PDA

View Full Version : New MacBooks by November?




Pages : [1] 2 3 4

MacRumors
Oct 9, 2007, 11:28 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

ThinkSecret reports (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0710macbookrev.html) that Apple is set to introduce new MacBook updates soon after the release of Mac OS X Leopard (10.5). Leopard is rumored to be launched on October 26th, and the rumor site expects the new MacBooks to be in the hands of consumers "by the first half of November, if not sooner."

According to their sources, the MacBook update will be a relatively modest update, and simply bump processor speeds. It's unknown if the new MacBooks will adopt the Santa Rosa architecture that adopted (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/06/05/apple-releases-new-macbook-pros-with-santa-rosa/) by the MacBook Pros in June. ThinkSecret also believes this will be the last Apple hardware revision before the holidays.

These expectations don't entirely correlate with September rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/09/21/slim-aluminum-macbooks-soon/) of a slim aluminum MacBook arriving "soon".

The last MacBook update was May 15, 2007 (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/05/15/apple-releases-new-macbooks/).

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/09/new-macbooks-by-november/)



jackc
Oct 9, 2007, 11:31 AM
Noooooooooooo! I want my aluminum MacBook!

vendettabass
Oct 9, 2007, 11:32 AM
come on, mac pros have to be first

Wild-Bill
Oct 9, 2007, 11:34 AM
ThinkSecret also believes this will be the last Apple hardware revision before the holidays.


What!?!??!?!

What about the Mac Pro??!! I hope they are wrong about that. The Mac Pro needs an update.

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 11:36 AM
MacBook updates!

Just what I want. :D

Don't forget the Mac Pro either Apple!

QCassidy352
Oct 9, 2007, 11:37 AM
The next MB had damn well better not use the GMA 950. Give us Santa Rosa and the 3100, at least.

whenpaulsparks
Oct 9, 2007, 11:37 AM
yes, absolutely Mac Pros must get here before the new year. i've been holding myself back from getting a Mac Pro until they get a blu-ray/hd dvd burner. I do video production, and i can currently shoot and edit in HD, but i want to be able to easily deliver in HD as well. the Mac Pro is expected to get a burner first, and i will be one of the first to buy one.

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 11:38 AM
The next MB had damn well better not use the GMA 950. Give us Santa Rosa and the 3100, at least.Heads will roll if the GMA 950 shows up again.

mox123
Oct 9, 2007, 11:40 AM
oh noooooooooooooo....my machine which i bought in july will NOT be the latest!!! arrrgghhhhhh

Multimedia
Oct 9, 2007, 11:40 AM
The next MB had damn well better not use the GMA 950. Give us Santa Rosa and the 3100, at least.Gotta be. That's what I've been waiting for. If they're gonna be faster they've gotta be Santa Rosa & 3100 IG so we can run FCS 2 & CS3 with 4 GB of ram.yes, absolutely Mac Pros must get here before the new year. i've been holding myself back from getting a Mac Pro until they get a blu-ray/hd dvd burner. I do video production, and i can currently shoot and edit in HD, but i want to be able to easily deliver in HD as well. the Mac Pro is expected to get a burner first, and i will be one of the first to buy one.No I will. :p

flopticalcube
Oct 9, 2007, 11:40 AM
C'mon. Its got to be Santa Rosa!

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 11:41 AM
Gotta be. That's what I've been waiting for. If they're gonna be faster they've gotta be Santa Rosa.No I will. :pWe still have the T7600 :rolleyes:

C'mon. Its got to be Santa Rosa!Did we say this back this Spring as well? :D

xUKHCx
Oct 9, 2007, 11:41 AM
If it comes before the back to school ends i'll be all over it.

Lone Deranger
Oct 9, 2007, 11:43 AM
Unbelievable.. The thread's barely 10 minutes old and look at all the complaining going on already... :rolleyes:

GuntherS
Oct 9, 2007, 11:43 AM
Heads will roll if the GMA 950 shows up again.

Yeah, but I think it will..
I think we should wait till MacWorld to hear something about the aluminum MacBook with a (hopefully) upgraded graphics card.

Data
Oct 9, 2007, 11:46 AM
I would have thought the Mac Pro would get an update to, we'll wait and see then.

crisc
Oct 9, 2007, 11:48 AM
There were rumors of a new mac mini coming in November with the Santa Rosa chipset, but I guess it has been debunked if this Thinksecret article is true.

I hope so, I bought a mini two weeks ago and did the RAM and hard drive upgrade myself

Kingsly
Oct 9, 2007, 11:48 AM
No I will. :p

You're both wrong. I will.

I'd love to see new MB's! Too bad I've already got one... :o

I really hope TS is wrong and we get a Mac Pro in the next month. I have the money burning a hole in my pocket here Apple!! It burns!!! :mad:
:p :o

appledog
Oct 9, 2007, 11:48 AM
if true, this shows how important the Mac Pro is to Apple these days...
iPod, iPhone, iMac, Mac Books rule. Maybe a new OS if they get around to it.

Update our overpriced flagship? Were busy-- check back next year.

QCassidy352
Oct 9, 2007, 11:49 AM
Unbelievable.. The thread's barely 10 minutes old and look at all the complaining going on already... :rolleyes:

commenting on what we want is not the same as complaining.

netdog
Oct 9, 2007, 11:51 AM
ThinkSecret isn't exactly reliable. I am waiting for 9to5 to speak.

BTW
Oct 9, 2007, 11:52 AM
C'mon. Its got to be Santa Rosa!

That's right! There's no reason why Apple should neglect putting the Santa Rosa chipset into the MacBooks.

Also, the LED displays would be nice too. While you're at it add some flash hybrid-ness into the hard disk drives. :D

plumbingandtech
Oct 9, 2007, 11:52 AM
ThinkSecret isn't exactly reliable. I am waiting for 9to5 to speak.

I agree.

And I also think that if the next macbooks are NOT thin, then we will see the subnotebook at Jan. Macworld.

netdog
Oct 9, 2007, 11:53 AM
Unbelievable.. The thread's barely 10 minutes old and look at all the complaining going on already... :rolleyes:

If true, the big news isn't a minor speed bump to the Mac Book. It's no new Mac Pros. Much more significant as the MP hasn't had a real update since its introduction in 2006, and while I am happy for future Mac Book buyers, they get refreshed regularly and a minor speed bump isn't going to make or break anyone's day.

Kaspers
Oct 9, 2007, 11:53 AM
C'mon. Its got to be Santa Rosa!

I see no reason why it won't be..

Multimedia
Oct 9, 2007, 11:54 AM
if true, this shows how important the Mac Pro is to Apple these days...
iPod, iPhone, iMac, Mac Books rule. Maybe a new OS if they get around to it.

Update our overpriced flagship? Were busy-- check back next year.I wouldn't worry too much yet. I still think we get it in November. Meanwhile we can enjoy learning to use all the new cool features of Leopard on what we have.

MacinDoc
Oct 9, 2007, 11:55 AM
If they're gonna be faster they've gotta be Santa Rosa & 3100 IG so we can run FCS 2 & CS3 with 4 GB of ram.No I will. :p
The improved graphics would be welcome, but it doesn't "gotta be" able to run Pro apps like FCS2 & CS3, at least from Apple's POV. Apple wants to sell MacBook Pros to ppl who use that kind of software.

Although it's from TS, part of this rumor makes sense. Unfortunately, it's the "modest update" part. That rumored ultraslim is not a MacBook, it's something else. The MB could not have that significant an update without a price increase.

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 11:55 AM
I wouldn't worry too much yet. I still think we get it in November. Meanwhile we can enjoy learning to use all the new cool features of Leopard on what we have.I want Leopard first as well.

I can survive using my Dell Latitude for now.

Not that we aren't waiting for hardware updates.

samh004
Oct 9, 2007, 11:56 AM
Personally I think it's a little early for a MacBook revision, and not just because I bought so recently.

However... I'll be quite happy to see a MacBook update to an aluminium casing as I know my wireless reception will still be heaps better through this plastic. And hopefully by the time I upgrade, they'll have moved on to something a bit more thought through.

Multimedia
Oct 9, 2007, 11:56 AM
If true, the big news isn't a minor speed bump to the Mac Book. It's no new Mac Pros. Much more significant as the MP hasn't had a real update since its introduction in 2006, and while I am happy for future Mac Book buyers, they get refreshed regularly and a minor speed bump isn't going to make or break anyone's day.It's not the minor speed bump that will be significant. It's the Santa Rosa 4 GB capability with new integrated graphics that will be significant and certainly make my day. i.e. This will finally be a fully true 64-bit MacBook just in time for Leopard.

Heinekev
Oct 9, 2007, 11:57 AM
:(

want slim mac book sooo bad

GuntherS
Oct 9, 2007, 11:58 AM
If the MacBook will have Santa Rosa and a 3100 graphics card, I will buy one right away!

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 11:59 AM
It's not the minor speed bump that will be significant. It's the Santa Rosa 4 GB capability with new integrated graphics that will be significant and certainly make my day. i.e. This will finally be a fully true 64-bit MacBook just in time for Leopard.I have to agree. The easily replaceable hard drive and RAM are nice as well in the MacBook.

I want a portable laptop. If I need power I'll stick with a desktop. MacBook (Santa Rosa) + Q6600 tower (Gaming/Video Crunching) look more like my future everyday.

Don't think any less of me for not holding out for a Mac Pro.

plainclothes
Oct 9, 2007, 11:59 AM
So, a refresh rather than a redesign. Fair enough! But can we expect a price drop?

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 12:01 PM
So, a refresh rather than a redesign. Fair enough! But can we expect a price drop?Santa Rosa components are set at the same price points as Napa's.

It's possible for Apple to take $100 off and still maintain a good margin.

SirOmega
Oct 9, 2007, 12:01 PM
Unlikely. I dont expect new MBs until MWSF. In fact, I dont expect any hardware updates until MWSF (where I expect revised MBs, MPs, XServes).

And I dont expect a thin MB until the end of next year with that new SoC-style intel processor that integrates part of the MCH on a chip.

jellomizer
Oct 9, 2007, 12:02 PM
yes, absolutely Mac Pros must get here before the new year. i've been holding myself back from getting a Mac Pro until they get a blu-ray/hd dvd burner. I do video production, and i can currently shoot and edit in HD, but i want to be able to easily deliver in HD as well. the Mac Pro is expected to get a burner first, and i will be one of the first to buy one.

It looks like you are setting yourself up for a letdown. Macs are to popular now for revolutionary upgrades.

Consultant
Oct 9, 2007, 12:02 PM
Well, it seems to be the year of many changes.

Thankfully the MBP design isn't changed, but looks like all Apple products will have some metal on it by the year end.

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 12:03 PM
Well, it seems to be the year of many changes.

Thankfully the MBP design isn't changed, but looks like all Apple products will have some metal on it by the year end.Metal seems to be the thing for Apple.

I see too many dented PowerBook/MacBook Pros though.

DaBrain
Oct 9, 2007, 12:05 PM
yes, absolutely Mac Pros must get here before the new year. i've been holding myself back from getting a Mac Pro until they get a blu-ray/hd dvd burner. I do video production, and i can currently shoot and edit in HD, but i want to be able to easily deliver in HD as well. the Mac Pro is expected to get a burner first, and i will be one of the first to buy one.

Well good luck on a blu-ray/hd dvd burner! I just saw someone introduce one and they want a grand just for it! I had to change my drawers after reading that and it's price! :eek:

meagain
Oct 9, 2007, 12:08 PM
I certainly hope it's more than a refresh. I'm so tired of waiting for my dream laptop.

hollywoodmacguy
Oct 9, 2007, 12:11 PM
ThinkSecret also believes this will be the last Apple hardware revision before the holidays.


ok, so i guess this means no new ACDs until MWSF, if then... come on :apple:!!! :rolleyes:

hasah
Oct 9, 2007, 12:14 PM
If it comes before the back to school ends i'll be all over it.

likewise... i sold my imac g5 back in july and have been waiting for leopard to buy a new mac. hopefully Apple will release new macbooks by the end of october so i can have the latest macbook with leopard and free ipod nano... that would be just perfect! :D im not too bothered about major design change to Aluminium... i kinda like the white macbook :rolleyes:. a simple update to the macbooks would suffice.

andiwm2003
Oct 9, 2007, 12:14 PM
well, a white santa rosa macbook, 2.2GHz, 3100GPU, 2GB Ram, 160GB HD for $1299 could be a nice alternative to a 2.4GHz MBpro for $2499.
basically i'm torn between going cheap versus going top end.
right now going cheap has not enough power to be an alternative. with the santa rosa chipset and the GPU the MB would be just good enough for me. the savings could go into an iPod or software.

GekkePrutser
Oct 9, 2007, 12:16 PM
yes, absolutely Mac Pros must get here before the new year. i've been holding myself back from getting a Mac Pro until they get a blu-ray/hd dvd burner. I do video production, and i can currently shoot and edit in HD, but i want to be able to easily deliver in HD as well. the Mac Pro is expected to get a burner first, and i will be one of the first to buy one.

Can't you stick one in yourself? I thought the pro is meant to be user-modified.. Of course it's better to wait until it comes out of the box with proper support, but if you really need it then I'd say it be easy enough to install one. They're getting cheaper by the day, too.

xpisnotforme
Oct 9, 2007, 12:17 PM
No way.

Why update a product that is already selling like hotcakes with a crippled config in less than a year? (i have a 2.0 ghz white macbook) Unless it's something totally new (*fantasy image of slim macbook/pro) why release it from the business perspective of Apple at this time?:confused:

If one system is going to be updated for certain at leopard launch it is the mac pros with corroborated reports of penryn desktop launch + exclusivity.

let's see:)

:(

want slim mac book sooo bad

I second and quadruple that!!

DHagan4755
Oct 9, 2007, 12:20 PM
ThinkSecret also believes this will be the last Apple hardware revision before the holidays.
I am still trying to figure out why the delay is so large for the 17" MacBook Pro.

http://homepage.mac.com/davehagan/mbp17.jpg

It's 7-10 days for everyone, but 2-3 weeks for schools buying them. This is for both the standard and high resolution models. What else could cause a delay like that? If it is a component shortage, wouldn't that affect the similarly equipped 15" model? Something doesn't seem right. I think this is the first sign that something's coming...and it's not the MacBook....

By the way, schools trying to buy MacBooks -- they are at 5-7 days wait at the online Apple Store.

Clive At Five
Oct 9, 2007, 12:20 PM
So, a refresh rather than a redesign. Fair enough! But can we expect a price drop?

We just had a (minor) redesign on the MacBook last time... remember the "Chicklet" keyboard uproar? Yeah.

MBP, maybe... The MBP and MacPro are really starting to look old... especially the Mac Pro.

