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

Risasi said:
Well...there are more differences. Optical drive (aka second bay for SDD+HDD option), memory can be upgraded to 16GB, glossy screen which IMO is easier to look at for longer periods of time than the current Air.
Click to expand...

Nothing points to the next MBP having dual drives and having a glass screen again, so nothing is sure for now.

As for the RAM, as far as I know (somebody correct me if I'm wrong), the 4GB limit on the MBA is currently an artificial limitation that only tries to force prosumers to buy the 13" MBP which currently has a higher profit margin than the MBA.

If they consolidate the 13" MBA and MBP, I don't see why they wouldn't take your money if you want to pay extra for a 8GB/16GB RAM upgrade, unless of course they want you to buy the 15" MBP, but I'd be surprised if you had to pay 1800$ for the cheapest Mac laptop with more than 4GB of RAM.
 
ZOMG, new Macbook Pro:D

ideapad-fcc.jpg
 
If the 13" is delayed until June/July I will cry. My current laptop probably only has another month out of it at most, and is starting to overheat itself now regularly.

Plus I'm an impatient sod too.
 
Risasi said:
The cheapest quad core CPU is $378 list price. That means a MBP 13 w/ quad core would be much more expensive than the current dual core. For this reason alone I don't think they will do it, which saddens me. I suppose there is an outside chance that Apple has some special deal with Intel for a custom processor or early release on a dual core.
Click to expand...

If the 13" gets a quad core, it won't be one of the ones listed with a price tag. The only 35W qc is the i7-3612QM, which is sold to OEMs only, so we don't know the price at all. If Apple chooses to use it, they will buy it in bulk, thusdriving their own costs down significantly, regardless.
 
pgiguere1 said:
It really comes down to if they decide to put high-end internal parts like quad-core CPU and discrete graphics in the next 13" MBP.
Click to expand...

Won't happen. Especially the graphics. I absolutely guarantee it.

If not, don't expect Apple to sell two almost identical computers with the only difference being that the Pro has a 20% faster CPU and is a couple of millimeters thicker.
Click to expand...

Why not? They've been doing it successfully for years. And you're forgetting the main difference between the two... one you can open up and upgrade, the other you can't. To me that's enough to warrant the "Pro" tag.
 
PVisitors said:
If the 13" is delayed until June/July I will cry. My current laptop probably only has another month out of it at most, and is starting to overheat itself now regularly.

Plus I'm an impatient sod too.
Click to expand...

I am on my last leg too w/ 2009 mb..
 
Krazy Bill said:
Why not? They've been doing it successfully for years.
Click to expand...
Because the MBP is rumored to share much more with the MBA now: Slimmer body, high-res screen, no optical drive, SSD...
And you're forgetting the main difference between the two... one you can open up and upgrade, the other you can't. To me that's enough to warrant the "Pro" tag.
Click to expand...

You think the main difference is that you can upgrade its RAM? Because you can change the SSD in the MBA. I must admit that not being able to upgrade RAM sucks, but really I don't think that's the "main difference" and a reason to keep two models. If they consolidate the 13" MBA and MBP they would have no reason to keep the 4GB RAM artificial limitation and could possibily offer up to 16GB RAM which should be enough for many years to come.

Whatever you do with it, I'm pretty sure you'd be limited by the ULV CPU and integrated graphics long before you can fill up 16 or even 8GB RAM. If someone wants to "future proof" his computer that he wants to keep for long, he can order it with a BTO RAM upgrade. Of course that would be more expensive than upgrading down the road, but most people buying a 13" MBP never upgrade and Apple usually doesn't care about upgradibility of consumer devices (like iDevices). I see the 13" MBP more like a consumer than Pro device anyway.
 
Risasi said:
The cheapest quad core CPU is $378 list price. That means a MBP 13 w/ quad core would be much more expensive than the current dual core. For this reason alone I don't think they will do it, which saddens me. I suppose there is an outside chance that Apple has some special deal with Intel for a custom processor or early release on a dual core.
Click to expand...

Don't give up...the IB list is probably not complete. When SB was about to come out, I read that IB would be the platform to bring Quad Core CPUs to many machines like the first C2D did for dual cores. This would be done by cheaper manufacturing methods and also through lower power consumption. Given the power boost on the IB laptops seem evolutionary, I could see this happening.
 
Krazy Bill said:
Won't happen. Especially the graphics. I absolutely guarantee it.
Click to expand...

I always thought that they didn't put in quad-core or dGPU because they couldn't due to thermal constraints. But if PC companies are able to put Nvidia's 640M dGPU into some ultrabooks (Acer's Aspire Timeline Ultra M3-581TG is 15" but also had an ODD and is still thin enough to be an ultrabook), why wouldn't Apple at least match that in their 13" "Pro" model?
 
Yes but it's a 15 inch, not 13. See the difference? The larger the laptop, the better the heat dissipation. Also, the "pro" in macbook pro is nothing more than a marketing tool. The tool doesn't make someone a professional, but one's uses does. ;)
 
that1guyy said:
Yes but it's a 15 inch, not 13. See the difference? The larger the laptop, the better the heat dissipation. Also, the "pro" in macbook pro is nothing more than a marketing tool. The tool doesn't make someone a professional, but one's uses does. ;)
Click to expand...

Haha don't worry, I understand that its just a marketing tool and not just for professionals and that it's 15" but if you were to remove the ODD in the MBP's which is what most is expecting, shouldn't there be enough room for heat dissipation in the 13"? Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to argue, (which most of threads end up turning into lol) :p, I'm just curious because it seems that its not a thickness restriction for thermal dissipation since this fits into the ultrabook's thickness dimension and the amount of free space the in a 15" ultrabook with an ODD is probably similar to the amount of free space in the 13" MBP without an ODD right?

