13" and 15" MacBook Pros Have a Slower SATA Interface

[L0s7man]

Actually, they said "less than single digit percent"...

And they know it because of spyware software that monitors the usage of EC?

It's a funny statement to make. My guess is they've surveyed some 1000 people and that's it.

[needlz]

If I'd order a 13" or 15" MBP WITH SSD, would it still have the 1.5 SATA Interface or the 3.0?

Thanks

[turkay]

If I'd order a 13" or 15" MBP WITH SSD, would it still have the 1.5 SATA Interface or the 3.0?

Thanks

Currently 1.5, but the general opinion is they're capable of 3.0 and capped by Apple.

[kaamio]

These downgrades are not special for Apple, all the brands do something like that. Because this is marketing. They will never give you a 100% of your dream machine. They will always give something better but not perfect, this is the point of marketing. I don't like the downgrades though.

Show me another company that actually downgrades/cripples a PRO line on purpose. This has to unintentional, otherwise it doesn't make any sense. It might be marketing not to include the latest whatever component but it isn't marketing to actually downgrade the component for whatever reasons. That's what used car dealership companies do. Is this the iCar?

[turkay]

Microsoft

Haha i was just posting the same but anyway there is no exception for the companies. That's the concept.

[Darkroom]

One step forward, two steps back.

are you kidding? from 13" Unibody MacBook with faster Sata to 13" MacBook Pro with slower Sata and a better screen, better battery, SDCard Slot, FW800, lower price is like 5 long steps forward, one baby step back...

hey, i got a Unibody MacBook that's about a month old, anyone wanna trade for the new 13" MacBook Pro? *waves it in front of you* it's got faster SATA!!!!!

pfff... bunch of complainers!

[turkay]

are you kidding? from 13" Unibody MacBook with faster Sata to 13" MacBook Pro with slower Sata and a better screen, better battery, SDCard Slot, FW800, lower price is like 5 long steps forward, one baby step back...

+1. Not a baby step though..

[deconstruct60]

Hi folks;

Unfortunately there are way to many bad posts in this thread that I've had to respond. Some have already tried to correct the misinformation but it looks like nobody is listening. Here are some points to ponder:

.....
It would be interesting to find out how Apple is interfacing the SD slot as that could be limiting things a bit if it is indeed using SATA.


http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3553

Maxes out at 240 Mbit/s ( 30 MBps) . Well within USB 2.0 range (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_ATA#eSATA_in_comparison_to_other_external_buses).
Throw in the fact that it is right next to the other USB slots and even more likely. Finally, in light of the fact that "overkill" was not a design guideline elsewhere, why would it be so for the SD slot?

The SD slot is more likely another excuse to merge continued thrashing on ExpressCard issue into this thread. As if this one wasn't hot enough.




I've seen a lot of complaints here but has anybody looked up Apples specs for these devices?


Unless they are now ADC member only, curiously Apple has stopped writing Developer notes on the hardware:

http://developer.apple.com/documentation/HardwareDrivers/AppleHardware-date.html

The support specs are very nonspecific. Just say SATA and drive sizes.

http://support.apple.com/kb/SP544

[gnasher729]

That analogy is just plain wrong. While a synthetic graphics benchmark like 3Dmark is different from running Crysis, the harddrive "benchmark" used in the data I posted shows raw data stream read and write. The performance will be very close to the actual read/write file transfer performance you will moving files around in Finder.

Actually, no.

What usually takes time is folders with gazillions of tiny little files. When the speed of the drive is limited by head movement (usually around 10 ms, enough to read half a Megabyte on a slowish drive). Lots of the time ninety percent or more of the time is actually spent on moving the drive heads and not reading data.

Just open Activity Monitor and watch it.

[consoleboi]

Such as? Lack of ExpressCard? By that logic we should be complaining because Macs don't ship with floppy-drives anymore. Features get dropped, and new features take their place.


Sorry but your logic is flawed. ExpressCard is not dead nor is it old technology. Replacing ExpressCard with SDslot MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE. MBP is for power users...

ExpressCard allows people to put in for example, E-Sata card which in hindsight the new MBP should have.

[turkay]

Sorry but your logic is flawed. ExpressCard is not dead nor is it old technology. Replacing ExpressCard with SDslot MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE. MBP is for power users...

ExpressCard allows people to put in for example, E-Sata card which in hindsight the new MBP should have.

Apple may change their mind as they did with the FW port.

[consoleboi]

Apple may change their mind as they did with the FW port.

By the time they put in an E-Sata mini port, USB 3.0 would be out and MBP would still be on USB 2.0 =)

Or they could remove all firewire and put in 4 USB ports instead =)

[RetepNamenots]

And they know it because of spyware software that monitors the usage of EC?

It's a funny statement to make. My guess is they've surveyed some 1000 people and that's it.

Hardware reports to Apple might confirm how many people are using the port.

[Kindaichi]

Try to get to System Profiler and then compared ครับ.

Between

MB 13" Unibody Early 2009.
With
MBP 13" Unibody Mid 2009.

The same S-ATA Product is Nvidia MCP79 AHCI.
but the program tell it tell the difference Speed between the MB with 3.0 Gigabit and the MBP with 1.5 Gigabit.

[trancepriest]

HaHa... Apple doesn't care about poor folks.. they are now selling them trash laptops. Get some money folks and get a real computer... a 17" MacBook Pro. :) Don't flame on me now... it's the truth. The 13' and 15" models for the price... sucks ass. Only low end mac users would think their getting a bargain for those POS.

[Evangelion]

Sorry but your logic is flawed.

nope.

ExpressCard is not dead nor is it old technology.

Maybe not, but it was technology that no-one used.

Replacing ExpressCard with SDslot MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE. MBP is for power users...

They replaced one feature with a feature that I guarantee will see A LOT more use than the ExpressCard ever did. Doesn't it make sense to replace unused features with features that people will actually use?

[randyj]

I am surprised to see how passionate people are about this issue.
I have the new 13" and it is the fastest notebook i have ever had.
I don't have an ssd version, but a 7200 rpm drive installed after purchase.

I agree that the new gen ssd drives are getting extremely fast, but how can you get a laptop to read/write at such a fast rate continually with just 1 drive?
3 things to stress the interface, transfers from other devices, copying files locally and application usage.

Lets look at the interfaces into the Macbook Pro.
A laptop with a single drive is a bit like an island, in that there is no interface into it which is going to stress the 150MB per second write/speed.
ie Gigabit, dvd, firewire 800, wireless network and USB are all much slower than the Sata 1 interface.
If these laptops had an external e-sata port running at Sata 2, 300MBps and you plugged in an external SSD, then maybe you could see a performance bottleneck.

So next is copying files locally. How often do you copy a very large folder and paste it onto the same drive?
If you just move it to a new folder, it moves instantly anyway. I really don't think that this will stress it much anyway. I would be interested to see a real world test with a ssd of someone copying a large folder on the same drive to see if there is any difference between the old and new macbook pros.

The other thing that could stress it program usage. I just did some basic tests with activity monitor open to check the disk usage. Like opening programs, exporting images from Aperture, resizing in photoshop etc etc and none of them came close to hitting what I can hit copying files from a server over gigabit (68MBps). So i dont see a performance hit here.


I think it is a bit of a none issue, but I would be happy to see some real world tests (not benchmarks) that prove you would get a real performance gain if it had the faster interface.
Unlike a lot of you that have posted your dislike for this, i actually have one of these laptops. I used to like it 100%, now probably around 98%, but not enough to lose sleep over!!!!
Just go an get one and enjoy the amazing battery life. That is something you will notice everyday!!!!

[deconstruct60]

And they know it because of spyware software that monitors the usage of EC?

It's a funny statement to make. My guess is they've surveyed some 1000 people and that's it.

There are two important numbers to determine the percentage.

1. The total number of MacPros sold.
Is there any doubt that Apple knows better than anyone else what this number is? Without that number folks are going to have a hard time coming up with a very accurate answer.

2. Total number of express card devices sold
What could Apple use?

a. total number of logic/ final cut users.
multiple those by a percentage.
b. has partner relationships with various key hardware vendors
(Apogee , RME , all of examples that folks keep
repeatably mentioning here. It is not a very long of a list.).
they could call and ask them how many they sold.
What that be so hard for them to do?
c. Look at the how many developers pinged about driver development
problems that are PCI specific and how many of those were
attached to a MBP device.
Likewise, developers requesting access to the compatibility
support lab.
d. Look at the support ticket database as to how many folks had
problems with ExpressCard and called Apple (kernel panic,
work , etc. )
e. Buy marketing report from some niche consultant that goes around
counting different slot usages and sells it to hardware vendors.
f. Call the vendor that Apple uses to buy ExpressCard connectors from
to find out how many of the other side they make.
g. your idea of a survey of 500-1000 random Mac Pro Users who
answer.


Merge those sources into an approximation of a number.

( they may have also chosen to prune out the ExpressCard usages that are really just USB in a funny format. e.g., cellular modems. The EC slot is hooked to both USB and PCI-1x bus. )


This is all versus folks who say " I use it (or may use it) so therefore it must be a significant number of folks". (Well documented untrained human inferencing from the small into the large. "Well I use it and there much be thousands like me so therefore the percentage can't be small". ) At no point citing how many MacPro users there are total. Throw in the folks who try to reclassified who is "entitled" to a Pro machine; "Well if they aren't using it then they aren't pros".

No random sampling of a population across different demographics.


Both sides are off from the absolute precise number. It is a matter of who has a better approximation. Apple has one of the two pieces to a high degree of accuracy. The other can be debated.

[turkay]

I am surprised to see how passionate people are about this issue.

This thread reminds me the endless whining Macbook threads. I hope Apple to fix it via a firmware update as soon as possible.

[ericinboston]

So you thought that you would get the "PRO" with BETTER specs and LOWER price?? Since when did Apple give anything away for free? That's what Apple advertised. Hello?! Are you even reading their advertisements? And I never said the new machine was to be better (but let's face it...99% of all "updated" products are better than than the previous gen)...I said Apple re-labeled it and dropped the price. By re-labeling it, it should "come up" to the specs of the existing "Pros".


