Review: Apple's entry-level 2020 13-inch MacBook Pro is yesterday's tech for today's price...

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 21
Since the 2017 revision, the 13-inch MacBook Pro line has been a tale of two computers, and the 2020 refresh is no exception. But, there are some interesting "updates" in the new model, that puzzle us, and make us wonder why they were made.




For this review, we're specifically looking at the entry-level 2020 13-inch MacBook Pro with an 8th Gen 1.4GHz Core i5 processor that can Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz (the 2020 13-inch MacBook Pro can also be configured with an 8th Gen 1.7GHz quad-core Core i7 with a Turbo Boost speed of 4.5GHz). There is a giant difference between the MacBook Pro that has the eighth-generation Intel processor, versus the tenth generation. Enough of one, in fact, that they warrant a separate examination.

While we'll be briefly discussing the higher-end models today, we'll be reviewing the higher-end 10th generation model a bit later as there are sufficient differences.


Not the refresh that was expected

Many users had hoped to see Apple move to a 14-inch design for the smaller MacBook Pro, adopting a similar design aesthetic as Apple had for the 15.4-inch MacBook Pro that became the 16-inch. That hasn't -- yet -- come to pass and instead we got another iteration on the existing MacBook Pro design.

The refresh still has the gorgeous P3 wide color gamut Retina display, two Thunderbolt three ports on the entry-level model we're discussing here, a headphone jack, the contested Touch Bar, and the same 720p camera that has been maligned for years.






Many things, Apple chose not to update. Wi-Fi is still only 802.11ac and not Wi-Fi 6 that the iPhone first brought to Apple products. Most devices and routers don't support Wi-Fi 6 at the moment but for a machine destined to last for at least six years, Wi-Fi 6 should be included. At least it has Bluetooth 5, though.

The exterior looks the same, though it did increase in weight from 3.02 pounds to 3.11 pounds and thickness from .59 inches to .61 inches. This has everything to do with the new keyboard.

The 13.3-inch refresh doesn't belie a 14-inch redesign, it just isn't here yet. Recent rumors point to early 2021 as the timeframe for the updated aesthetic.

Apple's Magic Keyboard

Apple has updated the keyboard design. After several false starts, Apple's kicked its butterfly switch mechanisms to the curb in favor of Apple's latest version of a scissor-switch design.

The previous butterfly keyboard was divisive, to say the least, but it had few staunch advocates. Between it and the Touch Bar, we believe that Apple was trying to migrate users to a more iPad-like experience for typing on the Mac. It appears to have not gone that well.




We have spoken at some length on the updated Magic Keyboard again, and again. It still has a full millimeter of key travel. It still feels more responsive to type on and not all that different from the 16-inch MacBook Pro which also has Apple's Magic Keyboard embedded into its aluminum body.

We truly do like the feel of the updated keyboard. While the extra key travel at times makes us feel like we are slightly slower than on the previous design that we've been hammering away on for nearly five years, it is an improvement. It isn't enough to cause us to trip up while typing that often, and is enough to make the keys feel more responsive when depressed.




Aside from moving to the Magic Keyboard, other changes are also notable. Specifically, Apple has included a standalone physical escape key and also returned the inverted "T" design for the arrow keys. Depending on a user's work, these may be more impactful than a shift from the previous-gen keyboard.

Upgraded internals

We're just going to come out and say it -- we're not impressed with the lower-end of the 13-inch MacBook Pro. While the high-end 13-inch models were improved with the tenth-generation Intel processors, the entry-level units got stuck with the same eighth-generation chips as the 2019 models.

We see the impacts of this choice in performance. Our 1.4GHz quad-core 8th-generation Intel Core i5 processor model obviously scored the same as the 2019 model with the same chip. The entry 13-inch MacBook Pro (2019) scored 942 and 3913 on the Geekbench 5.1.1 single and multi-core tests while the 2020 model earned a 948 and a 4015.




In the Cinebench R20 benchmark, the fans barely spun up, not kicking in until two thirds through the test. They were audible, but not as loud as Apple's laptop fans used to be. Monitoring with Intel Power Gadget, the 13-inch MacBook Pro was able to maintain its clock speed without unnecessarily throttling down. In the test it scored 1588 points.

There is a degree of variance in these tests. While the 2020 13-inch MacBook Pro scores mildly higher, on average, they are identical for all intents and purposes.

