prices are very competitive for high end laptops with supposedly pretty solid battery life. I'm a little weary since they all quote up to 9 hrs. I'm guessing if they idle for 9 hrs they will all die around the same time but in reality I'm guessing the two quads ($1150/$1300) to get maybe half of that usage.
The SSD caching is nice in the sense companies are looking at ways to increase responsiveness but 8gb is really too little to be useful. Unless their software somehow dumps whatever the current cache is while using to store boot items before shutdown. I can see this will either have slow boot times after using other programs a good bit, or cause little to zero caching of other programs outside of the boot process.
Intel's msata SSDs have 20/40/80gb options. the 20gb SLC cache would likely add a $100 premium. If they did use intel's SRT, they eliminate a secondary software to worry about while using intel's proven SRT software. Their laptops would be more responsive for end users with larger cache and provide more options to customize their builds.
It's a Sandy Bridge Quad, so it doesn't eat more battery while idle than a dual core.
And you do realize that upon boot a Win 7 takes about 700 MB of RAM? That leaves plenty of space in a 8 GB cache. Seagates Momentus XT does well with just 4 GB.
But I agree: using larger caches and Intels SRT seems better (for the buyer)
I've complained about Momentus XT many times --- it's basically useless in the real world. Now Samsung COULD have a substantially better algorithm than Seagate for deciding what lives in the cache --- but, honestly, I doubt it.
For all the talk of the Apple Tax being gone at the MacBook Air level (with the struggles to get to sub-$1000 pricing), there certainly still appears to be a large "tax" at the MacBook Pro level. I wonder if Apple has any tricks up its sleeve (e.g. a 15" "Air" for this fall)?
The Samsungs do look like good values for the money, and they also look well-built. The SSD cache is interesting, too.
Apple have no reason to lower the price of the Macbook Pro's though. Sheeple will buy them simply because of the logo even though theres clearly better alternatives, like these Samsung laptops. Whats ridiculous though is that you get the same kind of hardware here with Samsung, but higher res screen and more RAM by default, along with the aluminium case for about half the price of a Macbook Pro.
I wasn't looking for trolling comments. Based on the number of anti-Apple comments on message boards I think more people reject Macs out of hand because of the logo than buy them.
My point is that it's interesting that Samsung can manage to undercut competitors significantly with this notebook, but not with the Series 9, for instance, which is actually priced higher than a comparably-equipped MacBook Air.
Oh please. Look who is talking. The series 9 is more expensive than an air because it has REGULAR VOLTAGE processor as opposed to the low voltage underpowered one. The AIR still has the "mythical"(bye your perception) apple tax because Asus' ultraportables(same SKU this time) undercut the air by 2,3 hundred dollars. Keep in mind that the most reasonable spec-ed air is the 1.599$ one at 13", alas with low voltage sandy. Sheesh. Apple still affords to charge extra because it has the brand power. The windows hardware oem's compete with each other and cannot afford to charge as Apple, even if they have AT LEAST the same build quality.
As only an apple fan would say, good for apple that they can charge extra and get away with it. After all they have 457% of the media coverage in the states.
Ummm, perhaps I am missing something but doesn't the Samsung 9 come with an Intel i5-2537M 1.4ghz processor? Those are 17W low voltage processors. There are other variants that use the 2467M processor but again, that's still a low voltage 1.6ghz part. I'm not sure where you got it that the Samsung 9 comes with a standard voltage processor. By contrast the newer MBA comes with the i5-2557M 1.7ghz processor which is also 17W.
Now that we've gotten that out of the way there is no reason the Samsung 9 should be more expensive than the MBA. If Samsung was smart they would have released it the same price point as the MBA but for whatever reason they decided to overprice it. Again, the cpu in the MBA is actually better than the one in the 9. The rest of the specs are a wash basically, both have 128gb SSD's, 4gb of ram and both use integrated Intel HD3000 graphics.
However, the MBA has distinct advantages in other areas. Lets not forget that the 9 carries a pathetic 16:9 1366x768 resolution screen compared to the 16:10 1440x900 resolution that the MBA has. Sorry but 1366x768 is a no-no when we're talking about a $1649 laptop. It also has better battery life than the 9 as well.
The cheapest I've seen the 9 is $1299 at the Microsoft Store so that makes it the same price as the base MBA. I'm not sure what the 9 brings to the table from a hardware perspective that makes it a better buy than the MBA at the same price points. I'm not sure why you say the only reasonable MBA is the $1599 one. The only difference is that it carries a 256gb SSD. Why does that argument not apply to the Samsung 9 where it's 256gb SSD version comes in at the same price of $1599 on TigerDirect?
