info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
New MacBook Pro impressions
18 views
Skip to first unread message
D.M. Procida
Nov 5, 2021, 4:46:34 PM11/5/21
to
My new MacBook Pro (16", M1 Pro, 16GB RAM, 1TB SSD) arrived on Monday, ahead
of schedule and without warning.
The first thing to say is: thank God that the era of the pig-headed lack of
ports, sub-functional keyboards and unwanted touchbar gewgaws is behind us.
And MagSafe is back. My 2013 MacBook Pro did sterling service for a very long
time, but it shouldn't have been necessary to have hung on for so many years.
The new machine is appreciably heavier than the 15" model it replaces, it's
only 150g or so but you can tell.
The shape is nice, it's quite austere and reminds me of the PowerBook G4. The
2013 model looks very elegant next to it. Someone said here years ago when the
PB G4 came out that they still liked the curvy, friendly shape of their
PowerBook G3 - which they felt was somehow like Nigella Lawson. I can't
remember who that was.
The older one slips into a backpack more easily than the new one, just because
of its shape rather than its size. I don't see why the rubber feet on the new
one couldn't have had the same smooth shape as before, that would have helped.
The keyboard feels pretty good to me, not quite as much travel as before, but
I can certainly live very happily with it. And now that I have a fingerprint
sensor, typing in passwords feels as primitive and inconvenient as having to
pick up and sort a pile of punch cards that were dropped all over the floor.
The display notch is quite odd. It hasn't caused any problems so far, but it
takes a bit of getting used to.
The display itself is actually the most disappointing aspect of the machine.
At 16" and with a higher pixel density I thought I might be able to enjoy a
slightly but usefully high display resolution than the 1440 x 900 default of
the old one, but no. The default of this one is 1728 x 1117, which makes
things a little uncomfortably small for me, or else I can have 1496 x 967,
which isn't much more than it was before.
Something in between would have been nice. I'm surprised that it's not
possible to have arbitrary scaling now, the displays have such high pixel
density.
The biggest positive suprise for me was the sound quality, I've never heard
anything like it from a computer. It's rich and full and the bass extends much
lower than I was expecting. I've no idea how they managed to do that.
Daniele
of schedule and without warning.
The first thing to say is: thank God that the era of the pig-headed lack of
ports, sub-functional keyboards and unwanted touchbar gewgaws is behind us.
And MagSafe is back. My 2013 MacBook Pro did sterling service for a very long
time, but it shouldn't have been necessary to have hung on for so many years.
The new machine is appreciably heavier than the 15" model it replaces, it's
only 150g or so but you can tell.
The shape is nice, it's quite austere and reminds me of the PowerBook G4. The
2013 model looks very elegant next to it. Someone said here years ago when the
PB G4 came out that they still liked the curvy, friendly shape of their
PowerBook G3 - which they felt was somehow like Nigella Lawson. I can't
remember who that was.
The older one slips into a backpack more easily than the new one, just because
of its shape rather than its size. I don't see why the rubber feet on the new
one couldn't have had the same smooth shape as before, that would have helped.
The keyboard feels pretty good to me, not quite as much travel as before, but
I can certainly live very happily with it. And now that I have a fingerprint
sensor, typing in passwords feels as primitive and inconvenient as having to
pick up and sort a pile of punch cards that were dropped all over the floor.
The display notch is quite odd. It hasn't caused any problems so far, but it
takes a bit of getting used to.
The display itself is actually the most disappointing aspect of the machine.
At 16" and with a higher pixel density I thought I might be able to enjoy a
slightly but usefully high display resolution than the 1440 x 900 default of
the old one, but no. The default of this one is 1728 x 1117, which makes
things a little uncomfortably small for me, or else I can have 1496 x 967,
which isn't much more than it was before.
Something in between would have been nice. I'm surprised that it's not
possible to have arbitrary scaling now, the displays have such high pixel
density.
The biggest positive suprise for me was the sound quality, I've never heard
anything like it from a computer. It's rich and full and the bass extends much
lower than I was expecting. I've no idea how they managed to do that.
Daniele
Chris Ridd
Nov 6, 2021, 2:26:03 AM11/6/21
to
On 05/11/2021 21:51, TimS wrote:
> On 05 Nov 2021 at 20:46:32 GMT, D.M. Procida
> entering the passcode) because the fingerprint business only worked about 25%
> of the time.
My wife has similar problems, I think some people's skin just doesn't
quite work right. Too dry or cold or something?
While we wait for Face ID to happen on Macs, the only simple alternative
is proximity unlocking with your Apple Watch.
For a more complicated alternative I think you might be able to unlock
with things like yubikeys (acting as smart cards) if you fiddle with
your pam config.