Btw, I'm not saying this stuff just because I want this in the next MBP 13" haha. I'm going to the get the next 15"MBP or a 15" MBA if its offered with 8GB of RAM available :D
 
neilpryde23 said:
I always thought that they didn't put in quad-core or dGPU because they couldn't due to thermal constraints. But if PC companies are able to put Nvidia's 640M dGPU into some ultrabooks (Acer's Aspire Timeline Ultra M3-581TG is 15" but also had an ODD and is still thin enough to be an ultrabook), why wouldn't Apple at least match that in their 13" "Pro" model?
Click to expand...

Yep, if you read about, it goes crazy hot (but the cooling system is very weak : no heatpipe).
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Acer-Aspire-Timeline-Ultra-M3-581TG-Ultrabook.72194.0.html
 
Just thoughts - Don't flame

Exana said:
Yep, if you read about, it goes crazy hot (but the cooling system is very weak : no heatpipe).
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Acer-Aspire-Timeline-Ultra-M3-581TG-Ultrabook.72194.0.html
Click to expand...

No if  removes the Super drive in the 13' it could easily be done. You would free up a good 30% of space. Thickness shouldn't be a concern, the issue was space in the 13' and now that will (HOPEFULLY) be freed. The thickness of the 15 and 13 is the same!  would most likely to jump on the 28nm bandwagon so they wouldn't use a AMD chip for this generation (first batch of AMD gpus are all 40nm). So they will (hopefully) use Kepler. If they went down that route (for the 28nm thing) you might assume they would use the lowest end dedicated chip, personally I think this is wrong, the HD 4000 has better (or around the same) performance compared to the lowest end 28nm chip (620M). So that leaves the AMAZING 640M and the 640M LE. If your paranoid about them using less power, heat, space etc. The 640M LE would be a great option and only looses about 20% peformance compared to the 640M. So along with upgradable ram, fast dual core or low end quad core processor, high res screen (at least whats in 13' air) and other benefits. This would really distinguish the 13' pro and air. I would love a MBP with these specs!
 
Last edited:
mslide said:
I use it all the time and think it's a great feature. I use it mainly when I'm driving for things like getting directions, finding the nearest whatever, setting reminders to pick up milk on the way home from work, etc. Not a sad gimmick at all.

Now having Siri on a Macbook... not so sure about that. I'd never use it.
Click to expand...

For me Siri would make sense on the MacBook because I can dictate things
 
Risasi said:
The cheapest quad core CPU is $378 list price. That means a MBP 13 w/ quad core would be much more expensive than the current dual core. For this reason alone I don't think they will do it, which saddens me. I suppose there is an outside chance that Apple has some special deal with Intel for a custom processor or early release on a dual core.
Click to expand...

if other manufacturers and apple too start buying in bulk, the price will drop significantly!
 
mcman77 said:
if other manufacturers and apple too start buying in bulk, the price will drop significantly!
Click to expand...
The prices quoted by Intel are traditionally quoted as per unit for an order of a thousand units. OEMs ordering hundreds of thousands of these units will of course pay significantly less than that.

But we shouldn't get hung up about this 378 dollar price tag anyway, because as already pointed out by axu539, Apple probably wouldn't use this CPU in the 13 inch model anyway. The interesting quad core CPU in this case is indeed the i7-3612QM, because of its lower TDP (35W instead of 45W), making it more suitable for cramped enclosures.
 
the new ones are rumored to be in production now
they are 13 and 15 and will be blade like, just like the macbook air
heres the link to the rumor at http://techland.time.com/2012/03/29...k-pro-13-inch-wanted-more-than-15-inch-model/
this is disappointing

first we want something with beef
not the girly man macbook air format
if apple do that then the 2011 model mbps will be highly sought after
people dont want soldered on memory cpus and gpus
they want future proof machines
i want mac to improve
first they should offer a 19 incher

but if they dont they need to wake up and smell the apples of the competition out there
to match the competition such as the hp envy 17 3xxx they would need:
extra bay and caddy for plug and play ssd/hdd
easily replaceable original ssd/hdd
easily replaceable battery
blu ray
hdmi and two display ports
3 usb 3.0 ports
easily upgradeable ram using only a basic screwdriver
did i mention blu ray
or what about an m disc which is an archival dvd made of stone with 1000 year life
or what about an mo/md disc, which is archivable for 1.000,000 rewrites and hundreds of years, and non erasable from magnetics
think different apple! give us a better drive - at least a bd drive
and better graphics and gpu
thats what the competition is offering at half the price

if they go the mba format they will lose a lot of customers
the mbps are thin enough
people want power not girly man machines!

what do you think?
and btw, apple, ditch the 5600 drives, thats so 2006!
people are paying $2500 for a mbp 17 with a 5600 drive?
insane that its standard
 
Yes , I too have read the service manual for the new Envy 17.

BUT , although it is easy to change the battery , it also states that it is not a "User Serviceable Part" , true they give a part number in the manual but will HP send you a battery or tell you to send it back for service ?

Just something to think about.

Later :)

G. 
 
Last edited:
icecoldart said:
17" for sure 15 is a bit small and the price for a 15 with a higher res is just too much, it's better to get the 17' with full hd.
Click to expand...

but for the same money you (or even less) you can get a 27".

You see i'm in a similar dilemma. Do I go for a 15" or go for a 13" + ipad?

you see where i'm going with this? I mean in your case I don't know what I would do. 15" + ipad? or maybe even 21" + mba 11.62? they all come round to the same money.

I find it hard to justify the price all on 1 product.
 
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