Review - Apple's MacBook Pro

Provataki writes "OSNews posted a 2-editor review of Apple's MacBook Pro laptop. The whole review feels like a long conversation between the two editors with agreements and disagreements on several issues and topics. They both agree that the laptop is too hot, but there is disagreement on the screen quality for example."

Speaker quality?

[Mononoke]

TH: ...That's not unacceptable, but for a computer aimed at excellence in audio processing, this is a shortcoming, plain and simple.

No one who does audio processing on a computer uses the internal speakers, no matter what brand of computer it is.

That's just one of many misinformed statements TH makes about the machine.

Re:Speaker quality?

[ThinkingInBinary]

No one who does audio processing on a computer uses the internal speakers, no matter what brand of computer it is.

No, not for production work, but it's nice to be able to get good audio quality out of the speakers. No one's expecting miracles, but it should be able to reproduce a normal range of sounds at a decent volume, without major distortion. My laptop, for example, completely ignores bass frequencies, and, if they're loud enough, they distort everything else and there's a little "gap" in the audio where the bass beat was. That is bad.

There are laptops with good sound quality--a friend of mine has the Dell Inspiron e1705, and it has pretty good sound. (It's a 17" widescreen, though, so it's got room for bigger speakers.)

screen is important!

[yagu]

The weakest link in user experience is one of the most important features to have maximum information. This is an ongoing frustration -- for me, the screen is the weakest link in interacting with a computer (assuming disk, cpu, and memory are reasonably up to snuff). If the screen isn't pretty, I ain't happy.

In this review as often occurs there is little feedback objective or otherwise on the screen quality. From the article:

The Screen
TH: I find that the MBP screen has very bad viewing angles, which is extra annoying because it's a laptop (you have to adjust the screen angle all the time). The screen on my 'cheap' Dell Inspiron 6000 is much better in that respect.
AS: I disagree. Everyone seems to go ga-ga over "Brightview" or whatever they're calling it these days. While it does make the picture crisp, it also adds glare from virtually every other angle. I have no issue with the screen position or angle.
TH: I'm not talking about the glossy thing; my Inspiron does not have a glossy screen either. What bothers me on the MacBook Pro is how the colours change even when you tilt your head slightly away from the ideal viewing angle, causing me to adjust or my head, or the screen, continuously; this especially reveals itself via the shadows underneath the windows in the MacOS. The Dell does not have this problem, or at least, not as bad as the MacBook Pro.
AS: I haven't noticed this. I actually find the display to be very bright. I'm in love with the widescreen.
TH: That's for sure, the brightness and wideness are very much appreciated. I just expected a better viewing angle on a 'pro' laptop.

I want to know screen resolution! I want to know measured viewing angles! (For $2000, or $2500 you get 1440x900 -- so-so, for $2800 you get 1680x1050 -- not bad, but way too expensive.) I want to know contrast ratios.

Unfortunately lots if not all of this information is rarely included in discussions and ads for laptops -- I think it's intentional. And, it's the reason I would never buy a notebook or laptop sight-unseen. The screen is something you can't change on a laptop, you'd better be happy with it when you get it. (This has been an excellent policy for me -- I've been very happy with the last several laptops I've had -- if the screen's pretty, I'm happy.)

Re:Summary

[Aiku1337]

(The regular MacBook, surprisingly enough, since Apple is usually overpriced, matches up pretty well with PC manufacturers. It's hard to compare it directly because of the odd screen size, but it's only $100-$200 more than a PC, if even that.)

This is probably my Apple fanboyism talking, but the MacBook (or, previously iBook) has always been competively priced. The entry level iBook was going for 1000 USD and included more standard features than any PC laptop did, for that price. I wouldn't say Apple is usually overpriced, maybe just their pro line. But then again, the pro line is targeted towards business and professionals. You'd expect to pay more.

Re:Summary

[ThinkingInBinary]

This is probably my Apple fanboyism talking, but the MacBook (or, previously iBook) has always been competively priced. The entry level iBook was going for 1000 USD and included more standard features than any PC laptop did, for that price. I wouldn't say Apple is usually overpriced, maybe just their pro line. But then again, the pro line is targeted towards business and professionals. You'd expect to pay more.

Competitive on price? Yes. Competitive on performance? Not until Intel came out. My brother has an iBook G4 that cost (before the educational discount) around $1700, and I have a PC laptop that cost the same amount. Mine is a full 50% faster on processor-intensive tasks, and is much snappier in general desktop use.

Also

[SuperKendall]

One thing the artcile neglects to mention is that you have the option of ordering a Macbook Pro with or without a glossy screen.

Even after seeing them in person I am still unsure which I'd prefer.

I agree with you it would be nice to see more technical details on the laptop screens.

Review

[general scruff]

ME: I thought that this review was quite two sided.
ME: Agreed. There were definitley two points of view on most of the subject covered.
ME: I think that a review should be more talking about pros/cons and not just agreeing with another editor.
ME: I totally dissagree! Seeing two people converse about a certain item seems to get the point across quiet nice!
ME: Dude! Shut up about your DELL!
ME: Agreed. Dell is quite the SUX0R!

Re:Summary

[hlimethe3rd]

The fact that the G4-based laptops weren't competitive on performance was largely due to the lag in technology. The 1.25 GHz (or whatever) G4 chip in your brother's iBook G4 probably was competitive with the PC laptops that came out at the same time, but realistically it had been three years since the G4 chips had been significantly refreshed (yes, I'm not counting moving from 1.25GHz to 1.33). Apple's portables were very, very long in the tooth looking just at the chips.

Re:Summary

[ThinkingInBinary]

/me admits that maybe his chip was old. But in any other industry, if the product is obsolete, or just older, and isn't competitive with the current products, the price drops. It should have cost less since it doesn't perform as well.

Re:Summary

[Anonymous Coward]

* Built-in webcam

included with MacBook Pro

* Dedicated VGA port (no DVI-VGA cable required)
* Dedicated S-Video port (no DVI-S-Video cable required)

Cables are included with the MBP; no need to buy them.

* Windows XP Professional included (familiar to more people, more software available, more hardware compatible)
* 0.2" wider, 1.1" deeper, same thickness
* 1 lb heavier

These aren't exactly features...

Re:Summary

[pVoid]

Yeah, that's what they were arguing too. The problem: I consider it an OS vulnerability if a program I'm running can halt my entire system (whether out of neglect or malice doesn't matter, does it?)

Your point about MS is off target: MS doesn't keep old functionality to keep its OS from functioning, it keeps around old functionality to not break badly written apps - that's a choice that you can chose to say is unnecessary. But it is completely a different class of problems. Any OS that can be crippled by a simple user mode application has a serious flaw.

Actually, it is

[LKM]

I guess this points out that the MacBook Pro isn't "above" anything else

It has Mac OS X. For me, that puts it high enough above everything else.