|
Most likely law enforcement won't do anything about it. If you get an electronic device stolen it is gone for good.
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 03:30 |
|
|
I said come in! posted:Most likely law enforcement won't do anything about it. If you get an electronic device stolen it is gone for good. The best option is to buy all your Apple tech with a decent credit card that comes with complimentary insurance. Obviously make sure Find My iPhone/Mac is enabled. Having FileVault on is generally considered good practise as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
Or just keep your macbook safe. If youre worried about burglary. Hide it... etc.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
Roger, thanks all
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
'Find my Mac/iPad/etc' also has a remote lock/wipe function that lets you brick your device (maybe it only wipes the contents of a Mac? I'm not sure if those can be permanently locked like phones/tablets) via the web once you're sure it's in someone else's hands. At least you get some degree of satisfaction/security if you can't get the device back.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
I've got a dumb question about VNC/AFP. I have my MacPro and iMac linked with a CAT5 cable and routinely use OSX's native VNC/AFP protocol to control the iMac remotely and to move the occasional file between the machines. I have a feeling the cable isn't being used though as screensharing seems to slow down drastically during periods of heavy wireless usage. There's got to be a way to force VNC/AFP to only use the hard Ethernet connection between the machines, right? How do I set this up?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
I have Lojack on my main laptop. They claim their recovery rate is pretty high, but I haven't had to use it. I got it free from work, but I think it was like $100 for a few year plan.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
Mister Speaker posted:I've got a dumb question about VNC/AFP. I have my MacPro and iMac linked with a CAT5 cable and routinely use OSX's native VNC/AFP protocol to control the iMac remotely and to move the occasional file between the machines. I have a feeling the cable isn't being used though as screensharing seems to slow down drastically during periods of heavy wireless usage. There's got to be a way to force VNC/AFP to only use the hard Ethernet connection between the machines, right? How do I set this up?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
Mister Speaker posted:I've got a dumb question about VNC/AFP. I have my MacPro and iMac linked with a CAT5 cable and routinely use OSX's native VNC/AFP protocol to control the iMac remotely and to move the occasional file between the machines. I have a feeling the cable isn't being used though as screensharing seems to slow down drastically during periods of heavy wireless usage. There's got to be a way to force VNC/AFP to only use the hard Ethernet connection between the machines, right? How do I set this up? The way to force it is to turn off the wireless adapters and test. EDIT: A quick google shows that will work. https://support.apple.com/kb/PH18722?locale=en_US Proteus Jones fucked around with this message at 23:19 on Sep 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1072686-REG/apple_mgx82ll_a_13_3_macbook_pro_notebook.html I needed something that would arrive the next day cause I'm in the hospital at the moment DARPA Dad fucked around with this message at 00:08 on Sep 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 00:00
|
|
|
Mister Speaker posted:I've got a dumb question about VNC/AFP. I have my MacPro and iMac linked with a CAT5 cable and routinely use OSX's native VNC/AFP protocol to control the iMac remotely and to move the occasional file between the machines. I have a feeling the cable isn't being used though as screensharing seems to slow down drastically during periods of heavy wireless usage. There's got to be a way to force VNC/AFP to only use the hard Ethernet connection between the machines, right? How do I set this up? How are you connecting to the iMac? Name or IP address? If you used the IP address on the wired NIC of the iMac it'll use that physical path.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
Also if your LAN traffic is heavy you might experience lag. Regular internet usage probably shouldn't get you close, but if you have a home network with a file server that people are streaming from you might experience slowdowns.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