I'm not even going to include the ASUS ultraportables in this argument. They are vastly inferior to the Samsung and Apple offerings. If you've felt them side by side you can tell there is a huge difference in build quality between the ASUS compared to the Sammy 9 and the MBA. Oh and not to mention that ASUS is infamous for putting in below average TN lcd's in their laptops.
I admit my mistake. Was thinking at VaioZ maybe. The series 9, an older SKU, when released was compared to the core2duo air. I suspect the series 9 has dropped in price ever since dunno; the price u mentioned puts it right there near the 11" air, side for the lower freq. cpu on the samsung side. Samsung may obviously have different release cycles than Apple.
The Asus and the forgot to add Acer ones aren't released yet, being their first foray into ultraportable niche segment; but as I read from Engadget's cover on the rumored specs and prices are sure to undercut the airs. You cannot know anything about Asus UXs as they are not released yet. Asus is also infamous for being no1 in reliability surveys if you want to nitpick.
So yes I was wrong about the 9, my recollection on the 9 review was that it had a better CPU than the air, which was true in march when it was pitted against core2duo air. In september 1 2011 I was wrong and you are right. I give you that.
Anyhow to keep my main point against KPOM, pc manufacturers do not undercut Apple because they cannot; it is Apple that puts a premium on their pcs(talking about same specs), while the win pc industry competes within itself in a commoditized( by MS )market which forces them all to diminish their margins; who cares, win for pc consumers :).
Asus and Acer have been in the "ultraportable" market for some time now. Asus with their UL and U series and Acer with their TimelineX series. If you're talking about the "Ultrabook" segment then sure, it's their first foray.
I'm not sure why you think I'm nitpicking Asus. My biggest complaint against Asus and Acer is the type and quality of LCDs that they use in their laptops. They consistantly rank either average or below average. They've continually displayed 1366x768 junk on their laptops over the past couple of years. You can read the myriad of Anandtech reviews which have dogged Asus for using low quality screens. It's become a pattern for them. I hope Asus and Acer finally decide to step it up in the quality and resolution of their screens on their ultrabooks. However, I'm not holding my breath for it to happen and I'll believe it when I see it. Companies like Apple, Sony (Z series), Dell (RGB+), Samsung (9 series), HP (Radiance) and Lenovo (IPS in their X220) have all made commitments to putting higher quality LCDs in their top tier laptops. Why haven't Asus and Acer?
I mean you can say I'm nitpicking about screens but for me, screen quality is the biggest deciding factor when it comes to buying a laptop. The CPU's will be good enough and I don't do any laptop gaming so gpu is not a big factor either. I basically pass on any laptop that has a 1366x768 rez on a 13"+ LCD. That's the only reason why I bought the MBA over the Samsung 9. I don't completely agree with your argument that Apple and PC manufacturers don't compete with each other based on my experience of getting the MBA over any Win 7 laptop. Had the 9 had better resolution, I would have gotten it instead as I like Windows 7 much better than OSX. Likewise, I have a Sony Z (last gen) simply because it has a 1600x900 resolution.
Another reason to get a Mac is so you can make iphone/ipad apps using Apple's SDK. I'm seriously considering getting an old Mac just for that purpose, even though this new Samsung series 7 would be much cheaper and faster than a year old MBP. I read there are ways to get around the Mac requirement, but I read you cannot use some functions.
My eye's on this series 7. the 15.6" looks to be the best buy, hope that they can cramp the same specs into the 14".
Thats a ridiculous reason reason to get a Mac. HAVING to own a Mac in order to use the SDK is something you should be angry about. Another thing is that you cant even submit apps to the Apple App store without using a Mac. It's a joke. If MS did this sort of thing everyone would seriously bash them and you know it. It's just another typical bad business practice for Apple, which are becoming even worse than MS were in the 90's.
And if you want to make apps then atleast make them for a superior platform like Android.
I guess the hardware isn't everything huh? There's something called software also, and I'm pretty sure that's a pretty big part of the equation for most buyers of Apple laptops.
I don't even own an Apple laptop or computer (never have) but I get somewhat offended by people who call other people 'sheeple' just because they want something different than the insulter does from their computer. Stop being a spoiled brat and just let people buy what they like without insulting them, ok?
I feel unqualified posting here, but what exactly is the advantage of OSX for the normal person?
