[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by Remlyor 

Intel® Core™ 2 Quad QX9300(2.53GHz, 12M L2 Cache,1067MHZ) Quad Core
Genuine Windows Vista® Ultimate SP1, With media
17" UltraSharp™ WideScreen WUXGA RGB LED Edge2Edge Covet Display
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3700M, 1.0GB Discrete
4.0GB, DDR3-1066 SDRAM, 2 DIMMS

and this is what the configurator allows on their web site...lol (8GB RAM?)

It has been said ALREADY that Dell US has a bug on their form which also doesn't show the Vista 64bit option. The UK site shows correctly. Keep giggling like a girl and making yourself look silly for no good reason.

http://img291.imageshack.us/my.php?image=16gbty4.jpg

[Super Mario]

I'd buy the memory later when prices drop anyway

[angelmb]

Originally Posted by Atheist 

There are those of us that require significant performance in a mobile format. I travel 2-3 weeks a month and need a very powerful yet still portable computer.

Wouldn't this imply that current Apple laptops aren't powerful enough ??

Not to mention people is complaining about the lack of a true successor to the 12" PB… I had a 17" PB which was stupidly big, I guess the DELL is even worse when it comes to portability.

Oh, and by the way, there's nothing stopping you from running Leopard on that monster Dell.

Given the aforementioned weirdos when it comes to configure the computer from DELL site, be it Vista or anything else, I guess to run OS X on such computer has to turn to be an adventure to say the least. No need even to take the EULA into consideration.

Just my humble opinion… and I am done with this thread.

[Brien]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

This thing has a 210 W power adapter
(The ProBooks have 85 W power adapters, MacBooks and PowerBooks 65 W.)

There is certainly a market for luggable desktop replacements, but it's rather small. On the other hand, a few things would be nice that would make an enticing offer for pros: built-in calibration, for example, or eSATA ports. Although analogika argued that Apple will include it as soon as a bus powered version becomes available.

Other components (e. g. quad-core cpu or quadro-line gpu) are out of the question in a ProBook (or any other laptop of similar weight), I doubt the cooling system can handle 200 W of heat.

Well the OP is complaining about the lack of a 16GB RAM option, lack of a Quadro, lack of a Core 2 Quad, etc, etc. Personally, I think if those are the kinds of specs you need, it's smarter to get a desktop. DTRs seem kinda pointless. They weight so much and have such little battery life, you might as well carry around a desktop in the first place and save a few grand.

[Remlyor]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

It has been said ALREADY that Dell US has a bug on their form which also doesn't show the Vista 64bit option. The UK site shows correctly. Keep giggling like a girl and making yourself look silly for no good reason.

http://img291.imageshack.us/my.php?image=16gbty4.jpg

so, just curious, how much in US dollars is this thing? configured your way?

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by Remlyor 

so, just curious, how much in US dollars is this thing? configured your way?

When the form was working the other day and I compared the US and UK prices (for a quad-core, 8GB, 1GB Quadro, dual hard drives) it was something like $4200 or £3000! The two things that raise the price are the screen and the GPU which are default on the Covet model. If you were to buy the equivalent screen and GPU for a Mac Pro desktop the same thing would happen. It's high spec stuff so it costs, but it is worth it because it speeds up the workflow a lot and pays back soon.

I like to move between desk, couch and bed because my back doesn't permit me to stay at a desk too long. If I think I can manage it then I'd get a Mac Pro, but if I kit that out with a 10bit color screen and high performance workstation GPU then I might be paying more than the Dell Precision Covet M6400 and still won't have a 64bit Creative Suite

[Remlyor]

Black-Hawk XR5 17 Inch Super Notebook
$8692
17" HD WUXGA 1920x1200 Ultra Resolution Crystal-View Wide Screen Cinema Display
**NEW** Intel® XEON QUAD X3370 (3.0GHz/45nm/1333MHz/12MB)
**NEW** 8192MB Ultra Speed DDR2 800MHz Extreme Performance Memory
3 x OCZ 250GB Solid State RAID 0 Extreme Performance
50GB HD Blu-Ray-RW / DVD-RW / CD-RW DL Next Gen. Burner
SLI Dual nVIDIA Geforce 9800GTX 2GB DDR3 EXTREME GPUs
Microsoft® Windows Vista Ultimate Edition x64

Or maybe this thing would be better for you Super Mario

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by Remlyor 

Black-Hawk XR5 17 Inch Super Notebook
$8692
17" HD WUXGA 1920x1200 Ultra Resolution Crystal-View Wide Screen Cinema Display

That screen isn't for pro graphics so it is a deal breaker!

