PDA

View Full Version : News reports of the MacBook Air Refresh Model to receive Core-i7 ULV Processor?




Jobsian
May 14, 2010, 07:45 AM
Doing some Google News-ing and several news outlets are reporting that an Ultra-Low Voltage Core i7 is being lined up for the MacBook Air refresh. See link (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=p&tbs=nws%3A1&q=Core+i7+680+UM+macbook+air&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=).

I canít find their source for this info but some of the websites are in foreign languages. Most are from end April/early May. Examples:

MacBook Air to receive Core i7 680Um? Ė Italian article (http://www.tomshw.it/cont/news/nuovi-core-i7-um-le-cpu-del-macbook-air/25058/1.html)

English article: ďThe fist known notebooks with the ULV Core CPUs are the new Lenovo IdeaPad U and AcerÖAsusÖ.as well as the rumoured Apple MacBook Air refresh models.Ē (http://www.electronicsinfoline.com/News/New_Gadgets/Laptop/intel-core-i5-520um-i7-620um-i7-640um-new-ulv-chips.html)

Chinese report of MacBook Air and Core-i ULVís. (http://digi.tech.qq.com/a/20100504/000940.htm) Does anyone know if this pic from that website refers to any update?

http://img1.gtimg.com/digi/pics/hv1/110/168/510/33205700.jpg

http://img1.gtimg.com/digi/pics/hv1/112/168/510/33205702.jpg


As Iíve mentioned earlier, the possibility of the Core i7 680 UM, excites me in quite the extreme fashion., ie in a way that causes physical flushing of the skin and spiritual failing of the kidneys.

The only problem is going to be what GPU they use. I donít want Intelís offerings. I wonder if there is a discrete option which is sufficiently small (with a new MBA chassis) and sufficiently low-watted ? I havenít done research on this myself so Iím not aware of such options from Nvidia or ATI but I was under the impression that these are available (I think it was an ATI card?).

The CPU however on paper, the Core-i7 680UM is absolutely perfect for me. 18 Watts TDP so it wonít sear my thighs/duvet/sofa - I love to lap/bed/sofa surf Ė being able to at least watch videos on these surfaces is an enormous factor for me. Its 1.46GHz standard clock is perfectly sufficient for my everyday use, with the 2.56GHz Turbo reserved for those few times I personally do heavy lifting Ė eg video editing Ė whereupon Iíll put it on a hardtop table and let it roar.

Nothing at all certain in any of these reports but if the Core-i7 680UM can be put into Rev D Air with an adequate resolution of the GPU issue Iíd be very very satisfied :)



iMacmatician
May 14, 2010, 08:16 AM
I wonder if this CPU model is what Apple has been waiting for for an MacBook Air update. The switch from LV to ULV is probably for increased battery life (lower heat too), and the 680UM probably has the clock speeds that Apple wants for the MBA.

Since the 18 W includes the integrated GPU, I don't think the TDP with a low-power discrete GPU (underclocked 320M?) will be a problem. I don't know about space though.

I think the strong Turbo modes on UM CPUs means that Apple can go from Penryn LV to Westmere ULV without a big performance drop, if at all.

Core 2 Duo SL9600
2.13 GHz

Core i7-680UM
1.47 GHz
2.13 GHz (Turbo 2 cores)
2.53 GHz (Turbo 1 core)

Scottsdale
May 14, 2010, 08:40 AM
The interesting part, which I had never considered, states that these chips will be overclocked to always run at the boost speeds? I didn't know this was possible? I don't believe it would be with the GMA IGPs enabled because they're supposed to clock up to 500 MHz when available otherwise stick much lower in the 133 MHz range. So, I don't know how that works and the CPU can be overclocked unless the GMA IGP is out of the picture?

Let's say Apple strays from its MBA that works - you know the same as the configuration of the five Macs creating one set of drivers, OpenCL support, h.264 decoding, and the economies of scale of buying a whole bunch of them... What would Apple use for graphics with these CPUs? I mean SJ came out publicly and stated that we're much better off with C2D and Nvidia GPU/chipsets. Why would Apple be so foolish? Why would Apple want to completely write all of the drivers and tools necessary to put a different CPU/GPU in the MBA? Would it enable h.264, OpenCL, and write drivers to take advantage of these technologies if it's the only Mac that has that setup? We have seen Apple fail us before in those circumstances... a one system strategy really works best for all of us in the short and long run!

I just see low voltage Core i7-6x0LM as the logical replacement when Apple needs to go to Ci7. I don't get going backwards with graphics, and I don't see Apple going dedicated in the MBA when it couldn't in the 13" MBPs.

What would really suck is if Apple did this to get the damned 7-hour battery. What the hell does someone need a 7-hour battery for anyways? I would rather go more mobile and more powerful with a 5-hour battery than stick us with an ultra low voltage Ci7 and sole use of Intel's most worthless GMA HD for graphics. We have been down that road with the original MBA and it was a P.O.S.! I refuse to be suckered by Apple again. I will not be buying such a Mac again when Apple fooled me once with the original MBA and its worthless Intel GMA! Fool me twice and it's shame on me, and I am not going to be SJ's money train again for another useless MBA that cannot even play a damned video.

I certainly hope these rumors are completely wrong and my one strategy across five Macs theory plays out again for the MBA just as it did with the 13" MBP a few weeks ago.

Of course, I will be glad to be wrong and see Apple use any Core series CPU that can stay above 2 GHz with a dedicated ATI graphics solution... otherwise the cons will seriously outweigh the pros in this deal.

I think this is nothing more than baseless rumors. We have had plenty of information to indicate an MBA with a C2D at 30% performance boost, Nvidia 320m GPU at 50% boost, 4 GB RAM, 192/256 GB SSD, glass trackpad and possibly an IPS HD display. It's all guesswork based on Apple's history of using a strategic setup for five Macs including the MBA since October 2008! Since the v 2,1 MBA was introduced then, Apple has put the MBA back on track to being a truly capable Mac.

iMacmatician
May 14, 2010, 09:39 AM
Let's say Apple strays from its MBA that works - you know the same as the configuration of the five Macs creating one set of drivers, OpenCL support, h.264 decoding, and the economies of scale of buying a whole bunch of them... What would Apple use for graphics with these CPUs? I mean SJ came out publicly and stated that we're much better off with C2D and Nvidia GPU/chipsets. Why would Apple be so foolish? Possibly using the space saved for a larger battery, as Apple's recently been pushing the whole long battery life thing.

pharmx
May 14, 2010, 11:08 AM
Would the GPU performance loss by going with the Core-i7 ULV (and therefore committed to Intel's GMA) be offset by the improvements to architecture that Sandy Bridge is supposed to provide?

"The GPU in Sandy Bridge is reported to have 2x the performance of the one in Clarkdale/Arrandale."

That quote from the Intel roadmap posted here is what got me curious.

jdechko
May 14, 2010, 11:47 AM
I could actually see this working. And I'd like to believe that there is actually space in there for this. Right now, the Air has 2 chips, the C2D and the 9400m chipset. If Apple when with the ULV, they could still go with the 2-chip approach: the i7/IGP + nVidia 320m (with the chipset disabled or eliminated). We'd probably see significant performance increase with the i7 being able to ramp up to 2.13/2.53 and the fact that the 320m is a big jump from the 9400m. We'd also likely see a huge jump in battery life since both chips would be more efficient than the C2D & 9400m. So we could have our cake (performance) and eat it too (7+ hr battery life).

ChemGolf
May 14, 2010, 11:55 AM
just have a look at this:

http://www.mcdigital.ru/catalog/view/macbook_air_core_i3_mc516.html

I would go for that config if all this is true...

To summarise: core i3, 256 SSD & 4 GB RAM. 90000 ruble in Russia, this might correspond to 1999 Euro or 2499 US-$ I guess...

Spacekatgal
May 14, 2010, 12:52 PM
It would be really nice, but you're dreaming. They didn't even got to an i5 in the 13 inch to save battery life. I'd bet anything that they wait a year and then go this route. I don't think the MBA will be updated this year.

Bri

Scott6666
May 14, 2010, 12:55 PM
...Why would Apple want to completely write all of the drivers and tools necessary to put a different CPU/GPU in the MBA?

...a one system strategy really works best for all of us in the short and long run!

...I don't get going backwards with graphics, and I don't see Apple going dedicated in the MBA when it couldn't in the 13" MBPs.

... am not going to be SJ's money train again for another useless MBA that cannot even play a damned video.
...
I certainly hope these rumors are completely wrong and my one strategy across five Macs theory plays out again for the MBA just as it did with the 13" MBP a few weeks ago.


It's always risky to argue with Scottsdale, who I can safely say is the preeminent MBA scholar on these boards, and potentially the world :D but...

1) I think the one system strategy has not worked for the Air. I think it has limitations in physical designs that are not properly wedded to an optimal chip design. I think that the Air could work better with board designed more for it's limitations such as size and heat dissipation.

2) I think Apple is large enough to support multiple chipsets and could actually write the drivers and code to do so. In fact they do now by supporting both NVidia and ATI in the iMac.

3) Going backwards with the graphics to reduce heat may be OK if it's done in a way that support the Air market segment. You really can't game much on an Air now anyway so why bother to even try to support gaming graphics. If they support watching decent video and iPad level gaming that should be enough for 80% of the users. This part of my argument is controversial. It means that the Air could not be one's only machine if they were a gamer. But for general business use, surfing most web pages, email, you don't need great graphics. Gaming and video graphics to the level of an iPad (NOT arguing at all to go to iPhone OS for the air) could be enough and that requires no fans at all.

