2011 Mac Book Pro 13" - predictions?

[Hellhammer]

MacBook White:
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.66ghz
2GB RAM
Newer graphics
250GB HDD
1440x900 resolution screen ?

nVidia ain't doing chipsets anymore, thus Apple would likely use 320M (quite normal as usually the same GPU lasts through two generations)

And Apple needs to put 6GB of RAM in all of its Pros. 4GB is just not enough when you have Safari hogging over 1GB.

6GB isn't practical because you lose dual-channeling in the remaining 2GB. Yes, it's not noticeable but usually Apple tends to do it in pairs (6GB isn't even an option)

 

[T.Cee]

Hey guys!

Really confused about one thing... if the C2D processor is about to be (has?) discontinued by Intel. Then why would Apple go ahead and put it in the Air?!

Does this mean that when this refresh we are all waiting for happens that along with the Mac Mini, Macbook and Pro. The Air will get a really premature update too?

Or does this seem like an indicator that Apple have some sort of plan to keep using C2D (hopefully not! )? Or some other master plan!

What do you guys think about this?

 

[deeddawg]

Really confused about one thing... if the C2D processor is about to be (has?) discontinued by Intel. Then why would Apple go ahead and put it in the Air?!

Do you know for sure that all lines of the C2D are 100% discontinued?

Even if so, it'd be pretty easy for Apple to make an estimate of how many MBA's they'll sell during its product lifecycle and contract with Intel to ensure sufficient CPU's are warehoused.

It's very unlikely that Apple hasn't addressed this, it's very basic supply chain management.

As to what it "means", I don't think we can draw any conclusion other than that a lot of people get too wrapped up in what generation a CPU is rather than whether it really impacts the typical user. While there are certainly many power users who frequent this site, I'd venture to say the majority of MBA and MBP13 buyers really aren't impacted by whether the CPU is a C2D or an i3/i5 or newer.

 

[MrX8503]

If Apple uses a Core i3/i5 the MBP 13 has to have a discrete card. This is why the MBP 13 is still using a Core2Duo with a NVIDIA IGP.

 

[zodqyv]

The future of the 13" MacBook Pro is a very confusing situation even for those who follow such things relentlessly.

If Apple were to stick with the C2D due to a need to stick with the nVidia 320M, then what exactly would the improvement be? A new form factor?

If there is a new form factor, especially one lacking an optical drive, then why would Apple stick with the C2D when there would be enough room inside the slab to have a Sandy Bridge plus dedicated graphics?

Finally, there is the option of just slapping in a Sandy Bridge with it's integrated graphics and calling it a day. As far as this option goes, I can tell you that even middleweight gamers who play games like World of Warcraft will not be happy. WoW recently upped it's graphics load with the new Cataclysm expansion. The 13" MacBook Pro of 2010 could handle WoW just fine with all the bells and whistles turned on before Cataclysm. No so anymore. I cannot imagine trying to play on a machine with even lesser graphics.

 

[Richard1028]

Finally, there is the option of just slapping in a Sandy Bridge with it's integrated graphics and calling it a day. As far as this option goes, I can tell you that even middleweight gamers who play games like World of Warcraft will not be happy.

13" screen size is the upper end of the ultra portable market. If one needs a heavy gaming machine I don't know why they're even looking at the MBP13 in the first place.

I can certainly see the MBP13 getting SB and no discrete GPU. After all, it already has a history of being the "runt" of the litter.

 

[zodqyv]

13" screen size is the upper end of the ultra portable market. If one needs a heavy gaming machine I don't know why they're even looking at the MBP13 in the first place.

I can certainly see the MBP13 getting SB and no discrete GPU. After all, it already has a history of being the "runt" of the litter.

Disagree. I have a family of three. We have a current Mac Pro which is used for all sorts of things including gaming. We also each have a 13" MacBook Pro. We usually buy a single new 13" MacBook Pro each time a new one comes out so that all of our notebooks don't become dated at the same time.

We have two World of Warcraft accounts. Often someone will be playing on the Mac Pro and someone else will log in to the second account from their MacBook. This works just fine today, but I fear next year's model will fare poorer than today's machine for doing the same task.

