Intel iBook (MacBook) Arriving in May? and 17'' MacBook Pro?

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif

ThinkSecret claims that Apple has begun manufacturing the new "MacBook" (Intel iBook) which should be available in the next 30-60 days.

According to the rumor site, the newest version of the iBook will indeed be rebranded as a "MacBook" and will come with a 13.3" widescreen display with 1280x720 resolution.

The upcoming MacBook is said to share internal components with the recently released Mac mini which comes in both Core Solo and Core Duo configurations. The new MacBook will therefore replace both the current 12" and 14" iBooks as well as the 12" PowerBook G4. This corroborates a similar report that new iBooks were in production to be delivered by June. The iBook was last updated in July 2005.

Meanwhile, a 17" MacBook Pro with brighter display is also in the works and should arrive around the same time. The 17" MacBook Pro is said to be otherwise similar to the current 15" MacBook Pro.

[BlizzardBomb]

1280x720 (16:9) is an odd resolution for Apple who prefers to use 16:10. I thought they'd go for 1280x800.

[dejo]

Originally Posted by BlizzardBomb

1280x720 (16:9) is an odd resolution for Apple who prefers to use 16:10. I thought they'd go for 1280x800.

True, but allows native HD resolution (720p).

[babyjenniferLB]

Originally Posted by dejo

True, but allows native HD resolution (720p).

now theres a big plus and 720p is about all the low core solos and low core duos can manage its only the >1.8 that seem to manage 1080p

[dr_lha]

Originally Posted by babyjenniferLB

now theres a big plus and 720p is about all the low core solos and low core duos can manage its only the >1.8 that seem to manage 1080p

If you read this site at all, which I think you do, you should have seen already that the 1.66Mhz Core Duo Minis can handle 1080p just fine.

[zen]

Originally Posted by dejo

True, but allows native HD resolution (720p).

The MacBook Pro is 16:9 - the space at the top of the screen is occupied by the built-in camera. If the MacBook (iBook) is also 16:9, this suggests it will also have a camera.

And yes, 16:9 is a much more sensible ratio.

[loveturtle]

I can't wait, i've been waiting for the 17" all year.
I keep getting so close to breaking down and just buying the 15"...
I would buy the 17" right now if i could..

I hope the resolution is decent though, my current 15.4" laptop is 1920x1200 and I like it like that!

All I can say is Apple, please hurry up so I can give you some money! kthx.

[dejo]

Originally Posted by zen

The MacBook Pro is 16:9 - the space at the top of the screen is occupied by the built-in camera. If the MacBook (iBook) is also 16:9, this suggests it will also have a camera.

And yes, 16:9 is a much more sensible ratio.

The MacBook Pro is not 16:9. It is 1440x900 which translates to 1.6:1 whereas 16:9 is 1.78:1. Even if it did, it wouldn't have a native HD resolution (either 720p or 1080p). I think this is important since it allows full-screen, non-scaled HD content to be displayed. Less heavy-lifting involved.

[AidenShaw]

Originally Posted by zen

And yes, 16:9 is a much more sensible ratio.

If removing pixels could ever be considered to be "sensible"....

[Eidorian]

Originally Posted by BlizzardBomb

1280x720 (16:9) is an odd resolution for Apple who prefers to use 16:10. I thought they'd go for 1280x800.

One more thing, I would have named it the iBook HD. >_>

[g.x]

Originally Posted by Eidorian

One more thing, I would have named it the iBook HD. >_>

In a very refreshing way, Apple has high standards for HD. Unlike many manufacturers, they don't call something HD just because it can play some HD resolution out there (720p or 1080i).

Apple only calls something HD if it can play ALL HD resolutions out there. In other words, according to Apple, if it doesn't do 1080p, then it's not HD.

That's why the 20" display and iMac are not called HD by Apple...even though they will certainly do 720p.

[Demon Hunter]

Originally Posted by g.x

In a very refreshing way, Apple has high standards for HD. Unlike many manufacturers, they don't call something HD just because it can play some HD resolution out there (720p or 1080i).