I've been looking at getting a new laptop, and I'm considering a rMBP. The 256gb/8gb model is $1399, which is fine...except I can get a similarly spec'd (if I do the SSD myself) 1080p Lenovo T450s for $900, counting the SSD cost. For someone who doesn't care about the OS and is capable of handling computer concerns on his own, what benefits am I gaining from the extra $500 for the MBP? I know the display is fantastic, which is important, but I'm assuming the 1080p IPS display in the Lenovo is fine, too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
If you aren't bothered about whether your computer is a Mac or not, and you don't really care about the display, and you're happy to buy a laptop with a spinning disk and then swap a SATA SSD into that machine then nobody here is going to be able to give you reasons to buy a Mac that you haven't already discounted as unimportant.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
Thanks Ants posted:If you aren't bothered about whether your computer is a Mac or not, and you don't really care about the display, and you're happy to buy a laptop with a spinning disk and then swap a SATA SSD into that machine then nobody here is going to be able to give you reasons to buy a Mac that you haven't already discounted as unimportant. Display is very important - but I'm not certain whether the display in the MBP is going to be significantly better than what is supposed to be a quality 1080p IPS display. Additionally, the thing that has me really tempted to buy a Mac is that I want this to last for quite a while - I'd like to get 4-5 years out of it, and it seems to be pretty common for people to be getting along acceptably with 2010 Macbooks. Not just from a performance standpoint, but also from a software/hardware support standpoint. IuniusBrutus fucked around with this message at 20:53 on Sep 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
Just for andecotal giggles, my T410 from 2009 still runs fine (with the addition of an SSD) - the T-series have alway been tanks. If I was making that decision, I'd go to an Apple Store or BB and check the screen/keyboard for myself. Apple's Retina displays blew my mind the first time I used one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
anecdotally I'm posting on a mid 2009 MBP right now. It's showing its age here and there, but for the most part it works well enough that I've decided not to replace it for traveling/office duties and get a iMac instead.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
There is a tangible difference in available storage drives. I'm assuming you'd be replacing a HDD with an mSATA SSD in the Lenovo. rMBPs come with PCIe drives that are, on paper, several times faster. It's debatable as to how much of that you'd actually notice on a regular basis however. If you're stuck on cost, the Apple refurb store is a good place to get a functionally brand-new, fully warrantied rMBP with 2014 or 2013 guts for a few hundred less than new. Thanks to Intel's recent development issues, the 2014 Broadwell chips perform practically the same as the 2015 ones and the 2013 Haswells are only marginally less powerful. It's arguably the best time in Apple's history to go with a refurb over new, Force Touch trackpad notwithstanding. Just my 2 cents: Ultrabooks have been a thing now for like 4 years, so this shopping comparison feels weird to me. While I know that a lot of Windows ultrabooks have their share of issues, I'd be much more likely to comparison shop an rMBP with a PC closer to its price that also comes with PCIe storage and a hi-res display/touchscreen. It's not like Apple have a monopoly on retina screens and hi-speed storage anymore. Similar thoughts about the plain 1080p display. Yes, Windows 10 works better in the desktop than 8 did, but Microsoft has gone all-in with touch and it's only going to continue to be a core feature from here on out. Surely someone interested in future-proofing their machine for the next 5 years would want to get something touch-enabled if they were going to stick with the Windows camp, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
the rmbp cpu is faster, has a better feel, has a better screen, has a pcie ssd, has better customer support, doen't have chinese spyware, get the mbp
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
IuniusBrutus posted:Display is very important - but I'm not certain whether the display in the MBP is going to be significantly better than what is supposed to be a quality 1080p IPS display. 