[Remlyor]

Wish ya luck on your purchase, I work for an Apple Specialist, and while these new notebooks are cool, they don't meet my needs for real graphics power like the Mac Pro. The MBP 17 future is uncertain, and may or may not make it this year for a refresh.

[arpinski]

Ok.... I just had to hop in on this...... the thing configured as the original poster posted is $9000 dollars US.

(How do you attach screen captures?)

[webraider]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

But the MBP's screen was easier without being glossy. If I was worried about color banding I would check with a curves layer in Photoshop, and then make final corrections later on a pro monitor. I can't rely on the curves with a glossy screen. It's one step too far from professional use.

I'm not "Professional" photographer although I do work in Photoshop some and other apps. However, I saw a brand new macbook today. It was in a bright environment and I couldn't even tell the screen was "glossy". It looks awesome. I think you guys are being too hard on the screen without actually seeing them. It's not like the "glossy-ness" of the HP laptops and monitors where it looks like they've shellacked.

[driven]

FWIW: My company bought me a Dell Latitude E6400 with 2.8Ghz, 8GB RAM, 250lb hard disk, etc. It also has Vista Business 64 bit on it.

The thing hangs multiple times per day. Total dead freeze. This happened out of the box before any 3rd party software was installed. We purchased 3 of them and all do similar things. (one blue screens constantly, whereas mine only bluescreens occasionally but hard-freezes more often.) The Vista reliability monitor is down to 30% on mine. I hate the things.

One of my co-workers tried to swap out the OS for XP 64-bit, but that blue-screened during the install. Dell recommended that we try Vista 32-bit, of course that means tossing away 4GB+ of memory.

I really miss my Macbook Pro's reliability. I'd never willingly pay for Dell.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Remlyor 

Black-Hawk XR5 17 Inch Super Notebook
$8692
17" HD WUXGA 1920x1200 Ultra Resolution Crystal-View Wide Screen Cinema Display
**NEW** Intel® XEON QUAD X3370 (3.0GHz/45nm/1333MHz/12MB)
**NEW** 8192MB Ultra Speed DDR2 800MHz Extreme Performance Memory
...

Congratulations. A notebook with a 95W TDP dekstop CPU. This thing is ging to be hot, noisy, and either heavy as hell or come with next to zero battery life. Probably both actually. I'd like to know which part of that is considered "super".

Seriously, where is this discussion going? You might as well compare the new MBP to a cash register.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

No, seriously, according to the SATA consortium, powered SATA will be added in 2009.

Oh sure, we know bus-powered eSATA is around the corner. But AFAIK we have no idea if/when Apple plans on using it. But of course I'd like to hear any rumors on the issue. Unless it means you'd have to kill me though.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by analogika 

The question is what will replace Firewire.

I have no idea whether USB3 will be a viable alternative for production; USB2 most certainly is not.

I think Apple has made up it's mind on this one. For consumers USB2 replaces FW. End of story. Pros OTOH are still getting FW800/400.

For pros it's really not so much of an issue anyway. Thanks to the EC/34 they can get pretty much whatever they want. I think in essence what Apple has done is redefined what a pro user is. People who need expansion or something else than USB2 are now considere "pros". It'll be interesting to see if the market agrees with them. My guess is that eventually it will.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Brien 

Well the OP is complaining about the lack of a 16GB RAM option, lack of a Quadro, lack of a Core 2 Quad, etc, etc. Personally, I think if those are the kinds of specs you need, it's smarter to get a desktop. DTRs seem kinda pointless. They weight so much and have such little battery life, you might as well carry around a desktop in the first place and save a few grand.

Lenovo has similar machines (W-series). Configurations which include these features cost $4k+. These puppies are simply in another class compared to the ProBooks, price-wise and feature-wise.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Simon 

For pros it's really not so much of an issue anyway. Thanks to the EC/34 they can get pretty much whatever they want.

Except, of course, a second Firewire bus. However, I suppose that an eSATA card is an adequate replacement for a second high-speed bus for tracking (the idea being to keep one bus for the audio interface, and a separate one for storage - done to minimize interference and maximize track count).

[Simon]

Sure. Whatever you plug into your EC/34 is independent from your FW800 bus. So you could use a FW or eSATA card and have a second high-speed interface in addition to your built-in FW800.

The MBP has enough space to offer a high-speed port in addition to the two USB2 ports. So even if Apple were to can that FW800 port on the next generation MBP (which I don't believe they will) there would be enough space for something like eSATA. On the MB this is unfortunately not the case. There seems to be no space left for FW or an EC/34 slot.