--
Chris
> On 05 Nov 2021 at 20:46:32 GMT, D.M. Procida
> <daniele-at-...@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>> The keyboard feels pretty good to me, not quite as much travel as before, but
>> I can certainly live very happily with it. And now that I have a fingerprint
>> sensor, typing in passwords feels as primitive and inconvenient as having to
>> pick up and sort a pile of punch cards that were dropped all over the floor.
>
> Provided it works, of course. I took that off my iPhone 6s (went back to
>
>> The keyboard feels pretty good to me, not quite as much travel as before, but
>> I can certainly live very happily with it. And now that I have a fingerprint
>> sensor, typing in passwords feels as primitive and inconvenient as having to
>> pick up and sort a pile of punch cards that were dropped all over the floor.
>
> entering the passcode) because the fingerprint business only worked about 25%
> of the time.
My wife has similar problems, I think some people's skin just doesn't
quite work right. Too dry or cold or something?
While we wait for Face ID to happen on Macs, the only simple alternative
is proximity unlocking with your Apple Watch.
For a more complicated alternative I think you might be able to unlock
with things like yubikeys (acting as smart cards) if you fiddle with
your pam config.
--
Chris
David Kennedy
Nov 6, 2021, 4:14:13 AM11/6/21
to
On 05/11/2021 20:46, D.M. Procida wrote:
>
> The biggest positive suprise for me was the sound quality, I've never heard
> anything like it from a computer. It's rich and full and the bass extends much
> lower than I was expecting. I've no idea how they managed to do that.
>
> Daniele
>
I would agree, the sound quality is really excellent.
>
> The biggest positive suprise for me was the sound quality, I've never heard
> anything like it from a computer. It's rich and full and the bass extends much
> lower than I was expecting. I've no idea how they managed to do that.
>
> Daniele
>
Jeff Gaines
Nov 6, 2021, 4:40:46 AM11/6/21
to
On 05/11/2021 in message <iulnbe...@mid.individual.net> TimS wrote:
><daniele-at-...@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>The keyboard feels pretty good to me, not quite as much travel as before,
>>but
>>I can certainly live very happily with it. And now that I have a
>>fingerprint
>>sensor, typing in passwords feels as primitive and inconvenient as having
>>to
>>pick up and sort a pile of punch cards that were dropped all over the
>>floor.
>
>self-checkout.
>Can't get the bastard to accept my screen-tap. SWMBO has to do it and it
>works
>first time for her. Meanwhile the Waitrose ones work without issue.
I can't use the touchpad on a laptop perhaps for similar reasons, I use a
Bluetooth mouse instead.
--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
Though no-one can go back and make a new start, everyone can start from
now and make a new ending.
><daniele-at-...@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>The keyboard feels pretty good to me, not quite as much travel as before,
>>but
>>I can certainly live very happily with it. And now that I have a
>>fingerprint
>>sensor, typing in passwords feels as primitive and inconvenient as having
>>to
>>pick up and sort a pile of punch cards that were dropped all over the
>>floor.
>
>Provided it works, of course. I took that off my iPhone 6s (went back to
>entering the passcode) because the fingerprint business only worked about
>25%
>of the time.
>
>I have the same trouble with Morrison's touch screens on their
>entering the passcode) because the fingerprint business only worked about
>25%
>of the time.
>
>self-checkout.
>Can't get the bastard to accept my screen-tap. SWMBO has to do it and it
>works
>first time for her. Meanwhile the Waitrose ones work without issue.
I can't use the touchpad on a laptop perhaps for similar reasons, I use a
Bluetooth mouse instead.
--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
Though no-one can go back and make a new start, everyone can start from
now and make a new ending.
RJH
Nov 6, 2021, 5:27:17 AM11/6/21
to
On 6 Nov 2021 at 08:22:59 GMT, "Ray" <amos-...@outlook.com> wrote:
> On 5 Nov 2021 at 20:46:32 GMT, "D.M. Procida"
> and amplifiers in recent years.
> I'm constantly impressed with the quality of music coming out of my Echo Dot.
> It ain't super HiFi of course, but the bass reproduction, for example , is
> surprising for something so small.
Agreed - 'impressive' rather than hifi. Has anyone tried retrofitting these
new types of speaker/amplifier to something like a clock radio (with weedy
sound)?
--
Cheers, Rob
> On 5 Nov 2021 at 20:46:32 GMT, "D.M. Procida"
> <daniele-at-...@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>> The biggest positive suprise for me was the sound quality, I've never heard
>> anything like it from a computer. It's rich and full and the bass extends much
>> lower than I was expecting. I've no idea how they managed to do that.
>
> There has been a major shift in small speaker quality along with enclosures
>
>> The biggest positive suprise for me was the sound quality, I've never heard
>> anything like it from a computer. It's rich and full and the bass extends much
>> lower than I was expecting. I've no idea how they managed to do that.
>
> and amplifiers in recent years.
