Apple MacBook Pro 15-inch (MC373LL/A) Notebook

   Not too long ago (3 months, actually) I bought a new 15" Apple MacBook Pro.  That machine was the top of the line, with a 2.8GHz processor, 512MB video card and the antiglare (matte) screen.  It was a delightful machine in every way, and remains one of the most powerful and capable notebooks available at any price.  I don't have it anymore.

No, its not what you think.  I didn't rush out after only three months in a fit of upgrade fever to buy the newer model.  The old one was the victim of an unfortunate encounter with a cup of hot tea, and while the machine dried off and works perfectly, the vender who was in my office and spilled said cup of tea, accepted responsibility right away and bought the machine.  It will (I hope) give him years of reliable service, but what it won't do is carry any Apple warranty whatsoever because of those pesky moisture sensors they put in their modern laptops for just such occasions. 

So, here I am with the new 15" MacBook Pro, the top-of-the-line Core i7, again with 512MB video card and antiglare display, now only available in higher 1680X1050 resolution (old one was 1440X900).  Apple says the new 2.66GHz Core i7 processor is almost 50% faster than the old 2.8 GHz Core2Duo and that the new GeForce GT330M is up to 80% faster than the old GeForce 9600M GT.  Honestly, the old one was wickedly fast on productivity tasks, and even high end games like Mass Effect 2, Crysis and Fallout3 ran at high frame rates and full (1440X900) resolution with high detail.  The new one runs those same games at similar framerates (movie-like, I didn't run benchmarks) at the new machine's higher 1680X1050 resolution, so I don't doubt Apple's claims, but really can't judge the accuracy.  In day-to-day tasks, there is almost no difference between the speed of two.

Where the difference is extremely noticeable is battery life.  The old MacBook Pro was rated at 7 hours, and generally gave me about 5.  DVD playback would last a few minutes over 4 hours.  The new MacBook Pro is a revelation, and I thought the old one was terrific.  Apple claims 8 to 9 hours, but used at work today, ALL DAY, I still have 21% showing after 7:21 hours of use.  Its been on all day, with the screen dimming here and there, but generally used all day.  I was writing court motions, doing web-based research and constantly reading and replying to email.  Screen was on roughly 50% bright and wifi was on all day, which activity generously and continuously provided by an active connection to a Microsoft Exchange server.  The machine never sat long enough to go to sleep.  I have never seen a laptop last so long, and its still telling me I have just short of two hours runtime remaining.

The other thing that is immediately different is the screen.  The old one was terrific, and the new one isn't any better or worse at all in terms of picture quality.  It has higher resolution, making everything smaller by default, and sharper as well.  So good are both panels that I would suggest that neither is better or worse, just better suited for different tasks.  If you want to display more information in the same space, the new high-res screen is the way to go.  If you want everything to be large and easy to read, stick with low res.  Me?  Not sure which I prefer as my eyes are aging, but I love to play games in high resolution.  Of course, with display panels this good (these are both true 24 bit color-accurate panels), there is no wrong answer.

Another enhancement that you can't see, but will notice in use, is the way the MacBook Pro switches between integrated and discreet graphics.  From what I've read, the new Intel integrated graphics are slower and weaker, though more energy-efficient than the old nVidia integrated graphics.  Chances are, a good deal of the newfound battery life comes from that integrated Intel GPU.  Clearly I was using the Intel GPU all day today, and with text, websites, database and PDF charts the Intel GPU performed every bit as well as my old MacBook Pro did on the powerful discreet graphics. 

The bigger change is the way that the MacBook Pro switches between dedicated and integrated graphics.   Previously, you had to log out of your user account and log back in (closing all applications and saving all work) to switch between the graphics cards.  Now the MacBook Pro does all the work, seamlessly, on the fly.  If you are using the business applications that I do (Acrobat Professional, FileMaker Pro, Word and Entourage, etc) you might never kick in the dedicated nVidia graphics.  Launch Aperture, Final Cut or play a little Force Unleashed and you won't even notice the switch to nVidia dedicated graphics other than the decreased (though still very good) battery life.  No flashing on the display, no logging out, no hardware or software switch to engage.  When you need graphics power, the MacBook Pro gives it to you right away.  When you don't, it doesn't.  Unlike nVidia's Optimus system used on some PCs, Apple's system even cuts power to the integrated graphics, thereby emphasizing power efficiency even when the discreet graphics are required by powering one (heavy duty) chip instead of two.

Everything else is the same, and that's a good thing.  The backlit keyboard with soft-touch chiclet keys, the single piece of aluminum carved out by a miling machine to make the casing.  The magnetic power connector (improved with a MacBook Air style plug that feels stronger) and the magnetic lid latch.  Identical looks aside, Apple has hidden a few more gems in the new MacBook Pro.  The glass trackpad is even better than before, with inertial scrolling like many smartphones now have that makes scrolling feel more natural, if not really any faster.

Boot Camp, Apple's driver support for running Windows natively on a Mac, is even easier to configure.

You might guess that I really like the new MacBook Pro, and you would be correct.  In my last review I said that the previous generation MacBook pro was possibly the best laptop available today.  Well, this one is even better.