You are reading the article M2 Macbook Air Vs. M2 Macbook Pro: Is The Pro A Professional Machine? updated in February 2024 on the website Flu.edu.vn. We hope that the information we have shared is helpful to you. If you find the content interesting and meaningful, please share it with your friends and continue to follow and support us for the latest updates. Suggested March 2024 M2 Macbook Air Vs. M2 Macbook Pro: Is The Pro A Professional Machine?
MacBook Air M1 is the best laptop under $1000 money can buy. Yes, there are many alternatives if you prefer Windows. But none match the battery life while providing equivalent performance to the M1 MacBook Air. And Apple just pulled off the veil of the much-anticipated M2 MacBook Air.
Apple also launched the successor to the 13″ MacBook Pro with Apple’s M2 SoC, but we already have 14″ and 16″ MacBooks with M1 Pro and M1 Max SoC. The 13″ MacBook Pro seems like the middle child who needs to compete with its younger M2 sibling and its M1 Pro and M1 Max elder siblings. However, in this article, let’s focus on the differences between the M2 MacBook Air and M2 MacBook Pro.
Differences between the M2 MacBook Air and the M2 MacBook Pro
When a consumer is looking to buy a product, price is always the first concern. We set a budget, and the price of a product will always influence decisions. The M2 MacBook Air is priced at $1199, and the M2 MacBook Pro is just $100 more than its Air counterpart. But the price is not the only differentiating factor between the two.Design: MacBook Air looks more professional than the MacBook Pro
You read that right, and I say this not because I like the design of the M2 MacBook Air (which I do), but because the M2 MacBook Air has a similar design to the M1 Pro and M1 Max MacBook Pros. And the M2 MacBook Air also has more ports than the M2 MacBook Pro, more on that later.
The result of the new or rather inspired design of the M2 MacBook Air is a slimmer form factor than its predecessor and even the M2 MacBook Pro. And the M2 MacBook Air is also available in more colors, viz. Space Gray, Silver, Starlight, and Midnight while the M2 MacBook is only available in Space Gray and Silver.Display, Camera, and Speakers
It feels like the notch has become an iconic aspect of Apple’s design. You can find the notch on the iPhone (which we hope changes with iPhone 14 series), the 14″ and 16″ MacBook Pro, and it has finally made its way to the MacBook Air, which results in a slightly bigger screen. Now the M2 MacBook Air has a 13.6″ display, a 0.3″ increase over its predecessor. And the display is also now 100 nits brighter and has a peak brightness of 500 nits which is the same as the M2 MacBook Pro.
But the M2 MacBook Pro neither has a larger display nor houses a notch. While some might prefer the bezels over the notch for several reasons, the notch enables a larger screen and houses an upgraded 1080p camera sensor. So, the M2 MacBook Air cameras are better than the M2 MacBook Pro.
The M2 MacBook Air has a four-speaker sound system, and the M2 MacBook Pro has Stereo speakers. I suppose the speakers on the M2 MacBook Air are louder and better than the M2 MacBook Pro, but cannot pass a verdict without testing them. Always remember higher quantity does not always equate to higher quality. Nonetheless, I expect the M2 MacBook Air speakers to be louder and sound richer than the M2 MacBook Pro.Touch Bar vs. Function Row
You either love the Touch Bar, or you don’t give a damn about its existence. There’s no in-between. And that’s exactly why the only device to still feature the Touch Bar in the MacBook lineup is the M2 MacBook Pro. If you’re on the lookout for a new machine with the Touch Bar functionality, the M2 MacBook Pro is your only choice. Do note that you miss the function row when you get a MacBook with the Touch Bar.
The MacBook Air lineup never featured a Touch Bar, as the feature was exclusive to MacBook Pros. However, you get a full-height Function Key row with the M2 MacBook Air. Not a significant upgrade, but an upgrade nonetheless.A Pro MacBook without MagSafe
Apple reintroduced the MagSafe charging port last year with the MacBook Pro. And, the MagSafe port has finally made its way back to the M2 MacBook Air. You get a MagSafe port, two Thunderbolt ports, and a high impedance 3.5mm headphone jack with the M2 MacBook Air.
