Agree with everything except the display. I would guess it'll stay 1280x800 non-LED. Even the 15" Macbook rumored to be coming out will most likely have 1280x800 res, which is the standard for 15" PC notebooks. With the Macbooks, Apple is looking to have the lowest costs possible.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Official "Waiting for Santa Rosa" thread.
- Thread starter wrxpert
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Agree with everything except the display. I would guess it'll stay 1280x800 non-LED. Even the 15" Macbook rumored to be coming out will most likely have 1280x800 res, which is the standard for 15" PC notebooks. With the Macbooks, Apple is looking to have the lowest costs possible.
What to do?
I'm hoping to get a regular macbook (2.0ghz core 2 duo processor, 2gb of RAM, 120 or 160 Hdd) but I don't know when to buy it. I really want it soon because I am fed up of my crappy PC.
The thing is though, I don't know whether to wait or not. I'm not that fussed about waiting for leopard, I'll just upgrade when it comes out - I have heard that the first major releases can be buggy anyway. I'm not sure if I want to wait for the hardware though because if it is substantial upgrades then I may wait but the first Macbooks had little problems like the heat isues and the "mooing" and I want my first Mac to be as good as it can be. (the issues with the current macbook are mostly solved).
Will the next macbook definitely have the X3000? The graphics are the only thing that I'm not sure about on the current model (GMA 950). The rest of it is good enough for me and I don't want a pro macbook beacuae it is too big and expensive.
Thanks in advance for any advice on my first ever mac!
I'm hoping to get a regular macbook (2.0ghz core 2 duo processor, 2gb of RAM, 120 or 160 Hdd) but I don't know when to buy it. I really want it soon because I am fed up of my crappy PC.
The thing is though, I don't know whether to wait or not. I'm not that fussed about waiting for leopard, I'll just upgrade when it comes out - I have heard that the first major releases can be buggy anyway. I'm not sure if I want to wait for the hardware though because if it is substantial upgrades then I may wait but the first Macbooks had little problems like the heat isues and the "mooing" and I want my first Mac to be as good as it can be. (the issues with the current macbook are mostly solved).Will the next macbook definitely have the X3000? The graphics are the only thing that I'm not sure about on the current model (GMA 950). The rest of it is good enough for me and I don't want a pro macbook beacuae it is too big and expensive.
Thanks in advance for any advice on my first ever mac!
I have a question: is the macbook the biggest selling single laptop model in the world? Other companies might sell more laptops overall, but spread out over a wider range of models.
I recall that Apple is now one of the biggest computer sellers in the world, so the macbook's gotta be up there somewhere.
The unit costs of the macbook must be starting to get pretty low as I think has the same motherboard as the macbookpro, the imac and the mac mini. (I tried to check this on lowendmac.com but it seems to be down at the moment)
Apple must be one of the worlds biggest purchasers of that particular laptop motherboard.
Well my three year old 15" Dell laptop (soon to be retired in favour of a MacBook) has a 1650*1050 resolution, which is STILL better than the "professional" MBPs at the moment. Apple are lagging behind in terms of resolution and with all the resolution independent stuff in Leopard I would expect them to release higher DPI displays in any new Macs. Otherwise the resolution independent capabilities of Leopard are kinda pointless.
I would expect:
13/15" MacBook: 1440*900
15" MBP: 1650*1050
17" MBP: 1980*1200
Macbooks aren't the "cheap" laptops, they're the consumer (non-pro) ones. If Apple was concerned about cutting as much cost as possible then it would have Mac-Mini specs when it's closer to a 17" iMac.
I'm with you. My first gen G4 iMac still works perfectly, but I crave a new 24" iMac. It's hard to justify it though until something really compelling gets delivered. And since I'm an iMac user, I prefer to get the majority of the things I want since there really is no practical way to get better graphics, ports, etc. I've considered a Mac Pro in the past, but I'm really not a pro user. For me, I'm hoping Santa Rosa delivers eSATA as much as anything else. I like to archive DV, and firewire just doesn't cut it.
Actually, the 2.2 and the 2.4 Ghz chips are being released at the same time, so I think that we can expect the initial Santa Rosa MacBook Pros will have the option of 2.2 and 2.4 Ghz, which is really anything but impressive.
I'm currently waiting to buy my first Macbook (first Mac in awhile too - last Mac I had was a MacSE...), currently aiming at the middle White model. Main things I'm looking forward to (I hope they deliver!) is the X3000 integrated graphics. Anything else would be a bonus since I'm pretty happy with the current Macbook as it is...