> I'm constantly impressed with the quality of music coming out of my Echo Dot.
> It ain't super HiFi of course, but the bass reproduction, for example , is
> surprising for something so small.
Agreed - 'impressive' rather than hifi. Has anyone tried retrofitting these
new types of speaker/amplifier to something like a clock radio (with weedy
sound)?
--
Cheers, Rob
J. J. Lodder
Nov 6, 2021, 6:33:08 AM11/6/21
to
while it lasts.
How long till Apple gets up to 3840x2400 retina, and 17" again?
Jan
Steve Hodgson
Nov 6, 2021, 9:00:25 AM11/6/21
to
On 5 Nov 2021, D.M. Procida wrote
(in article <iuljh8...@mid.individual.net>):
> The older one slips into a backpack more easily than the new one, just because
> of its shape rather than its size. I don't see why the rubber feet on the new
> one couldn't have had the same smooth shape as before, that would have helped.
When I saw the feet I thought they maybe needed to lift the base for thermal
management reasons. I’ve not had the opportunity to see one in the real
world and probably won’t for a long time!
--
Cheers,
Steve Hodgson
(in article <iuljh8...@mid.individual.net>):
> The older one slips into a backpack more easily than the new one, just because
> of its shape rather than its size. I don't see why the rubber feet on the new
> one couldn't have had the same smooth shape as before, that would have helped.
management reasons. I’ve not had the opportunity to see one in the real
world and probably won’t for a long time!
--
Cheers,
Steve Hodgson
J. J. Lodder
Nov 6, 2021, 5:22:23 PM11/6/21
to
J. J. Lodder <nos...@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
> D.M. Procida <daniele-at-...@invalid.com> wrote:
>
> > My new MacBook Pro (16", M1 Pro, 16GB RAM, 1TB SSD) arrived on Monday, ahead
> > of schedule and without warning.
[-]
> D.M. Procida <daniele-at-...@invalid.com> wrote:
>
> > My new MacBook Pro (16", M1 Pro, 16GB RAM, 1TB SSD) arrived on Monday, ahead
> > of schedule and without warning.
> > The display itself is actually the most disappointing aspect of the machine.
> > At 16" and with a higher pixel density I thought I might be able to enjoy a
> > slightly but usefully high display resolution than the 1440 x 900 default of
> > the old one, but no. The default of this one is 1728 x 1117, which makes
> > things a little uncomfortably small for me, or else I can have 1496 x 967,
> > which isn't much more than it was before.
> >
> > Something in between would have been nice. I'm surprised that it's not
> > possible to have arbitrary scaling now, the displays have such high pixel
> > density.
>
> Agreed. I'll hang on to my good old 17" MacBook Pro @ 1920x1200,
> while it lasts.
> How long till Apple gets up to 3840x2400 retina, and 17" again?
[second thoughts]
> > At 16" and with a higher pixel density I thought I might be able to enjoy a
> > slightly but usefully high display resolution than the 1440 x 900 default of
> > the old one, but no. The default of this one is 1728 x 1117, which makes
> > things a little uncomfortably small for me, or else I can have 1496 x 967,
> > which isn't much more than it was before.
> >
> > Something in between would have been nice. I'm surprised that it's not
> > possible to have arbitrary scaling now, the displays have such high pixel
> > density.
>
> Agreed. I'll hang on to my good old 17" MacBook Pro @ 1920x1200,
> while it lasts.
> How long till Apple gets up to 3840x2400 retina, and 17" again?
It is surprising how slow progress in displays has been.
The original unibody MacBook Pro with the first 1920x1200 display
appeared in mid-2009.
So that is less than a factor of two of improvement (linear)
in more than twelve years, with a still a decrease in size as well,
Jan
nospam
Nov 6, 2021, 5:47:17 PM11/6/21
to
In article <1pi8tsq.1g3...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>, J. J. Lodder
it's actually been substantial.
> The original unibody MacBook Pro with the first 1920x1200 display
> appeared in mid-2009.
> So that is less than a factor of two of improvement (linear)
that was not retina, which is a significant improvement over non-retina.
the 17" macbook pro was discontinued because it did not sell enough to
keep making it and the 15" had higher resolution.
> in more than twelve years, with a still a decrease in size as well,
increase.
<https://www.samsung.com/us/computing/monitors/gaming/49--chg90-qled-gam
ing-monitor-lc49hg90dmnxza/>
Groundbreaking 49-inch super ultra-wide 32:9 curved screen fills
your field of view
there is also a vast improvement in dynamic range with mini-led on the
current macbook pro, ipad pro and the standalone xdr display.
modern displays also have a wider colour gamut and more accurate colour.
oled displays on iphone and apple watch (and many other devices) are
another step forward.
and then there's micro-led, although it's not quite ready for consumer
products.
it's actually been substantial.
