, there had been some rumors on LV i7 quad cores, a chipset that could easily fit onto the 13" MBP. However, it wouldn't fit the MBA's ULV needs. All-in-all, if the MBP 13" gets phased out, that means no 13" quad-core laptop from Apple.

 

[macmastersam]

You do get less. You get lower storage space, Ultra-low voltage CPUs/GPUs which lack performance in comparison to the MBP's LVs, less ports, lower battery life, a lack of a superdrive, lack of RAM upgradeability, higher price, and also a widely-acknowledged poorer-quality screen despite the higher resolution. As you said, how much one values each one of these points is a personal preference. I personally don't value the Superdrive that much, but value everything else.

It's okay to prefer one to the other. Different people want different things. What's not okay is to shove one's opinions down others' throats. If people want 13" MBPs over MBAs, they have their reasons, and most of them are pretty legitimate.

In my case, I need more than 128GB of space, and not only am I unwilling to pay the premium for 256GB, I am also not looking foward to having to carry an external HDD with me at all times which would easily offset the weight advantage - the only thing I would actually value over the MBP. In the end, the net result would be a more expensive laptop with less ports, worse CPU/GPU, lower screen quality and battery life, and RAM unupgradeability.

As a small bonus, there had been some rumors on LV i7 quad cores, a chipset that could easily fit onto the 13" MBP. However, it wouldn't fit the MBA's ULV needs. All-in-all, if the MBP 13" gets phased out, that means no 13" quad-core laptop from Apple.

i would so get a 13" MBP if they had quad-core i5/7's in the next refresh, as well as a better GFX and also the price is kept the same hell, i bet there would be a lot of people here on macrumours that would like to have a portable mac with good CPU and graphics in a 13" screen. And i suppose if you agree then an Macbook air wont cut it for you. lol.

 

[Blues003]

i would so get a 13" MBP if they had quad-core i5/7's in the next refresh, as well as a better GFX and also the price is kept the same hell, i bet there would be a lot of people here on macrumours that would like to have a portable mac with good CPU and graphics in a 13" screen. And i suppose if you agree then an Macbook air wont cut it for you. lol.

ULV CPU/GPU of the MBA vs LV CPU/GPU of the MBP have around a 20~30% of performance difference, which while not staggering, is very significant for CPU-intenstive tasks (such as video exporting). This difference would obviously increase if the i7 quad-core ever came to the 13" MBP. And I would surely pay the extra for a quad-core CPU over a dual-core one.

As for the GPU, I don't think they'll ever put a dedicated GPU on the MBP, no matter how many times I pray. The Intel HD 4000 has impressed those who have had the opportunity to use it though, so perhaps the need for a dedicated GPU won't be as big in a few months as it is now.

For me, the biggest problem with the MBA really is the storage and the RAM upgradeability. I do value most of the other topics I presented as well, and that is why if the 13" MBP gets phased out I am seriously considering getting a late '11 13" MBP over the new 2012 13" MBA.

 

[elliottfamily5]

Everyone doesn't. Buy what fits your needs and ignore what everyone else thinks or says. You're the one who will be stuck every day, using whatever computer you decide to buy, not them.

Very well said.

Purchase what fits your individual needs, and just enjoy it. Late 2011 13" i5 8GB ram, 120 GB SSD/HDD in Optibay combo and could not be happier.

 

[Demosthenes X]

People have been ragging on the 13" Pro since it was released. It's what inspired my signature.

The 13" Pro is a great little computer. Yes, it's always been a little bit of an oddball (in 2009 it was basically an aluminium MacBook, now it's basically a thicker/heavier Air), but none of those things take away from the fact that mine is the best Mac I've ever owned.

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

Well frankly its really underpowered compared to the 15 and 17 inch models, and comparable to to the Airs in terms of processing speed.

This is only true of the latest model, and that came about because the Core-i series is so dang efficient. I have a 2009 C2D 13" and it absolutely destroys my friend's late 2010 MBA in terms of performance (except I don't have an SSD, so anything related to that he beats me).

