OMG I cannot believe my eyes, that toshiba hazz a QUAD-CORE i7, I have to buy ,at least, 4. Do you know why I need 4 of them? To reach the MBP's Battery Life.
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.
2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo MBP was released in JUNE 2007!
- Thread starter ThomasJL
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
OMG I cannot believe my eyes, that toshiba hazz a QUAD-CORE i7, I have to buy ,at least, 4. Do you know why I need 4 of them? To reach the MBP's Battery Life.
Um, I thought the "Pro" in "MacBook Pro" stands for "professional." Oh well... For Apple fanboys, functionality is not as important as form factor. 'Form before function' is the Apple fanboy mantra.
By the way, I have been using Apple computers since 1982, and I preferred the Apple II OS to MS DOS. I have been using Macs since 1987, and have always preferred the Mac OS to Windows. I still prefer the Mac OS, but I am not a fanboy who blindly accepts every poor decision Apple makes.
+1
OP, Quit whining and buy that amazing toshiba. I couldn't care less. Personally I think the C2D was the best choice for the 13". It will mainly be purchased by college students and they need battery life more so than performance. An i3 would force apple to use Intel graphics and dedicated to get the graphics power the 13" update produced. Also it would have been nearly impossible to fit a dedicated card in the 13" and would have caused heat issues and possibly less computer life.
Here is a little tip. Stop saying this. I agree with you. Even with this update, the hardware is underpowered for it's price. The fanboys will try to defend it. They then get all bitchy and tell you to buy the "better" brand. I've done what your doing. A Dell has better specs. But you NEED to know that this is an Apple forum WITH apple fanboys. Macs have nice things too. It has mag safe. A very long lasting battery, a nice aluminum case. It all "just works"... Most of the time. It does suck that they use C2Ds. But if it's not good enough, don't rant an buy that windows computer. I've used Windows 7. It's nice. But in my opinion, OSX is better. I still know that 2.4GHz is MORE than enough for me. 1.8 Ghz would be fine. But I agree for $1199 we should get more than a 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo. Yes it does everyday tasks fine, but I feel for that price I deserve more. That's why there is Windows. Ranting about APPLE on an Apple forum will only get you clammed by the apple fanboys.
Well said. I agree with all of your points.
I just wish there were more critical thoughts on this forum. I realize it will never change, so it's best to heed your advice.
The processor itself is not important like five years ago.
It doesn't matter how much power it has if you can't use it.
Is like having a Ferrari to go in the center of London at peak hour, you don't use your HP and you will run out of fuel soon.
If you want more than a C2D then you can go either on 15" or 17" so you can go pro as much as you want with a bigger screen.
Still Jobs wrote why they decide to keep the C2D on the 13" that you can read on the main page of macrumors. They made their choice, you can make yours.
There are other companies out there; it's up to you to pick Apple Macs or some other PC.
WHY THE HELL PEOPLE DON'T STOP WHINING ALL THE TIME???
It doesn't matter how much power it has if you can't use it.
Is like having a Ferrari to go in the center of London at peak hour, you don't use your HP and you will run out of fuel soon.
If you want more than a C2D then you can go either on 15" or 17" so you can go pro as much as you want with a bigger screen.
Still Jobs wrote why they decide to keep the C2D on the 13" that you can read on the main page of macrumors. They made their choice, you can make yours.
There are other companies out there; it's up to you to pick Apple Macs or some other PC.
WHY THE HELL PEOPLE DON'T STOP WHINING ALL THE TIME???
Not exactly...
They're completely different models. The 13" MBP uses a P model rather than the T because it has a lower power usage. This is just the same CPU as the Macbook Aluminum. Link below as evidence.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-2-Duo-P8600-Notebook-Processor.23026.0.html
They're completely different models. The 13" MBP uses a P model rather than the T because it has a lower power usage. This is just the same CPU as the Macbook Aluminum. Link below as evidence.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-2-Duo-P8600-Notebook-Processor.23026.0.html
Fanboys are wrong about power consumption and battery life
For those pandering about low power consumption and battery life, the entire i series chips, clock for clock, consume less power than their c2d counterparts. The i3's draw less power than c2d's, the i5's draw less power than c2q. Even the i7's with hyper-threading enabled draw less power. Sure, the new 2.4 c2d might be a re-spin that draws a bit less power than its predecessor, but the only thing that allowed for higher FSB and better memory is an improvement in the logic board chipset.