The M2 MacBook Pro also features the same ports and 3.5mm headphone jack but does not feature MagSafe charging. The result of this is a MacBook Pro, a machine meant for professionals housing fewer ports than its Air counterpart, which is targeted toward users with light to medium usage.Faster charging vs. longer battery life
With the introduction of M1 SoC’s came the era of phenomenal battery life on MacBooks powered by M1. The M2 SoC is an upgrade expected to provide better battery life than the M1 SoC. Nonetheless, the M2 MacBook Pro houses a bigger battery than the M2 MacBook Air. The battery of the M2 MacBook Pro will last over 2 hours longer than the M2 MacBook Air. But the Air charges faster than the Pro.
Both the M2 MacBook Air and the M2 MacBook Pro support 67W charging. But only the MacBook Air supports fast charging. Apple claims the M2 MacBook Air can charge up to 50% in under 30 minutes. So, it boils down to if you want your MacBook to charge faster or last longer? Most of us would love the best of both worlds, but I’d pick fast charging over a slightly larger battery from what is available.Is the M2 MacBook Pro the infamous awkward middle child?
After reading everything above, the M2 MacBook Pro might not seem as impressive as the M2 MacBook Air. Also, $1200 is the base price for the M2 MacBook Air, which again is a lot higher than the M1 MacBook Air, and while the upgrades might be worth the extra 200 dollars, I expected the Air to launch at $999.
The M2 MacBook Pro sits in a weird spot where it is neither as powerful as MacBooks with M1 Pro and M1 Max SoCs, nor does it feature the extra ports available with these machines. The MagSafe charging port, which has made its way to the M2 MacBook Air, is also unavailable on the M2 MacBook Pro.
Like always, Apple plays well with the Popcorn pricing phenomenon, as we saw with the M1 iPad Air. Recommending getting the 14″ M1 Pro MacBook Pro isn’t as easy as there’s almost a $500 price difference between the two. There’s always a better product available within Apple’s lineup for a bumped-up price. That seems like how Apple pushes users to increase their budget and get consumers to spend more than they initially intended.
If a dedicated cooling system and a slightly larger battery are what you’re on the lookout for, the M2 MacBook Pro might be the way to go. But for most people, the M2 MacBook Air will get the job done without breaking a sweat. Nonetheless, tread lightly and make an informed decision by listing your needs and then picking one machine over the other.
Consumer Technology and Motorcycles are the two things that excite Darryl the most. Why? Because Tech helps better people’s lives, and solving people’s problems related to tech is something he enjoys. And what about bikes, you ask? Well, drop a gear and disappear.
You're reading M2 Macbook Air Vs. M2 Macbook Pro: Is The Pro A Professional Machine?
The MacBook Air’s battery life is legendary. Colleagues who drive MacBook Airs claim they can get all-day battery life, and that no similarly sized PC can do the same. But now we have a real contender: The Dell XPS 13. Time to test those claims.
Before we dig in, it’s important to note that there’s no single test that can compare PC and MacBook battery life directly. We have to arrive at comparable numbers through reasoned use of similar tests. I’ll also be discussing other reviewers’ tests to help paint a more detailed picture.
Other outlets have actually expressed disappointment with the XPS 13’s run time. Jason Evangelho of Forbes said: “Dell’s battery life claims miss the mark by a not-insignificant amount, and the XPS 13 still can’t match or exceed the Air in that department. I was desperately hoping it would. But is it poor battery life? Absolutely not.”
Gordon Mah Ung
The XPS13 can out perform the MacBook Air in battery life even with its high resolution screen.
Here’s an important detail, though: Evangelho’s comparison was with a MacBook Air 13, which has a larger battery than the MacBook Air 11. He’s also planning to retest after disabling Windows Indexing and seeing the Dell’s life shoot from 7.5 hours to 9.5 hours.
Over at Gizmodo, Sean Hollister was also deeply disappointed: “Dell quotes up to 15 hours of battery life, and I struggled to get even half that in the real world.” But he, too, tested the XPS 13 agains the MacBook Air 13. Hollister tested the QHD+ version and the 1080p version of the XPS 13, getting 5 hours and 6 hours respectively, while the MacBook Air 13 gave him 8.5 hours of practical use.
The MacBook Air 11 is slightly smaller than the XPS13 and also has 1/5 its pixels too.We think differently
Here’s where my tests will differ. In my view, the MacBook Air 13 is quite a bit larger than XPS 13, despite the XPS 13’s similarly sized chúng tôi fairer comparison to the XPS 13 2024 should be based on size. So I reached into our locker for a MacBook Air 11 2014. That model is just slightly smaller than the XPS 13.
