![]() ![]() We know, we know: This all sounds dreadfully obvious. At the same time, it's still noticeably heavier than the Air, both in a backpack and in the hand. The build quality is also just as sturdy as you'd expect from a Mac. All told, the new Pro is light enough that I was easily able to tote it around in my pack for a weekend without any strain. Still, it's a clear improvement over last year's model, which weighed 3.57 pounds. Well, not a fatso, but it is noticeably heavier at 3.46 pounds, compared with 2.96 for the Air. And that's more of a cosmetic flourish than anything else it's not like the MBP is a fatso or anything. Really, if you were to stack them one on top of the other, you'd only be able to tell the difference because of the Air's signature wedge shape. That puts it within spitting distance of the 13-inch Air, which measures 0.68 inch at its widest point. It measures 0.71 inch thick, down from 0.75 inch on last year's model. To be honest, you still wouldn't, but on the continuum that separates the Air and MacBook Pro, the 13-inch Retina model is starting to look more and more like an Ultrabook. They were deliciously thin, yes - especially compared to the legacy models - but you would never have mistaken the 13-inch one for an Air. ![]() The first generation of Retina display Macs lived in the cracks between the MacBook Air and the old MBPs. So does that mean the 13-inch Retina display MacBook Pro offers better value than it did then? More importantly, with a lower price, lighter design and a claimed 10 hours of battery life, is it starting to veer into MacBook Air territory? And, in the case of the 13-inch model, it's cheaper too: The starting price is now $1,299, versus $1,699 a year ago. Sounds like a simple sales pitch: They're thinner, lighter and speedier. Meanwhile, Apple moved to PCI Express SSDs for much-improved transfer rates, and upgraded the wireless card to 802.11ac for faster streaming. This time around, as you'd expect, Apple used Haswell processors, though it also went with Intel's brand-new Iris and Iris Pro chipsets, which haven't actually been used in that many notebooks yet. That doesn't mean this isn't a meaningful upgrade. There wasn't a lot to say - at least not after a few minutes of hands-on time. In particular, the MacBook Pros sort of flew under the radar that day, mostly because they look more or less like last year's models, just with slightly thinner chassis. But it also used the 80-minute news conference to refresh its Mac lineup, announcing a new Mac Pro desktop and some slimmed-down MacBook Pros, all running Apple's brand-new operating system, OS X 10.9 Mavericks. Sorry I'm a brand new Mac user coming over from PC and am having a hard time understanding how a dual core, 4GB RAM device could have much higher read and write scores.When Apple held its last big keynote, it unveiled some new iPads, just like we knew it would. What exactly is this measuring? Does this mean her Macbook is that much faster than mine? I've seen new Macbook Pro's hitting over 1600 Mb/s so I'm wondering if these computers are really 2-4 times faster at working with audio/video production. My gf on the other hand has an early 2015 Macbook Air (1.6 Ghz dual core, 4gb RAM, 128 GB flash storage) and her Blackmagic results show over 1000 Mb/s on read and write. (Some RAID 0 setups have speeds around 900 Mb/s from what I've seen on youtube as well) This seems on par with most youtube video results who have a similar setup after upgrading their Mid-2012 MacBook Pro. It feels blazing fast and my Blackmagic disk speed test results measure around 400-450 Mb/s for both read and write. So I recently bought a Mid-2012 MacBook Pro (2.6 Ghz quad-quad core) that was maxed out with an SSD and 16GB of Ram. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |