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

2012 Macbook Pro Redesign

jamezr said:
That what I thought you were just stating your opinion without any real data to back it up......
Click to expand...

I recall reading more than a couple of reviews on Anand and maybe other that said that SSD were not the boon for battery efficiency that they were hoped to be.
As for reliability, he doesn't mean shock resistance or something like that. SSD have been plagued with issues that hard drives are almost immune nowadays like firmware bugs. All of this contributes to a lesser reliability. If I would have to trust my most valuable data to a storage medium between the two, right now I would choose HDD for longterm storage, decades of testing have made them worthy, Id say they are pretty reliable (NOT shockproof or rugged)
 
Naimfan said:
Ahem . . .

Reliability numbers that are available show platter drives to be as reliable as SSD. Go figure. Platter drives also don't consume any more power than do SSD.

SSD are great if you reboot a lot, open applications frequently, etc. But they remain a terrible value proposition for mass storage - which is, after all, the point of mass storage in a laptop.
Click to expand...

Since you didn't actually know and were just stating your opinion as fact I will post the facts for you....

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-reliability-failure-rate,2923.html
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscent...drives_no_better_than_others_survey_says.html
 
Last edited:
ermir4444 said:
Do you still use floppy drives? :D I hear their price/GB is roughly 0.01% compared to HDD.
Click to expand...

Another clueless wonder . . .

You've been fed incorrect information. But then, what else should we expect?

;)

ermir4444 said:
Just admit that SSD are much better than HDD and they are the future of storage in computing.
Click to expand...

Sorry, they are not "much better." That's your value judgment and screeching it more and more loudly does not make it fact.

SSD are outrageously expensive per GB, and that is a large factor in "better." SSD are potentially much faster, and their cost is likely to come down, but right now they are next to useless for people like me who need large amounts of storage on the road at a not-astronomical price. Having an external drive on the road defeats the purpose of a laptop.

And as I've said, most people won't benefit, because the advantages of SSD aren't terribly relevant to most people, which point I note you haven't bothered to dispute. How many times a day do you reboot? Or better yet, how many days do you go between reboots? Similarly, how many times do you open an application? Run the math on how little time is saved, realize that people can do other things in the few seconds difference, and admit to yourself that while SSD is cool, it's far from a panacea.
 
Last edited:
charlieroberts said:
Have you read it? It clearly shows HDD and SSD are equally reliable
Click to expand...
I agree...but that is not what the other guy was saying he was stating that SSDs were more reliable. They are not.....
The only advantage of a SSD is RW. They don't save power and they are not more reliable than a platter drive.
 
Last edited:
jamezr said:
I agree...but that is not what the other guy was saying he was stating that SSDs were more reliable. They are not.....
The only advantage of a SSD is RW. They don't save power and they are not more reliable than a platter drive.
Click to expand...

You had best learn to read.

I wrote that HDD and SSD are approximately equal in reliability. It's particularly funny because you wasted the time to bold and expand my text where I said exactly that.

Vide:

Naimfan said:
Ahem . . .

Reliability numbers that are available show platter drives to be as reliable as SSD. Go figure. Platter drives also don't consume any more power than do SSD.

SSD are great if you reboot a lot, open applications frequently, etc. But they remain a terrible value proposition for mass storage - which is, after all, the point of mass storage in a laptop.
Click to expand...
 
Naimfan said:
You had best learn to read.

I wrote that HDD and SSD are approximately equal in reliability. It's particularly funny because you wasted the time to bold and expand my text where I said exactly that.

Vide:
Click to expand...
so...you still haven't posted anything to back up one thing you said....all we learned from you is that we don't like you.....a little on the arrogant side...stating opinion as fact and then refusing to back up what was said. Then you insult those that disagree with you...... nice pleasant person aren't you?
 
Listen, testing 5000 drives is nothing.

All I can say is, of three ssd I bought , three failed within 2 months, different manufacturers, different machines.

In twenty years I've had two hard drives fail.

I may well just have bad luck, but 5000 isn't a big sample.

IMHO apple will move to a 64 gig msata and traditional hdd, based on intels chipset.
 
jamezr said:
so...you still haven't posted anything to back up one thing you said....all we learned from you is that we don't like you.....a little on the arrogant side...stating opinion as fact and then refusing to back up what was said. Then you insult those that disagree with you...... nice pleasant person aren't you?
Click to expand...

