• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Mac Hardware and Software |OT| - All things Macintosh

The Real Abed

Perma-Junior
Thunderbolt can run those things full speed. Even an SSD won't saturate it. Amazing bus.
Yeah, but what is the actual read/write speed of a HDD? Like a normal HDD, not some expensive server grade. There are what, three main speeds? 4200, 5400 and 7200 or something like that, right? What about laptop HDD's?

Obviously TB would let you get the actual HDD speed, I just don't know what that is. (My Retina Pro SSD has 1GB/s transfer rate.)

I'd kill for a TB portable case with a short cable that allowed me to put my own laptop sized HDD in that didn't cost a bundle. I'd get me one of them 2TB laptop drives and glue the thing to the back of my display. Instant lightweight super storage. Right now I have a LaCie Rikiki USB3 1TB HDD which only seems to get maybe 70Mb/s max.
 
Im thinking about either getting the baseline 13.3 inch MBA or the baseline MBPr model. Of course there is the weight difference, for some people thats an issue. However, I drive everywhere. I would just be carrying it to and from my car. My concern is the screen on the MBA, I hear its not as good as the one on the MBP. But do you guys think the difference between screens is worth $200 dollars?
 

Deku Tree

Member
Im thinking about either getting the baseline 13.3 inch MBA or the baseline MBPr model. Of course there is the weight difference, for some people thats an issue. However, I drive everywhere. I would just be carrying it to and from my car. My concern is the screen on the MBA, I hear its not as good as the one on the MBP. But do you guys think the difference between screens is worth $200 dollars?

Go into a store and look at the two screens side by side, to decide for yourself. To me personally the nicer screen (and the faster processor) is worth it. But depending upon your usage and your needs, it may or may not be worth it. Or the MBA might be more what you are looking for...
 
Go into a store and look at the two screens side by side, to decide for yourself. To me personally the nicer screen (and the faster processor) is worth it. But depending upon your usage and your needs, it may or may not be worth it. Or the MBA might be more what you are looking for...


Thats what I really should do. But the closest place that sells them is an hour and a half away. Still, its an expensive purchase its probably worth it to just take the trip. My usage needs arent that heavy on hardware. I write a bunch of papers, type a ton on notes, that kind of thing. I would be surprised if the MBA's CPU couldnt handle it
 

japtor

Member
I don't have any TB devices. At all.
Any external displays? Not TB of course, but even without TB it's still a display output.
Yeah, but what is the actual read/write speed of a HDD? Like a normal HDD, not some expensive server grade. There are what, three main speeds? 4200, 5400 and 7200 or something like that, right? What about laptop HDD's?

Obviously TB would let you get the actual HDD speed, I just don't know what that is. (My Retina Pro SSD has 1GB/s transfer rate.)

I'd kill for a TB portable case with a short cable that allowed me to put my own laptop sized HDD in that didn't cost a bundle. I'd get me one of them 2TB laptop drives and glue the thing to the back of my display. Instant lightweight super storage. Right now I have a LaCie Rikiki USB3 1TB HDD which only seems to get maybe 70Mb/s max.
Laptop drives push around 90-100MB/s last I looked for myself, might be better now. That was with 5400RPM 1TB drives at the time, while there's 1.5-2TB drives now which (theoretically) should be faster due to increased density. Desktop drives are in the 150MB/s range I think? I think some can push over 200, and can burst from cache more than that (albeit most drive caches are pretty small so that's mostly a moot point). I vaguely remember a test showing improved latency and in general performance tests over TB as well, i.e. it's not just purely a max throughput advantage.

As for TB enclosures, at this time you just gotta choose to bite the price bullet at some point I guess. There's .5M cables now at least. The Seagate 1TB ain't too horrible I guess, but that's just relative to other TB options. The adapter alone (w/no drive case) goes for $90 and .5M TB cables are $30, drive cases on eBay are $20-30. Shouldn't be too hard to swap for 2TB, although I figure you might as well use the 1TB drive since it's already there. Some company called Delock has an enclosure but it's around $100 by itself without a cable. Buffalo's TB/USB one is similarly priced but I remember reading that it's kind of a bitch to open up.

