Apple releases new 15" MacBook Pro

2456720

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 383
    hattighattig Posts: 860member
    Good Stuff



    1. Machining Process: These should hopefully create MacBooks and MacBook Pros that last longer, and have fewer defects (cracking case edges, etc).



    2. Glass Touchpad with no buttons and multitouch++: The more area for mousing the better, I already single and double tap on my iBook's touchpad which has been awesome and one of the best features, the button is redundant and takes away space.



    3. MacBook is really a 13.3" MacBook Pro: Same process, same hardware sans Firewire and discrete graphics (due to size constraints).



    4. Mini DisplayPort: A single, common, display connector across all of Apple's computer lines.



    5. Decent graphics, even in the MacBook and MacBook Air. This is a major plus against other Air competitors with their Intel graphics.



    So So Stuff



    1. New 24" display. I am sure this display is awesome, but $899 makes it a difficult choice over other 24" displays, even excluding the cheap TN displays and only considering the decent panels.



    Bad Stuff



    1. Plastic MacBook is $999 - still very high compared to the rest of the market.



    2. The prices in general seem too high, even if this is due to the construction process that will give you a year or two more use in general.



    3. No 17" MacBook Pro details, even if one is forthcoming.



    4. Glossy displays. I know this is a little subjective, and I know they make the systems look awesome, but for actual work it can be a hassle.
  • Reply 22 of 383
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,839member
    The new MBP is fine, except for the black keyboard. That's just plain ugly.
  • Reply 23 of 383
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    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.



    Expect a lot a screen glare covers for sale.
  • Reply 24 of 383
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AHeneen View Post


    "Q: Are you going to have matte screens or just go with glossy glass ones? How about with reflection problems?

    A: Just glass, and we’re going to compensate for the reflection from pushing more light through the back. And, since these are notebooks, you can position it any way you want."



    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.



    I can't say anything for this version, but the previous MBP screens did have a mild rayleigh antireflective coating. It's not the aggressive kind that you might see as a green, blue or purple tinge on reflections, but it is there. Glossy vs. matte is really all a trade-off, you either see reflections or you get it diffuse where incident light washes out the display.



    I really don't understand this push to increase brightness on screens though, is there a glaucoma epidemic? Usually I can see things just fine with brightness set to a minimum.
  • Reply 25 of 383
    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 teach private computer lessons which usually consist of a student and me sitting side by side with both our laptops on the table in front of us. My office has large windows and lots of natural light, which I enjoy very much. However, in every lesson where the student has a glossy screen PC laptop, I find myself constantly squirming and shifting in my seat, craning my neck trying to read the student's screen. The students often complain about not being able to read their own screens, too. The problem is even more dramatic when I glance over at my matte-screen MacBook Pro and can read everything with no difficulty.



    Maybe Apple can do this better, but personally I'm glad I bought a new machine earlier this year and don't need to buy one of these glass things.



    By the way, I also own a white MacBook with the new style keyboard and I prefer the old style keyboard on my MBP. I can't get used to those squared-off keys on the MB.
  • Reply 26 of 383
    I am mostly disappointed. While I did not buy into most of the wild rumors that we floating around I still expected more than Apple gave today.



    The restructuring is a great thing.

    The trackpad is a cool change, but nothing groundbreaking.

    I'm not familiar enough with graphics to know how important the new cards all are.



    Letdowns:

    No processor upgrade?? Not even a little bit of speed? Maybe just another .1 ghz! GEEZ!

    Barely any hard drive space increase.

    A wimpy price drop.

    RAM still the SAME??? ugh.

    No increase of speed on the Superdrive?

    No thinner/lighter??

    LESS options amongst models?? When will Apple learn that the public likes OPTIONS?



    It just really disappointed me that the only things new are the infrastructure, video cards, and some flashy features.



    As a consumer who has been holding out a bit for the new models to purchase the computer we will use for the next several years I must say I'm disappointed.

    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.
  • Reply 27 of 383
    Ah, the kvetching has begun in earnest, I see........
  • Reply 28 of 383
    irelandireland Posts: 17,798member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post


    I too am amazed that they're carving the MacBook and MacBook Pro cases as per the rumors. To me, I can't imagine this process being anything but expensive. The carved out metal cannot be used again unless extracted from the liquid, dried, cleaned, and melted back into a block.



    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.
  • Reply 29 of 383
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    The close-ups of the case do look awesome though - shows the fineness and pinpoint accuracy of their machining process. They will look really great beside a plastic effort from a competing manufacturer.
  • Reply 30 of 383
    So the new Apple Cinema Displays only work on the new Macbook, Macbook Pros and the Macbook Air?



