TUAW Review: MacBook Pro (Late 2008)

Apple was kind enough to supply me with a free mini DisplayPort to DVI cable with the MBP I ordered. Can't fault them for that.

I also can't fault them for the lack of a matte screen. I no longer do very much production or design work on the small laptop screen. It slows down the workflow. Instead, a cinema screen is really the only way to go. In the field, my local coffee house, or elsewhere the glossy screen gives me more oomph for light surfing, coding, or reading.

I love the design, feel, and the new graphic power. Lightroom can now processes my 16MB raw files at light speed.

Where I do think Apple was a little short sighted, was with their frugal offer of just one FW800 port. I have a number of printers, flatbeds, film scanners, and drives running at various FW speeds. That means while in the studio, my new MPB must remain married to a new FW 800 expresscard. I can't even find any FW800 hubs for the one port -- as it appears most were discontinued many, many months ago. What was Apple thinking? Now I have to get creative -- especially when working with new high speed eSATA drives.

While there's a lot to praise Apple for, I can't help but feel the Pro in the new MacBook Pro has slipped a notch to mean the new MacBook Prosumer.

I think you are spot on with the review it is a great looking machine and feels really solid and somehow feels heavier than my old MBP 2.16. I have unfortunately having a strange intermittent problem with my machine, whenever I put the machine to sleep for more than 10-15 mins on wake up the screen starts flickering so I have sent it back to my dealer today.

Let's be clear. Glossy displays are bad for soft-proofing output. That being said, so are 6 or 8-bit laptop displays, but using one in the field is a necessary evil for many pro photographers. Glossy, low-bit displays are just useless for pro photographers in the field. A matte laptop display can be calibrated to present soft-proofed images that look reasonably similar to the same soft-proofed image on a pro desktop display, such as the Eizo ColorEdge line or the LaCie 700 series. A glossy laptop display simply cannot be calibrated to present soft-proofed images that look anything like either the actual output or the soft-proof on a pro desktop display.

Incidently, the new LaCie 700 line is LED, just like the MacBook Pro and the 24" LED Cinema display. The LaCie display finish is matte. Many specialty glassmakers make coated glass that eliminate 99% of reflections. It seems to me that Apple could make a higher bit-rate laptop display with LEDs, the color and contrast of matte displays, and anti-reflective glass. It would be expensive, but Apple should support the pro users whose work is color output critical. The pros supported Apple when no one else did for the very reason that they supplied the necessary visual performance specs and ease-of-use that pros demand. Pro have also always been willing to spend the extra money for necessary features.

Higher bit-rate processing in laptop displays would eat into the power usage improvements of LED, but combine it with a matte finish and finer adjustment capabilities and you have a laptop that will have pro photographers lining up to buy. Right now they're staying away in droves.

Just got mine (MBP 2.53 GHz) last night. Why doesn't Handbrake utilize the CPU fully??? It's like it's capped at 20-25% for some reason. Otherwise, this computer is amazing!

nikster said:" The LCD display glass must hold up to the same standards as expensive optical glasses - the optical quality must be perfect. To that end, glossy is the only way to go."

You know, there's a plastic panel behind that glass?

wow, a lot of gripes about the glossy screen. my macbook came glossy and I've had no problems with it in two years. Hell, the iphone is glass and therefore glossy, and I use it all the tyme outside!!! and it's always still usable. the benefits of it being glass far out way the glossiness.

Obviously the glossy screen issue is highly subjective. I prefer it to all of my previous matte displays, glare and all. I find it easy enough to adjust the display angle as needed.

As for being wary of revision A hardware, I agree, but bought this new MBP because I viewed it as a revision B product; the Air being revision A. It's run well, and I run it hard every day using Vmware Fusion and developing ASP.NET web applications.

I'd also like to point out that the MBP has a card slot which can be used to add FireWire 400, a solid state disk, or more.

OK, I just upgraded my aging MBP (Holiday 2006) with more HD space and a new battery for college, so I plan on getting another year out of this one. But I do like the new design; glossy works well for portables. But to go glossy on a desktop display? Stupid. That only works under certain lighting conditions.

Plus, it's never a smart idea to get Rev. A Apple hardware. That's why I waited as long as I did to get my MBP (that and I wanted Core 2), and I've had minimal problems with it. I hope that with Rev. B, they bring back FW400. Chances are slim, but if there is a clear and intense demand from the people, it could happen. I just don't want to lose my FW800 speed when I need to connect 400 devices.

I really like my new MPB. :)

"It reminds me of the old CRT monitors that everyone used before LCDs were popular"

Huh?!? Funny, every CRT I've ever owned had an anti-glare coating on it! You couldn't sell one without it on your bullet point list. Not only did high end CRT's for color critical work have really good anti-glare coatings, they also had hoods to cut down on stray side lights. Some even came with black smocks for the user to wear.