Airforcekid
May 14, 2010, 01:41 PM
just have a look at this:

http://www.mcdigital.ru/catalog/view/macbook_air_core_i3_mc516.html

I would go for that config if all this is true...

To summarise: core i3, 256 SSD & 4 GB RAM. 90000 ruble in Russia, this might correspond to 1999 Euro or 2499 US-$ I guess...

I3 wont work well at least and would kill the battery. A low voltage i7 is the best we can get.

ChemGolf
May 14, 2010, 01:47 PM
I3 wont work well at least and would kill the battery. A low voltage i7 is the best we can get.

The Russian article also states a batt life of 8-9 hours

Scottsdale
May 14, 2010, 03:11 PM
Would the GPU performance loss by going with the Core-i7 ULV (and therefore committed to Intel's GMA) be offset by the improvements to architecture that Sandy Bridge is supposed to provide?

"The GPU in Sandy Bridge is reported to have 2x the performance of the one in Clarkdale/Arrandale."

That quote from the Intel roadmap posted here is what got me curious.

No. The Intel GMA HD will run HD videos acceptably in Windows but Windows is far superior in the graphics game. I believe we will be right back to the same old problems as the original MBA if Apple uses Intel's GMA as the MBA's sole graphics solution. When Sandy Bridge comes, the graphics are supposed to be double the capability and performance. At that time, the GMA HD will support full Display Port up to a 30" ACD or up to four displays.

Right now I, and most of you, will be devastated for an MBA with only Intel's GMA HD. The problem is people compare what it's capable of in Windows. I can use my MBA as a nice comparison. My current MBA uses 400% more CPU in OS X than it does in Windows 7 to run HD content/videos, Flash, and etc. This shows just how bad the performance is in OS X. My MBA can easily do super graphics intensive stuff in Windows because OpenGL is so much better, the Nvidia drivers are so much better, and the system is worried about performance to the max where Apple doesn't take a grand graphics system approach to computing. We're going to have problems with Intel's GMA HD for sole graphics on the MBA... OpenGL, OpenCL, and h.264 capabilities would drop in OS X. And that's if Apple even worries about writing a completely different driver set.

I could actually see this working. And I'd like to believe that there is actually space in there for this. Right now, the Air has 2 chips, the C2D and the 9400m chipset. If Apple when with the ULV, they could still go with the 2-chip approach: the i7/IGP + nVidia 320m (with the chipset disabled or eliminated). We'd probably see significant performance increase with the i7 being able to ramp up to 2.13/2.53 and the fact that the 320m is a big jump from the 9400m. We'd also likely see a huge jump in battery life since both chips would be more efficient than the C2D & 9400m. So we could have our cake (performance) and eat it too (7+ hr battery life).

The 320m cannot be used with a Core i7. Do you not remember the big licensing dispute with Nvidia and Intel? Nvidia cannot provide GPU/chipsets for Nehalem CPUs and beyond (including Arrandale). Intel switched part of the chipset to the CPU beyond C2D, so it says that voids Nvidia's license to provide chipsets. It's bogus, but it worked and Nvidia is out of the chipset game for post C2D Macs. So an Nvidia 320m might sound nice but it cannot legally happen.

What Apple could do is use an Nvidia 310m dedicated GPU along with the Intel chipset and Core i7 CPU. If it did this, and overclocked the CPUs, it would have to turn off the Intel GMA and run the Nvidia 310m full-time. This would be acceptable, but it's not in Apple's recent history to provide a dedicated CPU for a 13" Mac notebook. The thing is SJ came out and said we're all better off with C2D and Nvidia GPU/chipset for now to gain huge graphics boosts and moderate CPU boosts... rather than take a big CPU boost of Core i7 and a GIGANTIC drop in graphics performance from Nvidia to an Intel chipset and GMA HD for graphics.

I am all for what's best for the end user to get an MBA that is just as or more capable than the current MBA in terms of CPU and GPU. But the MBA has to have other improvements from there. Any drop in performance to the MBA doesn't make sense FOR ME. It might for some others to get their mythical 7-hour MBA, but they're going to suffer for it when it comes to entertainment or graphics on their beloved MBAs.

halledise
May 14, 2010, 03:54 PM
I certainly hope these rumors are completely wrong and my one strategy across five Macs theory plays out again for the MBA just as it did with the 13" MBP a few weeks ago.

Of course, I will be glad to be wrong and see Apple use any Core series CPU that can stay above 2 GHz with a dedicated ATI graphics solution... otherwise the cons will seriously outweigh the pros in this deal.

I think this is nothing more than baseless rumors. We have had plenty of information to indicate an MBA with a C2D at 30% performance boost, Nvidia 320m GPU at 50% boost, 4 GB RAM, 192/256 GB SSD, glass trackpad and possibly an IPS HD display. It's all guesswork based on Apple's history of using a strategic setup for five Macs including the MBA since October 2008! Since the v 2,1 MBA was introduced then, Apple has put the MBA back on track to being a truly capable Mac.

eloquently put Scotters, and I'm in agreement with you.
battery life is not that big a deal for me (neither is a glass trackpad), but performance boost is - esp in the areas you mention.

that said I'm still happy with my 2.13/9400M/SSD Air, even though I did have a little play with a new MBPro at the local Reseller the other day.
Made me realise how much and why I love my Air.

what do you reckon are the chances are for a 15" Air - would that provide the space needed to ring in the changes that are being discussed?

Scottsdale
May 14, 2010, 04:25 PM
eloquently put Scotters, and I'm in agreement with you.
battery life is not that big a deal for me (neither is a glass trackpad), but performance boost is - esp in the areas you mention.

that said I'm still happy with my 2.13/9400M/SSD Air, even though I did have a little play with a new MBPro at the local Reseller the other day.
Made me realise how much and why I love my Air.

what do you reckon are the chances are for a 15" Air - would that provide the space needed to ring in the changes that are being discussed?

You know, I don't get why there's no 15" MBA yet. There were definitely rumors for it over a year ago. Here's the thing, the MBA shows us that there are people that don't need/want an optical drive and we want to focus on thin and lightweight. Apple could make a 15" MBA and 15"/17" MBs too. I don't understand why one needs to be a "Pro" to get a 15" or 17" Mac notebook. It was just like before the 13" MBPs... and they're really just al. MBs anyways without dedicated graphics. Many "Pros" want a 13" MBP that has the capabilities of the 15" model including a dedicated graphics card, Core i5/i7 CPUs, and etc.

The Apple system of only a Pro could want a 15" or 17" Mac notebook is ridiculous. With any other computer company a lowly "consumer" can buy a 15" or 17" laptop. With Apple such grandness is only available for the "Pro" user. I would like to see Apple change its strategy to provide consumers with a range of Mac notebooks that might fit their needs. I believe a large market exists for light and thin notebooks like the MBA... and why wouldn't these consumers want 15" and 17" options?

Apple definitely doesn't get "assortments" or individuality. Apple wants to make as few of products as possible so it can maximize the economies of scale for buying and developing Macs that it can make gigantic margins on. At the end of the day, we're the ones allowing Apple to dictate what we want from a computer. Apple is holding its OS X hostage and the biggest problem is the advantages of OS X are now nearly nonexistent. The last part of the model is the beautiful industrial design of the Macs... which is why the rest of us are here. I would love to see an assortment of sizes for all Mac notebooks.

To your last bit on still being happy with the MBA - I am too. At the end of the day, it's still my favorite computer ever. Even at 19-months-old, the MBA is completely capable of running all of my Mac OS X applications really well. And the 2 GB of RAM would be acceptable if I didn't really want to run Windows 7 in a VM. The biggest problem I have with the MBA is Apple isn't updating it to better compete in a tech world. When the MBA was introduced in October 2008, it beat every ultraportable on the market in every component or spec capability... from RAM, to CPU, to GPU, to SSD, to thinness, to weight, to OS X, to design, to capabilities... and etc. I want the MBA to beat the hell out of the competition again, and I want Apple to give us a reward for being willing to spend thousands of dollars to line the pocketbooks of AAPL shareholders.

While this minimal update would make many of us happy, of course I would prefer a new Arrandale Core i7, dedicated ATI graphics, 8 GB RAM, thinner MBA, with a 512 GB SSD, that weighs 2 lb., and that makes competing ultraportables wish they had never been born (okay a little too dramatic but you get the point).

pharmx
May 14, 2010, 04:42 PM
Well, Apple must have something up their sleeves, that's the only thing that makes sense to me.

Given these two facts:
1. Intel is not playing nice with nVidia
2. Production of c2d's will stop by the end of the year

To continue selling MBA's (2011 and afterwards), Apple will have to either:
1. Convince Intel to play nice
2. Convince Intel to step up their game
3. Look to AMD for options
4. Surprise everyone with a multicore hybrid ARM solution that can run x86/x64 instruction sets virtually at an acceptable speed
5. Do a complete redesign that somehow allows for a dedicated GPU
6. Ignore the GPU performance loss and go with Core i series
7. Say screw it and EOL the MBA in favor of having a 13" MBP without the optical drive

gri
May 14, 2010, 05:06 PM
7. Say screw it and EOL the MBA in favor of having a 13" MBP without the optical drive

There you go:
The ALL NEW MacBook Pro-Air (MBP-A)...:rolleyes:

BTW - the more I think about it would make sense. The "Air" would indicate the "loss" of the optical drive. The books get thinner and lighter without much loss of functionality (more or less) - and there could also be a couple months later a 15' and a 17' MBP-A... The Air users are happy (the updated MBA, which in reality is something else), "Pro" sounds way cooler (oh we wish, pun indented) - and the old MBA is silently EOL'd with the end of C2D.

