Hacker News

points by tristanj 1 day ago | 0 comments

Everyone's focused on the touchscreen, but I'm seriously impressed how they managed to cut down the weight.

* For the 14-inch: 3.5 lb (1.59 kg) -> 3.0 lb (1.36 kg)

* For the 16-inch: 4.7 lb (2.13 kg) -> 4.0 lb (1.81 kg)

About 15% lighter on both models. Switching from LCD to OLED saves weight because the screen does not need a backlight and has fewer layers. They also made the laptop thinner by nearly 1 mm. But that's not enough to push the weight down by 300 grams. They must have redesigned internal components to cut weight as well.

There must have been a dedicated effort to reduce weight. Kudos to the MacBook Pro team!

[–] kristianp 1 day ago

They've reduced size in every dimension, here's the 14 inch size from the specs for example:

Oled:

    Height: 1.50 cm (0.59 inch)
    Width: 31.08 cm (12.24 inches)
    Depth: 21.63 cm (8.52 inches)
    Weight (M5 Pro): 1.38 kg (3.0 pounds)
    Weight (M5 Max): 1.40 kg (3.1 pounds)

Ye Olde:

    Height: 1.55 cm (0.61 inch)
    Width: 31.26 cm (12.31 inches)
    Depth: 22.12 cm (8.71 inches)
    Weight (M6): 1.55 kg (3.4 pounds)
    Weight (M5 Pro): 1.60 kg (3.5 pounds)
    Weight (M5 Max): 1.62 kg (3.6 pounds)

[–] dmitshur 1 day ago

How do they compare to the 13/15/16” MBPs from 2016-2020 era (Intel CPUs and 4 USB-C ports)?

[–] pdpi 1 day ago

The 2020 Touch Bar 13" was 1.56cm x 30.4 cm x 21.2cm and 1.4kg, so this is the same weight, and thinner while having a slightly bigger footprint.

[–] reenorap 1 day ago

I would have loved to get the decrease in weight, but I bought my Macbook Pro 128 GB in March and the equivalent is now 50% more expensive, from 5000 to 7500. The memory price skyrocketing is so bad but I don't know if it will ever get better or if these prices are the best we will ever see again.

[–] nrmitchi 1 day ago

Those are completely disjointed things though, and one of them (price of RAM) is currently very-much outside Apple's control.

IF memory prices drop, apple product prices will likely drop. And it will stay lighter.

[–] indemnity 1 day ago

Apple never drops prices, never. It will go straight into their margin.

I have an M1 Max but I am not paying 50% more than a few months ago to upgrade.

I have bought Apple laptops since 2004 but I can’t justify the current extortionate pricing, so I’ll sit it out (permanently if need be).

[–] nrmitchi 1 day ago

> Apple never drops prices, never.

The first gen apple TVs were $300.

The second gen was $99.

The first and second 4k gen were $179.

The third gen was $129.

They might not drop prices on existing models, but they have definitely dropped prices on new versions of product lines.

[–] FireBeyond 1 day ago

Ironic that you chose the Apple TV. There's a bit of nuance, and the 3rd gen was $149, not $129 (the latter is Wifi only, when the first two were Wifi+Ethernet).

They then bumped UP the 3rd gen: $249 (+$100) and $199 (+$70).

And the 4th gen has only one option, at $299.

So we've not only "not dropped" prices on the 4K Apple TV, but they've gone up forty per cent.

[–] yreg 1 day ago

So what, they still dropped at times. The claim was that they never drop prices.

[–] stouset 1 day ago

The pricing isn’t extortionate. It’s literally just them having to pass on the insane price of RAM (itself priced due to the massive demand and supply shortage).

And you’re right that Apple is hesitant to change prices on models. But that cuts both ways. Apple notably held off of bumping prices across their product line for a considerable amount of time, very plausibly eating the cost of RAM price increases.

It would definitely be atypical but given the unique and extreme nature of the current situation, I wouldn’t be shocked if they cut prices somewhat once the RAM situation relaxes.

[–] FireBeyond 1 day ago

Right up to the launch of the Apple Silicon Mac Pro in mid 2023, Apple would still happily charge you early 2019 prices for the 2019 Xeon processors in the previous edition, 2019 prices for memory and flash (I ordered mine with 32 and used OWC to go to 192GB, because for the exact same chips, spec, timings, OWC wanted $1,050 for 192GB, and Apple wanted $3,000 for 160GB, i.e. minus the 32GB already rolled into the price. Similar $1K to $3K margin for 8TB of SSD - I bought a PCIe card with 4x2TB Samsung Pro drives).