I’ll also point out that both Dells pack far more pixels than the competition. The top-end XPS 13, with its QHD+ screen, has a resolution of 3200×1800. The base model’s is 1920×1080. The MacBook Air 11 is 1366×768, while the 13-inch model is 1440×900.
Thinking about resolution in megapixels helps illustrate the scale of the difference. The 11-inch MacBook Air is 1MP (1 million pixels). The 13-inch model is 1.3MP, and the 1080p XPS 13 is 2MP. The high-res Dell XPS 13 is…wait for it: 5.7MP.More pixels use more power
As we all know, an increase in resolution can impact battery life. We’ve seen it in phones and laptops. Pixel density is nice, but it isn’t free.
I queried Dell’s laptop panel expert, who summarized it this way: The circuitry to drive the panel eats more power. A 1080p panel might consume 0.9 watts, while a 4K panel controller might use 1.3 watts to 1.5 watts. That’s significant when you consider that the monitor generally consumes the most power on a laptop today.
Then there’s also the power needed to light higher-dpi panels. Because the pixel pitch is much tighter, it blocks more light. That means it takes more light to get to the same brightness level of a lower-resolution screen.
One way to get around that is to use different screen technology. IGZO panels, for example, let more light through than a traditional high-res IPS panel, so you don’t have to burn as much power to hit the same lighting levels.
It’s a trick Lenovo/NEC is taking with its LaVie to cut the weight to 1.76 lbs. By using an IGZO panel, Lenovo can reduce the battery size while maintaining acceptable brightness and run time.Battery Tests
In my XPS 13 review, I used BAPCo’s MobileMark 2014 test. It’s the updated version of the industry-standard MobileMark 2012. It uses off-the-shelf and popular applications, and it runs them through various tasks at normal speeds.
MobileMark is unlike most rundown tests in that it acknowledges typical users’ tendencies to take breaks or zone out like Office Space‘s Peter Gibbons. MobileMark replicates this by allowing long pauses and letting the screen go to black. PCWorld
MobileMark 14 is perhaps the most realistic test for measuring actual office productivity battery life around and the Broadwell chip delivers in battery life. Keep in mind, the XPS13 also has a larger battery too.
The above test shows the battery life performance of the XPS 13 with QHD+ screen against the larger and older Lenovo X1 Carbon 2014. Despite its higher-resolution screen, that’s decent battery life in the Dell. The X1 Carbon is a different beast: It has a 14-inch screen and a 45-watt-hour battery. Keep in mind, that’s with the Wi-Fi hot (but connected to a router that goes nowhere), which is required by MobileMark 2014.
Gordon Mah Ung
The XPS13 on top of the MacBook Air 13 shows the size difference and why I selected the MacBook Air 11 for my tests.What about the MacBook Air?
There is no MobileMark on the Mac that runs in OS X. Yes, I could install Windows 8.1 and dual-boot, but I’m not sure that accomplishes much. I’m also not sure how much actual optimization Apple does for Windows. I suspect the company would rather have its users boot into OS X and run Windows apps in Parallels.
Is there really a cross-platform battery test that makes sense? I’m investigating, but for now I decided to do video run-down test. It’s something everyone can agree is a fair usage scenario.
For what it’s worth, Apple rates the 11-inch MacBook Air for 9 hours of browsing and 8 hours of video runtime. The 13-inch model, with the 40 percent larger battery, gets you to 12 hours of browsing, 12 hours of movies.
Dell rates the QHD+ version of the XPS 13 for 11 hours of browsing and 8 hours of HD video playback. The 1080p version of the XPS 13 takes it to 15 hours of browsing and just under 13 hours of video.
Each company uses its own battery methodology that can’t be directly compared. Even the “browsing” tasks are different: Apple uses iTunes to play a 720p video, while Dell uses Microsoft’s standardized Windows Assessment & Deployment Kit, which uses an H.264 file to gauge battery life in Windows-based devices. With two different video files and two different video players, it’s like comparing oranges and bricks.
VLC is popular because it’ll play just about any file format in the universe and it runs on OS X and Windows.How I tested
To make it as even as possible, so I grabbed VLC 2.1.5 for OS X and Windows and used the 1080p Big Buck Bunny .OGG file PCWorld has. You should know that using VLC on Windows hardly favors the platform—in fact, it’s downright mediocre in optimization. Tim Schiesser over at TechSpot has done some great testing on this front, and other individuals have validated his findings. For my tests, I disabled hardware acceleration in VLC on both platforms, as I saw screen corruption when I enabled it under OS X.
