Apple releases new Penryn-based Mac Pro

Xisiqomelir · Post by **Xisiqomelir** » 2008-01-10 04:11pm

Durandal wrote:Yes, and it's twice as thick, weighs 4 pounds more, is ugly as fuck and has a pathetic battery life of 56 minutes compared to the almost 6 hours you can get from the MacBook Pro. (The battery life on that laptop is so bad that Dell doesn't even offer an estimate on their page. Battery life isn't even mentioned.) And I don't even want to know how fast the thing fries an egg or how easily the dog confuses it with a vacuum when firing all cylinders.

I don't think people appreciate how important engineering and design are on a laptop. Towers can be as gargantuan and hideous as they please because you can hide them under a desk, but laptops actually have to be carried around and looked at all the time.

InnocentBystander · Post by **InnocentBystander** » 2008-01-10 05:02pm

Xisiqomelir wrote:
Durandal wrote:Yes, and it's twice as thick, weighs 4 pounds more, is ugly as fuck and has a pathetic battery life of 56 minutes compared to the almost 6 hours you can get from the MacBook Pro. (The battery life on that laptop is so bad that Dell doesn't even offer an estimate on their page. Battery life isn't even mentioned.) And I don't even want to know how fast the thing fries an egg or how easily the dog confuses it with a vacuum when firing all cylinders.
I don't think people appreciate how important engineering and design are on a laptop. Towers can be as gargantuan and hideous as they please because you can hide them under a desk, but laptops actually have to be carried around and looked at all the time.

I eagerly await apple's entry into the SLI laptop arena.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2008-01-10 05:09pm

InnocentBystander wrote:I like how Lenovo's "Help Me Decide" thing for the graphics card is out of date and only shows ATI graphics solutions. Its very classy.

IBM/Lenovo have a long history of not updating their "help me decide" popup windows. It gets annoying, though most people buying a ThinkPad know exactly what they want.

Fingolfin_Noldor · Post by **Fingolfin_Noldor** » 2008-01-10 05:10pm

InnocentBystander wrote:
Xisiqomelir wrote:
Durandal wrote:Yes, and it's twice as thick, weighs 4 pounds more, is ugly as fuck and has a pathetic battery life of 56 minutes compared to the almost 6 hours you can get from the MacBook Pro. (The battery life on that laptop is so bad that Dell doesn't even offer an estimate on their page. Battery life isn't even mentioned.) And I don't even want to know how fast the thing fries an egg or how easily the dog confuses it with a vacuum when firing all cylinders.
I don't think people appreciate how important engineering and design are on a laptop. Towers can be as gargantuan and hideous as they please because you can hide them under a desk, but laptops actually have to be carried around and looked at all the time.
I eagerly await apple's entry into the SLI laptop arena.

Sarcasm aside, what incentive does Apple have to indulge gamers? Or only smart ass comments?

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2008-01-10 09:21pm

Beowulf wrote:
Definitely high. An XPS M1330 with same spec processor is generally hardware identical to the Macbook, in terms of specs, and is a good $50 cheaper. It's a little thicker, but it's also kinda wedge shaped. Most of the iLife equivalent software is either generally useless for most people, or is already included with Vista. I think they only thing you actually miss is the tilt sensor. Whoo! Also, you get the option of upgrading parts, like getting a LED backlight for the screen, which makes the entire laptop thinner. Or getting a better video card (which still sucks, but hey).

Identical hardware at $50 less, and the MacBook's got a higher-res VGA camera, the tilt sensor, a little thinner, and a better software package. Additionally, the MacBook has far better battery life; over 30%, according to ZDNet:

The M1330 ran for 2 hours, 23 minutes on our DVD battery drain test, using the included six-cell battery. That's not bad, but nearly an hour less than the latest 13-inch MacBook, a testament to Apple's emphasis on battery life.

$50 is not a deal breaker. I hardly see the massive markup most are claiming.

Also, you claim that the iLife software is "either generally useless" or already included with Vista. Pass around whatever you're smoking- iLife blows away anything bundled with Vista. iMovie runs circles around Windows Movie Maker, iPhoto is a lot more polished than Windows Photo Gallery, iDVD beats Vista's DVD creator, GarageBand has no equivalent, etc.

The MacBook is pretty fairly priced compared to Dell. Much better battery, slightly higher res camera, slightly thinner, tilt/shock sensor on hard drive, and a better software package for $50 doesn't seem like a massive markup to me.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2008-01-10 11:32pm

It's not the Macbook that is overpriced, it's the Macbook Pro. You can get the Dell XPS M1530 with the EXACT SAME load out (except that the Dell has 3GB of memory to the MBP's 2GB) for $1700. And this isn't some POS dell grey box, this is the XPS model that is nice and thin and is actually ATTRACTIVE looking. My mom has one of these and it even has the damn slot loading DVD drive, and a 2MP webcam to boot.