[–] bhouston 1 day ago

> Apple never drops prices, never. It will go straight into their margin.

They have dropped the price of the MacBook Air a few years ago and the Mac Mini as well. So your statement is categorically false.

That said, with cpu, ram and storage prices the way they are right now, prices won't be dropping soon. But there is hope long term.

[–] intrasight 1 day ago

Inflation means they drop the price by not raising the price.

[–] 2muchcoffeeman 1 day ago

Spoken like someone who’s not tried to buy any computer anywhere in the last year.

All the pricing is bad everywhere.

[–] jwilcoxson 1 day ago

They do drop prices from time to time, they just don’t do the live market pricing Dell and Lenovo do where it can change day to day.

I hear you though on the cost. The Mac Mini was a killer deal a year ago, especially if you could get it on sale for <$500. Not today though.

[–] whizzter 1 day ago

Apple knows how much of a premium they can charge vs other manufacturers, if everyone else starts dropping they will as well.

[–] raydev 1 day ago

Hard to compare since the screen is significantly better and touch-capable.

[–] alberth 1 day ago

2019, 13" MacBook only weighed 3.02 lbs

https://support.apple.com/en-us/111945

EDIT:

Yes, 13" ≈ 14"

The form factor of this new 14" PROLED and the old 2019 13" is nearly the same (due to smaller bezels)

  PROLED: 0.59" x 12.24" x 8.5"
  2019:   0.59" x 11.97" x 8.36"

[–] vallerie 1 day ago

It also thermally throttled like hell, was much thinner, and had much reduced IO. What's impressive is keeping the same form factor and IO selection, and still getting that weight reduction.

[–] wpm 1 day ago

Assuming you are talking about the 4-port version of the 2019 Intel Pro model, the 2019 had more I/O than the next gen 14-inch, specifically because the 4th port on the 14-inch got turned into a dumb HDMI port that can only do HDMI out, not HDMI/DP/USB/Thunderbolt like an actual Thunderbolt port can. It is absolutely a reduction in total I/O capabilities, changes in abilities from Thunderbolt 3 to 4 notwithstanding.

I would rather have 4 Thunderbolt 3 ports than 3 Thunderbolt 4 ports, an SD card slot I won't use, and 1 HDMI port that can only be used for HDMI instead of whatever the hell I need it to be another Thunderbolt port can be.

[–] Grombobulous 1 day ago

I would rather have a Framework 13 Pro where I could choose 4 ports of my choosing and swap them out at will. (That’s my current machine, sold my M2 MacBook Pro for it).

I would rather have a ThinkPad X9 15p Aura Edition, which has 3x thunderbolt, SD Card, HDMI, and USB-A, all at the same time with no dongle.

[–] AprilArcus 1 day ago

I love the Framework laptops in every other respect, but I just don't get the "swappable port" concept. Those are still dongles; they're just special dongles that can only be used on one brand of machine and which require allocating internal space away from battery, on a machine whose power-hungry OSes can't spare a single watt-hour.

[–] Grombobulous 1 day ago

I don't know what's so hard to understand about it. They're dongles that don't stick out when you use them. That eliminates a lot of the annoyance with dongles.

They also let you customize what ports you want in your laptop. You don't have to customize them. You don't have to pull them out. It's still an advantage.

You can also replace your ports easily if they get physical damage.

They can also be used on any brand of machine or even a smartphone. They're just Thunderbolt/USB-C.

They don't take space away from the battery, the battery on the Framework 13 Pro is almost the exact same size as the one in the MacBook Pro 14, and as of the M5 model the Framework 13 Pro gets better battery life than that Mac.

[–] tencentshill 17 hours ago

They're just USB-C adapters. You can use them on any other laptop.

[–] vallerie 1 day ago

Perhaps but I never once used all four thunderbolt ports at once on that gen of macbook.

I hazard a guess most users are the same and would prefer having a HDMI / SD card for those moments where you just forgot a dongle while travelling (or, as always happens to me - dongle breaking at the worst moment) and I think the modern MacBook IO is significantly better for it

[–] wpm 18 hours ago

I have two MacBook Pros on my desk that have all three Thunderbolt ports occupied basically all the time.