Apple only calls something HD if it can play ALL HD resolutions out there. In other words, according to Apple, if it doesn't do 1080p, then it's not HD.

That's why the 20" display and iMac are not called HD by Apple...even though they will certainly do 720p.

Or they just want HD customers to pay more.

A 19-inch MacBook Pro would be sweet. But a third of your arm would be reaching for the keyboard.

[SaddY]

Let me predict the following:

The redesign will sweep you off your feet so whatever they put in it you will want it anyway.

They will not keep the 999 price point.. every intel product they released went up in price. So why wouldn't the macbook ?

People screeming for a core duo and hating on integrated graphics and want a x1300 or x1600 in and want to keep the price point should stop dreaming..
The only duo's as far as I know are 1,66 1,83 2.0 and 2.16 ghz.
We know the macbook's come in 1,83 an 2.0 with option for 2.16.. so there could only be a 1,66 used in the macbooks to not exceed the macbook pro's...

A 1.66 Core Duo with X1600 would just be way to close to the MBP.. so either expect the price to be close to 1999 or don't expect those specs

I as a MacBook Pro owner (just upgraded from a latest gen iBook G4) feel that at a 999 price point you should not expect more then a intel integrated graphics chip. If you however go for the more expensive model you should be able to count on a dedicated graphics chip. Maybe they have alot of spare 9700 stock :P

I don't know..
but I forcast not to big of a deal.. The Macbook pro's can't be upgraded anymore (only make the 2.16 a standard instead of BTO) untill the Memrom comes out which will be at the end of the year early next year. So neither can the Macbooks. So they WILL start at a core solo low end and core duo 1.66 high end.

So to sum it up

MBP : 1,83 and 2.0 ---> upgrade 2.16
MB : 1.5 1.66 --> upgrade 1.83 when MBP's upgrade

That only seems logical to me :S
And yes I do think they will have integrated graphics..

Don't really get the 17 inch MBP hype. The specs will be the same as the MBP obviously except for some slight changes. (the CPU, Ram and HD will be the same atleast). Why do you want such a huge thing ? just get the 15 inch and hook it up to external if you want bigger imho..

thats just my 2 cents..

[milo]

Originally Posted by SaddY

They will not keep the 999 price point.. every intel product they released went up in price. So why wouldn't the macbook ?

No they didn't. Only the minis went up in price. iMacs were $1299. 15 inch laptops were $1999. Both same as before. I'd say the odds are 50/50 on the MacBook being the same or going up a bit.

[Demon Hunter]

Originally Posted by SaddY

Don't really get the 17 inch MBP hype. The specs will be the same as the MBP obviously except for some slight changes. (the CPU, Ram and HD will be the same atleast). Why do you want such a huge thing ? just get the 15 inch and hook it up to external if you want bigger imho..

thats just my 2 cents..

We want our FireWire 800 back.

[ready2switch]

What is so bad about wanting dedicated graphics on a “consumer” laptop? Or a Core Duo? Or any of the other *hopes* listed? IMO there is a reachable and reasonable solution:

MacBook – Low option (think mini with a screen)
1.5 (or 1.66) Core Solo
512MB memory
60GB hard drive
Combo Drive
Airport Extreme/Bluetooth/Remote/iSight
Intel GMA950 graphics

BTO Options:
1.66 Core Duo
up to 2GB memory
up to 120GB hard drive
Super Drive
dedicated graphics (64MB or 128MB)

Standard “Low option” priced @ $999
Options bump price as desired.

I don’t think it’s out of reach, and would be in line with some other available counterparts in the PC world. I, for one, would be more than willing to pay for the options I want. Those wanting dedicated graphics aren't wanting them for free, just as an OPTION.

[SeaFox]

I think it's kinda cool how teleconfrencing cameras are becoming standard equipment on Macs. Maybe the next time they update cinema displays they'll add iSights to them as well.

