Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

My opinion about 2012 Pros. (FakeScreen inside)

G

gpat

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Mar 1, 2011
1,989
5,707
Italy
I would advise to read my opinion about 2012 Airs before reading this, not wanting to crosspost but I think this could make a lot more sense after reading the other thread.

BTW, Screenshot.

My logic for this mock-up:
a) Apple has two 35W quad CPUs, one 45W but could kill battery life, virtually no declared 25W quads but a lower-clocked i7q appeared in the OEM list, that could be the one for the 13" Pro (25W).
b) Apple kills SuperDrive. Pro line has more free space in chassis. 13" gains discrete GPU.
c) SSD for caching. mSATA form factor (like Air). Intel Ivy Bridge Smart Response Technology automatically caches most used data on SSD up to 64GB. Little space used in chassis.
d) Standard 8GB RAM for avoiding Macbook cannibalization (read Air mock-up thread).
e) GPU: 13" gains lower-power AMD GPU, 15" and 17" more powerful ones (in line with battery size).
f) Retina display standard. Again, to avoid cannibalization.
g) SuperDrive loss allows for bigger batteries. 8-10-12 hour for wireless productivity.
h) nVidia could be too late with the new GPUs for Q2 2012, AMD will be ready before Ivy Bridge.
i) Pro becomes more "Pro", price of 13" increases as differences with 15" decrease. Less BTOs and SKUs for mass economy logic.

Not saying that Apple will do this (reeeeally slim eventuality), but I would like too see what you think, because IMHO this could be one hell of an upgrade to the MBP lineup! :D
 
Last edited:
I think there will be a lot of disappointed people on these forums come refresh time.
 
I hope for cool things next refresh but the only things I can honestly see happening is a redesign (and that is iffy since there is nothing wrong with the unibody) and slight spec bump. If there is going to be a game changer addition I think Apple will do it one refresh at a time.

EDIT: Something that I think would be cool to see on everything Apple offers.. http://www.liquipel.com/
 
I'm really hoping for no optical drive and a "retina" display; this would really be a way of bringing the MacBook Pro line into the future. I'm not too excited about the possibility of a small SSD for the system and a larger HDD for storage. Apple is about simplicity and a dual hard drive setup complicates things. Apple tends to use mediocre SSDs. While most average users won't care or notice, but power users (most of the people on this forum) will notice and will care.

Otherwise, cool thread. I liked the mock Apple.com screenshot.
 
3 issues-

If the 13" has a dedicated card and is mostly comparable in specs there is no reason for most people to spring for the 15" and as a result Apple loses more profit.

Apple said they could not fit a dedicated GPU on the 13" If you've ever seen the logic board there's not much room, and personally I believe them. Plus, adding the flash memory would further lessen available space.

The price raise would probably hurt sales. I know there's the Mini and MacBook air, but when a person is looking at the Air and is upsold the 13" Pro, it's a $300 difference. What you propose would be double that, $600, which is outrageous to some people considering you can buy a standalone PC laptop for that. I realize the 13" price has to be raised to justify the flash memory and the dedicated GPU, however this would probably hurt the sales of the unit and push more people towards the Air.

However, I would love to see that 13" as a reality.
 
gpat said:
I would advise to read my opinion about 2012 Airs before reading this, not wanting to crosspost but I think this could make a lot more sense after reading the other thread.

BTW, Screenshot.

My logic for this mock-up:
a) Apple has two 35W quad CPUs, one 45W but could kill battery life, virtually no declared 25W quads but a lower-clocked i7q appeared in the OEM list, that could be the one for the 13" Pro (25W).
b) Apple kills SuperDrive. Pro line has more free space in chassis. 13" gains discrete GPU.
c) SSD for caching. mSATA form factor (like Air). Intel Ivy Bridge Smart Response Technology automatically caches most used data on SSD up to 64GB. Little space used in chassis.
d) Standard 8GB RAM for avoiding Macbook cannibalization (read Air mock-up thread).
e) GPU: 13" gains lower-power AMD GPU, 15" and 17" more powerful ones (in line with battery size).
f) Retina display standard. Again, to avoid cannibalization.
g) SuperDrive loss allows for bigger batteries. 8-10-12 hour for wireless productivity.
h) nVidia could be too late with the new GPUs for Q2 2012, AMD will be ready before Ivy Bridge.
i) Pro becomes more "Pro", price of 13" increases as differences with 15" decrease. Less BTOs and SKUs for mass economy logic.

Not saying that Apple will do this (reeeeally slim eventuality), but I would like too see what you think, because IMHO this could be one hell of an upgrade to the MBP lineup! :D
Click to expand...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA!


lol:rolleyes:
 
If that actually happens, I will become a huge apple fan boy and will buy the 15inch the minute it releases. Too bad its too good to be true.

I think they'll keep the base RAM at 4gb but offer upgrade options to 32gb, at least for the 15 and 17 inch.

We'll see faster graphics card and ivy bridge cpu. The retina display is a big possibility but I really don't think they'll call it a "retina."

They'll kill the optical drive but probably offer a model that still has it. I'm really doubting that there will be dual drives (SSD + HDD). Apple isn't that generous.

Battery life probably will be the same. USB 3.0 is a strong possibility.
 
A GPU with a TDP of 50W... the machine will run at 120 C or so :D :D :D

The AMD 77XX is the ceiling here, and already makes the 2011 MBPs consume more power than the magsafe can provide.
 
that1guyy said:
If that actually happens, I will become a huge apple fan boy and will buy the 15inch the minute it releases. Too bad its too good to be true.

I think they'll keep the base RAM at 4gb but offer upgrade options to 32gb, at least for the 15 and 17 inch.

We'll see faster graphics card and ivy bridge cpu. The retina display is a big possibility but I really don't think they'll call it a "retina."