I could also assert my experience is universal too but I won't, as it would be dishonest to just make up statistics.

[–] RulerOf 1 day ago

> the 4th port on the 14-inch got turned into a dumb HDMI port that can only do HDMI out

I would have paid extra to turn it into a USB A port instead.

[–] rjrjrjrj 1 day ago

Welcome to dongleville, population: you.

[–] wpm 1 day ago

Exactly. I'm not happy about being in Dongleville. It sucks shit here. I have boxes of dongles. They get tangled on my desk with is stupid messy with dongles. Stupid things. But I am here. And everyone else seems really happy about Dongleville and I can't change the fact that I need dongles, so we might as well just embrace it.

Because the Dongle-heads do have one thing right, one port that can be turned into lots of other kinds of ports with a dongle is more versatile than a port that can only be a video out, especially when the device doesn't have a ton of room for lots of ports.

[–] rjrjrjrj 1 day ago

Theoretically more versatile, but high-quality SDXC and HDMI built-in is much more practical than a 4th(!) Thunderbolt 5 port.

Also MagSafe, which the 2019 didn’t have.

[–] wpm 18 hours ago

How is an HDMI port more practical than a port that can be an HDMI port or a DisplayPort or a USB port or an SD card reader or an SDExpress reader or a dock or a port expander or whatever else?

[–] _trampeltier 1 day ago

Fujitsu U939 13" is lighter than 1kg, has a charger port, 2 USB-C, 2 USB-3, RJ45 (folded), HDMI, Smartcart, SD card, SIM Card, Pen, Mouspad with real buttons, keyboard with normal cursor buttons and separate PgUp and PgDown buttons.

[–] dsego 1 day ago

My t480s is also very light as is the framework 13. I was actually surprised how heavy the m1 pro was when i got it, much heavier than the intel 13 before it, but more like the macbook from 2012.

[–] stagalooo 1 day ago

How big was the battery?

[–] insane_dreamer 1 day ago

13" != 14"

[–] mbrumlow 1 day ago

That is the screen size. I think the 14 inch body is probably close to the same size as the 13 inch. Maybe I am wrong.

[–] nicoburns 1 day ago

Definitely appreciated. The increased weight is the one downside of my M1 laptop over my earlier 2015 Macbook.

[–] saturn8601 1 day ago

Sounds like maybe the Macbook Air could become the original 12 inch Macbook(2015) weight eventually. They might even re-introduce a 12 inch model. Imagine that!

[–] usaphp 1 day ago

To put in a perspective it’s the weight of a new iPhone duo.

[–] ramijames 1 day ago

That's crazy.

[–] whoisburbansky 1 day ago

It sounds crazy because it's not true; the Duo weighs 8.96oz, or 254g, a far cry from the MacBook weights.

[–] Yabood 1 day ago

I think they meant the weight reduction is equivalent to the Duo.

[–] peaseagee 1 day ago

The delta is 300g, which is close(ish) to 254g. But yes, the laptops are heavier than the phones.

[–] hias 1 day ago

the new macbook weights one Iphone Duo less than the old macbooks.

[–] vjvjvjvjghv 1 day ago

How many bananas is that?

[–] ulf-77723 1 day ago

Tried to fold a banana?

[–] vallerie 1 day ago

thank god! at work many people intentionally choose the 14" just because of weight. Once you add the charger in, the 16" is very noticeable in a bag and makes you pack a little differently for flights.

[–] pknomad 1 day ago

Yep. I got a 15" MacBook Air as a replacement because I still wanted portability but reduce the weight. I have 2 M1 Pro MBP (one work, one personal) and the added weight is noticeable at conferences...

[–] abujazar 1 day ago

Nice, but they're merely fixing a regression ;) Now if they could do the same with the iPhone instead of introducing more Bricky McBrick editions…

[–] ebbi 1 day ago

iPhone Air?

or if you want more battery life, iPhone 17 or 17e?

Or if you want even more battery life, iPhone 18 Pro/Pro Max?

[–] charlie0 1 day ago

Will this impact thermal performance? Last thing I want on my $6K laptop is throttling.