-Clive

Wild-Bill
Oct 9, 2007, 12:20 PM
If true, the big news isn't a minor speed bump to the Mac Book. It's no new Mac Pros. Much more significant as the MP hasn't had a real update since its introduction in 2006

Yep. Shows how much Apple doesn't care about its professional customers. iPhones, iPods, and Macbooks for everyone. Leopard maybe if they get a GM out. Mac Pro updates?? NO. Mac Pro price drops to reflect the 2006 tech on board??? NO. iPhone price drop after 5 weeks? Sure!

MacinDoc
Oct 9, 2007, 12:23 PM
well, a white santa rosa macbook, 2.2GHz, 3100GPU, 2GB Ram, 160GB HD for $1299 could be a nice alternative to a 2.4GHz MBpro for $2499.
basically i'm torn between going cheap versus going top end.
right now going cheap has not enough power to be an alternative. with the santa rosa chipset and the GPU the MB would be just good enough for me. the savings could go into an iPod or software.
...and you think Apple would sell a MacBook with those specs at that price?

C'mon, Apple would still prefer to sell MPBs to those who want more RAM. If the video card was the only reason to buy a MBP over a MB, few would buy it.

Rocketman
Oct 9, 2007, 12:24 PM
Gotta be. That's what I've been waiting for. If they're gonna be faster they've gotta be Santa Rosa & 3100 IG so we can run FCS 2 & CS3 with 4 GB of ram.No I will. :p

I hope so but I am not holding my breath. I am buying three for employees and two for family members independent of what the actual updates are. So make all these folks happy Apple :)

Rocketman

bananas
Oct 9, 2007, 12:28 PM
MacBook has to get slimmer. you can get cheaper pc laptops that are lighter and thinner.

Also Santa Rosa with better integrated graphics is welcome.

DaBrain
Oct 9, 2007, 12:28 PM
I hope so but I am not holding my breath. I am buying three for employees and two for family members independent of what the actual updates are. So make all these folks happy Apple :)

Rocketman

Are you looking for a new employee?--))))))):D

Uragon
Oct 9, 2007, 12:31 PM
I think the MB will be updated within the year and the MP/MBP will be at MWSF.

Any modest upgrade and better graphics for MB is good enough for me.

InLikeALion
Oct 9, 2007, 12:31 PM
I hope so but I am not holding my breath. I am buying three for employees and two for family members independent of what the actual updates are. So make all these folks happy Apple :)

Rocketman

Or a new family member?

Zadillo
Oct 9, 2007, 12:32 PM
MacBook has to get slimmer. you can get cheaper pc laptops that are lighter and thinner.

Also Santa Rosa with better integrated graphics is welcome.

The MacBook is already 1.08" thick........ what PC laptops can you get for CHEAPER than the MacBook that are lighter AND thinner?

The only machines I can think of that are lighter at least are things like the Sony SZ series and XPSm1330, but neither of those are cheaper.

And there are some 12" PC laptops that are el cheapo (Asus F9S, Lenovo 3000, etc.) but they are also considerably thicker.

tivoboy
Oct 9, 2007, 12:32 PM
don't me much care too much bout faster, slimmer or cheaper.

I just want one that isn't glossy!!

please steve!

ChrisA
Oct 9, 2007, 12:32 PM
If it is a component shortage, wouldn't that affect the similarly equipped 15" model? Something doesn't seem right.


One guess....
Component shortage. The 17" LCD panel is in short supply. Apple lets those paying the full MSRP price jump to the front of the line, schools with their discount have to wait.

hvfsl
Oct 9, 2007, 12:33 PM
yes, absolutely Mac Pros must get here before the new year. i've been holding myself back from getting a Mac Pro until they get a blu-ray/hd dvd burner. I do video production, and i can currently shoot and edit in HD, but i want to be able to easily deliver in HD as well. the Mac Pro is expected to get a burner first, and i will be one of the first to buy one.
Well there is nothing stopping you from fitting your own burner in one and using Adobe Encore CS3.

But I can't see Apple fitting a HD burner in their MacPros until they update DVD Studio, because it is currently pretty limited when it comes to burning HD movies (I don't think it supports BluRay at all and only half heartedly supports HD-DVD).

monkeytap
Oct 9, 2007, 12:33 PM
yes, absolutely Mac Pros must get here before the new year. i've been holding myself back from getting a Mac Pro until they get a blu-ray/hd dvd burner. I do video production, and i can currently shoot and edit in HD, but i want to be able to easily deliver in HD as well. the Mac Pro is expected to get a burner first, and i will be one of the first to buy one.

im in the same boat....please apple make it a blu christmas

whenpaulsparks
Oct 9, 2007, 12:34 PM
Can't you stick one in yourself? I thought the pro is meant to be user-modified.. Of course it's better to wait until it comes out of the box with proper support, but if you really need it then I'd say it be easy enough to install one. They're getting cheaper by the day, too.

Yes, but DVD Studio Pro doesn't support it yet. It only supports exporting HD DVD projects to DVD-5/9, or to DLT for duplication. And Toast's support for blu-ray is very premature. I should have mentioned that i'm waiting for a Blu-ray Mac Pro, and hopefully shortly after a DVD Studio Pro upgrade that supports native Blu-ray burning and creation.

It looks like you are setting yourself up for a letdown. Macs are to popular now for revolutionary upgrades.

Macs are too popular now for Blu-ray? That doesn't make much sense. The Mac Pro, which is all i'm talking about, is a desktop for professionals, and professional videographers are wanting blu-ray. Most average consumers aren't going to get a Mac Pro, or if they do, they may or may not pay for a blu-ray upgrade, who cares. i want one, and so do a lot of other videographers that have been shooting and editing in HD for years and have clients with blu-ray players. Second, Blu-ray has been out for over a year. It's way overdue to not have at least READ support as an OPTION to a Mac Pro.

monkeytap
Oct 9, 2007, 12:36 PM
Well there is nothing stopping you from fitting your own burner in one and using Adobe Premiere CS3.

But I can't see Apple fitting a HD burner in their MacPros until they update DVD Studio, because it is currently pretty limited when it comes to burning HD movies (I don't think it supports BluRay at all and only half heartedly supports HD-DVD).

a $1000 price tag (blu-ray burning capability) is stopping me...

and yes, i cant see it until they update dvd studio either but isnt that what leopards for?

mox123
Oct 9, 2007, 12:38 PM
It's not the minor speed bump that will be significant. It's the Santa Rosa 4 GB capability with new integrated graphics that will be significant and certainly make my day. i.e. This will finally be a fully true 64-bit MacBook just in time for Leopard.

what do u mean by fully true 64-bit macbook? is the current hardware NOT truly 64-bit??

modelbehaviour
Oct 9, 2007, 12:38 PM
i hope this is true....i want a new macbook but im gonna wait till leopard and i don't wanna have to buy some aluminium thing....i want white!!!

Consultant
Oct 9, 2007, 12:38 PM
I am still trying to figure out why the delay is so large for the 17" MacBook Pro.

http://homepage.mac.com/davehagan/mbp17.jpg

It's 7-10 days for everyone, but 2-3 weeks for schools buying them. This is for both the standard and high resolution models. What else could cause a delay like that? If it is a component shortage, wouldn't that affect the similarly equipped 15" model? Something doesn't seem right. I think this is the first sign that something's coming...and it's not the MacBook....

By the way, schools trying to buy MacBooks -- they are at 5-7 days wait at the online Apple Store.

Cool... Good catch. Maybe MBP 17" will be updated with LED displays (but it was updated just a few months ago)? The 17" MBP does use a different logic board than the 15" though, so if they switch capacity to make 15" then the 17" will take longer.

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 12:39 PM
what do u mean by fully true 64-bit macbook? is the current hardware NOT truly 64-bit??We have a 64-bit processor but the chipset wasn't.

mox123
Oct 9, 2007, 12:43 PM
We have a 64-bit processor but the chipset wasn't.


hmmm so what does that mean? my machine is basically 32-bit then due to the bottleneck with the chipset? how much of a performance impact would this amount to? i always thought i finally have a 64-bit mobile machine with the macbook....:confused:

Uragon
Oct 9, 2007, 12:45 PM
Cool... Good catch. Maybe MBP 17" will be updated with LED displays (but it was updated just a few months ago)? The 17" MBP does use a different logic board than the 15" though, so if they switch capacity to make 15" then the 17" will take longer.

I Have checked another store it's still 7-10 business day for all three models..

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 12:45 PM
hmmm so what does that mean? my machine is basically 32-bit then due to the bottleneck with the chipset? how much of a performance impact would this amount to? i always thought i finally have a 64-bit mobile machine with the macbook....:confused:64-bit arithmetic can be handled by the processor. 64-bit memory addressing isn't available though on Napa.

Antares
Oct 9, 2007, 12:48 PM
This is great news. Updates are always a good thing. :)

Multimedia
Oct 9, 2007, 12:50 PM
hmmm so what does that mean? my machine is basically 32-bit then due to the bottleneck with the chipset? how much of a performance impact would this amount to? i always thought i finally have a 64-bit mobile machine with the macbook....:confused:Not yet. Until MB goes Santa Rosa (SR) you have a 32-bit logic board. That's why you can't use 4GB of ram in it yet. That's also why we think this next update has got to be SR because how else are they going to go faster? My guess is they will be offered in 2GHz and 2.2GHz speeds since MBPs go up to 2.4GHz. The big change won't be its speed but rather it's ability to see and use 4GB of ram from a fully 64-bit logic chipset inside. Combine that with Leopard and it should be noticeably faster than the current model.

GodWhomIsMike
Oct 9, 2007, 12:51 PM
It's not the minor speed bump that will be significant. It's the Santa Rosa 4 GB capability with new integrated graphics that will be significant and certainly make my day. i.e. This will finally be a fully true 64-bit MacBook just in time for Leopard.

I have worked using a Macbook everyday since last November, and recently had my Macbook exchanged for a 2.16 GHz model with 2GB ram and a 160GB hard drive.

Having used them everyday from early morning to late at night over the past year - I could tell you from first hand experience that being able to make use of a full 4GB of ram would be extremely beneficial. Also, the severely outdated onboard graphics are a bit annoying at times. I also wonder why there is no option for a 7200 rpm hard drive, this would also definitely help things along.

I am afraid that the update will be nothing more than just a processor update. Either 2.16 GHz for the base and 2.33 GHz for the upgraded Macbook, and the same specs in every other category.

ziwi
Oct 9, 2007, 12:56 PM
Ugh...Want Pro!

Not too much waiting now - little more than a month to find out - otherwise it is January...

Multimedia
Oct 9, 2007, 01:02 PM
I have worked using a Macbook everyday since last November, and recently had my Macbook exchanged for a 2.16 GHz model with 2GB ram and a 160GB hard drive.

Having used them everyday from early morning to late at night over the past year - I could tell you from first hand experience that being able to make use of a full 4GB of ram would be extremely beneficial. Also, the severely outdated onboard graphics are a bit annoying at times. I also wonder why there is no option for a 7200 rpm hard drive, this would also definitely help things along.

I am afraid that the update will be nothing more than just a processor update. Either 2.16 GHz for the base and 2.33 GHz for the upgraded Macbook, and the same specs in every other category.You can easily put in your own 7200 rpm HD of choice. I sure hope you're wrong about the update. If it's not to SR I will be shocked. I don't see Apple offering a faster 32-bit MB than the bottom of the line 64-bit MBP. Makes no sense. No with the 64-bit Leopard shipping end of this month will come a 64-bit MB @ 2.2GHz.

GodWhomIsMike
Oct 9, 2007, 01:07 PM
You can easily put in your own 7200 rpm HD of choice. I sure hope you're wrong about the update. If it's not to SR I will be shocked. I don't see Apple offering a faster 32-bit MB than the bottom of the line 64-bit MBP. Makes no sense. No with the 64-bit Leopard shipping end of this month will come a 64-bit MB @ 2.2GHz.

I hope you are right about the 64-bit. The Macbook's small size and light weight, makes it perfect for carrying around and taking back and forth on a two hour commute each day. Having a bit more performance, without increasing size or weight would only stand to sweeten the deal.

I'm also in the "Waiting for the new Mac Pro" club. Hopefully, at least one or both of them happen in the next month.

CWallace
Oct 9, 2007, 01:10 PM
I don't see Apple offering a faster 32-bit MB than the bottom of the line 64-bit MBP. Makes no sense. No with the 64-bit Leopard shipping end of this month will come a 64-bit MB @ 2.2GHz.

The only reason I could see it happening is to offer another reason to (try and) compel folks to buy MBPs, instead.

Nothing wrong with my Gen1 MB, but I do want something a bit faster. And the MBP just doesn't offer the "bang for the buck" for what I use my MB for, but if the next MB isn't on Santa Rosa, then I'd hold my nose (and open my wallet) and get the MBP for the added performance from the 4GB.

QCassidy352
Oct 9, 2007, 01:13 PM
I see no reason why it won't be..

Agreed, but then again, one could have said the same thing the last time they were updated.

safetyobc
Oct 9, 2007, 01:14 PM
I am on the verge of buying my very first Mac. I want a MB but I am waiting to see what happens at the end of the month.

I sure hope the prices don't go up with the upgrades. If they do, I'll be forced to buy a Mac Mini and use with my existing equipment. I would much rather have the Macbook. Maybe I'll buy a refurb instead?

Can't wait to see what happens.

Neverland
Oct 9, 2007, 01:14 PM
So i've already bought a MB white 2,16 - think i get it at thuesday
should i wait to open the box and send it back? any ideas?

I've already thought a long time whether to buy MB or MB Pro cause of the SR chipset :-/ so it's very disappointing for me waiting a long shipment time and now there is a rumor about a new release...

RichP
Oct 9, 2007, 01:19 PM
This rumor makes the most sense. Leopard will be in the spotlight for some time, and an update to the macbook is just enough to get consumers interested in it for Christmas. Face it, November and December are geared for consumer sales : ipod, iphone, macbook and imac. I would expect some bigger hardware/new products at MWSF. (macpro, subnotebook, etc)

Multimedia
Oct 9, 2007, 01:19 PM
So i've already bought a MB white 2,16 - think i get it at thuesday
should i wait to open the box and send it back? any ideas?

I've already thought a long time whether to buy MB or MB Pro cause of the SR chipset :-/ so it's very disappointing for me waiting a long shipment time and now there is a rumor about a new release...If I were you I would phone Apple right now and tell them you have changed your mind and decided you don't want that MB. They will send you a label PDF and pay for the return shipping. Do not open it. If you open it, you own it and can't return it. Also, it can't be a custom order. You can only return a STOCK unit.

boxandrew
Oct 9, 2007, 01:20 PM
Personally I think it's a little early for a MacBook revision, and not just because I bought so recently.

I'm thinking of buying a Macbook soon, so I checked the Buyer's Guide yesterday. If you look, there is only one year when the Macbooks haven't been updated in either October or November and in that year they were updated in July. It seems like they are normally updated twice a year. Also, it looks like the MBPs almost always get an refresh in Oct/Nov too, so perhaps everyone will be happy.