That's a $700 price premium for the Macbook Pro and the Dell comes better equipped in an equivalently attractive package.

Praxis wrote:Also, you claim that the iLife software is "either generally useless" or already included with Vista. Pass around whatever you're smoking- iLife blows away anything bundled with Vista. iMovie runs circles around Windows Movie Maker, iPhoto is a lot more polished than Windows Photo Gallery, iDVD beats Vista's DVD creator, GarageBand has no equivalent, etc.

I'm not going to disagree that iLife is superior to the standard Vista stuff, but Moviemaker and DVD Maker have improved considerably over the last few years. You might want to take a second look because I actually prefer MovieMaker to iMovie and that was before the dreaded iLife '08 version.

EDIT: In regards to the Mac Pro, it's actually not a badly priced box, but it's also not a niche with a lot of competition. Hybrid workstation boxes is what the high end Apple desktops have always been about and they don't really have anything comparable on the PC side. Sure you can loadout a workstation class machine this way, but that's not the same market and they often include a lot of stuff you don't need.

Apple has always been about offering a few high end features for a price premium and in those areas they do very well. The iMac has the design on its side, the Macbook competes in a field that is already boutique, and the Mac Pro is a hybrid desktop/workstation so Apple does quite well.

The problem with the Macbook Pro is that Apple has little justification to be charging premium prices since 15" laptops is a VERY crowded market and there are plenty of good laptops in this field for much less money.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2008-01-11 01:45am

atg wrote:Which is why I mentioned that a similar spec'd machine from Dell (or Acer, etc), including in battery life and size, will be roughly half the price. So yeah, we can compare those details if you want.

You never mentioned anything about battery life in your post. What am I, psychic?

My personal experience has shown that the MacBooks and MacBook Pros run hotter than an equivalent Acer laptop (I compare to Acer here because they're the ones I have most day to day experience with other than Apples). I've had to have my own MacBook repaired twice due to overheating issues and it's pretty well known as far as I'm aware that the first gen Intel MacBooks (the Core Duo based ones as opposed to the Core 2) have had major heat (to the point where the plastic permanently dis-colours) and case cracking problems. So I don't really consider Apple's supposedly infallible designs to be worth double the price either.

No one said they were infallible. Please don't strawmander me again.

The problem with my own MacBook, and as mentioned appears to be common with the MacBooks (though not the Pros as far as I'm aware), was that as the CPU heatsink expands slightly as it heats it burns though an internal wire, shorting the system. Evidence of great design there?

That was a problem in the first generation of MacBooks. I never claimed that Apple's designs were perfect or infallible, but you can't deny that they spend a lot more time and effort on their designs than Dell or Acer does.

I don't specifically have anything against Apple, as mentioned I personally own a MacBook, but is OSX, the only real difference between a PC-Laptop and an Apple laptop, really worth paying double for on a MacBook Pro as opposed to a similar spec'd Acer/Dell/HP/whatever?

My cursory specs show a $300-$400 premium. "Twice as much" is a bit of an exaggeration.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2008-01-11 02:02am

The Kernel wrote:It's not the Macbook that is overpriced, it's the Macbook Pro. You can get the Dell XPS M1530 with the EXACT SAME load out (except that the Dell has 3GB of memory to the MBP's 2GB) for $1700. And this isn't some POS dell grey box, this is the XPS model that is nice and thin and is actually ATTRACTIVE looking. My mom has one of these and it even has the damn slot loading DVD drive, and a 2MP webcam to boot.

I will not disagree with that.

I advocate that the MacBook and Mac Pro are well priced, and the iMac is well priced for an all-in-one.

I won't deny that there's a gaping hole in Apple's lineup (a tower) and that the MBP is a bit overpriced and so is the Mac Mini.

The problem with my own MacBook, and as mentioned appears to be common with the MacBooks (though not the Pros as far as I'm aware), was that as the CPU heatsink expands slightly as it heats it burns though an internal wire, shorting the system. Evidence of great design there?