[–] unsupp0rted 1 day ago

I love my M1 16" but it's a giant heavy cinder block that I have dragged with me to more places than I can count, always grudgingly

[–] needforSp33d 1 day ago

They might have changed the internal fan layout. If you look it AR mode, you can look underneath the display , there’s usually two fan exhausts there, this one has only one

But I also only have an m1 16” so it may not be a brand new change

[–] shpx 1 day ago

13-inch M1 MacBook Air: 2.8 pounds (1.29 kg)

https://support.apple.com/en-us/111883

[–] freehorse 1 day ago

13-inch M5 MacBook Air: 2.7 pounds (1.23 kg)

https://support.apple.com/en-us/126320

Macbook airs are lighter because they are smaller and lack fans (and maybe for other reasons too) so it is not comparable, but it is one of the reasons I like fanless laptops (whatever cuts a bit the weight for mobility is welcome).

[–] teki_one 1 day ago

And the 13" Air is still heavier than the Asus A16 :(.

[–] scrlk 1 day ago

Back to similar weight as the 2016 Touch Bar era MBPs (13" 1.37 kg; 15" 1.83 kg), except way better thermals and battery life.

[–] Grombobulous 1 day ago

Way better thermals and battery life according to Apple, we do not yet have units in hand to review.

[–] scrlk 1 day ago

True. But I'm cautiously optimistic based on their track record of not shipping dud MacBooks (on the thermal and battery life front) since the switch to Apple Silicon. The Touch Bar/butterfly keyboard era of MacBooks was a total disaster. The chassis design didn't fit the hot and power hungry 14 nm Intel CPUs + generally poor reliability.

[–] Grombobulous 1 day ago

Sure, I certainly don’t expect for the laptop to be a slouch, but Apple is no stranger to exaggeration.

[–] jorvi 1 day ago

The best thing about OLED is not having disgusting amounts of blooming[0] and purple-pink edge fraying.

It's so bad that the first time I used my M series I thought I needed to RMA it because the display must be broken it it looks this bad, right? Nope.

[0]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/m0zq6aEnGWs/sddefault.jpg

[–] saturn8601 1 day ago

Thats a side effect of the 1000+ dimming zones no? I snagged this ASUS ProArt display that was Professional Grade on eBay and among its many flaws is that its 1000+ dimming zones result in blooming whenever you have bright items on top of a complete black background. Makes it terrible for horror movies. :/

[–] jorvi 1 day ago

Yes. What I've never understood is why Apple, when they looked at it in prototype, didn't just adapt a color profile that latched black a few values higher (basically the opposite of crushing blacks). It would have meant the display would have had slightly worse blacks, but at least they would have been uniform. If Jobs had seen this display he would have thrown the device, and perhaps the designer, straight out of a window.

[–] kalleboo 1 day ago

You're exaggerating wildly. The display looks amazing compared to 90% of the computer displays people use.

And Steve Jobs sold the plastic MacBooks with their terrible glossy TN display.

[–] jorvi 19 hours ago

No, they look horrific with any deep blacks? Not sure how that qualifies as "amazing".

They are amazing in terms of peak brightness. Blasting out at 1200-1600 nits makes working in direct sunlight a breeze.

[–] littlecranky67 1 day ago

I had the same experience but to be fair, you only notice this in complete dark rooms. Which is a fringe scenario.

[–] ahartmetz 1 day ago

You know what you also only notice in very dark rooms? Super high contrast ratios. So the feature fails in the one situation in which it could make a positive contribution.

[–] jorvi 1 day ago

It is visible even in daylight.

[–] mmcnl 1 day ago

In practice you will hardly ever notice this. Especially not during normal use. Maybe only during videos.

[–] tonymet 1 day ago

10oz of battery would have been another 20+ hours. that would have been nice

[–] rowanG077 1 day ago

TBH this is one of the things that will be a clear downgrade imo. Weight reductions and thinness are not free. The Pro and Max chip version are already over powered for the cooling system the current macbook pros have. And now they are further cutting into the laptop...

[–] stetrain 1 day ago

The display change itself likely accounts for some of the thickness and weight reduction. The mini-LED backlight grid on the previous displays wasn't nearly as thin or light as an OLED panel.

[–] rowanG077 1 day ago

I hope so. I just see Apple going down the same dark path they used to before the M series laptops.

[–] saturn8601 1 day ago

I heard that was a result of them designing for certain thermal envelopes ahead of time and Intel then delivering chips that didn't meet the specs they were promised. Not sure is this is what happened though so take with a grain of salt.