> The original unibody MacBook Pro with the first 1920x1200 display
> appeared in mid-2009.
> So that is less than a factor of two of improvement (linear)
the 17" macbook pro was discontinued because it did not sell enough to
keep making it and the 15" had higher resolution.
> in more than twelve years, with a still a decrease in size as well,
<https://www.samsung.com/us/computing/monitors/gaming/49--chg90-qled-gam
ing-monitor-lc49hg90dmnxza/>
Groundbreaking 49-inch super ultra-wide 32:9 curved screen fills
your field of view
there is also a vast improvement in dynamic range with mini-led on the
current macbook pro, ipad pro and the standalone xdr display.
modern displays also have a wider colour gamut and more accurate colour.
oled displays on iphone and apple watch (and many other devices) are
another step forward.
and then there's micro-led, although it's not quite ready for consumer
products.
J. J. Lodder
Nov 7, 2021, 3:44:54 AM11/7/21
to
nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <1pi8tsq.1g3...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>, J. J. Lodder
> <nos...@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
>
> > It is surprising how slow progress in displays has been.
>
> it's actually been substantial.
Well, yes.
> In article <1pi8tsq.1g3...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>, J. J. Lodder
> <nos...@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
>
> > It is surprising how slow progress in displays has been.
>
> it's actually been substantial.
Less than a factor of two/12years is still better than nothing.
> > The original unibody MacBook Pro with the first 1920x1200 display
> > appeared in mid-2009.
> > So that is less than a factor of two of improvement (linear)
>
> that was not retina, which is a significant improvement over non-retina.
> the 17" macbook pro was discontinued because it did not sell enough to
> keep making it and the 15" had higher resolution.
>
> > in more than twelve years, with a still a decrease in size as well,
>
> increase.
> <https://www.samsung.com/us/computing/monitors/gaming/49--chg90-qled-gam
> ing-monitor-lc49hg90dmnxza/>
> Groundbreaking 49-inch super ultra-wide 32:9 curved screen fills
> your field of view
so about half of pixels of the MacBook Pro 16"
And completely useless for computer use,
just more fun for gamers.
For computer use two old 1920x1200 are more useful.
> there is also a vast improvement in dynamic range with mini-led on the
> current macbook pro, ipad pro and the standalone xdr display.
So at the bottom I fully agree with Danielle's comment that
'The display itself is actually the most disappointing aspect of the
machine.' (because of lack of growth in pixels)
Jan
[1] Having had the 12.9" ipad pro 4th and 5th side by side:
yes, there is a visible difference, with suitable images,
but you have to look carefully to see it.
Theo
Nov 7, 2021, 4:50:54 AM11/7/21
to
The problem with such high resolution displays is the resolution is a bit too
much - the pixels are too small to see, yet scaling can be awkward for some
apps that don't support HiDPI.
Meanwhile the design issue is that each tiny pixel needs to include an
opaque drive transistor, which doesn't shrink with the pixel size. So
proportionately more of the display is occluded by the transistors. To
remedy that the LCD is run brighter, which takes more power. So you suffer
worse battery life as the resolution goes up.
It seems like Apple have gone for a lower resolution/lower power sweet spot.
Although I'm a bit surprised they haven't allowed you to scale the desktop
down for more real estate.
Theo
nospam
Nov 7, 2021, 3:21:27 PM11/7/21
to
In article <dPf*EH...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, Theo
mac os has no issues whatsoever with such displays.
> Meanwhile the design issue is that each tiny pixel needs to include an
> opaque drive transistor, which doesn't shrink with the pixel size. So
> proportionately more of the display is occluded by the transistors. To
> remedy that the LCD is run brighter, which takes more power. So you suffer
> worse battery life as the resolution goes up.
rubbish. battery life keeps improving. it's also irrelevant.
> It seems like Apple have gone for a lower resolution/lower power sweet spot.
false.
> Although I'm a bit surprised they haven't allowed you to scale the desktop
> down for more real estate.
they absolutely do and always have with retina displays.
the optimal setting is 2x but that's not required and is sometimes not
the default.
<theom...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> The problem with such high resolution displays is the resolution is a bit too
> much - the pixels are too small to see, yet scaling can be awkward for some
> apps that don't support HiDPI.
that's because windows support of hidpi is very broken.
> The problem with such high resolution displays is the resolution is a bit too
> much - the pixels are too small to see, yet scaling can be awkward for some
> apps that don't support HiDPI.
mac os has no issues whatsoever with such displays.
> Meanwhile the design issue is that each tiny pixel needs to include an
> opaque drive transistor, which doesn't shrink with the pixel size. So
> proportionately more of the display is occluded by the transistors. To
> remedy that the LCD is run brighter, which takes more power. So you suffer
> worse battery life as the resolution goes up.
> It seems like Apple have gone for a lower resolution/lower power sweet spot.