No one in our house has any desire for a larger notebook. In fact, as they become more powerful, we will all likely move to 11.6" MacBook Airs in the future (we presently have one and love it). We also have no desire for a second desktop, as we only use the one we have for doing things that require a lot of horsepower.

First, It is unreasonable to bring a new product to market that performs less than the machine it is replacing. Second, I know many people who like us don't want to pack around a larger notebook. Third, I know many people who cannot afford a a larger notebook than the 13" MacBook Pro. Many of the people in that third category are regular World of Warcraft players.

 

[Yin]

Disagree. I have a family of three. We have a current Mac Pro which is used for all sorts of things including gaming. We also each have a 13" MacBook Pro. We usually buy a single new 13" MacBook Pro each time a new one comes out so that all of our notebooks don't become dated at the same time.

We have two World of Warcraft accounts. Often someone will be playing on the Mac Pro and someone else will log in to the second account from their MacBook. This works just fine today, but I fear next year's model will fare poorer than today's machine for doing the same task.

No one in our house has any desire for a larger notebook. In fact, as they become more powerful, we will all likely move to 11.6" MacBook Airs in the future (we presently have one and love it). We also have no desire for a second desktop, as we only use the one we have for doing things that require a lot of horsepower.

First, It is unreasonable to bring a new product to market that performs less than the machine it is replacing. Second, I know many people who like us don't want to pack around a larger notebook. Third, I know many people who cannot afford a a larger notebook than the 13" MacBook Pro. Many of the people in that third category are regular World of Warcraft players.

if one cannot afford to buy a mbp 15" and still wants to play WoW, one can buy an asus or dell instead... problem solved... there is no need to change the 13" for that purpose, as the mb is not a gaming device.

 

[zodqyv]

if one cannot afford to buy a mbp 15" and still wants to play WoW, one can buy an asus or dell instead... problem solved... there is no need to change the 13" for that purpose, as the mb is not a gaming device.

You can argue until you are blue in the face. The fact is that I am using a 13" MacBook Pro to play World of Warcraft at this very minute. It works just fine. If next year's models don't then there is a problem.

And why would I buy a PC notebook just to play World of Warcraft? I hate Windows with a bloody passion. I am perfectly happy with the current situation. I just don't want to see Apple go backwards.

 

[Richard1028]

First, It is unreasonable to bring a new product to market that performs less than the machine it is replacing.

What does "less" mean? That's a relative and subjective term. If the new 13" MBP comes with only SB Integrated Graphics and kicks ass at most everything it's predecessor did but sucks at WoW, I'd call that *better* for me. (Since I use a Quad Dell for trivial things like gaming like I should).

Second, I know many people who like us don't want to pack around a larger notebook. Third, I know many people who cannot afford a a larger notebook than the 13" MacBook Pro.

It's an ultra portable. There's only so much space in the thing to do all the things you demand of it. It's not designed to be "all things to all people" and like everything else, compromises need to be made. Fortunately, there are other options.

Many of the people in that third category are regular World of Warcraft players.[/B]

So you're telling me that Apple's 13" MBP strategy has always been structured around heavy gaming? WoW for that matter? The current specs seem to say otherwise and should tell you that you're the exception.

And how the heck are you gong to do this on an 11" MBA anyway?

 

[Yin]

You can argue until you are blue in the face. The fact is that I am using a 13" MacBook Pro to play World of Warcraft at this very minute. It works just fine. If next year's models don't then there is a problem.

And why would I buy a PC notebook just to play World of Warcraft? I hate Windows with a bloody passion. I am perfectly happy with the current situation. I just don't want to see Apple go backwards.

you can play as much as you want. i simply stated that if somebody does not have the money to buy anything more expensive than the mbp 13" and wants to play games which this notebook can't, then there are many alternatives.

What does "less" mean? That's a relative and subjective term. If the new 13" MBP comes with only SB Integrated Graphics and kicks ass at most everything it's predecessor did but sucks at WoW, I'd call that *better* for me. (Since I use a Quad Dell for trivial things like gaming like I should).



It's an ultra portable. There's only so much space in the thing to do all the things you demand of it. It's not designed to be "all things to all people" and like everything else, compromises need to be made. Fortunately, there are other options.



So you're telling me that Apple's 13" MBP strategy has always been structured around heavy gaming? WoW for that matter? The current specs seem to say otherwise and should tell you that you're the exception.