After using it for about a week, i developed a strong aversion towards it. But i was mighty impressed with the hardware. Have i missed something, or have i fallen a victim to habit (using windows right from the start)? Since i also hated every linux i ever tried, i guess it's the latter.
It doesn't matter whether or not you like MAC OS X, the point is that for the majority of people buying Apple computers, it is an important feature for them.
And to answer your question, I would guess that it's just that you are very comfortable with Windows, given that you don't like anything else you have tried.
That's why i asked. I only know 2 people with macbooks. My cousin who is trying to become the next paris hilton, and my uncle who bought it because of the quality.
You have to admit that the Apple Tax is lowest when a product cycle is new and largest when Apple is about to retire the product (in other words, they are in their profit maximization phase of the life cycle).
You're comparing a "new" series 7 design to a three year old aluminum unibody design.
There is expectation and rumor that Apple is going to expire the design next year with one modeled after the MacBook Air (tapered, SSD, removing the optical drive). The only reason it wouldn't be cheaper is that the cost of SSD would raise the price, but it would be competitive with a similar system also utilizing SSD.
The problem is, they are only rumors. Nowadays there are plenty of Apple rumors, of which most are inaccurate. Sure, at some point Apple will change the design and at some point, Apple will utilize SSDs.
I doubt Apple will use SSDs as sole storage in MBPs anytime soon though. The prices are way too high at the moment. Apple can't go from 750GB HDs to 128GB SSDs, there are people who need more storage. A hybrid solution is possible as it wouldn't cost too much but that wouldn't justify the premium of MBP.
If you remove the ODD and replace it with a HDD bay, you get the effect of a super fast SSD cache, lower weight, better battery life, and large storage.
So you tack on a $200 premium for a 128gb SSD, but a cheaper 5400rpm HDD for massive storage.
It is, after all, a BTO option for their current generation of iMacs, and would work perfectly transparently on a MBP.
And, yes, the hybrid solution would justify the premium of a MBP because you get the same 1s sleep/wake, storing the OS and apps on a 60gb SSD partition for faster application performance and app state saving, and the ability to sleep the HDD while most of the system runs off ram and SSD.
You don't get better battery life. With an HD, you only have the HD spinning, the ODD only uses power when you actually stick a disc in it. However, with HD+SSD combo, you have two drives sucking power constantly. Okay, the HD can be put into sleep mode but that means it will take several seconds before the files can be accessed (and the HD might randomly spin up, at least my external does).
I still don't see how adding a $100 SSD would justify paying over $1000 more. You could get a 512GB SSD for your PC and still save money compared to MBP. PC OEMs will definitely offer hybrid solutions for less $ too, so that wouldn't make MBP any special.
You misunderstand. When Apple releases a new architecture they tend to be price competitive with the current state of the art, so the $200 premium would mean a $1700 15" with SSD+HDD, and $100 cheaper than the base current 15" MBP.
Pretty impressed by these laptops. The specs for the price is certainly good and the hardware on a whole seems great. SSD caching is something that should be on many other laptops by now, it makes sense. And to top it off these laptops look nice, well built and have a decent screen res. I also like the thin bezel which also gets the size down. Samsung seem to have put a lot of thought in to these. Might actually get one...
From the review you guys did earlier with the 20 gig Intel cache ssd it seems like the benefits from an 8gig cache will be marginal. It's too bad the cache ssd isn't use upgradeable.
Oh my, they finally got the screen resolution right. If I haven't bought ThinkPad T420 with 1600x900 couple months back, I would be very interested in those.
Hackintoshing should be possible as the hardware is so similar. Hacks have their pros and cons though and I wouldn't use one as my main computer (or it must have Windows at least).
Looks like a great notebook, aside from the off-center trackpad and mangled arrow keys anyway.
Unfortunately I find the lack of quad options and better graphics rather disappointing, as I'd rather have the 14" which is lighter and eschews the pointless numpad.
Considering the pricing of these I'd feel cheated by choosing the 14" model though.
Quads have higher TDP and thus require more cooling. The same applies to beefier GPUs. It's already pretty good that Samsung has fitted a decent discrete GPU and ODD in the 14" model. You are paying for the smaller form factor too, don't forget that.
Indeed, I understand why they choose to go that route... I'm just miffed at the lack of options. And the fact that I'll get a quad for less if I can settle for the 15.5" model.
Personally I don't see the point of bottom-end discrete graphics either, I'd rather just use the integrated and save some space, power and a little cash.
