Does anyone know in the past how recently bought has the hardware had to be to qualify for a free upgrade to the latest OS?
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
Does anyone know in the past how recently bought has the hardware had to be to qualify for a free upgrade to the latest OS?
Last year for Lion the free upgrade program started on June 6 and Lion was released on July 20th.
Great mock-up. I thought it was a leak at first sight lol. I wouldn't mind the extra USB port either. I want my Audio-in jack though.
J
Jerion
Guest
Exactly. 3 USB is a good touch, plus audio in should be added. Looks good to me. I think a second TB port might prove useful though.
Fewer. You mean fewer grammar lessons.
Hahhahah
----------
That looks amazing. I would buy that no question.
Wouldn't you think they would use a thinner screen like the macbook air rather than the same kinda bulky one it currently has?
I think so. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if the glass screen goes away completely on the Macbook line. They add weight and thickness, not even getting into the glare discussion.
I'm guessing aluminum bezel just like the Air, with glossy LCD panel by default and an antiglare option.
1440x900 (or higher!) antiglare, even as an option, on the 13" MBP please.
Other than that I think the mockup looks pretty good. As others have said two thunderbolt ports might happen. I'm still torn on the Ethernet situation, but would not be surprised one bit to see it go.
https://www.macrumors.com/2012/01/23/apple-expected-to-adopt-802-11ac-5g-gigabit-wi-fi-this-year/
I found something to want more than an Ethernet port.
I found something to want more than an Ethernet port.
Widespread Public adoption of 802.11n (hotels, coffee shops, households not willing to fork over money for a NEW router, etc) still hasn't happened and I would be pissed if a MBP came without ethernet. I use it all the time when there is a shatty wi-fi connection or I need the reliability of ethernet to fix problems with routers or switches.
Terrible design, you dropped the ethernet port. Apple will not do that for several years yet, especially on the 'Pro' model!
The form factor is perfect. I would love to be able to purchase that. A few other inputs are necessary, though, but that's up to Apple.
Maybe its just me but I find the thick to thinner designs a little pointless and ugly.
I agree. I see no point in forcing a "wedge design" into the MBP. What's wrong with current design? Shave a few milimeters if you wish, but why making it "wedge"?
No I agree it doesnt need to be wedged, I just really really really really _really_ hope they dont thin it too much to compromise things as heat and performance and what not.
Wwdc
I don't really know much but I think the new macbook pros will come out before the WWDC2012 since a it would deduct it will focus on its developers, software and APPS due to the logo
https://www.macrumors.com/2012/04/25/tickets-for-wwdc-2012-now-on-sale-june-11-15/
This is just a guess of mine which I hope it comes reality and so we have the chance to spend our cash on those MBP sooon!!
I don't really know much but I think the new macbook pros will come out before the WWDC2012 since a it would deduct it will focus on its developers, software and APPS due to the logo
https://www.macrumors.com/2012/04/25/tickets-for-wwdc-2012-now-on-sale-june-11-15/
This is just a guess of mine which I hope it comes reality and so we have the chance to spend our cash on those MBP sooon!!
can you make it twice as thin please. oh, and give it some liquid to. shave a little off the height of the screen. make it have a wide screen with absolutely no bezel around the border at all. aesthetics finished, I think we have it.
I've got insider information that the redesign of the Macbook Pros are going old school, and instead of very thin (which is so 2012), instead will look like this:
I'm still hoping that the optical drive stays. I cant be arsed getting in to the "I don't use the optical drive"/"I *DO* use the optical drive" **** all over again, so I won't, I'll just say this - eventually people will stop using DVDs, I understand that and have no issue with it. I haven't, and neither has anyone I know.
Still, plenty of computers could get away without an optical drive.
I don't think something with the label "Pro" and sells for over 1k falls in to that category, however.
A lack of optical drive is fine on a 10/11 inch netbook that you buy from HP for $250-$300. Most people don't use those as their main computers. If I'm spending 1k on a computer, on a Pro computer, you'd better believe that I'm going to be using it as my main computer. Like I said, some machines are fine without an optical drive, but I don't want to buy a main computer without an ODD. Not yet, anyway. I could buy an external drive, but that sort of defeats the purpose of having a portable computer that I can just chuck in a bag and go out with.
Anyway, enough about the optical drive - people will disagree, I'm just talking from my POV. I won't spend 1k on a Pro computer that I will be using as my main computer, when it doesn't have an optical drive. Not yet, maybe in a few years, but at the moment I watch too many DVDs on my computer.
</rant>
A really big thing I'm worried about is if they just upgrade the displays to retina displays and essentially doubling the amount of pixels or whatever without changing the "physical" screen resolution. Yes to clearer, pin sharp graphics and photographs - as long as that doesn't stop them keeping the same ****** "physical" screen resolution. I don't just want my **** clearer, I want to open Mail/Safari and have things spread out more.
My worry is if they go to retina displays they'll just go from 1280x800 --> 2560x1600 but keep the same "physicalness" of the display meaning it's still 1280x800 for intents and purposes just clearer and more crisp.
That would suck. If they upgrade the displays I hope they don't think going retina negates the need for more physical space on screen.
(I'm not a technical person, so I have probably explained this horrifically bad. Basically, my understanding, rightly or wrongly, is that retina displays are all about increasing the amount of pixels whilst keeping things with the same physical dimensions so they look clearer/more sharp, without looking any bigger/smaller. That's fine, but I don't want just that - I want more screen estate, and going retina doesn't and shouldn't negate that. Super clear amazingly crisp graphics = win... but on a 1280x800 display? Nah!)
Still, plenty of computers could get away without an optical drive.
I don't think something with the label "Pro" and sells for over 1k falls in to that category, however.
A lack of optical drive is fine on a 10/11 inch netbook that you buy from HP for $250-$300. Most people don't use those as their main computers. If I'm spending 1k on a computer, on a Pro computer, you'd better believe that I'm going to be using it as my main computer. Like I said, some machines are fine without an optical drive, but I don't want to buy a main computer without an ODD. Not yet, anyway. I could buy an external drive, but that sort of defeats the purpose of having a portable computer that I can just chuck in a bag and go out with.
Anyway, enough about the optical drive - people will disagree, I'm just talking from my POV. I won't spend 1k on a Pro computer that I will be using as my main computer, when it doesn't have an optical drive. Not yet, maybe in a few years, but at the moment I watch too many DVDs on my computer.
</rant>
A really big thing I'm worried about is if they just upgrade the displays to retina displays and essentially doubling the amount of pixels or whatever without changing the "physical" screen resolution. Yes to clearer, pin sharp graphics and photographs - as long as that doesn't stop them keeping the same ****** "physical" screen resolution. I don't just want my **** clearer, I want to open Mail/Safari and have things spread out more.
My worry is if they go to retina displays they'll just go from 1280x800 --> 2560x1600 but keep the same "physicalness" of the display meaning it's still 1280x800 for intents and purposes just clearer and more crisp.
That would suck. If they upgrade the displays I hope they don't think going retina negates the need for more physical space on screen.
(I'm not a technical person, so I have probably explained this horrifically bad. Basically, my understanding, rightly or wrongly, is that retina displays are all about increasing the amount of pixels whilst keeping things with the same physical dimensions so they look clearer/more sharp, without looking any bigger/smaller. That's fine, but I don't want just that - I want more screen estate, and going retina doesn't and shouldn't negate that. Super clear amazingly crisp graphics = win... but on a 1280x800 display? Nah!)