I stopped bothering with him the moment he said that the only thing sdd are good for is bootup and opening applications and that they dont offer much to most people :eek:. He is completely unreasonable and delusional. And he cant back up anything he says
 
Heh. I love the ad hominems - keep them coming!

;)

Ermir - what benefit do you imagine most people would find from SSD aside from boot time and app launching?
 
Naimfan said:
Heh. I love the ad hominems - keep them coming!

;)

Ermir - what benefit do you imagine most people would find from SSD aside from boot time and app launching?
Click to expand...
you are joking right!! Seriously......app launching??? really???/ Thats all????
What is the operating system??? Is it an app???? so every mouse move every little click is launching a set of commands in the operating system....which BTW is an app sitting on and running the hardware..... So an SSD would make everything you do in this app called an operating system run faster and be more responsive. Do you just boot your computer and just watch it or do you actually use the computer? Do you use applications on your computer? Do you want them to be faster?
 
Naimfan said:
Heh. I love the ad hominems - keep them coming!

;)

Ermir - what benefit do you imagine most people would find from SSD aside from boot time and app launching?
Click to expand...

Hold on, after several ad hominems yourself you're going to go and judge someone who does the same thing?

I know you have your rights and I get your point, but perhaps it's best to stop discussing this (or at the least make a new topic about it) instead of talking about SSD vs. HDD in a topic unrelated to the subject spare a tiny relation. This paragraph goes for both sides of this laughable 'debate'.

On topic:

I think the 2012 Macbook Pro will be re-designed. The 13" will lose the optical drive and gain a dedicated graphics card option, as well as a bigger battery for 10 hours of battery life with the same test type. It will only have USB 3.0 because it's standard on Intel chipsets with Ivy Bridge. The MBP will get a thinner screen and ports on both sides like the MBA, but it won't be more than a hair thinner. It will be a little bit 'flatter' looking with different bevels, but it will be generally the same thickness.

The 15" and 17" models will not lose their optical drives and will still have the ports on one side, but they will also get a thinner display. The battery life will not increase and they will also look generally the same as their predecessors, albeit with a slightly more modern, flat look.

There's a slight possibility Apple will stop the 17" MBP, I reckon.
 
ExnomenDei said:
The 15" and 17" models will not lose their optical drives and will still have the ports on one side, but they will also get a thinner display. The battery life will not increase and they will also look generally the same as their predecessors, albeit with a slightly more modern, flat look.
Click to expand...

The 15" you described but with a black liquid metal look with an SSD would be awesome! I reallly want one now but I can't let myself buy one without knowing what the new one is like in a few months, I'm thinking June/July too so quite a while yet. :/
 
There's also the possibility that the case will not be redesigned at all. I don't see many people speculating on this.

Personally, I think that the first iteration of the Ivy Bridge MBP will fit into the current model. Then we'll see a redesign with removed opti-bay in late 2012.
 
Naimfan said:
Another clueless wonder . . .

You've been fed incorrect information. But then, what else should we expect?

;)



Sorry, they are not "much better." That's your value judgment and screeching it more and more loudly does not make it fact.

SSD are outrageously expensive per GB, and that is a large factor in "better." SSD are potentially much faster, and their cost is likely to come down, but right now they are next to useless for people like me who need large amounts of storage on the road at a not-astronomical price. Having an external drive on the road defeats the purpose of a laptop.

And as I've said, most people won't benefit, because the advantages of SSD aren't terribly relevant to most people, which point I note you haven't bothered to dispute. How many times a day do you reboot? Or better yet, how many days do you go between reboots? Similarly, how many times do you open an application? Run the math on how little time is saved, realize that people can do other things in the few seconds difference, and admit to yourself that while SSD is cool, it's far from a panacea.
Click to expand...