The 14" is also SRT ready while the base 15.6" is not. I actually think this 14" has the best price/performance ratio for a notebook this year. It's hard enough to find anything with a resolution larger than 1366x768 these days let alone WITH a discrete graphics card and a slim aluminum FF for less than $1500. The 10W saved in the i5 vs the i7 is at least beneficial to heat dissipation even if the smaller battery cannot match the larger one in battery life.
I think the bigger disparity in price/performance is between the 14" and the 15.6" that costs $50 more for a quad and better gpu. The jump from the $1149 to the $1299 15.6" model is nonsensical though as you only get 2 more gigs of ram out of the premium...RAM speed is probably 1333mhz so I'd rather upgrade both sticks to 1600 anyways.
SSD performance depends on the number of dies in parallel, the smaller the capacity, the lower the die count usually. And then the overhead of the controller.
I'd rather have +8GB of memory and let the OS do the rest.
Maybe they put those 8GB of SSD only to be used to dump the content of the RAM during hibernation. This explains both the small size (8GB is enough because the laptop has 4GB RAM onboard + max 4GB into one slot) and the quick startup (from hibernation).
The macbooks don't use IPS panels. They're just better-quality TN panels, and only the iMacs and cinema displays have IPS panels. As for glossy/matte, apparently all the models are matte screens with 1600x900 resolution, so if Sammy puts high quality TN or even VA/IPS panels in there, they have a winner.
Sorry, but for me, if you don't have a 1080p screen option for a 15"+ laptop, it's a fail for me. I have a 1080p screen now on my current laptop, and I'll never go back because the extra screen real estate is great for work.
Pretty sure these don't compete with MBP since these Sandy Bridge procs are the ULV version numbers and thus, aren't as fast as the full fledged SB processors that are in the MBP. Even still, that 14" with 1600x900 screen looks tasty, wish it had better graphics but thats probably all you can fit in such a diminutive chassis.
Those aren't ulv processors. In fact the i7 one even seems to have higher clocked version of intel hd 3000 integrated graphics card. We really need to see a full review of these laptops. Hope I can finally replace my 2007 mbp with these.
i7-2635QM is as fast as i7-2630QM (or actually slightly faster given the 100MHz faster GPU Turbo), the difference is packaging. 30QM uses rBGA998 whereas 35QM uses BGA 1224
These laptops are an improvement, but still not as thin as the MacBook Pro. There is a weird flip down Ethernet jack that I'm not sure I'd like. The track pads are large but not centered. The 16x9 display could be a weak point PC makers rarely spec high end panels. I love the edge-to-edge glass display of the MacBook Pro, it would be difficult to give that up. I can't wait to see what Apple can do when they ditch the Optical drive on the MacBook Pro. My guess is a three way split - thinner, bigger battery, better cooling. I think they will ditch the Ethernet port, they have to to make it thinner. Luckily, I prefer WiFi for simplicity above performance.
Well, considering your trolling on techreport, and the apple eulogy you're presenting right now(complete with your macbook wet dreams) I dunno if any PC can satisfy you; at least not in the same visceral way the apple PC does by the looks of it.
Looks pretty good, only misses DisplayPort sadly. Good for consumer device, but that omission kinda makes it miss the boat. Would not buy it as a DTR thanks to that.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
55 Comments
Back to Article
MarkLuvsCS - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
prices are very competitive for high end laptops with supposedly pretty solid battery life. I'm a little weary since they all quote up to 9 hrs. I'm guessing if they idle for 9 hrs they will all die around the same time but in reality I'm guessing the two quads ($1150/$1300) to get maybe half of that usage.The SSD caching is nice in the sense companies are looking at ways to increase responsiveness but 8gb is really too little to be useful. Unless their software somehow dumps whatever the current cache is while using to store boot items before shutdown. I can see this will either have slow boot times after using other programs a good bit, or cause little to zero caching of other programs outside of the boot process.
Intel's msata SSDs have 20/40/80gb options. the 20gb SLC cache would likely add a $100 premium. If they did use intel's SRT, they eliminate a secondary software to worry about while using intel's proven SRT software. Their laptops would be more responsive for end users with larger cache and provide more options to customize their builds.
MrSpadge - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
It's a Sandy Bridge Quad, so it doesn't eat more battery while idle than a dual core.And you do realize that upon boot a Win 7 takes about 700 MB of RAM? That leaves plenty of space in a 8 GB cache. Seagates Momentus XT does well with just 4 GB.
But I agree: using larger caches and Intels SRT seems better (for the buyer)
MrS
name99 - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
"Seagates Momentus XT does well with just 4 GB."Where, by "does well" you mean "does very badly"?