2560x1600 = ~4 megapixels 1920x1080 = ~2 megapixels Apple's IPS LCDs are generally close to best in class on parameters like contrast ratio, out-of-the-box color accuracy, etc. I have no idea whether Lenovo's better LCDs live up to that standard, but even assuming so, 2x the pixel count is a pretty substantial difference. Also, the rMBP is a 16:10 display, the Lenovo's a 16:9. If you care about 16:10, that's a big deal. (16:9 advantage: when you fullscreen a dvd movie or other widescreen video there's less chance of black bars. 16:10 advantage: more vertical space for text when you're doing work.) quote:Additionally, the thing that has me really tempted to buy a Mac is that I want this to last for quite a while - I'd like to get 4-5 years out of it, and it seems to be pretty common for people to be getting along acceptably with 2010 Macbooks. Not just from a performance standpoint, but also from a software/hardware support standpoint. The one problem here is you're not buying it to run MacOS. Apple's software support priority is MacOS first and bootcamp Windows a very, very distant second. (An example of a typical shortcoming: Windows will get substantially less battery life out of any given Macbook than OS X does, when running similar workloads.) There are also likely to be a lot of niggling annoyances centered around the machine's hardware not being designed for Windows, e.g. the keyboard layout is a Mac keyboard layout. Not saying you're going to have an absolutely terrible experience, since I know there's people out there who are happy to run Windows or Linux exclusively on Mac hardware, but it's not going to be as smooth as OS X on Mac hardware.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:2560x1600 = ~4 megapixels Don't the retina Macbooks all scale the display down some, though? Does the higher resolution it still provide some additional clarity or benefit when it is scaled down? Also, I if I go with the Macbook, I'll use OSX - I don't have any attachment to Windows, so that won't be an issue. Electric Bugaloo posted:There is a tangible difference in available storage drives. I'm assuming you'd be replacing a HDD with an mSATA SSD in the Lenovo. rMBPs come with PCIe drives that are, on paper, several times faster. It's debatable as to how much of that you'd actually notice on a regular basis however. I'm going between two somewhat-dissimilar models because the main concern I have is long-term support and durability, which pretty much leaves me with Apple products and business class laptops. I'll be able to buy batteries and parts for a Thinkpad if needed, and with an Apple computer I can get it serviced locally without too much issue. Going more expensive than the T450s doesn't make much sense; it ticks off all of the boxes I'm looking for. I'd look at a Macbook Air, and love the 13" version in every way except for the screen - I really want a quality screen.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:The one problem here is you're not buying it to run MacOS. Apple's software support priority is MacOS first and bootcamp Windows a very, very distant second. (An example of a typical shortcoming: Windows will get substantially less battery life out of any given Macbook than OS X does, when running similar workloads.) There are also likely to be a lot of niggling annoyances centered around the machine's hardware not being designed for Windows, e.g. the keyboard layout is a Mac keyboard layout. I think it was less wanting to install an alternate OS on the rMBP, but that he's more concerned about features like display and performance in whatever he does get. In other words, he's fine with OS X on a rMBP and would be equally fine on a Windows 10 Lenovo from a does what I need standpoint. I think what he's looking for is best-in-class@price-point for display and performance regardless of OS and manufacturer. EDIT: ^^ There we go. IuniusBrutus posted:I'm going between two somewhat-dissimilar models because the main concern I have is long-term support and durability, which pretty much leaves me with Apple products and business class laptops. I'll be able to buy batteries and parts for a Thinkpad if needed, and with an Apple computer I can get it serviced locally without too much issue. Going more expensive than the T450s doesn't make much sense; it ticks off all of the boxes I'm looking for. I'd look at a Macbook Air, and love the 13" version in every way except for the screen - I really want a quality screen. So, a T450 spec'd with a similar processor and memory comes to $1061 on their site. Not including the SATA3 SSD you'd have to provide. A refrunb 2015 13 rMBP with 256GB/8GB is going for $1099 @ Apple (full warranty on refurbs) http://www.apple.com/shop/product/FF839LL/A/refurbished-133-inch-macbook-pro-27ghz-dual-core-intel-i5-with-retina-display Honestly, there's no real price difference (especially when you add in a quality SSD). And in my opinion the rMBP is the superior choice in this case. Proteus Jones fucked around with this message at 23:52 on Sep 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
