New Macbook pro announced with new dimensions

[D13H4RD]

They swapped that god-awful keyboard with hopefully a more reliable one

They seem to have improved battery performance

Maybe thermals won't be as craptastic?

 

Maybe, just maybe.....this might be the first solid Mac laptop in years.

[Sorenson]

1 minute ago, D13H4RD said:

They swapped that god-awful keyboard with hopefully a more reliable one

They seem to have improved battery performance

Maybe thermals won't be as craptastic?

 

Maybe, just maybe.....this might be the first solid Mac laptop in years.

Also the graphics don't look to be complete crap for the first time since the GTX 750 MacBook pro. The 5500m apparently performs around the 1660 mobile. 

[dizmo]

All that room for a numpad and yet...nothing...

[DrMacintosh]

19 minutes ago, dizmo said:

All that room for a numpad and yet...nothing...

Pros who use Macs don’t want a numpad. Numpads also look horrible and offset the keyboard causing massive radial deviation in the right wrist. 

[yolosnail]

5 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

Pros who use Macs don’t want a numpad. Numpads also look horrible and offset the keyboard causing massive radial deviation in the right wrist. 

I use the numpad far too much to even consider getting a MacBook. 

 

Real pros don't care if it looks horrible, they care about efficiency, and not having a numpad is a major hit to efficiency (assuming you work with numbers that is)

[DrMacintosh]

38 minutes ago, yolosnail said:

Real pros don't care if it looks horrible, they care about efficiency, and not having a numpad is a major hit to efficiency (assuming you work with numbers that is)

Which the professionals who work with MacBook Pros do not. The Mac was built with creators in mind, people who work with spreadsheets are rarely content creators. 

[Belgarathian]

$5 this is the replacement Anthony has been waiting for

[dizmo]

58 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

Pros who use Macs don’t want a numpad. Numpads also look horrible and offset the keyboard causing massive radial deviation in the right wrist. 

You do realize you can simply move your body slightly to the left and you'll be centered, right? 

[Sorenson]

57 minutes ago, yolosnail said:

I use the numpad far too much to even consider getting a MacBook. 

 

Real pros don't care if it looks horrible, they care about efficiency, and not having a numpad is a major hit to efficiency (assuming you work with numbers that is)

You know there are usb number pads right? That’s what I use with my accounting homework on my MBP. 

[germgoatz]

19 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

Which the professionals who work with MacBook Pros do not. The Mac was built with creators in mind, people who work with spreadsheets are rarely content creators. 

techtubers who make specsheets, and a lot of other graphish stuff 0.o

theyre creators

[DrMacintosh]

20 minutes ago, dizmo said:

You do realize you can simply move your body slightly to the left and you'll be centered, right? 

You are then no longer centered with the display. 

[DrMacintosh]

11 minutes ago, germgoatz said:

techtubers who make specsheets, and a lot of other graphish stuff 0.o

theyre creators

But that is not all those people do. 

[thorhammerz]

1 hour ago, yolosnail said:

I use the numpad far too much to even consider getting a MacBook. 

 

Real pros don't care if it looks horrible, they care about efficiency, and not having a numpad is a major hit to efficiency (assuming you work with numbers that is)

You (and I) are simply not the target audience for these things - the market for their products on the PC side is very focused/niche (7-8% market share in sales volume) and hardly their largest revenue driver.

[dizmo]

41 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

You are then no longer centered with the display. 

I really don't think the maybe 3 inches of left movement would be that big of a deal

[EarthWormJM2]

Same spec laptop from Razer (with a GTX 1660 ti instead of a RX5500M, basically the same card give or take), but $800 cheaper and you get more IO and HW features. Hmmmmm come'on apple. 

 

 

Even looks very similar if aesthetic is what you are going for:

 

Also, $800 additional (on top of what you are already paying for 16GB) to upgrade to 64GB of RAM!?! WTH is Apple smoking!