Actually, I have the MacBook with that problem. It happened a number of times to me, especially when booted in Windows running games. It doesn't burn through an internal wire, it touches a circuit and shorts...and just turns off. Apple released a firmware update so that the fans kick on earlier, and I haven't had it happen since. That was half a year ago.

atg · Post by **atg** » 2008-01-11 07:18am

Durandal wrote:
My personal experience has shown that the MacBooks and MacBook Pros run hotter than an equivalent Acer laptop (I compare to Acer here because they're the ones I have most day to day experience with other than Apples). I've had to have my own MacBook repaired twice due to overheating issues and it's pretty well known as far as I'm aware that the first gen Intel MacBooks (the Core Duo based ones as opposed to the Core 2) have had major heat (to the point where the plastic permanently dis-colours) and case cracking problems. So I don't really consider Apple's supposedly infallible designs to be worth double the price either.
No one said they were infallible. Please don't strawmander me again.

Appologies on that. It was meant to be more a reference to the fanbois for whom Apple design is the be all and end all, absolutely perfect. I put that poorly so again appologies on that.

Durandal wrote:
I don't specifically have anything against Apple, as mentioned I personally own a MacBook, but is OSX, the only real difference between a PC-Laptop and an Apple laptop, really worth paying double for on a MacBook Pro as opposed to a similar spec'd Acer/Dell/HP/whatever?
My cursory specs show a $300-$400 premium. "Twice as much" is a bit of an exaggeration.

There may be a difference between the prices for Australia compared to what your seeing.
A look at Australian Dell website show that the XPS M1530 range (not actually shown on that link), which seems roughly similar to the 15" MacBook Pro are between $500~$1000 cheaper.
The Inspiron 1720, when configured with the same 2.4Ghz CPU, works out to be $2,074.60, which is approx $1600 cheaper than our price for the 15" MacBook, and is almost half the price of the 17" MacBook (though admittedly the 17" MacBook's screen res is superior at 1680x1050 as compared to the 1440x900 of the Dell).

The Acer resellers guide I've got at work (their website seems to be showing the older model range for some reason) shows most of their comparable laptops to be in the AUD$1700~AUD$2400 range.

Unless I'm missing something, and please say so if I am, then I don't think the half price claim I made was much of an exaggeration.

InnocentBystander · Post by **InnocentBystander** » 2008-01-11 12:19pm

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:
InnocentBystander wrote:
Xisiqomelir wrote: I don't think people appreciate how important engineering and design are on a laptop. Towers can be as gargantuan and hideous as they please because you can hide them under a desk, but laptops actually have to be carried around and looked at all the time.
I eagerly await apple's entry into the SLI laptop arena.
Sarcasm aside, what incentive does Apple have to indulge gamers? Or only smart ass comments?

You're comparing a normal laptop (MBP) to a machine that has more hardware in it than most home computers. Most of the HPs, Dells and Acers are (in my opinion) all fairly well designed. If apple can engineer a dual graphics notebook with a 6 hour battery life that weighs less than 10 pounds, kudos. Don't peg a technological/economic constraint as HP/Dell/Acer unable to recognize that a system needs to look good too. Frankly, I think the Dell XPS machines and the HP entertainment lineup looks just as good as the MacBook/Pros.

Durandal wrote:My cursory specs show a $300-$400 premium. "Twice as much" is a bit of an exaggeration.

XPS @ 2.4 ghz - $1750 - Superior Screen, More Ram, 3 Year Warranty, Superior Battery Life (I think - my Vostro has the 9 cell and it can go around 8 hours)
MBP @ 2.4 ghz - $2500

I will admit, however, that the Dell website is very crafty and underhanded. If you try and configure an XPS to be equal to the $2000 MBP it costs the same price as if you try and configure one to exceed the $2500 MBP. This is bad and evil, I agree. However you're still getting a machine for significantly less money ($300 is nothing to spit at) no matter how you look at it.

I'd just like to point out that I dislike battery reviews. What you're doing with the computer while its on battery has a major impact on how long the battery will hold out. There are about a million factors that can have a big impact on battery life. My Vostro, for example, can get about 8 hours when the brightness isn't quite at minimum, I'm using mostly word and IE, and am running the wireless. When I run games without wireless and the brightness on full, I get 3 or 4 hours, not quite as impressive. Does a MBP get 6 hours of playing WoW, or does it get 6 hours of web surfing and email?