I disabled variable screen brightness on both platforms and set the brightness to as close to 190 nits as I could on all three laptops. The QHD+ was actually putting out closer to 200 nits. I used our Minolta Photometer to measure the laptops’ display brightness at dead center.
If you’re setting the laptops based on the percentage of slider controls, you should know that doesn’t mean much. Setting the the MacBook Air 11 to 50-percent brightness is about 64 nits, while the same middle of the slider setting on the XPS 13 QHD+ is 185 nits. That’s a huge difference.
So as not to annoy my officemates, I ran our tests with volume muted, which isn’t realistic, but at least the audio was not a factor. Since I wrote my original review, I also was able to obtain the 1080p version of the XPS 13 that has 4GB of DDR3L/1600. My results are in minutes and were manually recorded by having all three laptops sitting on my desk and noting the time when the screens finally went to black. WiFi was hot on all three, but the connected router went nowhere, so there was no chance of their downloading updates in the background.
Using VLC and the 1080p .ogg file, I saw about five hours on the QHD+ XPS 13, another half-hour so on the MacBook Air 11, and just over seven hours on the 1080p version of the XPS 13. It’s pretty clear that with a lower-resolution file and using Windows 8.1’s built-in Metro video player, the XPS units can come close to the rated video run time. There should also be a healthy bump up in run time for the MacBook Air using iTunes.
So the MacBook Air 11 is better in run time, right? Sometimes. When I ran my original review, I actually didn’t use the shorter .ogg file. I used our encoding test file: a 31GB MKV file that’s high bit-rate and 1080p. PCWorld
Using a higher bit rate MKV file, the MacBook Air 11 loses to both XPS13 units.
That file is a bear, and we can see all the laptops taking a far bigger hit in battery life–including the MacBook Air 11, which suddenly falls behind the XPS 13 QHD+. This could be because the Haswell CPU in the MacBook Air 11 worked harder to decode the file than the Broadwell CPU in the XPS 13, or possibly something to do with the M.2 drive in the MacBook Air, which is PCIe-based and far faster than the M.2 SATA in the Dells.No one gets bragging rights
After trying to wrangle cross-platform battery testing and seeing how many variables can go into the tests, I’ve decided that the best we can say is battery life on X platform is better for Y task. So, I can say quite comfortably that playing 1080p MKV files using VLC, the XPS 13 gives you better battery life.
I also believe that unless you’re saying what exactly you’re testing and how you’re testing it, it’s not very easy to compare the two platforms on pure battery life. I also don’t think it’s valid to try to compare platform Y against platform X by seat-of-the-pants testing of “using it.” That’s just too hard to replicate in a manner that’s actually useful beyond trolling each other in a forum.
Maybe the best way to settle this discussion next time is to say your mileage may vary.
Apple said that the new iPad Pro with its A12X chip was faster than “92% of portable PCs” at its announcement event on Tuesday. Apple uses ‘PCs’ as a nice euphemism for both Windows and Mac computers without directly slighting its own Macs.
Geekbench benchmarks for the new iPad Pro have shown up online, and the scores are certainly impressive. The iPad reports ~5030 in single-core, and ~18000 in multi-core. The single core score goes to toe-to-toe with a 2.6 GHz i7 2023 MacBook Pro …
You can build-to-order a 13-inch MacBook Pro with the i7 processor and 256 GB SSD for $2099. The comparable 256 GB 12.9-inch iPad Pro is $1149. Apple offers an off-the-shelf 2.6GHz i7 in a 512 GB 15-inch MacBook Pro config for $2799. The 12.9-inch iPad Pro specced with 512 GB storage sells for $1349, half as much.
The six-core i7 is faster in the multi-core benchmark than the eight-core iPad Pro — but it is really not that far behind.
The 2023 iPad Pro can achieve 3908 single-core and 9310 multi-core scores. The new iPad Pro is 30% faster than its predecessor in single-core and effectively doubles multi-core performance up to 18217, at least according to these synthetic benchmarks.
Tasking the GPU computational ability, Geekbench shows the Metal Compute Score rising by 40% year-over-year. The second-gen iPad Pro could achieve just under 30,000 on the compute benchmark. The new Pro models easily top 41,000.