But yes, things on my wishlist (that probably won't come true, at least for the next Macbook release):
X3000 graphics
2.2Ghz processor
2GB RAM standard
120GB HDD standard
LED screen
Firewire 800
Leopard
But yes, things on my wishlist (that probably won't come true, at least for the next Macbook release):
X3000 graphics
2.2Ghz processor
2GB RAM standard
120GB HDD standard
LED screen
Firewire 800
Leopard
i don't think there will be a difference of price from the one thats in-stores now,,, i THINK but don t know,,, what about firewire 800? anyone think macbooks should have that as well? or is it just me?
Seems very chicken-and-egg to me, though obviously I don't know the sales history of the mini. I mean, is the mini got crap hardware because it hasn't been selling well, or is it just not selling well because it's got crap hardware?
I don't actually know that it is not selling well, but I'm sure most around here would agree, if Apple isn't gonna give the mid-range screenless mac many are clamouring for around here, at least not let the mini fall behind so much!
I waiting for the black macbook or maybe a 15 MBP :-(
It will be my first mac and laptop and I've been wanting one for 4 years. Now that I'm graduating high school. I'm going to a university I'm finally going to get a laptop.
It will be my first mac and laptop and I've been wanting one for 4 years. Now that I'm graduating high school. I'm going to a university I'm finally going to get a laptop.
Unless they upgrade the Macbooks first and the MBPs later. I think this may be a possibility since if they wait to upgrade the MBPs then they can include the new GPUs from Nvidia or ATI and have a 2.4/2.6 config.
Just as Micro$oft is the largest purchaser of the XBOX360 processor...
I'm currently waiting to buy my first Macbook (first Mac in awhile too - last Mac I had was a MacSE...), currently aiming at the middle White model. Main things I'm looking forward to (I hope they deliver!) is the X3000 integrated graphics. Anything else would be a bonus since I'm pretty happy with the current Macbook as it is...
But yes, things on my wishlist (that probably won't come true, at least for the next Macbook release):
X3000 graphics
2.2Ghz processor
2GB RAM standard
120GB HDD standard
LED screen
Firewire 800
Leopard
Keep dreaming.
What I think is more realistic is:
2.0/2.16Ghz processors (MBPs receive 2.33 and 2.4?)
512/1GB of ram standard
100GB of hard drive
Possibly X3000
Predictions such as yours are just going to get people disappointed.
Hell, I am even expecting Apple to continue using the old Core 2 Duo chips for the Macbooks until the next cycle while the Macbook Pros receive the new Santa Rosa based Socket P ones.
I think this has been the only reasonable prediction so far, and it's probably similar to what will end up being released, although with just a 1280 x 800 screen (same one it uses now) so that it doesn't have the same res as the 15" MBP. Some can argue that the 15" can get a higher res screen (ie: same res as the 17" MBP), but then the 17" MBP would need to receive a screen update as well, and quite frankly, is Apple going to upgrade every screen within a short span?
And don't expect Robson cache or anything of the sort in a MacBook. I'm sure they'll differentiate the pro laptops from the consumer level laptops this way.
You post a lot, and lots of it is misinformation or just random jibber-jabber, although if you don't have a timeline planned out, your dream of a standard Blu-Ray burner in a MacBook and MacBook Pro may come true by 2012.
Notice how Combo drives still come standard in the low end MacBook, and DVD burners have been out for ages.
You can't use old C2Ds in the Santa Rosa chipset, as far as I'm aware. Which means you can't use the 2.16 or 2.33Ghz C2Ds. Socket P C2D goes: 1.8, 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, 2.6 and eventually 2.8. Those are the choices for the new Macs.
yyyyyyeeesssss!!!!!!
Product MacBook Pro
Recommendation: Buy only if you need it - Approaching the end of a cycle
Last Release October 24, 2006
Days Since Update 146 (Avg = 182)
I've been waiting for it to say "Buy only if you need it - Approaching the end of a cycle" since like January! Who's excited? I know I am!. . . even though almost everything on the buyers guide is way passed due for an update. Still happy haha
Product MacBook Pro
Recommendation: Buy only if you need it - Approaching the end of a cycle
Last Release October 24, 2006
Days Since Update 146 (Avg = 182)
I've been waiting for it to say "Buy only if you need it - Approaching the end of a cycle" since like January! Who's excited? I know I am!. . . even though almost everything on the buyers guide is way passed due for an update. Still happy haha
I also think that both the MacBooks and MBP's will utilize the new Santa Rosa platform.