I decided yesterday to wait till the middle of November. Thinksecret read my mind! :cool:

On a worrying side note: Apple's strategy in April 2005 for releasing Tiger was interesting. They announced Tiger's release on a Tuesday early in the month before releasing it on almost the last day. Unless there is an announcement later today, I would begin to wonder if the 26th is going to turn out correct. And where is the Gold Master? :confused:

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 01:21 PM
I am on the verge of buying my very first Mac. I want a MB but I am waiting to see what happens at the end of the month.

I sure hope the prices don't go up with the upgrades. If they do, I'll be forced to buy a Mac Mini and use with my existing equipment. I would much rather have the Macbook. Maybe I'll buy a refurb instead?

Can't wait to see what happens.As I said before, Santa Rosa's hardware price points are identical to the previous Napa ones.

Wild-Bill
Oct 9, 2007, 01:22 PM
I really hope this ThinkSecret rumor is wrong about the Macbook being the only hardware updated before the holidays. It's been what, 149 days since the last Macbook update?? It's been over 400 for the Mac Pro if you don't count the octo-core option and RAID card. Still, the Mac Pro is the oldest horse in the barn.

Whether ThinkSecret is right or wrong I went ahead and submitted my feedback to the Mac Pro team (link in signature). I let them know exactly how I feel about this rumor. :mad:


(and I'm sure it was immediately moved to the Trash :p )

skellener
Oct 9, 2007, 01:24 PM
Last updates....
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/

MacBook - May 15, 2007
MacBook Pro - June 05, 2007

If there's an update soon, it will be the MacBook first. Makes sense, I can see parents buying them for their kids as Xmas gifts for school.

Maybe the we'll see an updated MacBookPro in January at MacWorld. I doubt it will be before then.

A MacPro update for Leopard would also make sense, but they may save that for January as well.

Multimedia
Oct 9, 2007, 01:24 PM
On a worrying side note: Apple's strategy in April 2005 for releasing Tiger was interesting. They announced Tiger's release on a Tuesday early in the month before releasing it on almost the last day. Unless there is an announcement later today, I would begin to wonder if the 26th is going to turn out correct. And where is the Gold Master? :confused:The holiday on Monday always causes new announcements to happen on Wednesdays instead of Tuesdays. This year Wednesdays have been the new Tuesday almost all the time in spite of no Monday holiday.

twoodcc
Oct 9, 2007, 01:25 PM
wow, looking forward to leopard on the 26th :)

but last hardware revision before the holidays? not too excited about that

Butthead
Oct 9, 2007, 01:27 PM
Unbelievable.. The thread's barely 10 minutes old and look at all the complaining going on already... :rolleyes:

Really quite normal for MR, happens all the time :D

MacSA
Oct 9, 2007, 01:30 PM
Heads will roll if the GMA 950 shows up again.

...or the ComboDrive

boxandrew
Oct 9, 2007, 01:33 PM
The holiday on Monday always causes new announcements to happen on Wednesdays instead of Tuesdays.

Good point.

That's the problem with always working on holidays. I always forget they even happened.

DHagan4755
Oct 9, 2007, 01:34 PM
Just checked Apple Education Store again...things have changed since Sunday...

http://homepage.mac.com/davehagan/mbp17a.jpg

It looks like the 15-inch is coming into better supply, but the 17" is still at 2-3 weeks.

tibi08
Oct 9, 2007, 01:41 PM
I saw a Dell XPS M1330 the other day - note I hate Dell - and I thought it looked slicker and better than a Macbook. The White macbooks have a different shade of white inside the laptop and it looks a bit shoddy. The blackbook suffers from fingerprint-mania. The macbooks have razor edges for your wrists to rest on.

It's a sad day that Dell beat Apple for design - new design refresh pls.

jdhayes117
Oct 9, 2007, 01:43 PM
Concur with the other Mac Pro users. Apple has updated every significant product line (phones, pods, iMacs, MacBooks, Airport, software )this year except the Mac Pros and OSX. By my calculation, it's been appx 429 days since introduction of the current configuration, over twice as long as their normal refresh schedule. Since then Nvidia has come out with the 8800 video card, ATI the 2900 series, RAM prices have dropped significantly and base RAM configurations have gone up across the board, storage costs have dropped dramatically and capacities have sky-rocketed, HD optical drives are available, eSATA capability has become wide spread and Intel has announced Penryn. Given all of the above, the Mac Pro refresh is very very overdue.

Like other respondents, I've been sitting on a couple grand waiting on the Pro refresh. At this point I don't want to get burned by paying twice the price for half the capability.

For all of you in the Apple tips/secrets business, how about spending a little less time (for awhile) tracking down the latest iPod Nano color or iPhone 3rd party app and help out those of us who use the Mac Pro for a living. We're not hard to please. Give us one significant Mac Pro refresh (soon) and we'll go away for another 400 days...!

Consultant
Oct 9, 2007, 01:44 PM
im in the same boat....please apple make it a blu christmas

Blue Ray desktop burners can be bought for $300 now.

kzin
Oct 9, 2007, 01:45 PM
Bah.

Incremental updates of the mac book and pro lines don't strike me as anything noteworthy.

It's not _news_ until they come out with either:

a) a touch-screen laptop with the twist-around screen (like the gateway laptop that can be used as a laptop or a tablet). Multi-touch and some iPhone -like interface items would be nice, but ultimately optional here.

b) a flash storage based laptop. They make, what, 60GB cf cards now? A mac laptop with 1 internal cf slot dedicated to storage and 1 to 3 open cf slots, usable for storage OR peripherals, would be nice.

c) now that they've got a regular deal with AT&T, where's an AT&T supported PC-card cell/mobile modem with OS X drivers and software? Where's a mac laptop with that as an Apple Store accessory? (I'd prefer a EVDO or WiMAX product over an EDGE one, but EDGE will do)

When they release mac laptops with those features, let me know. Until then, it's just maintenance mode. Nothing to get excited about.

Butthead
Oct 9, 2007, 01:45 PM
ThinkSecret isn't exactly reliable. I am waiting for 9to5 to speak.

Digitimes is the most reliable MR site, lol.

TS has been wrong too many times. But I guess no one noticed they claimed the MB could have as high as a 2.2Ghz CPU, lol. The MBP doesn't even have the speed bumped standard 2.6Ghz Merom, let alone the 2.8 Extreme. Both the MBP & MB should be updated before MWSF with faster Merom's; and at MWSF, Apple should announce Penryn on the MBP, along with 17in LED screen, along with 128GB RAID 0 Samsung SSD option for the 17in MBP, just like Alienware does. Funny how all sites are now reporting that SR supports 800Mhz DD2 RAM, when just 3 months ago, almost everyone here on MR was ranting and raving about how SR did not support 800Mhz mem, only 667 (even if the speed increase by using 800Mhz is *very* minor).

Dell has 64GB speedy Samsung SSD option on their 13.3in 4lb lightweight, the MB is a slacker.

Neverland
Oct 9, 2007, 01:52 PM
If I were you I would phone Apple right now and tell them you have changed your mind and decided you don't want that MB. They will send you a label PDF and pay for the return shipping. Do not open it. If you open it, you own it and can't return it. Also, it can't be a custom order. You can only return a STOCK unit.

Thanks to your answer - but since i'm from germany my contract regulations and return informations from the german apple store said i can return CTO/custom configured hardware within 14-days. I've orderd an engraved ipod too, so this part of the shipment i have to keep. Any ideas for that?

Virgil-TB2
Oct 9, 2007, 01:55 PM
I really hope this ThinkSecret rumor is wrong about the Macbook being the only hardware updated before the holidays. It's been what, 149 days since the last Macbook update?? It's been over 400 for the Mac Pro if you don't count the octo-core option and RAID card. Still, the Mac Pro is the oldest horse in the barn.... I think you read the press release wrong.

They didn't say it was the *only* hardware update before Christmas, they said it was the *last* one.

Since they also stated it will be happening after the release of Leopard, there is still the possibility that hardware revisions or even entirely new products will be announced with Leopard later this month.

TurboSC
Oct 9, 2007, 01:55 PM
Dammit I want to go out and buy a macbookpro but the wait is killing me!

AidenShaw
Oct 9, 2007, 01:56 PM
The big change won't be its speed but rather it's ability to see and use 4GB of ram from a fully 64-bit logic chipset inside. Combine that with Leopard and it should be noticeably faster than the current model.

The current MacBook has the Napa64 platform - the CPU is fully 64-bit capable. 64-bit virtual memory and 64-bit instructions are fully supported by the hardware (but not in a very useful way by OSX).

The restriction is that Napa64 has 32 physical address lines to memory - and since some physical addressing is needed for hardware and OS purposes only about 3.4 GiB of RAM is usable by the system.

And guess what - Santa Rosa adds 4 bits, it has 36 physical address lines on the chipset instead of 32.

Santa Rosa may be faster because of its faster memory bus, it may be faster because the chips clock slightly faster, it may be faster because you can use 4 GiB instead of 3.4 GiB (if you have a true 64-bit OS) - but it's not faster because it's "fully 64-bit".

Virgil-TB2
Oct 9, 2007, 01:58 PM
ThinkSecret isn't exactly reliable. I am waiting for 9to5 to speak.If you take away their last two "hits" or turn the clock back even 6 months or so...

9to5mac had a *zero* accuracy rate.

Just sayin. :)

thies
Oct 9, 2007, 02:01 PM
Just hoping for a MB with leopard and something better than the GMA950 in stores in sufficient quantity by the time turkey day rolls around.

Rocketman
Oct 9, 2007, 02:02 PM
Multimedia is almost always right about what "should" happen, but has a poor record on timing and a spotty record on if it happens at all as he suggests.

I do believe a MacPro update will follow very shortly after Leopard being released, and in fact the scheduling of the Xeon chip update seems to have been a factor in the rescheduling of Leopard.

As for Santa Rosa and a "pure" 64 bit product line, I have said for several months now that at MWSF Steevie-poo will announce full 64 bit computer line support. Makes sense.

He likes "insanely great" announcements. Lately he has changed the words to "stunning" and "like magic" and "really cool", which for a Mac Geek isn't quite as familiar, but to the new Apple customers around us, they can pick their poison.

I am convinced Apple has gone completely mainstream now because my GF got an iPhone and my Mom got a PB17, not because I had input, but because that is what they wanted and felt filled their needs.

That is stunning. :)

As for folks begging to be employees or family members just to get a MacBook paid for, know this. All you have to do is adjust your lifestyle so you devote all your waking hours to rockets all the time, and attend rocket test events 2 weekends a month at the most remote and desolate locations in California, then take a huge cut in pay.

Let's roll!

Rocketman

Orng
Oct 9, 2007, 02:05 PM
...or the ComboDrive

No kidding... For the life of me I can't figure out why any mac is shipping without a DVD burner in 2007.

Consultant
Oct 9, 2007, 02:06 PM
If I were you I would phone Apple right now and tell them you have changed your mind and decided you don't want that MB. They will send you a label PDF and pay for the return shipping. Do not open it. If you open it, you own it and can't return it. Also, it can't be a custom order. You can only return a STOCK unit.

Opened box is returnable, minus 10% restocking fee if returned within 14 days. No returns after 14 days.

Edit: Built to order, engraved items cannot be returned.

danvdr
Oct 9, 2007, 02:08 PM
I've orderd an engraved ipod too, so this part of the shipment i have to keep. Any ideas for that?

I'd recommend giving Apple a call to get a definitive answer.

xUKHCx
Oct 9, 2007, 02:10 PM
As for folks begging to be employees or family members just to get a MacBook paid for, know this. All you have to do is adjust your lifestyle so you devote all your waking hours to rockets all the time, and attend rocket test events 2 weekends a month at the most remote and desolate locations in California, then take a huge cut in pay.

Let's roll!

Rocketman

I live in Sheffield and don"t have a job, so that is fine by me. One new macbook please.

Eduardo1971
Oct 9, 2007, 02:10 PM
oh noooooooooooooo....my machine which i bought in july will NOT be the latest!!! arrrgghhhhhh

Oh no! Maybe Macbook owners will join like some did for the iPhone---Apple will upgrade your computer.:p

Yes, I am kidding!:)

Padaung
Oct 9, 2007, 02:12 PM
I need a small laptop for work and as the Macbook is the smallest on offer, that is what I'm gonna buy once leopard is out, but please, please, please Apple, ditch the GMA 950 - it is surely nearly as old as the ZX Spectrum I had as a kid! That change alone would make me very happy. Don't even care about a faster processor...

No more cruddy combo drive would be a blessing, too. And a matt screen option, and... and... 4Gb standard RAM (OK, dreaming now)

Consultant
Oct 9, 2007, 02:14 PM
Bah.

Incremental updates of the mac book and pro lines don't strike me as anything noteworthy.

It's not _news_ until they come out with either:

a) a touch-screen laptop with the twist-around screen (like the gateway laptop that can be used as a laptop or a tablet). Multi-touch and some iPhone -like interface items would be nice, but ultimately optional here.

b) a flash storage based laptop. They make, what, 60GB cf cards now? A mac laptop with 1 internal cf slot dedicated to storage and 1 to 3 open cf slots, usable for storage OR peripherals, would be nice.

c) now that they've got a regular deal with AT&T, where's an AT&T supported PC-card cell/mobile modem with OS X drivers and software? Where's a mac laptop with that as an Apple Store accessory? (I'd prefer a EVDO or WiMAX product over an EDGE one, but EDGE will do)

When they release mac laptops with those features, let me know. Until then, it's just maintenance mode. Nothing to get excited about.

a. Not many people actually use those windoze machines with touchscreens, because they are a little hard to use. It's just something techie people like to say they have. But Multi-touch will be a big hit. Note how Apple is making Leopard touch compatible with coverflow in finder, resolution independent (works on screen of any size!)

b. No 60 CF cards are available. They do make a 64GB solid state drive but I think it's either $1000 or $1500 for the drive alone.

c. yeah that'll be cool, but a user can also tether the iPhone to the Mac (only Safari works the last time I checked), wink, wink.

Much Ado
Oct 9, 2007, 02:19 PM
and... and... 4Gb standard RAM (OK, dreaming now)

Would you like a collar for your flying pig, sir ;)

MacinDoc
Oct 9, 2007, 02:29 PM
The only reason I could see it happening is to offer another reason to (try and) compel folks to buy MBPs, instead.

Nothing wrong with my Gen1 MB, but I do want something a bit faster. And the MBP just doesn't offer the "bang for the buck" for what I use my MB for, but if the next MB isn't on Santa Rosa, then I'd hold my nose (and open my wallet) and get the MBP for the added performance from the 4GB.
Then I think you'll be getting the MBP. I believe Santa Rosa is firmly in next year country for the MB, after the MBP is updated to use a new chipset.