Apple increased the storage capacities, thankfully. Doubling the capacities across the line. It now starts at 256GB and the low-end options can be upgraded to 2TB. Twice what they previously started at and were capped at. In terms of speed, we were averaging around 1250 megabytes per second for write speeds and 1600 megabytes per second for read speeds using the Blackmagic Disk Speed Test.

For comparison, the 16-inch MacBook Pro at just about any capacity will peak at 3150 megabytes per second read speeds, and about 2900 megabytes per second write speeds. The 2020 MacBook Air delivers about 1250 megabytes per second read, and 1000 megabytes per second write.

Memory too is the same as last year, starting at 8GB of 2133MHz LPDDR3. Graphics as well sticking around, relying on the Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645.

Entry-level 13-inch MacBook Pro versus high-end

This year, more than ever, there is a distinction between the entry-level units and the upper-level units. They are physically differentiated by the number of Thunderbolt 3 ports. The entry-level has two while the upper-end has four. As we've mentioned, we will review the higher-end machine soon, but to give you an idea of the differences, we wanted to touch on them quickly.




The high-end units have the aforementioned tenth generation Intel chips rather than the older eighth generation. They use faster 3733MHz LPDDR4X memory, start at 16GB, and can be updated to 32GB. Internal storage can be maxed out at 4TB.

Because of those tenth generation chips, the 2020 high-end model has better graphics than the 2019 refresh, and this 2020 low-end MacBook Pro. On the high end, a 6K display such as the Pro Display XDR can be driven, with this model only able to connect to a 5K external display.

Should you buy the entry-level 13-inch 2020 MacBook Pro?

This new 13-inch MacBook Pro for 2020 is... fine. It is, in a vacuum, a solid machine. But in the ladder that is Apple's portable Mac lineup, it is an extra rung.




The new MacBook Pro does perform a hair better than the MacBook Air, but not by much. If users actually want power, they should spring for the $1,799 model that adopts the tenth generation Intel chips, or even the 16-inch MacBook Pro which isn't much more than that $1799, street-priced. But, that is a conversation for another day.

The newest MacBook Air is a more enticing option versus the 13-inch MacBook Pro at the low-end. It is cheaper, slimmer, and more portable. Not to mention, the MacBook Air has those updated tenth generation Intel processors that the entry-level MacBook Pro lacks.

Users who are dead-set on picking up an entry-level MacBook Pro are buying it for a few reasons. Compared to the Air, it is very slightly more capable and does come with the Touch Bar -- but if the latter is a bonus varies very much user to user. Compared to the previous-gen MacBook Pro it also has beam-forming microphones, Dolby Atmos support on tiny speakers, as well as better value with the doubled internal storage capacities.

Those aren't inherently bad reasons to buy the machine, but the MacBook Air is a better value overall, and the high-end 13-inch MacBook Pro has more to offer.

If we weren't comparing this to the MacBook Air, if it existed in an ideal vacuum, we'd give this machine a four out of five for its design, feature set, and performance. But with the MacBook Air in such close proximity, occupying the same market segment, the entry-level Pro doesn't warrant more than a 3.5.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

New 2020 13" MacBook Pro deals

Apple's brand-new 2020 13-inch MacBook Pro is already on sale, with exclusive coupon discounts of up to $200 off, plus bonus savings on AppleCare.