In Apple America, display watches YOU!

Sorry, sorry, I couldn't resist that, although it really belongs on Slashdot.

[Random Passerby]

But what I WANT is a 12" MBP!
It seems like such a bad move from apple to cut out the pros who want a portable machine. I hope it isn't true.

[lduncan]

I'm still waiting for my Macbook Pro to arrive! I ordered the day it was announced at MacWorld.

Apple Australia has a lot to answer for!! Surely sending a few dozen MacBook Pros to New Zealand is not a big ask?

[yoshi31]

Originally Posted by lduncan

I'm still waiting for my Macbook Pro to arrive! I ordered the day it was announced at MacWorld.

Apple Australia has a lot to answer for!! Surely sending a few dozen MacBook Pros to New Zealand is not a big ask?

Are you serious? I am moving to AKL in July and wanted to get one once there, may be I should get one here in Sweden...

[macpastor]

Originally Posted by Random Passerby

But what I WANT is a 12" MBP!
It seems like such a bad move from apple to cut out the pros who want a portable machine. I hope it isn't true.

I had a 12" Powerbook... it never was in the same class as the 15" and 17" I think it was less pro than the other two. It seems right to combine the iBook and the 12" PB and give a grand computer! I only hope they go with aluminum and not the plastic crap. The iBook always mars, and looks terrible, in my opinion. What could be even better than that? A choice of colors, just like the iPod mini. How cool would that be?

[Moshiiii]

Could somone explain to me what Integrated Graphics are?

[dr_lha]

Originally Posted by macpastor

I had a 12" Powerbook... it never was in the same class as the 15" and 17" I think it was less pro than the other two.

I hear this opinion all the time on Mac sites. In what way was the 12" less pro than the other two. The only reason I can think is that it's languished for a long time without being upgraded.

However when it first came out, I think you have a difficult time arguing it wasn't a pro machine.

[dejo]

Originally Posted by Random Passerby

But what I WANT is a 12" MBP!
It seems like such a bad move from apple to cut out the pros who want a portable machine. I hope it isn't true.

I didn't realize the MacBook Pros weren't portable...

[Legacy]

Hello folks, I am hoping for a new MacBook this June/July too as my nearly one year old iBook is getting close to expiring its warranty and needs trading for an updated, multicapable and feature-packed MacBook!

Standard features include 13.3" WideDisplay, MagSafe, MagClose (lol), and MacOS software bundle.

Here are my predictions for the upcoming models:

$999 MacBook

Intel Core Duo 1.66Ghz Processor
512Mb DDR2 Memory (2GB Max)
40Gb Hard Drive
Intel GMA 950/965 Graphics Chipset
CD-RW/DVD Combo Drive
Gigabit Ethernet, Airport and Bluetooth

$1299 MacBook

Intel Core Duo 1.66Ghz Processor
512Mb DDR2 Memory (2GB Max)
60Gb Hard Drive
Intel GMA 950/965 Graphics Chipset
SuperDrive SL
Gigabit Ethernet, Airport and Bluetooth
iSight and FrontRow with Remote

$1499 MacBook

Intel Core Duo 1.83Ghz Processor
512Mb DDR2 Memory (2GB Max)
80Gb Hard Drive
Ati Radeon X1300/1400 64Mb GPU with 128Mb BTO available
SuperDrive SL
Gigabit Ethernet, Airport and Bluetooth
iSight and FrontRow with Remote

Basis: Appleinsider

1. At least CoreDuo Processors
2. FrontRow and iSight on top two models
3. First model really intended for budget student/education
4. Appleinsider says 'several configurations' not just one or two.

Realistically, you cannot expect an iSight, FR AND CoreDuo system for under $999..come on guys...besides, the education sector is neither in need of lots of HDD capacity, dedicated graphics, iSight or FR.
MacBook Pro will most likely be bumped up to 2Ghz/2.16Ghz variants with 2.33Ghz BTO, as expected for release later by Intel. OR configs could stay the same depending on demand...