And how the heck are you gong to do this on an 11" MBA anyway?

+1

 

[zodqyv]

What does "less" mean? That's a relative and subjective term. If the new 13" MBP comes with only SB Integrated Graphics and kicks ass at most everything it's predecessor did but sucks at WoW, I'd call that *better* for me. (Since I use a Quad Dell for trivial things like gaming like I should).



It's an ultra portable. There's only so much space in the thing to do all the things you demand of it. It's not designed to be "all things to all people" and like everything else, compromises need to be made. Fortunately, there are other options.



So you're telling me that Apple's 13" MBP strategy has always been structured around heavy gaming? WoW for that matter? The current specs seem to say otherwise and should tell you that you're the exception.

And how the heck are you gong to do this on an 11" MBA anyway?

I totally disagree with everything in your reply, but since you know everything we will leave it at that. No need to argue any further.

 

[zodqyv]

you can play as much as you want. i simply stated that if somebody does not have the money to buy anything more expensive than the mbp 13" and wants to play games which this notebook can't, then there are many alternatives.

But who wants to change platforms when the current machine is doing everything they want it to do? Why would next year's model be a lesser machine for doing those very same tasks?

 

[Yin]

What does "less" mean? That's a relative and subjective term. If the new 13" MBP comes with only SB Integrated Graphics and kicks ass at most everything it's predecessor did but sucks at WoW, I'd call that *better* for me. (Since I use a Quad Dell for trivial things like gaming like I should).



It's an ultra portable. There's only so much space in the thing to do all the things you demand of it. It's not designed to be "all things to all people" and like everything else, compromises need to be made. Fortunately, there are other options.



So you're telling me that Apple's 13" MBP strategy has always been structured around heavy gaming? WoW for that matter? The current specs seem to say otherwise and should tell you that you're the exception.

And how the heck are you gong to do this on an 11" MBA anyway?

But who wants to change platforms when the current machine is doing everything they want it to do? Why would next year's model be a lesser machine for doing those very same tasks?

i am NOT talking about you, just about the people you quote! read what you wrote a few posts back.
and yes it can. the loss of the floppy drive is an example. you could not use floppy disks anymore and the previous models could.

 

[zodqyv]

i am NOT talking about you, just about the people you quote! read what you wrote a few posts back.
and yes it can. the loss of the floppy drive is an example. you could not use floppy disks anymore and the previous models could.

Look at what a reversal of Steve's position it would be to put lesser graphics into next year's 13" MacBook Pro. Last year he stated that they stuck with the C2D so they could use the nVidia chipset. Now suddenly it's ok to replace the 320M with Sandy Bridge integrated graphics which are believed to perform in the ballpark of the 9400M?

"We chose killer graphics plus 10 hour battery life over a very small CPU speed increase. Users will see far more performance boost from the speedy graphics." -Steve Jobs

 

[Richard1028]

"We chose killer graphics plus 10 hour battery life over a very small CPU speed increase. Users will see far more performance boost from the speedy graphics." -Steve Jobs

LOL!

Translation: "Intel and Nvidia were suing each other so we had to stick with the C2D 'cause that's the only chipset Nvidia could make for us."

 

[gianly1985]

So, to recap, last year we had 32nm 35W (including mobo chipset and IGP) arrandale 2C/4T parts and they didn't make it to the 13"-inchers and Minis. IGP was less than ideal.
This year we have 32nm 35W* (including mobo chipset and IGP) sandybridge 2C/4T parts and the IGP, while improved, is still meh. (and worse than the current nvidia 320m igp)
Why should those parts make it to 13-inchers/Minis again? Pretending to be 100% sure C2D won't be available to Apple is not an answer. Also, the 9400m lasted 2 years in macs, it would be strange for the "320m era" to be so short lived.

(*LV and ULV parts don't count, they're a MBA-only thing or at least that's what happened so far)

 

[Yin]

So, to recap, last year we had 32nm 35W (including mobo chipset and IGP) arrandale 2C/4T parts and they didn't make it to the 13"-inchers and Minis. IGP was less than ideal.
This year we have 32nm 35W* (including mobo chipset and IGP) sandybridge 2C/4T parts and the IGP, while improved, is still meh. (and worse than the current nvidia 320m igp)
Why should those parts make it to 13-inchers/Minis again? Pretending to be 100% sure C2D won't be available to Apple is not an answer. Also, the 9400m lasted 2 years in macs, it would be strange for the "320m era" to be so short lived.