If this was the case, one the one hand they should be criticized for releasing such bad laptops on the market but if they had already decided on developing their own silicon then maybe it made sense to just accept that some generations of Macbook were going to have thermal issues and focus all efforts on the future.

[–] rowanG077 1 day ago

That would be excusable for a generation of macbooks. Not over multiple generations.

[–] saturn8601 1 day ago

Correct me if I am wrong but the heat problems were essentially Intel chips in the mid to late 2010s right? They are all essentially the same chip design with small window dressing added each year. The underlying problem is the same. Old design that suffered from Intel's issues in their fabs.

[–] rowanG077 1 day ago

Yes, but there was ample time for Apple to re-design the thermal system of their macbooks. Instead they kept releasing extremely thermally limited devices year after year.

[–] stetrain 1 day ago

It's a reasonable concern and something to look out for in reviews and user reports. Hopefully they aren't repeating that mistake.

[–] ksec 1 day ago

Not sure why this is downvoted but it is a valid concern. I will wait and see some thermal testing as someone mentioned on new cooling design which I can't find on the page just yet.

[–] scblock 1 day ago

It looks like it went from a 100 Wh battery to 72.6 Wh battery. That will definitely reduce the weight.

Edit: I was incorrect, I thought I had clicked the 16" spec page but had not. The 16" MacBook is still at 100 Wh.

[–] stetrain 1 day ago

The 16" still lists 100Wh:

https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/proled-xdr-display/specs/

The 14" went from 72.4Wh to 72.6Wh.

[–] traceroute66 1 day ago

> The 16" still lists 100Wh

For those not aware, the 100Wh limitation is not Apple, but imposed on them by the airline industry (IATA)[1]

Anything over >100Wh && <160Wh requires airline approval at individual passenger level. Anything >160Wh is classified as dangerous goods and must be prepared and packaged correctly and put in the hold.

[1] https://www.iata.org/contentassets/6fea26dd84d24b26a7a1fd578...

[–] whycome 1 day ago

It would be cool if they had an add on battery that fit seamlessly. Or imagine a swappable battery? And then ensure you only use the 100wh when flying?

The airline rules are a bit arbitrary. They have allowances for mobility devices but don't seem to take any extra precautions for them when they have bigger batteries. There are still a lot of dangerous gaps in airline safety when it comes to lithium batteries.

[–] JoshTriplett 1 day ago

> The airline rules are a bit arbitrary. They have allowances for mobility devices but don't seem to take any extra precautions for them when they have bigger batteries. There are still a lot of dangerous gaps in airline safety when it comes to lithium batteries.

They're absolutely arbitrary. From what I've seen, one of the major problems is wild variation in quality. An 80Wh battery from six-random-letters-off-Amazon is going to be more dangerous than a 160Wh battery from a reputable manufacturer.

[–] traceroute66 1 day ago

> An 80Wh battery from six-random-letters-off-Amazon is going to be more dangerous than a 160Wh battery from a reputable manufacturer.

I think the point is more the amount of energy stored in a fully-charged or 80% charged battery.

In that respect it doesn't matter if your 160Wh battery is from a leading manufacturer or some knock-off factory. 160Wh is 160Wh.

Also the airlines have to draw a line about what level can be permitted without specific permission, what level needs authorisation and what level needs dangerous goods handling.

So suspect the numbers feel arbitrary because its the result of various committees having consulted with various different interested parties and then having the unattractive job of needing to write some rules at the end of it.

It is an inevitable part of the process that some numbers will need to be picked which can easily be explained to passengers, and are workable for manufacturers and the airline industry.

[–] JoshTriplett 1 day ago

> 160Wh is 160Wh.

And yet you can carry a 100Wh spare battery and a 100Wh laptop and a 15Wh cell phone...

Ultimately, an 80Wh battery and a 160Wh battery both have more than enough energy for overheating to start a serious fire. The much more important consideration is the quality of the battery controller and the physical protections on and within the battery. And it's also important that many planes now carry burn bags that they can quickly put a runaway overheating battery (or phone or other device) into.

It would make more sense to have a battery certification and require batteries to have that certification in order to carry them on a plane.

[–] kccqzy 1 day ago

Yup. For example they don’t care if you bring two laptops each with a 100Wh battery.

[–] motti 1 day ago

You can take along a battery pack with usb-c and charge the macbook.

[–] traceroute66 1 day ago

> You can take along a battery pack with usb-c and charge the macbook.