 

 

...And I'm sure I'll hear the MAC OS argument... it's just an OS, not worth all that premium, especially when Apple won't support it at all after ~5 years.

 

[Commodus]

4 hours ago, thorhammerz said:

No thermal throttling? Is the combination of "larger heatsink" and "improved airflow" capable of dissipating ~2x the thermal energy of the previous model? Octa-core i9's sip well beyond the nominal 45w TDP when they boost under load.

I didn't say there was no thermal throttling, just that whining about it is pointless until we see how Apple's improvements affect performance.  The company went out of its way to highlight that upgrade -- I think it's worth waiting to see just how much of a difference it makes.

[Blademaster91]

4 hours ago, OlympicAssEater said:

Only if you are a rich student. Poor students are going to be hell to the nah nah nah. 

Even if I could afford one, I'd just get something like a used Thinkpad instead, more durable so I wouldn't have to worry as much about putting it in a bag, and I couldn't give up having a USB type A port, and being able to replace or upgrade the SSD/HDD or RAM.

[yolosnail]

1 hour ago, Sorenson said:

You know there are usb number pads right? That’s what I use with my accounting homework on my MBP. 

Have you tried using a USB numpad when on the go?

I do a lot of work on the bus as I have a 2 hour ride each way and a USB numpad would be impossible

[melete]

Looks nice. I see no reason to upgrade my dual core XPS 13 right now, but if Apple started making laptops with usable keyboards again it would be nice to have that option back. The keyboard was the main reason I went from a MBP to a Windows laptop.

[Commodus]

35 minutes ago, EarthWormJM2 said:

Same spec laptop from Razer (with a GTX 1660 ti instead of a RX5500M, basically the same card give or take), but $800 cheaper and you get more IO and HW features. Hmmmmm come'on apple. 

 

 

Even looks very similar if aesthetic is what you are going for:

 

Also, $800 additional (on top of what you are already paying for 16GB) to upgrade to 64GB of RAM!?! WTH is Apple smoking!

 

 

...And I'm sure I'll hear the MAC OS argument... it's just an OS, not worth all that premium, especially when Apple won't support it at all after ~5 years.

 

I'm calling bull on this comparison, because there are a lot of differences that don't line up.

 

First: the 16-inch MacBook Pro has a larger, much higher-resolution display.  You cannot get more than a 1080p display in most Razer Blade 15 configurations, and the ones that do (with the RTX 2080 or Quadro RTX 5000) cost considerably more than $1,800.

 

Apple also starts the 16-inch MBP with a 512GB SSD.  Want that in the Blade 15?  It'll be at least $2,000... with a 1080p display.  If you want a more comparable 4K screen (albeit OLED), it'll cost you $3,300.

 

Now, Apple is known for charging an arm and a leg for RAM, but it's hard to compare directly when we don't know how many DIMMs Apple is using.  If it has to use two it may be pricing more fairly -- not that this makes it any more affordable, just not as much of a bad deal as you think it is.

 

And I'm sorry, but the OS matters.  In my case, macOS is better for my workflow (you know, the whole "pro" part you seem to have forgotten).  It also helps me avoid some of the nuisances that come with Windows today.  It integrates elegantly with my iPhone, which helps with both work and leisure.  Just how much of a premium it's worth is debatable, but it's clearly not that steep.

[SenKa]

1 hour ago, EarthWormJM2 said:

...And I'm sure I'll hear the MAC OS argument... it's just an OS, not worth all that premium, especially when Apple won't support it at all after ~5 years.

Quote

MacOS Catalina Compatibility List of Supported Macs

MacOS Catalina 10.15 is compatible with the following Macs:

• MacBook Pro (mid 2012 and newer)
• MacBook Air (mid 2012 and newer)
• MacBook (early 2015 and later)
• iMac (late 2012 or newer)
• iMac Pro (2017 or newer)
• Mac Pro (late 2013 or newer)
• Mac Mini (late 2012 or newer)

2019-5=2014. 2014 ≠ 2012

 

Not to mention developers like DosDude1 make mostly seemless patchers that work even beyond what he says they will. I have successfully ran Catalina on a 2007 Macbook with a RAM and SSD Upgrade, and it ran very well.