They'll kill the optical drive but probably offer a model that still has it. I'm really doubting that there will be dual drives (SSD + HDD). Apple isn't that generous. Battery life probably will be the same. USB 3.0 is a strong possibility.
Click to expand...


agreed I think we will see an upgrade option to swap the optical for a 2nd hard drive before its removed totally
 
gpat said:
Not saying that Apple will do this (reeeeally slim eventuality),
Click to expand...

Less than slim. Apple has no compelling reason to do this given they are the only ones making gains just the way things are.

These days, Apple could put a polished turd inside an aluminum unibody enclosure and sell it for $199.
 
gpat said:
I would advise to read my opinion about 2012 Airs before reading this, not wanting to crosspost but I think this could make a lot more sense after reading the other thread.

BTW, Screenshot.

My logic for this mock-up:
a) Apple has two 35W quad CPUs, one 45W but could kill battery life, virtually no declared 25W quads but a lower-clocked i7q appeared in the OEM list, that could be the one for the 13" Pro (25W).
b) Apple kills SuperDrive. Pro line has more free space in chassis. 13" gains discrete GPU.
c) SSD for caching. mSATA form factor (like Air). Intel Ivy Bridge Smart Response Technology automatically caches most used data on SSD up to 64GB. Little space used in chassis.
d) Standard 8GB RAM for avoiding Macbook cannibalization (read Air mock-up thread).
e) GPU: 13" gains lower-power AMD GPU, 15" and 17" more powerful ones (in line with battery size).
f) Retina display standard. Again, to avoid cannibalization.
g) SuperDrive loss allows for bigger batteries. 8-10-12 hour for wireless productivity.
h) nVidia could be too late with the new GPUs for Q2 2012, AMD will be ready before Ivy Bridge.
i) Pro becomes more "Pro", price of 13" increases as differences with 15" decrease. Less BTOs and SKUs for mass economy logic.

Not saying that Apple will do this (reeeeally slim eventuality), but I would like too see what you think, because IMHO this could be one hell of an upgrade to the MBP lineup! :D
Click to expand...

Couple of things...

1) If the 13" MBP already has a 35W quad, there is no way you can fit in a dGPU because the chassis isn't big enough to dissipate the extra heat. What you want is a 25W dual-core CPU + 10W GPU. Or just a quad-core CPU, akin to the 2011 Mac Mini w/ dGPU. Either that or fan noise would be unbearable.

2) If the dGPU is in there, the battery of the 13" Pro can't be that much bigger, thus it'll have just the same battery life, or worse when the dGPU is on.

3) Retina displays won't be standard because doubling the resolution of the 17" Pro is very costly. It's getting into 4K territory, and I haven't seen any company claim that they can make that kind of resolution at an affordable price. And not a lot of people would want to buy a $8000 Pro.

4) Radeon HD 7850M doesn't exist, and likely would have very high TDP if it ever does, which is impossible for 15" and 17" Pro. The HD 7690M is more likely as it fits the same TDP as the current 6750M and 6770M, and it provides a moderate boost (about on par with an overclocked 6750M). I'm hoping that they would also have a lower end Pro 15" model with HD 7470M and more focus on battery life rather than performance, but I wouldn't hold my breath as it's a huge step backward for them, and it's the same HD 6490M that was used this year.
 
bill-p said:
3) Retina displays won't be standard because doubling the resolution of the 17" Pro is very costly. It's getting into 4K territory, and I haven't seen any company claim that they can make that kind of resolution at an affordable price. And not a lot of people would want to buy a $8000 Pro
Click to expand...
You're correct that finding a 4K 17" display is near impossible. However, Apple doesn't plan on doubling the resolution of its computers' displays. The rumor is that the 15" model could have a 2880x1800 display. This resolution would be "retina" at a distance of 1.5 feet.
 
Nielsenius said:
You're correct that finding a 4K 17" display is near impossible. However, Apple doesn't plan on doubling the resolution of its computers' displays. The rumor is that the 15" model could have a 2880x1800 display. This resolution would be "retina" at a distance of 1.5 feet.
Click to expand...

2880x1800 is double my 1440x900 2011 Early 15"
 
iisforiphone said:
2880x1800 is double my 1440x900 2011 Early 15"
Click to expand...

Higher resolution is completely pointless. It's useful on a mobile device because you stick your face into one, but at normal viewing distances, 1440x900 is already "retina enough".

The downsides are massive - power consumption, native gaming resolution, image density etc.. not going to happen.
 
old-wiz said:
Historically, Apple doesn't raise the prices like that. I can't see any way Apple would raise the price of the base 13" MBP by $400.
Click to expand...

I have to agree, historically they lower them. Not saying Apple's prices aren't high, but I remember when their highest end laptop was over $5000. Of course, that was back in the 90's when portables were relatively new, but they do a pretty good job of offering new PowerB--I mean MacBook Pros at the same base price with newer technology.

Not sure I see an SSD offered as standard anytime in the near future, but then again Apple was one of the first companies to stop offering an internal 3.5" floppy drive, scrap PS2 ports for USB, and generally get rid of soon-to-be outdated technology while other manufacturers were still using it as standard.
 
mzjin said:
Higher resolution is completely pointless. It's useful on a mobile device because you stick your face into one, but at normal viewing distances, 1440x900 is already "retina enough".

The downsides are massive - power consumption, native gaming resolution, image density etc.. not going to happen.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with this. What is the point with a ultra retina resolution you can't really benefit from, plus it will stress your GPU?
 
Image is extremely sharp, the OS scales it up so everything is as big as it always was.

Gaming is not a real option on a MacBook Pro ... and it won't look that ugly if you don't use native resolution on retina display.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back