I mean, the current MBP 13" is very close in terms of performance with the 2011 MBA 13", but it weights a whole 66% more and sports a clearly outdated 1200x800 resolution (I can't believe Apple upgraded the MBAs resolution back in 2010 but they never did it for the MBP. Why?!?!?).

Yes, the screen resolution is abominable. However, it is far more flexible than the MBA. I NEED FireWire, so I would never buy a MBA. I can also upgrade my own hardware on it, which I can't do on the MBA. I also wouldn't want to buy a USB dongle JUST so I can use Ethernet. The MBA is intended to be a secondary machine, while the 13" MBP is intended to be a primary machine. That's the big difference.

I've read quite a few online comparisons about MBP 13" vs. MBA 13", and they all conclude that the performance gap is a mere 5% to 10%, which is not enough to differentiate itself as a "pro" machine.

Yeah, although there are some who think that even the 15" and 17" MBPs aren't really "Pro" machines, though this was more true before the quad cores came out.

The biggest thing holding the 13" MBP back from really being a Pro machine is the lack of a discrete GPU. I went from a 2008 C2D 2.2 GHz MacBook to a 2009 2.26 GHz C2D MBP and, TBH, there isn't a whole lot of difference. I love the backlit keyboard, and the DDR3 RAM makes a big difference, but there's not a huge gap, just a small one in terms of overall performance.

 

[mac jones]

Frankly, it's an abomination. This is so because of the dinosauric screen resolution.

I mean, why don't they just use the Air screen? It doesn't even make any sense.

Somebody needs a spanking

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

I mean, why don't they just use the Air screen? It doesn't even make any sense.

The Air has a higher resolution but lower quality. Me, I'd choose quality over quantity.

 

[KohPhiPhi]

The Air has a higher resolution but lower quality. Me, I'd choose quality over quantity.

I'm not quite sure why you keep on saying that the MBP has a "more quality" screen to the MBA... do you mean the color gamut? because if so, the MBP's glossy panel is what makes most of the difference, not the screen itself. And I personally prefer matte screens for outdoor usage.

 

[macness]

Which is fine. If you don't care about OS X, a trackpad that works and build quality that isn't crap.

Lol

 

[macness]

Well if your using an external monitor does screen resolution even matter? Mine also has an i7. Doesn't that make a difference? Can u even get an i7 in the 13" air?

----------

Screen resolution especially won't matter as much to me with the airplay feature comming up in mountain lion

 

[Liquinn]

Well if your using an external monitor does screen resolution even matter? Mine also has an i7. Doesn't that make a difference? Can u even get an i7 in the 13" air?

----------

Screen resolution especially won't matter as much to me with the airplay feature comming up in mountain lion

According to MacTracker, you can get a i7 processor in the 13" Macbook Air.

Cheers.

 

[rockyroad55]

I just don't like it because of the screen resolution. If the 13" Air can go 1440, why not the MBP. After all, it does have "Pro" in its name even if it could be a marketing gimmick.

 

[Mojo1]

People would be a lot better off if they avoided forums and the obsession with specifications that don't make a difference to average users.

I prefer the lower resolution display. The MBA displays are of lesser quality and give me severe eyestrain. Resolution isn't everything...

The current MBP 13" is a lot of computer. Most people don't need quad core processors or discrete GPUs. My base model 13" runs a high-end display and apps like Aperture just fine.

I'm waiting to see if the Intel HD 4000 is included with the next upgrade. Otherwise I will get a previous-generation MBP at a discount price. I got my 2.3 GHz MBP for $900; refurbs are available for $929. That's a bargain price for a powerful computer in a relatively small package.

 

[techfest]

13inch is a pos

 

[macness]

13inch is a pos

Pos?

 

[iThinkergoiMac]

I'm not quite sure why you keep on saying that the MBP has a "more quality" screen to the MBA... do you mean the color gamut? because if so, the MBP's glossy panel is what makes most of the difference, not the screen itself. And I personally prefer matte screens for outdoor usage.

I keep saying? I said it once...

The color gamut is higher, but that doesn't have to do with only the glossy screen. I believe the viewing angle is also greater, but I'm not sure.

 

[rockyroad55]

People would be a lot better off if they avoided forums and the obsession with specifications that don't make a difference to average users.

