Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New MacBook Pro series

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 359 posts

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#261

Post by smokey_the_bear »

ssharp wrote: post #71
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…

>Thunderbolt port (count on buying another $30 display adapter like every generation) Existing (edit: mini)displayport adapters will work. Per the Apple Thunderbolt site ( http://www.apple.com/thunderbolt/ ): "And because Thunderbolt is based on DisplayPort technology, the video standard for high-resolution displays, any Mini DisplayPort display plugs right into the Thunderbolt port. To connect a DisplayPort, DVI, HD…

It's $100 for the mini-display port to dual-dvi, and it doesn't even work very well.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#262

Post by jseliger »

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?

Last night, to rip a DVD from Netflix. Before that, I didn't use it often, to be fair, but I've still used it to install Office, to install OS X, and to burn a DVD with the complete audio _Ulysses_ on it.

Do I use it as often as I did, say, 10 years ago? No, but I can imagine why Apple would leave it.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#263

Post by Raphael »

moe wrote: post #223
wisty wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Dell XPS is a desktop-replacement laptop. Fast, but bulky. I doubt it has wonderful battery life. It's probably got a cheap case. Resale value will be low. Comparing Apples to Apples, you might look at high-end Sony laptops. The MBP 13" close to the S series, both in price and quality. The F series (big, bulky powerhouse) is much cheaper, and has much better specs - but it's a desktop replacement (like the Dell X…

It doesn't even make desktops! Huh? What about the Mac Mini, the iMac and the Mac Pro?

Only the Mac Pro is a true screenless tower.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#264

Post by wyclif »

SandB0x wrote: post #78

Didn't get as much coverage, but there are also new ThinkPads this week: http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/22/lenovo-trots-out-new-thin... The 14" models look good: 30 hours (claimed) battery on the T420, 0.83" ultrathin T420s with discrete graphics. Edit: Here's the official announcement, which took a bit of digging around to find: http://news.lenovo.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=1421 . synacksynack has posted a…

ThinkPad keyboards are still better than any keyboard on any Apple product.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#265

Post by MrFoof »

siglesias wrote: post #64
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…

>>• 3 hours less battery life The old battery tests were unrealistic. They advertised 8 hours on the 17'', but who really got even close to that under normal use? I'm thankful they're taking the hit on pure battery life numbers to report an honest, realistic test.

I'm not sure if they're being more realistic.

The previous MBPs had CPUs with a TDP of 35W. The TDP of the CPUs in the 2011 MBPs are 45W. Battery life seems to have dropped inline with the increase in power envelope.

We should see improved battery life next year with Ivy Bridge, or if there's a mid-year refresh with Sandy Bridge processors with new steppings.

Regardless, I plunked down for a 15" today so I could rid myself of the large brick my workplace saddled with me. They didn't believe me when I said I'd buy my own laptop with my own case. Hell, I meant it.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#266

Post by kooshball »

samatman wrote: post #176
CountSessine wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 it's more profitable for Apple if you get your 3G from a tethered iPhone?

why would it be tethering be profitable for Apple? AFAIK they do not get a cut of the tethering charge from providers.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#267

Post by joonap »

tsycho wrote: post #12

Interesting that they are now offering a SSD drive......does this mean they have now added the SSD TRIM command (or planning to add it in Lion)?

According to a benchmark, OS X doesn't really require TRIM to keep the performance up.

Please see this link: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/apple/2010/07/01/mac-ssd-pe...

I have been using two Intel X25-M SSDs as RAID 0 in a Macbook Pro almost a year now and I've yet to see any loss in performance. Apple has been offering SSDs as BTO for quite some time now. If you can use a screwdriver I suggest you buy a Sandforce-based SSD and install it yourself as those are immensely faster than the Apple-provided ones.

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#268

Post by cnlwsu »

jonpaul wrote: post #124

Bummed that you can't get more than 8 GB of memory on even the i7. Why are the i7 mobiles only limited to 8 GB? That seems silly for today's standards and memory costs.

its not the new i7 mobiles that are not supporting it... You can get a sager with 16GB http://www.sagernotebook.com/index.php?page=product_customed...

Re: New MacBook Pro series

#270

Post by DrJokepu »

rmc wrote: post #254
achompas wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you used OS X before? I pay the Mac premium for two reasons: (1) my laptop is supported by tons of Apple Stores across the country, and (2) OS X is awesome (and since it's Unix-based, I can work in the terminal without a problem). There's also a great reselling market for Macs. If (1) and (2) don't really matter to you, go with the Dell. I'll pay the extra price to get exactly what I want in my computer.

As a Linux user I find it funny when OSX is compared to a Unix OS since it has a terminal. That's like saying Nextstep (what OSX is based on) is an acceptable OSX

OS X is a fully POSIX compliant operating system (as opposed to Linux, which is not fully compliant). It is officially branded as Unix. I don't understand what you mean?
Post reply on HN