For those pandering about low power consumption and battery life, the entire i series chips, clock for clock, consume less power than their c2d counterparts. The i3's draw less power than c2d's, the i5's draw less power than c2q. Even the i7's with hyper-threading enabled draw less power. Sure, the new 2.4 c2d might be a re-spin that draws a bit less power than its predecessor, but the only thing that allowed for higher FSB and better memory is an improvement in the logic board chipset.
The i5s and i7s use more power under load than the C2Ds that they replace, but this is not a good enough reason to pick the C2Ds over them as the power/performance ratio is still much between the i5/7 chips.
I do not believe that Apple went with the C2D for any reason other than cost.
I do not believe that Apple went with the C2D for any reason other than cost.
Well, yesterday, Ars Technica revealed that Apple's wanting to keep the same form factor was one reason for their lame decision to include a Core 2 Duo chip in the new 13" MBP.
It is sad that many Apple fanboys value form factor over functionality. For fanboys, a computer is an accessory that they can use to show off in attempts to impress people at Starbucks. For non-fanboy Apple customers (like myself), a computer is actually a tool to accomplish work. Therefore, better specs leads to better efficiency. That is why better specs are more important (to non-fanboys) than form factor.
Computers should be about maximizing efficiency... That is why computers were created in the first place, and that is why the computer industry has kept on creating more powerful computers. Computers should not be about being a fashion accessory intended for smug fanboys to impress their fellow iDouchebags.
It is sad that many Apple fanboys value form factor over functionality. For fanboys, a computer is an accessory that they can use to show off in attempts to impress people at Starbucks. For non-fanboy Apple customers (like myself), a computer is actually a tool to accomplish work. Therefore, better specs leads to better efficiency. That is why better specs are more important (to non-fanboys) than form factor.
Computers should be about maximizing efficiency... That is why computers were created in the first place, and that is why the computer industry has kept on creating more powerful computers. Computers should not be about being a fashion accessory intended for smug fanboys to impress their fellow iDouchebags.
I'm a non-fanboy and I value Apple's form EQUAL to performance.
Having something so thin and light and uncluttered is what will keep me tied to Apple's hardware for life. Other notebooks just frustrate me simply by having so many individual case parts and panels and such. Apple's design is simple and straight forward. Other computer manufacturers look like they started to design something...went another way about it...decided against it...then finally figured out how to put it all together. Apple's machines look like they were planned forward then backward, inside and out.
However, it must perform well too. The performance I get from my MacBook is what made me come back to Apple, I've now owned an iMac G3, a PowerMac G4, a White MacBook, an aluminum MacBook, a PowerMac G3 and my current MacBook Pro.
The combination of form, function AND exclusive or best-implemented features adds up to an incredible deal that I find irresistable. Hell, the trackpad alone on all other computers repulses me enough to stick with Apple...until they start effing things up like with the iPad and the supposed iPhone 4G >8
Having something so thin and light and uncluttered is what will keep me tied to Apple's hardware for life. Other notebooks just frustrate me simply by having so many individual case parts and panels and such. Apple's design is simple and straight forward. Other computer manufacturers look like they started to design something...went another way about it...decided against it...then finally figured out how to put it all together. Apple's machines look like they were planned forward then backward, inside and out.
However, it must perform well too. The performance I get from my MacBook is what made me come back to Apple, I've now owned an iMac G3, a PowerMac G4, a White MacBook, an aluminum MacBook, a PowerMac G3 and my current MacBook Pro.
The combination of form, function AND exclusive or best-implemented features adds up to an incredible deal that I find irresistable. Hell, the trackpad alone on all other computers repulses me enough to stick with Apple...until they start effing things up like with the iPad and the supposed iPhone 4G >8
NO, I said if they effed up any further I wouldn't stick with them.
I'm simply saying that the way things are going I haven't found anything to compel me AWAY from Apple.
If Apple released OS 11 tomorrow and it was based on the vintage kernel (pre-OS X) and stopped supporting OS X, I'd start downloading Linux distros left and right to find the right one.
I'm simply saying that the way things are going I haven't found anything to compel me AWAY from Apple.
If Apple released OS 11 tomorrow and it was based on the vintage kernel (pre-OS X) and stopped supporting OS X, I'd start downloading Linux distros left and right to find the right one.
*raises hand* I'm still using an iBook G4
The reason I am still using a 6 year old computer is that it is still very stable. Only upgrades are increased RAM and hard drive. I recall the specs weren't as impressive as PCs when I got it. And it was more expensive. Yet, with the power it had it seemed to wring more performance and run better.