 

Thats a mobile C2D and nVidia 8800 mobile graphics. I would LOVE to see that on Windows 10.

[EarthWormJM2]

13 minutes ago, Commodus said:

I'm calling bull on this comparison, because there are a lot of differences that don't line up.

 

First: the 16-inch MacBook Pro has a larger, much higher-resolution display.  You cannot get more than a 1080p display in most Razer Blade 15 configurations, and the ones that do (with the RTX 2080 or Quadro RTX 5000) cost considerably more than $1,800.

 

Apple also starts the 16-inch MBP with a 512GB SSD.  Want that in the Blade 15?  It'll be at least $2,000... with a 1080p display.  If you want a more comparable 4K screen (albeit OLED), it'll cost you $3,300.

 

Now, Apple is known for charging an arm and a leg for RAM, but it's hard to compare directly when we don't know how many DIMMs Apple is using.  If it has to use two it may be pricing more fairly -- not that this makes it any more affordable, just not as much of a bad deal as you think it is.

 

And I'm sorry, but the OS matters.  In my case, macOS is better for my workflow (you know, the whole "pro" part you seem to have forgotten).  It also helps me avoid some of the nuisances that come with Windows today.  It integrates elegantly with my iPhone, which helps with both work and leisure.  Just how much of a premium it's worth is debatable, but it's clearly not that steep.

Yes, the configurations from Razer are a little odd, clearly pre built, but the display is 144hz not 60hz. Also the 4k option from Razer is touch and OLED (MBP 16 is neither). Plus if you go that option then you are getting a wayyyy better GPU with the i9 and the price would still be several hundred less then the higher end MBP 16 with the top GPU and i9.

 

I also have listed a 2 dimm config as it is more pricey then the 4 dimm options, still $500 cheaper and thats not including how much they are charging you for the 16GB on the base model. I really tried to keep it as fair as possible from a brand that is set up for easy user purchasing experience and similar to the base low end configuration. Even a fully maxed out Razer workstation with 4k everything (which the MBP 16 is not quite 4k) the Razer is only $4k, which is less than $5k for a fully maxed MBP 16 (minus the 8TB drive cuz holy hell, lol) and it comes with a quadro 5000 which is leaps and bounds ahead of a RX5500M. Same processor.

 

If I really wanted I could go to Acer/HP/Dell and build one from scratch probably even cheaper, but I was going for a brand with a similar user experience, keeping it fairly simple and not a million options.

 

And I understand OS matter for some people. But an $800+ premium to have the "privilege" to use MAC OS that will be outdated relatively quickly and have a short support lifespan, is ridiculous. I mean hell I have an old Windows desktop from 2010 that I can upgrade to whatever latest and greatest OS I want (win 10 currently) and was able to upgrade the RAM and GPU myself for fairly cheap and I use it for my Abelton/recording/multi-media pc/extra gaming PC as it can play anything still albeit at 1080p only. I'm only into it about $900 and that is including the original purchase price from 2010  an old Dell XPS Laptop from 2008/9 that still works beautifully with just upgraded RAM and an SSD (i know that a desktop and not a good comparison here, just pointing out that for less money I get more longevity out of non apple products) 

 

And when you say integrates elegantly... Yea, until you hit the 5GB cloud storage limit and it starts yelling at you everyday, most normal consumers believe that they are out of memory when it says that and Apple wants you to buy more when it is unnecessary. Only thing you need to back up is your contacts and notes. Pictures can be synced to any computer with or with out itunes super easily, just plug it in, win 10 is great about it, and music is on itunes or your computer. what else do you need it to "integrate" with on your MBP? 

 

I'm not trying to get into a nitpicking argument, just trying to show what everyone should know: Apple products are overpriced. Period.     Not saying that they are all hot garbage, but when it come to price for performance or for straight up the same components, Apple charges too much.