> Although I'm a bit surprised they haven't allowed you to scale the desktop
> down for more real estate.
the optimal setting is 2x but that's not required and is sometimes not
the default.
nospam
Nov 7, 2021, 3:21:29 PM11/7/21
to
In article <1pi8wjz.1xf...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>, J. J. Lodder
> > > The original unibody MacBook Pro with the first 1920x1200 display
> > > appeared in mid-2009.
> > > So that is less than a factor of two of improvement (linear)
> >
> > that was not retina, which is a significant improvement over non-retina.
>
> 'Retina' is a sales term. It just means smaller pixels.
retina means pixels smaller than human resolution, and in almost every
case, it's by at least a factor of 2. on iphones, it's more.
> > the 17" macbook pro was discontinued because it did not sell enough to
> > keep making it and the 15" had higher resolution.
> >
> > > in more than twelve years, with a still a decrease in size as well,
> >
> > increase.
>
> 16 < 17
16 > 15
the 16" macbook pro is the replacement for the 15" macbook pro.
the 16" is physically about the same size, but with a larger display
due to having smaller bezels.
the 17" macbook pro was discontinued because it did not sell enough to
continue making it and because the 15" retina had a higher resolution
display. it never went retina, thus comparing it to a 15" is bogus.
> > <https://www.samsung.com/us/computing/monitors/gaming/49--chg90-qled-gam
> > ing-monitor-lc49hg90dmnxza/>
> > Groundbreaking 49-inch super ultra-wide 32:9 curved screen fills
> > your field of view
>
> Nope. Well hidden in the specs, but it is only 3840 X 1080
> so about half of pixels of the MacBook Pro 16"
> And completely useless for computer use,
it's actually very useful.
your claim was that displays have not become larger. that is false.
they have grown in size, and by a *lot*.
if you want higher resolution, there is apple's xdr display at
6016x3384 pixels, 1600 nits peak, 1000 nits sustained, p3 wide gamut,
10 bit/pixel. that's a huge improvement over older displays. it's
basically a reference monitor that costs a fraction of the price.
> just more fun for gamers.
> For computer use two old 1920x1200 are more useful.
rubbish.
first of all, if you're going to use two displays, then two 2560x1600
displays would be better, or better still, two 5k or 6k displays.
second, having content split across two displays is often bad, such as
large images, spreadsheets, etc.
> > there is also a vast improvement in dynamic range with mini-led on the
> > current macbook pro, ipad pro and the standalone xdr display.
>
> Yes, for not too large values of 'vast'. [1]
very large values of vast.
the current macbook pro displays are capable of 1600 nit peak
brightness for hdr content.
the previous ones were nowhere near that.
> So at the bottom I fully agree with Danielle's comment that
> 'The display itself is actually the most disappointing aspect of the
> machine.' (because of lack of growth in pixels)
the display on the 16" is in no way disappointing. anyone claiming such
ought to visit an eye doctor.
the new display is actually one of the biggest improvements for the
macbook.
another improvement is the higher refresh rate.
> [1] Having had the 12.9" ipad pro 4th and 5th side by side:
> yes, there is a visible difference, with suitable images,
> but you have to look carefully to see it.
not true. the difference is very noticeable unless the content you're
looking at is not hdr, or possibly if it's misconfigured.
<nos...@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
> > > It is surprising how slow progress in displays has been.
> >
> > it's actually been substantial.
>
> Well, yes.
> Less than a factor of two/12years is still better than nothing.
it's more than a factor of 2, notably on iphones
> > > It is surprising how slow progress in displays has been.
> >
> > it's actually been substantial.
>
> Well, yes.
> Less than a factor of two/12years is still better than nothing.
> > > The original unibody MacBook Pro with the first 1920x1200 display
> > > appeared in mid-2009.
> > > So that is less than a factor of two of improvement (linear)
> >
> > that was not retina, which is a significant improvement over non-retina.
>
> 'Retina' is a sales term. It just means smaller pixels.
case, it's by at least a factor of 2. on iphones, it's more.
> > the 17" macbook pro was discontinued because it did not sell enough to
> > keep making it and the 15" had higher resolution.
> >
> > > in more than twelve years, with a still a decrease in size as well,
> >
> > increase.
>
> 16 < 17
the 16" macbook pro is the replacement for the 15" macbook pro.
the 16" is physically about the same size, but with a larger display
due to having smaller bezels.
the 17" macbook pro was discontinued because it did not sell enough to
display. it never went retina, thus comparing it to a 15" is bogus.