Mobius · Post by **Mobius** » 2008-01-11 01:11pm

My experience with Apple hardware ( a mac mini that died 4 times in the spawn of 5months) and Customer Services (they lost the bloody machine!) is so horrible that i'll never buy anything from them again.
Especially when i had the opportunity to test the thinkpad customer care: i spilled coffee on keyboard; a few keys went missing. A phone call later, they sent a replacement keyboard. it arrived the following morning, 20mminutes late, the machine was operational like day one.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2008-01-12 01:04am

atg wrote:There may be a difference between the prices for Australia compared to what your seeing.
A look at Australian Dell website show that the XPS M1530 range (not actually shown on that link), which seems roughly similar to the 15" MacBook Pro are between $500~$1000 cheaper.
The Inspiron 1720, when configured with the same 2.4Ghz CPU, works out to be $2,074.60, which is approx $1600 cheaper than our price for the 15" MacBook, and is almost half the price of the 17" MacBook (though admittedly the 17" MacBook's screen res is superior at 1680x1050 as compared to the 1440x900 of the Dell).

That's not totally unbelievable. Apple's overseas prices are typically monstrous compared to US prices.

The Grim Squeaker · Post by **The Grim Squeaker** » 2008-01-12 02:17am

Durandal wrote:
atg wrote:There may be a difference between the prices for Australia compared to what your seeing.
A look at Australian Dell website show that the XPS M1530 range (not actually shown on that link), which seems roughly similar to the 15" MacBook Pro are between $500~$1000 cheaper.
The Inspiron 1720, when configured with the same 2.4Ghz CPU, works out to be $2,074.60, which is approx $1600 cheaper than our price for the 15" MacBook, and is almost half the price of the 17" MacBook (though admittedly the 17" MacBook's screen res is superior at 1680x1050 as compared to the 1440x900 of the Dell).
That's not totally unbelievable. Apple's overseas prices are typically monstrous compared to US prices.

Sounds reasonable, prices in the UK are a bit higher, but here in Israel the premium is usually around 80-110% (And the warranty is terrible).
There's a reason my ipod is from the US

Ypoknons · Post by **Ypoknons** » 2008-01-12 08:48am

The Kernel wrote:The problem with the Macbook Pro is that Apple has little justification to be charging premium prices since 15" laptops is a VERY crowded market and there are plenty of good laptops in this field for much less money.

The screen is a lot brighter - about twice, I think - and it's as bright as a media center laptop. It's really a revolution when watching movies, less so when playing games. It's also got more aluminum (dents, but doesn't fade like plastic I think) and its half a pound lighter. It also comes with an Apple Remote.

True, the M1530 has other advantages - Blu-ray, 3G data options, price - but for me, that screen matters a lot. Does the M1530 even have a matte option?

Source for screen brightness: Notebookcheck

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2008-01-12 05:05pm

Ypoknons wrote:
The Kernel wrote:The problem with the Macbook Pro is that Apple has little justification to be charging premium prices since 15" laptops is a VERY crowded market and there are plenty of good laptops in this field for much less money.
The screen is a lot brighter - about twice, I think - and it's as bright as a media center laptop. It's really a revolution when watching movies, less so when playing games. It's also got more aluminum (dents, but doesn't fade like plastic I think) and its half a pound lighter. It also comes with an Apple Remote.

True, the M1530 has other advantages - Blu-ray, 3G data options, price - but for me, that screen matters a lot. Does the M1530 even have a matte option?

Source for screen brightness: Notebookcheck

Sorry, but BULLSHIT. I have the new Macbook Pro LED backlit display and it's exactly the same fucking thing as a regular florescent LCD, the only difference is that it reaches full brightness a lot quicker when turned off and it consumes less battery life.

The LED backlit display is a nice feature (and Dell includes it on the 13-series XPS notebooks), but its not all that special.

Ypoknons · Post by **Ypoknons** » 2008-01-12 09:21pm

The Kernel wrote:Sorry, but BULLSHIT. I have the new Macbook Pro LED backlit display and it's exactly the same fucking thing as a regular florescent LCD, the only difference is that it reaches full brightness a lot quicker when turned off and it consumes less battery life.

The LED backlit display is a nice feature (and Dell includes it on the 13-series XPS notebooks), but its not all that special.

Bullshit right back to you. I've never really used an XPS, to be honest, but reading my experience comparing a MBP and an A8J squares exactly with the figures in this MBP review and this A8J review. I have both subjective and objective figures - what's your refutation?

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2008-01-13 12:26am

Ypoknons wrote:
The Kernel wrote:Sorry, but BULLSHIT. I have the new Macbook Pro LED backlit display and it's exactly the same fucking thing as a regular florescent LCD, the only difference is that it reaches full brightness a lot quicker when turned off and it consumes less battery life.

The LED backlit display is a nice feature (and Dell includes it on the 13-series XPS notebooks), but its not all that special.
Bullshit right back to you. I've never really used an XPS, to be honest, but reading my experience comparing a MBP and an A8J squares exactly with the figures in this MBP review and this A8J review. I have both subjective and objective figures - what's your refutation?

