or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple releases new 15" MacBook Pro
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple releases new 15" MacBook Pro - Page 2

post #41 of 384
For the cost and lack of significant spec upgrades, 7200RPM drives should be standard. It's also unfortunate higher-density displays aren't available. I don't want to have to spend $2800 and lug around a 17" machine just to get a resolution better than 1440x900.
post #42 of 384
Quick question only just come on so not had a look, works with the existing 20 apple cinema display?
post #43 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Nonsense! My wife and daughter both have 24" glass iMacs. The images from those screens are by far the best Apple ever offered. Neither has reflection problems.

In fact, both look much better than the Samsung and Viewsonic monitors these replaced from their old Mac towers. My wife has the room light just where reflections would be seen by her from the glass, but it does't. My daughter has a window that reflected badly from her Viewsonic, but not from the iMac.

There's a big knee jerk reflex from some of you guys on this.

I totally agree.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #44 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Recycling isn't the expensive part here, aluminum is very cheap to recycle, and very easily gathered. The issues are the amount of machining needed, man-hours, tools, very high production costs.

That's what I thought too. Maybe this is what that shareholder conference call was about, reducing margins because of something that noone else can compete with. This isn't like the old metal cases which can be stamped, probably in one hit, with very little scrap or chips, or plastic which can be injected in seconds with only a tiny bit of scrap. It would seem that the extra machining cost is more expensive than the savings due to parts reductions.
post #45 of 384
It appears that there is no longer a way to plug the new laptops into a TV.

Also, no firewire on the 13" laptop? I am saddened.


Amorya
post #46 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

That's what I thought too. Maybe this is what that shareholder conference call was about, reducing margins because of something that noone else can compete with. This isn't like the old metal cases which can be stamped, probably in one hit, with very little scrap or chips, or plastic which can be injected in seconds. It would seem that the extra machining cost is more expensive than the savings due to parts reductions.

This is exactly that. Profit margins are smaller on these machines, do doubt.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #47 of 384
Don't like the gloss, that's the only thing holding me back from getting one in the future.

I enjoy my none-gloss first gen intel macbook pro just fine. these new ones do look very nice.
post #48 of 384
Null.
Þ & þ are called "Thorn" & þey represent þe sound you've associated "th" wiþ since þe 13þ or 14þ century. I'm bringing it back.
<(=_=)> (>=_=)> <(=_=<) ^(=_=^) (^=_=)^ ^(=_=)^ +(=_=)+
Reply
Þ & þ are called "Thorn" & þey represent þe sound you've associated "th" wiþ since þe 13þ or 14þ century. I'm bringing it back.
<(=_=)> (>=_=)> <(=_=<) ^(=_=^) (^=_=)^ ^(=_=)^ +(=_=)+
Reply
post #49 of 384
(1) Apple made only minor incremental improvements to the laptops. Once you get past the manufacturing process and physical changes, the processor speeds, disk and memory sizes, battery life, and weight are nearly identical.

(2) Apple will be revving these laptops slightly sooner than usual (summer 2009) with the mobile version of Nehalem (Gilo?) and otherwise focusing on the internals.

(3) Jobs comments on the Netbook market were revealing. I suspect the rise of this market has caught them slightly off guard. In combination with the comment that they invested so heavily in their new manufacturing process, I doubt they had the bandwidth to tackle the R&D required.

(4) The memory change from 667 MHz DDR2 to 1066 DDR3 suggests a similar upgrade for the Pros in the near future.

(5) The 24" monitor signals that Apple sees a large population of users for whom the monitor IS the dock.

(6) The inclusion of two GPUs and stated support for OpenCL in Snow Leopard will make the MBP an attractive platform for many engineers.
post #50 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post

Sorry, but you don't know what you are talking about here.

While it's true that most people prefer glossy, (and Apple is probably smart to go that way for that reason alone), glossy displays don't give true colour reproduction.

The pictures "look better" because they appear over-saturated. For the segment of the Pro market that needs true colour reproduction (and this segment basically comprised of graphic designers and pro photographers), glossy is just not going to do it. They are a minority segment, but still, if you want truly accurate colour, you need a non glossy screen.