It's not a scam. It's the buyer's responsibility to figure out the value of the product, not automatically assume this and that. This is business, and Apple has obligations mainly to its shareholders.


Yeah, even the most conscious consumer is going to know what these specs mean. We're talking a controller here...which is RARELY advertised on consumer desktops and laptops. It took some TECHIE to announce this scam.

[Tompkinson]

That's what Apple advertised. Hello?! Are you even reading their advertisements?

Well, maybe you should immediately stop reading their advertisments, right?
Read only Tech-Forums, Tech Review sites, review sites for the software you use, etc. I don't now anyone who would buy this (very expensive) product based on info found in the advertising.

Advertising serves to tell you the things they want you to know. Why would you believe advertising? Ads, Jobs' Keynotes, etc: never the truth


(but let's face it...99% of all "updated" products are better than than the previous gen)

Excuse me? since when? this is a basic truth of life, is it?


...I said Apple re-labeled it and dropped the price. By re-labeling it, it should "come up" to the specs of the existing "Pros".

why? they announced a new product. it's has things you'll like, and things you won't like. find out about these before you lose you money to a corporation.


We're talking a controller here...which is RARELY advertised on consumer desktops and laptops. It took some TECHIE to announce this scam.


exactly, that's how it should be. So: read the tech sites, not the advertising!
I remember days of buying tech before the internet, it was much easier to lose money; now, we surf the forums and don't buy till you're happy with the product.

[iMacmatician]

The "catch" is that they're using cheaper CPUs with half the cache... Another thing the media didn't pick up on..They're not using cheaper CPUs, and the $1999 MacBook Pro has previously had 3 MB L2.

[antic]

I can't understand why this is such a big issue. If you look at the specs for any laptop on Apple's web site it clearly stats that the drives are SATA. I don't see anywhere where is states the drives are SATA2

[Chupa Chupa]

I can't understand why this is such a big issue. If you look at the specs for any laptop on Apple's web site it clearly stats that the drives are SATA. I don't see anywhere where is states the drives are SATA2


SATA is generic. There is SATA 1.5Gb (SATA I), which is an older standard, generally not used anymore, and its successor SATA 3Gb (SATA II). So when a company like Apple, known for high quality products, says a laptop has a SATA bus, and the previous model used SATA II most people are going to logically conclude that SATA II is also the standard on the newest model.

That is why this is such a big issue. Now if Apple stated SATA I or SATA 1.5Gb clearly and upfront, you'd have a point. But, IF, this was intentional, and we do not know that yet, but IF, then Apple is being deceptive using the generic SATA label. And for that people have every right to be pissed and cut Apple down.

[Bubba Satori]

Maybe not, but it was technology that no-one used.


Patently absurd statements like that don't do a lot for your credibility.

[rockonchen]

I can't understand why this is such a big issue. If you look at the specs for any laptop on Apple's web site it clearly stats that the drives are SATA. I don't see anywhere where is states the drives are SATA2


If you look at the specs for any laptop on Apple's web site it clearly doesn't stats that the drives are SATA 1.5G, either.

[L0s7man]

They're not using cheaper CPUs, and the $1999 MacBook Pro has previously had 3 MB L2.

It is cheaper, it has half the cache; the only mitigating circumstance it's that it generates less heat 25W vs 35W. But yearh: "We've cut the price*"

<very very very very small print>
* we've put much cheaper CPU :P

Now you need to get the top of the line, 2.8Ghz to get simple things like 512MB for GPU and 6MB cache; seriously, 256 MB on GPU? Are we back in time few years?

Where's the frickin 1 GB option? It's RAM; RAM is cheap.

Apple = LOL

I think I'll just go with Sony; Sony sux too, but now it seems it sux less than Apple does.

[Evangelion]

Patently absurd statements like that don't do a lot for your credibility.

According to Apple, "less than single-digit percentage of our users used it"....

Yes, there are people out there who need it, That's why 17" MBP still has it. But fact is that it's a niche-feature.

EDIT: nice = niche

[Evangelion]

It is cheaper, it has half the cache; the only mitigating circumstance it's that it generates less heat 25W vs 35W. But yearh: "We've cut the price*"

I don't think that the CPU's are cheaper.... My MBP has 2.4GHz C2D with 4MB of cache, and I bet that CPU cost about as much as these newer CPU's do. And my CPU would lose in performance. It just happens that the newer C2D's don't need as much cache since it has beefier access to the RAM:

Besides, they didn't move to 3M of cache with these latest updates, they already had 3M of cache

<very very very very small print>
* we've put much cheaper CPU :P

...that is still faster than the more expensive CPU we offered a while back.

Now you need to get the top of the line, 2.8Ghz to get simple things like 512MB for GPU and 6MB cache; seriously, 256 MB on GPU? Are we back in time few years?

Cut the crap. 256MB is the low-end of VRAM on dedicated GPU's. Few years ago it was the top end. I should know since my top-of-the-line 15" MacBook Pro from 2007 has 256MB of VRAM. You make it sound like there has been no progress, but there has. The amount of VRAM has basicly doubled.

Where's the frickin 1 GB option? It's RAM; RAM is cheap.

Not all RAM is. VRAM is more expensive than normal RAM is.

I think I'll just go with Sony; Sony sux too, but now it seems it sux less than Apple does.

Go right ahead. Enjoy your "Sony Style".

[harshw]

Reading all the replies by Apple apologists makes me wonder - why are they doing it ? Is it some need to 'belong' to the Cult Of Apple ? Isn't it possible to like a company as much as is deserved ? ie When Apple or MS or Sony make bad products - call them out. And praise them when they do deliver good products ?

But the fanboys here - a small but very vocal percentage - seem to be forgetting one thing: It's a few dissatisfied owners today, people who acted in good faith and placed orders for the new MBPs. But one day, it will be the fanboys turn, when Apple shafts them over something or the other. At that point they'll probably suddenly turn into Apple-haters and claim loudly to have been shafted and demand sympathy. Sadly, that's how they are :D

[Bubba Satori]

According to Apple, "less than single-digit percentage of our users used it"....

Yes, there are people out there who need it, That's why 17" MBP still has it. But fact is that it's a niche-feature.

EDIT: nice = niche

They probably used the same research "methods" to conclude that firewire wasn't needed on some models. :D

[BNO]

It can't be that Apple removes features from the MacBook Pro 15" inch line since they first introduced the Unibody and now they are going back 4 years of Hard Disk Interface evolution. For all who want to step forward and show their disappointment about the recent developments, see the petition link below.

[Chupa Chupa]

According to Apple, "less than single-digit percentage of our users used it"....

Yes, there are people out there who need it, That's why 17" MBP still has it. But fact is that it's a niche-feature.

EDIT: nice = niche


That makes about as much sense as a home builder saying his 5000 sq ft. mini-mansions have cable jacks in all rooms. However, his 1500 sq ft. bungalows have no cable jacks so if you need cable jacks buy the mini-mansion, even if you are single w/o children.

There are people who find the 15" the sweet spot of the line - not to big to travel, not to small to work with; video out if a bigger monitor is needed. It's not possible these users have no use for an ExpressCard slot? I know what Apple said -- but the logic is flawed and clearly bent for Apple to justify removing the slot.

OK. So they removed the slot and told us why. That brings us back to the SATA issue. Don't you think Apple should at least explain why previous versions had SATA II and the newest version does not just as they explained why ExpressCard went away?

[GodWhomIsMike]

HaHa... Apple doesn't care about poor folks.. they are now selling them trash laptops. Get some money folks and get a real computer... a 17" MacBook Pro. :) Don't flame on me now... it's the truth. The 13' and 15" models for the price... sucks ass. Only low end mac users would think their getting a bargain for those POS.

Sorry, your argument sucks. I like the 13" for the size and weight. 4.5lbs is easier on the shoulder during a 2 hours each way when commuting than a 6.6lb 17" MBP. Yes it's a little slower, but for the size and weight, it's fine. Plus, my employer lets me upgrade the ram and hard drives on it.

At this point, I think I am pretty much maxed on my (2+ year old) 2.16GHz Macbook. It's got 3GB ram and 320GB hard drive. Not much room let for improvement. I used this thing everyday for 12-16 hours a day.

Worked great, but feeling out the management here to see if they are willing to get me a new 13" Macbook Pro w/ 4GB of ram and a 500GB hard drive. Least then, it can be upgraded to 8GB of ram in a year or two once 4GB DDR3 so-dimm module prices are a 1/4 or 1/8 of what they are today. I see 3-4 years out of that model.

As for my old Macbook, it will likely live on for at least 3 more years in the hands of someone with significantly less demanding requirements.

[Tompkinson]

That makes about as much sense as a home builder saying his 5000 sq ft. mini-mansions have cable jacks in all rooms. However, his 1500 sq ft. bungalows have no cable jacks so if you need cable jacks buy the mini-mansion, even if you are single w/o children.


If that is his decision, fine. No one is forcing a "single w/o children" to buy any of his buildings right?


I know what Apple said -- but the logic is flawed and clearly bent for Apple to justify removing the slot.

You make it sound as if there is a devious plan hidden beneath the flawed and bent logic behind removing the slot. Probably they said: "This slot is not going to sell enough computers to justify itself" and got rid of it. Guess they say this about lots of features. Do you think getting rid of the Pismos's two expansion bays was a big mistake, justified using flawed and bent logic? think today's MBP are less Pro because they lack plastic expansion bays ?


Don't you think Apple should at least explain why previous versions had SATA II and the newest version does not just as they explained why ExpressCard went away?

yes, absolutely. that would be very welcome. Then some folks here can return to being adults and stop sounding like little kids who've had their ice cream taken away by a bully. A bully they usually never tire of throwing money at without researching the product first.

[Evangelion]

That makes about as much sense as a home builder saying his 5000 sq ft. mini-mansions have cable jacks in all rooms. However, his 1500 sq ft. bungalows have no cable jacks so if you need cable jacks buy the mini-mansion, even if you are single w/o children.

But there's very little NEED for either cable-jacks or ExpressCard. ExpressCard is needed for some audio and video-work. And people who do those most likely need as big screen as possible, so it makes sense to keep it in the 17-incher.

