or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Mossberg: Apple's iMac, MacBook 'evolutionary, not revolutionary'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mossberg: Apple's iMac, MacBook 'evolutionary, not revolutionary' - Page 4

post #121 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by daehl View Post

The Magic mouse is the only really innovative news here.

Ha, you missed one other innovation. It was staring (or must I say glaring) in your face: a resolution of 2560 x 1440.
I think the real innovation is the quality of the total product. It is really really exceptional good.
post #122 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

These are cheap parts.

One reason (apart from the ok performance) is the heat dissipation of the ATI Radeon HD 4670 card.
In this respect it is way better than the 4850.
post #123 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnjnjnjn View Post

Ha, you missed one other innovation. It was staring (or must I say glaring) in your face: a resolution of 2560 x 1440.
I think the real innovation is the quality of the total product. It is really really exceptional good.

Maybe he missed it because he could not see it due to the mirror like image of himself looking at the screen that was between him and a resolution of 2560 x 1440. The high glare screens are not at all appealing.

(Wake up Apple! A rather large portion of your potential customer base is turned off by the high glare screens.)
post #124 of 128
Interesting that the author talked about the similarities between MacBook Pro 13" and the new MacBook 13". I mentioned this under another discussion, but I think that this might be more appropriate.

Both MacBook Pro 13" and the new MacBook 13" have:

Intel Core 2 Duo 2.26 GHz
2 GB DDR3
1280 x 800 gloss display LCD
NVIDIA GeForce 9400M
7h hour battery
New touch pad

Apparently, the only differences are:

Aluminum case vs Plastic case
Firewire port present vs No Firewire port
Backlit keyboard vs Regular keyboard
160GB vs 250GB (!!!)

But, one costs 1199.00 (or 1078.00 using AppleInsider's discount) and the other costs 999.00 (or 899.18 using AppleInsider's discount).

Does anyone else here think that Apple should lower the prices for MacBook Pro 13"? Or, at least, start shipping MacBook Pro 13" with 250GB standard?

I went to an Apple Store and test-drove both and, though, I like the aluminum case, I don't see a point in purchasing it anymore, especially with a hard disk 36% smaller.
post #125 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnjnjnjn View Post

Ha, you missed one other innovation. It was staring (or must I say glaring) in your face: a resolution of 2560 x 1440.
I think the real innovation is the quality of the total product. It is really really exceptional good.

The why does it sport such a low end iSight camera for all that HD resolution?
Why hasn't that been upgraded to something decent like Sony uses for the last 2 years?
Why must we wait yet again??
post #126 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroubleStarter View Post

Interesting that the author talked about the similarities between MacBook Pro 13" and the new MacBook 13". I mentioned this under another discussion, but I think that this might be more appropriate.

Both MacBook Pro 13" and the new MacBook 13" have:

Intel Core 2 Duo 2.26 GHz
2 GB DDR3
1280 x 800 gloss display LCD
NVIDIA GeForce 9400M
7h hour battery
New touch pad

Apparently, the only differences are:

Aluminum case vs Plastic case
Firewire port present vs No Firewire port
Backlit keyboard vs Regular keyboard
160GB vs 250GB (!!!)

But, one costs 1199.00 (or 1078.00 using AppleInsider's discount) and the other costs 999.00 (or 899.18 using AppleInsider's discount).

Does anyone else here think that Apple should lower the prices for MacBook Pro 13"? Or, at least, start shipping MacBook Pro 13" with 250GB standard?

I went to an Apple Store and test-drove both and, though, I like the aluminum case, I don't see a point in purchasing it anymore, especially with a hard disk 36% smaller.

No- just lower the MacBook to $899 at the VERy least- more like $799.
Also the 13 inch Pro should get the I5 in Jan and then all comparisons are over. That is why I wait. And hopefully it also gets matte like its big brothers. Then you will see me buy it blind.
post #127 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

Maybe he missed it because he could not see it due to the mirror like image of himself looking at the screen that was between him and a resolution of 2560 x 1440. The high glare screens are not at all appealing.

(Wake up Apple! A rather large portion of your potential customer base is turned off by the high glare screens.)

YOu know I went to the store on 5th Ave hoping to really embrace it. But the glare is worse. As I've always said the larger the glass is (and the 27 is huge) the more glare you're bombarded with. And this was particularly annoying because when you are looking dead center the glare is now hitting you from the extreme ends of the widescreen. With a HDTV glare is not an issue as you sit 6 plus feet away. But when you are a foot and 1/2 away from your desktop- it's awful. And the ironic thing is in the store they still use the 30" Matte cinema display to teach class to 12 lookers. Why?- so the image can be seen from all angles.
post #128 of 128
I do not follow Mr. Mossberg's work, however I did read his Windows 7 review last week which inspired me to write a review of his review. which kind of points out that most Windows 7 reviews read pretty much the same. So I may not give as much creedence to his other reviews unless it's proven to me that brainwashing is universal. I would point you to:

http://timedwardsblog.wordpress.com/

Tim in Bovey
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Mossberg: Apple's iMac, MacBook 'evolutionary, not revolutionary'