Almost forgot one extra thing about TB, apparently it's easy to boot Windows from it nowadays:
http://dadhacks.dadpower.net/post/47998058347/set-up-bootcamp-on-an-external-thunderbolt-drive
And to be sure I found reports of the same technique working over on MacRumors forums. I remember it involving a bunch of driver hacks/tricks before but not anymore.
Thats what I really should do. But the closest place that sells them is an hour and a half away. Still, its an expensive purchase its probably worth it to just take the trip. My usage needs arent that heavy on hardware. I write a bunch of papers, type a ton on notes, that kind of thing. I would be surprised if the MBA's CPU couldnt handle it
No general electronics stores like Best Buy any closer?

In any case if/when you check it out, also test out the different resolutions on the MBP. If screen real estate matters it can make a big difference. The native res is equivalent to 1280x800, but the scaled modes go up something like 1440x900 and 1680x1050 I think.
 
Any external displays? Not TB of course, but even without TB it's still a display output.

Laptop drives push around 90-100MB/s last I looked for myself, might be better now. That was with 5400RPM 1TB drives at the time, while there's 1.5-2TB drives now which (theoretically) should be faster due to increased density. Desktop drives are in the 150MB/s range I think? I think some can push over 200, and can burst from cache more than that (albeit most drive caches are pretty small so that's mostly a moot point). I vaguely remember a test showing improved latency and in general performance tests over TB as well, i.e. it's not just purely a max throughput advantage.

As for TB enclosures, at this time you just gotta choose to bite the price bullet at some point I guess. There's .5M cables now at least. The Seagate 1TB ain't too horrible I guess, but that's just relative to other TB options. The adapter alone (w/no drive case) goes for $90 and .5M TB cables are $30, drive cases on eBay are $20-30. Shouldn't be too hard to swap for 2TB, although I figure you might as well use the 1TB drive since it's already there. Some company called Delock has an enclosure but it's around $100 by itself without a cable. Buffalo's TB/USB one is similarly priced but I remember reading that it's kind of a bitch to open up.

No general electronics stores like Best Buy any closer?

In any case if/when you check it out, also test out the different resolutions on the MBP. If screen real estate matters it can make a big difference. The native res is equivalent to 1280x800, but the scaled modes go up something like 1440x900 and 1680x1050 I think.

Just wanted to mention my experience. I noticed lag on the 13" rMBP (at the Apple Store) when I tried it at those higher scaled resolutions. It was great at the "best for retina" setting but it's effectively only 1280x800 resolution. When I bumped it up, I noticed lag when doing mission control and things like that. A lot of people have had a similar complaint if you do some google searches... it was bad enough that I immediately took it out of consideration as a new laptop for me. The Air was definitely smoother, as it had one-quarter the pixels to render at 1440x900 and no downsampling.

Problem is that you're asking integrated graphics to render double the resolution and downsample... so it's really rendering 3360*2100 to get the 1680x1050 desktop. I ended up just buying a computer with a native 1080p panel, as nice as the retina is.
 

The Real Abed

Perma-Junior
Any external displays? Not TB of course, but even without TB it's still a display output.
I have an external Apple Cinnamon Display from 2005. It has DVI. I use a HDMI-DVI adapter instead of a Display Port-DVI adapter.

Even on my Mac mini I use the HDMI output instead of the Display Port. I literally don't use it. I would if TB wasn't still expensive or non-existent.
 
Yeah, but what is the actual read/write speed of a HDD? Like a normal HDD, not some expensive server grade. There are what, three main speeds? 4200, 5400 and 7200 or something like that, right? What about laptop HDD's?

Obviously TB would let you get the actual HDD speed, I just don't know what that is. (My Retina Pro SSD has 1GB/s transfer rate.)

I'd kill for a TB portable case with a short cable that allowed me to put my own laptop sized HDD in that didn't cost a bundle. I'd get me one of them 2TB laptop drives and glue the thing to the back of my display. Instant lightweight super storage. Right now I have a LaCie Rikiki USB3 1TB HDD which only seems to get maybe 70Mb/s max.

7200RPM laptop drives can hit around 135-150MB/s.
 

Deku Tree

Member
I have an external Apple Cinnamon Display from 2005. It has DVI. I use a HDMI-DVI adapter instead of a Display Port-DVI adapter.

Even on my Mac mini I use the HDMI output instead of the Display Port. I literally don't use it. I would if TB wasn't still expensive or non-existent.