Your last paragraph is quite flawed. Your claim is that "most people won't benefit," and your point saying "the advantages of SSD aren't terribly relevant to most people" is irrelevant to that claim for a number of reasons. To begin, that statement is merely an opinion, and you offer no data suggesting that "most people" won't benefit from what SSDs have to offer, nor do you offer data suggesting what "terribly relevant" advantages are (which is ironic since you seem to be quick to point out opinion (or perhaps "judgement" as you put it) over fact when someone else uses that against you). Further, you've contradicted your own claim when attempting to validate this premise by noting the better boot-up times, faster application boot-up, etc. as benefits of an SSD and how frequently they are obtained. The frequency that people obtain these benefits is largely irrelevant to your own original claim. You did not state that "most people won't benefit very often," but rather you definitively stated that they won't benefit. Now it is reasonable to assume that virtually every user will boot up their computer and/or open up an application at some point, correct? And if so, then the aforementioned benefits will in fact be obtained, and so "most" (if not virtually all) users will benefit. Your predispositions regarding how frequently you ASSUME people may obtain these benefits is irrelevant unless you want to revise your conclusion to state that the benefits of SSDs may not be the most cost-effective option (which is currently a valid point), nor might these benefits may obtained frequently (which is related to the first point), but omit the unqualified claim that "most people" won't benefit (for the above reasons).

And as a side note, arguing the cost-effectiveness of a relatively "new" technology to attempt to refute a claim that SSDs may be the "future" of storage is rather shaky, to put it nicely. Surely there are better premises to base that argument off of?
 
As someone that purely uses their PC for Lightroom/Photoshop and very interested in the MBA, should I wait for the revised ones? I hear that the MBA (due to limited 4Gig Ram) stutters sometimes.

Also, I've never used a mac before, always a PC guy.
 
kaydot said:
There's also the possibility that the case will not be redesigned at all. I don't see many people speculating on this.

Personally, I think that the first iteration of the Ivy Bridge MBP will fit into the current model. Then we'll see a redesign with removed opti-bay in late 2012.
Click to expand...

I doubt it. Apple does the big stuff in the first half of the year, and spec bumps in the end of the year.
 
bertritto said:
As someone that purely uses their PC for Lightroom/Photoshop and very interested in the MBA, should I wait for the revised ones? I hear that the MBA (due to limited 4Gig Ram) stutters sometimes.

Also, I've never used a mac before, always a PC guy.
Click to expand...


Totally depends what your main camera is and how big you print..

If you don't upsize a lot and don't go to photoshop for every photo from raw to tiff a few times, you'll be fine.

What camera are you mainly using and what's your current workflow?

Lightroom itself runs well, as does photoshop by itself...the two run ok, but I had to close the rest of my apps like mail etc, due to multiple layers and large files.

Lion is a ram hog and I'd prefer if 8gb was standard..but the ssd does mitigate paging to an extent.
 
I still don't care about a redesign to the 17" ... I just want it soon! It has to keep the optical drive, though, that's a deal-breaker for me

I think most 15" and 17" purchasers still want an optical drive. It's only uber-nerds like people on this forum who've switched to all digital media at this point, and I'll bet only 1/2 of us here (if that) even have!
 
natejohnstone@g said:
I still don't care about a redesign to the 17" ... I just want it soon! It has to keep the optical drive, though, that's a deal-breaker for me

I think most 15" and 17" purchasers still want an optical drive. It's only uber-nerds like people on this forum who've switched to all digital media at this point, and I'll bet only 1/2 of us here (if that) even have!
Click to expand...

I would like the optical drive to still be there too, I'd hate to be on the road and find that I couldn't load a CD. Not just that, I still buy CD's so it would be convinient to not have to copy the CD's to my desktop and then transfer the files. Not only that either, there has been a time when one of my University lecturers has required the work to be burned to a CD for a backup, so it would be nice to have the ability of using the laptop as a full workstation/desktop equivalent.
 
well maybe this redisign won't go the right way,
If they ditch the optical drive (which is fine), they might not replace it with something else like ssd or hdd for the sake of simplicity (what? two drives? that's confusing). then no hdd superdrive upgrade possible.
I remember when they ditched the firewire on the macbook (then the whole line entirely). The original white macbook (which I own) was a perfect machine for live musicians (which I am). without firewire no good quality soundcard.
Then the macbook pro became the entry line for a higher price.
Maybe they'le lose firewire to promote their thunderbolt, which will ultimately replace it. which would really suck.
Maybe they'll also ditch ethernet, which would also suck.
(anyway in the long run they might not even build computers anymore. What I see with Lion is not good news
So maybe I won't wait.
 
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