I prefer the lower resolution display. The MBA displays are of lesser quality and give me severe eyestrain. Resolution isn't everything...

The current MBP 13" is a lot of computer. Most people don't need quad core processors or discrete GPUs. My base model 13" runs a high-end display and apps like Aperture just fine.

I'm waiting to see if the Intel HD 4000 is included with the next upgrade. Otherwise I will get a previous-generation MBP at a discount price. I got my 2.3 GHz MBP for $900; refurbs are available for $929. That's a bargain price for a powerful computer in a relatively small package.

Something that gives you eyestrain may be needed for someone else. I currently attend a class that uses speadsheets a lot and the extra resolution may help in fitting more cells onto the screen. Then again, I jumped from the 13" to a 15".

 

[techfest]

Pos?

thats right.

 

[Z3man]

Frankly, it's an abomination. This is so because of the dinosauric screen resolution.

I mean, why don't they just use the Air screen? It doesn't even make any sense.

Somebody needs a spanking

i actually prefer the lower resolution screen. i currently own two air's, a 2008 with 1200 x 800 resolution and a mid 2011 with 1440 x 900 resolution. i prefer the 2008 air for surfing the web because the lower resolution means everything is bigger, on the 2011 air everything is smaller, its as if it is zoomed out, you do get more info on the screen like that but it does give me eye strain, on sites with small text i have to keep adjusting it. so i think i will be returning it and buying a 13" pro with an SSD fitted, the only thing that worries me about the pro is the glossy screen.

 

[fisherking]

i don't understand the haters. i mean, i certainly have a 13" mbp wishlist:
screen resolution and quality, smaller footprint (vs thinner). a few other things.

but overall, this is my fave mac to date (and i've owned a lot of them).

i can do my pro work in logic on it with NO issues.
8 gigs of ram is great, an SSD is huge (including a minimum of heat...yay).

overall, am very happy.

to each his (or her) own i guess.

 

[Mojo1]

Something that gives you eyestrain may be needed for someone else. I currently attend a class that uses speadsheets a lot and the extra resolution may help in fitting more cells onto the screen. Then again, I jumped from the 13" to a 15".

I agree that it depends on what you need and how a display works for you. A lot of people are having problems with Apple's current LED backlit displays; there is a very long thread on the Apple forums dating back to August 2008. That was around the time when the unibody MBPs were released. My early 2008 LED 15" MBP never gave me eyestrain; the 11" MBA and to a lesser extent the 13" MBP do. CCFL displays such as my NEC are no problem for me.

If you need to fit a spreadsheet on a portable display then you may well need a high-resolution display to accomplish what you want. But if you suffer from severe eyestrain it will be a moot point if you cannot stand to look at the display.

Display preferences are very subjective. It makes no sense to accept anyone else's opinion about what is the "best" display. When I post my opinion about Apple displays I am just wanting to let people know that some people have problems with LED backlighting and high-resolution. That is why I suggest demoing displays at a store before buying. If that isn't possible just be sure to purchase it from a retailer with a generous return policy. That way you are covered if the display proves to be problematic to use.

 

[Medic278]

I have both a 2011 13"MBP and a 2011 MBA and I prefer my Pro hands down everyday of the week. I think its just a better computer and as others have said people think its an inferior machine, well I don't and for me its perfect. I hate laptops with huge screens and like the 13" screen it has plenty of power for my photo and video editing plus its lightning fast. All in all I think its the perfect computer the i7 is great, I don't need quad core dual core is just fine for me. So when people pick on the 13 or say it doesn't deserve to be a pro I just move past it, compared to my Air the 13 is for sure a pro.

 

[macness]

I have both a 2011 13"MBP and a 2011 MBA and I prefer my Pro hands down everyday of the week. I think its just a better computer and as others have said people think its an inferior machine, well I don't and for its perfect. I hate laptops with huge screens and like the 13" screen it has plenty of power for my photo and video editing plus its lightning fast. All in all I think its the perfect computer the i7 is great, I don't need quad core dual core is just fine for me. So when people pick on the 13 or say it doesn't deserve to be a pro I just move it, compared to my Air the 13 is for sure a pro.

Agreed