    For them to work on any of the other systems, we'll have to wait for a newer update to come out for them to work with it and they won't work at all with any of the older systems?
  • Reply 31 of 383
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,540member
    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.



    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.



    Matt screens don't reflect less. They spread the reflection over a larger part of the screen. Supposedly, this results in a lower level of reflection, even though it's larger in area. In reality, it's no better. I find it harder to position a matte monitor than a glossy one, because the matter surface reflects from more angles than does a glossy one.



    You really have to try it.



    And the glossy surface really does deliver better, more saturated colors, and better blacks. much better when working with graphics, type and color than matter screens.



    In the profession, years ago, we groaned when they stopped making glossy screens except for the very high end (unaffordable to most) Barco's and others.
  • Reply 32 of 383
    irelandireland Posts: 17,798member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by majortom1981 View Post


    I am guessing most of you who agree with steve jobs have lcd panel tvs at home. I still have a glass crt hdtv and glass makes the refelction even worse.(over glossy plastic panels).



    Also wouldnt glass screen break easier?



    I have a few friends was glass covered Plasmas, the difference is the glass is dipped to diffuse reflection like your CRT is not. You get what you pay for biatch!
  • Reply 33 of 383
    virgil-tb2virgil-tb2 Posts: 1,416member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by webhead View Post


    The glossy displays are so much better. I'm a graphic designer and a pro photographer and I love the increased sharpness and colour quality the glossy displays give and I can't understand what so many people don't see that. The picture quality is better on a glossy display, ...



    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.
  • Reply 34 of 383
    I'm disappointed with the pro. The macbook on the other hand looks good!
  • Reply 35 of 383
    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.



    Matt screens don't reflect less. They spread the reflection over a larger part of the screen. Supposedly, this results in a lower level of reflection, even though it's larger in area. In reality, it's no better. I find it harder to position a matte monitor than a glossy one, because the matter surface reflects from more angles than does a glossy one.



    You really have to try it.



    And the glossy surface really does deliver better, more saturated colors, and better blacks. much better when working with graphics, type and color than matter screens.



    In the profession, years ago, we groaned when they stopped making glossy screens except for the very high end (unaffordable to most) Barco's and others.



    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!
  • Reply 36 of 383
    irelandireland Posts: 17,798member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kim kap sol;


    Anyway, the new MacBooks seem great.



    But what was Apple smoking when they designed the new display. I had a feeling that an iSight would be built-in if a new display was ever released. But speakers!?



    They read my mind. The iSight and speakers are also for Mac Pro owners, don't forget.
  • Reply 37 of 383
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by webhead View Post


    The glossy displays are so much better. I'm a graphic designer and a pro photographer and I love the increased sharpness and colour quality the glossy displays give and I can't understand what so many people don't see that. The picture quality is better on a glossy display, and that should be the most important aspect of any display. I can't hardly look at matt displays anymore because all my photos look mushy and out of focus. having said that, if the glossy glass on the new laptops is as easy to remove as on the imac, what not create an industry for replacing the glossy glass for a matt glass instead of whining about it so much?



    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!
  • Reply 38 of 383
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    Agreed- how exactly do you move it when you don't have the option to turn off the lights at a public place???



    I've never run into ANY lighting glare issue that couldn't be rectified by simply tilting the display a mere quarter of an inch or so.



    Where do you people work, anyway?
  • Reply 38 of 383
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,358moderator
    Steve: "A few of our customers prefer matte screens, but a vast majority (capital "V" on Vast) prefer glass because of brighter colors, etc."



    This 'minority' is giving you a capital "V" right now. So that's Apple's mid-range desktop off my ever buying again in future list and their entire new laptop range. Ok so we're down to the Mac Pro and Mini. Two ways they can screw those up: never update the Mini (good going so far), only update the Mac Pro every year (likewise).



    Chalk up another disappointing event. Running out of chalk.



    What I like is how he sells up the fact that you can now get a $1299 Macbook which you used to have to pay $1999 for = 35% off. Not really because that says the only thing we were paying for is the GPU and metal, which everybody considered to be a rip-off price difference anyway.



    So if this is the case Steve, what is the difference between the £1299 MB and the $1999 MBP now? Only 100% GPU increase and yet we are paying $700. Before it was $900 for 1000% increase. This makes the MBP more a rip-off than ever and like someone said will push people down to the mid-range because why would you pay so much more?



    Oh but you already had that board meeting and went the usual route of crippling the low end - this time by removing firewire so people have no choice but to upgrade.



    Anybody looking for a new laptop, I suggest you check out the refurb matte MBPs because they are going to fly out the refurb store.
  • Reply 40 of 383
    cory bauercory bauer Posts: 1,286member
    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.