If, after reading this 2020 13-inch MacBook Pro review, you want to pick up a system for yourself, check out the MacBook Pro deals in the AppleInsider 2020 13-inch MacBook Pro Price Guide.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 43
    kpomkpom Posts: 655member
    I think it is important to point out that the 8th generation chips will still significantly outperform the Air’s chips in CPU-intensive tasks since the Air uses lower power chips that max out around 12W, while the Pros will go up to 25W. That said, I agree they should have made the 15W 10th generation chips available. 
    macplusplusjdb8167GeorgeBMacwatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 43
    Fred257Fred257 Posts: 125member
    So, an old keyboard design that works along with last years processors and you can pay a bunch more for 32GB of RAM.  Apple knows it’s users well and this update is insufficient in many regards.
    mike54
  • Reply 3 of 43
    digitoldigitol Posts: 246member
    Most of Apples product line is yesterday’s technology at today’s or premium price. Wake up mac users and fellow apple fans. Problem is the alternatives still suck worse! So we can’t just use other stuff. The only effective way to make Apple better, and to do the right thing and give us truly an amazing hardware/software integrated experience is to keep your old stuff. Don’t buy, unless Apple makes it truly compelling (not hype) but truly compelling and. a special product. You will know when that moment happens for you. 
    Fred257entropysmaltzOfermike54
  • Reply 4 of 43
    digitol said:
    Most of Apples product line is yesterday’s technology at today’s or premium price. Wake up mac users and fellow apple fans. Problem is the alternatives still suck worse! So we can’t just use other stuff. The only effective way to make Apple better, and to do the right thing and give us truly an amazing hardware/software integrated experience is to keep your old stuff. Don’t buy, unless Apple makes it truly compelling (not hype) but truly compelling and. a special product. You will know when that moment happens for you. 
    No. Every Apple product I’ve kept lasted us many years. We still have a Mac Mini 2007 for some chores at home. Same for my iPad first retina (the one that lasted 6 months as the top model) that I use for my secondary kindle account. 
    But yes. Some products are expensive. In February I’ve sold a gorgeous IPad Pro 2019 with keyboard & pencil ‘cause there is not a huge difference with the entry level iPad (for our use cases). And I’m now probably going to sell our new Apple TV ‘cause the remote stinks (and the old Apple TV 3rd gen gives almost the same value). My sensation is that sometimes form is more important than value nowadays and flexibility (and value) are compromised. 
    Oferjdb8167digitolrandominternetperson
  • Reply 5 of 43
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,319administrator
    digitol said:
    Most of Apples product line is yesterday’s technology at today’s or premium price. Wake up mac users and fellow apple fans. Problem is the alternatives still suck worse! So we can’t just use other stuff. The only effective way to make Apple better, and to do the right thing and give us truly an amazing hardware/software integrated experience is to keep your old stuff. Don’t buy, unless Apple makes it truly compelling (not hype) but truly compelling and. a special product. You will know when that moment happens for you. 
    No. Every Apple product I’ve kept lasted us many years. We still have a Mac Mini 2007 for some chores at home. Same for my iPad first retina (the one that lasted 6 months as the top model) that I use for my secondary kindle account. 
    But yes. Some products are expensive. In February I’ve sold a gorgeous IPad Pro 2019 with keyboard & pencil ‘cause there is not a huge difference with the entry level iPad (for our use cases). And I’m now probably going to sell our new Apple TV ‘cause the remote stinks (and the old Apple TV 3rd gen gives almost the same value). My sensation is that sometimes form is more important than value nowadays and flexibility (and value) are compromised. 
    My suggestion? Keep the Apple TV, because the third gen is losing services as codecs advance, and get a different remote. The Apple aluminum one from the third generation works great.
    ivanhAppleSince1976chasmchiadigitolstompyFidonet127watto_cobra[Deleted User]
  • Reply 6 of 43
    ivanhivanh Posts: 597member
    Tell me which new Macs can run Treemaker 5.0.1. I’m still using my MBP 2011 because of the Treemaker and a handful of beautiful apps on High Sierra.  New is good for Apple and old is good for users.
    digitol
  • Reply 7 of 43
    entropysentropys Posts: 3,198member
    The base MBP is a marketing tool for a price point. Apple expects people wanting the grunt of a MBP to pony up the extra dollars for a four port model. Otherwise there is the MBA for productivity applications and school at a lower price.
    it isn’t intended to be a great computer so Apple can make money. It is a price point filler for marketing so Apple can make money. I really hate that, The company that once flew the private flag is once again becoming infested with corporate tossers with cookie cutter post grad quals. ”This has all happened before and will all happen again.”
    WarrenBuffduckhseanjdigitolmike54[Deleted User]
  • Reply 8 of 43
    maltzmaltz Posts: 282member
    Apple hardware has variously been 1 to 5 (Mac Mini/Pro) years behind the industry's cutting-edge for a over a decade, while selling at prices at least slightly higher than the latest-and-greatest.  The headline is accurate, but hopefully not a surprise to anyone.
    Ofermuthuk_vanalingamdigitolmike54[Deleted User]
  • Reply 9 of 43
    mrmojomrmojo Posts: 2member
    The Ars Technica review of the 2020 13" MBP was more objective in its assessment and it does not include the clickbait title of the AppleInsider review.

    It's a simple fact that many real-world Mac users do not need a lot of power in a portable Mac.  They aren't routinely editing 4k video or processing 46mp RAW image files with umpteen layers in Photoshop. Two Thunderbolt 3 ports is plenty because they never directly connect their Mac to anything.  The GPUs get the job done and if I ever want to plug-in a high res 27" or larger display, the Mac will handle it with aplomb.