PsyD4Me
May 14, 2010, 07:03 PM
The interesting part, which I had never considered, states that these chips will be overclocked to always run at the boost speeds? I didn't know this was possible? I don't believe it would be with the GMA IGPs enabled because they're supposed to clock up to 500 MHz when available otherwise stick much lower in the 133 MHz range. So, I don't know how that works and the CPU can be overclocked unless the GMA IGP is out of the picture?

Let's say Apple strays from its MBA that works - you know the same as the configuration of the five Macs creating one set of drivers, OpenCL support, h.264 decoding, and the economies of scale of buying a whole bunch of them... What would Apple use for graphics with these CPUs? I mean SJ came out publicly and stated that we're much better off with C2D and Nvidia GPU/chipsets. Why would Apple be so foolish? Why would Apple want to completely write all of the drivers and tools necessary to put a different CPU/GPU in the MBA? Would it enable h.264, OpenCL, and write drivers to take advantage of these technologies if it's the only Mac that has that setup? We have seen Apple fail us before in those circumstances... a one system strategy really works best for all of us in the short and long run!

I just see low voltage Core i7-6x0LM as the logical replacement when Apple needs to go to Ci7. I don't get going backwards with graphics, and I don't see Apple going dedicated in the MBA when it couldn't in the 13" MBPs.

What would really suck is if Apple did this to get the damned 7-hour battery. What the hell does someone need a 7-hour battery for anyways? I would rather go more mobile and more powerful with a 5-hour battery than stick us with an ultra low voltage Ci7 and sole use of Intel's most worthless GMA HD for graphics. We have been down that road with the original MBA and it was a P.O.S.! I refuse to be suckered by Apple again. I will not be buying such a Mac again when Apple fooled me once with the original MBA and its worthless Intel GMA! Fool me twice and it's shame on me, and I am not going to be SJ's money train again for another useless MBA that cannot even play a damned video.

I certainly hope these rumors are completely wrong and my one strategy across five Macs theory plays out again for the MBA just as it did with the 13" MBP a few weeks ago.

Of course, I will be glad to be wrong and see Apple use any Core series CPU that can stay above 2 GHz with a dedicated ATI graphics solution... otherwise the cons will seriously outweigh the pros in this deal.

I think this is nothing more than baseless rumors. We have had plenty of information to indicate an MBA with a C2D at 30% performance boost, Nvidia 320m GPU at 50% boost, 4 GB RAM, 192/256 GB SSD, glass trackpad and possibly an IPS HD display. It's all guesswork based on Apple's history of using a strategic setup for five Macs including the MBA since October 2008! Since the v 2,1 MBA was introduced then, Apple has put the MBA back on track to being a truly capable Mac.

A 7 hour battery from apple would result in 5 real hours of use, and so I think the they will be going toward this goal

gwsat
May 14, 2010, 10:06 PM
I don't know which I find more intriguing, the prospect of Apple putting an i7 processor in the new MBA, or how in hell Apple would deal with the graphics performance hit the MBA would take if the i7 were to be adopted. What a conundrum!

Scottsdale
May 14, 2010, 10:32 PM
I don't know which I find more intriguing, the prospect of Apple putting an i7 processor in the new MBA, or how in hell Apple would deal with the graphics performance hit the MBA would take if the i7 were to be adopted. What a conundrum!

Actually, read my post in the poll thread.

What they are doing is turning off the GMA so the full performance of the CPU can run at an overclocked "boost" speed all the time. The current ULV Core CPU has 18W of power for both GMA and clock speed of the CPU itself. Turn off the GMA and the CPU uses less TDP, or run the CPU full out and it's only using 18W. That leaves 11W to the 29W the MBA uses... for a dedicated graphics card. Seeing that Apple is overclocking the CPU, it CANNOT run the GMA so the horrific graphics of Intel are gone. There are plenty of ATI solutions that use less than 11W.

What this tells us is, IF TRUE, Apple didn't stop innovating and it's implementing its "Core" strategies for its Omni-Mac system (one setup for five Macs - MB, 13" MBP, MBA, Mm, and 21.5" iMac). It released the last C2D MBP and it's planning its replacement and will implement it first in the MBA... as Apple has done in the past. So we can expect that IF ALL OF THIS IS TRUE that the 13" MBP will eventually get a Core i5, with GMA off, and a dedicated GPU. As would the MB, Mm, and 21.5" iMac. There lies another PROBLEM. We have rumors of a C2D and Nvidia 320m finding there way into the Mac mini update. So would Apple go ahead and update the MB, Mm, and 21.5" iMac to the C2D and Nvidia 320m now... while it sends the MBA down the alternate path first with a Core i7 and dedicated GPU?

I am excited at these possibilities, but this is all new. It would definitely redeem Apple from taking a year to update the MBA. It doesn't seem likely to me still as it's a lot cheaper and more efficient to use one platform strategy across five Macs. However, technology requires progress, and this could be true progress for the luxury MBA.

What we would DEFINITELY expect is this MBA being updated at WWDC, and not one of the next Tuesdays. Apple would want to show this off. In addition, it's entirely possible that Apple wouldn't have such an MBA ready for WWDC. It could be a "one more thing" for an update to the iPods or it could even be a focus of a media event beyond that. I just don't know that it's possible to expect such an update now??? But I love this prospect more than C2D with Nvidia 320m!

pharmx
May 14, 2010, 10:50 PM
Actually, read my post in the poll thread.

What they are doing is turning off the GMA so the full performance of the CPU can run at an overclocked "boost" speed all the time. The current ULV Core CPU has 18W of power for both GMA and clock speed of the CPU itself. Turn off the GMA and the CPU uses less TDP, or run the CPU full out and it's only using 18W. That leaves 11W to the 29W the MBA uses... for a dedicated graphics card. Seeing that Apple is overclocking the CPU, it CANNOT run the GMA so the horrific graphics of Intel are gone. There are plenty of ATI solutions that use less than 11W.

What this tells us is, IF TRUE, Apple didn't stop innovating and it's implementing its "Core" strategies for its Omni-Mac system (one setup for five Macs - MB, 13" MBP, MBA, Mm, and 21.5" iMac). It released the last C2D MBP and it's planning its replacement and will implement it first in the MBA... as Apple has done in the past. So we can expect that IF ALL OF THIS IS TRUE that the 13" MBP will eventually get a Core i5, with GMA off, and a dedicated GPU. As would the MB, Mm, and 21.5" iMac. There lies another PROBLEM. We have rumors of a C2D and Nvidia 320m finding there way into the Mac mini update. So would Apple go ahead and update the MB, Mm, and 21.5" iMac to the C2D and Nvidia 320m now... while it sends the MBA down the alternate path first with a Core i7 and dedicated GPU?

I am excited at these possibilities, but this is all new. It would definitely redeem Apple from taking a year to update the MBA. It doesn't seem likely to me still as it's a lot cheaper and more efficient to use one platform strategy across five Macs. However, technology requires progress, and this could be true progress for the luxury MBA.

What we would DEFINITELY expect is this MBA being updated at WWDC, and not one of the next Tuesdays. Apple would want to show this off. In addition, it's entirely possible that Apple wouldn't have such an MBA ready for WWDC. It could be a "one more thing" for an update to the iPods or it could even be a focus of a media event beyond that. I just don't know that it's possible to expect such an update now??? But I love this prospect more than C2D with Nvidia 320m!


So let me see if I understand this correctly....there is a slight chance that we could see a ULV Core i7 with a dedicated ATI GPU? Which cards would be an ideal match for the i7 MBA in this scenario?

And just to reiterate...this is made possible because the MBA uses 29W and the ULV i7 has 18W to split between GMA and CPU, but by OC'ing the CPU, the full 18W is allocated, effectively taking the GMA out of the equation...this in turn leaves 11W which can be used towards a dedicated GPU, of which ATI has a few to choose from.

That would be a best of both worlds situation right? The benefits of the Intel CPU but without the drawbacks of the Intel GMA? Where would that leave nVidia in future lineups?




So would the ATI card be something like this (http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/NOTEBOOK/GRAPHICS/ATI-MOBILITY-HD-5400/Pages/hd-5450-specs.aspx)?

Scottsdale
May 15, 2010, 01:47 AM
So let me see if I understand this correctly....there is a slight chance that we could see a ULV Core i7 with a dedicated ATI GPU? Which cards would be an ideal match for the i7 MBA in this scenario?

And just to reiterate...this is made possible because the MBA uses 29W and the ULV i7 has 18W to split between GMA and CPU, but by OC'ing the CPU, the full 18W is allocated, effectively taking the GMA out of the equation...this in turn leaves 11W which can be used towards a dedicated GPU, of which ATI has a few to choose from.

That would be a best of both worlds situation right? The benefits of the Intel CPU but without the drawbacks of the Intel GMA? Where would that leave nVidia in future lineups?




So would the ATI card be something like this (http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/NOTEBOOK/GRAPHICS/ATI-MOBILITY-HD-5400/Pages/hd-5450-specs.aspx)?

Well, I am speculating ATI GPU because ATI's dedicated graphics use a super low TDP. When we know there's 11W (included w/18W CPU) to be the exact same as C2D and Nvidia 9400m, it makes a dedicated GPU a possibility ONLY with ATI at the current total 29W TDP (assuming 29W Max). However, it doesn't mean that Nvidia doesn't have something that meets those specs using a lower or equal TDP in the works or that could be introduced in the MBA.