Sorry, but you're wrong here.

Matte displays cut down on the possible saturation and contrast the monitor is natively capable of. They also out a hard limit on the blacks which is below what the display is again itself capable of delivering.

If you really want to, you can always lower these numbers yourself numerous ways. PS offers mucho options to do this on your monitor all by itself.

But, you can never bring it back properly on your monitor when it's cut down by the matte screen.

When you raise saturation, you're always in danger of losing a few levels in that color. That simply lowers the quality even further.

Try raising saturation in a single color in PS. If it's already well saturated, you'll notice that detail in that color begins to disappear as the saturation is raised. That's because you're artificially moving the entire gamma structure out of range on the high side.

That's no solution. It gives us even more reasons for doing graphics work in a darkened room. That's less of a problem with glossy.
post #51 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xian Zhu Xuande View Post

Wah... have you ever really used one?
Positioning it to avoid glare is so easy that you do it subconsciously.

I agree. for laptops, you just need to open the display at 90 degrees while facing you to avoid glare. Always worked for me.
post #52 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Sorry, but you're wrong here.

Matte displays cut down on the possible saturation and contrast the monitor is natively capable of. They also out a hard limit on the blacks which is below what the display is again itself capable of delivering.

If you really want to, you can always lower these numbers yourself numerous ways. PS offers mucho options to do this on your monitor all by itself.

But, you can never bring it back properly on your monitor when it's cut down by the matte screen.

When you raise saturation, you're always in danger of losing a few levels in that color. That simply lowers the quality even further.

Try raising saturation in a single color in PS. If it's already well saturated, you'll notice that detail in that color begins to disappear as the saturation is raised. That's because you're artificially moving the entire gamma structure out of range on the high side.

That's no solution. It gives us even more reasons for doing graphics work in a darkened room. That's less of a problem with glossy.

Exactly. If you're doing graphics work in a room with lighting so bad that glare is an issue to begin with, you're in the wrong line of work.
post #53 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slewis View Post

Very close, although it looks like a tablet of any kind won't be arriving anytime soon either going by what Jobs said about touch screens...

You should no better than to listen to the words coming out of Job's mouth, he's a master of the art of bullshit. He constantly lies about their future plans, constantly.

Although I would agree it's not coming soon as there's a huge amount of touch cocoa OS-work to be done before the thing could be ready, including getting the hardware just right. Earliest I'd say is a demo at WWDC next year, with a late year release. Or no demo and a Macworld 2009 release.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slewis View Post

I think your TV was just the new display though.

No way. That displays is for the office, this TV will be shot like a bullet directly at the living room market. It's coming. These things take time, especially considering they way Apple's stretched lately. And it's also a content play, so that's another roadblock for this to really work. I'm betting on late 2009- mid 2010 release with an iTunes TV Show iPTV subscription model, as an option.

If the subscription model is optional we'll see a mid 2009, or possibly even (but doubtful) a Macworld 2009 release.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #54 of 384
Glassy glossy is a deal breaker especially for a lot of people in the MacBook Pro's target market.

This is my worst nightmare come true. As soon as I stopped using my two glassy-glossy iMacs my migraine incidence rate went right back down again.

I'll be looking for stocks of a high res. matte screen 17-inch MBP tomorrow...
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
post #55 of 384
Do you guys think that the next 10.5.6 combo update will unify all the new MacBook trackpad software and drivers? Im about to revise my core MacBook deployment image, but I might wait if Apple will include all the required software into the next major OS update.

Anyone know if the MacBooks ship with 10.5.5 or not?
A friend will help you move, but a REAL FRIEND will help you move a body.
Reply
A friend will help you move, but a REAL FRIEND will help you move a body.
Reply
post #56 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by zzcoop View Post

Exactly. If you're doing graphics work in a room with lighting so bad that glare is an issue to begin with, you're in the wrong line of work.