    My 73 year old wife is a good example.  She uses her 2011 13" MBP for hours every day.  It's the usual Internet, messaging, email and word processing usage syndrome.  Replacing the stock mechanical drive several years ago with a Samsung 850 EVO 128GB SSD for around $70 has given her MBP years of additional life.  (The original cost for the MBP was just shy of $900 during an Amazon sale with a 20% discount.) The increase in speed was considerable and very noticeable.   The stock 8GB RAM is plenty for her uses. (I can always install 16GB in the improbable case that the need arises.)

    I haven't tried out the new MBP keyboard yet and I hope that it is a decent upgrade for typing vs. the 3 generations of the horrible butterfly keyboards.  We'll just have to wait and see if the new keyboard is more reliable. . .  With Apple's recent track-record with portable keyboards I wouldn't get a new MBP until others have done the public beta testing.

    Now that we have this update along with the 2020 Air there are actually some portable Macs that I would buy to replace the 2011 MBP.  I couldn't care less about 8th generation vs. 10th generation CPUs or the integrated GPU.  What we have are some reasonably priced Macs (the inevitable discounts will help and there are always Apple refurbs. . .) that have the Mac OS.  If you want a faster/more powerful Mac you can spend the extra $$$ that meets your needs or confers bragging rights.

    The ironic thing is that my wife is happy with her old MBP and she will likely use it until it or she finally croaks. . .  Of course, it's a Mac and like most of the Macs that I have owned since 1995, I always expected it to have a long, useful life, so I don't mind paying a reasonable premium for a Mac.  And anyway I have better things to do with my time than installing dozens of patches every month when Microsoft Patch Tuesday rolls around. . .
    AppleSince1976seanjrandominternetperson
  • Reply 10 of 43
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,319administrator
    mrmojo said:
    The Ars Technica review of the 2020 13" MBP was more objective in its assessment and it does not include the clickbait title of the AppleInsider review.

    It's a simple fact that many real-world Mac users do not need a lot of power in a portable Mac.  They aren't routinely editing 4k video or processing 46mp RAW image files with umpteen layers in Photoshop. Two Thunderbolt 3 ports is plenty because they never directly connect their Mac to anything.  The GPUs get the job done and if I ever want to plug-in a high res 27" or larger display, the Mac will handle it with aplomb.

    My 73 year old wife is a good example.  She uses her 2011 13" MBP for hours every day.  It's the usual Internet, messaging, email and word processing usage syndrome.  Replacing the stock mechanical drive several years ago with a Samsung 850 EVO 128GB SSD for around $70 has given her MBP years of additional life.  (The original cost for the MBP was just shy of $900 during an Amazon sale with a 20% discount.) The increase in speed was considerable and very noticeable.   The stock 8GB RAM is plenty for her uses. (I can always install 16GB in the improbable case that the need arises.)

    I haven't tried out the new MBP keyboard yet and I hope that it is a decent upgrade for typing vs. the 3 generations of the horrible butterfly keyboards.  We'll just have to wait and see if the new keyboard is more reliable. . .  With Apple's recent track-record with portable keyboards I wouldn't get a new MBP until others have done the public beta testing.

    Now that we have this update along with the 2020 Air there are actually some portable Macs that I would buy to replace the 2011 MBP.  I couldn't care less about 8th generation vs. 10th generation CPUs or the integrated GPU.  What we have are some reasonably priced Macs (the inevitable discounts will help and there are always Apple refurbs. . .) that have the Mac OS.  If you want a faster/more powerful Mac you can spend the extra $$$ that meets your needs or confers bragging rights.

    The ironic thing is that my wife is happy with her old MBP and she will likely use it until it or she finally croaks. . .  Of course, it's a Mac and like most of the Macs that I have owned since 1995, I always expected it to have a long, useful life, so I don't mind paying a reasonable premium for a Mac.  And anyway I have better things to do with my time than installing dozens of patches every month when Microsoft Patch Tuesday rolls around. . .
    They also didn’t review this model that this review is about. They reviewed the tenth generation one.

    if you read either review, this is apparent.
    edited May 2020 muthuk_vanalingamcorebeliefschasmentropysCloudTalkindigitolmike54uraharagatorguy[Deleted User]
  • Reply 11 of 43
    neilmneilm Posts: 917member
    Fred257 said:
    So, an old keyboard design that works along with last years processors and you can pay a bunch more for 32GB of RAM.  Apple knows it’s users well and this update is insufficient in many regards.
    The 32GB option is only available with the 10th gen processor model.
    urahara
  • Reply 12 of 43
    Review is inconsiderate of people who may be in the market for a MacBook and don't have the budget for the higher-end models.
    AppleSince1976macplusplusescargot
  • Reply 13 of 43
    KITAKITA Posts: 382member
    maltz said:
    Apple hardware has variously been 1 to 5 (Mac Mini/Pro) years behind the industry's cutting-edge for a over a decade, while selling at prices at least slightly higher than the latest-and-greatest.  The headline is accurate, but hopefully not a surprise to anyone.
    Yes. The Mac Pro especially is extremely overpriced and behind in performance for what you get.