I used to use PCs exclusively before my iBook. While I was always able to fix the issues that came up with my PCs, I got tired of fixing them. To use the car analogy that comes up often, if you could drive the same car for 6 years and not have to rebuild the transmission, wouldn't you? Even if you knew how to rebuild a transmission? The computer is a tool, and it is a much more satisfying experience when it actually works as intended.
As stated before, the topic of this post is misleading. The 2007 Core 2 Duo referenced has a bus speed of 800 MHz and a RAM speed of 667 MHz. The current 13" has a bus and memory speed of 1066MHz. A very conservative estimate would be at least 50% increase in performance (enough to excite people about an i5 over the Core 2 Duo).
The reason I am still using a 6 year old computer is that it is still very stable. Only upgrades are increased RAM and hard drive. I recall the specs weren't as impressive as PCs when I got it. And it was more expensive. Yet, with the power it had it seemed to wring more performance and run better.
I used to use PCs exclusively before my iBook. While I was always able to fix the issues that came up with my PCs, I got tired of fixing them. To use the car analogy that comes up often, if you could drive the same car for 6 years and not have to rebuild the transmission, wouldn't you? Even if you knew how to rebuild a transmission? The computer is a tool, and it is a much more satisfying experience when it actually works as intended.
As stated before, the topic of this post is misleading. The 2007 Core 2 Duo referenced has a bus speed of 800 MHz and a RAM speed of 667 MHz. The current 13" has a bus and memory speed of 1066MHz. A very conservative estimate would be at least 50% increase in performance (enough to excite people about an i5 over the Core 2 Duo).
This is too funny, very few things we are forced to buy (Gas, Car Insurance), but not apple. You don't like it don't buy it, but you went and purchased it and now you complain. Sell it and buy your top of the line what ever you want.
This is my 1st. mac and I paid what they asked, if I don't like it, I'll move on. Last I checked we live in free country
This is my 1st. mac and I paid what they asked, if I don't like it, I'll move on. Last I checked we live in free country
i7 Quad-Core Toshiba for $949
Here is an i7 quad-core Toshiba that is not only $250 cheaper than the cheapest 13" MacBook Pro (the one with the outdated Core 2 Duo), but also $50 cheaper than the white MacBook:
http://www.toshibadirect.com/td/b2c/pdet.to?poid=463912
Keep in mind that the $949 i7 quad-core Toshiba is more powerful and can outperform the top-of-the line $2,299 i5 dual-core MacBook Pro. In other words, for spending an extra $1,350 for that Mac, you can get a machine that will be significantly slower for multitasking, and become obsolete much quicker. What a deal!
Here is an i7 quad-core Toshiba that is not only $250 cheaper than the cheapest 13" MacBook Pro (the one with the outdated Core 2 Duo), but also $50 cheaper than the white MacBook:
http://www.toshibadirect.com/td/b2c/pdet.to?poid=463912
Keep in mind that the $949 i7 quad-core Toshiba is more powerful and can outperform the top-of-the line $2,299 i5 dual-core MacBook Pro. In other words, for spending an extra $1,350 for that Mac, you can get a machine that will be significantly slower for multitasking, and become obsolete much quicker. What a deal!
Thanks for letting us know!
I've always wanted a 16 incher with 1366x768 res that weights 6.5 lbs
Not to mention the amazing 4400mah battery, will prolly give max 2 hrs with a quad core. The Toshiba also uses the nvidia 310M which is not even in the same league as the 330M.
It doesn't even support gigabit ethernet only 100mbit!
100 mbit ethernet is from 1995. See here for proof: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_Ethernet
Now, stop trolling and leave us alone...
Most people here are pretty happy with their macs and doesn't need you to tell us otherwise and linking mediocre hardware with high performance.
Some people actually value weight, battery life and design.
You know the i3 benches the same as the current Core 2 Duo right? And inclusion of the i3 would require Intels crappy graphics.
Functionality is not determined by paper specs... the fastest cars aren't necessarily the most functional cars.
A 2.4 GHz C2D running OSX is totally functional, and the 13" MBP is a great little machine that sells like crazy and are happily working for tons of people. If it wasn't functional, no one would be buying them.
How exactly is a C2D processor not functional?
Toshiba is a POS, why don't you go buy it, instead of whinging on a Mac Forum about how Steve Jobs is not making your dream laptop spec for $2.