IuniusBrutus posted:Don't the retina Macbooks all scale the display down some, though? Does the higher resolution it still provide some additional clarity or benefit when it is scaled down? Also, I if I go with the Macbook, I'll use OSX - I don't have any attachment to Windows, so that won't be an issue. OS X has a variety of scaling options, but the retina Pros output at native resolution by default. The 13" model has a 2560x1600 display, but everything is rendered at 4x its "usual" size, so you get the same amount of screen real estate as you would on a 1280x800 display, but everything is incredibly sharp. You can scale it to get more screen real estate at the expense of sharpness, although it still looks pretty good no matter what resolution you use. If you've never seen a MacBook's retina display, go to a store and look at one. They're the best-looking laptop displays I have ever seen, and OS X looks amazing on them. The Lenovo's 1080p display may be nice, but nothing compares to the retina MBP.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
The way retina displays work is: for every 1 pixel you had in the pre-retina design, now there are 4. So the 13" retina MBP has an equivalent resolution of 1280x800. It looks great if you just up the resolution to "retina" 1440x900. It just gets downscaled but there's so many pixels that you can't really perceive the artifacts of it. It's possible to go higher than 1680x1050 on the 13" or 1920x1200 on the 15" with third party software but it's too small to see anything. My impression of Windows is that even now it's not very good at high DPI and so they just give you very small UI elements for their high DPI displays.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
fleshweasel posted:The way retina displays work is: for every 1 pixel you had in the pre-retina design, now there are 4. So the 13" retina MBP has an equivalent resolution of 1280x800. It looks great if you just up the resolution to "retina" 1440x900. It just gets downscaled but there's so many pixels that you can't really perceive the artifacts of it. It's possible to go higher than 1680x1050 on the 13" or 1920x1200 on the 15" with third party software but it's too small to see anything. My impression of Windows is that even now it's not very good at high DPI and so they just give you very small UI elements for their high DPI displays. Windows 10 has very good scaling for high DPI, I've found. It looks fantastic in Bootcamp on a 2014 15" rMBP. Still sucks a battery like it's starving for power, so I ended up migrating it to a VM and clawing back the space on my system drive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 23:54
|
|
|
A couple other things I spot as fundamentally different between the T450s and rMBP 13: CPUs - Apple's using the 28W TDP line of CPUs with Iris graphics, Lenovo's using 15W TDP CPUs with HD 5500. This translates into a minor performance advantage for the rMBP on the CPU side and a substantial advantage on graphics, especially when the system is under heavy load. Battery - The rMBP has a single fixed internal 75Wh battery. The T450s has one internal 23.2 Wh, and a rear bay for a second hot swappable battery. This can either be a second 23.2 Wh battery (the standard config, 46 Wh total) or an extra cost (about $140) 6-cell 72 Wh battery for 95 Wh total. If you're looking for something with all-day battery life even if you decide to crank up browser games now and then, and you don't care about a giant bulge, the T450s with the 6-cell is for you. On the other hand I'd hazard a guess that in the stock non-bulge config, the T450s probably won't last as long as the rMBP 13 on typical light workloads.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
Mister Speaker posted:I've got a dumb question about VNC/AFP. I have my MacPro and iMac linked with a CAT5 cable and routinely use OSX's native VNC/AFP protocol to control the iMac remotely and to move the occasional file between the machines. I have a feeling the cable isn't being used though as screensharing seems to slow down drastically during periods of heavy wireless usage. There's got to be a way to force VNC/AFP to only use the hard Ethernet connection between the machines, right? How do I set this up? Connect to the Ethernet IP address rather than the machine name.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
Anybody have experience hooking up an external GPU to their MBP with a device like this? I'm thinking of doing it so I can have good game performance at home without having to build a gaming PC.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
fleshweasel posted:Anybody have experience hooking up an external GPU to their MBP with a device like this? I'm thinking of doing it so I can have good game performance at home without having to build a gaming PC. It looks like Frankensteining the one you linked is probably the cheapest way. You'll need a powered PCIe riser and a 450W+ power supply to take the thing from 25W to usable for graphics adapter. That being said, I don't know what the performance would be like in bootcamp Windows using thunderbolt or even if you can take advantage of the full feature set. http://www.amazon.com/review/R2P9KQ...541966&store=pc