I've complained about Momentus XT many times --- it's basically useless in the real world. Now Samsung COULD have a substantially better algorithm than Seagate for deciding what lives in the cache --- but, honestly, I doubt it.
KPOM - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
For all the talk of the Apple Tax being gone at the MacBook Air level (with the struggles to get to sub-$1000 pricing), there certainly still appears to be a large "tax" at the MacBook Pro level. I wonder if Apple has any tricks up its sleeve (e.g. a 15" "Air" for this fall)?The Samsungs do look like good values for the money, and they also look well-built. The SSD cache is interesting, too.
B3an - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Apple have no reason to lower the price of the Macbook Pro's though. Sheeple will buy them simply because of the logo even though theres clearly better alternatives, like these Samsung laptops. Whats ridiculous though is that you get the same kind of hardware here with Samsung, but higher res screen and more RAM by default, along with the aluminium case for about half the price of a Macbook Pro.KPOM - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
I wasn't looking for trolling comments. Based on the number of anti-Apple comments on message boards I think more people reject Macs out of hand because of the logo than buy them.My point is that it's interesting that Samsung can manage to undercut competitors significantly with this notebook, but not with the Series 9, for instance, which is actually priced higher than a comparably-equipped MacBook Air.
KPOM - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Also, Samsung has undercut not just Apple, but Dell, per the article.ananduser - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
Oh please. Look who is talking. The series 9 is more expensive than an air because it has REGULAR VOLTAGE processor as opposed to the low voltage underpowered one. The AIR still has the "mythical"(bye your perception) apple tax because Asus' ultraportables(same SKU this time) undercut the air by 2,3 hundred dollars. Keep in mind that the most reasonable spec-ed air is the 1.599$ one at 13", alas with low voltage sandy. Sheesh. Apple still affords to charge extra because it has the brand power. The windows hardware oem's compete with each other and cannot afford to charge as Apple, even if they have AT LEAST the same build quality.As only an apple fan would say, good for apple that they can charge extra and get away with it. After all they have 457% of the media coverage in the states.
Gazziza - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
Ummm, perhaps I am missing something but doesn't the Samsung 9 come with an Intel i5-2537M 1.4ghz processor? Those are 17W low voltage processors. There are other variants that use the 2467M processor but again, that's still a low voltage 1.6ghz part. I'm not sure where you got it that the Samsung 9 comes with a standard voltage processor. By contrast the newer MBA comes with the i5-2557M 1.7ghz processor which is also 17W.Now that we've gotten that out of the way there is no reason the Samsung 9 should be more expensive than the MBA. If Samsung was smart they would have released it the same price point as the MBA but for whatever reason they decided to overprice it. Again, the cpu in the MBA is actually better than the one in the 9. The rest of the specs are a wash basically, both have 128gb SSD's, 4gb of ram and both use integrated Intel HD3000 graphics.
However, the MBA has distinct advantages in other areas. Lets not forget that the 9 carries a pathetic 16:9 1366x768 resolution screen compared to the 16:10 1440x900 resolution that the MBA has. Sorry but 1366x768 is a no-no when we're talking about a $1649 laptop. It also has better battery life than the 9 as well.
The cheapest I've seen the 9 is $1299 at the Microsoft Store so that makes it the same price as the base MBA. I'm not sure what the 9 brings to the table from a hardware perspective that makes it a better buy than the MBA at the same price points. I'm not sure why you say the only reasonable MBA is the $1599 one. The only difference is that it carries a 256gb SSD. Why does that argument not apply to the Samsung 9 where it's 256gb SSD version comes in at the same price of $1599 on TigerDirect?
I'm not even going to include the ASUS ultraportables in this argument. They are vastly inferior to the Samsung and Apple offerings. If you've felt them side by side you can tell there is a huge difference in build quality between the ASUS compared to the Sammy 9 and the MBA. Oh and not to mention that ASUS is infamous for putting in below average TN lcd's in their laptops.
ananduser - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
I admit my mistake. Was thinking at VaioZ maybe. The series 9, an older SKU, when released was compared to the core2duo air. I suspect the series 9 has dropped in price ever since dunno; the price u mentioned puts it right there near the 11" air, side for the lower freq. cpu on the samsung side. Samsung may obviously have different release cycles than Apple.The Asus and the forgot to add Acer ones aren't released yet, being their first foray into ultraportable niche segment; but as I read from Engadget's cover on the rumored specs and prices are sure to undercut the airs. You cannot know anything about Asus UXs as they are not released yet. Asus is also infamous for being no1 in reliability surveys if you want to nitpick.