That may be OK for a 2005 ACD. But for my 27" Dell U2713hm HDMI output would not give me 1440p. Only display port, Dual Link DVI, or TB to display port can do it with my Dell.
 

The Real Abed

Perma-Junior
That may be OK for a 2005 ACD. But for my 27" Dell U2713hm HDMI output would not give me 1440p. Only display port, Dual Link DVI, or TB to display port can do it with my Dell.
OS X is treating my ACD as a normal display through HDMI. In fact I'm actually using QuickRes to push the resolution past the 1680x1050 to 1920x1200 with a top resolution of 4096x2160. (I love QuickRes) I'm using the HDMI-DVI adapter that came with my Mac mini. Actually, try QuickRes and see if it lets you output resolutions you normally wouldn't be able to. Thanks to OS X's superior resolution handling it's easier to fake it now. (Though my Mac mini is still only able to output 720 and 1080 to my 2006 HDTV over HDMI so I guess there's limits in some cases.) Of course the pixels on my ACD are so big and noticeable that text is blurry, but it's still good for some things.

Got the early 2013 15" model 2 weeks ago. Should I upgrade the OSX even after the horrible reviews of Maverick?
Yeah, what horrible reviews? Mavericks is amazing and totally worth upgrading to.
 

Water

Member
Just wanted to mention my experience. I noticed lag on the 13" rMBP (at the Apple Store) when I tried it at those higher scaled resolutions. It was great at the "best for retina" setting but it's effectively only 1280x800 resolution. When I bumped it up, I noticed lag when doing mission control and things like that. A lot of people have had a similar complaint if you do some google searches... it was bad enough that I immediately took it out of consideration as a new laptop for me. The Air was definitely smoother, as it had one-quarter the pixels to render at 1440x900 and no downsampling.
I recall there's a slight but perceivable fuzziness when the retina display is downsampling from one of the higher resolutions (tried on a friend's 15" MBPr). I presume it has to also affect battery life a bit.

The Air's display is not state of the art, but is very usable. The 1440x900 resolution is about as much as you can reasonably put in this size (without going retina and the scaling that comes with it). Apple sold the 13" non-retina MBP for years with a much worse display than what the Air has. For the majority of people, the Air is the better choice; it's not just cheaper but also lighter and has better battery life. You'd definitely want the MBPr if you were doing serious graphics/video work where color accuracy is important, though.
 
Got the early 2013 15" model 2 weeks ago. Should I upgrade the OSX even after the horrible reviews of Maverick?

Go Mavericks and stop reading forums *cough*MacRumours*cough* where people complain all the time.

10.9.2 is coming out soon, and is going to take care of the biggest couple of small bugs for me. It's a great time to hop on board.
 

Fuchsdh

Member
Go Mavericks and stop reading forums *cough*MacRumours*cough* where people complain all the time.

10.9.2 is coming out soon, and is going to take care of the biggest couple of small bugs for me. It's a great time to hop on board.

I've got big gripes with Mavericks and I don't frequent Macrumors. Multi monitor support took two steps forward and one step back and the update broke CUDA support for my work conputer's graphics (while not breaking CUDA or my AE.) Fixing Safari shouldn't have required updating the OS.

I feel like since 10.4 odd-numbered OS releases have generally been mediocre.
 

The Real Abed

Perma-Junior
Lately I've actually upgraded before they came out. The past few versions I've used DP's as soon as they hit a certain number. I just like getting all the new features as soon as possible. Not something I'd recommend to everyone though as there will always be bugs and problems and features that aren't implemented right yet. (Like cross-platform OS X-iOS features that need to be turned on at Apple's servers in order to work)

It's the reason I look forward to WWDC every year much more than E3.
 
I've got big gripes with Mavericks and I don't frequent Macrumors. Multi monitor support took two steps forward and one step back and the update broke CUDA support for my work conputer's graphics (while not breaking CUDA or my AE.) Fixing Safari shouldn't have required updating the OS.

I feel like since 10.4 odd-numbered OS releases have generally been mediocre.

I would agree with Lion. Definitely in retrospect. The CUDA part is pretty unacceptable, though, and I get that. Especially when it's Pro software that you use for your livelihood (but then again, if that's the case, we probably shouldn't be rushing into an update). The same thing hit me with Mountain Lion, where I lost OpenCL acceleration support in Photoshop CS6 on my 6490M, making it dog slow in comparison to Lion.
 

