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

MacBook Pro 14-inch and MacBook Pro 16-inch

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 1001 posts

Re: MacBook Pro 14-inch and MacBook Pro 16-inch

#531

Post by amelius »

mFixman wrote: post #464
mizzack wrote: post #92

Wow looks like Apple has abandoned every bad decision on the MBP for the past 5 years in one swoop. No touchbar, increased key travel, added back hdmi/sd/headphone/power jacks. Plus bumped up RAM limit, M1, new displays, 120Hz... Wow.

Damn, I liked the touchbar :-( I think that Apple's biggest mistake is not making it more obvious that the bar is editable in all programs. It becomes pretty useful when you can keep only the functions that you use the most.

> Damn, I liked the touchbar :-(

Yep, that's the downside of a quasi-monopolist. Limited choice.

Re: MacBook Pro 14-inch and MacBook Pro 16-inch

#533

Post by ericmay »

darkwater wrote: post #525

> HDMI, SD Card, and MagSafe. Things people on the internet inclusive but not limited to HN said they will never come back because the future is USB-C. Gonna be downvoted for the snark but... I'd like to hear now how the "a usb-c dongle fixes everything and it's perfect" Apple crowd will backpedal on this.

I’m that crowd and while I think MagSafe is a good addition back to the lineup (single-purpose and the other end is still USB-C) I just don’t see the point of adding back HDMI and SD cards. Now we get to go back to the era of jeez I sure hope there’s a dongle somewhere instead of moving to a future of just one cable.

Maybe we should keep Lightning too instead of USB-C for the iPhone.

Re: MacBook Pro 14-inch and MacBook Pro 16-inch

#534

Post by solarmist »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #479

Priced out the one I would buy and it is $4300. Seems the value isn't quite there. Hard to say though without playing with it for a while. So clearly I need to go back to work for some tech company that will buy one for me :-). It is more interesting to me to reflect on the comments from about 5 years ago that "ARM will never be in laptops, its a 'phone' processor." That statement was both true and ignored the realit…

Apple has always been a hardware company though. Software has just been for the purpose of selling their hardware.

MSFT is the opposite. So it makes sense it be much slower/harder to get going in this area.

Re: MacBook Pro 14-inch and MacBook Pro 16-inch

#535

Post by csomar »

Onewildgamer wrote: post #238
smoovb wrote: post #16

Kills the touch bar, the light touch keyboard, adds back weight, card reader, ports and the mag safe. Feels like an apology for prior design decisions. My 2011 MBP is new again!

I have owned macbooks only since 2017 and found the older (2011 era) aesthetic design to be bulky and not too appealing. I own a 2020 model, which looks sharp and professional. I don't like them going back to this rounded edges on the bottom. I love everything else, except this simple gripe over aesthetics.

Yeah, the design suck. But these are machine that are going to be used 8-10 hours a day. Better be functional than trendy.

Re: MacBook Pro 14-inch and MacBook Pro 16-inch

#536

Post by Toutouxc »

trebor wrote: post #521
mizzack wrote: post #92

Wow looks like Apple has abandoned every bad decision on the MBP for the past 5 years in one swoop. No touchbar, increased key travel, added back hdmi/sd/headphone/power jacks. Plus bumped up RAM limit, M1, new displays, 120Hz... Wow.

Actually, they kept one of the oldest mistakes: overcharging. $400 to upgrade from 16GB RAM to 32GB. $200 to upgrade to 1TB SSD. These guys control the whole supply chain without middlemen like WD, Samsung, Crucial, etc — and they charge basically double what anyone else charges. I'm not paying $2k for a laptop below what I need as a developer, when Apple is ridiculous. Inflation is murder right now, and they JACK th…

> I'm not paying $2k for a laptop below what I need as a developer, when That's perfectly fine, you don't have to use a MacBook if the value isn't there for you.

Re: MacBook Pro 14-inch and MacBook Pro 16-inch

#537

Post by 1-more »

darkwater wrote: post #525

> HDMI, SD Card, and MagSafe. Things people on the internet inclusive but not limited to HN said they will never come back because the future is USB-C. Gonna be downvoted for the snark but... I'd like to hear now how the "a usb-c dongle fixes everything and it's perfect" Apple crowd will backpedal on this.

I think everyone thought that was just over the horizon for a long time, and it never quite got there. My monitor is my dongle for everything, but I'm lucky in that I didn't have a monitor before the USB-C everything era.

Re: MacBook Pro 14-inch and MacBook Pro 16-inch

#538

Post by csomar »

tmp_anon_22 wrote: post #181
ssijak wrote: post #96

This is literally a dream laptop. Improved in every area and lacking in none I can think of right now. And the price is crazy cheap for this performance if you ask me.

Its not crazy cheap, a lot of people overvalue mobility when 90% of white collar work is done at home or in an office.

If they can (really) deliver Desktop performance, then they are (really) cheap. There is nothing on the market that can deliver such performance that isn't desktop. But the jury is still early on that one, I'd wait for the reviews.

Re: MacBook Pro 14-inch and MacBook Pro 16-inch

#539

Post by seanmcdirmid »

deergomoo wrote: post #500
ksec wrote: post #118

HDMI, SD Card, and MagSafe. Things people on the internet inclusive but not limited to HN said they will never come back because the future is USB-C. Now I just want to know if the new keyboard has more key travel distance back to the like of MacBook Pro 2015. In case anyone wants to know the thickness difference. MacBook Pro 13" 2015 - 1.8 cm MacBook Pro 13" 2016 - 1.49 / 1.55 cm MacBook Pro 14" / 16" 2021 - 1.55 /…

> Both 14" and 16" have 254 PPI, up from ~220 Which also means they finally support more screen real estate at native 2x! Since 2016 the 13" MacBooks retained their 2560x1600 panels but shipped by default in a "looks like 1440x900" mode, which renders a 2880x1800 frame and does a non-integer scale down to the panel's native resolution, trading sharpness for extra space. I hate the slight fuzzy look so I run mine at n…

> which renders a 2880x1800 frame and does a non-integer scale down to the panel's native resolution, trading sharpness for extra space.

This isn't how it really works. It doesn't render 2880x1800 frame and scale down, it will just render at the resolution given for the size of the widgets desired. Any modern GPU can do that, the only time down scaling is needed is if you have a higher resolution bitmap that you want rendered at a lower resolution (or you can scale up, anyways, modern applications should not be rendering fixed sized bitmaps to ever need to do that).

Edit: never mind, that is how it actually works. I never realized MacOS never got true resolution independence like WPF.

Re: MacBook Pro 14-inch and MacBook Pro 16-inch

#540

Post by whiskyant »

huy-nguyen wrote: post #516
whiskyant wrote: post #492

How come when you upgrade to the 24 core M1 max, it adds +$600 when the upgrade lists it as +$200. After you try to remove the upgrade the price only drops by only -$200. Is this a bug?

I think the reason is that the upgraded CPU ($200 extra) automatically triggers an upgrade of the memory config from 16GB to 32GB ($400 extra). That explains the $600 increase.

Ah, that makes sense.
Post reply on HN