Done for 2009: The Holiday MacBook Pro Roundup
by Anand Lal Shimpi on November 10, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Mac
Swap the Pro Out for Some Flavor
The 17-inch MacBook Pro is a workhorse. You get FireWire 800, an ExpressCard/34 slot and discrete graphics if you choose to use it. Apple figures someone who wants such a big machine will probably have some fast external storage to connect to it, some peripherals to slide in it, and some GPU intensive applications to run.
From left to right: 13-inch, 15-inch and 17-inch MacBook Pro
The 13-inch and 15-inch are much more consumer focused, despite their Pro branding. You lose the features mentioned above (although the 9600M is optional on the 15-inch), but gain a built in SD card reader. With most professional DSLRs using Compact Flash, the SD card reader seems to imply that Apple's entry level Pro users are shooting with point-and-shoot cameras instead.
13-inch MacBook Pro
15-inch MacBook Pro
Mini DisplayPort is still standard, and you still don't get any adapters in the box. The number of USB ports is cut down to two and processor speeds drop accordingly.
The 13-inch MacBook Pro. Compact but with a great keyboard.
The 13-inch MacBook Pro comes with a 2.26GHz Core 2 Duo by default. Still a 45nm chip, it only has 3MB of L2 cache to share between the cores. The base 13-inch model only comes with 2GB of memory, Apple's biggest fault, presumably to maintain profit margins even at the lowest end of the spectrum.
Moving to the $1499 version you can get the 2.53GHz Core 2 Duo, keeping the 3MB L2 cache. 4GB is also standard with the more expensive 13-inch model.
Hard drive speed remains at 5400RPM across all MacBook Pros, which is fine because if you really want speed you want an SSD anyway.
The 15-inch MacBook Pro. Same keyboard, more screen.
The 15-inch picks up where the 13-inch leaves off. You can get a 2.53GHz, 2.66GHz, 2.80GHz or 3.06GHz chip - the latter is only available in built-to-order configurations. It's the most flexible of all of the options, but its default configuration isn't bad at all. 4GB of RAM is standard on the 15-inch.
| Apple's 2009 Lineup | 13-inch MacBook Pro | 15-inch MacBook Pro | 17-inch MacBook Pro |
| CPU | Intel Core 2 Duo 2.26GHz | Intel Core 2 Duo 2.53GHz | Intel Core 2 Duo 2.8GHz |
| Memory | 2GB DDR3-1066 | 4GB DDR3-1066 | 4GB DDR3-1066 |
| HDD | 160GB 5400RPM | 250GB 5400RPM | 500GB 5400RPM |
| Video | NVIDIA GeForce 9400M (integrated) | NVIDIA GeForce 9400M (integrated) | NVIDIA GeForce 9400M (integrated) + NVIDIA GeForce 9600M 512MB (discrete) |
| Optical Drive | 8X Slot Load DL DVD +/-R | 8X Slot Load DL DVD +/-R | 8X Slot Load DL DVD +/-R |
| Screen Resolution | 1280 x 800 | 1440 x 900 | 1920 x 1200 |
| USB | 2 | 2 | 3 |
| SD Card Reader | Yes | Yes | No |
| FireWire 800 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| ExpressCard/34 | No | No | Yes |
| Battery | 60Whr | 73Whr | 95Whr |
| Dimensions (W x D x H) | 12.78" x 8.94" x 0.95" | 14.35" x 9.82" x 0.95" | 15.47" x 10.51" x 0.98" |
| Weight | 4.5 lbs | 5.5 lbs | 6.6 lbs |
| Price | $1199 | $1699 | $2499 |
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
115 Comments
View All Comments
SmCaudata - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
Edit: I meant ASUS Laptop.JimmyJimmington - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
Do people really buy 17 inch laptops? I could never justify spending that much money on something I can't even take to school. Might as well build an amazing desktop... And then use the leftover money to buy a great laptop...The0ne - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
Not many of us would shell out $2500 for one but many of us would for 1/3 the price with similar if not better specs.damianrobertjones - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
Can we have a roundup of the following machinesDell
Toshiba
HP
etc
etc
That would make everything fair.