Fact is that there are very little things that absolutely NEED ExpressCard-slot. Those that do need it, can get the 17" MBP. For everything else, there are altnernative ways to get the job done.

There are people who find the 15" the sweet spot of the line - not to big to travel, not to small to work with; video out if a bigger monitor is needed. It's not possible these users have no use for an ExpressCard slot? I know what Apple said -- but the logic is flawed and clearly bent for Apple to justify removing the slot.

Of course Apple can't offer every single combination of their hardware that will satisfy everyone 100%. They need to find a middle-ground somehow that will be as useful as possible for as many users as possible. And you can bet that Apple has detailed information regarding use-patters on their hardware. They don't make changes like this on a whim. They probably noticed that most people never touch the ExpressCard-slot, and of those that do, half use it for cardreader.

OK. So they removed the slot and told us why. That brings us back to the SATA issue. Don't you think Apple should at least explain why previous versions had SATA II and the newest version does not just as they explained why ExpressCard went away?

I have no idea. My bet is that it's a firmware-problem, since the hardware obviously supports it.

The more I read these discussions, the more obvious it becomes that people just need to have something to whine about. When unibody-MacBook was released, people whined because it lacks FireWire. Now Apple brought FireWire back to it. And they increased the RAM-limit to 8GB. And they added a card-reader. And they increased the specs. And they increased battery-life. And they improved the screen. And they lowered the price. So Apple fixed the #1 complaint people had, and added a lot of new stuff while lowering the price. So all is fine, right? Wrong. People find something to complain about EVERY SINGLE TIME. This time it was the lack of audio in-port and integrated battery. And now they found another point to whine about: the SATA-bus. When the fact remains that all three of those complaints are very, very minor when compared to the things that Apple added.

You can be damn sure that if the MacBook still had audio-in port, had SATA 3.0 and removable battery, people would still be whining like there's no tomorrow.

same thing with other MacBooks, more or less. It just boggles the mind. If Apple released a laptop that was made from gold-pressed latinum, had a CPU and GPU that ran inside a warp-bubble and used giga-quad datacrystals for storage and came with a personal holodeck, people would still whine. "No, this is the worst laptop Apple has ever made, that's it, I'm going back to PC's!".

[lixuelai]

They should have kept the ExpressCard and sold a universal card reader for it. Make it like $50 I bet people will buy it (even though it is like $15 on Ebay).

[VoR]

They should have kept the ExpressCard and sold a universal card reader for it. Make it like $50 I bet people will buy it (even though it is like $15 on Ebay).

Apple products are hardly cheap for what (hardware) you get. Seems a bit silly they just didn't include a nice looking, flush card reader for the slot - probably cost them a few cents from one of their chinese factories.

[Evangelion]

They should have kept the ExpressCard and sold a universal card reader for it. Make it like $50 I bet people will buy it (even though it is like $15 on Ebay).

They haven't bought those this far, why would they suddenly start buying them? Besides, it adds complexity (one more gizmo to carry around).

[akutz]

I'm just going out on a limb here and wondering if this bump down to 1.5 is in preparation for Snow Leopard. I wonder if Snow Leopard has some implementation of load-based disk I/O similar to SpeedStep for processors. With all of the changes in the Snow Leopard kernel, along with Grand Central, this seems probable.

--
-a

[iMacmatician]

It is cheaper, it has half the cache; the only mitigating circumstance it's that it generates less heat 25W vs 35W. But yearh: "We've cut the price*"The last-gen MacBook Pro already used 25 W CPUs (the high-end used 35 W, but so does the high-end of this gen).

Now you need to get the top of the line, 2.8Ghz to get simple things like 512MB for GPU and 6MB cache; seriously, 256 MB on GPU? Are we back in time few years?256 MB was low-end in the previous generation too.

I don't think that the CPU's are cheaper.... My MBP has 2.4GHz C2D with 4MB of cache, and I bet that CPU cost about as much as these newer CPU's do. And my CPU would lose in performance. It just happens that the newer C2D's don't need as much cache since it has beefier access to the RAM:

Besides, they didn't move to 3M of cache with these latest updates, they already had 3M of cacheThings are no different in the CPU area compared to October 2008. The $1999 model went up 267 MHz instead of 133 MHz, but that was because it didn't have a 133 MHz CPU bump in March.

...that is still faster than the more expensive CPU we offered a while back.It's possible to stay still or upgrade and still be relatively worse compared to the full range of hardware, but it didn't happen this time.

For the $2499 pricepoint, now you get a larger display while not backtracking on CPU speed and CPU position.

October 2008:
Product Price CPU L2 GPU VRAM
------- $1699
MBP 15” $1999 2.40 GHz 3 MB 9600M 256 MB
MBP 15” $2499 2.53 GHz 6 MB 9600M 512 MB
MBP 17” $2799 2.53 GHz 6 MB 9600M 512 MB

Two 133 MHz bumps from Intel later...

June 2009:
Product Price CPU L2 GPU VRAM
MBP 15” $1699 2.53 GHz 3 MB 9400M 256 MB
MBP 15” $1999 2.67 GHz 3 MB 9600M 256 MB
MBP 15” $2299 2.80 GHz 6 MB 9600M 512 MB
MBP 17” $2499 2.80 GHz 6 MB 9600M 512 MB

[Data]

No, you wouldn't see any difference until you go SSD.

I have to disagree, you will notice the difference with a 7200rpm hd, just use the 5400 for 2 months and then replace it with a 7200 , not as big a difference as going to ssd but you will notice improvement for sure, also shorter batterij life of course ;-).

[ddTaylor]

Not all "Pros" need dedicated graphics. I'm a musician and DJ and I couldn't be happier that I can save $400 on a machine that is not catered to just graphic artists/designers/animators. In my opinion, the improved capability of the uMPB to expand equally as the 17" model is the core idea that makes it a pro machine.



Again, this shouldn't be a deal breaker for other pros not in the graphics business.



Firewire > ExpressCard Slot.



That is currently being contested, and since the new uMPB uses the same exact chipset as the 17" model, your argument is mute until further clarification of this issue. Though I just bought a 13" uMPB, so Apple better fix this on Monday.



Daisy chaining. Look it up.



Listen to the keynote at all? The vastly improved long run longevity of the new battery negates the need of ever replacing the battery during the average notebook's life.



I have nothing to say to this. The blu-ray argument is getting old.

Why do you negate EVERY argument made by the OP? I couldn't care-less about the internal battery lasting LONGER as is might die when you NEED IT MOST! My helicopter (R/C) I fly has used Lithium Polymer batteries for years now - and there is NO REASON they could not re-design the enclosure for the battery housing and make it replaceable. So the battery lasts for 6-hours REAL-WORLD but allows for user replacement on the fly? Why so hard? No matte display option is a HUGE AND EGREGIOUS OMISSION (that means very BIG oversight - that should save you the time to look it up, if you need to)!

You CANNOT dismiss the needs of others as unwarranted just because you do not need/want the features omitted. I am an audio engineer and I WILL NOT upgrade until a matte display option is available again - if they chose not to offer that option I will continue with my '07 MBP matte, WMB and PB G4 and my new hackbook with 10.5.7. It has what I need and works 100% - I might go with the same spec'd Dell 13" and add the anti-glare screen cover to THAT and save $400.

Please be considerate and realize that there are those who have used EACH AND EVERY FEATURE you have dismissed as they were or currently are options that users have come to count on.

The selfish nature of those in the 'younger' generation is scary - most, but not all - are not capable of EMPATHY (that means putting yourself in the position of others and trying to understand their thoughts and feelings regarding a certain situation or situations therefore gaining insight on those who may differ from you). You are the generation that is going to take care of me when I get older as I am sure I am at least twice the age of the average user.

D

[ddTaylor]

The pro tag might be contested, but the pro whinner tag is not as is showcased by many a forum member lamenting how lack of blue ray has tied their hands while they can buy better content via iTunes, and how no express card slot is ohhhh so bad while only a documented 5% users used it, and the no matte blah blah while oh wait... The 17" has both matte and express!!!


To the apple loyalists. It was a good thing you bought early, our continued support have made apple what it is: the best hardware and software co, the most stylish, usable, and innovative - Better Than All The Rest Put Together. I am sure apple will not dissapoint if you become vocal about this issue with either AppleCare repairs or other means. In any case most of you wont see any difference and as another person said the bottleneck is mode so the ram not the he ssd

I mean no disrespect to you, sir or ma'am...but are familiar, with. punCtuation 'n propper; use of it<>?

See how hard that was to read? Please, use the English dialect and rules for writing (such as punctuation and proper context) so we can better understand your drivel.

D

[hashholly]

I think most of you all need to just calm the hell down for a second and start using some logic.

Apple's Sata drivers weren't written to handle the high speed of SSD's, that kinda speed causes saturation issues, which means you will experience problems, so the quick and dirty solution is to limit the bus to 1.5, instead of 3.0, think of it as throttling. At 1.5 you cant hit the speeds that cause issues and everything is gravy. Chances are this is something that will be fixed with a new driver that can handle the speed, and a firmware update to allow the bus to work at 3.0 since we already know its hardware capable. When? Possibly upon snow leopards release, maybe when 10.5.8 drops, who knows.

[Chupa Chupa]

If that is his decision, fine. No one is forcing a "single w/o children" to buy any of his buildings right?



You make it sound as if there is a devious plan hidden beneath the flawed and bent logic behind removing the slot. Probably they said: "This slot is not going to sell enough computers to justify itself" and got rid of it. Guess they say this about lots of features. Do you think getting rid of the Pismos's two expansion bays was a big mistake, justified using flawed and bent logic? think today's MBP are less Pro because they lack plastic expansion bays ?



yes, absolutely. that would be very welcome. Then some folks here can return to being adults and stop sounding like little kids who've had their ice cream taken away by a bully. A bully they usually never tire of throwing money at without researching the product first.


1) It's not about the buyer, it's about the maker's logic, either Apple's or the Builders. You are confusing the buyer's buying power w/ the seller's marketing logic. My comment only went to the seller's marketing logic. I suspect most single people w/o kids would not be too interested in a 5000 sq ft house unless they were of the likes of Huge Hefner.