So yes I was wrong about the 9, my recollection on the 9 review was that it had a better CPU than the air, which was true in march when it was pitted against core2duo air. In september 1 2011 I was wrong and you are right. I give you that.
Anyhow to keep my main point against KPOM, pc manufacturers do not undercut Apple because they cannot; it is Apple that puts a premium on their pcs(talking about same specs), while the win pc industry competes within itself in a commoditized( by MS )market which forces them all to diminish their margins; who cares, win for pc consumers :).
ananduser - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
Damn no edit button..."near the 13 air"... sorry.Gazziza - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
Asus and Acer have been in the "ultraportable" market for some time now. Asus with their UL and U series and Acer with their TimelineX series. If you're talking about the "Ultrabook" segment then sure, it's their first foray.I'm not sure why you think I'm nitpicking Asus. My biggest complaint against Asus and Acer is the type and quality of LCDs that they use in their laptops. They consistantly rank either average or below average. They've continually displayed 1366x768 junk on their laptops over the past couple of years. You can read the myriad of Anandtech reviews which have dogged Asus for using low quality screens. It's become a pattern for them. I hope Asus and Acer finally decide to step it up in the quality and resolution of their screens on their ultrabooks. However, I'm not holding my breath for it to happen and I'll believe it when I see it. Companies like Apple, Sony (Z series), Dell (RGB+), Samsung (9 series), HP (Radiance) and Lenovo (IPS in their X220) have all made commitments to putting higher quality LCDs in their top tier laptops. Why haven't Asus and Acer?
I mean you can say I'm nitpicking about screens but for me, screen quality is the biggest deciding factor when it comes to buying a laptop. The CPU's will be good enough and I don't do any laptop gaming so gpu is not a big factor either. I basically pass on any laptop that has a 1366x768 rez on a 13"+ LCD. That's the only reason why I bought the MBA over the Samsung 9. I don't completely agree with your argument that Apple and PC manufacturers don't compete with each other based on my experience of getting the MBA over any Win 7 laptop. Had the 9 had better resolution, I would have gotten it instead as I like Windows 7 much better than OSX. Likewise, I have a Sony Z (last gen) simply because it has a 1600x900 resolution.
Miggleness - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Another reason to get a Mac is so you can make iphone/ipad apps using Apple's SDK. I'm seriously considering getting an old Mac just for that purpose, even though this new Samsung series 7 would be much cheaper and faster than a year old MBP. I read there are ways to get around the Mac requirement, but I read you cannot use some functions.My eye's on this series 7. the 15.6" looks to be the best buy, hope that they can cramp the same specs into the 14".
B3an - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Thats a ridiculous reason reason to get a Mac. HAVING to own a Mac in order to use the SDK is something you should be angry about. Another thing is that you cant even submit apps to the Apple App store without using a Mac. It's a joke. If MS did this sort of thing everyone would seriously bash them and you know it. It's just another typical bad business practice for Apple, which are becoming even worse than MS were in the 90's.And if you want to make apps then atleast make them for a superior platform like Android.
bji - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
I guess the hardware isn't everything huh? There's something called software also, and I'm pretty sure that's a pretty big part of the equation for most buyers of Apple laptops.I don't even own an Apple laptop or computer (never have) but I get somewhat offended by people who call other people 'sheeple' just because they want something different than the insulter does from their computer. Stop being a spoiled brat and just let people buy what they like without insulting them, ok?
markiz - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
I feel unqualified posting here, but what exactly is the advantage of OSX for the normal person?After using it for about a week, i developed a strong aversion towards it. But i was mighty impressed with the hardware.
Have i missed something, or have i fallen a victim to habit (using windows right from the start)?
Since i also hated every linux i ever tried, i guess it's the latter.
bji - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
It doesn't matter whether or not you like MAC OS X, the point is that for the majority of people buying Apple computers, it is an important feature for them.And to answer your question, I would guess that it's just that you are very comfortable with Windows, given that you don't like anything else you have tried.
markiz - Friday, September 2, 2011 - link
That's why i asked. I only know 2 people with macbooks. My cousin who is trying to become the next paris hilton, and my uncle who bought it because of the quality.But i'll take you're word for it.
michael2k - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
You have to admit that the Apple Tax is lowest when a product cycle is new and largest when Apple is about to retire the product (in other words, they are in their profit maximization phase of the life cycle).You're comparing a "new" series 7 design to a three year old aluminum unibody design.