Take ATI's 5430 for example. It has a 7W TDP and would destroy the 310m dedicated card Apple might use from Nvidia that requires DOUBLE the TDP.

http://www.amd.com/us/products/notebook/graphics/ati-mobility-hd-5400/Pages/hd-5430-specs.aspx

Probably not a 5450 as you suggested, but it's possible. We have to assume Apple wants to get the TDP down to allow maximum capabilities when powered by the battery.

The thing about ATI's graphics are they have a lower TDP. Everyone expected Apple to use ATI in the MBPs because they have a lower TDP than anything Nvidia has to offer.

For example, Nvidia's 310m is a less capable GPU and uses 14W TDP. And the 330m GT used in the MBPs use 23W. Whereas ATI has GPUs that are far more capable that have a lower TDP.

You're correct, this would be by far the best possibility... as long as we get a dedicated GPU with at least 256MB of VRAM in an MBA with 4 GB of system RAM.

I am speculating here, but I wonder if Nvidia has an alternative to the 320m that uses the same driver, OpenCL, h.264 and etc instructions so to speak? I mean if Apple could use the same driver set as the 320m integrated GPU for a dedicated version of a similar graphics card less the integration. The problem is, it doesn't work that way. An integrated GPU cannot just be "separated" and made into a dedicated GPU, as the integrated GPU is part of the chipset itself. It's like they're using all of the same parts just broken up into different components.

And this is all a big speculation that Apple can make a dedicated GPU fit in an MBA. Does this lead us to a new MBA, meaning a new case? I don't know? I don't know if Apple can work this deal. It seems like a lot of stretching and innovation. I would suspect they could make them physically fit inside the MBA, but Apple seems to like Nvidia and their current graphics use a higher TDP totaling more than the current 29W TDP used by the MBA, and that's with a throttled CPU and GPU. I just hope Apple has been working on this for a long time and they get it really right!

One thing is for sure. The MBA was originally designed with the thickness and weight designed in a time where three to four hours on battery was acceptable. I don't agree with those wanting the MBA to have a 10-hour battery, because they have to know the true difference between the MBA and 13" MBP is just the weight of the battery and space required by battery and optical drive. Meaning, if people want a 10-hour MBA, they can have it in its capable form as a 13" MBP. Part of the 5-hour MBA battery is that it has to fit within the limitations of the MBA's current form factor.

A new design could be used as is used in the iPhone. Rather than tapering the thickness of the MBA, Apple could use a non-tapered design and keep it at maybe .6" thick all across, yet have a lot more space for components and a larger battery. As big of a feature as the tapered case is for the MBA, it is wasting space and not nearly as important as the weight. Perhaps we could get a .6" MBA that has a 7-hour battery, and has plenty of space to fit and cool a dedicated GPU??? But this is ALL SPECULATION and possibilities not probability. I still believe we're going to get an MBA with a C2D and Nvidia 320m integrated GPU/chipset. I believe that because Apple is all about the margin and how much money can be made. I welcome an MBA with a dedicated graphics card, but I had discounted it as improbable since the 13" MBP was taken in a different direction - if any of the 13" Mac notebooks were going to have a dedicated GPU one would figure it to be the 13" MBP.

hohohong
May 15, 2010, 03:30 AM
Scottdale, seem like you check this forum very often! Lol,Ö sometimes, i think you work for Apple?

Either way, Iím hoping of Air that can at least play 720p movie without lag. My Rev B SSD is laggy playing MKV.

Jobsian
May 15, 2010, 04:09 AM
Great info Scottsdale et al, this (plausible) speculation of IGP-less Core-i is really exciting, I'm hoping for no revision next week and looking forward to June 7!

Pharmx, the poll Scotts was referring to is:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=9904853

Looking forward to seeing more of you vote, still notably absent is gwsat :)

Scottsdale
May 15, 2010, 07:12 AM
Scottdale, seem like you check this forum very often! Lol,Ö sometimes, i think you work for Apple?

Either way, Iím hoping of Air that can at least play 720p movie without lag. My Rev B SSD is laggy playing MKV.

No, I don't currently nor have I ever work for Apple. Do to health and medical reasons, I am not currently working. Therefore I have a lot of time for reading and writing. I type pretty fast, but I do spend too much time here. Ha ha.

thinkdesign
May 15, 2010, 08:07 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.11) Sprint PPC6850SP)

Does this affect the "WHEN?" question? I needed to buy in aproximately* January, but MacRumors's Buying Guide and then the many blogs' rumors of a Jan./Feb./March/April debut persuaded me to wait. But the wait for Godot has now stretched so long, it seems that probably I should've bought a new or refurbed SSD-120 model in January. I need it yesterday. /// So, could someone please just boil this ULV-7 rumor down to -- How does this affect the date-forecast on when 'Air' likely gets refreshed? /// Have ALL the parts for this ULV-7 version been available for enough weeks, that there COULD be a warehouse full of these Rev. D Airs already built, just waiting to drop at or before WWDC ? Thanks. /////// (* I know "aproximately" sounds odd, but I won't bore everyone with the details of one person's career-changing calendar.)

koyou
May 15, 2010, 09:34 AM
There is a rumor saying that the next Macbook update will stick to C2D and 320m. Does this mean MBA will have the same fate?

Scottsdale
May 15, 2010, 10:21 AM
Does this affect the "WHEN?" question?

It probably does if the MBA were to get the Core i7-6x0UM CPUs. However, it might still be soon. The MBA has been the same basic configuration since October 2008, and it's way past due for an update. I really believe we're going to get an MBA update before or at WWDC. I am really leaning towards this Tuesday. There are a lot of rumors for an MBA, MB, and Mac mini updates and even a part number for the MBA.


There is a rumor saying that the next Macbook update will stick to C2D and 320m. Does this mean MBA will have the same fate?

That has been my theory since the day the 13" MBP was released...

Starting in October 2008, when Apple updated to MBA v 2,1, Apple has used one basic strategy for five Macs - 13" MBP, 13" MB, 13" MBA, Mac mini, and 20/21.5" iMac. I will call this "MacFive" from now on. MacFive is more than just a typical economies of scale strategy as it's not just ensuring bulk pricing for components for these five Macs. MacFive allows Apple to develop drivers, OpenCL instructions, h.264 acceleration, updates, and etc into its integration into the Mac OS X operating system. This allows Apple to more rapidly update its Macs in bundles and future OS X updates too. It allows Apple to make one set of drivers for all five Macs, which all get updated at the same time. Other companies might have a completely different set of drivers for every computer they make, and they're making 10x as many models as Apple is making. This strategy is really an integral part in making gigantic margins off already highly priced computers.

I expect to see an MBA update before WWDC. I expect the MB, Mac mini, and 21.5" iMac to all get updates around the same time and makeup as the MBA. All five of these Macs will use the C2D and Nvidia GPU/chipset until they can no longer purchase C2D CPUs from Intel at the end of 2010. If Apple were to upgrade to Core i-series CPUs in these Macs, it wouldn't be able to use the Nvidia GPU/chipset model in these Macs; Intel cancelled Nvidia's license to create chipsets for Intel CPUs beyond C2D.

Now, since last November when Apple said its holiday lineup was set, the rumors began that Apple was going to use Core i7 in the MBAs when the Core CPUs were going to be introduced on January 7, 2010. These rumors also said, all the way up to the morning before the MBP update, that the 13" MBPs would get the Core i3 and Core i5 CPU lineup also. These same rumor sources have been saying the MBA is still getting an ultra low voltage CPU, even when the direct replacement for the SL9x00 CPUs in the MBA is the Intel Core i7-6x0LM that is a low voltage CPU not ULV.

I believe we were just hearing chatter that isn't accurate and doesn't mean anything until yesterday when the rumor became clearer that the Core i7-6x0UM would overclock the CPU to run at boost speeds by turning off the integrated GMA IGP that is on the CPU. That makes it extremely clear that Apple would use a dedicated GPU in the new MBA. Now, it's very possible that Apple could do this, but it sounds too good to be true. I mean Apple is going to run a 1.46 GHz CPU at 2.26 GHz Core i7 and use a dedicated graphics card in its MBA while the "Pro" users get integrated graphics and C2D in their MB "Pro." I just don't believe it's probable that Apple will do this. Possible, not probable.

Now we have both Mac mini and WhiteBook rumors of C2D and Nvidia 320m for a release soon. This follows in logic to the MBA getting the same basic makeup as MacFive. I suspect an MBA with a C2D SL9x00 CPU lineup (at 30% boost in performance), Nvidia 320m GPU (at reduced GPU clock speed), 4 GB RAM, 192/256 GB SSD, and a glass trackpad. If Apple raises the price, I believe it will also add IPS HD displays to the high-end MBA. I wouldn't rule out the larger SSD being a BTO option rather than included with the high-end MBA. I wouldn't rule out not getting an Intel 160 GB 1.8" SSD in this new MBA either as Intel announced it a few days ago which seems awfully close to the hopeful MBA update. I wouldn't rule out the MBA going the opposite way and breaking up from MacFive alliance. Basically, none of us know the truth at this time.

One thing is for certain, people shouldn't freak out if Apple updates the MacBook, Mac mini, and iMac in a silent update before WWDC with no MBA update. I believe that could happen IF Apple is moving forward with the Core i7 in the MBA at WWDC. If Apple goes not just with Core i7-6x0UM but also a dedicated GPU in the new MBA, along with the IPS display I am hopeful for, it's going to want to show this thing off! It might even get a redesign, hopefully allowing for two RAM slots... I am really looking forward to the next few weeks, and I don't know if I want an update this Tuesday or at WWDC because the implications that come with the later seems more beneficial as long as it includes 2+ GHz CPU and dedicated GPU in the MBA.