2) As for removing the ExpressCard slot, c'mon. They replaced it with a lesser SD slot. There was no logical reason except maybe to save a few bucks and stoop down to the PC's makers level. The ExpressCard is multi-functional and belongs on a "pro" machine. Apple charges a premium for it's products. That premium should be based on the product being of a higher quality product compared to it's peers, not past reputation or good PR.

[Chupa Chupa]

I think most of you all need to just calm the hell down for a second and start using some logic.

Apple's Sata drivers weren't written to handle the high speed of SSD's, that kinda speed causes saturation issues, which means you will experience problems, so the quick and dirty solution is to limit the bus to 1.5, instead of 3.0, think of it as throttling. At 1.5 you cant hit the speeds that cause issues and everything is gravy. Chances are this is something that will be fixed with a new driver that can handle the speed, and a firmware update to allow the bus to work at 3.0 since we already know its hardware capable. When? Possibly upon snow leopards release, maybe when 10.5.8 drops, who knows.

That's just a cheap excuse worthy of a 3rd tier PC maker w/o a decent R&D department. We are talking about Apple here which is a multi-billion dollar company with a rep for being a leader in technology. There is no excuse for intentionally making (and we don't know if this is intentional) a "pro" machine in 2009 that is limited to SATA 1.5Gb. None. So I hope you are correct and Apple is quick to fix. They should at least acknowledge in the mean time, but they won't.

[xlii]

Ok Mac Mini (9400M):

MCP79AHCI = 3 GIGABIT

13MBP

MCP79AHCI = 1.5 GIGABIT

They are identical! Therefore a EFI firmware update should solve this?

SSD Benchmark = 197.28 Write MacMini
SSD Benchmark= 143.9 13MBP

Here is the spec for the mcp79 ahci... on page 15 you will find in bits 23:20 the encoding for the interface speed 1.5g/3.0g/6.0g. Looks fixable in firmware.

http://download.intel.com/technology/serialata/pdf/rev1_3.pdf

[Unprocessed1]

What are the chances an Apple Store would accept a return and either not charge you a restocking fee or reduce it due to being upset that the SATA was downgraded and it was impossible to discover it unless you looked in the system profiler, and was information not on Apple's website?

[Evangelion]

256 MB was low-end in the previous generation too.

You mean "previous version of this generation"? The MBP's they just released were more or less just refreshes of the existing models. True. 13" MBP was a big change, but other than that they were basically refreshes. Besides, not only were the specs bumbed, but they lowered the prices. They obviously thought that in this economic climate, it makes more sense to make the machines more affordable, than it is to keep the prices high while increase the specs (well, they did increase the specs as well). And I can't say that I blame them for that.

Things are no different in the CPU area compared to October 2008. The $1999 model went up 267 MHz instead of 133 MHz, but that was because it didn't have a 133 MHz CPU bump in March.

Maybe that's because there's not that much to upgrade to? Intel, Apple and everyone else are waiting for Arrendale-CPU's that are released in Q4/Q1. Up until that we will get quite minor speed-bumbs in the CPU-area at best.

And besides CPU's, other specs were improved as well. Like RAM, HD's, battery and the like. And even in the CPU's there has been changes, even though raw clock-speed hasn't gone up that much. Bus-speeds have gone up quite a bit for example.

I have a 2.4GHz MBP from 2007, and I have no reason to upgrade. The speed between current models and my machine aren't that big. But that does NOT mean that Apple's current machines are outdated. Far from it. I have promised myself that I will wait till next summer at least before I upgrade, so I'm on a 3-year upgrade-cycle. By then we will have Arrendales, and they bring with them quite a big speed-bumbs.

[princigalli]

They are very, very confused. Then just the way they did with Macbooks firewire, they will end up reintroducing them.

[Evangelion]

Why do you negate EVERY argument made by the OP? I couldn't care-less about the internal battery lasting LONGER as is might die when you NEED IT MOST!

Is this the "We need replaceable batteries!"-argument? That argument is stupid. You do not NEED replaceable batteries. What you need is longer battery-life. Replaceable batteries are just means to an end, not the end of means.

How could you get longer battery-life without replaceable batteries? How about external battery-pack? Seriously?

You CANNOT dismiss the needs of others as unwarranted just because you do not need/want the features omitted.

As far as the battery goes, their needs are not logical. They are so fixated at the means of getting more battery life (by replacing batteries) that they have forgotten the reason why they want to replace batteries in the first place. It's the reason that is important, not the method you reach it. And you can get longer battery-life through other means besides replacing batteries.

[Tompkinson]

Please be considerate and realize that there are those who have used EACH AND EVERY FEATURE you have dismissed as they were or currently are options that users have come to count on.

The selfish nature of those in the 'younger' generation is scary - most, but not all - are not capable of EMPATHY (that means putting yourself in the position of others and trying to understand their thoughts and feelings regarding a certain situation or situations therefore gaining insight on those who may differ from you). You are the generation that is going to take care of me when I get older as I am sure I am at least twice the age of the average user.

D

Interesting point, and I too am older than most here, I guess.
And yet I interpret today's messy thread here quite differently.
It seems to me that the 'younger' generation has a very twisted sense of entitlement, and that many posters here seem to believe they are involved in an emotional relationship with a company which makes hardware and software. Apple are a company, not a family. S Jobs is a hard-nosed salesman, not a guru or wonder-doctor.
Apple and Microsoft are companies not football teams, it seems to me that many posters on this and other forums get confused and turn into fans of a company.

I've used apple since the mid 90ies, but also used amigas, ataris, pcs, silicon graphics. they are all machines, tools, not pets or loved ones, and none ever deliver everything that everybody needs, that's reality. But many here seem to think of S Jobs as a surrogate father or santa claus, throw money and adoration at him, and are disappointed when he does not offer exactly what they want & expect, then sound like spoiled children, whining on a forum, believing there is something constructive about endlessly posting "we've been screwed again".

there is something worrying about grown people, acting like teenage fans, crying when a hardware manufacturer changes its product line and doesn't tell the whole truth in advertising. wonder what their relationships with wives, husbands and children are like. and I hope I'm not relying on any of these people when something really bad happens. pandemics, hurricanes, whatever. They'd fall over at the slightest breeze.
oh well, no generation fully understands the next generation I guess.
Have a good day

[Unprocessed1]

Ok...everyone that bought the new MBP knew they weren't getting a replaceable battery or an express card slot...let's focus on the "important" feature we didn't know we were getting...

[kidtronix]

There is no excuse for this. As someone who just bought the 2.8ghz on tuesday, I'm quite pissed off. SSD's is the way of the future and a vital part of future updates and my plans for my new laptop. I was thrilled that I now can have 8gb, but I much rather get full use out of the Intel SSD drive I've been planning to buy. I'm not going to return my machine because in all other aspects I love it and there is no alternative (I've been a Mac user since 10.1 came out and there is no turning back).

But there is no excuse and Apple better make it up for us. What would be the best way to make a complaint about this? Let's get heard.

[iMacmatician]

You mean "previous version of this generation"? Yes, the October 2008 one.

Maybe that's because there's not that much to upgrade to? Intel, Apple and everyone else are waiting for Arrendale-CPU's that are released in Q4/Q1. Up until that we will get quite minor speed-bumbs in the CPU-area at best.By that I meant the CPU hasn't gone up or down in the Intel mobile lineup in terms of price or positioning. Intel has speed bumped their CPUs, and Apple has upgraded their CPUs to match the bumps.

[hashholly]

That's just a cheap excuse worthy of a 3rd tier PC maker w/o a decent R&D department. We are talking about Apple here which is a multi-billion dollar company with a rep for being a leader in technology. There is no excuse for intentionally making (and we don't know if this is intentional) a "pro" machine in 2009 that is limited to SATA 1.5Gb. None. So I hope you are correct and Apple is quick to fix. They should at least acknowledge in the mean time, but they won't.

Im not necessarily quick to jump and defend apple, but consider this, on the PC side, getting SSD's to work flawlessly with Windows XP is a chore, lots of registry tweaks, ssd flushing, etc, and why? Because Windows XP wasn't designed with SSD's in mind ( it is a very old OSX). Considering an HDD user wont "feel" the difference between a 1.5Gb and 3.0Gb connection its not a big deal, even on a pro machine. Its only a concern with High End/High Speed SSD users, and hell, wouldn't you rather be able to use your SSD without any hicups (albeit slower) than at Full speed, with freezing and crashing? I fully believe that we will see a new driver that fixes any possible saturation / throughput issues with SSD's and then a firmware upgrade for the bus.

[Unprocessed1]

there is something worrying about grown people, acting like teenage fans, crying when a hardware manufacturer changes its product line and doesn't tell the whole truth in advertising. wonder what their relationships with wives, husbands and children are like. and I hope I'm not relying on any of these people when something really bad happens. pandemics, hurricanes, whatever. They'd fall over at the slightest breeze.
oh well, no generation fully understands the next generation I guess.
Have a good day

Maybe when these college students/teenagers spend 2 summers saving up for a top of the line notebook, only to see that it isn't the powerhouse as originally advertised, I think they should a little upset. And stop making assumptions, it's not fair to evaluate people's life experiences based on a message board.

BTW: the real "fans" of Apple are the ones who are defending the SATA downgrade. Blind fanboys wouldn't be fazed by downgrades. ;)

[L0s7man]

Besides, they didn't move to 3M of cache with these latest updates, they already had 3M of cache



You're wrong.

In 2.66Ghz MBP, apple used this CPU:
http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLGE4

Now they moved to this:
http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLB3S

And you're telling me there's no difference?

[mmulin]

The MBP I looked at was the top model and it was SATA 1.5.

Sigh... It is not so much that I can't complain as 3 Gb/s doesn't seem really necessary at the moment but being future proof is something and I am sure the last word on the speed of SSDs had not been spoken yet. I easily could imagine that in a year or two SSDs speeds might starting to hitting the roof of even SATA II.

[iMacmatician]

You're wrong.