[Commodus]

21 minutes ago, EarthWormJM2 said:

Yes, the configurations from Razer are a little odd, clearly pre built, but the display is 144hz not 60hz. Also the 4k option from Razer is touch and OLED (MBP 16 is neither). Plus if you go that option then you are getting a wayyyy better GPU with the i9 and the price would still be several hundred less then the higher end MBP 16 with the top GPU and i9.

 

I also have listed a 2 dimm config as it is more pricey then the 4 dimm options, still $500 cheaper and thats not including how much they are charging you for the 16GB on the base model. I really tried to keep it as fair as possible from a brand that is set up for easy user purchasing experience and similar to the base low end configuration. Even a fully maxed out Razer workstation with 4k everything (which the MBP 16 is not quite 4k) the Razer is only $4k, which is less than $5k for a fully maxed MBP 16 (minus the 8TB drive cuz holy hell, lol) and it comes with a quadro 5000 which is leaps and bounds ahead of a RX5500M. Same processor.

 

If I really wanted I could go to Acer/HP/Dell and build one from scratch probably even cheaper, but I was going for a brand with a similar user experience, keeping it fairly simple and not a million options.

 

And I understand OS matter for some people. But an $800+ premium to have the "privilege" to use MAC OS that will be outdated relatively quickly and have a short support lifespan, is ridiculous. I mean hell I have an old Windows desktop from 2010 that I can upgrade to whatever latest and greatest OS I want (win 10 currently) and was able to upgrade the RAM and GPU myself for fairly cheap and I use it for my Abelton/recording/multi-media pc/extra gaming PC as it can play anything still albeit at 1080p only. I'm only into it about $900 and that is including the original purchase price from 2010  an old Dell XPS Laptop from 2008/9 that still works beautifully with just upgraded RAM and an SSD (i know that a desktop and not a good comparison here, just pointing out that for less money I get more longevity out of non apple products) 

 

And when you say integrates elegantly... Yea, until you hit the 5GB cloud storage limit and it starts yelling at you everyday, most normal consumers believe that they are out of memory when it says that and Apple wants you to buy more when it is unnecessary. Only thing you need to back up is your contacts and notes. Pictures can be synced to any computer with or with out itunes super easily, just plug it in, win 10 is great about it, and music is on itunes or your computer. what else do you need it to "integrate" with on your MBP? 

 

I'm not trying to get into a nitpicking argument, just trying to show what everyone should know: Apple products are overpriced. Period.     Not saying that they are all hot garbage, but when it come to price for performance or for straight up the same components, Apple charges too much.

But here's the thing: they're not overpriced, or at least not as much you think they are.  Your claimed $800 price gap is based on an inherently flawed, invalid comparison.

 

I also noticed that you missed a key point here: the Blade 15 and 16-inch MacBook Pro are, for the most part, aiming at fundamentally different audiences.  Outside of the Quadro model, the Blade is made primarily for gamers; the MacBook Pro is meant for creatives.  A 144Hz 1080p panel is great if you're playing Modern Warfare, but pretty lousy if you're handling rough edits for a video production or sorting through photos from a fashion shoot.  And keep in mind that OLED isn't always great for creatives, since you don't want to risk burn-in from having the same image on the screen for half an hour.

 

Yes, the Razer is unequivocally better for gaming, and might be better for some creatives if you're more interested in the fastest possible GPU regardless of thermals, noise or pro-oriented optimizations.  And yes, Windows does tend to have longer support (although Mac support is more like 7 years plus security updates).  But if you're going to cry "overpriced," you need to compare using hardware that's actually close.  You can't just hand-wave away key differences in design.

[DrMacintosh]

2 hours ago, EarthWormJM2 said:

but $800 cheaper and you get more IO and HW features. Hmmmmm come'on apple. 

You actually factually don’t get more IO with the Razer. TB3 is far more versatile. 
 

 

[captain_to_fire]