There is expectation and rumor that Apple is going to expire the design next year with one modeled after the MacBook Air (tapered, SSD, removing the optical drive). The only reason it wouldn't be cheaper is that the cost of SSD would raise the price, but it would be competitive with a similar system also utilizing SSD.
Kristian Vättö - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
The problem is, they are only rumors. Nowadays there are plenty of Apple rumors, of which most are inaccurate. Sure, at some point Apple will change the design and at some point, Apple will utilize SSDs.I doubt Apple will use SSDs as sole storage in MBPs anytime soon though. The prices are way too high at the moment. Apple can't go from 750GB HDs to 128GB SSDs, there are people who need more storage. A hybrid solution is possible as it wouldn't cost too much but that wouldn't justify the premium of MBP.
michael2k - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
If you remove the ODD and replace it with a HDD bay, you get the effect of a super fast SSD cache, lower weight, better battery life, and large storage.So you tack on a $200 premium for a 128gb SSD, but a cheaper 5400rpm HDD for massive storage.
It is, after all, a BTO option for their current generation of iMacs, and would work perfectly transparently on a MBP.
And, yes, the hybrid solution would justify the premium of a MBP because you get the same 1s sleep/wake, storing the OS and apps on a 60gb SSD partition for faster application performance and app state saving, and the ability to sleep the HDD while most of the system runs off ram and SSD.
Kristian Vättö - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
You don't get better battery life. With an HD, you only have the HD spinning, the ODD only uses power when you actually stick a disc in it. However, with HD+SSD combo, you have two drives sucking power constantly. Okay, the HD can be put into sleep mode but that means it will take several seconds before the files can be accessed (and the HD might randomly spin up, at least my external does).I still don't see how adding a $100 SSD would justify paying over $1000 more. You could get a 512GB SSD for your PC and still save money compared to MBP. PC OEMs will definitely offer hybrid solutions for less $ too, so that wouldn't make MBP any special.
michael2k - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
You misunderstand. When Apple releases a new architecture they tend to be price competitive with the current state of the art, so the $200 premium would mean a $1700 15" with SSD+HDD, and $100 cheaper than the base current 15" MBP.B3an - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Pretty impressed by these laptops. The specs for the price is certainly good and the hardware on a whole seems great. SSD caching is something that should be on many other laptops by now, it makes sense. And to top it off these laptops look nice, well built and have a decent screen res.I also like the thin bezel which also gets the size down. Samsung seem to have put a lot of thought in to these. Might actually get one...
yibrushn - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
From the review you guys did earlier with the 20 gig Intel cache ssd it seems like the benefits from an 8gig cache will be marginal. It's too bad the cache ssd isn't use upgradeable.Anubis - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
sighyuriylsh - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Oh my, they finally got the screen resolution right. If I haven't bought ThinkPad T420 with 1600x900 couple months back, I would be very interested in those.GotThumbs - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Good to see companies putting some effort in following Apples fashion focus in marketing, but at a more reasonable cost to interested consumers.The next question is.....could this run Apples OS? I'm not a fan of Apple, but would love to see other options made available to Apple consumers.
Kristian Vättö - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Hackintoshing should be possible as the hardware is so similar. Hacks have their pros and cons though and I wouldn't use one as my main computer (or it must have Windows at least).Exodite - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Looks like a great notebook, aside from the off-center trackpad and mangled arrow keys anyway.Unfortunately I find the lack of quad options and better graphics rather disappointing, as I'd rather have the 14" which is lighter and eschews the pointless numpad.
Considering the pricing of these I'd feel cheated by choosing the 14" model though.
Kristian Vättö - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Quads have higher TDP and thus require more cooling. The same applies to beefier GPUs. It's already pretty good that Samsung has fitted a decent discrete GPU and ODD in the 14" model. You are paying for the smaller form factor too, don't forget that.Exodite - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Indeed, I understand why they choose to go that route... I'm just miffed at the lack of options. And the fact that I'll get a quad for less if I can settle for the 15.5" model.Personally I don't see the point of bottom-end discrete graphics either, I'd rather just use the integrated and save some space, power and a little cash.
markiz - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
i though that amd is middle class?Also, didn't rhey say that because of the thin bezel, 15.5 is more like 14.5 chasis?