In 2.66Ghz MBP, apple used this CPU:
http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLGE4

Now they moved to this:
http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLB3S

And you're telling me there's no difference?The previous 2.67 GHz MacBook Pro was more expensive than the current 2.67 GHz MacBook Pro. Why are people comparing different models? By that logic I could say the 13" MacBook Pro was a CPU downgrade since the new 2.27 GHz is slower than the old 2.4 GHz.

[hashholly]

You're wrong.

In 2.66Ghz MBP, apple used this CPU:
http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLGE4

Now they moved to this:
http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLB3S

And you're telling me there's no difference?

You do realize that Apple no longer sells the MBP with a 2.4ghz proccy......right?

[hodgeheg]

I'd suggest that everyone take a chill pill and wait till some official word comes out.

This is Apple. They're not exactly known for being forthcoming when it comes to acknowledging things people aren't happy with about their products. They are far far far more likely to say nothing whatsoever. I hope I'm wrong, really, but if you look at their record. If they acknowledge anything at all it's usually by a silent product update, or next major revision (though they haven't even bothered then with the MacBook Air screen issues). Unless something's exploding or catching fire I'd be (pleasantly) surprised to see them issuing any comment on this at all.

Re the battery life thing. I don't personally know about this, but friends who design and build hardware from scratch (i.e. not just slotting together components lego-style) say that it's likely the SATA2 that Apple no longer appear to be using would actually reduce power consumption due to the greater efficiency of NCQ and reduced time things have to be powered up.

[Eric S.]

When people draw conclusions and then construct arguments to support their conclusion, it is often pointless to present a case that deduces from the constraints that Apple followed if worked forward in making constraint trade-offs.

This has to be the best statement I have seen on MacRumors. I think.

Meanwhile, this story is hitting all of the trade reports this morning, so I expect that Apple will have to make a public comment soon.

[jazz1]

I'm just going out on a limb here and wondering if this bump down to 1.5 is in preparation for Snow Leopard. I wonder if Snow Leopard has some implementation of load-based disk I/O similar to SpeedStep for processors. With all of the changes in the Snow Leopard kernel, along with Grand Central, this seems probable.

--
-a

Ok then, what will happen with Snow Leopard and those of us with 3.0?

[Unprocessed1]

Yup, gizmodo is reporting on it too...

http://gizmodo.com/5291042/did-apple-downgrade-the-hard-drive-controller-in-the-new-macbook-pros

One the biggest ones yet.

[antic]

Would it be possible to use the SATA2 kernel extensions from an older 15" unibody mac and transfer them to the newer 13" / 15" model.

I have access to both laptops if someone can give me some idea of what to do.

[hodgeheg]

Patently absurd statements like that don't do a lot for your credibility.

Apple said it. It must be true! Just like "Noone uses firewire any more".

[bytethese]

So I popped my 320GB Scorpio Black (7200rpm, 16MB cache, SATA II) into my new 13" MBP last night and it's working pretty damn fast writing all my files to disk from backups. :)

I haven't run any VM's yet but so far the machine seems to be working well, even with the 1.5Gb/s interface.

[CrownSeven]

Sata 1.5 and no express card slot is fantastic news!!! It just increased the resale value of my original 2.8 Unibody Macbook Pro when its comes time to sell.

Thanks Apple!

[Unprocessed1]

So I popped my 320GB Scorpio Black (7200rpm, 16MB cache, SATA II) into my new 13" MBP last night and it's working pretty damn fast writing all my files to disk from backups. :)

I haven't run any VM's yet but so far the machine seems to be working well, even with the 1.5Gb/s interface.

Why wouldn't it work just fine? :confused::confused: It doesn't break max SATA I speeds. Only SSD speeds are affected by the downgrade....

[Tompkinson]

1) It's not about the buyer, it's about the maker's logic, either Apple's or the Builders. You are confusing the buyer's buying power w/ the seller's marketing logic. My comment only went to the seller's marketing logic. I suspect most single people w/o kids would not be too interested in a 5000 sq ft house unless they were of the likes of Huge Hefner.

thanks for pointing this out, but I am not confusing anything, I am very clear about it. I am only interested in the buyer's power, the seller's marketing logic is of absolutely no interest to me. That's their 'problem', (by all accounts they're pretty good at it. not doing too badly despite recession i seem to remember) Why would we convene here to talk about Apple marketing logic? I come here to inform myself of upcoming products/rumors etc, and - as in today's case - to learn of problems before i buy. i certainly do not come here to criticize or improve apple's marketing logic. I don't care about it. do you? (serious question)


2) As for removing the ExpressCard slot, c'mon. They replaced it with a lesser SD slot. There was no logical reason except maybe to save a few bucks and stoop down to the PC's makers level. The ExpressCard is multi-functional and belongs on a "pro" machine. Apple charges a premium for it's products. That premium should be based on the product being of a higher quality product compared to it's peers, not past reputation or good PR.

Ok, (to speak of marketing logic for a change :-) ) --> I have never used this slot, most of the people I know who did use it (music & video production) moved to firewire a long time ago. and I really doubt that apple would save the cost of said slot, (perhaps max 1$?) at the expense of losing a lot of customers. Strategically they are not that dumb, I'm sure they make mistakes, I guess they think it's not worth including anymore. and this is part of the computer game.

I do understand if people are upset, if people move to another platform that suits them better. That's fine. What I find preposterous is the whining and shouting. Instead of a rational approach to the tools we need to get our jobs done, (eg, avalaunching apple's feedback page, coordinated jamming of their phone lines, refusing to buy, returning if unsatisfied, etc) I see a crowd of squawking cry-babies, who seem to think there is some point in making even cooler disparaging remarks about the new laptops. Upset is fine, but coming here to vent the rage is pointless and pretty infantile

take care,

[kidtronix]

Is it true that you get SATAII if you purchase with Apples SSD?

[L0s7man]

The previous 2.67 GHz MacBook Pro was more expensive than the current 2.67 GHz MacBook Pro. Why are people comparing different models? By that logic I could say the 13" MacBook Pro was a CPU downgrade since the new 2.27 GHz is slower than the old 2.4 GHz.

Ok, look:

1. You see a 2.66 Ghz MBP and it sots XYZ
2. Apple kenote; happily announce "We've cut the price"
3. You go to Apple Store and see 2.66 Ghz MBP for $300 or whatever less.

4. You read the fine print and you realize that it has LESS GPU MEMORY, HALF THE CACHE, now the SATA thingy and so on and so on.

Is that not dodgy? The price difference on the CPU itself is 100usd. No wonder they can sell it cheaper; it is cheaper!

So, they didn't cut the price; they've got cheaper stuff to put into so the price is lower.

That's quite different thing from cutting the price!

[turkay]

I don't know you guys but i feel there's gonna be a firmware update soon.

[Unprocessed1]

I don't know you guys but i feel there's gonna be a firmware update soon.

I'm crossing my fingers, but Apple usually doesn't admit these lapses until months or years later.

[Tompkinson]

What are the chances an Apple Store would accept a return and either not charge you a restocking fee or reduce it due to being upset that the SATA was downgraded and it was impossible to discover it unless you looked in the system profiler, and was information not on Apple's website?

hello again,
I just checked with Apple here in Germany, they said they had no info on this matter yet. But anything bought here can be returned and fully refunded. I hope it's the same for you where every you are writing from! - good luck!

Take Care,

[bytethese]

Why wouldn't it work just fine? :confused::confused: It doesn't break max SATA I speeds. Only SSD speeds are affected by the downgrade....

I didn't think it wouldn't work fine. :)

Personally I'm out of the loop on theoretical maximum throughputs of a 7200rpm drive but I was hoping that 1.5Gb/s wouldn't be a bottleneck.

[ChrisA]

sorry for the noob question, but is it cheaper for apple to go back to 1,5 ? i guess....


Likely they did it to conserve battery power. Almost certainly that's the reason.

This is a case where engineers will think it's reasonable, not effect on disk performance but fanboys and spec readers will be upset.

BTW this is the interface that connects the CPU to the disk drives internal cache. It does not mean the disk itself is slower

[Dreamail]

Is it true that you get SATAII if you purchase with Apples SSD?
No apparently not (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=7799798#post7799798).


There were a few users who reported that their 13" MBPs, which were ordered with SSD, also reported slower SATA I speeds.
Which kind of sucks.

[Unprocessed1]

hello again,
I just checked with Apple here in Germany, they said they had no info on this matter yet. But anything bought here can be returned and fully refunded. I hope it's the same for you where every you are writing from! - good luck!

Take Care,

The thing is I LOVE the MBP. The screen and battery life are amazing, but I intend to put in a nice SSD soon, so if Apple doesn't intend to fix it, I should just return/sell it now, and buy a SATA II MBP.

[Chupa Chupa]

Yup, gizmodo is reporting on it too...

http://gizmodo.com/5291042/did-apple-downgrade-the-hard-drive-controller-in-the-new-macbook-pros

One the biggest ones yet.


Fantastic. Hopefully Engadget and the other major electronics blogs will cover this too enough to force Apple to respond either w/ a fix or explanation.

[Unprocessed1]

Likely they did it to conserve battery power. Almost certainly that's the reason.

This is a case where engineers will think it's reasonable, not effect on disk performance but fanboys and spec readers will be upset.

BTW this is the interface that connects the CPU to the disk drives internal cache. It does not mean the disk itself is slower

The consensus is that it doesn't affect battery life. Also the MBp 17" has SATA II and as as long battery life as the smaller MBP line. People are saying battery life would extend by 5-10 minutes, if at all.

[Carl Abudephane]

If one orders a new MacBook Pro from the UK and you want to have an SSD put in, with the 13 & 15" there is a two week estimate put on the shipping time, as opposed to the usual 24hr if one orders the 17".

So what is the reason for the delay with the 13&15? There is obviously something slowing Apple up when it comes to those two models, but not the 17".
Surely this is linked to this SATA issue. So are we just going to have to wait until somebody takes delivery of their SSD-equipped 13"/15" to get any further with this?

Basically, if the SSD'd 13&15 were also going to also have the 1.5, wouldn't they have simply the same delivery estimate as the 17"? And if not - if they are delaying those being sent out until they fix 'something', does that mean the fix, whatever it may be, will be firmware(so that all the current owners will be okay)or not, in which case the current owners are buggered?