Zak - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
Not everyone can afford an SSD, SSDs offered by Apple as BTO are crap and overpriced, and a fast 7200rpm HD does make a difference.Z.
Zak - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
" Apple figures someone who wants such a big machine will probably have some fast external storage to connect to it..." And still no SATA? BTW, the screen on the 17" is indeed amazing.Z.
mschira - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
I like the logic you draw with the heavy load test.So that all makes sense.
Some other thing:
Did you check battery time on a Hackintosh?
Like an Acer Timeline get's up to 7 hours on Win7, what can it get when we make it a Hackintosh?
M.
CharonPDX - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
You compare the 17" to an HP and a Dell, which are both monsters. (But, they are nearly 1/3 the price, for noticeably more CPU power.)You compare the 13" to a Dell that is slightly larger. (Compare to the HP Envy 13; then you'll get a definitive Apple win, as the HP costs more than a 13" MBP.)
But you don't do the obvious comparison: 15" MacBook Pro to HP Envy 15.
I think the MacBook Pro would lose out instantly in this comparison. It is what the 15" MacBook Pro *SHOULD* be right now.
For the 17"? You dismiss the Dell and HP as being too big. Yet they both cost less than $1200. And HP offers an identically-sized model that throws in a 1080 screen and Blu-ray player for $1300. For that matter, you can completely max out the HP's specs (fastest mobile Core i7, 8 GB RAM, dual 500 GB hard drives, Blu-ray writer, etc,) before it becomes more expensive than the MacBook Pro. (And then, by only $50.) I'm sorry, but it's not worth the massive loss in features (or $1000, if you take the 'stock' 1080/Blu-ray HP,) to save 1.1 lbs.
ChuckyP83 - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
I think you are missing the point of the article. Comparing a one piece aluminum vault of a laptop to a flimsy, plasticky, lowest-cost-built Dell (or HP or whoever) just doesn't work just on specs buddy. Nobody knows how to build a laptop as solidly as Apple. That is a fact you CANNOT argue (I think Apple patented their manufacturing technique). Apples don't compete on price and specs because the ways they surpass the average PC competition aren't easily quantifiable. Not sure why I am even replying to this guy....The0ne - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
That is subjective. I have many dell laptops and they aren't cheap. I have my 17" with me as a backpack hiking weight in China and it still works afterward. Granted the Macbook quality might be a bit better but when people like you said it in your way you make it out as though Dell or HP has horrible quality build, that the laptop wouldn't last being carrying around, that a drop would kill it, etc. Unless you don't know how to lug around a laptop the build quality is the least of your concern.The bottom line is that most of us are fine with the build quality of Dell, HPs, Acer, etc. But some people don't mind spending A LOT more to have nicer metal pieces and looks. Seriously in the end what would you prefer, function or style?
You're too much of a Apple fanboy. Thank God no one builds laptop, or in more general terms hardware, like Apple. I won't even go into the details of their greatness here. Their hardware is not perfect as you know. Knowing this and claiming no one does it better than they do is fan-boyish.
Apple doesn't have a patent on manufacturing techniques. If they did it would be a very specific process that is not covered by countless generations of manufacturing processes. They could, like Intel, put a freeze on the process to prevent any changes. But this has severe advantages and disadvantages.
"Apples don't compete on price and specs because the ways they surpass the average PC competition aren't easily quantifiable. Not sure why I am even replying to this guy.... "
Who else besides me thinks these sentences is a load of BS? Please respond to this user if you do. Apple don't compete in price and spec because lets see...they are the only ones selling them and thus can dictate the prices? They surpass the average PC competition so they can do whatever they want because the user wouldn't be able to quantify the reasons? O.o
To be honest, I'm not even sure why I'M responding to your post. It's so lame, riddled with false facts it's not even funny. Urgh.