DJ Kwai
May 15, 2010, 10:24 AM
Well, maybe Scottsdale's original forecast for the mba update was more correct than this i7 one. Here's a recent leak of the new macbook: http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/15/apple-macbook-with-2-4ghz-core-2-duo-and-nvidia-geforce-320m-gra/

It would strike me as odd if Apple/SJ was willing to simply update the macbook with core duo, and not just make the same bet with the mba update - especially since so many of us would be willing to buy it simply with increased ram (and then so many more would buy the core i7 version sometime in 2011 anyways, perhaps with a major revision).

Jobsian
May 15, 2010, 11:08 AM
It's true that it may seem odd for Apple to update the 13" MBP and the Whitebook with a C2D and not the MBA however this may only be an illusion. We have to remember that Apple markets the MBA as a premium notebook, with premium prices for the hardware.

This alone may be enough not to completely discount a possible departure from the direction taken on the 13" MBP and Whitebook.

We can't say for certain. I'm personally really hoping for a major revision regardless of cost, but would be happy with a minor update. I wouldn't be that surprised either way. And either way, we win :D

gwsat
May 15, 2010, 11:22 AM
We can't say for certain. I'm personally really hoping for a major revision regardless of cost, but would be happy with a minor update. I wouldn't be that surprised either way. And either way, we win :D
I, too, hope that we get a major revision of the MBA because I fear a modest revision would result in an MBA still too resource poor to allow me to run all the OS X and Windows apps I now run on my MBP. Alas, all we can do is wait and see. The upside to all of this is that it keeps us off the streets and gives us something to talk about.:)

halledise
May 15, 2010, 02:40 PM
still reckon there are new models being released 18.May and 8.June as per my previous post in another thread.

we now know about the impending MB refresh, so I'd say that'll be the 18.May release.
thus, 8.June is my tip for an MBA refresh.

I really don't think Apple will EOL the Air for at least 2 or 3 reasons.

1. they will sell like hot cakes, albeit in a smaller volume than a MB or a MBPro.
Apple do their research and given it's a 'niche' market (isn't everything these days!) they would know what percentage of current Air owners will update within a month or so (around 80% methinks; include me here :D) and they would know how many other punters would favor a stunningly spec'd Air over the alternatives.

2. we all thought the Mini was fecked with soooo long between refreshes and were thinking EOL for sure; but it's still around and selling well and I'd say in about the same numbers as the Air.

3. add your reasons here. (I'm noticing an increase on eBay for example of the numbers of MBAirs up for sale)

gwsat
May 15, 2010, 03:10 PM
I really don't think Apple will EOL the Air for at least 2 or 3 reasons.

1. they will sell like hot cakes, albeit in a smaller volume than a MB or a MBPro.
Apple do their research and given it's a 'niche' market (isn't everything these days!) they would know what percentage of current Air owners will update within a month or so (around 80% methinks; include me here :D) and they would know how many other punters would favor a stunningly spec'd Air over the alternatives.
I think you may be right that the MBA would sell decently if appropriately updated. I do not currently own an MBA but, as noted in earlier posts, will buy one as long as it is updated sufficiently to give it the power to run the OS X and Windows apps I currently run on my MBP.

Speaking of the prospective update of the MB, I still can't understand how Apple sells them to anybody but teenyboppers these days, now that they are all white. I don't know how anybody else feels but I hate the looks of the white MB and was both puzzled and disappointed with Apple's decision to drop the black model. My son in law got one of the last black MBs and I will guarantee that he would never have bought a white MB. Others have postulated that Apple dropped the black MB as a marketing strategy to sell more 13 inch MBPs. If so, it would have worked that way on my son and law and me, at least.

calderone
May 15, 2010, 03:26 PM
3. add your reasons here. (I'm noticing an increase on eBay for example of the numbers of MBAirs up for sale)

Selling them off after buying an iPad perhaps? That is what I did!

johnnymg
May 15, 2010, 04:18 PM
Is a 3G option for the next MBA too crazy to consider? :eek:.

Thanks for all the well reasoned comments this thread.
JohnG

cleric
May 15, 2010, 04:47 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.11) Sprint PPC6850SP)

Does this affect the "WHEN?" question? I needed to buy in aproximately* January, but MacRumors's Buying Guide and then the many blogs' rumors of a Jan./Feb./March/April debut persuaded me to wait. But the wait for Godot has now stretched so long, it seems that probably I should've bought a new or refurbed SSD-120 model in January. I need it yesterday. /// So, could someone please just boil this ULV-7 rumor down to -- How does this affect the date-forecast on when 'Air' likely gets refreshed? /// Have ALL the parts for this ULV-7 version been available for enough weeks, that there COULD be a warehouse full of these Rev. D Airs already built, just waiting to drop at or before WWDC ? Thanks. /////// (* I know "aproximately" sounds odd, but I won't bore everyone with the details of one person's career-changing calendar.)

I have to buy on June 5th which I can realistically stretch to WWDC on the 7th, personally if it isn't updated by then its probably not going to be for a while. Honestly I think it is just going to be a ram bump and nvidia 320m maybe a cpu bump like the last time. I really doubt we are getting a core i7 at this point in time.

pharmx
May 15, 2010, 06:47 PM
Hmm...what do you think the chances are that Apple will split up the MacBook Air lineup?

For example, the low end staying with the C2D (but with a CPU boost and nVidia 320M) while the high end receives the ULV Core i7 (with dedicated graphics card and SSD boost). Maybe some new features could be shared like glass trackpad, IPS screen, and 4GB RAM.

I believe the iMacs, and now the MBPs, have c2d in some configurations, and core i-series in others, so would this be so far fetched?

Scottsdale
May 15, 2010, 07:12 PM
I, too, hope that we get a major revision of the MBA because I fear a modest revision would result in an MBA still too resource poor to allow me to run all the OS X and Windows apps I now run on my MBP. Alas, all we can do is wait and see. The upside to all of this is that it keeps us off the streets and gives us something to talk about.:)

Come on, a Core 2 Duo at 2.13 GHz de-throttled with an Nvidia 320m isn't going to be "too limited" in any way if it has 4 GB of RAM or better yet two RAM slots. The CPU and GPU are not the issues. The only issues for the vast majority of the buyers are most importantly the lack of RAM followed closely by a larger SSD. People can be happy with 4 GB of RAM and a 192 GB SSD... people would be ecstatic for two RAM slots for 8 GB of RAM and a 256 GB SSD. Hell, Apple wouldn't need to upgrade the CPU or Nvidia 9400m to make it a huge seller.

still reckon there are new models being released 18.May and 8.June as per my previous post in another thread.

we now know about the impending MB refresh, so I'd say that'll be the 18.May release.
thus, 8.June is my tip for an MBA refresh.

I really don't think Apple will EOL the Air for at least 2 or 3 reasons.


I know, you said three weeks ago that it would be the 18th, and if you remember correctly, I said I believe you! I do think that the 18th is a C2D MBA with an Nvidia 320m. I believe a June 7th MBA is a Core i7, and I pray to God it's with an ATI 5430 GPU! But then every Pro out there would then consider the MBA over the 13" MBP... which would be a hell of an upsell.


Selling them off after buying an iPad perhaps? That is what I did!

I believe that's accurate. But we have to remember who is selling their MBA and why? I believe, as I have stated repetitively here, that the real market segment buyers for the MBA will not abandon the MBA for an iPad. The MBA target buyer is using it for business and needs a real computer to do input or creation of work.

Those who bought dumped MBAs for $999 to $1299 are not the intended target buyers for the MBA, and they just wanted in to the club to use the MBA as a secondary device for "netbook" like uses which can be replaced by the iPad.

The MBA targeted buyer is more interested than ever in an MBA that meets their demand for power and performance of a Mac, who can use it as their primary computer on the go or at their desk. If the MBA gets an update to either a C2D and Nvidia 320m, 4 GB RAM, and a 256 GB SSD, I believe they can sell two or three times as many MBAs at $500 more per top end... to cover the larger SSD.


Dream land...

Now if we get a Core i7 at faster than 2 GHz besting the SL9600 by 30%, a dedicated ATI 5430 graphics card with 256 MB VRAM, two RAM slots, a 256 GB SSD, glass trackpad and an IPS HD display and the MBA market will change and grow tremendously/exponentially (okay not really but it would really grow).

The 13" MBP buyer will see the MBA as a possibility if the MBA has a dedicated ATI 5430 GPU and a Core i7. Honestly, this is a GOLDMINE opportunity for Apple. It might even fortell why Apple stuck with C2D in the 13" MBP... to make a crapload of money selling MBAs for $2499 again to the original target buyer, the tech enthusiasts, and even the "pro" users who don't give a damn about a worthless DVD drive in their Mac notebook. And people will shell the money if it has a Core i7, dedicated ATI card, up to 8 GB RAM, and a 256 GB SSD... wow, this could be a miracle... I need to slow down or I will hyperventalate - I am joking people. I don't believe this is going to happen, but I sure would love this MBA.

I would absolutely buy an MBA with a Core i7 at 2.26 GHz with GMA HD IGP disabled, an ATI 5430 GPU with 256 MB dedicated VRAM, two RAM slots with up to 8 GB DDR3 RAM, 256 GB SSD, IPS HD display, and a silky smooth glass trackpad. I would think it would be the high end at $2499.

Could Apple even have two different MBAs? A "consumer" model and a "pro" model? Seriously, this Core i7 potential with a dedicated 5430 ATI GPU completely changes the MBA's market. Apple could even go consumer with a C2D in low-end with an Nvidia 320m, 4 GB RAM soldered to the board, and a 128 GB SSD. That would make a great $1799 low-end MBA. No, this isn't going to happen. It's either going to be all C2D or all Core series CPUs in the MBAs.