[GodWhomIsMike]

Sigh... It is not so much that I can't complain as 3 Gb/s doesn't seem really necessary at the moment but being future proof is something and I am sure the last word on the speed of SSDs had not been spoken yet. I easily could imagine that in a year or two SSDs speeds might starting to hitting the roof of even SATA II.

There are a handful of SSD drives that already hit the roof of SATA II, and a few upcoming SSD drives in the pipeline, which will hit speeds of 5.0Gbps.

[Chupa Chupa]

Likely they did it to conserve battery power. Almost certainly that's the reason.

This is a case where engineers will think it's reasonable, not effect on disk performance but fanboys and spec readers will be upset.

BTW this is the interface that connects the CPU to the disk drives internal cache. It does not mean the disk itself is slower


If that turns out to be the case then so much for Apple new "revolutionary" battery. If you toss out all the luggage, passengers, and seats from an airplane it will get better fuel economy too. The USAF has been doing that since the 50's starting with the C-133 cargo plane. So hardly a "revolutionary" concept.

And to say no effect on disk performance isn't totally correct. HDDs maybe, but not the current high-end SSDs (take a look at the benchmarks) and certainly not the lower cost SSDs of next year. (2010 is on target to be the year of the SSD and the beginning of the end of the 2.5" HDD). So from a value perspective SATA II missing is a big deal, especially if you have a high end 15".

[Unprocessed1]

If one orders a new MacBook Pro from the UK and you want to have an SSD put in, with the 13 & 15" there is a two week estimate put on the shipping time, as opposed to the usual 24hr if one orders the 17".

So what is the reason for the delay with the 13&15? There is obviously something slowing Apple up when it comes to those two models, but not the 17".
Surely this is linked to this SATA issue. So are we just going to have to wait until somebody takes delivery of their SSD-equipped 13"/15" to get any further with this?

Basically, if the SSD'd 13&15 were also going to also have the 1.5, wouldn't they have simply the same delivery estimate as the 17"? And if not - if they are delaying those being sent out until they fix 'something', does that mean the fix, whatever it may be, will be firmware(so that all the current owners will be okay)or not, in which case the current owners are buggered?

In the states, shipping time for the SSD 13" and 15" is now only 1-3 days. They must have had a shortage in SSD's or something to delay it. It shouldn't be related to SATA I/II

[Tompkinson]

Maybe when these college students/teenagers spend 2 summers saving up for a top of the line notebook, only to see that it isn't the powerhouse as originally advertised, I think they should a little upset.


well, sorry for repeating myself, but this is the reason i just do not understand why people - especially people who have spent much effort to accumulate the money - buy the d*mn thing right after it's announced. Do you? does not experience tell us to "wait and see"? Unless I got free tickets I would not go to the first night of a theatre show until i read reviews, heard some feedback. do these people have money to burn? in a recession? Honestly, it is well known that the computer industry treats the consumer like a beta tester. if the car industry did the same there'd be millions more dead on the roads around the world. remember when apple released a new version of OSX - panther I think it was - and early adopters lost the data on their external harddrives in the first hours after release? Who the hell installs a new OS hours after release????? and the whines and gets upset. Most so-called ProUSers wait till there have been some updates before installing the new OS versions. I wait at least 6 months before updating and after reading every tech forum i can find.



And stop making assumptions, it's not fair to evaluate people's life experiences based on a message board.


ok, accepted.



BTW: the real "fans" of Apple are the ones who are defending the SATA downgrade. Blind fanboys wouldn't be fazed by downgrades. ;)



I guess you are having a laugh, don't quite understand, but either way. by fans i did not mean the ever present slander Fanboy (not even sure what that is) I meant the mind set of one who follows a football team, identifiying with them and defending them blindly. Which is stupid behaviour, but costs you a few drinks in the pub when you watch the game. What i fail to understand is when this mindset is applied to a manufacturer of hard and sofware, and which costs you literally thousands of dollars, euros, pounds whatever. We must be careful before we buy. didn't anybody tell the upset people on this forum? good luck to anybody who bought and is worried by the sata situation!

[iMacmatician]

Ok, look:

1. You see a 2.66 Ghz MBP and it sots XYZ
2. Apple kenote; happily announce "We've cut the price"
3. You go to Apple Store and see 2.66 Ghz MBP for $300 or whatever less.

4. You read the fine print and you realize that it has LESS GPU MEMORY, HALF THE CACHE, now the SATA thingy and so on and so on.

Is that not dodgy? The price difference on the CPU itself is 100usd. No wonder they can sell it cheaper; it is cheaper!

So, they didn't cut the price; they've got cheaper stuff to put into so the price is lower.

That's quite different thing from cutting the price!The 2.67 GHz MBP is $500 less than before. The specs point to Apple updating the individual models rather than lowering the price based on GHz, the price reductions are from the new $1699 model.

[Chupa Chupa]

thanks for pointing this out, but I am not confusing anything, I am very clear about it. I am only interested in the buyer's power, the seller's marketing logic is of absolutely no interest to me. That's their 'problem', (by all accounts they're pretty good at it. not doing too badly despite recession i seem to remember) Why would we convene here to talk about Apple marketing logic? I come here to inform myself of upcoming products/rumors etc, and - as in today's case - to learn of problems before i buy. i certainly do not come here to criticize or improve apple's marketing logic. I don't care about it. do you? (serious question)



Ok, (to speak of marketing logic for a change :-) ) --> I have never used this slot, most of the people I know who did use it (music & video production) moved to firewire a long time ago. and I really doubt that apple would save the cost of said slot, (perhaps max 1$?) at the expense of losing a lot of customers. Strategically they are not that dumb, I'm sure they make mistakes, I guess they think it's not worth including anymore. and this is part of the computer game.

I do understand if people are upset, if people move to another platform that suits them better. That's fine. What I find preposterous is the whining and shouting. Instead of a rational approach to the tools we need to get our jobs done, (eg, avalaunching apple's feedback page, coordinated jamming of their phone lines, refusing to buy, returning if unsatisfied, etc) I see a crowd of squawking cry-babies, who seem to think there is some point in making even cooler disparaging remarks about the new laptops. Upset is fine, but coming here to vent the rage is pointless and pretty infantile

take care,

Again you miss the point of my original post in order to make your own. My comment went to the seller's marketing because the poster's comment I was commenting on was about the seller's marketing. I agree the buyer has the ultimate power here. I certainly have delayed my purchase until more info is available.

As for the ExpressCard slot...again. Should Apple design laptops based on your or my own personal use, exclusively? The fact is the ExpressCard slot is used by a lot of people -- for eSATA, for SD Cards, for RAID, etc. Maybe not everyday, but it's used and by people who don't want a 17". So unless Apple wants to make it's survey data public for independent verification I think they are puffing.

Now it's interesting that you claim to be a proponent of buyer's power, but then call potential buyers "whiners," and "cry babies," when Apple removes features they liked and use. So which position do you hold? Is the customer right or should they just suck up whatever slop Apple gives us and be happy with it -- praised be Apple?

[Tompkinson]

The thing is I LOVE the MBP. The screen and battery life are amazing, but I intend to put in a nice SSD soon, so if Apple doesn't intend to fix it, I should just return/sell it now, and buy a SATA II MBP.

If you have bought it and like it so much, i would wait till either apple explain, or fixes, or both, or it becomes apparent they will stay stumm on the matter.

i understand the arguments about faster SSD in the future etc, but if you like the screen, battery etc so much --> wait for a few days before taking reflex action.

you'd feel really angry if you return it, lose some money, buy a sataII MBP and then the problem gets fixed in the near future, right?
hang in there a few more days!
S

[ammonialime]

10 bucks says this gets rectified in the next month or two.
in addition, I have another 10 bucks that says rectified is one of the best words in the english language.

[Barney0]

10 bucks says this gets rectified in the next month or two.
in addition, I have another 10 bucks that says rectified is one of the best words in the english language.

I'm not betting you, that is one mighty fine word you got there....:D

[Chupa Chupa]

10 bucks says this gets rectified in the next month or two.
in addition, I have another 10 bucks that says rectified is one of the best words in the english language.

Yeah, probably a couple weeks before announcement of the the mobile i7 MBPs. :D

[budfoot]

10 bucks says this gets rectified in the next month or two.
in addition, I have another 10 bucks that says rectified is one of the best words in the english language.

you win the internets!

Wrecked 'em? I hardly know 'em!

[windywoo]

in addition, I have another 10 bucks that says rectified is one of the best words in the english language.

Is that because you can have a cheeky chuckle at the fact that it sounds like "rectum", and whenever something is being "rectified" it sound like something is being done to its bottom?

[Poirot818]

Not really. If some other component goes up 0.5 Watts and the 9400M goes down 0.5 Watts than you have simply just made an even trade off.
The only folks presenting that this represents some massive megawatt change are the ones trying to knock down the change.

Clocking things slower saves power. Deny that till the cows come home you are not going to change to the laws of physics.

The warrant off the design trade-off is if you are actually taking something away that was actually being leveraged. The SATA bus speed is more so driven by having multiple devices on the shared network. Someone may have had an Aha! moment and noticed there is only one drive here.
No one will be motivated until somebody gets out a sharp pencil and says "we've got to cut power somewhere. Where can do that and have minimal impact elsewhere."





Because :

i. It is the lemming thing to do. Just follow the herd. Extremely likely was harder to do this somewhat custom mode than the run things at the canonical settings that chip is geared toward. You take chipsets that are designed to work with multiple hard drives and SATA bus saturation issues and just apply them to your laptop. If don't run into any power/thermal constraints just use them just like used in iMac or similar desktop.


ii. Megahertz Myth works. Better means faster , bigger number. When folks don't know anything about the technologies real utilization and are technologically ignorant then bigger numbers always sound better. Never mind the motivating design trade-offs involved.

It isn't like nobody has introduce faster tech which really didn't pan out of the long run ... Oh yeah that's right, Intel has completely canned their P4 design track at this point. How many Megawatts of power has gone up folks HVAC units on P4 that consumed tons of no-op cycles not really getting anything done.


iii. It is cheaper to just use a common set of components if you can get away with it. Chip vendors give you bigger discounts if buy in bigger bulk.