> > <https://www.samsung.com/us/computing/monitors/gaming/49--chg90-qled-gam
> > ing-monitor-lc49hg90dmnxza/>
> > Groundbreaking 49-inch super ultra-wide 32:9 curved screen fills
> > your field of view
>
> Nope. Well hidden in the specs, but it is only 3840 X 1080
> so about half of pixels of the MacBook Pro 16"
> And completely useless for computer use,
your claim was that displays have not become larger. that is false.
they have grown in size, and by a *lot*.
if you want higher resolution, there is apple's xdr display at
6016x3384 pixels, 1600 nits peak, 1000 nits sustained, p3 wide gamut,
10 bit/pixel. that's a huge improvement over older displays. it's
basically a reference monitor that costs a fraction of the price.
> just more fun for gamers.
> For computer use two old 1920x1200 are more useful.
first of all, if you're going to use two displays, then two 2560x1600
displays would be better, or better still, two 5k or 6k displays.
second, having content split across two displays is often bad, such as
large images, spreadsheets, etc.
> > there is also a vast improvement in dynamic range with mini-led on the
> > current macbook pro, ipad pro and the standalone xdr display.
>
> Yes, for not too large values of 'vast'. [1]
the current macbook pro displays are capable of 1600 nit peak
brightness for hdr content.
the previous ones were nowhere near that.
> So at the bottom I fully agree with Danielle's comment that
> 'The display itself is actually the most disappointing aspect of the
> machine.' (because of lack of growth in pixels)
ought to visit an eye doctor.
the new display is actually one of the biggest improvements for the
macbook.
another improvement is the higher refresh rate.
> [1] Having had the 12.9" ipad pro 4th and 5th side by side:
> yes, there is a visible difference, with suitable images,
> but you have to look carefully to see it.
looking at is not hdr, or possibly if it's misconfigured.
pothead
Nov 7, 2021, 4:02:56 PM11/7/21
to
on display in Best Buy or Microcenter here in USA, the displays /
monitors in general look super sharp to me compared to the Windows
machines on display.
Maybe it's the resolutions or fonts or something else. I don't know.
Just saying.
--
pothead
Tommy Chong For President 2024
nospam
Nov 7, 2021, 4:05:11 PM11/7/21
to
In article <sm9etu$vds$1...@dont-email.me>, pothead
<pot...@snakebite.com> wrote:
> I know less than zero about Macs but I will say when looking at them
> on display in Best Buy or Microcenter here in USA, the displays /
> monitors in general look super sharp to me compared to the Windows
> machines on display.
> Maybe it's the resolutions or fonts or something else. I don't know.
> Just saying.
all three.
> I know less than zero about Macs but I will say when looking at them
> on display in Best Buy or Microcenter here in USA, the displays /
> monitors in general look super sharp to me compared to the Windows
> machines on display.
> Maybe it's the resolutions or fonts or something else. I don't know.
> Just saying.
pothead
Nov 7, 2021, 4:59:42 PM11/7/21
to
On 2021-11-07, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
D.M. Procida
Nov 8, 2021, 12:52:09 PM11/8/21
to
> And MagSafe is back.
I didn't mention this, but the MagSafe cable is now removable from the
charger, which is a great idea. Spare cables are £49, which is quite a lot to
pay for a wire, but still. It's a good step forward.
Daniele
I didn't mention this, but the MagSafe cable is now removable from the
charger, which is a great idea. Spare cables are £49, which is quite a lot to
pay for a wire, but still. It's a good step forward.
Daniele
nospam
Nov 8, 2021, 1:07:27 PM11/8/21
to
In article <iut6e8...@mid.individual.net>, D.M. Procida
magsafe connector, which needs to double-handshake with the usb-c
adapter and the macbook.
<daniele-at-...@invalid.com> wrote:
> > And MagSafe is back.
>
> I didn't mention this, but the MagSafe cable is now removable from the
> charger, which is a great idea. Spare cables are £49, which is quite a lot to
> pay for a wire, but still. It's a good step forward.
it's more than a wire. there are active components logic inside the
> > And MagSafe is back.
>
> I didn't mention this, but the MagSafe cable is now removable from the
> charger, which is a great idea. Spare cables are £49, which is quite a lot to
> pay for a wire, but still. It's a good step forward.
magsafe connector, which needs to double-handshake with the usb-c
adapter and the macbook.
Felix
Nov 20, 2021, 10:17:42 AM11/20/21
to
> My new MacBook Pro (16", M1 Pro, 16GB RAM, 1TB SSD) arrived on Monday, ahead
> of schedule and without warning.
> <snip>
> of schedule and without warning.
> The biggest positive suprise for me was the sound quality, I've never heard
> anything like it from a computer. It's rich and full and the bass extends much
> lower than I was expecting. I've no idea how they managed to do that.
>
> Daniele
Just got my replacement for a late 2013 MacBook, a MacBook Pro (16", M1 Pro,
> anything like it from a computer. It's rich and full and the bass extends much
> lower than I was expecting. I've no idea how they managed to do that.
>
> Daniele
32GB RAM, 1TB SSD) and was also struck by the sound quality.
