New MacBook Pro series • Hacker News Board

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#281

Post by trezor » Thu, Feb 24, 2011, 10:12 PM UTC

erik wrote: post #222

trezor wrote: post #67

Will you be able to get a MBP with a builtin 3G-adapter yet? No? Ok, I'll just go back to Dell then. Edit: While my comment may come off trollish, this is a requirement for me when buying any mobile gear. That Apple still doesn't provide this for their top of the line laptops still baffles me.

I've never understood the demand for builtin 3G for laptops. I don't want to pay for a 3G data plan for my laptop + 3G data plan for my iPad + 3G data plan for my phone. I want a data plan for my phone, and I want all of my devices to be able to access it via tethering.

I can get a twin-card for my phone so it's tied to the same subscription and I don't have an iPad. In that case, it makes very much sense to me to be able to use that twin SIM-card somewhere useful.

It may not fit your needs, but in the parts of the world where 3G is way more ubiquitous than wifi, it's very neat having. And it's extra neat to have without the need to bring up the phone and setting up tethering.

Dell offers it as an option, just like everything else. I fail to see why Apple can't do the same.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#282

Post by davidhperry » Thu, Feb 24, 2011, 10:14 PM UTC

wheels wrote: post #18

Color me disappointed. I was hoping for: • Ditching the optical media for longer battery life • 4 cores in the 13" • Max RAM of 12 GB (this one isn't listed ... maybe?) • The higher resolution 1440x900 resolution in the 13" that the Macbook Air has Altogether it's a pretty wussy update. Basically it looks like the diff (on the 13" model, which is what I care about) is: • Faster CPU (finally!) • Thunderbolt port (coun…

Totally agreed on ditching optical media. I'm also wondering when they'll get around to adding mobile broadband support.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#283

Post by seabee » Thu, Feb 24, 2011, 10:25 PM UTC

jimbokun wrote: post #280

astrodust wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The number of potential customers for this model that actually know what that means is very small. If Apple put in a 1900x1080 screen, what you'd hear instead from consumers is that everything is too tiny to read.

I think the kind of people who just look at the size of the screen and not the number of pixels, are likely the same people who will just buy the same size Windows PC because it's several hundred dollars less. In other words, the people willing to pay Apple prices care enough about their computer purchase to actually read the specs. Like if you buy a high performance car, you at least want to do enough research not t…

I know at least 2 such Apple customers. It's an Apple, it's good enough, and that's all that matters to them; specs are the last things they care about.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#284

Post by calloc » Thu, Feb 24, 2011, 10:28 PM UTC

hackermom wrote: post #97

wheels wrote: post #18

Color me disappointed. I was hoping for: • Ditching the optical media for longer battery life • 4 cores in the 13" • Max RAM of 12 GB (this one isn't listed ... maybe?) • The higher resolution 1440x900 resolution in the 13" that the Macbook Air has Altogether it's a pretty wussy update. Basically it looks like the diff (on the 13" model, which is what I care about) is: • Faster CPU (finally!) • Thunderbolt port (coun…

I almost choked on a sip of tea when I noticed that the 13" "Pro" is still stuck with a 1280*800 display. Talk about boneheaded move.

My work provided me with a 13" MacBook Pro and I hate how the display is only 1280 by 800. When we get our new budget I am hoping I can get an upgrade to a 15" with the hi-res display, but we shall see.

My MacBook Pro 15" from a couple of years ago has a 1440 by 900 display and that is MUCH better than this 1280 by 800. Shame that Apple still thinks that is acceptable.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#285

Post by litewulf » Thu, Feb 24, 2011, 10:29 PM UTC

dotBen wrote: post #255

jhancock wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. Try going 4 years older. My IBM branded X41 is the finest laptop I've owned and ubuntu works flawless on it. I bought a replacement battery for it and get a good 5 hours and a few days standby. I like it so much, I even consider not telling people so I can buy up more used ones and set aside for future parts. But hey, what's life if you don't share. Considering the cost of these on ebay (as much as some new n…

arhh yes, the X41 - the last laptop I had before I went Mac. I called it my Darth Vadar laptop - strong, sleek black frame, powerful, ugly yet strangely beautiful at the same time. The problem is the X41 always suffered from poor resolution, and certainly that is true by today's standards. I wield a MBP with hi-res matte screen and 1680 x 1050 in a 15" package used at 2 feet from my eyes is basically like a Retina di…

I upgraded the resolution on my X61t to 1400x1050 on a 12" display.

"Retina display"? Hah.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#286

Post by Terretta » Thu, Feb 24, 2011, 10:31 PM UTC

rdl wrote: post #208

bnastic wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I do get very close to 8 hours on my 17" MBP (when the cpu is not too stressed). That number will go down if any serious work is done, but light browsing etc. takes it all the way up to 8h.

The key I find with my mid 2010 17 is to manually force intel graphics. Several web browsers and plugins seem to invoke the NVidia discrete chip which sucks power.

Thank you for this reminder.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#287

Post by daniel02216 » Thu, Feb 24, 2011, 10:31 PM UTC

mmt wrote: post #144

trezor wrote: post #67

Will you be able to get a MBP with a builtin 3G-adapter yet? No? Ok, I'll just go back to Dell then. Edit: While my comment may come off trollish, this is a requirement for me when buying any mobile gear. That Apple still doesn't provide this for their top of the line laptops still baffles me.

3G? What about 4G? I'm a little irked that there's no system bus [1] slot, into which I could install a 3G/4G combo card. However, in the past, I've turned out to be unwilling to spend the extra money on the dedicated hardware and extra subscription. I'd rather have a (nowadays quite tolerably small) USB dongle that I can use on any laptop or even a battery-powered wireless access point [2] than the sleek convenience…

There is an ExpressCard/34 slot on the 17" MBPs, and there isn't really room for one on the 15" and smaller sizes.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#288

Post by rdl » Thu, Feb 24, 2011, 10:34 PM UTC

rdl wrote: post #208

bnastic wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I do get very close to 8 hours on my 17" MBP (when the cpu is not too stressed). That number will go down if any serious work is done, but light browsing etc. takes it all the way up to 8h.

The key I find with my mid 2010 17 is to manually force intel graphics. Several web browsers and plugins seem to invoke the NVidia discrete chip which sucks power.

http://codykrieger.com/gfxCardStatus is a great tool for this.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#289

Post by danudey » Thu, Feb 24, 2011, 10:34 PM UTC

CountSessine wrote: post #151

pclark wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add to your list: 3G internet.

Yeah, why not? Among top tier laptop and cellphone manufacturers, the only name that appears on both lists is Apple (well, I guess Samsung makes laptops too...). Adding a SIM/RUIM slot and a 3G chip makes so much sense. I know a lot of laptop manufacturers in Europe have offered this as an option. Why not Apple?

Because most people don't want to pay for two 3G data plans, and the types of people who would want 3G connectivity on their laptops probably have 3G smartphones with tethering already.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#290

Post by vrruiz » Thu, Feb 24, 2011, 10:37 PM UTC

moe wrote: post #226

pmjordan wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the laptop versions of the Core i* have 3 memory channels (neither do the Socket-1155/1156 desktop versions), so 3x4GB of RAM would be a strange/suboptimal configuration. There probably isn't enough physical space in a 13" laptop for more than 2 modules anyway (unless you sacrifice battery or optical drive space). Even soldering them to the motherboard wouldn't save much space - I think all current 4GB…

unless you sacrifice [...] optical drive space What they really sacrificed here was the opportunity to make a compelling product. It's 2011, when have you last time used an optical drive?

When I updated the system to Snow Leopard.