Actually not quite. The rules have tightened up significantly on powerbanks.[1]

First the same size rules apply as always, i.e. 100Wh, 100–160Wh with personal individual passenger permission and never above 160Wh.

Second, max two per passenger.

Third, you are prohibited from:

     - using them to charge devices on-board
     - recharging the power bank itself on-board.

[1] https://www.caa.co.uk/commercial-industry/airlines/dangerous...

[–] scblock 1 day ago

You're correct, I misclicked on the specs page. Thanks.

[–] gigatexal 1 day ago

ahh that's no bueno...

is the touch part of the display toggle-able? i don't mind a better display but i have no, not a single desire ever to touch it.

[–] darkteflon 1 day ago

I have some excellent news for you: you don’t have to.

[–] neya 1 day ago

Welcome to 2016. Lightweight OLED displays have been in the market since a decade ago, but now we are praising Apple for catching up 10 years later for a laptop with a "pro" moniker? Damn, the Apple ass-kissing here never disappoints.

[–] tgma 1 day ago

I am a fan of OLEDs and have enjoyed secondary PC laptops with OLED, however, to be clear:

- Most OLED PCs were not anywhere as bright as the old MBP miniLED display.

- Almost all OLED PCs have terrible blue shift when viewed at an angle.

- Apple miniLED XDR displays are no slouches either. They are not quite OLED, but they implemented the dimming zones very well with uniform backlighting and deep blacks.

I have not seen Apple's on MBP, but I bet it meets or exceeds iPad Pro Tandem OLED which does not have the two problems above.

So no, it is not the same as the decade old PC OLED. And I have ignored all the potential durability issues.

[–] ako 1 day ago

I had a Lenovo thinkpad with OLED before switching to a MacBook Pro (first M1 Max, now M5 max). I don’t really mis the OLED display, it’s not that big of a difference (according to my 55 year old eyes…) the thinkpad also had a touchscreen, never used it, only by mistake. I would not pay extra for a touchscreen or OLED on a laptop. The photos on the apple website are not convincing, playing a keyboard on a vertical screen looks very uncomfortable.

Also don’t understand the iPhone duo, I’d rather have a normal iPhone and an iPad Air. Cheaper, and better for mobile use and for couch media consumption.

[–] internetter 1 day ago

Have you ever used a Mac? It is by and far the best laptop on average, and it keeps getting better.

[–] NexRebular 22 hours ago

The Apple Powerbook G3 PDQ is by and far the best laptop ever, indeed. Modular, easy to repair and even the CPU is on a swappable board. A breath of fresh air in the world of soldered in components!

[–] neya 1 day ago

I have 3 Macs running. I love them, but that doesn't mean I can't criticise them for falling behind.

[–] internetter 1 day ago

In what regard are they falling behind? There are lighter laptops, sure. Are there lighter laptops with the same performance, or the same battery, the same ergonomics, the same build quality, or the same screen quality?

[–] burningChrome 1 day ago

Gaming laptops they've never competed at all. Windows laptops offer far more form factors with easily upgradeable hardware. One of the only places Apple has an advantage is their chipsets. However, Qualcomm’s Snapdragon X chips have significantly closed the gap on Apple's ARM based M-chips.

I just got a 16" MacBook Pro with an M5 pro chipset and its total pig compared to my 15.6" HP ZBook Power G8.

The only area I can see where Apple is still holding their own is their UI/UX has always been buttery smooth compared to Windows or Linux. Not a fan the new liquid glass, but its still a very smooth running UI regardless.

[–] neya 1 day ago

What build quality? You must be joking. My M3 Pro is at the service center as of this moment for touch ID replacement. Because, apparently the quality of the harness is so bad it gives up in under 2 years of ownership - google it, it's a known issue. Next, the cheap ass 5V regulator fries if you actually try to as much as use a phone connected to it for long periods. This was a known issue across multiple generations. This is a tech forum, ass kissing a giant corporation that doesn't care about you should be the last thing one would expect to read here.

[–] yoavm 1 day ago

In the OLED regard. Other laptops had this for a decade now.

[–] shahar2k 1 day ago

I pretty much daily use a MacBook Air and an arm windows laptop costing about half the price. I use the MacBook Air at home for administrative and basic tasks, but the arm laptop is actually useful and runs software that I need... MacBooks at this point are just like luxury cars they have way more features than they need and are polishing areas that appear good but not necessarily are good for everyday requirements.