I like the keyboard and the fingerprint sensor is very helpful...
The screen seems to suit my glasses!
--
Felix
Diesel / Gremlin Crook
Nov 20, 2021, 5:33:03 PM11/20/21
to
can not indict Nospam for his hissy fit but I don't figure out why he
comes here now that he gets what this place is. Nospam is pushing discussions
as done in a serious forum and open forums just will just lead to frustration.
Once Nospam understood how effective Mike Easter is at portraying himself
as the 'scapegoat' he realizes this isn't nearly as insane as it was
claimed. Right, Mike Easter is pushing to sell an API variable, which
Nospam can get in 5 seconds, that is grade school simple. If he could
stop being so clueless he'd get how lost he appears.
Search <https://www.bing.com/search?q=dustin%20cook%20functionally%20illiterate%20fraud>
<https://duckduckgo.com/?q=dustin+cook%3A+functionally+illiterate+fraud>
You can do even just this - <https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22functionally+illiterate+fraud%22>
--
Curious how these posts are made? Mike Easter automates them: https://youtu.be/hYQ4Tg0r0g0
Steve Petruzzellis - frelwizen
Nov 21, 2021, 8:22:53 AM11/21/21
to
On Monday, November 8, 2021 at 11:07:27 AM UTC-7, nospam wrote:
Thanks Linux! Don't look now, but I think Chris has a serious mancrush on
Snit (a real advocate). Sooner or later, if you bother to look... you would
see that Chris's game is to 'accidentally' incite people and then play 'injured
party'.
--
Live on Kickstarter!
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Dustin%20Cook%20functional%20illiterate%20fraud
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=steve+carroll+narcissistic+bigot
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Dustin+Cook+the+functional+illiterate+fraud
Steve 'Narcissistic Bigot' Carroll
Chris Ridd
Nov 22, 2021, 3:00:19 AM11/22/21
to
On 20/11/2021 15:17, Felix wrote:
> Just got my replacement for a late 2013 MacBook, a MacBook Pro (16", M1 Pro,
> 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD) and was also struck by the sound quality.
>
> I like the keyboard and the fingerprint sensor is very helpful...
Argh, mine is still "processing" in the far east and still ~ 2 weeks
> Just got my replacement for a late 2013 MacBook, a MacBook Pro (16", M1 Pro,
> 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD) and was also struck by the sound quality.
>
> I like the keyboard and the fingerprint sensor is very helpful...
away. And I thought the M1 was a fast processor :-)
> The screen seems to suit my glasses!
--
Chris
Felix
Nov 22, 2021, 3:17:13 AM11/22/21
to
without the glasses!
Delivery was originally projected 26th Nov - 3rd December but it actually
arrived 18th November...
--
Felix
Mark
Nov 22, 2021, 5:01:31 AM11/22/21
to
is Apple implementing some "under promise and overdeliver" mojo. Gets
them some cheap bonus points.
--
Cheers ... Mark
nospam
Nov 22, 2021, 7:21:08 AM11/22/21
to
In article <snfppp$255$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Mark
<captai...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Delivery was originally projected 26th Nov - 3rd December but it actually
> > arrived 18th November...
>
> Having seen this happen on many an occasion, I can't help feeling this
> is Apple implementing some "under promise and overdeliver" mojo. Gets
> them some cheap bonus points.
they've always done that.
> > Delivery was originally projected 26th Nov - 3rd December but it actually
> > arrived 18th November...
>
> Having seen this happen on many an occasion, I can't help feeling this
> is Apple implementing some "under promise and overdeliver" mojo. Gets
> them some cheap bonus points.
Chris Ridd
Nov 22, 2021, 2:27:13 PM11/22/21
to
On 22/11/2021 10:01, Mark wrote:
> Having seen this happen on many an occasion, I can't help feeling this
> is Apple implementing some "under promise and overdeliver" mojo. Gets
> them some cheap bonus points.
Yes, it is an easy win for them. I just got an airtag delivered a day
> Having seen this happen on many an occasion, I can't help feeling this
> is Apple implementing some "under promise and overdeliver" mojo. Gets
> them some cheap bonus points.
"early".
Fingers crossed the MBP arrives "early" too!
--
Chris
Steve Carroll
Nov 22, 2021, 2:41:51 PM11/22/21
to
in a detention center earlier this year. Anyone know what for? The probes
can not go into that amount of specificity and public reports apparently
are private unless court ordered. Kaspersky was initially written and
transcoded using a bootleg copy of MonoDevelop, in Visual Basic 6. Snit
sock Meat's allegation is misplaced first of all, and not accurate second
of all. Is David trying to be just as much of a dishonest liar as Snit
sock Meat is already known as being? Please give a case study of a successful
business that has gained its position by not giving a shit about its
customers and merchandise.