I give the C2D and Nvidia 320m a 85% chance, and I give the Core i7-6x0UM overclocked w/dedicated GPU a 5% chance, and I give a Core i7-6x0LM w/Intel HD a 10% chance. So let's not get our hopes way up here. I will be really happy with a C2D and Nvidia 320m, with 4 GB of RAM, 192/256 GB SSD, and a glass trackpad. An IPS display and all the rest are hopeful's not probables.

pharmx
May 15, 2010, 07:41 PM
Is there any reason why a 15" and 17" MBA have not been released? Is it possible that by increasing size (not thickness or relative weight), that a dedicated card and core i-series would make sense? I guess the MBA's would mirror the MBP's in this scenario where the 13" models stick with c2d and the bigger models go with the newer intel chips.

Would people even be interested in a 15" or 17" MBA? I guess I should make a new thread with a poll to find out, but the very prospect has me thinking of what my current MBA would be like with a bigger screen.

Scottsdale
May 15, 2010, 08:16 PM
Is there any reason why a 15" and 17" MBA have not been released? Is it possible that by increasing size (not thickness or relative weight), that a dedicated card and core i-series would make sense? I guess the MBA's would mirror the MBP's in this scenario where the 13" models stick with c2d and the bigger models go with the newer intel chips.

Would people even be interested in a 15" or 17" MBA? I guess I should make a new thread with a poll to find out, but the very prospect has me thinking of what my current MBA would be like with a bigger screen.

I think we are more likely to get 15" and 17" MBPs that are thinner like the MacBook Air. The NON-Super Drive is about worthless. Apple needs to either adopt BluRay or get rid of the NSD and use the space to thin the MBPs or use it for something productive and worthwhile. I don't care which way they go for the MBPs right now, but in the long run even Blu Ray is worthless. Digital is the way to go, and a thumb drive can be used to sell applications in much smaller boxes wasting less materials and being much greener. Plus, then the space of the drive isn't used. Apple needs to start selling its apps right on USB thumb drives if it wants to eliminate optical drives, and it makes a lot of sense. I just don't understand the Non-Super Drive.

I don't know if a 15" MBA or a 15" MBP without an optical drive is more sellable? I would guess a 15" MBP without an optical drive would still be thicker, but thinness isn't the best part of the MBA... the weight (or lack thereof) is the super amazing feature of the MBA.

Who would buy a 15" MBA? I have thought a lot about it, but I need the ultraportable 13" MBA because I travel frequently. A 15" MBA would be difficult to open in an airline seat. However, a 15" MBA would allow the space for dedicated graphics, but that might be possible in a 13" MBA - I guess we will see soon if that's possible. I really like having just one computer, and the capability for me to connect the 13" MBA to a 24" LED ACD gives me ultraportability on the go, and complete perfection of an instant desktop solution when at the desk.

So I believe I am out of the 15" MBA if the footprint were similar to the current 15" MBP, however, there's a solution. There is so much wasted space in the bezels of Mac notebooks. Why not take the display right to the edge with just a 1/8" thick "bead" of aluminum around the display? That way a 14.9" display would fit in the current footprint of the 13" MBA. That is the complete solution. I would LOVE this solution, and especially with an HD display all the way up to 1920 x 1200 resolution.

So a 15" MBA becomes the same basic footprint as the 13" MBA, and the 13" MBA gets a smaller footprint by reducing the bezel and wasted space on sides of keyboard. Doesn't this make more sense?

thinkdesign
May 15, 2010, 08:22 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.11) Sprint PPC6850SP)

2 questions: Re: MINI -- Is what I read a year or year and a half ago now plausible, that any idea of EOL-ing the Mini got delayed when the early fall '08 economic crisis occurred? Suggesting that if the economy got back up, then they might still want to EOL it? So that then it survives only as sort of merged with an improved Apple TV unit? ///// RE: WHITEBOOK: Does the one on sale, now, have the case cracking problem fixed? (If not, will the new one?) And is the MB another product (per '08 rumor) Apple might have EOLed, if the 9/'08 financial crisis hadn't made 2008-2009-2010 a bad time to drop the relatively most affordable model? Meaning again, that in better economic times, they may still want to dump it? Other than needing a dongle adapter to get SD-card pix into it, what won't the rumored-next MB do, that a 13" MBP can do?

pharmx
May 15, 2010, 08:48 PM
I think we are more likely to get 15" and 17" MBPs that are thinner like the MacBook Air. The NON-Super Drive is about worthless. Apple needs to either adopt BluRay or get rid of the NSD and use the space to thin the MBPs or use it for something productive and worthwhile. I don't care which way they go for the MBPs right now, but in the long run even Blu Ray is worthless. Digital is the way to go, and a thumb drive can be used to sell applications in much smaller boxes wasting less materials and being much greener. Plus, then the space of the drive isn't used. Apple needs to start selling its apps right on USB thumb drives if it wants to eliminate optical drives, and it makes a lot of sense. I just don't understand the Non-Super Drive.

I don't know if a 15" MBA or a 15" MBP without an optical drive is more sellable? I would guess a 15" MBP without an optical drive would still be thicker, but thinness isn't the best part of the MBA... the weight (or lack thereof) is the super amazing feature of the MBA.

Who would buy a 15" MBA? I have thought a lot about it, but I need the ultraportable 13" MBA because I travel frequently. A 15" MBA would be difficult to open in an airline seat. However, a 15" MBA would allow the space for dedicated graphics, but that might be possible in a 13" MBA - I guess we will see soon if that's possible. I really like having just one computer, and the capability for me to connect the 13" MBA to a 24" LED ACD gives me ultraportability on the go, and complete perfection of an instant desktop solution when at the desk.

So I believe I am out of the 15" MBA if the footprint were similar to the current 15" MBP, however, there's a solution. There is so much wasted space in the bezels of Mac notebooks. Why not take the display right to the edge with just a 1/8" thick "bead" of aluminum around the display? That way a 14.9" display would fit in the current footprint of the 13" MBA. That is the complete solution. I would LOVE this solution, and especially with an HD display all the way up to 1920 x 1200 resolution.

So a 15" MBA becomes the same basic footprint as the 13" MBA, and the 13" MBA gets a smaller footprint by reducing the bezel and wasted space on sides of keyboard. Doesn't this make more sense?


Perfect! That get's my vote for the ultimate 13" MBA:

- overclocked ULV Core i7 with disabled GMA
- dedicated graphics card from ATI (or maybe a custom nVidia solution)
- the new Intel SSD's that are coming out in 2011 which offer "double the storage for the same price"...320GB at the current 160's price...yes please!
- 4GB RAM
- improved screen size with bezel replaced by aluminum "bead" allowing a 14.9" display HD display with a resolution of 1920 x 1200
- Lightpeak port(s)
- Glass trackpad

So how much would you pay for that MBA? :D

cleric
May 16, 2010, 12:31 AM
Perfect! That get's my vote for the ultimate 13" MBA:

- overclocked ULV Core i7 with disabled GMA
- dedicated graphics card from ATI (or maybe a custom nVidia solution)
- the new Intel SSD's that are coming out in 2011 which offer "double the storage for the same price"...320GB at the current 160's price...yes please!
- 4GB RAM
- improved screen size with bezel replaced by aluminum "bead" allowing a 14.9" display HD display with a resolution of 1920 x 1200
- Lightpeak port(s)
- Glass trackpad

So how much would you pay for that MBA? :D
Not much how many lightpeak devices do you own versus usb? I'm so tired about people expecting lightpeak in every device now, how many of you need the bandwidth? A gigabit port would be more useful.

gwsat
May 16, 2010, 08:24 AM
Come on, a Core 2 Duo at 2.13 GHz de-throttled with an Nvidia 320m isn't going to be "too limited" in any way if it has 4 GB of RAM or better yet two RAM slots. The CPU and GPU are not the issues. The only issues for the vast majority of the buyers are most importantly the lack of RAM followed closely by a larger SSD. People can be happy with 4 GB of RAM and a 192 GB SSD... people would be ecstatic for two RAM slots for 8 GB of RAM and a 256 GB SSD. Hell, Apple wouldn't need to upgrade the CPU or Nvidia 9400m to make it a huge seller.
I agree that more RAM is far more important in any updated MBA than either the CPU or GPU. I also agree that the size of the SSD would be another vitally important consideration. Like you, part of me wants an update next Tuesday, while another wishes that Apple would wait until WWDC and announce a really dramatic upgrade.

Scuby
May 16, 2010, 12:43 PM
Been reading about this as I'm looking to replace my current (Dell / Windows Vista) laptop, and a MacBook Air is a definite possibility...

I suspect, however, that any rumours about big changes to the processor are wrong, and so the processor will be the same as the 13" MBP, ie still the Core 2 Duo. But the update must happen soon.

Why? Because (in an apparently slip-up, which has gone largely unnoticed) if you scroll to the bottom of this page (http://www.apple.com/uk/airportextreme/features/frequency.html) Apple themselves already have a link advertising the "new" MBA.

The new MacBook Air
More storage. Faster graphics.

Clearly then, the update to the MBA is relatively minor, with new graphics (presumably the same as the 13" MBP), and larger storage. Obviously that doesn't preclude the possibility of more RAM, glass trackpad, etc, but i'd suggest that given the headline improvements don't mention the processor then an i7 is not there, and presumably battery life won't be massive (but probably still a bump)?

All still speculation on the details, but that Apple's focus of the new MBA is graphics and storage is undeniably from a very reliable source: Apple!