etamin - Sunday, September 4, 2011 - link
The 14" is also SRT ready while the base 15.6" is not. I actually think this 14" has the best price/performance ratio for a notebook this year. It's hard enough to find anything with a resolution larger than 1366x768 these days let alone WITH a discrete graphics card and a slim aluminum FF for less than $1500. The 10W saved in the i5 vs the i7 is at least beneficial to heat dissipation even if the smaller battery cannot match the larger one in battery life.etamin - Sunday, September 4, 2011 - link
I think the bigger disparity in price/performance is between the 14" and the 15.6" that costs $50 more for a quad and better gpu. The jump from the $1149 to the $1299 15.6" model is nonsensical though as you only get 2 more gigs of ram out of the premium...RAM speed is probably 1333mhz so I'd rather upgrade both sticks to 1600 anyways.wutsurstyle - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
where are the left and right click touchpad buttons?Hulk - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Specifically how thick?piroroadkill - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
These actually look very nice. 1600x900 14" screen? Thank you, Samsung! No fucking 1366x768 in sight, thank christ.Conficio - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
I have my doubts that his is worth it.SSD performance depends on the number of dies in parallel, the smaller the capacity, the lower the die count usually. And then the overhead of the controller.
I'd rather have +8GB of memory and let the OS do the rest.
Kristian Vättö - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
8GB suggest a single die as that is what 25nm provides. If it's 34nm, then 2x4GB is possible.cdanc - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Maybe they put those 8GB of SSD only to be used to dump the content of the RAM during hibernation. This explains both the small size (8GB is enough because the laptop has 4GB RAM onboard + max 4GB into one slot) and the quick startup (from hibernation).kenyee - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Is it a regular LCD....IPS? The Macbooks all use IPS which is why their colors look so saturated.Is it glossy? Matte?
etherealkev - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
The macbooks don't use IPS panels. They're just better-quality TN panels, and only the iMacs and cinema displays have IPS panels. As for glossy/matte, apparently all the models are matte screens with 1600x900 resolution, so if Sammy puts high quality TN or even VA/IPS panels in there, they have a winner.Roland00Address - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Anandtech talked about the different panels in the last mac article he did.FlyBri - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Sorry, but for me, if you don't have a 1080p screen option for a 15"+ laptop, it's a fail for me. I have a 1080p screen now on my current laptop, and I'll never go back because the extra screen real estate is great for work.a2d - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Does anybody know if these beauties do support Power Express Switchable Graphics (AMD's equivalent to NVs Optimus Technology)?bhima - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Pretty sure these don't compete with MBP since these Sandy Bridge procs are the ULV version numbers and thus, aren't as fast as the full fledged SB processors that are in the MBP. Even still, that 14" with 1600x900 screen looks tasty, wish it had better graphics but thats probably all you can fit in such a diminutive chassis.etherealkev - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
Those aren't ulv processors. In fact the i7 one even seems to have higher clocked version of intel hd 3000 integrated graphics card. We really need to see a full review of these laptops. Hope I can finally replace my 2007 mbp with these.Kristian Vättö - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
i7-2635QM is as fast as i7-2630QM (or actually slightly faster given the 100MHz faster GPU Turbo), the difference is packaging. 30QM uses rBGA998 whereas 35QM uses BGA 1224TEAMSWITCHER - Wednesday, August 31, 2011 - link
These laptops are an improvement, but still not as thin as the MacBook Pro. There is a weird flip down Ethernet jack that I'm not sure I'd like. The track pads are large but not centered. The 16x9 display could be a weak point PC makers rarely spec high end panels. I love the edge-to-edge glass display of the MacBook Pro, it would be difficult to give that up. I can't wait to see what Apple can do when they ditch the Optical drive on the MacBook Pro. My guess is a three way split - thinner, bigger battery, better cooling. I think they will ditch the Ethernet port, they have to to make it thinner. Luckily, I prefer WiFi for simplicity above performance.ananduser - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
Well, considering your trolling on techreport, and the apple eulogy you're presenting right now(complete with your macbook wet dreams) I dunno if any PC can satisfy you; at least not in the same visceral way the apple PC does by the looks of it.FITCamaro - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
So is Apple going to sue Samsung for this too? Because you know Apple invented the idea of a laptop with an aluminum chassis.Kristian Vättö - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
If they own a patent, then maybe. I doubt you can patent such thing though. Or if they did, who has patented plastic laptops? That must be a rich guy.Penti - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
Looks pretty good, only misses DisplayPort sadly. Good for consumer device, but that omission kinda makes it miss the boat. Would not buy it as a DTR thanks to that.etamin - Sunday, September 4, 2011 - link
I daresay this is the best laptop of all time...(at least on paper)