Fuzzy14
Oct 9, 2007, 02:29 PM
I'm thinking of buying a Macbook soon, so I checked the Buyer's Guide yesterday. If you look, there is only one year when the Macbooks haven't been updated in either October or November and in that year they were updated in July. It seems like they are normally updated twice a year. Also, it looks like the MBPs almost always get an refresh in Oct/Nov too, so perhaps everyone will be happy.

I decided yesterday to wait till the middle of November. Thinksecret read my mind! :cool:

On a worrying side note: Apple's strategy in April 2005 for releasing Tiger was interesting. They announced Tiger's release on a Tuesday early in the month before releasing it on almost the last day. Unless there is an announcement later today, I would begin to wonder if the 26th is going to turn out correct. And where is the Gold Master? :confused:

Are there any big trade shows or Stevenotes before Macworld (is that Jan 2008?)
I thought Leopard would get a big release (although Steve did that about 2 years ago), not sure if they would just sneak it out as a press release at the end of October (hopes he's wrong!)

I have the same thinkings about new MB and/or MBPs. If it's a regular revision/faster processors then they might be announced end Oct, if it's the sooper dooper aluminium slims then I thought they would wait for the next big trade show...

Wild-Bill
Oct 9, 2007, 02:44 PM
I think you read the press release wrong.

They didn't say it was the *only* hardware update before Christmas, they said it was the *last* one.

Since they also stated it will be happening after the release of Leopard, there is still the possibility that hardware revisions or even entirely new products will be announced with Leopard later this month.

Negative, Virgil. I read it right:

..sources at this time don't expect any other Mac hardware to see a revision before the holidays.

I really hope TS is wrong as they usually are. I'm hoping the news that the Inquirer broke last week about Apple snarfing up all the Harpertowns will mean we will see a Mac Pro update.

If we don't, then like I said: proof positive that Apple could care less about professional customers.

tuc
Oct 9, 2007, 02:56 PM
If the MacBook will have Santa Rosa and a 3100 graphics card, I will buy one right away!

I feel the same way, even though it is unclear if the X3000/X3100 driver issues have been resolved yet.

It seems like a no-brainer for Apple to put Santa Rosa in the macbook (and also the mini) since it's more capable and doesn't cost any more, but the original rumor doesn't exactly support it.

<speculation> Sometimes I wonder if some of these decisions are based on chip inventory. If Apple has a boatload of Core (non-2) Duo processors, it can't return them so it continues to put them in the macmini until they run out. If Apple has a boatload of Napa/GMA950 chips, it can't return them so it continues to put them in the macbook until they run out. There's no evidence for this, but it might explain how a macbook update could be coming so soon. </speculation>

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 03:01 PM
I feel the same way, even though it is unclear if the X3000/X3100 driver issues have been resolved yet.

It seems like a no-brainer for Apple to put Santa Rosa in the macbook (and also the mini) since it's more capable and doesn't cost any more, but the original rumor doesn't exactly support it.Hardware T&L is enabled in Windows for the GMA X3100.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=344093

The performance is still questioned though.

50548
Oct 9, 2007, 03:07 PM
Simple recipe for sure success among MR members: NO GMA950 please...that's all.

boxandrew
Oct 9, 2007, 03:12 PM
Are there any big trade shows or Stevenotes before Macworld (is that Jan 2008?)
I thought Leopard would get a big release (although Steve did that about 2 years ago), not sure if they would just sneak it out as a press release at the end of October (hopes he's wrong!)

I have the same thinkings about new MB and/or MBPs. If it's a regular revision/faster processors then they might be announced end Oct, if it's the sooper dooper aluminium slims then I thought they would wait for the next big trade show...

I only know what I've been reading on the archives and the Buyer's Guide, but the shipping date of Tiger was announced without much fanfare, just an update to the website. They released new iMacs just after Tiger shipped and they were just an update to the website too. I wouldn't imagine we will get a special media event.

Having said that, Apple updated their pro line at NAB just before Tiger came out, so the MBP update could be in a week or two... :eek:

p33
Oct 9, 2007, 03:18 PM
if true, this shows how important the Mac Pro is to Apple these days...
iPod, iPhone, iMac, Mac Books rule. Maybe a new OS if they get around to it.

Update our overpriced flagship? Were busy-- check back next year.

Ditto.

MacinDoc
Oct 9, 2007, 03:23 PM
I feel the same way, even though it is unclear if the X3000/X3100 driver issues have been resolved yet.

It seems like a no-brainer for Apple to put Santa Rosa in the macbook (and also the mini) since it's more capable and doesn't cost any more, but the original rumor doesn't exactly support it.

<speculation> Sometimes I wonder if some of these decisions are based on chip inventory. If Apple has a boatload of Core (non-2) Duo processors, it can't return them so it continues to put them in the macmini until they run out. If Apple has a boatload of Napa/GMA950 chips, it can't return them so it continues to put them in the macbook until they run out. There's no evidence for this, but it might explain how a macbook update could be coming so soon. </speculation>
I have often had the same speculation with regard to iMac graphic processors (current models excluded). Processor bumps seem to be rarely accompanied by graphics upgrades.

cliffjumper68
Oct 9, 2007, 03:23 PM
The next MB had damn well better not use the GMA 950. Give us Santa Rosa and the 3100, at least.

I think they are right just a processor bump in speed. They are still selling well, so why rock the profit boat.

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 03:30 PM
I think they are right just a processor bump in speed. They are still selling well, so why rock the profit boat.The T7600 is the only option left on the Napa platform.

flopticalcube
Oct 9, 2007, 03:31 PM
I think they are right just a processor bump in speed. They are still selling well, so why rock the profit boat.

Because they are becoming an embarrassment compared to the competition. Apple shouldn't have a GMA950 laptop going into the Christmas '07 season.


<speculation> Sometimes I wonder if some of these decisions are based on chip inventory. If Apple has a boatload of Core (non-2) Duo processors, it can't return them so it continues to put them in the macmini until they run out. If Apple has a boatload of Napa/GMA950 chips, it can't return them so it continues to put them in the macbook until they run out. There's no evidence for this, but it might explain how a macbook update could be coming so soon. </speculation>

I always thought the mini was the dumping ground for old tech. The mini also uses Napa/GMA950, no real need to shortchange the MacBook.

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 03:33 PM
Because they are becoming an embarrassment compared to the competition. Apple shouldn't have a GMA950 laptop going into the Christmas '07 season.They shouldn't have used the GMA 950 to begin with. I digress...

sblasl
Oct 9, 2007, 03:38 PM
As it relates to the Mac Pro, Apple received a significant bump in sales to the Mac Pro line when Adobe updated their product line. Apple had to do absolutely nothing to the Mac Pro's to generate those sales.

Now we have the release(alleged) of Leopard. I am thinking that Apple is going to let the Mac Pro ride on the coat tails of Leopard. Once again doing absolutely nothing to the Mac Pro but generating a large amount of additional new sales.

Now Shipping with Mac OS X - Leopard will be stickered on the box and the Mac Pro web site will have the tag as well.

zorinlynx
Oct 9, 2007, 03:39 PM
What!?!??!?!

What about the Mac Pro??!! I hope they are wrong about that. The Mac Pro needs an update.

Apple seems to have been neglecting the Mac Pro lately. It's over a year old, it's time!

A better choice of video cards would be nice. Of course, Apple should fix their video driver issues first...

rcha101
Oct 9, 2007, 03:41 PM
I'm looking to refresh my MBP - possibly upgrading to 17 inch. My plan is to get a powerful system with the new OS that I think will last me 3 years before needing an update. For this to be a reality it needs to have a bluray drive - I don't need a bluray burner read only is fine but I would love to see bluray HD content on my HD display using my HD graphics card. I know Apple's competitors are doing it so if I saw an updated superdrive and a processor bump I would definitely buy.

Also, I can't see how they can update the MB without also bumping the MBP otherwise they would be too similar in spec.

!° V °!
Oct 9, 2007, 03:44 PM
Unbelievable.. The thread's barely 10 minutes old and look at all the complaining going on already... :rolleyes:

Don't be fooled, the site might be called MacRumors, however the Forum is known as MacComplainers. ;):p:D

Mock Turtleneck
Oct 9, 2007, 03:44 PM
I hate to say it but I think the Mac Pro is no longer the Flagship of the Apple Line, that honor has fallen to the MacBOOK Pro...

Honestly, look at Apple's most recent strategies, mobility is king in the new Apple World.

The Mac Pro will linger I think until Apple can no longer get the equipment that it uses and at that point we'll either see a reshuffle of the 'Tower' line or Apple will release the newest and latest in their line of 'Gimp Towers.'

A shame, if the Mac Pro didn't cost 3 arms and 2 legs I feel Apple really could have done something with it, however now a days it is starting to look less and less important to the Grand Scheme of things. :apple:

p33
Oct 9, 2007, 03:50 PM
They shouldn't have used the GMA 950 to begin with. I digress...

Well, if you start thinking baout what they should have done... I gues very many of us would agree that Apple computer hardware leaves much to be desired.

!° V °!
Oct 9, 2007, 03:51 PM
Apple seems to have been neglecting the Mac Pro lately. It's over a year old, it's time!

A better choice of video cards would be nice. Of course, Apple should fix their video driver issues first...

It's business for Apple, allow me to explain.

MP have a higher profit margin = profitable company and Quarterly report.

iMac and below have a lower profit margin = less profitable and larger consumer base on the Quarterly report.

To sum things up, to an investor it looks far better that :apple: is selling more units to more people thus building its user base and market share. Higher profits though nice, in the long run shrink pretty fast, thus the market share is smaller and the longevity of the company is in question by the shareholders.

This was done with the iPod when it was opened to the PC market, and look at the position it holds today. :apple: is trying to mimic the same strategy, simple. :)

Rocketman
Oct 9, 2007, 03:53 PM
I would be fine with seeing the current MacPro relegated to "Good" status, and have a new Mac Pro with updated Xeons and MB be the "Better" and "Best".

I consider the iPhone to be a "crippled feature" device as compared to say, a MacBook. A quad-sized iPhone device might be able to do 90% of its capability however.

All these discussions are, at their base, about Apple's product positioning and feature break-points. Price is set at maximum pain for a given market target.

But you gotta say, Apple may not be perfect but they get it pretty right and they add value through features, bug fixes and OS updates timely and at minimal long term costs.

Why don't I have a TV sized server closet servicing me and my 6 closest neighbors?

Rocketman

p33
Oct 9, 2007, 03:55 PM
Honestly, look at Apple's most recent strategies, mobility is king in the new Apple World.


Only, it's not the mobility, it's consumer stuff. Consumers tend to move a lot these days, hence, the mobility, it's not that mobility by itself is the king, imho.

Too bad... :(

!° V °!
Oct 9, 2007, 03:56 PM
I hate to say it but I think the Mac Pro is no longer the Flagship of the Apple Line, that honor has fallen to the MacBOOK Pro...

Honestly, look at Apple's most recent strategies, mobility is king in the new Apple World.

The Mac Pro will linger I think until Apple can no longer get the equipment that it uses and at that point we'll either see a reshuffle of the 'Tower' line or Apple will release the newest and latest in their line of 'Gimp Towers.'

A shame, if the Mac Pro didn't cost 3 arms and 2 legs I feel Apple really could have done something with it, however now a days it is starting to look less and less important to the Grand Scheme of things. :apple:

When :apple: decided to transition to Intel x86 based processors, one on the main reasons was the power:mobility ration, thus it's is quite clear where the focus is.

If you thought that the MP would benefit a lot from this transition, think twice as virtually the entire Mac lineup uses mobility chips and only the MP and Xserve is the soar thumbs.

There is a bigger market for mobility products than power, hungry, non-portable computers. Sad however the consumers have spoken through they purchases. :)

!° V °!
Oct 9, 2007, 04:03 PM
Only, it's not the mobility, it's consumer stuff. Consumers tend to move a lot these days, hence, the mobility, it's not that mobility by itself is the king, imho.

Too bad... :(

It has more to do with flexibility and aesthetics with a dash of power usage. Majority of PC users have had towers, mini-towers, etc.. for years and they realized that either they never had the time or took the effort to upgrade any of the components for numerious reasons, or they have felt strapped down to a desk.

A great indicator is WiFi a/b/g/pre-n, why would WiFi be pushed down our throats if consumers did not want it and if you did have it, why would you want to sit at a desk? :confused:

Fuzzy14
Oct 9, 2007, 04:04 PM
Now we have the release(alleged) of Leopard. I am thinking that Apple is going to let the Mac Pro ride on the coat tails of Leopard. Once again doing absolutely nothing to the Mac Pro but generating a large amount of additional new sales.

Now Shipping with Mac OS X - Leopard will be stickered on the box and the Mac Pro web site will have the tag as well.

Agreed. I am giving up hope that we'll see a MacBook before Spring '08, and will bite the bullet when Leopard comes out. Place your bets!

eastcoastsurfer
Oct 9, 2007, 04:08 PM
[QUOTE=Mock Turtleneck;4302287]I hate to say it but I think the Mac Pro is no longer the Flagship of the Apple Line, that honor has fallen to the MacBOOK Pro...

Honestly, look at Apple's most recent strategies, mobility is king in the new Apple World.
QUOTE]

Not just the Apple world, but the computing world in general. I remember reading not long ago that laptops have already taken or are very close to taking over sales when it comes to computers. Only makes sense that that is where Apple will focus their efforts from now on.

xUKHCx
Oct 9, 2007, 04:08 PM
When :apple: decided to transition to Intel x86 based processors, one on the main reasons was the power:mobility ration, thus it's is quite clear where the focus is.

If you thought that the MP would benefit a lot from this transition, think twice as virtually the entire Mac lineup uses mobility chips and only the MP and Xserve is the soar thumbs.

There is a bigger market for mobility products than power, hungry, non-portable computers. Sad however the consumers have spoken through they purchases. :)

wasn't it performance per watt, subtle difference but important.

CWallace
Oct 9, 2007, 04:10 PM
I really hope this ThinkSecret rumor is wrong about the Macbook being the only hardware updated before the holidays. It's been what, 149 days since the last Macbook update?? It's been over 400 for the Mac Pro if you don't count the octo-core option and RAID card. Still, the Mac Pro is the oldest horse in the barn.

Fortunately, it's one heck of a stallion. :D

!° V °!
Oct 9, 2007, 04:14 PM
wasn't it performance per watt, subtle difference but important.

That was also a part of :apple: deciding factors.

psychofreak
Oct 9, 2007, 04:18 PM
The Macbooks are very fast as-is, but they are Apple's biggest bringer of switchers, so the priority is on them, not the Mac Pro, which is desperately need of an update (not to mention the Xserve)...

digitalbiker
Oct 9, 2007, 04:35 PM
[QUOTE=Mock Turtleneck;4302287]I hate to say it but I think the Mac Pro is no longer the Flagship of the Apple Line, that honor has fallen to the MacBOOK Pro...