At least in single-core, Apple only sells a single configuration of portable Mac that is decidedly faster than the iPad Pro — the Core i9 MacBook Pro. Reminder: Apple sells the A12X-equipped iPad Pro from $799. The i9 MacBook Pro sells for more than $3000. Going beyond portables, the iPad Pro matches or beats almost all 2023 iMac configurations, and rivals the iMac Pro on single-core prowess.
These Geekbench reports also back up the claims that the iPad Pro offer 6 GB of RAM … on some models. As seen here, the device with identifier ‘iPad8,8’ has 5650 MB of memory whereas ‘iPad8,3’ has 3769 MB (6 GB vs 4 GB).
Multiple people are telling me that only the 1TB iPad Pros get 6GB RAM. … So that’s a thing.
— Steve Troughton-Smith (@stroughtonsmith) October 30, 2023
For the first time in an iOS device, 2023 iPad Pro RAM varies based on the particular storage configuration. 64 GB, 256 GB and 512 GB SKUs of both the 11-inch and 12.9-inch models feature 4 GB RAM, unchanged from the 2023 generation. The 1 TB configurations feature 6 GB RAM.
With the current state of iOS, the additional RAM will primarily make a difference in how many apps can stay frozen in memory, or how many Safari tabs can be kept open without reloading. In terms of future-proofing, obviously bigger is better.
Who knows what new iPad features will come along in iOS 13 or iOS 14, and there’s a chance that some features may require higher available RAM (or at least work better with the additional 2 GB floating around).
The new iPad Pro models can be ordered now from chúng tôi with first orders shipping to customers on November 7.
Check out 9to5Mac on YouTube for more Apple news:
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
After explaining my thinking last time, it’s time for my Dell UltraSharp 49 review to begin in earnest.
I’ve been wanting a new monitor ever since I got my 15-inch MacBook Pro way back in 2024. The problem was, my perfect monitor didn’t exist then and – one Mac later – it still doesn’t.
But the Dell UltraSharp 49 looked like it would tick a lot of boxes. Thin bezels, single-cable connection, and the ultra-wide format I fell in love with a couple of years ago.
And, at four feet wide and 49 inches of diagonal screen, I was certainly expecting to be wowed by it …Unboxing
If you want to see the unboxing process in detail, watch this video. I did so to see what I was letting myself in for.
In fact, Dell makes the process totally painless. There’s a quick-start guide with clear illustrations; numbered flaps to open in sequence – and you fit the stand to the monitor while it’s still in the box.
The screws do look alarmingly underspecced!
Just four of these hold the weight of the monitor. But it does feel rock-solid when installed. A Thunderbolt-compatible USB-C cable is included, along with HDMI ones.
There are two polystyrene grab handles to help lift it onto the desk, then these slide off the ends. I’d fully expected it to be a two-person job, but that turned out not to be the case. Getting it assembled and onto my desk was much easier than I’d expected.Look and feel
Once unpacked and placed on my desk, no surprise that the overwhelming impression of this thing is that it is huge! It almost fills the width of my desk. Indeed, I no longer have room for the fan that used to sit on my desk and had to bring forward a plan to replace it with a ceiling fan.
I have room for the monitor, my HomePods, and the MacBook Pro – which I initially placed underneath the monitor in clamshell mode as I, fairly obviously, have no need for it as an additional screen!
It’s plastic, but from the front you’re only seeing pleasingly slim bezels, and as my desk is against the wall, I’m never going to see the back. But even if you will, it’s inoffensive enough. Bottom line: it’s plastic, but doesn’t look plasticky.
The front has top and side bezels around 1cm thick, and slightly more than that at the bottom. There’s a small Dell logo in the center.
The stand is big! You can get a good impression of the size in the top photo, with my 16-inch MacBook Pro next to it. With such a large and heavy monitor, a beefy stand is unavoidable, of course. But it’s nothing like as obtrusive as the huge legs you see on many other ultrawide monitors, so I’m quite happy with this.
Adjustability is great! The monitor offers 90mm of height adjustment, as well as tilting between -5º and +21º. Both mechanisms are super-smooth and easy. There is, despite Dell’s claims, no swivel mechanism. I set it close to the lowest position and angled back around +7º.Set up
Physical set up is simple: plug in the power, and run a single Thunderbolt-compatible USB-C cable from the monitor to the MacBook. Cable management is … basic. You can run power and USB-C cables through a hole in the stand, and that’s it. But that is enough to keep them out of sight.