Again a false hypothesis of dramatic power improvements (as opposed to trade-offs and/or thermal ) being the motivating factor. Keep clinging to that; it is your lifeline.


Dramatically improving the time you can run on batteries is rather straightforwardly done by just using bigger batteries. That is one metric of battery life. (time till out of charge). If you swap out inert plastic parts ( battery case , latches , etc.) for components that consume power (e.g., batteries ) then the amount of heat you need to dissipate will go up. Not down.


Dramatically improving the lifetime can use a batteries comes from not power cycling it as much. Lower power draws lead to longer drain cycles which lead to longer useful lifetimes.

If you have other technical proofs otherwise, lets hear them.



You have EE and physics principles to back that up? Or just putting it in italics makes it true?
If you clock transitors slower they consume less power. That is what the overwhelming majority of the technical literature leads to. I'm waiting with baited breath on this dazzling proof that isn't true.

Thanks for proving my point. You posted this statement without any proof:

Gee Apple you made a reasonable design choice to probably save on power... slower but no real impact on my work.

And now you're asking me to prove why it's wrong? You even agreed with me that the power savings are minimal, so what the hell are you even babbling about in that long winded post?

edit: To summarize your "points":

1. Capping the connection provides minimal improvements in battery life.

2. Capping the connection is hard to do, and that's why other laptop companies didn't do it.

So why exactly did Apple do it? Here's your idiotic quote again:

Gee Apple you made a reasonable design choice to probably save on power... slower but no real impact on my work.

If English isn't your first language then sorry, but if it is, what the hell are you babbling on about?

[radek42]

Howdy,

I spent last 30-40 minutes reading posts here ...

I do not own Mac, but I was considering it for couple months now since my 6-year-old Dell latitude (which still works btw) is getting a bit sluggish. I got really excited about 13'' MB, now MBP, but than ... spending more on adapters, SD card reader rather that Express Card or PCMCIA, now SATA I ... what is next?

I do understand that current machines will be way better that what I have (although my latitude has PCMCIA expansion slot which I use). It's just very upsetting to see Apple cutting corners here and there just to save couple cents or dollars. Since I did not consider getting SSD at this moment it does not mean I would not get on in future.

It is not, at least for me, about specs and performance it is more about the attitude and approach to customers that bothers me to the point that I do not feel like supporting such company.

I expect number of people jumping up saying that other companies are even worse and that Mac OS X is worth it, but that is not the point. It is not OK to cripple your hardware just because you have an excellent software and you can get away with it.

For now, I'll keep looking for a decent laptop to sink my cash. Meanwhile, I will happily use my ancient laptop.

Cheers,
R>

[smadder]

I can't believe so many people are this pissed off. Mac is using the exact same chipset that comprises the previous uMBs, MBPs and the white MBs (not to mention the iMacs and Minis). The specs on the Nvidia site state the SATA bus is 3.0 on the 9400M chipset. This performance discrepancy will be addressed by Apple through a firmware/software update patch. Hardware-wise, nothing has changed in the new MBs/MBPs except the processors and a couple of ports. I think you can get one of the new uMBPs without worry that you are somehow signing up for a slower machine on a permanent basis.

That being said, I honestly have no idea why Apple would have dialed back the SATA bus, but they'll hear about it and get it fixed. Everyone must chill! This isn't a change in hardware - it's just a typical configuration limitation that shows up in Mac products. Remember the 144MB system RAM allocation to video in the Intel X3100 chipset MacBooks and Mac Minis had? If you went into Windows through boot camp, the system could dynamically allocate up to 384MB of system RAM.

This is going to be fixed through a patch. I know it's irritating to have it happen to begin with, but Apple almost always comes through - I think everyone should have a bit of faith. You aren't going to notice a difference in performance unless you are using a SSD, and even then it's going to be a negligible difference. Just be patient! This isn't worth the aneurysm some folks are throwing....

[HFU]

When Apple downgraded a wide range of 13"/15" (standard or BTO) models, investors will also downgrade AAPL! Watch it nosedive!

[Tompkinson]

Again you miss the point of my original post in order to make your own. My comment went to the seller's marketing because the poster's comment I was commenting on was about the seller's marketing.

understood, I thought we were talking about the same thing, no worries



As for the ExpressCard slot...again. Should Apple design laptops based on your or my own personal use, exclusively? The fact is the ExpressCard slot is used by a lot of people -- for eSATA, for SD Cards, for RAID, etc. Maybe not everyday, but it's used and by people who don't want a 17". So unless Apple wants to make it's survey data public for independent verification I think they are puffing.

understand your point, but do you really think they are trying to save such a tiny amount of money on the slot? it seems either that there is a 'real' reason to drop the slot, or that apple are 'incredibly' stupid. and judging by apple's success in business i find it very hard to believe that they are incredibly stupid. but i have no data on this, so will keep quiet. to all those who miss the slot. good luck finding alternatives: i can not really see them reintroducing a slot. but you never know!




Now it's interesting that you claim to be a proponent of buyer's power, but then call potential buyers "whiners," and "cry babies," when Apple removes features they liked and use. So which position do you hold? Is the customer right or should they just suck up whatever slop Apple gives us and be happy with it -- praised be Apple?

hmmmm, seems i must be speaking very unclearly. what in any of my messages make you think i feel: "suck up whatever slop Apple gives us and be happy with it -- praised be Apple?" ????
very odd.
you know there are alternatives to:
A - apple is *****, and
B - apple is g*d.
there are shades inbetween and we can take responsibility for how we spend our money. they make good products, but they are also a money grabbing corp.

to correct you: i have not called all potential buyers "whiners," and "cry babies," that is a misrepresentation. i called the whiners "whiners" because they buy without doing proper research, thus happily taking on the unpaid and very expensive job of beta tester. if you pay 1000s to work free as a beta tester for a corp which has, - how much? 25billion dollars in cash or something similar? - and your first experience with an untested product is not good, i do not believe you have the right to whine that you've been screwed. you screwed yourself when you put the cash on the counter in the apple shop, days after a new product was announced.

how come apple does not have it's laptops tested in the wild before they go on sale? they should be tested by tech reviewers around the world for a few weeks before you they even appear in the shops. cars are tested by independent bodies, planes are tested, food gets tested. but MBP announced and i see lots of comments from consumers here that they've "ordered mine right away". and if there is a delay between jobs' messiah act announcing new laptops, and the date of sale, half the forum is up in arms "i want mine now", "come on apple, we can't wait" etc. apple could not be happier to have such voluntary beta testing fodder that will pay for the privilege. that is who i called whiners, not potential buyers.

to answer your question: the customer is right, but he must take responsibility for his actions or he gives up his rights

[harshw]

I think most of you all need to just calm the hell down for a second and start using some logic.

Apple's Sata drivers weren't written to handle the high speed of SSD's, that kinda speed causes saturation issues, which means you will experience problems, so the quick and dirty solution is to limit the bus to 1.5, instead of 3.0, think of it as throttling. At 1.5 you cant hit the speeds that cause issues and everything is gravy. Chances are this is something that will be fixed with a new driver that can handle the speed, and a firmware update to allow the bus to work at 3.0 since we already know its hardware capable. When? Possibly upon snow leopards release, maybe when 10.5.8 drops, who knows.

You need to use that logic yourself :D

Previous gen MacBooks and MacBook Pro's have been running fine with Gen 2 SSDs ( with speeds of over 230 mb/sec read and 160 mb/sec write ). Here http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=664252 ... have a look. Subsequent revisions of the OCZ firmware solved a lot of issues while making the drive faster

So please don't spread FUD

[jose1983]

Just a quick question, is the Macbook Air affected by this SATAI downgrade issue? If NOT, shouldn't be a priority to extend battery life of a Macbook Air rather than the one of a laptop that just got 30%(13'')-46%(15'') more juice (it's just how much more energy batteries can store)? And, again, wouldn't be clever to downgrade even on the white Macbook IF it's for energy/saving reasons? And, my last point, wouldn't be more understandable even on the old Macbook unibody, since it has less battery capacity? Doesn't make sense... I was going to buy a new MBP 13'' with 128GB SSD, now I'm gonna wait until this issue is sorted out!

[ddTaylor]

Is this the "We need replaceable batteries!"-argument? That argument is stupid. You do not NEED replaceable batteries. What you need is longer battery-life. Replaceable batteries are just means to an end, not the end of means.

How could you get longer battery-life without replaceable batteries? How about external battery-pack? Seriously?



As far as the battery goes, their needs are not logical. They are so fixated at the means of getting more battery life (by replacing batteries) that they have forgotten the reason why they want to replace batteries in the first place. It's the reason that is important, not the method you reach it. And you can get longer battery-life through other means besides replacing batteries.

You just made my point - thank you for that. You dismiss others arguments out-of-hand and again - you may not need these features but others do. Get over yourself, man!

D

[errol]

When Apple downgraded a wide range of 13"/15" (standard or BTO) models, investors will also downgrade AAPL! Watch it nosedive!

This is a ridiculous comment. As furious as I am about my 13.3" MBP, and as an Apple investor myself, this makes no sense. Investors don't know the difference between SATAI/II. Only geeks do. This will hardly limit sales of the MBP machines, perhaps only to geeks... which doesn't amount to a lot of sales.

[jeme]

Post 929 here: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=718516&page=38

New MBP CTO with 256GB SSD at Sata 1.5gb. Unbelievable...

[Poirot818]

Just a quick question, is the Macbook Air affected by this SATAI downgrade issue? If NOT, shouldn't be a priority to extend battery life of a Macbook Air rather than the one of a laptop that just got 30%(13'')-46%(15'') more juice (it's just how much more energy batteries can store)? And, again, wouldn't be clever to downgrade even on the white Macbook IF it's for energy/saving reasons? And, my last point, wouldn't be more understandable even on the old Macbook unibody, since it has less battery capacity? Doesn't make sense... I was going to buy a new MBP 13'' with 128GB SSD, now I'm gonna wait until this issue is sorted out!