Fuchsdh

Member
I would agree with Lion. Definitely in retrospect. The CUDA part is pretty unacceptable, though, and I get that. Especially when it's Pro software that you use for your livelihood (but then again, if that's the case, we probably shouldn't be rushing into an update). The same thing hit me with Mountain Lion, where I lost OpenCL acceleration support in Photoshop CS6 on my 6490M, making it dog slow in comparison to Lion.

Unfortunately I've got a bit of a two-minded boss who complains about Apple's new machines and pro apps but then sends us iWork '13 documents where you can only open the docs and view changes with Mavericks (and installing it means iWork crashes every time I try and open it due to some random new font issues which means troubleshooting 13,000 fonts.)

As much as I like new shininess I feel like the downside of the yearly release schedule is that kinks don't get ironed out of the old one before the new one hits.
 

mrkgoo

Member
After nearly 6 years, my wife's black MacBook battery is starting to swell.

Guessing at a potential hazard and time to get a new one. However, NZ$200 is kinda steep for a replacement. Are third party batteries kind of pointless and bad?

Otherwise it might be a better idea to consider a new computer.
 

Deku Tree

Member
After nearly 6 years, my wife's black MacBook battery is starting to swell.

Guessing at a potential hazard and time to get a new one. However, NZ$200 is kinda steep for a replacement. Are third party batteries kind of pointless and bad?

Otherwise it might be a better idea to consider a new computer.

Yes, third party batteries are mostly not worth it. Six years is a long time to have one computer. But NZ$200 is a lot less than the cost of a new computer. If she would still be happy using the old computer for a few more years then that's something to think about...
 
After nearly 6 years, my wife's black MacBook battery is starting to swell.

Guessing at a potential hazard and time to get a new one. However, NZ$200 is kinda steep for a replacement. Are third party batteries kind of pointless and bad?

Otherwise it might be a better idea to consider a new computer.

Just had experience with this on my wife's Macbook as well. Originally went with a 3rd-party battery, and it was so large it prevented the trackpad from functioning. They sent us a replacement and it was just as bad. Had to go with an OEM one in the end anyway.
 

mrkgoo

Member
Yes, third party batteries are mostly not worth it. Six years is a long time to have one computer. But NZ$200 is a lot less than the cost of a new computer. If she would still be happy using the old computer for a few more years then that's something to think about...

Just had experience with this on my wife's Macbook as well. Originally went with a 3rd-party battery, and it was so large it prevented the trackpad from functioning. They sent us a replacement and it was just as bad. Had to go with an OEM one in the end anyway.

Thanks for the input. Yeah I guess I'll stay away from third party if I go that route.
 

Fuchsdh

Member
After nearly 6 years, my wife's black MacBook battery is starting to swell.

Guessing at a potential hazard and time to get a new one. However, NZ$200 is kinda steep for a replacement. Are third party batteries kind of pointless and bad?

Otherwise it might be a better idea to consider a new computer.
The NewerTech 3rd party battery I got for my early 2008 MacBook Pro worked like a charm with no issues. Third party batteries are tricky though, as the other responses attest. I'd say you'll prolly feel better with the first party option.
 
Unfortunately I've got a bit of a two-minded boss who complains about Apple's new machines and pro apps but then sends us iWork '13 documents where you can only open the docs and view changes with Mavericks (and installing it means iWork crashes every time I try and open it due to some random new font issues which means troubleshooting 13,000 fonts.)

As much as I like new shininess I feel like the downside of the yearly release schedule is that kinks don't get ironed out of the old one before the new one hits.

Yeah, I really think they need to stick closer at least 1.5 (OK, 1.25) year development cycles, sort of like they did with Mavericks, over yearly releases. 10.8.5 was able to achieve pretty decent stability, whereas Lion felt like it never really got there.

There's not nearly as much pressure on the Mac platform as their is on mobile devices for them to constantly be innovating, so maybe they could compromise and slow down a bit as needed.
 

Pachimari

Member
Guys, I need some urgent help.

I'm cleaning up my Mac Mini (2010) but I want to format it and reset it to factory. How do I do this?