(I additionally have an Ethernet cable directly connecting my MacBook to my gigabit fiber broadband in order to deliver the full speed, but it’s not often I have any practical use for the difference between the c.900Mbps speeds I see on Ethernet and the c.400Mbps I see on WiFi. For most people, including me most of the time, 1 single cable does the job.)
While I was in preferences, I increased the trackpad speed as the left side of monitor is a long way away from the centre of the screen! As an example, when resizing an image in Photoshop, the physical distance between the centre of the image and the Image menu is about twice the length of the Magic Keyboard!
In addition to the single USB-C port, there are two upstream USB 3.0 ports (as the monitor supports two computers if desired, with a built-in KVM switch to allow use with a single wired keyboard and mouse), five downstream USB 3.0 ports (three in the centre by the stand, two more accessible ones at the front), a DisplayPort socket and two HDMI ones.
In my case, the only thing I have permanently connected is an 8TB Lacie drive for Time Machine. I used to have a scanner as well, but the amount of incoming paper I have now is low, so I now use the Scanner Pro app on my iPhone.
With the USB-C/Thunderbolt connection, of course, neither of the upstream USB ports is needed.Quality
Let’s deal with the elephant in the room first. If you’re used to an Apple Thunderbolt Display 27, or any other 2560×1440 monitor, you’re going to be perfectly happy with the quality. However, if you’re used to either working directly on the MacBook Pro display or any doubled-pixel one, like the LG UltraFine 5K, then text will definitely seem less sharp.
If I’d come directly from my old ATD27, I likely wouldn’t have given it a second thought. But as I’ve been using my 16-inch MacBook Pro as my primary display for some time now, the difference is significant. How significant depends on the typeface.
Whether this will be a dealbreaker for me remains to be seen. My guess is not: I’m so wowed by the size and real-estate that it feels like a very minor thing. But that is, so far, my one question-mark.
When viewing photos or video, however, the quality is stunning. As I said last time, it’s not a pro monitor – and doesn’t have a pro monitor price tag – but I think even enthusiastic photographers will be more than happy with this. Photo editing on this size monitor is going to be a dream.
Not to mention the library overview you get.
Video editing, too, looks like it will be a wonderful experience. The amount of the timeline you can see at once is fantastic!In use
This monitor is for me first and foremost about productivity and convenience: being able to see all my main apps at the same time. I use Spaces, with different desktops for different contexts, my two main ones being Work and Home.
Here’s my setup for my Work desktop:
It’s fantastic to have everything visible at once on a single display!
It’s the same thing with my Home desktop. Different friends use different messenger apps, so it’s handy to have all of them on-screen at once:
I use a menubar app called Stay to position the windows in their assigned places each time I connect to the monitor.
The Dell UltraSharp 49 does offer an alternative setup: you can split the monitor in half and create two virtual 27-inch monitors, each 2560×1440. The one benefit of this would be that I could have two menubars, so would have less distance to move on the trackpad. I’ll probably experiment with that setup at some point.
There is one significant compromise in the specs: there’s no webcam in the monitor. For some people, that would be a dealbreaker. For me, the majority of my video calls are social ones, not professional, so I wouldn’t normally want to hold them in the office. All the same, I do sometimes, so that is a bit of a nuisance. I do have an HD webcam somewhere, so I’ll have to dig it out.
I’m using the display at 87% brightness, which is slightly higher than the approx 80% brightness I set when using my MacBook Pro display in the office.
The antiglare coating works extremely well! My office is set up to minimize reflections anyway, but I can angle it such that the bezels pick up the reflection of my ceiling light, and there’s nothing visible on the screen.
SSD aside, my 16-inch MacBook Pro is a base-spec one. Connected to the monitor when flat on my desk, there was some fan usage – perhaps around 20% – and the machine got warm but not hot. I today dug out an upright stand for it, and the fans quickly dropped to around 10% before switching off altogether.Dell UltraSharp 49 review: Initial conclusions
The most important of my initial conclusions can be summed up in one word: Wow!
It looks truly spectacular, and the ability to have all of my constantly-used apps visible all of the time on a single screen feels every good as bit as I’d expected. As a minimalist who likes a clean desk without clutter, a single ultra-wide monitor setup is a joy.
It’s not perfect, however.