I have a 17" MBP from previous gen, C2D, I'm very happy with my 12 or so hours of battery life. (I have SSD as well, so its super fast for what I want it to do).
What can you achieve by whinging on a Mac Forum, about Mac Products?
All I can say is
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha! Oh lawd!!!
JUST YESTERDAY I had a woman bring that EXACT model of Toshiba to me to have a virus removed. It was her second day with that computer when she brought it XD
The keyboard is CRAP! I almost puked when I had to type on it. They just made it shiny so people would be impressed by it's looks and overlook the awkward feel. NEVER in my life have I used a worse keyboard.
The trackpad...oh lawdy, was awful. The buttons were almost as large as the trackpad itself! Hahaha! They were so flimsy I thought they were held on by double-sided tape. But again, they just chrome-plate the buttons and nobody cares how it works, it just looks nice.
The thing had to be 2" thick and weighed more than any Apple portable I've held. The fan felt like a damn hair dryer blowing out the side when IDLE!
100mbit ethernet? FAIL! Yet another way to take advantage of stupid shoppers that make buying decisions on "which looks best for the price?"
The display...I had to suppress my laughter as I went into the Display settings and found that it maxes at 768 res. I just couldn't tell the poor single mother that her entire tax refund had been spent on crap and that her screen, while larger, had less display area than my 13".
Again, PC people are the type that just want something pretty and cheap. They don't care if it's some no-name Japanese knock-off as long as it's cheap. Chrome-plated plastic with tacky graphics on the lid also help, XD. Seriously, the majority of Windows user bought their computer based on some gimmick, like fingerprint readers or a remote-control.
Sad. She would have been much happier with a MacBook, I'm sure.
As to the OP, you have no idea what you're talking about. Do you have any idea how many people on this forum use their Macs, dating all the way back to the 1990's, every day?! As a matter of fact, I'm posting this RIGHT NOW on my PowerMac G4 from 2003. It is a 1.25ghz G4 and has 768mb of ram and feels DAMN smoother than my 2005 Compaq AMD Athlon64 2.2ghz with 1gb.
iBooks from 2000 sell for NO LESS than $100 in working condition, left and right, on eBay. How many 10-year-old notebooks from other manufacturers could go for more than $50?
Macs last longer, it's a fact. To deny that is to prove you are a troll and don't know what you're talking about.
Stop whining, chump.
JUST YESTERDAY I had a woman bring that EXACT model of Toshiba to me to have a virus removed. It was her second day with that computer when she brought it XD
The keyboard is CRAP! I almost puked when I had to type on it. They just made it shiny so people would be impressed by it's looks and overlook the awkward feel. NEVER in my life have I used a worse keyboard.
The trackpad...oh lawdy, was awful. The buttons were almost as large as the trackpad itself! Hahaha! They were so flimsy I thought they were held on by double-sided tape. But again, they just chrome-plate the buttons and nobody cares how it works, it just looks nice.
The thing had to be 2" thick and weighed more than any Apple portable I've held. The fan felt like a damn hair dryer blowing out the side when IDLE!
100mbit ethernet? FAIL! Yet another way to take advantage of stupid shoppers that make buying decisions on "which looks best for the price?"
The display...I had to suppress my laughter as I went into the Display settings and found that it maxes at 768 res. I just couldn't tell the poor single mother that her entire tax refund had been spent on crap and that her screen, while larger, had less display area than my 13".
Again, PC people are the type that just want something pretty and cheap. They don't care if it's some no-name Japanese knock-off as long as it's cheap. Chrome-plated plastic with tacky graphics on the lid also help, XD. Seriously, the majority of Windows user bought their computer based on some gimmick, like fingerprint readers or a remote-control.
Sad. She would have been much happier with a MacBook, I'm sure.
As to the OP, you have no idea what you're talking about. Do you have any idea how many people on this forum use their Macs, dating all the way back to the 1990's, every day?! As a matter of fact, I'm posting this RIGHT NOW on my PowerMac G4 from 2003. It is a 1.25ghz G4 and has 768mb of ram and feels DAMN smoother than my 2005 Compaq AMD Athlon64 2.2ghz with 1gb.
iBooks from 2000 sell for NO LESS than $100 in working condition, left and right, on eBay. How many 10-year-old notebooks from other manufacturers could go for more than $50?
Macs last longer, it's a fact. To deny that is to prove you are a troll and don't know what you're talking about.
Stop whining, chump.