(*LV and ULV parts don't count, they're a MBA-only thing or at least that's what happened so far)

apple cannot use the c2d anymore. so they HAVE to use other processors. this was not the case last year.
and why should this argument not work? c2ds will be discontinued. it is an official statement.

 

[zodqyv]

LOL!

Translation: "Intel and Nvidia were suing each other so we had to stick with the C2D 'cause that's the only chipset Nvidia could make for us."

Agree. That is definitely what Steve was saying. That is exactly why I quoted him.

 

[Richard1028]

Why should those parts make it to 13-inchers/Minis again?

Uh... maybe because Nvidia doesn't make chipsets anymore?

If history is any indication, I suspect the IGP of Sandy Bridge will suck but I don't know what else they can do with the 13MBP?

Either C2D again while waiting for IB, or IGP.

Either way, it sucks to be a 13" MBP fan right now and waiting to buy.

 

[zodqyv]

apple cannot use the c2d anymore. so they HAVE to use other processors. this was not the case last year.
and why should this argument not work? c2ds will be discontinued. it is an official statement.

Who says they "HAVE" to? They just introduced new Airs with the C2D. But anyway, the point is moot as I have no desire to see the C2D dragged any farther into the future either.

My only position is that Sandy Bridge should be accompanied by decent graphics in the 13" MacBook Pro. For the white MacBook the Sandy Bridge graphics will do. Not for the "Pro." If Sony can cram dedicated graphics into their sorry little z-series notebook then no doubt Apple can too. Definitely so if they dump the optical drive like so many people are predicting/calling for.

 

[Richard1028]

If Sony can cram dedicated graphics into their sorry little z-series notebook then no doubt Apple can too. Definitely so if they dump the optical drive like so many people are predicting/calling for.

Not too excited about going from 8 hours of battery life to 3 myself. Or, adding another pound to the thing after they make the battery bigger because of no ODD.

I'm actually not going to compromise on anything less than the battery life Apple has now. For me, that would be a major step backwards - especially if you can't swap in a spare.

 

[zodqyv]

Not too excited about going from 8 hours of battery life to 3 myself. Or, adding another pound to the thing after they make the battery bigger because of no ODD.

I'm actually not going to compromise on anything less than the battery life Apple has now. For me, that would be a major step backwards - especially if you can't swap in a spare.

I agree totally about the battery life. But I would definitely take heavier if it meant still longer battery life. I could see a bit larger battery and a bit larger mainboard to handle the dedicated graphics, each expanding to take up the space where the optical drive is now.

As far as a super light machines go, the Air is great for that.

 

[deeddawg]

apple cannot use the c2d anymore. so they HAVE to use other processors. this was not the case last year.
and why should this argument not work? c2ds will be discontinued. it is an official statement.

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2010/2010120703_Intel_discontinues_Core_2_mobile_CPUs.html

"Tray processors will be shipped until October 14, 2011"

My point isn't that they won't move away from the C2D, only that "discontinued" can mean different things and that supplier agreements are likely in place to ensure Apple has the CPU's they need for their intended product lifecycles.

 

[gianly1985]

Maybe Apple has ginormous stocks of 320Ms and C2Ds.

People swear over their mothers that C2Ds and nvidia chipsets are history but then the Airs (which will be around also for at least half 2011) come out and middle finger them.

Apple Inc. sounds like a contractor whose needs you wanna satisfy. Sometimes ppl invert causes and effects. Intel will shut down its last C2D line when Apple doesn't need them anymore. If Intel thinks Apple will need C2Ds in 2011, Intel will stock a ton of C2Ds to sell them to Apple in 2011. Same applies to nvidia. Apple can single handendly mess up flash memory and LCD industries. Apple has received CUSTOM parts from both intel (rev.A Air cpu) and nVidia (320m itself) in the past. Apple asked/suggested Intel to create Lightpeak. Apple makes the pace of many industries and tech trends. But you EOL-swearers can go on swearing over leaked (or not) powerpoint slides like they meant anything.