    After Effects



    While Macs often perform fairly well, in After Effects there is simply no argument that a PC workstation is both faster and significantly less expensive. Compared to the $20k Mac Pro we tested, a $4k PC using an Intel Core i9 9900K and NVIDIA GeForce 2080 Ti ended up being about 5% faster overall, while a $5.5k PC using an AMD Threadripper 3960X is about 18% faster. Even compared to the much better priced iMac Pro, a PC that costs $1K less is going to be about 35% faster.

    What this means is that you can get the same or faster performance from a properly configured PC at a quarter (or less) the cost of a Mac Pro. With an application like After Effects where you can distribute renders across multiple machines using plugins like BG Render Max or RenderGarden, this isn't even about just getting similar performance at a lower price point. You can decrease your render times by 4-5x by purchasing multiple PCs and using network rendering to split up the work between each system. This only improves render performance (not live playback), but also gives you a ton of flexibility to have renders running on multiple machines while simultaneously working on other comps on your primary workstation.

    Or, you can simply save that $15k and spend it on a new car, home remodel, or a really, really fancy vacation.

    https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/After-Effects-performance-PC-Workstation-vs-Mac-Pro-2019-1718/

    Photoshop


    Since Photoshop is largely unable to take advantage of higher CPU core counts, there often isn't much of a difference between most modern mid/high-end CPUs - and that applies for a Mac just as much as it does for a PC workstation. Overall, if Photoshop is your primary concern, you can get about 10% higher performance from one of our $4,200 Puget Systems workstations with either an AMD Ryzen 3900X or Intel Core i9 9900K compared to the $19,599 Mac Pro (2019) we tested.

    Now, is 10% going to be a game-changer for your workflow? Probably not - it is right on the edge of what you might be able to notice in everyday work. The main takeaway here is not necessarily the performance alone, but rather how much you have to pay to get it. Even if you forget the Mac Pro and go with the much more reasonably priced iMac Pro, you are still likely to pay about twice the cost for equivalent performance.

    https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Photoshop-performance-PC-Workstation-vs-Mac-Pro-2019-1716/

    Premiere Pro


    Since there are so many reasons why either a Mac or a PC may be right for you, we generally try to focus on the straight performance results and not tell you which you should purchase. But in this case, the Mac Pro is so underwhelming that it is hard to not simply say "Don't buy a Mac Pro for Premiere Pro".

    This isn't like our Photoshop testing where the Mac Pro was only a hair slower than a PC, or our After Effects testing where a PC can easily be 20% faster at a much lower cost. This time, we are talking a PC being up to 50% faster on average for 1/3 the cost. We understand that there is a lot of benefit to staying in the Apple ecosystem if you also have an iPhone, MacBook, etc., but that is a huge amount of performance and cost savings you will be giving up to get a Mac Pro.

    By skipping the Mac Pro and going with a PC, you could easily save $14,000 which could be used for a host of other things to improve your workflow. Maybe you can finally upgrade your reference monitor to a really nice Eizo or Flanders Scientific model. Or use it as an opportunity to move to a central NAS storage unit from LumaForge. Or just take a couple months off to recharge. And this isn't taking into account the amount of money you might be able to earn due to the higher performance of a PC.

    https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Premiere-Pro-performance-PC-Workstation-vs-Mac-Pro-2019-1719/

    maltz[Deleted User]
  • Reply 14 of 43
    thttht Posts: 4,130member
    Er, forum software nuked my comment. On well.
    edited May 2020
  • Reply 15 of 43
    jdb8167jdb8167 Posts: 621member
    maltz said:
    Apple hardware has variously been 1 to 5 (Mac Mini/Pro) years behind the industry's cutting-edge for a over a decade, while selling at prices at least slightly higher than the latest-and-greatest.  The headline is accurate, but hopefully not a surprise to anyone.
    This is such a joke. The CPUs that Apple is using in the 10th Gen MacBook Pros are so new that they don't show up in Intel's online documentation. Apple is literally the first to use them. But sure, Apple is 1 to 5 years behind the industry.
    chasmseanjchiaurahararandominternetpersonmacplusplus
  • Reply 16 of 43
    Fred257 said:
    So, an old keyboard design that works along with last years processors and you can pay a bunch more for 32GB of RAM.  Apple knows it’s users well and this update is insufficient in many regards.
    IMHO, the "old keyboard design" is the only reason for this upgrade. They wanted to excise the nightmare of the butterfly keyboard from their corporate memory, and this was the quickest way to do it. And users also get a physical ESC key as a bonus...