In an ideal world, it would offer doubled resolution to match the sharpness of the MacBook Pro display or the LG UltraFine 5K. But then we’d be looking at two UltraFine 5K displays in one panel – and that would roughly double the price. This thing is close to the limit of what I’m prepared to pay for a monitor, even one this size, so that would be a non-starter.
The curve is, as I expected, shallower than I would prefer. I mean, everything is perfectly viewable right across the screen, but the edges do feel a little too far away, and I do find myself scooting my chair across slightly for a more natural viewing angle when reading things at the edges.
I’d like it to have a webcam. I find the absence pretty inexplicable since there’s room in the top bezel and plenty of thickness. Perhaps it was a cost compromise.
I’d like it to be aluminum, not plastic. While it looks fine, it doesn’t have the same stylish look of an anodized aluminum casing.
Finally (for now), I’d like some downstream USB-C ports just to let me use the same cables on the monitor as I do on the MacBook.
But these shortcomings are all ones I can live with. I’ve never been a fan of multi-monitor setups, especially dual-27-inch ones, as you either have the bezels right in front of you, or you have to position the monitors asymmetrically, which I hate. This one gives all the benefits of 2 x 27-inch monitors without that downside.
I remember the first time I used the 30-inch Apple Cinema Display. When people say their jaw dropped, I assume they don’t mean it literally, but mine almost did. And this is the same. I really can’t tell you what a ‘wow’ experience it is when you’re sitting in front of it. I am in love with this thing. I can’t imagine sending it back.
I said that the mildly-compromised text quality was my only question mark. Well, I’ve now written several thousand words on it (2,000 of them in this review piece), and it bothers me only when I actively think about it. While I’m writing, I’m not even remotely aware of it.
In UK law, you have a 14-day cooling-off period for anything bought online. That obviously requires you to hold onto the box and all the packaging so you can return it as you received it. I’m already wondering whether I want that huge box sat in my office for a fortnight. So far, it’s still there, but the fact that I’m even considering throwing it in the recycling before the end of the 14-day period tells you how confident I am that I’m going to be keeping this.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
The new Apple M2 chip for the Mac delivers 90% of the performance of a 12-core Intel CPU while using just a quarter of the power.Apple M2 is the next-generation Apple silicon for the Mac
Apple during its Worldwide Developers Conference 2023 keynote introduced its next-generation Apple silicon platform for the Mac and the iPad. The M2 made its debut in the new MacBook Air, which was also unveiled at the WWDC 2023 keynote.
The M2 is manufactured using the second-generation five-nanometer process technology from TSMC, which is an improved version of the five-nanometer TSMC process used in the production of the M1 family of chips. The M2 packs in 20 billion transistors, an increase in transistor count of approximately 20 percent compared with the M1. Read: New to the Mac? Learn the basics of macOS System PreferencesM2 gives you 50% unified memory at 24GB
The M2 offers fifty percent greater memory bandwidth at up to 100GB/s than the previous generation. And more important than that, Apple laptops equipped with the new M2 chip offer up to 24 gigabytes of unified LPDDR5 memory (eight gigabytes more than the M1, a 50 percent increase). The M1 has an eight-core CPU with four performance cores, which are now faster and have more cache, and four efficiency cores, which are now even more power-efficient. You get about 18 percent faster performance out of the M2’s CPU than M1’s.
And just like with the M1 family of chips, the M2 doesn’t sacrifice performance for power efficiency as Apple’s silicon platform is extremely power efficient. Apple’s charts show the M2 outperforming the competition at at lower power usage levels, and by a significant margin. For example, the company claims that the M2 can compete with a high-end PC laptop by offering up to 90 percent of the peak CPU performance of a 12-core CPU from Intel, but while using just a quarter of the power.M2 delivers a big GPU boost
You can expect an even bigger boost in graphics performance since the GPU embedded in the M2 chip now has ten total cores versus eight cores in the M1’s GPU. This translates into one-quarter faster performance (25 percent) than the M1’s GPU at the same power level and up to a 35 percent jump in GPU performance at the maximum power level.Faster neural and media engines
The Apple M2 silicon platform also includes a second-generation Secure Enclave, which is a cryptographic coprocessor than handles all your security keys, encryption/decryption and stuff like that. The neural engine in the M2 now delivers up to 15.8 trillion operations per second versus 11 trillion operations per second for the M1, which translates to a 40 percent faster machine learning performance.