Honestly, look at Apple's most recent strategies, mobility is king in the new Apple World.
QUOTE]

Not just the Apple world, but the computing world in general. I remember reading not long ago that laptops have already taken or are very close to taking over sales when it comes to computers. Only makes sense that that is where Apple will focus their efforts from now on.

The Mac Pro was never going to be the biggest seller. It is a true pro machine which by definition is a much smaller market. It was never meant to compete sales-wise with the consumer laptop market which is much larger.

However it is still the flagship machine for Apple. It is their best offering in terms of pure computing power and is the only platform that is a true pro video authoring, 3D modeling workstation, scientific workstation, and software development platform.

If the Mac Pro model dies on the Apple vine, so too does high-end scientific, graphics, video, and future innovative software for the entire OS.

The Mac Pro is still an elegant beauty with plenty of muscle. The current octo runs like a beast under Leopard. People just complain too much. Frankly there is very little that can't be done with the current Mac Pro.

What is does need is more mature software, more video card offerings, and more peripheral offerings such as Blu-Ray / HD-DVD authoring devices.

andiwm2003
Oct 9, 2007, 04:36 PM
...and you think Apple would sell a MacBook with those specs at that price?

C'mon, Apple would still prefer to sell MPBs to those who want more RAM. If the video card was the only reason to buy a MBP over a MB, few would buy it.

aside of these specs there is nothing else to upgrade to. eventually they have to go santa rosa. the mbp go penryn soon and theyu have a much better gpu/screen/alu design/FW800/express card slot.

with ibooks/powerbooks it was similar.

Mock Turtleneck
Oct 9, 2007, 04:49 PM
The Mac Pro was never going to be the biggest seller. It is a true pro machine which by definition is a much smaller market. It was never meant to compete sales-wise with the consumer laptop market which is much larger.

However it is still the flagship machine for Apple. It is their best offering in terms of pure computing power and is the only platform that is a true pro video authoring, 3D modeling workstation, scientific workstation, and software development platform.

If the Mac Pro model dies on the Apple vine, so too does high-end scientific, graphics, video, and future innovative software for the entire OS.

The Mac Pro is still an elegant beauty with plenty of muscle. The current octo runs like a beast under Leopard. People just complain too much. Frankly there is very little that can't be done with the current Mac Pro.

What is does need is more mature software, more video card offerings, and more peripheral offerings such as Blu-Ray / HD-DVD authoring devices.

I don't agree with you when you say if the Mac Pro dies off that all high-end scientific, graphics, video, and future innovative software dies off with it. With the recent technology developed by Intel and Apple, Apple could release a smaller, cheaper form factor machine running more conventional technology and market it beyond the crowd you mentioned to Joe Schmo.

An updated Mac Mini form-factor with space for 4 Hard Drives and an up to date video chip on board (Or Small Form PCI-E card) could provide Apple a machine that is still up to the tasks of a Mac Pro while also providing a price point available to your average user. Given Apple's recent moves, I wouldn't be surprised to see something similar to this within the next 2 / 4 years.

The Mac Pro isn't as important as it once was, it has served it's purpose as a testbed for the technology now in the XServe which, sadly, seems to have been it's major purpose. :apple:

darthraige
Oct 9, 2007, 05:19 PM
That's good, update a laptop twice a year and a desktop every 2 years. I WANT A MACPRO!

Chupa Chupa
Oct 9, 2007, 05:25 PM
So the rumor is Apple will be bundling a new Phantom MB w/ it's new OS X 10.5 OS vaporware? :D Seriously, counting down the days to Oct 26. I just wish Apple would start taking pre-orders so I can order my discounted EDU copy.

Chupa Chupa
Oct 9, 2007, 05:27 PM
So the rumor is Apple will be bundling OS X 10.5 OS vaporware with a new Phantom MB? :D Seriously, counting down the days to Oct 26. I just wish Apple would start taking pre-orders so I can order my discounted EDU copy. Not sure I believe the MB rumor though.

digitalbiker
Oct 9, 2007, 05:38 PM
I don't agree with you when you say if the Mac Pro dies off that all high-end scientific, graphics, video, and future innovative software dies off with it. With the recent technology developed by Intel and Apple, Apple could release a smaller, cheaper form factor machine running more conventional technology and market it beyond the crowd you mentioned to Joe Schmo.

An updated Mac Mini form-factor with space for 4 Hard Drives and an up to date video chip on board (Or Small Form PCI-E card) could provide Apple a machine that is still up to the tasks of a Mac Pro while also providing a price point available to your average user. Given Apple's recent moves, I wouldn't be surprised to see something similar to this within the next 2 / 4 years.

The Mac Pro isn't as important as it once was, it has served it's purpose as a testbed for the technology now in the XServe which, sadly, seems to have been it's major purpose. :apple:

You obviously don't own a Mac Pro. If you did you would know that the differential between the mobility platforms (ie mb, mbp, & imac) and the desktop platforms (Mac Pro, Xserve) is like night and day. Sure the mobility platforms are getting more and more powerful but the desktops and workstations are jumping by the same leaps and bounds.

Also for true workstation tasks there is no reason to go mini. Most workstation users need the screen real estate, or huge storage capacity and space is usually not that much of an issue.

As technology reduces chip-sizes, increases performance, boosts micro storage capacity, the workstation just has more room to be even more powerful, have more storage, etc. etc.

Remember word processing, 3D modeling, graphics editing, etc. etc. used to be performed on 6502 chips with 64K of memory and 144K of disk space. Today I could have 1000 times that performance in a micro cell phone.

I don't see a lot of video editors working on their cell phones. Why? Because as CPU, Storage, etc. become more powerful then the applications that run on the systems utilize these improvements for advanced data processing, graphic display, and file manipulation.

Therefore the Mac Pro or similar product will always have a market because the platform that is best for the consumer just isn't the platform that is best for the designer / developer.

Multimedia
Oct 9, 2007, 05:48 PM
The current MacBook has the Napa64 platform - the CPU is fully 64-bit capable. 64-bit virtual memory and 64-bit instructions are fully supported by the hardware (but not in a very useful way by OSX).

The restriction is that Napa64 has 32 physical address lines to memory - and since some physical addressing is needed for hardware and OS purposes only about 3.4 GiB of RAM is usable by the system.

And guess what - Santa Rosa adds 4 bits, it has 36 physical address lines on the chipset instead of 32.

Santa Rosa may be faster because of its faster memory bus, it may be faster because the chips clock slightly faster, it may be faster because you can use 4 GiB instead of 3.4 GiB (if you have a true 64-bit OS) - but it's not faster because it's "fully 64-bit".Thanks for the full explanation.

Sources: Leopard finalized, 10.4.11 inching closer (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/10/09/sources_leopard_finalized_10_4_11_inching_closer.html)

Looks like the GM is out the door to the duplicators.

Multimedia
Oct 9, 2007, 05:55 PM
The Mac Pro isn't as important as it once was, it has served it's purpose as a testbed for the technology now in the XServe which, sadly, seems to have been it's major purpose. :apple:You're kidding right? :rolleyes:

This kind of post makes me want to join the guys who think newbies shouldn't be allowed to post for their first 6 months of membership. ;)

Whoops! I didn't realize you had written more than one of those zingers:I hate to say it but I think the Mac Pro is no longer the Flagship of the Apple Line, that honor has fallen to the MacBOOK Pro...

Honestly, look at Apple's most recent strategies, mobility is king in the new Apple World.

The Mac Pro will linger I think until Apple can no longer get the equipment that it uses and at that point we'll either see a reshuffle of the 'Tower' line or Apple will release the newest and latest in their line of 'Gimp Towers.'

A shame, if the Mac Pro didn't cost 3 arms and 2 legs I feel Apple really could have done something with it, however now a days it is starting to look less and less important to the Grand Scheme of things. :apple:ROTFLMAO... :) Since when is $5,000 a lot of money for a really fast loaded 16GB 8 core computer? How much money did you spend for your last car?

Your idea of what is expensive and Mac Pro users' idea of what is expensive are radically different ideas.

sblasl
Oct 9, 2007, 06:10 PM
Should we start a petition?;)

You're kidding right? :rolleyes:

This kind of post makes me want to join the guys who think newbies shouldn't be allowed to post for their first 6 months of membership. ;)

Tumeg101
Oct 9, 2007, 06:12 PM
If they are expecting new MacBooks to be in the hands of consumers by mid November... then they have to be released the same time as leopard, if not then a few days later....

What do you guys think the processor speed bump will be??
2.16ghz for low end, and 2.2 for the others??
If this is so.. is .04ghz enough of a speed increase for me to wait a few weeks longer for a macbook?



What do you guys think the chances are of it just being a minor processor bump?? And the santa rosa chip set...

Multimedia
Oct 9, 2007, 06:20 PM
If they are expecting new MacBooks to be in the hands of consumers by mid November... then they have to be released the same time as leopard, if not then a few days later....

What do you guys think the processor speed bump will be??
2.16ghz for low end, and 2.2 for the others??
If this is so.. is .04ghz enough of a speed increase for me to wait a few weeks longer for a macbook?

What do you guys think the chances are of it just being a minor processor bump?? And the santa rosa chip set...To repeat myself several pages down the thread, I think 2GHz and 2.2 GHz with 4GB ram capacity thanks to Santa Rosa & finally better new integrated graphics (IG). So from my point of view it will be a big deal because they've been offering the same tired old IG since the first MacBook last year plus it will see and use 4GB of RAM which will both make its performance a lot better than just the speed of the C2D.

Tumeg101
Oct 9, 2007, 06:23 PM
To repeat myself several pages down the thread, I think 2GHz and 2.2 GHz with 4GB ram capacity thanks to Santa Rosa & finally better new integrated graphics (IG). So from my point of view it will be a big deal because they've been offering the same tired old IG since the first MacBook last year plus it will see and use 4GB of RAM which will both make its performance a lot better than just the speed of the C2D.

What all does Santa Rosa do...
if it is mainly just raising the ram capacity, I don't think it is worth it for me to wait a few more weeks to get my first macbook... and would the .04ghz dif be big enough to make me wait??

Multimedia
Oct 9, 2007, 06:29 PM
What all does Santa Rosa do...
if it is mainly just raising the ram capacity, I don't think it is worth it for me to wait a few more weeks to get my first macbook... and would the .04ghz dif be big enough to make me wait??You would be mistaken. Having 4GB ram capacity makes a huge difference in performance when you are running multiple applications like normal.

You would regret not having waited soon enough. There are testimonies to that effect above in this thread. Go back and read it all.

Tumeg101
Oct 9, 2007, 06:31 PM
You would be mistaken. Having 4GB ram capacity makes a huge difference in performance when you are running multiple applications like normal.


I would never add more than 2gb of ram...
So the current model seems perfect for me... the only thing they can do to make me want to wait for the new ones... is maybe increase the battery life, add an extra USB port... and uhh... 2.3ghz, :p

I have simple needs, I have no need for 4gb of Ram... or .04ghz more, or even more battery life...
The biggest app I would run is photoshop, and I don't even know if I will be getting that... so I don't even need 2gb of ram... but if they did update a little more then just a small .04ghz speed boost... I might be interested in waiting anyway... but .04ghz and santa rosa, I don't even think I would wait for that either,

Multimedia
Oct 9, 2007, 06:38 PM
I would never add more than 2gb of ram...
So the current model seems perfect for me... the only thing they can do to make me want to wait for the new ones... is maybe increase the battery life, add an extra USB port... and uhh... 2.3ghz, :pHaving 4GB of ram increases battery life. 4GB of MacBook ram costs $194. You would spend $1200 for a MacBook and not $194 for 4GB of ram?

If you are going to run Photoshop CS3 then you will want 4GB of ram.

Tumeg101
Oct 9, 2007, 06:41 PM
Having 4GB of ram increases battery life. 4GB of MacBook ram costs $194. You would spend $1200 for a MacBook and not $194 for 4GB of ram?

If you are going to run Photoshop CS3 then you will want 4GB of ram.


I am only 14, I only have $2 more than the MacBook would cost me (with the $140 discount my dad can get)
So not really, lol... if they update the MacBook's to where they either just drop the price and a small speed bump, or maybe make 2gb ram standard in them... then I would wait, so I can have some extra cash for some extras

leekohler
Oct 9, 2007, 06:42 PM
You're kidding right? :rolleyes:

This kind of post makes me want to join the guys who think newbies shouldn't be allowed to post for their first 6 months of membership. ;)

Agreed. I'll always buy towers as well as laptops.

Whoops! I didn't realize you had written more than one of those zingers:ROTFLMAO... :) Since when is $5,000 a lot of money for a really fast loaded 16GB 8 core computer? How much money did you spend for your last car?

Your idea of what is expensive and Mac Pro users' idea of what is expensive are radically different ideas.

That all depends on how much you make with your MP in your respective career. I thought $1999 was appopriate for my dual core G5. However, now the lowest end MP starts at $2,200. I do feel that Apple could make a somewhat lower-end desktop tower. Some of us still need the capabilities of a desktop (multiple HDs, lots of RAM, etc), but don't necessarily need a quad or 8 core machine. And no, an iMac won't do either. And I don't own a car, MM. :) I live in the city. ;)

mox123
Oct 9, 2007, 06:43 PM
The current MacBook has the Napa64 platform - the CPU is fully 64-bit capable. 64-bit virtual memory and 64-bit instructions are fully supported by the hardware (but not in a very useful way by OSX).

The restriction is that Napa64 has 32 physical address lines to memory - and since some physical addressing is needed for hardware and OS purposes only about 3.4 GiB of RAM is usable by the system.

And guess what - Santa Rosa adds 4 bits, it has 36 physical address lines on the chipset instead of 32.

Santa Rosa may be faster because of its faster memory bus, it may be faster because the chips clock slightly faster, it may be faster because you can use 4 GiB instead of 3.4 GiB (if you have a true 64-bit OS) - but it's not faster because it's "fully 64-bit".


hmmmm so there's really not much difference then between 32-bit and 36-bit chipset then? why do they not have a true 64-bit chipset? i'm confused; i thought they can only do powers of 2 when talking about bits, so like 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, etc...no? :confused:

Gherkin
Oct 9, 2007, 06:49 PM
If you are going to run Photoshop CS3 then you will want 4GB of ram.

I run CS 2 through Rosetta on 1 GB of RAM and Photoshop runs just fine. I had the CS 3 beta while it was available and it ran AWESOME.

You are kidding yourself if you think you need 4 GB of RAM of RAM to run CS 3.

jdhayes117
Oct 9, 2007, 07:01 PM
[QUOTE=eastcoastsurfer;4302375]

The Mac Pro was never going to be the biggest seller. It is a true pro machine which by definition is a much smaller market. It was never meant to compete sales-wise with the consumer laptop market which is much larger.

