Windows fanboy stunned into submission by 13" Apple 'Sandy Bridge' MacBook Pro

Perhaps I should have mentioned that I restrained myself from awarding this a 10/10 due to the high cost and the less well specced graphics issues.

Useless review. All mentioned features can be found in similarly priced PC laptops. It should be called a review by a psuedo windows fanboy :-)

Really? What about the 'hewn from an aluminium block' form and the Thunderbolt I/O (on a current rather than forthcoming PC laptop) to name but one bit of tech mentioned?

And believe me, I've been a PC/Windows guy for close on twenty years so there's absolutely nothing pseudo about my loyalties :)

1280x800 AND 1500 dollar makes it a 5.6/10, not 9/10. I suggest you'd better get a sony vaio if your budget is that huge.

Did you seriously just pee your pants with joy because of a minor upgrade to a computer? For the sake of giving you the benefit of the doubt, we should assume this entire article was sarcastic. Also, how in the world could anybody think that 1200x800 is inferior to 1366x768? Hello? You just said a 16:10 screen with higher vertical pixelage was inferior to a 16:9? And a 1366x768 screen, at that? You just praised the concept of 1366x768! What is wrong with you? (Hint: it's that your standards for screen resolution on a 13" screen are absurdly low. My netbook with an 8" screen has a higher resolution than that.)

Any computer with less than a 1440x900 screen can't really be considered pro, but I'm being too generous -- we might consider that to be amateur, but we should at least give credit to 1600x900 for not being 768 pixels high. It's really a wanna-be 1400x1050, now that's pro, and 1680x1050 and 1920x1080 are naturally pro. If you want a real Pro machine these days you really need something like the Thinkpad T510 or W510 (or W520, coming soon) or HP Elitebook or *gasp* the MacBook Pro 17" edition, with its 1920x1200 resolution. All praise the MacBook 17" Pro! Honestly it's sad that I'm praising a computer with a 16:10 resolution, our standards have fallow so much from the days of 4:3. (Seriously with the 15" they could at least get 1680x1050 and none of this 1440x900 crap.)

Nobody with real work to do is going to get a computer with 1200x800 or 1366x768 resolution, unless by "real work" you mean mastering the art of online commentary or browsing the Facebook while sipping a latte at the local Starbucks while you eye that boy with the hair and hope he notices the sleek chassis on your computer but ohhh then he pulls his black magnesium-framed monolith and you flutter your eyes involuntarily, then he notices and "There's no time for you, woman, I've got real work to do," as he caresses his three-button trackpoint lovingly.

Well Mr Winder, I guess if there's one thing the apple haters hate worse than an apple user, it's the windows "fanboy" who dares to find something positive to say about a Mac.
Welcome to the world of Hating Apple No Matter What. You're probably a bit taken aback by the torrent of phlegm and vitriol your review has invoked, I wouldn't blame you if you never ran another story about anything Apple again. It's a bit like going to a tobacco chewing southern town a hundred years ago and suggesting that all men are equal.
How could you not know that you can't do real work on a computer with a 1280x800 resolution screen!
Let's stay real on the truth here and not forget that the world is flat.

Wow, happygeek, great review, right on the money. I agree with your assesment. My favorite testament to Apple's commitment to design and quality is the MagSafe power connector. Win!

Thanks Eyal, it's a lot of money but despite what some might argue you get a lot of bang for those bucks in terms of raw speed courtesy of Sandy Bridge. For me though, I guess it is the combination of form and factor that has me sold. Design isn't everything, but when it is this good it's very hard to ignore.

First and foremost, I loved the article, I don't get to see much good Apple press around anymore.

Second, to all the Apple haters, you have opinions, as does everyone else. If you're going to speak negatively about a product or company, please, I beg of you, base you speech in fact, not opinion or speculation.

Apple as a whole is an excellent business. I have had no problems with their customer support, their developer support, or with most of their products. I do own a late 2006 model MacBook (core 2 Duo 2Ghz), and the screen has gone out on me, and they replaced it with no questions asked. I did have to show them the issue, which was easy enough at my local Apple store.