I think that the MacBooks will still top out a 2.0GHz but utilize the 800MHz FSB. Also I think they will have the x3000 graphics that utilize 128MB of system Ram for video memory.
The MBPs will probly start at 2.2GHz and go to 2.6GHz on the 800MHz FSB. Im hoping they use the new GeForce 8000 series mobility chips for their video, but who knows. Finally, I speculate the MBP's will be able to utilize a full 4GB of System memory as a BTO option.
Enclousers will remain the same, as well as the screens IMO.
I think that the MacBooks will still top out a 2.0GHz but utilize the 800MHz FSB. Also I think they will have the x3000 graphics that utilize 128MB of system Ram for video memory.
The MBPs will probly start at 2.2GHz and go to 2.6GHz on the 800MHz FSB. Im hoping they use the new GeForce 8000 series mobility chips for their video, but who knows. Finally, I speculate the MBP's will be able to utilize a full 4GB of System memory as a BTO option.
Enclousers will remain the same, as well as the screens IMO.
Wow, the same screens?
That's it, I didn't just sell off my MBP at a loss to buy another grainy screen, I am buying a Dell if that's the case, screw OS X, there is project x86
Well, at first I thought it was a standard Intel laptop motherboard, but then I realised cos of the special port configurations, it must be a custom motherboard(s). (am I right?)
If it's custom, then yeah Apple is the biggest purchaser
But what i mean is, out of all the various companies that purchase C2D laptop motherboards, Apple must be one of the biggest purchasers of C2D laptop mobos.
2.8GHz Extreme For Me
Guess I'll have to get on the Official "Waiting for Santa Rosa Extreme" Thread.
Well then I'll stay dopped up on my 8 Core Mac Pro until the 2.8GHz EXTREME version ships this Fall.
Guess I'll have to get on the Official "Waiting for Santa Rosa Extreme" Thread.
Well then I'll stay dopped up on my 8 Core Mac Pro until the 2.8GHz EXTREME version ships this Fall.
Ha ha!
I think 2.4 is really enough for a MBP, any more is a bonus. Of course, I'm still hoping that Apple gets to use the 2.6, and release them at WWDC. 2.8 extreme edition? Sounds to me like it'll have a higher TDP, which means burning crotch, and low battery life. Then again, so does X2600 :-(
So:
OLD 2.16 Ghz Merom costs US$423.
OLD 2.33 GHz Merom costs US$637.
NEW 2.40 GHz Merom costs US$529.
NEW 2.60 GHz Merom costs US$795.
No doubt the 2.80 will cost a grand US.
So why does the 2.6 cost so much? The 2.4 is US$110 less than the 2.33, which certainly is nice, but the price of the 2.6 seems very high, but then again, the cost of the 2.33 seems high too, and Apple still uses them.
So, the question is, will Q2/3 mean released before WWDC in June, or not?
Dunno... early Robson offerings will likely be only 512MB or 1GB, so they'll be a dirt cheap component. According to some who've opened them up, Apple TV has a mini pci slot (which is what Robson is expected to use)...
But, to really make effective use of the technology of Robson you'd need a new OS designed to fully support it at the system level. Tiger doesn't. But presumably, Leopard will...
Dunno... early Robson offerings will likely be only 512MB or 1GB, so they'll be a dirt cheap component. According to some who've opened them up, Apple TV has a mini pci slot (which is what Robson is expected to use)...
But, to really make effective use of the technology of Robson you'd need a new OS designed to fully support it at the system level. Tiger doesn't. But presumably, Leopard will...
I don't see how 1GB is really helpful. I mean, the OS probably won't even fit! So what happens if you want to stick commonly used applications on it?
So, firstly, does anyone know if it is possible to have more than one? I mean, is it possible that the MBP could have two 1 GB Flash memory cards? Or more?
And secondly, off topic, but does anyone know if you can do a RAM disk in OSX like you could in 9? Because that is the kind of thing I see Robson being used for. User picks a commonly used app, sticks it in the flash memory, and it loads and runs at a much higher speed.
Oh, and the name "Turbo Memory" is a bit misleading. I mean, "Turbo" gives the impression of faster, and Flash memory is way, way slower than RAM. A better name would have been "Turbo Disk", considering what this stuff is supposed to augment.