[–] internetter 1 day ago

What is the battery life of your windows laptop which is half the price? What is the screen quality? What is the single and multi core performance? Does it beat even the macbook neo on even one of these metrics? At the same cost?

[–] random3 1 day ago

This comes as straight out of PC vs Mac commercials. You confuse technology with actual products.

[–] Grombobulous 1 day ago

And Apple apologists confuse stale designs, unchanged chassis, and subpar spec sheets for “intentional design” and “holistic products.”

I think some of those folks should face some facts:

- The notch on the MacBook Air and Pro lineups is unnecessarily huge and embarrassing. It’s obvious that Apple intended to implement FaceID and couldn’t get it into the notch by their deadline, then they just left the huge notch there with barely any software consideration for it, like how your menu bar icons and menus can just disappear if there isn’t enough room with no recourse.

- There is no design or cost reason for Apple to be this late on offering a touch screen on their laptops. There is no downside to a customer who buys one and doesn’t want a touch screen, they can just disable it.

- The 60Hz displays on the Air are not necessary for any kind of product quality or cost reason and are simply below-par for what you can get on similarly priced Windows laptops. 100% artificial product line anchoring.

- The idea that there was no such thing an OLED display that was “good enough for a MacBook Pro” before 2026 is absurd.

[–] calf 1 day ago

But Apple laptops are still the best recommended laptops on the market, despite these extra costs and margins passed onto the consumer, why is that?

[–] bigyabai 1 day ago

Marketing. macOS has a minority share of desktop operating systems, "best recommended laptops" is an easily-won Keynesian beauty contest.

But, that lowest-common-denominator design philosophy gave us innovations like the Butterfly Keyboard, Touch Bar, Dynamic Island, and now a touchscreen. None of those features inspire much faith in Apple's ability to listen to what their users want from the Macbook. Most people I know want a more powerful iPad, not an iPad-like Mac.

[–] calf 22 hours ago

So it cannot possibly be explained as Macs/macOS are still a better product despite some obvious flaws and drawbacks? It has to be cynical marketing and some kind of consumerist corporate conspiracy? I don't get your argument.

[–] Grombobulous 18 hours ago

If Apple is the better product why are they #4 in PC sales?

Lenovo sells over 2x more personal computers than Apple.

[–] bigyabai 14 hours ago

Macs and macOS have a very thin market segment: college students, mobile devs and prosumers. They market to them heavily, earning the Mac their recommendation.

Outside of those niches, in places like game development, backend work, high-performance ARM datacenters, edge compute and personal computing, Macs are a second-class-citizen and rarely get recommended. macOS has a niche, those people love it, but it has not broken out into the larger market for decades now. Macs are a minority, still.

[–] neya 1 day ago

Because, Macs are the only products and the rest which use OLEDs since 2016 aren't, right?

[–] ksec 1 day ago

Do they have the same OLED? Same PPI? Same Tandem OLED? The First Tandem OLED on PC only came in 2022 IRRC, and laptop in 2024 / 2025.

Switching to OLED in 2016 makes zero sense when brightness and burn in issues are not solved.

[–] Danox 1 day ago

Single OLED doesn’t count but Tandem OLED does…

[–] cpursley 1 day ago

> Macs are the only products

The only ones that work as a unified product, yes.

[–] neya 1 day ago

WTF is even a "unified product"?

It's a fucking laptop. All laptops are "unified products". Stop throwing random jargon to cover up for the lack of merit to your argument.

[–] Danox 1 day ago

Apple is the only vertical computer company left from the 1980s. That’s operating system plus hardware under one roof, all the other companies are dead Sun, SGI, Digital etc…, Microsoft and Google dabble in hardware and both do nothing but lose money in the hardware area because just releasing a Me-too badly made product doesn’t work or I should say isn’t profitable.

[–] neya 1 day ago

> Apple is the only vertical computer company left from the 1980s.

> Microsoft and Google dabble in hardware and both do nothing but lose money in the hardware area

How is losing money relevant here, you started off the argument by saying Apple is the only vertical computer company left. Which is clearly not true and as your own comment contradicts.

You should try using a Surface Pro once. It is what the MacBook Pro is becoming now, only it is 5 years ahead. Yes, Windows sucks. But, the form factor and its usability is unmatched. I wouldn't just write it off as "dabbling".