I wondered the same thing. Please read this reply by deconstruct60:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7817990&postcount=467

Can you tell me what the hell he's trying to say? I'm not being sarcastic here, I really want to know. All he did was take every point I made and tell me I was wrong, and then proceeded to agree with me.

[VoR]

This is going to be fixed through a patch. I know it's irritating to have it happen to begin with, but Apple almost always comes through - I think everyone should have a bit of faith. You aren't going to notice a difference in performance unless you are using a SSD, and even then it's going to be a negligible difference. Just be patient! This isn't worth the aneurysm some folks are throwing....

It might not make a huge difference to an average user with a normal disk, but that's not just the point. Why are they releasing products with such bugs/limitations/etc? What other computer manufacturer has forums full of people recommending that you "don't buy rev A hardware"? It's not going to be an EMI issue, it's hardly going to be power consumption issue...a thermal issue? - More amusing than the QA testing dept. of your favourite multi billion dollar tech corporation.

You're recommending that people still buy them and wait for a software update? I agree that it's crazy that this 'standard' hardware is shipping at a reduced spec, but I certainly wouldn't buy or recommend one to someone who thinks that a limited sata throughput would effect them.

Of course it's worth the aneurysm. It's a tech forum where people can talk about these things. There's nothing wrong with people saying it's a rediculously bad move, the same way it's ok to spout rubbish tech opinion to try and justify products.

I don't know why they don't include esata ports on all their machines (another port to spoil the look?), might be more of an issue to some people then.

[bobbylols]

got an email from apple that my mbp 13" with a 128gb ssd drive should be here by this friday. personally, i got the ssd drive more for durability and not so much for increased speed - i crashed 3 drives on my blackbook in 2 years.

anyway, i'll post again as soon as i get it, and let you guys know what the deal is with my sata, unless the issue is resolved by friday, which it could be. i've read speculation that it could auto detect drives in this thread but we'll see.

[SimonTheSoundMa]

My old iMac G5 states it has a 3Gb/s SATA interface.

This is a little odd downgrade when other manufacturers are now moving to SATA 3.0 which is 6Gb/s.

This reminds me of the problems Apple bought onto itself with Firewire and ever since the introduction of Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro's. They downgraded the chipset for FW400 and 800 to a cheaper version, some devices did not work, and devices that were bus powered didn't get enough power so they had to be mains powered. :(

They still haven't fixed the firewire chipsets, I know plenty of sound recordists who can't use their sound interfaces out in the field without having to use an ExpressCard firewire interface.

[iAlex]

This is a ridiculous comment. As furious as I am about my 13.3" MBP, and as an Apple investor myself, this makes no sense. Investors don't know the difference between SATAI/II. Only geeks do. This will hardly limit sales of the MBP machines, perhaps only to geeks... which doesn't amount to a lot of sales.

I think a significant amount of endusers will reconsider purchases. Apple customers tend to be more tech minded as a demographic. Look at the iphone demographic. Furthermore, considering Apples new focus on enterprise solutions, I have already heard from several IT mangers that one of the concerns with a move or support of OSX across an enterprise is the monopoly Apple has on supporting hardware. ESPECIALLY when Apple makes seeming senseless and stupid moves like crippling laptop SATA performance what other surprise should they expect? X-Serv with no eternal connections? I can see it now, ~the new wireless xserv? "Ethernet and fiber was just a fad like SATA II". When a enterprise or IT manager stands behind a large political and monetary investment, knowing there is no hardware alternative, "surprises" like these are NOT something they look forward to.

[GodWhomIsMike]

1 week after the new Macbook Pro release, nVidia announces the release of these mobile GPUs:

http://i41.tinypic.com/i4jpso.jpg

[jose1983]

I wondered the same thing. Please read this reply by deconstruct60:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7817990&postcount=467

Can you tell me what the hell he's trying to say? I'm not being sarcastic here, I really want to know. All he did was take every point I made and tell me I was wrong, and then proceeded to agree with me.

Ok, I read that post, I was reading that same post also ten mins ago but I had to give up: I'm italian but that doesn't seem to be the best english ever! It talks about an energy trade-off but since the Macbook unibody and the new MBP 13'' are virtually identical with respect to the HW (I can't understand why does he say that the consumption grows, which is the component to blame? Am I missing something?) I would go as far as to say that also the power consumption isn't that different either.
Back to the problem: I heard something about a heat issue. Same as before, a heat issue on a Macbook Pro 13'' would be at least a bit more serious on the Macbook Air (Still here I'm assuming the new one has a SATAII interface).

[gnasher729]

So I popped my 320GB Scorpio Black (7200rpm, 16MB cache, SATA II) into my new 13" MBP last night and it's working pretty damn fast writing all my files to disk from backups. :)

I haven't run any VM's yet but so far the machine seems to be working well, even with the 1.5Gb/s interface.

While doing the next backup, turn on "Activity Monitor" and watch disk activity. Make sure that the display shows "Megabyte per second". If you are limited by 1.5 GBit SATA then you will see that the transfer rate reaches 150 MB/second for read and write combined (unfortunately Activity Monitor shows them separate). If you don't reach 150 MB/second, then a 3.0 GBit interface wouldn't have helped you one bit.

I bet your drive never gets even close to 150 MB/second.

[Eidorian]

While doing the next backup, turn on "Activity Monitor" and watch disk activity. Make sure that the display shows "Megabyte per second". If you are limited by 1.5 GBit SATA then you will see that the transfer rate reaches 150 MB/second for read and write combined (unfortunately Activity Monitor shows them separate). If you don't reach 150 MB/second, then a 3.0 GBit interface wouldn't have helped you one bit.

I bet your drive never gets even close to 150 MB/second.Can you even check on the disk activity of an individual process using Activity Monitor? Or of an individual volume?

[iAlex]

Oh i got it... Ok... ~Have you heard? The next REV of Mac "Pro" workstations will be dropping all Ethernet connectors will revert back to RJ11 dial-up connections and airport ONLY.

[kidtronix]

Oh i got it... Ok... ~Have you heard? The next REV of Mac "Pro" workstations will be dropping all Ethernet connectors will revert back to RJ11 dial-up connections and airport ONLY.

Yes but they will do it to save energy, so why complain?

[turkay]

Yes but they will do it to save energy, so why complain?

Pro line products are about performance, not energy efficiency.

[alabanco]

Perhaps it will be a repost but still.
Just to have a look at how fast SSD can be in comparison to HD hard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0agBXaODMiI

[Stevamundo]

ah, pointless.

so basically you are enjoying being upset, right?

maybe you can start another thread? maybe start your own blog somewhere? maybe called "disappointed mac loyalists with an unrealistic sense of entitlement"?

i can give you a template, you just need to copy paste and add your user names:

1 - I am upset
2 - apple has screwed us over
3 - i am really upset
4 - apple, this isn't fair
5 - i am feeling really sorry for myself now. more than ever.

copy paste these ad infinitum & ad absurdum.
drink warm milk with honey.
stop trusting big corporations.
there'll be a fix/update/solution to the 1,5/3.0 situation within 30 days - all will be well, you'll see.
PS do you really think apple give a d*mn how much you complain here?
they don't give a *****. get onto them. jam their phone lines, picket their stores instead. much more effective than this whinging nonsense on macrumors.com. but it is amusing to watch you all. haven't had many real setbacks in life, have you?

Now that's funny!

Except for Apple does care about their customers and they'll have a fix to this HORRIFIC problem.

They will live happily ever after again. They get about 3 second speed ups on their fastest SSDs again! Oh I just love an happy ending don't you?

BTW, SSDs have a lower disk space than HDDs right? So I would personally prefer more disk space than a little more speed any day.

[kidtronix]

Pro line products are about performance, not energy efficiency.

Sorry I forgot the [/Sarcasm]

[Akira1980]

1 week after the new Macbook Pro release, nVidia announces the release of these mobile GPUs:

http://i41.tinypic.com/i4jpso.jpg

I wonder when Apple is going to adapt these...

[surferfromuk]

II hope this is the case - and since they brought back FW800 to the uMB I can only hope and pray they bring back the mat display

Agreed. I won't buy an new MBP 15" without a matt screen.

[iAlex]

NEWS FLASH: Today, Apple Inc. introduces for 2010 its new line up of laptop computers. The Mac Book Pro for 2010 is being heralded a breaking new ground in laptop design and performance. Industry analysts, and Apple fans expressed concern about the lack of any kind of screen or keyboard in the newly designed Mac Book Pro, and whispered about the striking similarity to the another Apple Product called the Mac Mini. Apple representatives blew off criticism by promoting increased energy savings and performance by reverting to a single simplified RJ11 connection in the rear of the unit, and also stated that the lack of keyboard and screen in the new laptop will not make any real-world difference in performance for most users. In addition, Apple claims improved performance via adoption of SATA II standards :END NEWS FLASH

[xlii]

Here is the spec for the mcp79 ahci... on page 15 you will find in bits 23:20 the encoding for the interface speed 1.5g/3.0g/6.0g. Looks fixable in firmware.

http://download.intel.com/technology/serialata/pdf/rev1_3.pdf

In case no one saw it.

[iMacmatician]

Can you even check on the disk activity of an individual process using Activity Monitor? Or of an individual volume?I really want this feature, but I haven't found it in Activity Monitor.

I wonder when Apple is going to adapt these...Most likely early 2010 with Arrandale.

[L0s7man]

In case no one saw it.

The question is, will Apple fix it? Maybe they don't want. Maybe Steve-o thinks 3Gbps is too much for you, maybe Steve-o thinks it's unfair that SSD drives offer better performance and wants everyone to have 'equal chances'

Maybe Apple sux since the introduction of uMBP

[frou]

to correct you: i have not called all potential buyers "whiners," and "cry babies," that is a misrepresentation. i called the whiners "whiners" because they buy without doing proper research, thus happily taking on the unpaid and very expensive job of beta tester.Haha - What exactly is proper research? Identifying every chip on the logic board then making sure they are all working at full specification?

Give me a break. SATA2 should be an absolute given on a premium notebook in 2009.

[annk]

After 629 posts, I think most things have been said here. In addition, I've just spent more time than I'd have liked to removing insulting comments from various posts.

Let's have a cooling off period.