Edit: Ignore all of the above. Seemingly the "More storage. Faster graphics." phrase was used for the 2008 launch of the MBA (see, for example, http://www.macworld.com/article/136051/2008/10/macbookair.html). Still seems a bit odd that Apple still use that after 2 years, but never mind :(

David

gimmi80
May 16, 2010, 12:54 PM
That would be good enough for me. 256SSD and the 320m. I'm in.

Anyway, we are not 100% that ads regards the new air. It may refer to the rev b or rev c MBA.

I don't recall apple using that motto, for the rev c the motto was faster than ever.

I keep my finger crossed.

Mr. Zarniwoop
May 16, 2010, 12:58 PM
(in an apparently slip-up, which has gone largely unnoticed) if you scroll to the bottom of this page (http://www.apple.com/uk/airportextreme/features/frequency.html) Apple themselves already have a link advertising the "new" MBA.
If you Google that phrase (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=the+new+macbook+air+more+storage+faster+graphics) you'll see it's just the headline from the 2008 introduction of the MacBook Air rev B/C.

Scuby
May 16, 2010, 01:03 PM
If you Google that phrase (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=the+new+macbook+air+more+storage+faster+graphics) you'll see it's just the headline from the 2008 introduction of the MacBook Air rev B/C.

Oh... that's rubbish then! lol

In which case, ignore me :rolleyes:

Scottsdale
May 16, 2010, 02:16 PM
Not much how many lightpeak devices do you own versus usb? I'm so tired about people expecting lightpeak in every device now, how many of you need the bandwidth? A gigabit port would be more useful.

The thing is LightPeak WILL be ultimately be infinitely faster as it's already amazingly faster than USB 3.0, but the technology can be written to go far faster than it already is. The idea of fiber is almost unlimited in terms of speed comparison to USB or any other port/cable technology available today.

The thing is we will all have USB 3.0 for awhile for input devices like keyboards and mice. However, even those are going wireless. For drives, displays, printers, network connection, and etc, LightPeak is the universal standard that will do all of these devices instead of needing a separate type of port for each technology.

A Mac in 2011 will probably have one USB 3.0, one mini Display Port, and one LightPeak. A Mac in 2013 will probably have three LightPeak ports. There will probably be a connector to use USB via a LightPeak cable to converter.

pharmx
May 16, 2010, 05:47 PM
The thing is LightPeak WILL be ultimately be infinitely faster as it's already amazingly faster than USB 3.0, but the technology can be written to go far faster than it already is. The idea of fiber is almost unlimited in terms of speed comparison to USB or any other port/cable technology available today.

The thing is we will all have USB 3.0 for awhile for input devices like keyboards and mice. However, even those are going wireless. For drives, displays, printers, network connection, and etc, LightPeak is the universal standard that will do all of these devices instead of needing a separate type of port for each technology.

A Mac in 2011 will probably have one USB 3.0, one mini Display Port, and one LightPeak. A Mac in 2013 will probably have three LightPeak ports. There will probably be a connector to use USB via a LightPeak cable to converter.

This.

Since space, and more specifically room for ports, is extremely constrained, the flexibility gained from what LightPeak claims to be able to do is extremely valuable. Since Apple and Intel are working together on developing this technology, I just saw it as the logical choice.

Scottsdale
May 16, 2010, 11:01 PM
This.

Since space, and more specifically room for ports, is extremely constrained, the flexibility gained from what LightPeak claims to be able to do is extremely valuable. Since Apple and Intel are working together on developing this technology, I just saw it as the logical choice.

I certainly hope Apple also considers taking on Intel's wireless display technology. It would be much better to completely eliminate wires - what the MBA sets out to do/BE.

animan
May 17, 2010, 12:47 AM
http://img1.gtimg.com/digi/pics/hv1/112/168/510/33205702.jpg


As I’ve mentioned earlier, the possibility of the Core i7 680 UM, excites me in quite the extreme fashion., ie in a way that causes physical flushing of the skin and spiritual failing of the kidneys.

The only problem is going to be what GPU they use. I don’t want Intel’s offerings. I wonder if there is a discrete option which is sufficiently small (with a new MBA chassis) and sufficiently low-watted ? I haven’t done research on this myself so I’m not aware of such options from Nvidia or ATI but I was under the impression that these are available (I think it was an ATI card?).

The CPU however on paper, the Core-i7 680UM is absolutely perfect for me. 18 Watts TDP so it won’t sear my thighs/duvet/sofa - I love to lap/bed/sofa surf – being able to at least watch videos on these surfaces is an enormous factor for me. Its 1.46GHz standard clock is perfectly sufficient for my everyday use, with the 2.56GHz Turbo reserved for those few times I personally do heavy lifting – eg video editing – whereupon I’ll put it on a hardtop table and let it roar.

Nothing at all certain in any of these reports but if the Core-i7 680UM can be put into Rev D Air with an adequate resolution of the GPU issue I’d be very very satisfied :)

Loving the Black box.... can see myself opening one of these babies :)

On another note, if the Air is getting the Core-i7, while the 13-inch Macbook Pro still has the Core 2 Duo, it seems like the 13-inch Pro might be on its way out. Apple would probably just keep the regular Macbook and the 15 and 17 inch Pro models.

PsyD4Me
May 17, 2010, 04:53 AM
Loving the Black box.... can see myself opening one of these babies :)

On another note, if the Air is getting the Core-i7, while the 13-inch Macbook Pro still has the Core 2 Duo, it seems like the 13-inch Pro might be on its way out. Apple would probably just keep the regular Macbook and the 15 and 17 inch Pro models.

the 13" MBP's are pretty popular, so i highly doubt it

animan
May 17, 2010, 09:05 PM
the 13" MBP's are pretty popular, so i highly doubt it

Yes, true they are popular now, however, the new MacBook lineup will likely change the balance, can't imagine lot of people opting for the Core 2 Duos with i5 & i7's available. Of course, again some folks might not care as long as it runs and the price is good.

I currently own the Air and had been seriously considering the 15in MBP with Core i7 and upgraded display. I am now going to wait for the Air announcement. Hoping for CPU/GPU upgrade, a display upgrade along with it would be awesome.

Scottsdale
May 17, 2010, 09:48 PM
Yes, true they are popular now, however, the new MacBook lineup will likely change the balance, can't imagine lot of people opting for the Core 2 Duos with i5 & i7's available. Of course, again some folks might not care as long as it runs and the price is good.

I currently own the Air and had been seriously considering the 15in MBP with Core i7 and upgraded display. I am now going to wait for the Air announcement. Hoping for CPU/GPU upgrade, a display upgrade along with it would be awesome.

Everyone is getting WAY TOO OPTIMISTIC about the potential for a Core i7-6x0UM CPU that will give us a true 2+ GHz Core CPU and dedicated GPU. I would say it's HIGHLY UNLIKELY! Much more likely to get either a C2D with Nvidia 320m or a Core i7-6x0UM/i7-6x0LM with Intel GMA HD as sole graphics solution.

gwsat
May 18, 2010, 09:13 AM
The more I think about an MBA update the more convinced I become that the future of the MBA may depend upon Apple providing a revision that is truly significant. Apple has allowed the MBA to fall far behind more modern ultra lightweights in memory, graphics, and processing power, all three. Apple has to do something soon to greatly improve the MBA or just quietly let it die. Otherwise, it will continue to be what it has become: a beautiful and elegantly designed lightweight with obsolescent features. Its beautifully thin form factor and ultra lightweight aren't enough to overcome its current weaknesses. Maybe Apple really does intend to drop the MBA, I hope not, but it's impossible not to consider the possibility.

raccoontail
May 18, 2010, 07:33 PM
What would really suck is if Apple did this to get the damned 7-hour battery. What the hell does someone need a 7-hour battery for anyways? I would rather go more mobile and more powerful with a 5-hour battery than stick us with an ultra low voltage Ci7 and sole use of Intel's most worthless GMA HD for graphics.

A GMA HD is still more useful than a MBA with an empty battery. I was on a flight from NY to LA last week seated next to a MBA user - her battery died before we crossed the rockies. I'm all in favor of Apple doing whatever it takes to get the MBA up to a 5-7 hour initial battery life. 7 hour batteries don't stay that way for long. By the time the machine is a few years (or hundred charge cycles old), it will be more like a 4-5 hour battery, and lots of folks need at least that - students with 3 classes in a day, cross-country fliers, freelancers who work from starbucks, etc... obviously battery capacity, performance, and weight are all at odds with each other. The best Apple can do is guess the average MBA user's needs and split the difference.

thinkdesign
May 18, 2010, 09:17 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.11) Sprint PPC6850SP)

If the next Air has i7 chipset, I would have to choose between 3 options ---- i7, the current 2.13 w/ SSD model, or the refurb 1.86 w/ same SSD. Could you please be specific on what the i7 won't do or do as well -- that the 2 older models I mentioned CAN do? ////// (My needs: No movie-making, no game-playing, no code-writing, no Windows O/S. A big volume of prints, maybe in Aperture. Some sort of project-type software to gather bits of stuff for each project. Watching lecture videos, and lecturing myself w/ a projector and maybe even occasionally displaying found audio/video snippets of less than a minute. Any multitasking would be limited to things like writing in Word via OfficeForMac while keeping a web page or old notes / an earlier draft of mine -- onscreen. If I can have web-radio playing too that's nice, but I don't need it.)

L0s7man
May 19, 2010, 01:58 AM
I'm getting confused here: MBP sell with i5/i7 and Nvidia GPU. So whats the problem with MBA? Why can't it have both i7 and a GPU from Nvidia?

To be honest, C2D + 320M would do just fine for me, as long as it comes with high-res screen and glass touchpad!