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
'Frankensteining' doesn't really do it justice. If this picture doesn't scare you into building a separate gaming desktop instead, you're broken, but good luck out there. It looks like there's some sort of community for eGPUs at least. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
It's kind of a bummer, because it seems to me (uninformed) an eGPU solution that let laptop users simply plug in and experience nearly desktop-class gaming would have a market.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
Most folk who game have a console. People who nee pro workstations already have them 
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
I've looked into making a working thunderbolt egpu in the past and came to the following conclusion: It would cost the same as an i3 based system and be about as powerful. However with a dedicated system you have options, whereas with the egpu you're pretty much locked in terms of what you have to work with. Also the frankenstein aspect where a fault in say the powered pci-e riser ribben would fry everything.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
fleshweasel posted:It's kind of a bummer, because it seems to me (uninformed) an eGPU solution that let laptop users simply plug in and experience nearly desktop-class gaming would have a market. Well, the Sonnet III comes with, 3 PCIe and a 300W PSU. People have successfully upgraded to 450W in it. But it costs $900. That's minus the new PSU and GFX card. My gaming rig has 16 GB of memory, 512 GB SSD, GTX 970 and i7-4770k, with a "Gold" PSU. Adding in the cooling pump, case, and motherboard, I think I came to $1100-$1200 total. And will run rings around a Mac with a thunderbolt graphics card for gaming.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
awesome-express posted:Most folk who game have a console. People who nee pro workstations already have them http://www.cnet.com/news/playing-games-on-the-pc-is-making-a-comeback/ It's not true that most gamers are console gamers. There must be a demographic of people who don't want to fuss with multiple PCs, need a laptop, and would like to use a powerful GPU at home. I can't claim to know this demographic is very large, but I am in it. Most likely I will get a 15" with dedicated GPU when Skylake comes out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
fleshweasel posted:There must be a demographic of people who don't want to fuss with multiple PCs, need a laptop, and would like to use a powerful GPU at home. I can't claim to know this demographic is very large, but I am in it. Most likely I will get a 15" with dedicated GPU when Skylake comes out. http://youtu.be/BFkp0GHz5v8 I'd wait for TB3 stuff before deciding to buy anything if you want that type of solution. I'm kinda curious if they'll work over TB1/2 since there'll be adapters and it's supposed to be back and forwards compatible.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
I honestly expect to never buy an actual desktop again. When I get a new laptop in a couple years, I'll move up to a 15" MBPr or equivalent with TB3 and just have an external GPU for games.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:A couple other things I spot as fundamentally different between the T450s and rMBP 13: How are Lenovo's trackpads? Because the trackpad on a MacBook is top notch and an Apple selling point that often gets overlooked. Every PC trackpad I've used has been garbage, though admittedly my experience is limited.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 04:43
|
|
|
empty baggie posted:How are Lenovo's trackpads? Because the trackpad on a MacBook is top notch and an Apple selling point that often gets overlooked. Every PC trackpad I've used has been garbage, though admittedly my experience is limited. I'm not sure about the Thinkpads (haven't used one newer than 2012) but the Ideapad trackpads aren't great. They're a lot better than some PC trackpads, but nothing to write home about.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 03:30 |
|
|
The rear end Stooge posted:I'm not sure about the Thinkpads (haven't used one newer than 2012) but the Ideapad trackpads aren't great. They're a lot better than some PC trackpads, but nothing to write home about. Yeah, most of the synaptic track pads are hot garbage. Pretty much the only one I can tolerate with windows is the Logitech one, and even then I need to use AutoHotkey to flip the scrolling. Still miss inertia when scrolling. Fortunately I only have to use that workstation when I'm at the office and need to access corporate stuff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 04:57
|
|