    And it does offer a significant maximum RAM update, as well as an equally-significant maximum SSD update.

    And the reason for no 10th-gen. CPUs is obvious: This is still using the same cooling design as the previous model (again, to get it out the door faster (butterfly keyboard, remember?), and so there probably wasn't time to redesign the heatsinking/fan setup and do all the requisite testing, and likely their attempt to put a 10th gen CPU in there resulted in unacceptable throttling (the review said the new 13" MBP exhibited essentially no throttling), and so they just decided to dodge that bullet. Afterall, those who want a 10th gen CPU in a 13" should have no problem justifying the higher-end model.

    All in all, I think the review was unnecessarily harsh, and the editorializing exhibited in the Headline was actually fairly unprofessional.
    macplusplus
  • Reply 17 of 43
    chasmchasm Posts: 2,404member
    Fred257 said:
    So, an old keyboard design that works along with last years processors and you can pay a bunch more for 32GB of RAM.  Apple knows it’s users well and this update is insufficient in many regards.
    This is largely a mischaracterization. While the new Magic Keyboard design is scissor-based, that's where the comparison with any "old keyboard design" ends. It's a new design that combines the best thing about the "butterfly" keyboard design (larger keys -- I could go on and on about how this change improved my accuracy) with 1mm of travel (double that of the "butterfly," but half that of the "chiclet" predecessor). So it's most definitely not an "old design" -- especially if you look at it from the inside, this much is blindingly obvious.

    The "last year's processor" charge is only fair if you're strictly referring to the entry model, which sells for the exact same price as last year's model -- but doubles the storage (which used to be a big extra expense) and opens the door to 32GB of RAM (remember when people like you were screaming for this when you couldn't have it, but now its an overpriced rip-off? Oh, the joys of hypocrisy ...).

    As with all previous models, for most people there is a "sweet spot" that meets their particular needs without breaking the bank. I certainly would have liked to have seen a 14" screen, but other than that the two things you complain about (along with the doubled storage) are actually the key selling points and (depending on how you type) big improvements on last year's model for the same money. This machine's not for me (I have a 15-inch already, thanks), but I can see the value even in this one over a MacBook Air.
    chiathtrandominternetpersonescargot
  • Reply 18 of 43
    ivanh said:
    Tell me which new Macs can run Treemaker 5.0.1. I’m still using my MBP 2011 because of the Treemaker and a handful of beautiful apps on High Sierra.  New is good for Apple and old is good for users.
    It looks like any Mac can now build and install Treemaker (the Origami application, right?). It just takes a couple of Terminal commands...

    See this:

    http://macappstore.org/treemaker/

    Or, perhaps you could run the Universal Binary version under an Emulator:

    https://langorigami.com/article/treemaker/



  • Reply 19 of 43
    jdb8167 said:
    maltz said:
    Apple hardware has variously been 1 to 5 (Mac Mini/Pro) years behind the industry's cutting-edge for a over a decade, while selling at prices at least slightly higher than the latest-and-greatest.  The headline is accurate, but hopefully not a surprise to anyone.
    This is such a joke. The CPUs that Apple is using in the 10th Gen MacBook Pros are so new that they don't show up in Intel's online documentation. Apple is literally the first to use them. But sure, Apple is 1 to 5 years behind the industry.
    You’re assuming that slavishly following Intel (single-supplier strategy) keeps you on top of the curve.
    Mmhh...
    edited May 2020 maltz[Deleted User]
  • Reply 20 of 43
    mike54mike54 Posts: 480member
    I don't like that Apple has fractured they 'pro' 13in line up. There is alot of buyers who would not know the differences between the low and high end but I assume they would know about the cpu and ports as this is listed in the tech specs. Most reviewers, even most tech blogs, fail to mention the differences. Apple is deceiving its consumers resulting in them  not being honest. The buyers really have to do their homework before purchasing.
    The higher end 13in's have: better speakers, better graphics, 2 fans, and of course, 10th gen cpu's, 4 ports,

Sign In or Register to comment.