Snit sock Meat - who caused more issues applying his 'solutions' than
what the computer started with before he did a thing. Steven Petruzzellis:
Narcissistic Bigot.
--
I Left My Husband & Daughter At Home And THIS happened
https://www.google.com/search?q=Steve+Petruzzellis+the+narcissistic+bigot
Dustin Cook the functional illiterate fraud
nospam
Nov 23, 2021, 6:48:41 AM11/23/21
to
In article <sni98g$f26$1...@amos-jones.eternal-september.org>, Ray
there's no reason why any news media would report that, for any company.
> And nospam is correct, it's nothing new.
> Predicting delivery dates for something coming from the other side of the
> planet is not an exact science.
actually, it is. they know how many units they can make per day and how
many orders they have. there's a small amount of variability due to
shipping delays and customer cancelations, but they also know how often
that happens and take that into account. most companies give a worst
case scenario, just in case something goes wrong.
<amos-...@outlook.com> wrote:
> >> Delivery was originally projected 26th Nov - 3rd December but it actually
> >> arrived 18th November...
> >
> > Having seen this happen on many an occasion, I can't help feeling this
> > is Apple implementing some "under promise and overdeliver" mojo. Gets
> > them some cheap bonus points.
>
> Only in places like this. It doesn't filter into the mainstream media.
> >> Delivery was originally projected 26th Nov - 3rd December but it actually
> >> arrived 18th November...
> >
> > Having seen this happen on many an occasion, I can't help feeling this
> > is Apple implementing some "under promise and overdeliver" mojo. Gets
> > them some cheap bonus points.
>
there's no reason why any news media would report that, for any company.
> And nospam is correct, it's nothing new.
> Predicting delivery dates for something coming from the other side of the
> planet is not an exact science.
actually, it is. they know how many units they can make per day and how
many orders they have. there's a small amount of variability due to
shipping delays and customer cancelations, but they also know how often
that happens and take that into account. most companies give a worst
case scenario, just in case something goes wrong.
David Kennedy
Nov 23, 2021, 11:34:04 AM11/23/21
to
Graeme Wall
Nov 23, 2021, 11:43:02 AM11/23/21
to
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Chris Ridd
Nov 23, 2021, 2:06:50 PM11/23/21
to
for shipment".
--
Chris
Jeff Gaines
Nov 24, 2021, 5:52:57 AM11/24/21
to
On 24/11/2021 in message <snl365$8ct$1...@amos-jones.eternal-september.org>
Ray wrote:
>Unavoidable logistical delays always happen on either side of the ocean.
Or in the Suez Canal :-)
--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists
or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedies.
Ray wrote:
>Unavoidable logistical delays always happen on either side of the ocean.
Or in the Suez Canal :-)
--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists
or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedies.
D.M. Procida
Nov 24, 2021, 12:40:36 PM11/24/21
to
A couple of additional things -
The default display brightness is lower than I am used to. This could be an
effect of the OS rather than the hardware of course, but I find it a little
dim, to my surprise.
And, in the recent cycle of Apple indecision about having the name in a visble
place, this one doesn't say "MacBook" on it except underneath. I wonder why
they can't make up their minds.
It's such a long time since there was a Macintosh that actually said
"Macintosh" on it. I think the last one must have been the PowerMac G3, or the
G3 all-in-one.
Daniele
The default display brightness is lower than I am used to. This could be an
effect of the OS rather than the hardware of course, but I find it a little
dim, to my surprise.
And, in the recent cycle of Apple indecision about having the name in a visble
place, this one doesn't say "MacBook" on it except underneath. I wonder why
they can't make up their minds.
It's such a long time since there was a Macintosh that actually said
"Macintosh" on it. I think the last one must have been the PowerMac G3, or the
G3 all-in-one.
Daniele
nospam
Nov 24, 2021, 1:07:09 PM11/24/21
to
In article <j07boh...@mid.individual.net>, D.M. Procida
new macbook pro, is much brighter than any previous macbook.
> And, in the recent cycle of Apple indecision about having the name in a visble
> place, this one doesn't say "MacBook" on it except underneath. I wonder why
> they can't make up their minds.
they removed the screen bezels, which means there's no place to put the
name, except on the bottom.
<daniele-at-...@invalid.com> wrote:
> The default display brightness is lower than I am used to. This could be an
> effect of the OS rather than the hardware of course, but I find it a little
> dim, to my surprise.
increase it. the default brightness is never the maximum, which for the
> The default display brightness is lower than I am used to. This could be an
> effect of the OS rather than the hardware of course, but I find it a little
> dim, to my surprise.
new macbook pro, is much brighter than any previous macbook.
> And, in the recent cycle of Apple indecision about having the name in a visble
> place, this one doesn't say "MacBook" on it except underneath. I wonder why
> they can't make up their minds.
name, except on the bottom.
0 new messages