However it is still the flagship machine for Apple. It is their best offering in terms of pure computing power and is the only platform that is a true pro video authoring, 3D modeling workstation, scientific workstation, and software development platform.

If the Mac Pro model dies on the Apple vine, so too does high-end scientific, graphics, video, and future innovative software for the entire OS.

The Mac Pro is still an elegant beauty with plenty of muscle. The current octo runs like a beast under Leopard. People just complain too much. Frankly there is very little that can't be done with the current Mac Pro.

What is does need is more mature software, more video card offerings, and more peripheral offerings such as Blu-Ray / HD-DVD authoring devices.

Concur on multiple levels. If you want to see what a MacPro is capable of, go to the Apple "Mac at Work" website (http://www.apple.com/macatwork/) and see how they are used by "pros".

I also agree about the capability of the current Mac Pro. I've been holding out for a refresh, not because the current system isn't capable, but because I don't want to get stuck with Aug '06 technology in Nov '07. I'd be content with upgrades to basic RAM capacity, basic storage capacity, a current video card (Nvidia 8800 or RADEON 2900), and the option for a High Def optical drive. All of the above have dropped in price significantly since introduction of the MP 429 days ago but the price hasn't budged a cent. I'm suggesting that Apple bring the current MP capability back in line with the price they are charging.

Finally, all of these are easily doable on/about 26 Oct. They require no change to the basic hardware and, at best, a couple of new drivers.:apple:

~~Hello~~
Oct 9, 2007, 07:02 PM
I am only 14, I only have $2 more than the MacBook would cost me (with the $140 discount my dad can get)
So not really, lol... if they update the MacBook's to where they either just drop the price and a small speed bump, or maybe make 2gb ram standard in them... then I would wait, so I can have some extra cash for some extras

Surely you would want to wait for the updated Intel graphics though?

Multimedia
Oct 9, 2007, 07:13 PM
Surely you would want to wait for the updated Intel graphics though?Yes I forgot how important that change will be - that's as important or moreso than the 4GB ram limit. Having the 4GB ram limit will also make the resale value higher even if you're not going to use it to begin with.

Tumeg101
Oct 9, 2007, 07:18 PM
The resale value is a good point to bring up...
So is the possible graphics upgrade...

But what exactly would I need the graphics upgrade for? (Besides resale value)
I guess I will just have to wait and see, because as people have been saying... the MacBook might need a graphics upgrade to work smoothly with leopard, but then developers might have said something about that by now, unless none of them downloaded leopard on there MacBook's...

And for resale value... if you look at the iBooks resale values... they actually aren't that different, a G3 and G4.... about the same, only like $100 difference...
And I don't really care about the resale value, because I am planning to keep my MacBook, even when I am ready to upgrade... for the same reason people keep clamshells... just because it would be nice to keep around, and I would like to have my first mac for a while, lol...
And the cash would be nice for when I am ready to upgrade, but if I do sell it to buy a new one, I would be without a computer for a while...

triobot
Oct 9, 2007, 07:19 PM
gonna wait till xmas to get my mb, getting it from HK rather than UK cos the taxation is toooooooooooooooo high here than in asia !!!

So i'll wait till the leopard to come out then see if the MBs get the aluminium make-over !!!

:D

OdduWon
Oct 9, 2007, 07:19 PM
I run CS 2 through Rosetta on 1 GB of RAM and Photoshop runs just fine. I had the CS 3 beta while it was available and it ran AWESOME.

You are kidding yourself if you think you need 4 GB of RAM of RAM to run CS 3.

who runs just one app while their photoshoping? i would have a 3d app open for exporting renderings for my large format presentation, music, internet for research (and macrumors), and external drive with archived photos, possibly iphoto, and acrobat for presentation requirements. try doing all this on a MB with 1 gig of ram, Iím sure it would "crawl" not "run". if you need speed as you multi-task Iím sure you would want more than 1 gig of ram, no?

kzin
Oct 9, 2007, 07:21 PM
a. Not many people actually use those windoze machines with touchscreens, because they are a little hard to use. It's just something techie people like to say they have. But Multi-touch will be a big hit. Note how Apple is making Leopard touch compatible with coverflow in finder, resolution independent (works on screen of any size!)

Actually, the people I know who have them make extensive use of them. Taking notes in meetings, etc. And it's much less disruptive to the meeting than having the laptop open in regular form factor (which tends to act like lots of little communication barriers). I wouldn't have mentioned it as a desire if I hadn't seen how well it actually works.

b. No 60 CF cards are available. They do make a 64GB solid state drive but I think it's either $1000 or $1500 for the drive alone.

Ahh, you're right. 16GB is the current limit. Still, one of those is probably more than enough for my laptop. Two would be a great fit.

c. yeah that'll be cool, but a user can also tether the iPhone to the Mac (only Safari works the last time I checked), wink, wink.

I've never heard it confirmed that the iPhone can do Bluetooth DUN... do you know for sure that it can?

flopticalcube
Oct 9, 2007, 07:27 PM
hmmmm so there's really not much difference then between 32-bit and 36-bit chipset then? why do they not have a true 64-bit chipset? i'm confused; i thought they can only do powers of 2 when talking about bits, so like 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, etc...no? :confused:

When it comes to memory addressing you can do some pretty funky things. The original IBM PC CPU had a 16-bit internal structure but an extra 4-bit register to give it the ability to address 20-bits of memory a maximum of 1MB of addressable memory. The original Mac CPU was 32-bit internal with only 24-bits of memory addressing outside. That gave it a 16MB memory limit. The extra lines or lack thereof are usually due to cost or design constraints. Up until this year it was not really worth putting more address lines out on the Napa chipset as the biggest laptop memory chips available in quantity were 1GB. Furthermore, Napa had to be used by both 32-bit (Core Duo) and 64-bit (Core 2 Duo) CPUs.


But what exactly would I need the graphics upgrade for? (Besides resale value)
I guess I will just have to wait and see, because as people have been saying... the MacBook might need a graphics upgrade to work smoothly with leopard, but then developers might have said something about that by now, unless none of them downloaded leopard on there MacBook's...


Spaces and other eye-candy will require more GPU punch. Watching 1080p films would be helped by a better GPU. Multiple screens would see an improvement.

I would not place to much emphasis on the new GPU. The X3100 is only about twice as fast as a GMA950. Dedicated cards are faster by an order of magnitude or greater. The addition of hardware T&L will help a lot in 3D games, however.

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 07:30 PM
hmmmm so there's really not much difference then between 32-bit and 36-bit chipset then? why do they not have a true 64-bit chipset? i'm confused; i thought they can only do powers of 2 when talking about bits, so like 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, etc...no? :confused:Well 64 GB of RAM addressing is nice when compared to 4 GB.

iDAG
Oct 9, 2007, 07:33 PM
A MacBook update is very important to me seeing that it would be the best choice to replace my PowerBook G3:cool: Would the new X3100 graphics have 128MB of intagrated VRAM instead of 64MBs?

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 07:34 PM
A MacBook update is very important to me seeing that it would be the best choice to replace my PowerBook G3:cool: Would the new X3100 graphics have 128MB of intagrated VRAM instead of 64MBs?The GMA X3100 can address up to 384 MB of system RAM.

Tumeg101
Oct 9, 2007, 07:46 PM
Spaces and other eye-candy will require more GPU punch. Watching 1080p films would be helped by a better GPU. Multiple screens would see an improvement.

I would not place to much emphasis on the new GPU. The X3100 is only about twice as fast as a GMA950. Dedicated cards are faster by an order of magnitude or greater. The addition of hardware T&L will help a lot in 3D games, however.

So for spaces and others, the current integrated graphics wouldn't be too good??
In what way? Would it just be slower?
Only thing I would need the extra graphics for, is basically just leopard... most likely not photoshop,

After reading my prev posts in this thread, what do you think I should do? Wait for the update (if they update the graphics, a .04ghz boost, and santa rosa) or buy the current model, but with leopard

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 07:53 PM
So for spaces and others, the current integrated graphics wouldn't be too good??
In what way? Would it just be slower?
Only thing I would need the extra graphics for, is basically just leopard... most likely not photoshop,

After reading my prev posts in this thread, what do you think I should do? Wait for the update (if they update the graphics, a .04ghz boost, and santa rosa) or buy the current model, but with leopardThe GMA X3100 has a higher peak bandwidth capability and can address more system RAM. There's also the matter of OpenGL 2.0/2.1 support as well.

It's more then just clock speed for Santa Rosa. You have to take into account the 800 MHz front side bus as well.

http://barefeats.com/rosa02.html

You can see that the 2.2 GHz can hold its own and win against the older 2.33 GHz models.

virduk
Oct 9, 2007, 08:22 PM
Heads will roll if the GMA 950 shows up again.

Yeah. I really don't want to be forced to buy a Dell or something.

MacFever
Oct 9, 2007, 08:36 PM
I'm really hoping for a Macbook Pro redesign especially the 17" with LED's...but still with the metal look. :)


We may see also a new video card in the macbook pro's soon.

Nvidia is officially launching their G92 this month instead of November. The date has been brought forward...interestingly...could it be to coincide with an apple release?

http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20071009PD207.html

DaBrain
Oct 9, 2007, 08:37 PM
Don't be fooled, the site might be called MacRumors, however the Forum is known as MacComplainers. ;):p:D

Nah, a better name would be maciPhonerumors as that's what 80 % or more of the postings have been since iPhone's debut--))) :D

Spritey
Oct 9, 2007, 08:38 PM
If they change the Macbooks by

1. adding a graphics card
2. changing the case to aluminum

Macbook = 13" Macbook Pro priced at nearly 50% less

at least in the minds of the average consumer. And increasing the price is doubtful. If that were to happen, what about Apple's friendly-priced laptop which has been selling like Ben and Jerry's on a hot summer day?

From a marketing perspective (in terms of differentiating MBs and MBPs), it doesn't make any sense at all with these two changes, UNLESS they also do some major upgrades to the MBP. A processor bump on the other hand seems reasonable without ruining the differentiating factor too much.

DrEasy
Oct 9, 2007, 10:12 PM
I also seem to recall that Santa Rosa provides substantially better battery life. Is that true? Cause that'd be the main reason why I'd still wait for Santa Rosa in a MacBook once Leopard is released.

Eidorian
Oct 9, 2007, 10:16 PM
I also seem to recall that Santa Rosa provides substantially better battery life. Is that true? Cause that'd be the main reason why I'd still wait for Santa Rosa in a MacBook once Leopard is released.The front side bus can scale speeds and deeper sleep states.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2007/05/09/intel_santa_rosa_mobile_platform/1

EagerDragon
Oct 9, 2007, 10:17 PM
come on, mac pros have to be first

Leave something for MacWorld.

Genghis Khan
Oct 9, 2007, 10:29 PM
Apple would only make the MacBooks aluminum if they were to have the same features of a MacBook Pro.

But as we've had rumors of such things, it's not out of the question.

In fact i may consider selling my own MacBook for a new aluminum one:D

JSpence
Oct 10, 2007, 12:01 AM
Should we start a petition?;)

:( nooooo.

I enjoy reading what goes on when the 'big boys' play :p

MacinDoc
Oct 10, 2007, 12:06 AM
I'm not saying that Santa Rosa is not something that would be desirable in a MacBook, just that it is unlikely to appear at this refresh. Look for SR or higher in all Apple products by WWDC 2008.

Just too little differentiation right now between the MB and the MBP. Especially if the MB gets substantially upgraded integrated graphics.

So, I expect a small speed boost and Intel GMA X3100 graphics at this time.

Anything else will be a pleasant surprise.

Let's not all get overly optimistic, just to be let down when the actual product is unveiled... Ppl on this board (myself included sometimes) don't always seem to be realistic with their expectations.

Eidorian
Oct 10, 2007, 12:07 AM
I'm not saying that Santa Rosa is not something that would be desirable in a MacBook, just that it is unlikely to appear at this refresh.What are we going to see then?

JSpence
Oct 10, 2007, 12:17 AM
Leave something for MacWorld.

Slim MB's.

I'n my personal, non-professional thought on the matter, we will see a refresher for the MB's, to really get them through the holiday season.
All students can expect to recieve a box containing something like,
A silver MB
OS X 10.5
2.16 GHz standard
2GB all models
backlight keyboard on upper models :)
no more ComboDrive! (my personal favorite daydream)

As far as MBP's go, I think they may see some sort of a refresh as well. There are a few ways this could go.
1. They see almost a 'minimalist' refresh, with a new AL design to match the refresh of the MB for the holiday sale (they have to refresh the MB so it matches the iPod and iMac, etc. AL is in, white is gone for now)
2. New body plus a small graphics update, and LED's on the 17" to push sales through the holiday season
3. No real substantial change, but a much needed price drop until MWSD, which could be a bad play unless they really bring the heat come January.
4. All out update on the MBP's, something small and substantial for the MB's, with a slimbook for MWSD


If I see anymore ComboDrive, ill choke:mad:. i agree with a few earlier posts, MBP's are starting to look a little old, and CD shiping out for holiday of '07? What is apple playing at. The MBP's need an update, and the MB's GMA 950? yuck:rolleyes:

ch02ce
Oct 10, 2007, 12:27 AM
It is clearly going to be LED screens for the MacBook.

That might even be it.

Remember when Apple declared all of its computers would be more environmentally friendly by the end of 2007??

And the rumoured buy-up of smaller LED screens?

drewyboy
Oct 10, 2007, 01:01 AM
Ok, it's been bothering me that no one has said this yet. I agree that we will see possibly only a SR upgrade to the current MB line. Why you say? Because they do need to upgrade to stay somewhat with the rest of the market only for the sake of us that know what SR is and why it's better and what it will do over the current configuration. Otherwise the rest of the world doesn't care. They see macbook...they want macbook regardless of what chipset is in it because majority of them are probably saying "chip what"?

Also, for those of you saying, "but it's going to bring the MB too close to the MBP!". I say they practically were the same thing (sorta) till the MBP got SR, plus the obvious differences btwn the lines which most ppl fail to recognize. The extra ports, the graphics cards and few other things. Anyways, the reason they can both have SR is because Apple wants to sell MBs like absolute crazy during the holiday season. MB is more of a daily consumer purchase, where as those buying the MBP are going to shop around and be very aware of what they are buying. I think that at MWSF we will see possibly new form factor, dont bet on it, but for sure a significantly updated MBP with the new Penryn mobo chips. I don't understand why no one has talked about the new chips?! The lines will be close for the holiday season to try and push quantity over profit margins. Then for all those whining about how MBP is way over priced, at MWSF, Apple will be like, "Hey, we updated MBP will brand new Penryn mobo chips that haven't been/ are just released." So there will be the huge difference in the lines which I think will be a very reasonable gap in performance and price.