I love how you think that everyone can control the environment that they work in... back in the real world...
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
post #57 of 384
I wasn't quite sure what to make of the monitor, but as I considered it, if I didn't already have a kick-ass desktop computer and high-end desktop computer needs, it sure would be awesome to get a new MBP and that screen for stupid simple and painless integration. It is the perfect way to eliminate a desktop computer from your routine/expenses while still enjoying many benefits of a desktop computer with minimal effort.

If I get anything announced, though, it will be a new MBP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rune66 View Post

I don't want a notebook I have to "reposition" to avoid something that shouldn't have been there from the start. "Ah if your notebook stops accepting key strokes, just move it a little ...". And you can never get rid of reflections entirely on the whole screen.

As said before, it is apparent that you haven't really tried it out. I avoided gloss like the plague until Apple released the re-designed Macbook. I wanted one and didn't feel like paying for the MBP upgrade so I picked one up. I expected it to be a pain but within days it didn't even register in my mind. More to the point, I was able to use it in environments where a matte screen would have been a nightmare due to light conditions. And it will be even less an issue with these new laptops. That is not my concern. Not sure what to make of a glossy desktop screen, though... but I'm a graphics/web designer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Venier View Post

(1) Apple made only minor incremental improvements to the laptops. Once you get past the manufacturing process and physical changes, the processor speeds, disk and memory sizes, battery life, and weight are nearly identical.

The video upgrade alone is a massive upgrade. Integrated Intel graphics was the biggest problem with the MacBook. The new MacBook will be perfectly capable of handing some of the more advanced graphics tasks now, and that is huge--especially at that price point. And quality of manufacturing, higher quality screens, improved battery life--I'm happy about those things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Venier View Post

(6) The inclusion of two GPUs and stated support for OpenCL in Snow Leopard will make the MBP an attractive platform for many engineers.

It the new GPU-related capabilities in Snow Leopard are leveraged properly this makes it a huge boon for everyone using the laptop.
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
post #58 of 384
Well....

I'm not in the market, but I would say this:

Good: New trackpad, new casing style//process, price drop.

Neutral: Only glossy screens. I have a matte, and I wish I had glossy. That said, I think keeping it as an option would have been good.

Bad: No speed increase. $500 more for step up model which gets to .153 GHZ and 3 additional MB of cache. Not sure this will make any performance difference at all. Better HDDs should have been introduced.

Oh, and the black keyboard is terrible.


-------

This would seem to be as one poster said...a whole new line, so to speak. It's obviously not a compelling upgrade for existings MBP owners. I bought mine two years ago and have 2GB, 2.33GHZ that still runs well. No reason to upgrade here.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #59 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by zzcoop View Post

Exactly. If you're doing graphics work in a room with lighting so bad that glare is an issue to begin with, you're in the wrong line of work.

I guess if you spend your entire day in an office or something... but if you do, then you've got no trouble, because you can easily position your tools. I do some of my work in a florescent-illuminated office and I've never had trouble with my glossy MacBook. But if you think a professional has such control over their environment you are dead wrong. Sometimes you've got to do work on the road, in any manner of moving vehicle, in any manner of building, indoors or outdoors...
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
post #60 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrochester View Post

That's strange because a friend of mine recently got an Imac and that reflects to a very offputting amount in comparison to her old matte screen. The mac is practically like a mirror it's that bad!

There will always be some person who has a problem with something.

What I find is that if you are looking for reflections, you will find them. Once you find them, they become more annoying. But I've seen this with matte displays as well as with glossy displays.

As I said, the matte makes the glare lower, but moves it across much more of the screen. Both can be equally problematic. Glare from matte screens may not be as obvious, but can be more damaging, even if the person doesn't realize it. Matte glare puts a haze across most of the screen, cutting down on the saturation, detail, contrast, and blacks, even more than the matte itself does.

Matte even causes the light from the screen itself to spread into neighboring pixels. This is why it cuts down on the quality of the image.

It may not be seen, but it is causing a problem.

You can think of a plastic cylinder. If you pass light through one end to the other, and look at the side of the cylinder, you will see very little illumination. What you do see is mostly from defects in the material, and dirt on the surface. This is why optical fiber can work. The index of refraction is very high at the air/material boundary.