I have OS X Mavericks installed, and when I insert the disc which were included with my Mac Mini, it won't allow me to "install Mac OS X".
 

Fuchsdh

Member
Guys, I need some urgent help.

I'm cleaning up my Mac Mini (2010) but I want to format it and reset it to factory. How do I do this?

I have OS X Mavericks installed, and when I insert the disc which were included with my Mac Mini, it won't allow me to "install Mac OS X".

You need to boot from the disks to install the original OS. For reinstalling Mavericks you have to boot into the recovery partition I believe (or boot from a USB stick with Mavericks installed onto it.)
 

kennah

Member
Guys, I need some urgent help.

I'm cleaning up my Mac Mini (2010) but I want to format it and reset it to factory. How do I do this?

I have OS X Mavericks installed, and when I insert the disc which were included with my Mac Mini, it won't allow me to "install Mac OS X".

You'd need to boot from that disc. Hold down OPTION when rebooting.
 

Pachimari

Member
Thanks. I'm choosing to install OS X fresh from the disc, but should I erase a disk utility first to delete everything on the Mac Mini before reinstalling OS X?
 

SuperPac

Member
Ordered a new machine over the weekend after my 2010 iMac inches ever closer to completely breaking down. Delivers in early Feb.

27" iMac
• NVIDIAGeForceGTX775M 2GB GDDR5
• 3.5GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7
• 16GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM-2X8GB
• 3TB Fusion Drive

Quite pumped for the Fusion drive - and I plan on installing Windows on it too to do some light gaming. Should be awesome.
 

mrkgoo

Member
Ordered a new machine over the weekend after my 2010 iMac inches ever closer to completely breaking down. Delivers in early Feb.

27" iMac
• NVIDIAGeForceGTX775M 2GB GDDR5
• 3.5GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7
• 16GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM-2X8GB
• 3TB Fusion Drive

Quite pumped for the Fusion drive - and I plan on installing Windows on it too to do some light gaming. Should be awesome.

I bought a 2012 21" iMac with fusion drive last year - the fusion drive is awesome!
 

Ridli

Member
Anyone have impressions on the 13 retina mbp for incidental gaming? I'm not expecting it to be a dedicated gaming rig, just curious if I can get a few games of Dota2 in while on the road and have a stable frame rate. I honestly have no idea what the Iris is capable of.
 

Fuchsdh

Member
Anyone have impressions on the 13 retina mbp for incidental gaming? I'm not expecting it to be a dedicated gaming rig, just curious if I can get a few games of Dota2 in while on the road and have a stable frame rate. I honestly have no idea what the Iris is capable of.

That one comes with the 5100, not the Pro 5200, correct? Notebookcheck.net gives it acceptable (>30 fps) scores for Dota 2 on Medium and above. So turn off the extraneous bells and whistles and you should have no problems.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Graphics-5100.91977.0.html
 

Fuchsdh

Member
Ah, okay. Now that is a useful site. Thanks!

Yep, it's excellent. Unfortunately as its name implies it doesn't do a whole lot of benchmarks on desktop cards but considering everything save the Pro now uses mobile cards it's a really good resource.
 
Anyone have impressions on the 13 retina mbp for incidental gaming? I'm not expecting it to be a dedicated gaming rig, just curious if I can get a few games of Dota2 in while on the road and have a stable frame rate. I honestly have no idea what the Iris is capable of.

I personally wouldn't want to do anything more than Indie gaming on an integrated Intel GPU without the L4 Cache (5200 models) until DDR4 is common, personally.
 

Deku Tree

Member
Pages is a huge memory hog. I have one document open and it is using 650 MB's of memory. By comparison Apple Mail with my tens of thousands of messages is only using 85 MB.
 

Water

Member
Yep, it's excellent. Unfortunately as its name implies it doesn't do a whole lot of benchmarks on desktop cards but considering everything save the Pro now uses mobile cards it's a really good resource.
It's unfortunate their data conflates image quality settings and resolution. For instance, their "medium" quality apparently doesn't just mean medium settings but also 1368x768 resolution, while the "high" quality means high settings and 1080p resolution. The reality is you'll usually want to use the native resolution, and increase IQ only if you have enough framerate left over. The retina machines are an exception, of course.
 
Top Bottom