By James DunmorePosted Monday 20th July 2009 13:12 GMT
Am I alone in wanting a 15inch mac book - not a pro, just a mac book. The normal mac book spec would be fine for my needs, but the largest is 13inch - I can't be the only one who doesn't want all the features of a pro, but does want a 15/17inch screen?!
By Alastair 7Posted Monday 20th July 2009 16:24 GMT
And it's bloody awesome. I was originally looking at the 15" Pro model, but then the 13" came out- more portable, and cheap enough that I could afford to buy an external (22") monitor with the money I saved. So, even better on the desk and even better on the road. Thumbs up.
Also, I bought the base model (2GB RAM, 160GB HDD) then upgraded them to 4GB and 500GB 7200rpm with stuff I bought separately- far, far cheaper and really not very difficult to do once you get the right ruddy screwdriver to get into the thing.
Edward above is right- it comes with a mini Display Port, so you need an adapter to connect to DVI. But the old ones needed a mini-DVI to DVI adapter anyway, I've still never seen a monitor with an actual mini-DVI connection...
By Bad BeaverPosted Monday 20th July 2009 17:32 GMT
While I am partial about the built-in battery, the return of FireWire gets this model back into purchase territory. I was mighty miffed that there suddenly was nothing decent to replace the 12" G4 once it bites the dust, and I was not alone. The Macbook is fine if you're on a budget, but if it is your main machine and actually gets handled a lot, you will always appreciate the Pro line.
By Anonymous CowardPosted Monday 20th July 2009 18:21 GMT
Thing that disappoints me most is to get 1920x1200 you have to get a 17" Apple laptop. Several vendors offer this resolution at 15" and I find the dot pitch to be easy on the eyes.
Just cause Steve Jobs has poor eyesight we all have to suffer.
By Anonymous CowardPosted Monday 20th July 2009 18:28 GMT
if you want a stripped-down machine, get the bottom-end 15" Macbook Pro which skips the 9600GT graphics chip and comes with a smaller hard drive in order to sneak in under £1300. An actual 15" white plastic Macbook would look bloody horrible
At last I can replace the current 17" MacBook Pro with a more portable 13" machine that has the memory (expandable to 8Gb), hard disc (500Gb) and decent graphics processor. Will be far easier to lug around and use on public transport. As most offices now have decent resolution monitors so with a Bluetooth keyboard & mouse, and the £20 adapter, it'll be developer's heaven.
One of life's great pleasures is to go into an Apple store, look at the machines, then go into a Sony store (wearing sunglasses) to behold the shiny plastic wannabes running Vista. Ugh.
BTW it's the more expensive machine that's in demand and is short of stock.
By Michael CPosted Monday 20th July 2009 19:20 GMT
...now can we get a larger basic line please?????
Granted, I'm shelling our $1850 next month for a 15" pro with the 9600G graphics chip added, but I'd really like a 15" base model for kicking around town... 13" machines are simply too small for my tastes, but i don't need the horsepower (and pricetag) of the performance machine in the unit I bring back and forth to work. Besides, the gaming notebook is really the wife's machine, I have a powerful desktop (and prefer to sit at a desk when gaming, as opposed to her wanting to sit on a couch to play).
By passionate indifferencePosted Monday 20th July 2009 22:20 GMT
"..but I can get a laptop from xxxx for £yyyy, with the same hardware.."
Rising to this one. Dell Studio 15, HP Pavilion dv3t and Toshiba Satellite U500 can all be bought cheaper than this, with similar or greater specs. There's even an option to specify a better battery.
In fact, it's hard to find a MacBook or MacBook Pro that competes solely on price and performance. I know, I've been looking.
But that's not the only selling points of the Mac, is it?
And why on earth can't other laptop makers respond?
...based almost exclusively on hardware - the least relevant part of the system. It appears in not falling for Apple's slick marketing, the register has fallen for Microsofts!
By Ed SwierkPosted Friday 24th July 2009 02:02 GMT
Your suspicions about the 13-in MacBook Pro's having a smaller battery than the 15-in model are correct: the 13-in model has a 60-Watt-hour battery, while the 15-in model has a 73-Watt-hour battery.
Apple cleverly hid this information by placing it on the World Wide Web, on the specs pages for each model, under "Battery and power", next to the 7-hour battery claim.
Comments on: Apple MacBook Pro 13in June 2009 release
They haven't got it right yet.... #
By James Dunmore Posted Monday 20th July 2009 13:12 GMT
Mini DVI? #
By edward wright Posted Monday 20th July 2009 13:14 GMT
'Apple finally notices theres a recession' #
By debaser Posted Monday 20th July 2009 13:39 GMT
Cue the usual rants of: #
By Anonymous Coward Posted Monday 20th July 2009 13:51 GMT
I've got one of these #
By Alastair 7 Posted Monday 20th July 2009 16:24 GMT
Epic Fail #
By Andy Towler Posted Monday 20th July 2009 17:19 GMT
Thank's, Apple #
By Bad Beaver Posted Monday 20th July 2009 17:32 GMT
1920x1200 on a 15 inch #
By Anonymous Coward Posted Monday 20th July 2009 18:21 GMT
@ James Dunmore #
By Anonymous Coward Posted Monday 20th July 2009 18:28 GMT
Not everybody takes part in the recession #
By Wibble Posted Monday 20th July 2009 19:14 GMT
finally a low price on the pro line #
By Michael C Posted Monday 20th July 2009 19:20 GMT
@AC 13:51 #
By passionate indifference Posted Monday 20th July 2009 22:20 GMT
Upgrades still overpriced #
By bex Posted Tuesday 21st July 2009 10:42 GMT
Another review... #
By McDave Posted Thursday 23rd July 2009 01:25 GMT
Battery capacity #
By Ed Swierk Posted Friday 24th July 2009 02:02 GMT