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.
2012 Macbook Pro Redesign
- Thread starter Funkymonk
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Agree, I'm not sure of Apple going strictly SSD. Either we would be stuck with smaller capacity drives, or they will tremendously increase cost. I have a 500GB drive in both, even with the SSD prices coming down, 480 GB SSD's today go for north of a grand... add on top of that Apples lovely "apple tax" like their current SSD's and we'd have crazy expensive laptops.
Then again the 3rd party drives are better than Apples anyway and cheaper, be better off getting the base capacity and then buying one of the larger SSDs elsewhere. Seriously, if they offer a 500GB option just imagine what they'll charge for it lol.
I am really concerned that the new MBP will use 7mm 2.5" SSD, then I won't be able to swap in the 9.5mm SSD I have right now in 2011 MBP
From the article "Retina Displays Also Coming to Next-Generation iMac?"
"[...] rumored 15-inch MacBook Pro with 2880x1800 display compared to the 1440x900 display in the current model [...]"
I'd really like to see real increases in screen resolution. But if the 15" MBP gets a display which sharper, but otherwise acts as a 1400x900 display (i.e. text is sharper, but you can't put more of it on screen), that's hardly much of a win.
Am I alone in thinking it's a little early for Apple to give up on making Thunderbolt a standard and start adding USB 3 to MBPs?
"[...] rumored 15-inch MacBook Pro with 2880x1800 display compared to the 1440x900 display in the current model [...]"
I'd really like to see real increases in screen resolution. But if the 15" MBP gets a display which sharper, but otherwise acts as a 1400x900 display (i.e. text is sharper, but you can't put more of it on screen), that's hardly much of a win.
Am I alone in thinking it's a little early for Apple to give up on making Thunderbolt a standard and start adding USB 3 to MBPs?
USB 3 is integrated into the ivy bridge chipset... Apple would have to go out of there way to not support it and instead support the older version (usb2). Why would they do that?
I wonder how some website can tell about retina without speaking about price. Higher resolution means higher price. It costs about 100 to up from 1440x900 to 1680x1050... If you look for tft panel price, 1920x1200 panel cost much than 1680x1050 and much more than 1440x900. So 3840x2400 or 3360x2100 will never be as cheap as current ones.
OK, thanks! I guess it's going to be a struggle for Thunderbolt to catch on with USB 3 on Macs.
Retina Display and SSD
If Apple decides to extend retina displays and SSD to their entire line of Macbooks I am sure they were able to negotiate at a very large scale and therefore take the economies of scale both to their SSD and also their retina displays.
If Apple decides to extend retina displays and SSD to their entire line of Macbooks I am sure they were able to negotiate at a very large scale and therefore take the economies of scale both to their SSD and also their retina displays.
I think technically the MDD G4's had USB 2.0, but Apple disabled it though firmware. (It's been a long time, my history could be rusty.) This wouldn't be a first (not that I'm saying they'd do it).
How the hardware will manage that high resolutions ?! This is goodbye to gaming on mac,because there is no way that ivy bridge and gt650 can handle "retina" ( excluding the fact they calling hi resolutions "retina display"TM is the same thing like i call trackpad - "multitouch user experience" and try it to make revolution of it) resolutions
Games can work the same way they "non-retina" apps are handled in iOS, by doubling the pixels.
I'm not sure about that - I don't think that most games are actually fill-rate limited nowadays, are they? Except maybe really old ones...
If the game *is* fill-rate/memory bound (and I doubt that this is common), then rendering at full retina resolution would be slower, but it wouldn't be 4x slower, if only because AA wouldn't be necessary at retina resolution. I don't have a lot of experience GPU programming on PC's. On the xbox360, the GPU has a very nice filtering rasterizer that can do on-the-fly resolution conversion - in other words, you can render into the display buffer at a low resolution and then the GPU can filter that up to a higher resolution without doing any copies. This is why your xbox360 always seems to be outputting a 1920x1080 signal, even though almost no games render at that resolution. The PS3 OTOH, has to switch the final display resolution that your TV sees as the resolution of the game's display buffer changes. Maybe desktop GPUs can do the same thing the 360 can?
If the game is heavily fragment-shader bound, then the best approach would probably be to pre-render at a lower/normal resolution as always, and then filter-up into the display buffer.
I guess we'll see?
In regards to gaming you will need to wait and see what they do. But yes a high res screen makes a game look great but the new machines will never run something like BF3 or newer games at native resolution with settings on high!
This Samsung NP700Z7C-S01US is the closet to the rumoured MB Pro specs, can't find any benchmarks for it?
I would also add we will have to wait and see what Apple launches, because a lot of people will want to play games on the new machines, maybe I will be wrong about the performance? We will have to just wait and see.
This Samsung NP700Z7C-S01US is the closet to the rumoured MB Pro specs, can't find any benchmarks for it?
I would also add we will have to wait and see what Apple launches, because a lot of people will want to play games on the new machines, maybe I will be wrong about the performance? We will have to just wait and see.
Better yet they could actually be smoothly upscaled, rather than pixel doubled. That works with movies and games, just not so much with text and UI elements which is why iPhone/iPad apps default to being pixel doubled.
It'll be more like watching 720p on a 1080p TV.
You will need to change the resolution the game runs at? Resolution is resolution, it is always preferable to run games at a screens native res, but of course the higher the res the more power you need for high end games.
But I don't understand enough how OSX works with graphics drivers etc to know how it will handle games at lower then native resolutions?
But I don't understand enough how OSX works with graphics drivers etc to know how it will handle games at lower then native resolutions?
9to5 says the new MBPs are 0.95 inches thick.
Wikipedia says the current ones are 1 inch thick.
So they made them 5% thinner? And we supposedly lose an ethernet port for this 5% reduction? Can someone clarify? I'm sure I am either interpreting the measurements wrong, or using incorrect ones. Thanks
edit: source is bloomberg, not 9to5
Wikipedia says the current ones are 1 inch thick.
So they made them 5% thinner? And we supposedly lose an ethernet port for this 5% reduction? Can someone clarify? I'm sure I am either interpreting the measurements wrong, or using incorrect ones. Thanks
edit: source is bloomberg, not 9to5
Last edited:
The bloomberg article says that the current MBPs are 0.95" thick, not the new ones.
I'm STILL NOT CONVINCED that these latest rumors are about a new MacBook PRO!
It makes perfect sense to me that these rumors of a new thinner laptop with no ethernet, ODD, etc are really just rumors of a new 15" MacBook AIR.
Then Apple can do a chipset refresh the current MacBook Pro. Everyone goes home happy, the two laptop lines stay separate, and Apple sells more laptops than ever.
It makes perfect sense to me that these rumors of a new thinner laptop with no ethernet, ODD, etc are really just rumors of a new 15" MacBook AIR.
Then Apple can do a chipset refresh the current MacBook Pro. Everyone goes home happy, the two laptop lines stay separate, and Apple sells more laptops than ever.
Apple is most likely looking to unify the two lines, leading to a set of air-like pros and a possible rebranding to just macbook or MBP
It's been said before and as mental as it sounds it's actually true: a gaming MacBook would make an absolute killing. There are hordes of PC gamers out there who'd switch for thicker 15" MBP with high end GPU.
Stick it in a black anodised chassis and call it the MacBook Extreme and watch those 18-25 year old males flock.
But that unfortunately is not Apple or what Apple is about, so it'll never happen I'm afraid
But a black anodised 17" pro with SLI or Crossfire GPU's and an Intel extreme CPU plus ODD and ethernet and USB3 and thunderbolt and dual SSD's. And hi res screen...
it would be good, and good price too considering how much other makes charge for specification like that!