I have both computers moron; I've owned the MBP since a week after the LED model and the XPS for at least four months. I've looked at these displays side-by-side, the brightness is not significantly different between the two.

Also, from CNET's review:

Cnet wrote:Aside from faster processors and new chipset, more memory and larger hard drives, the big change to the 15-inch MacBook Pro is its LED-backlit display, similar to those making their way into new Sony and Toshiba laptops. Apple doesn't claim any difference in image quality or screen brightness (the new screens feature the same 1,440x900 native resolution as that of the previous 15-inch models), and based on anecdotal observation, we'd agree. Instead, Apple touts the new display's energy efficiency (and being mercury-free), and our battery drain tests show a marked improvement to battery life.

And also, about your review of the XPS M1530 from Notebookcheck? Read the review a bit close you idiot:

TrueLife refers to a reflecting surface, which unfortunately sometimes even causes annoying reflections indoors. We will discuss this aspect a little later. The maximum resolution of the WXGA display of 1280x800 pixels is currently standard. Those you would like to work with a number of applications at the same time, might need a bigger desktop and might be better off with a finer resolution.

They are using the low end 1280x800 screen, not the optional 1440x900 or 1680x1050 screens. That is NOT the screen I quote for the $700 delta between the MBP and the XPS 1530, I quoted the LED display. So the displays are fucking IDENTICAL.

Despite this, LED screens do not have any current brightness advantage, although they should in theory.

Ypoknons · Post by **Ypoknons** » 2008-01-13 12:33am

The Kernel wrote:I have both computers moron; I've owned the MBP since a week after the LED model and the XPS for at least four months. I've looked at these displays side-by-side, the brightness is not significantly different between the two.

Furthermore, I'll admit I haven't seen a XPS but then I've had laptop with a similar brightness rating and feel the MBP is significantly brighter. This argument is boiling down to "no, I can't see anything" and "yes, I can." How can I believe you over a magazine with a testing method and quantitative measures?

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2008-01-13 12:34am

Ypoknons wrote:
The Kernel wrote:I have both computers moron; I've owned the MBP since a week after the LED model and the XPS for at least four months. I've looked at these displays side-by-side, the brightness is not significantly different between the two.
Furthermore, I'll admit I haven't seen a XPS but then I've had laptop with a similar brightness rating and feel the MBP is significantly brighter. This argument is boiling down to "no, I can't see anything" and "yes, I can." How can I believe you over a magazine with a testing method and quantitative measures?

Your own magazine agrees with me, you just have to read it closely.

Ypoknons · Post by **Ypoknons** » 2008-01-13 12:42am

The Kernel wrote:Despite this, LED screens do not have any current brightness advantage, although they should in theory.

I never said they'd intrinsically have any - just that this particular Apple screen is bright. How do you know the M1530 has the exactly same screen as the MBP? Just because they have the same resolution and size? Plenty of screens might exist.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2008-01-13 12:46am

Ypoknons wrote:
The Kernel wrote:Despite this, LED screens do not have any current brightness advantage, although they should in theory.
I never said they'd intrinsically have any - just that this particular Apple screen is bright. How do you know the M1530 has the exactly same screen as the MBP? Just because they have the same resolution and size? Plenty of screens might exist.

Alright pigfucker, you made the claim that the MBP has an advantage in brightness. It's time for you to prove it, and your previous links have been completely discredited.

Either prove it or shut the fuck up.

Ypoknons · Post by **Ypoknons** » 2008-01-13 12:52am

The Kernel wrote:Alright pigfucker, you made the claim that the MBP has an advantage in brightness. It's time for you to prove it, and your previous links have been completely discredited.

I'll concede I can't prove the MBP is brighter than the M1530. I assumed that the (edit - LED) M1330 and the M1530 have identically bright screens, and the M1330 is not as bright as the MBP. My mistake. I never asked you to refer to the M1530 review - I knew that was not the LED screen.

1138 · Post by **1138** » 2008-01-15 03:27am

Praxis wrote:Additionally, the MacBook has far better battery life; over 30%, according to ZDNet:
The M1330 ran for 2 hours, 23 minutes on our DVD battery drain test, using the included six-cell battery. That's not bad, but nearly an hour less than the latest 13-inch MacBook, a testament to Apple's emphasis on battery life.

If you are referring to: http://review.zdnet.com/laptops/dell-xp ... 65545.html

That's not actually a fair comparison. The Macbook is using integrated graphics, whereas the M1330 being tested there had a Geforce 8400M. The Geforce takes off up to 40 to 50 minutes of battery life vs. the integrated chip, if I remember correctly.