I am not a Microsoft Fan boy, I rather dislike them. I am not an Apple fan either. I believe that you should use the best tool for the job that you know how to use. I am a developer, I specialize in Web and mobile development. If I want to make an app for Windows Phone 7, I use Visual studio in Windows. If I want to make an iOS (iPhone/iPod/iPad) app, I use OSX. Best of both worlds... Boot Camp.

Back to the article, I agree that Apple is way too expensive, but is it worth it considering the stability of the platform as compared to Windows? I do plan on getting a new macbook Pro, but I think I'm going with the 17" model, and using the beefier specs available...

For me, 13.3" just squeezes into my definition of a baby laptop whereas 15" does not, and that's important to me. My day to day machine for the last year or so has been an 11" (Windows7) netbook as it fulfills my need for real grab and go portability coupled with a big enough keyboard to be able to knock out a couple of thousand words (minimum) every day, wherever I happen to be.

15" is just too big for me, for casual carry-around-everywhere use. 14" is of course tolerable, I learned to tolerate that at college, but 13" is really a nice sweet spot. The main depressing downside of the new MacBook pro is that it has a built in CD drive, even on the 13" version, instead of eschewing that and making users carry a separate drive. There's no use of a drive without disks, and if you have disks, a drive's not much bigger. They could surely use that space for something... something power-consumptive, or perhaps just more battery. I can see a 15" machine carrying such a drive, especially if it's a particularly thick workstation model, or if it's swappable with extra battery or better yet an SSD. Which you can do on a MacBook Pro but not in some friendly way.

If I wanted a largeish netbook replacement and was willing to spend the money I'd consider going with a 13" MacBook Air. It lacks the unnecessary stuff, has the essential stuff. Unfortunately right now I'm getting into heavy-duty software development where I'm fighting high compile times and absurd performance demands, and there are better things when the variable in question is portability. On the portable carry-anywhere netbook front, I'm really happy with the Sony Vaio P Series, which is itty-bitty and actually fits in pockets. So if you want to type something out in a cafe, or visit a friend in the city, you don't have to carry anything in your hands or on some hipsterbag and you just put it in you coat pocket. Plus it has a 1600x768 screen. That's a plus. And it has a "stick" mouse, not a track pad (because there is no room for one). Which is another plus. It is quite slow, though, but hey that's the price you pay for being as thin as possible.

The MBP has other problems, notably that its trackpad is centered relative to the machine instead of being in the appropriate place for the user's thumbs. Other laptops have left-of-center trackpads, but Apple's fashion sense is too effete for that. And of course that it lacks a middle mouse button. Which a thinkpad has. Thinkpads also have a better keyboard, but of course that may be subjective.

For my next machine I'm going with a Thinkpad W520, which as far as I can tell has a better price, better specs (well it's 5.95 lb instead of 5.6 lb, and thicker), and deeper upgradeability than the 15" MBP. On a 15.6" model you can go 1920x1080 instead of MBP's puny 1680x1050 (that's not actually puny), with a touch screen. I'm going to get a touch screen. I have needs. It's only a shame that it's not 1920x1200.

And of course with that you get more slots and ports, a DVD drive you can replace with an extra SSD, and a thicker frame. So it's a W520 for a desktop replacement laptop and a netbook that's like 1/15 the size for writing Sailor Moon fanfiction on the train. Haha, just kidding, I meant Harry Potter fanfiction.

Happygeek, I have been reading you in PC Pro for well over ten years now. And this contribution is of the same high quality. It tees me off when quality work provokes a stream of blind prejudice.

On a technical note, Apple decided to skip USB3 for Light Peak, now aka Thunderbolt. Just like it decided to skip Blu-ray for downloads. Why would they include what they see as yesterday's technology alongside today's? So you will never see either of them on any Apple product.

On price I'd say that while most folk are of the 'know the price of everything, but the value of nothing' tribe and are compelled to drive a Ford 'cos they are cheap; some of us see the value in a BMW and are happy to pay it's price! I make a good living out of Microsoft as a SharePoint Architect but at home we are all Mac. As is one in five computer owning homes in the US now!