Apple's displays are very nice, they are practically unmatched in the industry.
Yup. You shouldn't buy Apple for the best panels. But if they've convinced you that you really want Thunderbolt...Until Samsung, Lenovo, Asus, and Sony surpassed them last year.. Apple had a pretty nice lead simply by buying up all the supply of higher resolution panels.
Wait, what variety of crack are you smoking?Also since OS X updates are now free you will have a future proof system.
Wait, what variety of crack are you smoking?
There's no such thing as "future proof".
Further more, all Mac hardware is crippled by their hilarious refusal to acknowledge the greatest & only UI advance in 20+ years: the touchscreen.
Wait, what variety of crack are you smoking?
There's no such thing as "future proof".
Further more, all Mac hardware is crippled by their hilarious refusal to acknowledge the greatest & only UI advance in 20+ years: the touchscreen.
Wait, what variety of crack are you smoking?
There's no such thing as "future proof".
Further more, all Mac hardware is crippled by their hilarious refusal to acknowledge the greatest & only UI advance in 20+ years: the touchscreen.
Have you looked at actual productivity battery life when you're not testing the ideal Mac-encoded video playback loop on your totally stripped-out Mac?
Have you looked at engineering excellence / viability as opposed to how slick the black PCB looks?
Have you looked at how blurry HiDpi is on the retinas once you get past the distinctly unproductive native retina resolution?
Have you looked at what productive and more practically effective alternatives you could get for the same money?
There's marketing, and there's substance. Some people go all-in on the former.
I'm personally not a big Apple fan because I either want a cheap laptop for surfing or a gaming/desktop replacement and Apple sells neither.Until Samsung, Lenovo, Asus, and Sony surpassed them last year.. Apple had a pretty nice lead simply by buying up all the supply of higher resolution panels.
That said, Macbook are premium grade notebooks at a extremely premium price. Unless you want to act snooty at Starbucks, there's not much advantage to them that you won't find in other premium notebooks.
......
These days 1080p and better resolutions are very common and they are good enough for a great many people. Thing is Apple only sells at the high end. Where is Apple's $400 laptop?
BTW these features seem a bit cherry picked just to come out in Apple's favor, almost like you knew the answer before you asked the question...
......
Yes I did. There fan design is excellent. They are using state of the art technology (Hi-DPI screens, PCIe SSDs). Their machines are both exceptional functional and good looking, but too each their own. I suggest you make some solid point. What exactly do think is not of high quality with Apples engineering?
Have you used a 13 or 15" rMBP before? I don't think you have. It's not blurry. I use it all day. It's a HUGE difference when you work a lot with texts and pictures. You can use scaled resolution for more desk space if you really think you can't work on the retina resolution.
........
Can you use the larger scaled resolutions under vmfusion Windows? Or is it only under MacOS?
Yes: again I used Windows based Laptops for quite some time. I used a 13" MacBook Air and now a 13" rMBP daily at university, without a charger. handles that all fine.
Also explain to me how my 13" rMBP is stripped-out? I don't feel like it's missing anything at all.
Yes I did. There fan design is excellent. They are using state of the art technology (Hi-DPI screens, PCIe SSDs). Their machines are both exceptional functional and good looking, but too each their own. I suggest you make some solid point. What exactly do think is not of high quality with Apples engineering?
Have you used a 13 or 15" rMBP before? I don't think you have. It's not blurry. I use it all day. It's a HUGE difference when you work a lot with texts and pictures. You can use scaled resolution for more desk space if you really think you can't work on the retina resolution.
At this point, with this comment about blurriness I think you are just trolling.
Yes I have. A comparable Asus Notebook cost just the same (ASUS ZENBOOK UX301LA). HP does offer something similar for the same price. Dell doesn't have anything like that in the ballpark. Sony neither. Lenovo has a few coming, but no pricing information so far...that's like what 1 1/2 years after Apple introduced the MacBook Pros with Retina Display?
If you suggest stuff feel free to post examples...I'd like to follow your train of thought.
And then there are people that rehash lies about Apple over and over again. You have yet to disprove my points:
- Other notebooks vendors charge the same for similar Hardware
- Touchscreens are mostly a fail on Desktops/Notebooks; the technology is not there yet; tablets and notebooks are not ready to merge yet
- Hi-DPI is managed way better on Apple Hardware/Software
Try to keep this classy and make a point with examples. So far you make claims and not prove them at all. It's not really helping answering the OPs question.
The problem is that it's like debating a creationist - you begin with those points you hold dear as immutables while ignoring the points I put across as a dissenting Mac owner and screaming Proof! Proof! while making Schopenhauer sarcasm reality. It would be funny if it wasn't so predictable.My difference is that I also own a swathe of the competition and I use them every day - and the rMBP's are *not* my machine of choice, partly for the reasons I put forward (among others) - and are reserved for times I have to walk around with OS X.
One thing I will answer - Retina, yes it is blurry if you use it outside of the (to me, pretty useless - why do I want e.g. a 1280 x 800 display, however sharp it seems to be, on a modern 13-inch computer now?) native Retina mode. I've had this 'discussion' before but the non-integer-scaling dithering in OS X means that the text waves around for me in the way it does not on a HiDPI machine in Windows (like my XPS 15).
The very top point is however a response to a mis-phrasing of mine - I meant that 'Apple runtime is amaaaaaazing' types usually hypermile their machines, tweaking it for least consumption by getting rid of even generally required extensions, then line them up against PC they haven't even bothered to learn it's power management features on. That, and since there's no generally agreed cross-platform metric to measure productivity use, things such as runtime tests are run which plays to OS X's strengths - I'm not sure if it's a conscious bias, but it seems to run the gamut in many publications - and the thing is that you have to ask what people are doing most of the day when they're working.
Just a small example, but in terms of the supposed hardware superiority (and the fact that Windows laptops with superior-performance storage exists is ignored of course) and taking the PCI-E storage you mentioned, I can tell you that it takes approximately 2.5 seconds for a small spreadsheet email attachment to open on a Late '13 rMBP (yes, with PCI-E storage) in Numbers. The same thing on a mSATA-equipped Sony Ultrabook in Office 2013 takes less than 1.5 seconds. I also know that in general productivity use - i.e. not browsing media-heavy websites in an automated manner or watching movies constantly, Windows notebooks from the 'big hitters' tend to hit their stated runtimes to the same degree as, if not usually notably better than, an Apple notebook - especially if you actually make use of the power saving features provided by the vendor.
I can already anticipate your answer, but as I said it's like debating creationists and I'm really not bothered about arguing every point down. I've said the reasons why you should buy a Macbook. They are valid and accurate reasons.
Thing is Apple only sells at the high end. Where is Apple's $400 laptop?