Life is Sweet
Oct 10, 2007, 02:14 AM
5 things(and i'm sorry if it's been posted):

1. MB will get SR, because if it doesnt will have year old chips by the time of next update. Therefore no more GMA950 to X3100

2. MB should get redesigned because its the only non-metal mac. It kinda stands out.

3. MB should get LED.

4. MP will be updated very soon because new penryn processor come out on November 12.

5. :apple: has booked a lot out 3.2ghz so they should be in MP soon.

Wild-Bill
Oct 10, 2007, 03:14 AM
I'm really hoping for a Macbook Pro redesign especially the 17" with LED's...but still with the metal look. :)

Um, weren't the MBP's just updated in June??? :rolleyes:

We may see also a new video card in the macbook pro's soon.
Nvidia is officially launching their G92 this month instead of November. The date has been brought forward...interestingly...could it be to coincide with an apple release?

No. The G92 release this month is for desktop cards, not laptops.

JSpence
Oct 10, 2007, 03:54 AM
5 things(and i'm sorry if it's been posted):

1. MB will get SR, because if it doesnt will have year old chips by the time of next update. Therefore no more GMA950 to X3100


Can anyone provide a strong case as to why the new MB's would get SR this November?

A little off topic. .:rolleyes:

AidenShaw
Oct 10, 2007, 04:08 AM
Can anyone provide a strong case as to why the new MB's would get SR this November?

GMA950.

'nuf said. ;)

JSpence
Oct 10, 2007, 04:13 AM
GMA950.

'nuf said. ;)

lol. true.

aswitcher
Oct 10, 2007, 04:34 AM
Another minor MB bump would be pretty lame. I suspect something more with Leopard.

sjwk
Oct 10, 2007, 05:09 AM
I'm a long time lurker, but have never had anything useful to say before... so I haven't bothered. But I won't be offended if you regard me as the newbie poster that I am :)

Anyway, while talking to our Apple account manager at work last week about a few things (such as release date of Leopard - he reckoned end of this week or next), I told him I was waiting for Leopard to buy myself a new MB. He wouldn't give anything away on details, but said that he would strongly advise me to wait until after Christmas.

Now, whether that's new models, or just long lead times due to Christmas orders I couldn't possibly say...

PMR
Oct 10, 2007, 05:24 AM
Gotta be. That's what I've been waiting for. If they're gonna be faster they've gotta be Santa Rosa & 3100 IG so we can run FCS 2 & CS3 with 4 GB of ram.

It's one more advantage for the macbook, but sorry, that shouldn't be no one's idea. That's why we have the MBP. Running video and photo in a 13" screen... C'mon...

Fuzzy14
Oct 10, 2007, 07:25 AM
Now, whether that's new models, or just long lead times due to Christmas orders I couldn't possibly say...

Check out the UK:apple:Store, MB are on 24 hour delivery, MBP on 3-5 days...

fewture
Oct 10, 2007, 08:36 AM
I'm not saying that Santa Rosa is not something that would be desirable in a MacBook, just that it is unlikely to appear at this refresh. Look for SR or higher in all Apple products by WWDC 2008.

Just too little differentiation right now between the MB and the MBP. Especially if the MB gets substantially upgraded integrated graphics.

So, I expect a small speed boost and Intel GMA X3100 graphics at this time.

Anything else will be a pleasant surprise.

Let's not all get overly optimistic, just to be let down when the actual product is unveiled... Ppl on this board (myself included sometimes) don't always seem to be realistic with their expectations.

As Drewyboy already state (just saw his post)

With Penryn in Jan 2008, MBP will be strides ahead of the MB (with SR or not). With all its other additional differentiating factors (dedicated GPU etc), the above is not an argument.

But yes wouldn't be surprised if Apple gave us another #&%^# 'upgrade' for the MB. I wouldn't buy one because I don't want to support a company which purposely sells outdated hardware because it can get away with it. I think Apple also knows it could sell more MB's if it finally made the switch to SR with x3100 (because then alot of people holding off would buy them and thats probably more than it seems - ppl are getting very savvy these days)

Now if MB got Penryn, that would be nice. But unlikely.

JSpence
Oct 10, 2007, 08:43 AM
As Drewyboy already state (just saw his post)

Now if MB got Penryn, that would be nice. But unlikely.


Very unlikely. But prove us wrong, by all means :)

whenpaulsparks
Oct 10, 2007, 09:14 AM
This rumor makes the most sense. Leopard will be in the spotlight for some time, and an update to the macbook is just enough to get consumers interested in it for Christmas. Face it, November and December are geared for consumer sales : ipod, iphone, macbook and imac. I would expect some bigger hardware/new products at MWSF. (macpro, subnotebook, etc)

... MWSF is always geared at consumer products.

brianus
Oct 10, 2007, 10:49 AM
... MWSF is always geared at consumer products.

They did announce the MacBook Pro at MWSF '06, though.

brianus
Oct 10, 2007, 10:51 AM
Anyway, while talking to our Apple account manager at work last week about a few things (such as release date of Leopard - he reckoned end of this week or next), I told him I was waiting for Leopard to buy myself a new MB. He wouldn't give anything away on details, but said that he would strongly advise me to wait until after Christmas.

Now, whether that's new models, or just long lead times due to Christmas orders I couldn't possibly say...

Could it be he was just saying you should wait a few months before buying Leopard (and therefore the MB)? It's conventional wisdom for any major Apple OS upgrade, after all.

mox123
Oct 10, 2007, 11:10 AM
As Drewyboy already state (just saw his post)

With Penryn in Jan 2008, MBP will be strides ahead of the MB (with SR or not). With all its other additional differentiating factors (dedicated GPU etc), the above is not an argument.

But yes wouldn't be surprised if Apple gave us another #&%^# 'upgrade' for the MB. I wouldn't buy one because I don't want to support a company which purposely sells outdated hardware because it can get away with it. I think Apple also knows it could sell more MB's if it finally made the switch to SR with x3100 (because then alot of people holding off would buy them and thats probably more than it seems - ppl are getting very savvy these days)

Now if MB got Penryn, that would be nice. But unlikely.

what's so innovative about Penryn that would make its appearance in the MBP to cause the latter to be strides ahead of the MB??

thies
Oct 10, 2007, 11:20 AM
In years gone by comparisons of as an example Dell to Apple were a hassle as mac zealots would argue that a G3/4/5 would be *so* much faster than current wintel models. But right now, simply go to dell.com and look at their 13.3' screen model and what they stuffed in there.

Yes, Macbooks are quite dated. All they have going for them are that they run OS X and some design innovations like the magnetic power cord. In other words: they seriously need to bump them to Santa Rosa for the holiday season in order to catch up to the specs other manufacturers currently offer for roughly the same price.

Give me the above and I'll gladly throw my money at apple. don't and I'm quite troubled with buying a macbook.

CWallace
Oct 10, 2007, 11:26 AM
I run CS 2 through Rosetta on 1 GB of RAM and Photoshop runs just fine. I had the CS 3 beta while it was available and it ran AWESOME.

You are kidding yourself if you think you need 4 GB of RAM of RAM to run CS 3.

Depends on what you do in Photoshop. I use it to dump images from my Epson scanner and rotate them, so I don't need any RAM.

My friend creates large advertising images in it, and even 4GB isn't nearly enough to hold his dataset, to say nothing of the scratch data...

AidenShaw
Oct 10, 2007, 12:08 PM
... MWSF is always geared at consumer products.

MWSF 2001 - Powerbook G4
http://www.pbzone.com/mwsf2001/day2/01mwsf012.jpg

MWSF 2003 - Powerbook G4 (12" and 17") http://www.thinksecret.com/news/mwsf03keynote.html

MWSF 2004 - Xserve G5 http://www.thinksecret.com/news/mwsf04announcements.html

MWSF 2006 - Aperture, MacBook Pro http://www.oreillynet.com/mac/blog/2006/01/mwsf_2006_keynote_notes.html

tuc
Oct 10, 2007, 12:10 PM
I'm not saying that Santa Rosa is not something that would be desirable in a MacBook, just that it is unlikely to appear at this refresh. ...

So, I expect a small speed boost and Intel GMA X3100 graphics at this time.


Is it even possible to attach X3100 graphics to the Napa chipset?

I thought that X3100/X3000 required Santa Rosa, but I'm hardly an expert.

Multimedia
Oct 10, 2007, 12:19 PM
Is it even possible to attach X3100 graphics to the Napa chipset?

I thought that X3100/X3000 required Santa Rosa, but I'm hardly an expert.That's right. We're saying it needs to be SR with the X3100/X3000 IG. The Napa 950 is really weak.

Multimedia
Oct 10, 2007, 12:28 PM
I run CS 2 through Rosetta on 1 GB of RAM and Photoshop runs just fine. I had the CS 3 beta while it was available and it ran AWESOME.

You are kidding yourself if you think you need 4 GB of RAM of RAM to run CS 3.I have the CS3 Master Collection on my 1.25 GHz G4 PB with 2GB of ram - the upper limit on this old horse. You're kidding yourself if you think you don't need 4GB. But then I always have 10-15 applications open simultaneously.

If you want to run one thing at a time - sure you can get by with 1GB. But it's hardly optimal - especially in light of the nominal $194 cost of two 2GB sticks.

I think those of us who expect the next update to be SR X3100/X3000 IG Merom C2D @ 2.2GHz would find that a lot more MacBook than the current offering - not so incremental from today.

There's also a good argument for 45nm Penryn in mobile Macs ASAP. But that doesn't appear to be in the cards before MWSF in mid January - almost another 100 days from now.

My scenario always has my mobile Mac hooked up to an external monitor at home. Some here poo-poo the idea of running pro apps on a MacBook because the screen is so small. But if it's hooked to a 24" 1920 x 1200 monitor at base all the time, it's not so small after all is it. That's why waiting for the 4GB limit with X3100/X3000 IG is so important to me. :)

Footnote. I don't expect to buy one. I'm shooting for a 45nm 2.8 GHz Penryn 17" 1920 x 1200 MBP next Spring.

50548
Oct 10, 2007, 01:01 PM
That's right. We're saying it needs to be SR with the X3100/X3000 IG. The Napa 950 is really weak.

Just a basic question now: would the adoption of the 3100 silence all whiners as regards basic/intermediate-level gaming on the Mac? Or is it almost as weak as the 950? Thanks in advance for the answer...

Multimedia
Oct 10, 2007, 01:03 PM
Just a basic question now: would the adoption of the 3100 silence all whiners as regards basic/intermediate-level gaming on the Mac? Or is it almost as weak as the 950? Thanks in advance for the answer...I'm guessing it should. But then most of those cats won't be happy until Apple puts a $500 dedicated 1GB graphics card in there for $49 extra. :rolleyes:

Eidorian
Oct 10, 2007, 01:07 PM
Just a basic question now: would the adoption of the 3100 silence all whiners as regards basic/intermediate-level gaming on the Mac? Or is it almost as weak as the 950? Thanks in advance for the answer...The GMA X3100 has been found to be on par with the GeForce 7300 and Radeon X1300. It's quite powerful for what it is. It still suffers from the lack of bandwidth like other integrated solutions.

It isn't much more to get even a low end discrete solution. The low end ones have ranged from $5-40.

MacSA
Oct 10, 2007, 01:16 PM
You're kidding yourself if you think you don't need 4GB. But then I always have 10-15 applications open simultaneously.


Are you serious? Maybe running 10-15 applications as well as CS3 is the reason why you think you need 4GB.;);)

p33
Oct 10, 2007, 02:02 PM
Are you serious? Maybe running 10-15 applications as well as CS3 is the reason why you think you need 4GB.;);)

I guess he is serious and in every sense of the word :) I use Linux most of the time and I have 15 virtual screens (the coming Spaces is the analogue to that, if you don't know), it is normal that about 10 screens are used at a time with typically more than one window per screen. Could it be that you just don't get the concept of multitasking right?

PMR
Oct 10, 2007, 02:25 PM
But then most of those cats won't be happy until Apple puts a $500 dedicated 1GB graphics card in there for $49 extra. :rolleyes:
Why not? They put $190 ones at $400...;)

50548
Oct 10, 2007, 02:25 PM
In years gone by comparisons of as an example Dell to Apple were a hassle as mac zealots would argue that a G3/4/5 would be *so* much faster than current wintel models. But right now, simply go to dell.com and look at their 13.3' screen model and what they stuffed in there.

Yes, Macbooks are quite dated. All they have going for them are that they run OS X and some design innovations like the magnetic power cord. In other words: they seriously need to bump them to Santa Rosa for the holiday season in order to catch up to the specs other manufacturers currently offer for roughly the same price.

Give me the above and I'll gladly throw my money at apple. don't and I'm quite troubled with buying a macbook.

And people STILL think that having better "specs" on the Dell is the factor for or against buying a Mac...once more, it's ALL about OS X and its integrated software.

The fact that we now have Intel has NO INFLUENCE WHATSOEVER on Mac purchasing decisions...it's only better, since those on the fence may also install Winblows if they need to.

50548
Oct 10, 2007, 02:28 PM
I guess he is serious and in every sense of the word :) I use Linux most of the time and I have 15 virtual screens (the coming Spaces is the analogue to that, if you don't know), it is normal that about 10 screens are used at a time with typically more than one window per screen. Could it be that you just don't get the concept of multitasking right?

From my own experience, it's more like WINDOWS doesn't get multitasking right...what a horrible system it is for the purpose of running multiple apps...more than 3 and it's already choking, unlike my G5 Mac...go figure...:rolleyes:

Glenn Wolsey
Oct 10, 2007, 02:46 PM
I'm really hoping to see these new MacBooks in Silver aluminium. The size form is perfect at the moment, I'd just like them to match the MacBook Pros aluminium casing.

AidenShaw
Oct 10, 2007, 02:47 PM
From my own experience, it's more like WINDOWS doesn't get multitasking right...what a horrible system it is for the purpose of running multiple apps...more than 3 and it's already choking, unlike my G5 Mac...

So I guess that those TPM benchmarks on 64 CPU Windows systems were faked?

ricgnzlzcr
Oct 10, 2007, 02:50 PM
I'm really hoping to see these new MacBooks in Silver aluminium. The size form is perfect at the moment, I'd just like them to match the MacBook Pros aluminium casing.

Ditto. Silver or black aluminum sounds fine to me. I just hope they do get the case redesign and not just an update inside. My macbook has been great, but I still miss my 12" powerbook's look and feel.

starman0147
Oct 10, 2007, 02:59 PM
I am deciding between getting a Macbook or Macbook pro.
If the Macbook gets a decent update and not just a simple speed bump when Leopard is released then I will go with that, otherwise it just seems still too dated for the moment.
As for the Macbook pro I was all but ready to get it back in June when it was updated and probably should have but decide to wait for Leopard but now that time is coming itís is starting too look a little overpriced.

The updates I expect (hope more like) to happen goes as follows.