[PBG4 User]

Originally Posted by Simon 

Sure. Whatever you plug into your EC/34 is independent from your FW800 bus. So you could use a FW or eSATA card and have a second high-speed interface in addition to your built-in FW800.

The MBP has enough space to offer a high-speed port in addition to the two USB2 ports. So even if Apple were to can that FW800 port on the next generation MBP (which I don't believe they will) there would be enough space for something like eSATA. On the MB this is unfortunately not the case. There seems to be no space left for FW or an EC/34 slot.

This MB wasn't designed with FW or EC/34 so of course it isn't going to have a conspicuous blank spot where it could be added in. If it were part of the MB specs, Apple engineers would've used their patented 'make it fit' technology to squeeze the appropriate components onto the motherboard.

[Simon]

What you are seeing is the available depth in a 13" MB when a 45Wh Li-pol battery has been taken into account. The FW port or EC/34 slot would have to be designed in place of something you see in that picture. Obviously neither FW nor EC/34 is required more than any one of those ports you see there. So unless you make the MB bigger, thicker, or make the battery smaller, there is simply such no option.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Simon 

Sure. Whatever you plug into your EC/34 is independent from your FW800 bus. So you could use a FW or eSATA card and have a second high-speed interface in addition to your built-in FW800.

I took your comment to mean that including Firewire isn't *that* vital in the future, since pros can have what they want via the EC slot.

Which, of course, they couldn't if they'd like two independent Firewire busses (if Firewire were removed).

Never mind, and carry on.

[webraider]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

No way!

It's not quad-core
It doesn't support up to 16GB RAM
It doesn't have a 1GB Quadro 3700M
It doesn't have built in eSATA port
Doesn't support dual hard drives
Adobe hasn't got a 64bit version of CS4 coming for the Mac yet
And most importantly, the Dell has a 17" edge-to-edge screen that supports 100% Adobe RGB color gamut. I don't have to buy an external monitor for color correction

Bingo.. this is why I use a MacPro. However.. There doesn't need to be RGB color Gamut on the Mac because it needs no color correction. PC's have needed color correction since day 1.

[PaperNotes]

Originally Posted by webraider 

Bingo.. this is why I use a MacPro. However.. There doesn't need to be RGB color Gamut on the Mac because it needs no color correction. PC's have needed color correction since day 1.

???

He is talking about images in Photoshop that need colour correction. You need at least 10bit colour matte screens and wide gamut to do that at pro level.

[webraider]

Originally Posted by PaperNotes 

???

He is talking about images in Photoshop that need colour correction. You need at least 10bit colour matte screens and wide gamut to do that at pro level.

I know exacltly what he's talking about. I answered him in a General way. Profiling has been much more difficult on the PC. However, You DO NOT need Matte Screens for Color Correction.. OMG.. this is simply not true. It used to be true but it's not anymore. Sometimes Pros are the slowest to move with Technology. However, if you don't want to buy that.. buy this. While Profesionals are in their own world holding out for matte screens that don't come.. everyone else will be looking at their images on Glossy Screens because NO computer company will be releasing Matte anymore. Dell is stopping, Sony is stopping. It actually makes the most sense to develop your images in a visual environment that people will be viewing it in and that is "Glossy". Does it mean you'll have to adjust ABSOLUTELY.. but that's the world. It's called change. You can either pout about it with the only aging Matte screened computer in the corner or stop fussing and adjust. You won't be alone... it's okay.

[JMurr187]

Some people just can't accept the fact that....
Macs are the best, always have been, always will be.

AND for the people that do "pro" photoshop work should definitely NOT be just using the screen on their computer no matter what it is. There are special monitors to use when using these programs to assure nothing but perfection right out of the box.
Glossy or not, the new MBP's are amazing. Even my die-hard PC friends agree (for once).

BTW, that dell looks like it should come with a trailer...

[webraider]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

I'm actually going from a Mac to a Dell. It's so strange but I'll report how it goes after I get it and take it through its paces

Cool let me know how it works with all the crashes. And for those of you who can.. you should rush and buy this dell while you can. You'll be using the ONLY laptop still available with a Matte Screen.. Meanwhile.. the people you develop your photos For will be viewing it on Their.. you know Glossy Screens and it won't look quite right becuase you didn't do it on a "glossy" screen. This is because Every computer manufacturer and LED manufacturer have switched to releasing Glossy Screens. You probably won't be able to buy a matte screen soon so Jump on this windows machine now and kick yourself later. By the way.. the Color on the Mac Pro's is superb. I actually went and "Looked" at one. Then I made up my mind. I didn't say.. "Glossy" and "I'm not getting one" until I went and saw it. The color accuracy is BETTER than the Matte version.. Buy that's my humble opinion. The point I'm making is everyone is looking at a glossy screen.. that's where you should be doing your photo editing.