Jobsian
May 19, 2010, 02:45 AM
The more I think about an MBA update the more convinced I become that the future of the MBA may depend upon Apple providing a revision that is truly significant. Apple has allowed the MBA to fall far behind more modern ultra lightweights in memory, graphics, and processing power, all three. Apple has to do something soon to greatly improve the MBA or just quietly let it die. Otherwise, it will continue to be what it has become: a beautiful and elegantly designed lightweight with obsolescent features. Its beautifully thin form factor and ultra lightweight aren't enough to overcome its current weaknesses. Maybe Apple really does intend to drop the MBA, I hope not, but it's impossible not to consider the possibility.I have to say, even reading this post is mouthwatering! I'm becoming both very excited at WWDC and at the same time anxious as I see more and more posts suggesting no Mac updates then...let's see

Scottsdale
May 20, 2010, 12:39 AM
I'm getting confused here: MBP sell with i5/i7 and Nvidia GPU. So whats the problem with MBA? Why can't it have both i7 and a GPU from Nvidia?

To be honest, C2D + 320M would do just fine for me, as long as it comes with high-res screen and glass touchpad!

Well, you need to read what people are saying then, because the reason why is all over the Internet.

Intel canceled Nvidia's license for making chipsets for Intel CPUs that have the GMA DIE on the CPU. Anything beyond Core 2 Duo will require a dedicated GPU. The Nvidia 320m is an integrated CHIPSET which has the GPU integrated into the chipset itself. Basically, Intel couldn't compete and was losing business to Nvidia with clients just like Apple; to cancel Nvidia's license Intel just said it was because chipset with GPU isn't necessary anymore because GMA IGP DIE is on the Intel Core i7 CPU itself as a second DIE. The Core series CPUs are made up of a 32nm CPU and 45nm GMA DIE.

The Justice Department is reviewing it. What happens in these situations of violation of an anti-trust law is the "bully" in this case Intel, says the competitor no longer has a valid license. The company bullied out, in this case Nvidia, no longer can sell chipsets so it stops spending money on R&D waiting for a legal remedy. By the time it plays out with the Justice Department, a few years down the road, Intel will have caught up with Nvidia's technology. Nvidia will have stopped development so it can no longer compete. It is a real travesty too because the real losers add up... the users are the biggest losers, followed by the company kicked out (Nvidia), and its shareholders. In the long-run Intel will be forced to play fair but by then it will have dominated the market and have a superior product. It turns out nobody will want to buy an Nvidia chipset because Intel will have a better product by the time any legal correction is acted upon. Intel gets its wrists slapped and goes on to dominate the chipset market from then on.

Last thing I am going to explain, Apple cannot legally use an Nvidia 320m GPU/chipset with a Core i3/5/7 CPU. This is why Apple did not use a Core i3 CPU in the 13" MBP and MBs. While Intel sells the CPUs themselves cheaper than C2D CPUs, they require Apple to buy Intel chipsets too. With the MBA Apple will either use a C2D along with an integrated Nvidia GPU, use a Core i-series CPU with Intel GMA HD integrated GPU, or use a Core i-series CPU with Intel GMA HD turned off and a discrete GPU. Unless Intel and Nvidia workout their agreement, not going to happen until justice department steps in, Apple CANNOT use the Nvidia 320m with any Core i-series CPU.

MartiNZ
May 20, 2010, 04:34 AM
Interesting just reading that, I had not cottoned on to the fact that the integrated solution for battery-life in the new 15&17" MBPs is in fact the Intel HD one. I had just assumed, and maybe Mr L0s7man had also, that it was the same integrated one as offered in the 13" ... despite knowledge of the current NVidia & Intel 'issues'.

When all reports are that the Intel HD integrated sucks, why did they even bother putting an integrated backup in anymore? Just to uphold the 10 hour battery claim?

allmIne
May 20, 2010, 05:08 AM
What would really suck is if Apple did this to get the damned 7-hour battery. [b]What the hell does someone need a 7-hour battery for anyways? I would rather go more mobile and more powerful with a 5-hour battery[/b[ than stick us with an ultra low voltage Ci7 and sole use of Intel's most worthless GMA HD for graphics. We have been down that road with the original MBA and it was a P.O.S.! I refuse to be suckered by Apple again. I will not be buying such a Mac again when Apple fooled me once with the original MBA and its worthless Intel GMA! Fool me twice and it's shame on me, and I am not going to be SJ's money train again for another useless MBA that cannot even play a damned video.


I'd wager most MBA users would value a 7 hour battery. Given its raison d'etre is portability. To me, it defeats the purpose of paying more for portability if I've to bring a power brick with me, or charge the machine where my charger is kept more often.

flynz4
May 20, 2010, 10:09 AM
I'd wager most MBA users would value a 7 hour battery. Given its raison d'etre is portability. To me, it defeats the purpose of paying more for portability if I've to bring a power brick with me, or charge the machine where my charger is kept more often.

Of course "longer battery life" is valuable... but I personally would not be willing to trade it off against higher weight or additional bulk. I can already get that... it is called a MBP.

If anything, I would prefer constant battery life with reduced bulk and weight. When I am traveling, my power adapter is coming with me irrespective of the battery life of my computer. I keep one in my computer backpack at all times. I also keep power adapters in places wherever I am likely to be repetitively (ex: home and work).

One nice thing about the air is the power adapter is smaller than the ones for the MBP. I wish Apple would integrate a USB port into MBA power adapter that could additionally charge the iPhone and iPad.

/Jim

Scottsdale
May 20, 2010, 02:24 PM
I'd wager most MBA users would value a 7 hour battery. Given its raison d'etre is portability. To me, it defeats the purpose of paying more for portability if I've to bring a power brick with me, or charge the machine where my charger is kept more often.

I never made the argument that people don't want a 7/10-hour battery.

Oh yes I do agree. Many MBA buyers want the extra battery capabilities. The problem is the added battery capabilities will reduce the level of performance we can expect from a new MBA.

Look at the potential ULV CPUs. 1.06 to 1.2 GHz to get us down to 18W TDP which could offer a 35% boost in time between charges without changing the battery at all. However, doesn't 1.06 to 1.2 GHz cost us in terms of performance capabilities. BTW, I don't believe Apple would be able to sell a 1.2 GHz MBA as it would be awfully different to market it when MBA did have 2.13 GHz available in prior update. It doesn't even matter if the 1.2 GHz boosts to as fast as the prior chips, people are influenced by the marketing numbers too (the clock speed).

Apple has to come up with a chip that at least seems as fast as the current CPUs so around 2 GHz. It might actually be able to do that with ULV CPUs, but would have to add dedicated graphics... then that affects battery negatively. So Apple would need to add weight to the MBA to make the battery larger. Might have to gain some thickness to the MBA itself.

I agree MANY buyers want a more capable 10-hour battery in the MBA. What I think is the 10-hour MBA is called the 13" MBP. The ability to go for 10 hours between charges is mostly due to the much larger battery in the 13" MBP... and it also weighs more. So would require thicker and heavier MBA.

I don't want that MBA whether Apple goes that way or not. I see a 3 lb. MBA as the winner, and I see making a 3 lb. MBA go for 10 or even 7 hours between charges have the performance capabilities affected negatively. I guess I believe the current MBA is the perfect level of performance to weight ratio. I don't want that affected in any way. But I agree, many do want those changes and would be happy if Apple used a Core i7 and stuck us with Intel's GMA HD for graphics... because they don't need power they want the ability to be away from a power source ten hours at a time.

I never made the argument that people don't want a 7/10-hour battery.

allmIne
May 20, 2010, 04:30 PM
I never made the argument that people don't want a 7/10-hour battery.

Oh yes I do agree. Many MBA buyers want the extra battery capabilities.

I never made the argument that people don't want a 7/10-hour battery.


Oh, I know you didn't :) You were speaking for yourself when mentioning your battery life / performance requirements, I know.

I agree completely with your point about battery life vs performance.

Jobsian
May 23, 2010, 02:54 AM
"Alienware M11x getting Intel Core i3 / i5 / i7 upgrade next month, says Dell rep"

http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/22/alienware-m11x-getting-intel-core-i3-i5-i7-upgrade-next-mont/

It doesn't mention what voltage processors he was talking about but a vanilla Arrandale Core i7 in an 11" form factor (albeit quite thick) would be mighty impressive.

2 things here: I'm waiting to see 1) What they do with the cooling and 2) This is marketed as a games machine- what graphics card solution they'll employ as they surely can't use Intel-only.

pharmx
May 23, 2010, 03:28 AM
"Alienware M11x getting Intel Core i3 / i5 / i7 upgrade next month, says Dell rep"

http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/22/alienware-m11x-getting-intel-core-i3-i5-i7-upgrade-next-mont/

It doesn't mention what voltage processors he was talking about but a vanilla Arrandale Core i7 in an 11" form factor (albeit quite thick) would be mighty impressive.

2 things here: I'm waiting to see 1) What they do with the cooling and 2) This is marketed as a games machine- what graphics card solution they'll employ as they surely can't use Intel-only.

I'm sorry, but that thing looks hideous...it looks like they took two completely different designs and mashed them together in a small form factor. And why in the world would you want to game on an 11" :confused:

AAPLaday
May 23, 2010, 03:30 AM
I'm sorry, but that thing looks hideous...it looks like they took two completely different designs and mashed them together in a small form factor. And why in the world would you want to game on an 11" :confused:

It has lots of power but why do they have to design them to appeal to 15 year old boys? Paying that much for a laptop i would want something that looked classy. Im not saying only Apple can make good looking machines but that looks like something id be embarrassed to use outside of the house. The specs of it are fantastic though