Read more.A mostly underwhelming refresh; 0.1GHz faster, no Retina display.
Read more.A mostly underwhelming refresh; 0.1GHz faster, no Retina display.
My reaction to the display is mixed, on one hand it's 16:10 which I find far more usable than 1366x768 (16:9), but in this day and age I expect higher resolutions especially from Apple - not to imply I'm after a res of the likes of 'retina', though, which IMO is a bit excessive. But then again, it's only a refresh so I wasn't expecting too much.
Regardless, glad to see 16:10 hanging in there.
Bit of a misleading title? Shouldn't this read 'Rumoured Macbook Pro 2012 13-inch specification list surfaces'?
There's more than just one variant for sale currently in any case. Chances are that there would be more than one after the next speed bump too.
1280x800! A new laptop with a respectable aspect ratio!
Still, it's an Apple, so nah.
rather dissapointing. I was hoping for around 1500 vertical pixels this year. It is 2012 now, tha knows!
16:10 should be the standard from my perspective, so on the one hand I applaud apple for this change. But nothing else: I want them to fix my work laptop which is only just over a year old and has died a horrible death twice, now. Awful, expensive, unreliable and slow computers :/ Still, where the sheeple follow, the other companies sit up and take note so perhaps 16:10 could be making a comeback. I will be maintaining my 24" samsung 1920x1200 monitor for as long as possible... It's been great for a number of years now and I have caps ready to make sure it runs for a good few more, until such time as I can get a tri-16:10 setup going, that is
Complete nonsense. This isn't news just speculation.
I was originally going to comment on the fact that Apple are behind every other major laptop manufacturer because they don't even offer Ivy Bridge yet, however I wasn't sure that this was specifically correct so I went on the Apple website to find out if it was correct or not. The only information on their site is that (15" MacBook Pro) the CPUs are Intel 2.2 or 2.4 GHz. There are no Intel models numbers, range or specifications. There is no chipset information either.
So I went on live chat (I have a full transcript of this conversation) to find out which specific CPUs they offer and whether they were Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge, I felt that this was a reasonable request. I made it clear that the CPU spec was important to me and that I needed to compare the CPU specification with other models and other brands in order to make an informed decision. The sales advisor told me:
"As it stands that information is not available."
"Some information is not publicized there for it isn't available for us to have or share" [sic]
"We offer the latest in modern technology"
Ok, so if Apple don't tell their staff which CPUs their laptops have then I can't get annoyed at the sales assistant, but really Apple.....come on. Simply stating that it is a 2.2 or 2.4GHz Intel CPU is not anywhere near informative enough, it's such a simple thing that why wouldn't they state which CPUs they are - what are they scared of?
She then attempted to sell me a laptop anyway, suggesting that I should buy one and if I didn't like it I could always return it for a full refund. Seemed to be a rehearsed response.
I informed her that I know how DSL works and that it would be like buying a new car without being able to find out which engine it would come with.
Then she tells me that I can even get a refund if the laptop is engraved (she brought engraving up not me) and:
"I'm sure you'll love it once you get it home and give it a go"
I'm not sure what annoyed me more, the fact that Apple won't tell people what CPUs are in their laptops or that the sales assistant told me that I should buy it anyway basically because it's an Apple. I have always felt like Apple have an air of arrogance about them and unfortunately this seems to have filtered through to their staff training. I love the design and some of the features, but (again) come on Apple, surely you can do better than this.
Last edited by hudsucker; 08-06-2012 at 05:26 PM.
A bit of research would tell you the CPUs used are Sandy Bridge with an Ivy Bridge refresh due in the next week. It's hardly rocket science to use Google to get this info!
Having said that you would've thought the info was available to the sales people. Perhaps it's down to imminent refresh so they don't actually know what CPU type you'd end up with!
I don't think the refresh has a bearing on the information I was trying to obtain. Maybe you're right and she actually didn't know what I would recieve (that's bad enough) but I wanted to know which range they offered and which specific models, none of this information was available on the website or by asking directly - the specific CPU skus aren't available for what you can buy today online so it's purposefully ambiguous. It doesn't matter if they will be refreshed in 2 weeks or not, the website and the sales reps should be able to tell me what they are selling me today. Add to that the fact that the sales representative basically told me to just buy it without knowing....
Apple don't want people to compare them to PCs based on specs as for general usage a Mac would be quicker than a PC even with a slightly lower spec, it's not a matter of having a faster processor or more RAM. Power users who need to know how many cores the CPU has and how fast the RAM is can easily find it out in about 5 seconds on Google, but putting that info in the hands of the general users (who will ask for it) would skew the comparison unfairly.
System:Atari 2600 CPU:8-bit 6507 (1.19MHz) RAM:128 bytes Colours: 16 (4 on screen) Resolution: 192x160Originally Posted by The Mock Turtle
I know full well what benefits I would be getting by paying more for a Mac than the equivalent spec PC laptop, in my case it would be longer battery life, lighter chassis and Thunderbolt. However, if a Mac would be quicker than a PC even with a slightly lower spec as you say then Apple should darn well point it out, it would help them justify the £800 more I would have to pay to match a MacBook Pro 15" to the same spec of a Windows laptop. This shouldn't skew the comparison unfairly against Apple, in fact it should work the other way round. Considering most of my work would be done on the CPU, the CPU choice and therefore spec of the laptop far outweighs any benefit the Apple platform as a whole would give me.
It's objective to compare specifications of anything, whether two Windows laptops or Windows vs Mac, especially based round your argument. I wanted Apple to give me something to think about, not just to say "but we're Apple, of course ours is better" on blind faith.
If you visit the Apple website and see what models are available, you're told specifically what CPU is in each model. As the world and his dog knows there's no Ivy Bridge Macs yet then that's all the info you need surely? I wouldn't rely on sales people anyway and always do my own research beforehand. And as all the info you need is on Apples website, I'm not sure what the issue is!
It's pretty poor that the sales staff didn't know what spec CPU in the laptop. The sales assistant, however, wasn't referring to the DSR when talking about buying Apple stock. You can buy anything in store, and return it within either 1 or 2 weeks, I forget which for a full refund, no questions asked.
I think I've made my objections and the facts quite clear, there's nothing to gain in gound round in circles.
Link to info on Apple store
While I appreciate your concerns regarding the Apple salesperson, I would personally be doing a lot more research of my own before splashing the best of £1,500 on a laptop.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)