[iREZ]

what are you talking about? not EVERYBODY looks at photos on their computers, you do know of a product called a printer right? also, stop assuming the industry is headed in one direction and thats better for us. just because somebody tells you something is better isn't so unless you use it and realize yourself that it's better. i have a matte mbp that i purchased AFTER the new books were released and i'm glad i didn't get glossy, and yes...i've seen every glossy screen apple makes save for the new mbp and 24" monitor (which im sure is identical to the imac 24"). stop assuming you're so correct...if there's an outcry for matte screens there's obviously a good reason (considering the matte v. glossy polls are usually 50/50). next i'm going to hear you say that it was good that apple got rid of fw because YOU don't need it, when there are thousands and thousands of people with a mini dv cam that could only transfer files via fw).

i personally have nothing against the glossy screens when watching films in a dark room, i just prefer the matte when i work and if i still had a choice (which i don't anymore) i'll continue to choose matte. just because apple has chosen not to supply matte doesn't necessarily mean its better for people in general.

i agree with super mario in that matte>glossy for professional work (professional, not browsing macnn forums and photoshopping you and your friends on the moon while watching something on hulu).

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by webraider 

I know exacltly what he's talking about. I answered him in a General way. Profiling has been much more difficult on the PC. However, You DO NOT need Matte Screens for Color Correction.. OMG.. this is simply not true. It used to be true but it's not anymore.

That's bollocks. If I took a laptop with a glossy screen to a Vanity Fair or Marie Claire shoot to assist the photographers I would lose my job instantly. They'd think I replaced by creative analytical brain with one from an Apple fanboi who makes up sh-it on forums to defend bad decisions by his favourite company of all time that he devotes all his time to religiously. I'll stick to matte and keep my job thank you very much.

BTW, if a screen is less than 8 bit RGB in the pro world, you are also going to have a hard time. MacBook Pros with 6 bit glossy screens are only good for iTunes downloading and light use. Look at the direction that screens in the pro world are going. Dell's Precision has a 10 bit screen that has 100% Adobe RGB Color Gamut. LaCie sold monitors with those specs two years ago. Now LaCie's screens are 14 bit with 125% Adobe Color Gamut. Apple's screens have taken a huge step backwards and cannot be used for any serious pro graphics or video.

[driven]

"Fire that man ... he has a glossy screen"

[itguy05]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

"Much" is an exaggeration. In general use lightweight users will probably not see a difference in heat output but when handling 200MB Photoshop images the situation is very different if a laptop is very thin. If it is on your lap you will feel the heat. Even on the desk I would worry about the effect of the heat on the longevity of the components.

Greatly exaggerated. I've got an almost 4 year old Powerbook G4/1.67. It's been run hard most of its life - many, many, many, many hours @ 100% CPU. It gets hot. But, guess what? It lasted 3.75 years until I replaced it with the new MacBook Pro. No issues at all related to heat.

You're talking the difference between 8 and 8.5 years - nothing to worry about. The machine will shut off if it gets too hot.

[Maflynn]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

BTW, if a screen is less than 8 bit RGB in the pro world, you are also going to have a hard time.

Regardless of glossy vs. matte. 6bit displays in a so-called pro level laptop is baffling. Why in the world does apple opt for substandard panels. To be honest, it doesn't bother me that apple went to the glossy display, but it bothers me greatly that I have to put up with dithering because apple cheaped out on their panels.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

That's bollocks. If I took a laptop with a glossy screen to a Vanity Fair or Marie Claire shoot to assist the photographers I would lose my job instantly. They'd think I replaced by creative analytical brain with one from an Apple fanboi who makes up sh-it on forums to defend bad decisions by his favourite company of all time that he devotes all his time to religiously. I'll stick to matte and keep my job thank you very much.

Now, I'm not too firm in the graphics world, but that paragraph right there smells like complete and utter Class A Bullshit.

[JMurr187]

Duuuudeee
Dells SUCK

[Simon]

Originally Posted by analogika 

Now, I'm not too firm in the graphics world, but that paragraph right there smells like complete and utter Class A Bullshit.

I had the same impression. If you get fired because you brought a glossy screen to work, you're were already worthless before.