We still have to wait for the brand-new redesign of the MacBook Air, but Apple already launched the updated version of the MacBook Pro 13 with the new Apple M2 processor. The changes are otherwise very limited since both the display as well as the chassis including the Touch Bar are unchanged from the previous model.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-13-2022-M2-Laptop-Review-Debut-for-the-new-Apple-M2.631003.0.html
What I find interesting is the R23 single result. Just 3 % improvement? I wasn't expecting that at all. That's laughable. One can only hope there was something wrong and it's not representative.
I don't get one thing. I know that PWM is really high (117780 Hz ≤ 56 % brightness setting) so theoretically it should not be an issue. But what's the problem of making the screen 100% flicker-free?
To be fair for that particular benchmark, the Speedometer 2.0 score on M1 has improved to ~340 since the initial release of the laptop. Probably a few % better for the Pro and Max due to clock.
Dear Andreas Osthoff,
Could you compare power consumption, autonomous time work in zoom or skype?
Compared M1 MacBook pro 13 with M2 Macbook pro.
I kindly ask you, it will be very interesting to know - any benefits in this scenario for autonomous work with M2 new chip or not?
I hope this scenario will be very interesting for audience, not only me.
Thank you in advance, for your cooperation.
Quote from: T5 on June 23, 2022, 14:12:54I don't get one thing. I know that PWM is really high (117780 Hz ≤ 56 % brightness setting) so theoretically it should not be an issue. But what's the problem of making the screen 100% flicker-free?
I'm curious about this as well. With a pwm refresh rate that high, why not just offer a flicker-free display to simplify things?
The chassis, bezels & display are 6 years old at this point; a literal eon in tech years. No mag-safe; no other amenities which the new MBA with the same cpu will have. What it DOES have, though, is a higher price than the new MBA. Seems like that's all important information to include in a review.
I'm thinking there's a flaw in your review process, unless the process is intended to deceive.
Quote from: JZSmith10 on June 25, 2022, 13:50:40The [...] bezels [...] are 6 years old
Design age does not make bezels good or bad. One aspect of bezels is whether they are equal on all sides or have different widths; the latter look a bit awkward as in this device.
Another aspect is the widths themselves. Too wide bezels, such as 3cm each, waste space. Very narrow bezels, such as 0.1cm each, require very strong material. Narrow bezels hardly waste space but also do not protect the view on the display from bright background light; therefore, minimising bezels is a compromise and matter of preference. E.g., I am happy that my desktop monitor has 1.5cm bezels to separate the display contents from sunlight in the background. On notebooks, I lack experience whether much narrower bezels would be ok for me or sunlight would create too much of a problem. On tablets, too narrow bezels make it harder to hold them without accidentally clicking on the display or covering part of the contents.
Then there is a competition between bezels and the quality of the, if any, camera. A great advantage of sufficient bezels is inclusion of the camera (or other sensors). If bezels are too narrow for that, ugly camera bumps or much uglier notches / drops / holes are introduced. In my opinion, they are the worst design flaws. I know that some people, especially quite a few Apple users, have a different perception and excuse.
Colour of bezels is another aspect but obviously mostly preference.
Uh, and then there are eccentric design elements, such as rounded corners of display panels, which emphasise fashion over function.
Whatever you like or dislike about bezels, you should express more relevant reasons than age of design. Bezels have functions and should not decay like fashion. If design and function were good in the past, it should also be good now and in the future.
Seriously... what's up with the R23 single core? That a typo? Other sources have it around 1700 or around a 12% gain from the M1 Base... not like 3%.
Quote from: Henk Poley on June 23, 2022, 14:39:31To be fair for that particular benchmark, the Speedometer 2.0 score on M1 has improved to ~340 since the initial release of the laptop. Probably a few % better for the Pro and Max due to clock.
Could you tell us the web site showing that M1 improvement?