November 2007
Macbook: Santa Rosa, X3100, all models to have Superdrive, Aluminium Case
Mac Pro: Penryn processors, Blu ray

Jaraunay 2008
New Macbook Pro with Penryn processors
New sub-notebook range

If the Macbook doesnít get an update when is Leopard released or an few weeks after I am not really sure what I will do, I probably will wait till January and see what happens, but I really want to get my notebook within the next month to take advantage of the back to school promotion and I tried of waiting. I know the next big thing is always round the corner and you cant always wait for it or youíll never end up buying anything but as the I donít expect to get another laptop for the next 3 years I want to have the latest technology at the time and not something at the end of it cycle. Decisions, decisionsÖ

p33
Oct 10, 2007, 03:00 PM
From my own experience, it's more like WINDOWS doesn't get multitasking right...what a horrible system it is for the purpose of running multiple apps...more than 3 and it's already choking, unlike my G5 Mac...go figure...:rolleyes:

From my own experience, WINDOWS just doesn't classify as an OS but that's way offtopic... so, I cut it.

Eidorian
Oct 10, 2007, 05:14 PM
I am deciding between getting a Macbook or Macbook pro.
If the Macbook gets a decent update and not just a simple speed bump when Leopard is released then I will go with that, otherwise it just seems still too dated for the moment.
As for the Macbook pro I was all but ready to get it back in June when it was updated and probably should have but decide to wait for Leopard but now that time is coming itís is starting too look a little overpriced.

The updates I expect (hope more like) to happen goes as follows.

November 2007
Macbook: Santa Rosa, X3100, all models to have Superdrive, Aluminium Case
Mac Pro: Penryn processors, Blu ray

Jaraunay 2008
New Macbook Pro with Penryn processors
New sub-notebook range

If the Macbook doesnít get an update when is Leopard released or an few weeks after I am not really sure what I will do, I probably will wait till January and see what happens, but I really want to get my notebook within the next month to take advantage of the back to school promotion and I tried of waiting. I know the next big thing is always round the corner and you cant always wait for it or youíll never end up buying anything but as the I donít expect to get another laptop for the next 3 years I want to have the latest technology at the time and not something at the end of it cycle. Decisions, decisionsÖI expect to see a similar update path.

fewture
Oct 10, 2007, 09:52 PM
I expect to see a similar update path.

yeah I expect similar update path too.

And yes Penryn will be strides ahead. Not amazing 'strides' but definitely enough to easily differentiate a MB with SR CPU/SR and MBP with Penryn/SR.

Is Intel planning on calling Penryn Core 3 Duo or something?

TheBigS
Oct 10, 2007, 10:05 PM
I really really really hope they upgrade the graphics. At least to a cheap 128mb. Its the biggest set back at the moment. The processors are miles ahead already.

Life is Sweet
Oct 11, 2007, 02:29 AM
Is Intel planning on calling Penryn Core 3 Duo or something?

No, Penryn is a shrink of Core 2 from 65nm to 45nm.

Core 3 will be 45nm, come out end of 08 /start of 09 and are codenamed Nehalem.

The next is Westmere, a shrink of Core 3 to 32nm

The next year, then 32nm Core 4 or whatever its called, codenamed Sandy Bridge.

AidenShaw
Oct 11, 2007, 08:06 AM
Core 3 will be 45nm, come out end of 08 /start of 09 and are codenamed Nehalem...

It would be logical that Nehalem will get the marketing name "Core 3", but history has shown that logic and marketing don't always follow the same path.

Best to stick with the code names until marketing picks the product name - it's still possible that on 12 November we'll see the "Core 3" Harpertowns....

By the time that Nehalem is formally introduced, Intel marketing might decide to change from "Core %d" labeling to something else.

Nichod
Oct 11, 2007, 09:06 AM
I saw this on Notebook review. Didn't read all the posts here, but thought if not already referenced/linked might be a good read.

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4007

Roba
Oct 11, 2007, 09:28 AM
Well it depends on what you want. If you really wanted a 13.3 thin and light notebook with a dedicated GPU people will most likely to opt with the Dell/Sony/Asus and not a MacBook. Of course specs do come into it.
And people STILL think that having better "specs" on the Dell is the factor for or against buying a Mac...once more, it's ALL about OS X and its integrated software.

The fact that we now have Intel has NO INFLUENCE WHATSOEVER on Mac purchasing decisions...it's only better, since those on the fence may also install Winblows if they need to.

50548
Oct 11, 2007, 11:53 AM
So I guess that those TPM benchmarks on 64 CPU Windows systems were faked?

English, please, I don't know what you refer to...and I am talking about the Windows (XP) I use everyday against the OS X I use everyday...there is simply no comparison in terms of stability and performance.

MagnusVonMagnum
Oct 11, 2007, 01:37 PM
The next MB had damn well better not use the GMA 950. Give us Santa Rosa and the 3100, at least.

It sure sounds like it will. At this point, I think Apple has lost a laptop sale here. I will have to buy a PC. I don't want to spend over $2000 for a MBP and the Macbook's graphics are simply unacceptable for 2008, which we are fast heading towards. I've been putting it off for many months now, hoping the next update would get Santa Rosa, but if this update does not, it's hello PC with Linux and XP installed. I simply cannot fathom why Apple places no value on GPU updates. Newer Mac games do not support the GMA 950 at all, yet any $700 PC can run newer 3D games with total aplomb. It's the one thing that really makes Apple look bad. They need to address it pronto, IMO.

I'm sure the usual suspects will chime in about how stupid gaming is or go buy an XBox. I've heard it a thousand times before and it bores me since I don't WANT a console for gaming (PC games are often a different type anyway). I want to run XP under BootCamp or Parallels/Fusion for such things, but the Apple hardware still has to have some guts to it for me to do so.

Eidorian
Oct 11, 2007, 01:43 PM
It sure sounds like it will. At this point, I think Apple has lost a laptop sale here. I will have to buy a PC. I don't want to spend over $2000 for a MBP and the Macbook's graphics are simply unacceptable for 2008, which we are fast heading towards. I've been putting it off for many months now, hoping the next update would get Santa Rosa, but if this update does not, it's hello PC with Linux and XP installed. I simply cannot fathom why Apple places no value on GPU updates. Newer Mac games do not support the GMA 950 at all, yet any $700 PC can run newer 3D games with total aplomb. It's the one thing that really makes Apple look bad. They need to address it pronto, IMO. I'm pretty much in the same boat. I might end up getting a MacBook and build own own minitower. I'd rather not have to manage two computers though. A Mac Pro update might tempt me but I'm trying to save some money. $500 on a half decent gaming rig looks really good though.


I'm sure the usual suspects will chime in about how stupid gaming is or go buy an XBox. I've heard it a thousand times before and it bores me since I don't WANT a console for gaming (PC games are often a different type anyway). I want to run XP under BootCamp or Parallels/Fusion for such things, but the Apple hardware still has to have some guts to it for me to do so.I get tired of "Just buy a XBox 360", as well. I have my Wii for my light gaming and Nintendo love but I'm a RTS and FPS fanatic for the PC.

thies
Oct 11, 2007, 01:54 PM
And people STILL think that having better "specs" on the Dell is the factor for or against buying a Mac...once more, it's ALL about OS X and its integrated software.

The fact that we now have Intel has NO INFLUENCE WHATSOEVER on Mac purchasing decisions...it's only better, since those on the fence may also install Winblows if they need to.

For me it was. Ever since I replaced my G4 466, whenever thereafter I looked at buying a new machine the machines Apple offered in their consumer lines were total turds when it came to getting the job done in comparison to the offerings of other manufacturers. I rather live with a not as flashy interface if I in turn get hardware that isn't bargain bin material for other manufacturers. Apples window of opportunity to get the job done right ends 24th of November. They by that time either have santa rosa alu macbooks in stores or I'll just buy a vaio.

gregorsamsa
Oct 11, 2007, 01:57 PM
I'm sure the usual suspects will chime in about how stupid gaming is or go buy an XBox. I've heard it a thousand times before and it bores me since I don't WANT a console for gaming (PC games are often a different type anyway). I want to run XP under BootCamp or Parallels/Fusion for such things, but the Apple hardware still has to have some guts to it for me to do so.

Quite agree. Though gaming isn't my priority, I still want to be able to play games like Medieval 2: Total War & Empire: TW (coming in 2008) at the highest settings, without forking out for a Mac Pro. I don't think that's so unreasonable. As the new iMacs simply don't do it for me, difficult decisions lie ahead.

Yes, it's now time MacBooks had better than GMA950 graphics, but with Apple's thinking on this I won't be too surprised if it doesn't happen for a while yet.

mox123
Oct 11, 2007, 02:37 PM
would people's complaints about the integrated graphics performance and the chipset be nitpicking really? I've upgraded from a powerbook G4 1.25"GHz to my current macbook....and the performance of the macbook is leaps and bounds above my old powerbook....i've had my machine since july, and i'm perfectly happy with it! granted i don't play computer games though

Eidorian
Oct 11, 2007, 02:40 PM
would people's complaints about the integrated graphics performance and the chipset be nitpicking really? I've upgraded from a powerbook G4 1.25"GHz to my current macbook....and the performance of the macbook is leaps and bounds above my old powerbook....i've had my machine since july, and i'm perfectly happy with it! granted i don't play computer games thoughThen what sort of input can you give in the performance of the graphics subsystem?

urbanski
Oct 11, 2007, 02:51 PM
would people's complaints about the integrated graphics performance and the chipset be nitpicking really? I've upgraded from a powerbook G4 1.25"GHz to my current macbook....and the performance of the macbook is leaps and bounds above my old powerbook

hmm...mebbe this will help....

"i've just upgraded my old axe for a newfangled musket...and it rocks!"

...except its a shame everyone else is already using apache copters and stealth fighters

so i'm like....er, stuffed...

:);):D

p33
Oct 11, 2007, 02:55 PM
And people STILL think that having better "specs" on the Dell is the factor for or against buying a Mac...once more, it's ALL about OS X and its integrated software.

No, BRLawyer, it's all about the freaking TPM that disables decent usage of OSX on decent hardware and the fact that Apple is merely cornering you (and myself) to buy its hardware. I wouldn't be against it if the hardware was at the bleeding edge, which is unfortunately not the case. If you want OSX they just don't give you any choice. IMHO, it sucks and, as I have been writing in other threads, I think it sucks big time.


The fact that we now have Intel has NO INFLUENCE WHATSOEVER on Mac purchasing decisions...it's only better, since those on the fence may also install Winblows if they need to.

The (read: our) problem, IMO, is that WE can not do the same: decently install OSX on whatever hardware that would be compatible at least to some extent.

CWallace
Oct 11, 2007, 02:59 PM
While FPS games will always push the GPU to the limit, even RPG/RTG games are now putting serious demands on the GPU to the point that most integrated GPUs just can't cut it anymore.

While the X3x00 will hardly be a pancea, it will at least let us run some current games that cannot be run now, period.

I bought an iMac 24" with the knowledge that the ATI 2600 would be enough to run my RPG/RTG games sufficiently, but would likely be unacceptable for FPS games. Since I don't play FPS games, I'm okay with that.

Unfortunately, the days of just buying a cheap Windows PC as a game box and using your Mac for "the real work" is becoming less and less of an option because modern video cards need such massive power supplies and high-end memory, CPUs and systemboards that $500, which used to get you a "decent" system a few years back, barely covers the video card now.

CWallace
Oct 11, 2007, 03:00 PM
hmm...mebbe this will help....

"i've just upgraded my old axe for a newfangled musket...and it rocks!"

...except its a shame everyone else is already using apache copters and stealth fighters

so i'm like....er, stuffed...

:);):D


"i've just upgraded my old axe for a newfangled musket...and it rocks!"

Alas, I still need to chop wood...

urbanski
Oct 11, 2007, 03:05 PM
"i've just upgraded my old axe for a newfangled musket...and it rocks!"

Alas, I still need to chop wood...

in that case, u shoulda kept yer old powerbook G4 1.25"GHz...:p

CWallace
Oct 11, 2007, 03:17 PM
in that case, u shoulda kept yer old powerbook G4 1.25"GHz...:p

I wish. I upgraded from a G3 Powerbook to my 1st gen MacBook. :eek:

urbanski
Oct 11, 2007, 03:20 PM
I wish. I upgraded from a G3 Powerbook to my 1st gen MacBook. :eek:

lolz

well, im still waiting 2 u/g from my 6-yr old pc to my 1st mac - so am rly hoping these new macbooks are santa rosa + new intel gfx and not the old 950...otherwise im gonna have to keep waiting...:(:(:(

Scott L
Oct 11, 2007, 03:36 PM
To repeat myself several pages down the thread, I think 2GHz and 2.2 GHz with 4GB ram capacity thanks to Santa Rosa & finally better new integrated graphics (IG). So from my point of view it will be a big deal because they've been offering the same tired old IG since the first MacBook last year plus it will see and use 4GB of RAM which will both make its performance a lot better than just the speed of the C2D.

This is exactly what I'm hoping for--better graphics chip, ability to go to 4MB RAM. Would buy this right away; if there's a minor speed bump too, so much the better, but that's secondary.

maninthemoon
Oct 11, 2007, 06:05 PM
Then what sort of input can you give in the performance of the graphics subsystem?


Just to clarify is that what it boils down to...the ability to play games or do work that involves 3d graphics?

For those of the us that don't do those things will we notice any difference between the two chips. Is there any reason (graphic chip wise) to wait for the update?

thanks,
mitm

Eidorian
Oct 11, 2007, 06:11 PM
Just to clarify is that what it boils down to...the ability to play games or do work that involves 3d graphics?

For those of the us that don't do those things will we notice any difference between the two chips. Is there any reason (graphic chip wise) to wait for the update?

thanks,
mitmThe user upgrading from their PowerBook said, "the performance of the macbook is leaps and bounds above my old powerbook."

This is more then likely from moving to Core 2 and having nothing to due with the GMA 950. Of course the Core 2 is going to give you incredible performance compared to the G4. :rolleyes:

Some of us do care about more then just raw CPU clock speed.

flopticalcube
Oct 11, 2007, 06:14 PM
Yes. The OS is using 3D tricks more and more to create a pleasing computing experience. The X3100 will run new OS's like Leopard and Vista with less stress on the CPU than the GMA950. Multiple monitors, if you ever find you need them, will also run smoother.

Eidorian
Oct 11, 2007, 06:17 PM
Yes. The OS is using 3D tricks more and more to create a pleasing computing experience. The X3100 will run new OS's like Leopard and Vista with less stress on the CPU than the GMA950. Multiple monitors, if you ever find you need them, will also run smoother.From what I can tell OpenGL 2.0/2.1 support isn't required for all the graphical sizzle. Then again that might only apply to the FX5200 and GMA 950.

Core Image alone might be enough for older discrete cards.

leekohler
Oct 11, 2007, 06:21 PM
And we need a matte screen option.

Eidorian
Oct 11, 2007, 06:27 PM
And we need a matte screen option.I'll agree to that.