But, if the surface of the cylinder is matte, the light will move out of the side, and it will shine a bright white (or whatever color you're using). Fiber optic cable would never work.

People aren't thinking about these problems.

So while there will be a few problems for a few, it's not really a problem for most.
post #61 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Messiah View Post



I love how you think that everyone can control the environment that they work in... back in the real world...

I don't know about you, but the environment I work in has lights with "ON" AND "OFF" switches!
post #62 of 384
The old Macbooks did have Firewire, I think? So they were removed on the new ones. Not good - what are people with DV camcorders who want to use iMovie to do? This must be a big part of you average family MacBook usage.

And keeping the old MacBook at the low end looks like a rush move to placate expectations that the update would bring entry prices down significantly. In this environment Apple needed something solidly desirable but in the lower price range. The improvements here are too esoteric and the price remains too high.

Overall, it looks a bit rushed and ill-thought-out to me, despite some interesting specifics.
post #63 of 384
Apple made a nice incremental improvements and some substantial ones, and lagged elsewhere.

I won't be upgrading because of
1- Glossy Screen
2- Blu-Ray
3- not sold on new trackpad lack of buttons, will need to try it out.

honestly, apple is only coming up with lame excuses for not supporting Blu-Ray, even as an option, at this time.

on MBP, the price is there and so are the interested consumers. Apple ought to stop stifling new technology that competes with their itunes movie store.

pretty damn lame.
post #64 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgraphix View Post

As a Graphic Designer you should be aware that glossy displays saturate colors. Not to mention that with the overpowered LED that they mentioned will totally screw any chance of having color accuracy when it comes to print design. STEVE JOBS IS RETARDED! PERIOD, EXCLAMATION!

I understand your concerns here, I really do, BUT....

1) What segment of Macbook purchasers are we talking about here? 5%? 10%

2) If you are doing print design and you need color accuracy, shouldn't you be using a calibrated monitor? And when one calibrates a monitor, isn't part of the consideration the ambient light in the room, and how the monitor is situated in relation to that light? So how can you properly calibrate the screen of a laptop that moves around on a regular basis?? Hmmm?
13.3" 2.4GHz MacBook White * 80 GB iPod Classic * 16GB iPhone 3G * Airport Extreme Base Station
Reply
13.3" 2.4GHz MacBook White * 80 GB iPod Classic * 16GB iPhone 3G * Airport Extreme Base Station
Reply
post #65 of 384
I am finding it hard to find words that express how hugely underwhelmed I am.

I am writing this from my 8 year old 400mhz Ti Powerbook, which quite frankly, is far better looking than this stunningly boring newbie. A tin of Heinz baked beans is probably more innovative, stylish and exciting.
post #66 of 384
Well I've just seen the pricing in the UK, and I'm afraid that a MacBook to replace my iBook is now totally off the todo list.

The new MacBooks are £949 and £1149. That's $1,654 and £2,003. Sure, take off tax ... $1408 and $1705.

Much as I love the machined appearance ... it's expensive, it's hard to justify that.

Even the white MacBook has gone UP in price, from £699 to £719. Some price drop that!

Actually, what I think Apple has done is leave the consumer laptop market with this move. They've gone into the quality boutique market. These machines are extremely high quality, no doubt about it. But you don't get a lot for your money. It's like how a fillet steak costs twice as much as a sirloin steak - both feed you, the fillet steak tastes a little nicer and is a better experience, but is it worth twice the money? On a special occasion ... or if it will get you laid, yeah, it is. This is just a computer.
post #67 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by rune66 View Post

I don't want a notebook I have to "reposition" to avoid something that shouldn't have been there from the start. "Ah if your notebook stops accepting key strokes, just move it a little ...".

If the screen goes blue with weird characters, just hit CRTL-ALT-DEL...
Well, at least it shows that the Mac and PC worlds keep converging... Same Intel based architecture, same softwares, same "if it doesn't work, fix it yourself" attitude...
post #68 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by cddude View Post

I will be using this computer for photography, video editing (just personal not pro) and general features. Maybe some sparse gaming.

Am I missing something here? Am I naive and not realizing how good these are? Let me know.