The media engine cores inside the M2 have been improved significantly and now support 8K video playback and capture with the HEVC/H.265 and ProRes video codecs, and other enhancements. The improvements will allow the next MacBook Air and other M2-powered notebooks to play back multiple streams of 4K and 8K video without skipping a beat.
For further information, read a press release in the Apple Newsroom.
realme X hands-on: Ten out of ten?
However, with such a quick turnaround between iterations, is realme 3 Pro enough of an upgrade over its not-too-old predecessor? We find out in this quick look at the realme 3 Pro vs realme 2 Pro!Design Display
realme 3 Pro
4GB or 6GB RAM
64GB or 128GB storage
realme 2 Pro
4GB, 6GB, or 8GB RAM
realme 2 Pro
A Micro-USB port is just poor future-proofing at this point.
The Pro 3 and Pro 2’s use of Micro-USB will not make any user happy, but realme has hinted that this was a limitation of the ultra-fast VOOC charging. While we would have definitely preferred USB-C, we suspect most users will opt for the rapid charging tech if given a choice against a phone with USB-C.
realme 3 Pro
Rear: 16MP f/1.7 primary, 5MP depth
realme 2 Pro
Rear: 16MP f/1.7 primary, 2MP depth
Sample from the realme 2 Pro Camera
The realme 2 Pro can take pretty good looking photos, especially in well-lit conditions. However, exposure is often all over the place, resulting in too many blown highlights. The realme 3 Pro brings a lot of improvement in this regard.
The photos taken with the realme 3 Pro weren’t overexposed, have more detail, and the colors are more saturated as well. Some would argue that the color reproduction is less accurate, but it does make for a prettier social media picture. Neither phone handles low-light conditions particularly well, with soft images and a distinct lack of detail across the board. Between the two, the realme 3 Pro does do a better job.
sample from the realme 3 Pro camera
The realme 2 Pro camera is a fairly capable shooter, especially when you consider its price point, and the realme 3 Pro carries on in the same vein. These aren’t poor performers by any stretch of the imagination, but they aren’t going to blow you away either.
realme 3 Pro
Android 9 Pie
realme 2 Pro
Android 8 Oreo
Neither version of ColorOS is going to be everyone’s cup of tea, but realme has done a great job refining and polishing the software experience with the latest version. On the 3 Pro, you now have an app drawer, a slew of navigation gestures, a cleaner notification bar, and a bunch of other improvements that make ColorOS 5.2 seem quite dated. There are still quite a few quirks and numerous pre-installed apps (that can be removed) to deal with, and there’s a bit of a learning curve, but this is not the worst smartphone software ever.
The 2 Pro will eventually get the upgrade to ColorOS 6.0, says realme, with a rollout slated for June.
Xiaomi was the first to go down the path of the affordable premium smartphone, but numerous competitors like realme are now enthusiastically giving chase. Beginning with the realme 1, which was released just a year ago, the biggest selling point of these smartphones is their price. This remains true with the realme 2 Pro and the realme 3 Pro.
The realme 2 Pro starts at a very affordable 11,990 rupees (~$172) for the 4GB RAM and 64GB storage version, and goes up to 15,990 rupees (~$230) for the 8GB RAM and 128GB storage model. On the other hand, the realme 3 Pro starts at 13,999 rupees (~$200) for 4GB RAM and 64GB storage, and goes up to 16,999 (~$245) for 6GB RAM and 128GB storage.
Is the realme 3 Pro a worthy successor? Absolutely!
Is the realme3 Pro worth the upgrade, though? Well, that depends. If you’re choosing between the realme 3 Pro and the realme 2 Pro, the newer smartphone is the much better way to go. If you already have the realme 2 Pro though, I think it’s best to just deal with the smartphone envy and wait for a future release. Considering how quickly realme churns out new phones, you won’t be waiting long.realme 3 Pro vs realme 2 Pro: Our verdict
In the battle of the realme 3 Pro vs realme 2 Pro, there’s a clear winner. Apart from the generic face and the similar dimensions, there’s very little real overlap between the two. The realme 3 Pro offers better display protection, Widevine L1 support, a faster processor and even better GPU, fantastic battery life, an improved camera experience, and more polished software. We would pick the realme 3 Pro.
Update the detailed information about M2 Macbook Air Vs. M2 Macbook Pro: Is The Pro A Professional Machine? on the Flu.edu.vn website. We hope the article's content will meet your needs, and we will regularly update the information to provide you with the fastest and most accurate information. Have a great day!