The updated graphics is pretty significant, especially considering what you'd like to do with the system.

In the presentation regarding the MBPs new graphics capabilities, Apple mentioned you could switch between the two GPU cores. But the potential is in the next version of the Mac OS (aka "Snow Leopard") and a new API called OpenCL, applications can take advantage of both GPUs to process graphics and video rather than the CPU. The benefit is complex content could be manipulated and rendered more quickly via the GPUs.

Having said that, the transcription of the Apple presentation did not explicitly say the above is possible. We'll have to wait until we get a complete debrief from Apple Insider and other news resources.

If you are considering a new MB, then you are essentially purchasing a so called "13 inch MBP". In essence all the power and capabilities of the current 2.5 GHz 15"/17" MBP but with slightly higher performing graphics and CPU performance... at nearly half the price. Not bad in my "mac"book.

Pardon the pun. Couldn't help it.

-YipYipYipee
post #69 of 384
[QUOTE=melgross;1322784]There will always be some person who has a problem with something.

Good:
Real graphics in MacBooks
MBPs with much faster graphics capabilities

Bad:
Glossy display - I dunno, I've been in an apple store - yes, many lights, not unlike work - where reflection on the glossy screens was very prominent. I have to hope the 17" MBPs have a matte option, or something otherwise reducing glare, perhaps in a hires display. Thoughts of using MBs or MBPs for real-time monitoring while recording video in anything but dark environments = Toast.

No FW400 - I thought multiple timing tests (on Macs) have shown FW400 to easily outpace USB2, despite the theoretical higher speed of USB. And, I have a $4000 video camera with FW400. Great.
I had considered a MacBook - once it had better graphics - but now the FW400 is gone and glossy is the only option up the (new) line.

And - glad to hear of great design, elegant construction etc, but: still $2k for a MBP? Why is it when I look at competing products - also Core 2 duo, also fast memory, big disk, 15" or larger display - theirs is under $1500, sometimes well under? I've owned Macs for over 20 years. I'm not thrilled by today's announcements.
post #70 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leehblanc View Post

I understand your concerns here, I really do, BUT....

1) What segment of Macbook purchasers are we talking about here? 5%? 10%

2) If you are doing print design and you need color accuracy, shouldn't you be using a calibrated monitor? And when one calibrates a monitor, isn't part of the consideration the ambient light in the room, and how the monitor is situated in relation to that light? So how can you properly calibrate the screen of a laptop that moves around on a regular basis?? Hmmm?

Not only graphic designers-Have you ever tried crunching numbers on a glossy? Talk about headache inducing.
post #71 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xian Zhu Xuande View Post

As said before, it is apparent that you haven't really tried it out. I avoided gloss like the plague until Apple released the re-designed Macbook. I wanted one and didn't feel like paying for the MBP upgrade so I picked one up. I expected it to be a pain but within days it didn't even register in my mind.

Well good for you. It's apparent that you must be half blind.
post #72 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

No FW400 - I thought multiple timing tests (on Macs) have shown FW400 to easily outpace USB2, despite the theoretical higher speed of USB. And, I have a $4000 video camera with FW400. Great.

You can use FW400 with the FW800 port.
post #73 of 384
Not sure what the heck is going on...Glossy screen on the MAcbook Pro? A Disaster if you cannot get a MAtte Screen.. Firewire 800 only? Lets get more adapters... Only 1 Firewire Port? LEts get a Firewire hub with a adapter...Display Port? Now everyone has to get a adapter to plug anything in.. Even a DVI connector... No Firewire 400 on a Macbook? Lets see all the Musicians Pay almost 2 times the amount for a mobile setup.. A Screen that is $900 and only works on the new laptops? I think is the worst idea ever....
post #74 of 384
Most annoying: No Firewire in the non-pro models, no matte option anywhere, no DVI. These are all indisputably steps in the wrong direction. They may be outweighed by better graphics, brighter screen, more environmentally friendly, etc. but I think it's easier to argue that they have taken a step back in terms of a better everyday experience.

The Firewire issue will probably be the worst for a lot of people--no more video editing for under $2k? If you have a lot of FW drives, you have to either buy new drives or spend a minimum of $2k for the laptop. No target disk mode for under $2k.

The LED displays and new manufactuing process are nice, but I can't see many people making a buying decision based on these factors.
post #75 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Sorry, but you're wrong here.

Matte displays cut down on the possible saturation and contrast the monitor is natively capable of. They also out a hard limit on the blacks which is below what the display is again itself capable of delivering.

If you really want to, you can always lower these numbers yourself numerous ways. PS offers mucho options to do this on your monitor all by itself.

But, you can never bring it back properly on your monitor when it's cut down by the matte screen.

When you raise saturation, you're always in danger of losing a few levels in that color. That simply lowers the quality even further.

Try raising saturation in a single color in PS. If it's already well saturated, you'll notice that detail in that color begins to disappear as the saturation is raised. That's because you're artificially moving the entire gamma structure out of range on the high side.

That's no solution. It gives us even more reasons for doing graphics work in a darkened room. That's less of a problem with glossy.

Glossy displays are CAPABLE of producing a more accurate representation of the information than matte displays - in lab conditions.

But matte displays are more likely to produce a more accurate representation in the real world, because of the reflections on a glossy display.

Then there is the issue of placing a sheet of glass between the panel and the user. A piece of glass whose sole purpose (in the iMac at least) is designed to 'enhance' the picture quality. It's this 'enhancement' that makes the iMac's glassy-glossy display doubly unsuitable for colour repro.

I have yet to meet an artworker (whom I respect) that prefers glossy over matte in a work environment. I do however know dozens who will avoid glossy displays at all costs. I know of one artworker in particular who threatened to walk out if the IT department forced him to use a new glassy-glossy iMac.

And a lot of us don't have the choice of where we work or how it's lit. I'm a freelancer, so I turn up and get told where to sit and that's it. And now, thanks to Apple we don't have the choice of a matte display laptop either.

My ideal kit was a 17" high res. matte MacBook Pro, with a matte Cinema Display at each location. Looks like I'll be spending my money on something else!
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
post #76 of 384
Does anyone know whether they will do a speed upgrade to the HD in the store?
Or is it On-Line order only?

I called Apple Mall of America and they didn't know anything yet.

... and... I'm pretty happy and excited about the new MBP.

The biggest thing missing at the moment is TOUCH interface.
Having used the iPhone for a year, TOUCH is awesome!
post #77 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

I am finding it hard to find words that express how hugely underwhelmed I am.

I am writing this from my 8 year old 400mhz Ti Powerbook, which quite frankly, is far better looking than this stunningly boring newbie. A tin of Heinz baked beans is probably more innovative, stylish and exciting.

I totally agree. This is what happens when you devote all your energy for the last 2 years into iPhone development.
post #78 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgraphix View Post

As a Graphic Designer you should be aware that glossy displays saturate colors. Not to mention that with the overpowered LED that they mentioned will totally screw any chance of having color accuracy when it comes to print design. STEVE JOBS IS RETARDED! PERIOD, EXCLAMATION!

You must not work at a very high level then. Your response isn't very professional.

You don't seem to know that you can turn down brightness. You can, and MUST, calibrate your display if you are to do any serious graphics, or color work.

You also seem to be the only one who thinks LED backlights are bad.
post #79 of 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by zzcoop View Post

I don't know about you, but the environment I work in has lights with "ON" AND "OFF" switches!

Well, in my office, like in most modern offices, it does not. There is a *central* switch. If I somehow manage to get access to it, I switch off the light for the *entire* floor. I know it's stupid, and telling my boss might change my work environment, but probably not in the way I want to...
post #80 of 384
That's it, for the first time in 13 years as a Mac user I hate or cant afford all of their computers. I hate, HATE glass screens and I Hate HATE Glossy Screens. Now I have no choice except a Mac Pro which I can't afford. I hope my 2 year old MacBook Pro last long enough for me to figure out how to build my own laptop.

Fuck You Apple, You just lost me. I now feel the pain of your bull shit locked system.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple releases new 15" MacBook Pro