Blame however you want, just remember that Apple has chosen Intel as their chip supplier, and therefore they are to blame.
Also, Apple doesn't ow you jack ****, so pointing fingers makes no sense what so ever.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Another Look at Apple's Core 2 Duo Choice for New 13-Inch MacBook Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Blame however you want, just remember that Apple has chosen Intel as their chip supplier, and therefore they are to blame.
Also, Apple doesn't ow you jack ****, so pointing fingers makes no sense what so ever.
That's why the Mac Pro is overkill for the average user. The tasks they do do not require extremely fast hardware. The biggest bottleneck is I/O, so a faster hard drive, 15k RPM or SSD, you'll really notice the difference.
The same is with the i7, it's really only worth the extra cash if you need the CPU power.
Also look at the price of the Vaio Z series. Considerably more than a MBP 13", in fact almost 50% more for the base model Z.
They dropped it by 100$ on both models. Also, I'm not sure but I think previous 2.4Ghz had 2GB ram.
I agree I would love to see a 13" MacBook Pro with the same form factor, larger battery, no optical drive, an i5 processor and dedicated graphics like the 15" laptop.
This is basically a MacBook Air, but it would have the regular number of ports. The specs of the 15" MacBook Pro and more space for a larger battery.
I can't imagine why people are complaining about price.
A token price drop? How old are you? The entry-level 13" MBP is an amazing value. In 2000 (or 2001) I paid $1799 for a Graphite iBook (the Hello Kitty style) that had a 466 MHZ G3 processor, 64 MB of RAM a WHOPPING 10 GB HD and a DVD drive (no burner of any kind). It had 1 USB port, 1 FW port and an audio out.
If it doesn't have what you want, too bad for you. I wonder how many of the whiners were REALLY going to buy one in the first place.
The iPad didn't have what I wanted, so I bought the 13". It's that simple.
A token price drop? How old are you? The entry-level 13" MBP is an amazing value. In 2000 (or 2001) I paid $1799 for a Graphite iBook (the Hello Kitty style) that had a 466 MHZ G3 processor, 64 MB of RAM a WHOPPING 10 GB HD and a DVD drive (no burner of any kind). It had 1 USB port, 1 FW port and an audio out.
If it doesn't have what you want, too bad for you. I wonder how many of the whiners were REALLY going to buy one in the first place.
The iPad didn't have what I wanted, so I bought the 13". It's that simple.
Very true most users would get better performance from the base 13" MBP + SSD, then the equivalent priced 15" MBP.
Where the hell did I say Apple owed me anything buddy? All I'm saying is that Intel is bickering over nothing. It's my own opinion so get over it.
Agreed. An SSD is a game changer. It's the single most significant upgrade you can make for day to day tasks.
hmm....
Intel should be extremely nervous that it actually makes sense for a major consumer computer company to stick with their old product rather than using their new one.
1. Crappy integrated GPU
2. Legal maneuvers to lock out much better competing integrated GPUs
3. CPU not really much of an improvement
It's no wonder that Apple is talking to AMD.
LOL, they're probably maintaining (the full) OS X on PPC and ARM, just in case.
Intel should be extremely nervous that it actually makes sense for a major consumer computer company to stick with their old product rather than using their new one.
1. Crappy integrated GPU
2. Legal maneuvers to lock out much better competing integrated GPUs
3. CPU not really much of an improvement
It's no wonder that Apple is talking to AMD.
LOL, they're probably maintaining (the full) OS X on PPC and ARM, just in case.
How about get rid of the ***** worthless optical drive and make room for components people will really use like a real graphics card!!! Use the savings from the outdated ancient tech of the non-Superdrive and charge $100 more and give users a real reason to buy it. There are plenty of 13" non-Apple computers with dedicated graphics.
The 320m is an improvement over the 9400m. I also believe the Arrandale GMA IGP is less than half of what the 9400m was capable of... but in the end don't "PRO" users deserve dedicated graphics? When is Apple going to learn to either make the optical drive usable with BluRay or get rid of the optical drive for once and all?
Also, this tells all 13" MB, 13" MBA, Mac mini, and 21.5" iMac users the CPU and GPU/chipset they will get with the update coming soon. Apple uses one lineup for all five of these devices (including 13" MBP).
The real problem is what does Apple do when it can no longer buy Core 2 Duo CPUs from Intel in early 2011? Move to AMD/ATI? Or finally give the PRO users a real graphics card? What about the other four Macs that use the same tech? I believe this is all about margins... and not about not being able to give users a dedicated graphics solution due to space.
The 320m is an improvement over the 9400m. I also believe the Arrandale GMA IGP is less than half of what the 9400m was capable of... but in the end don't "PRO" users deserve dedicated graphics? When is Apple going to learn to either make the optical drive usable with BluRay or get rid of the optical drive for once and all?
Also, this tells all 13" MB, 13" MBA, Mac mini, and 21.5" iMac users the CPU and GPU/chipset they will get with the update coming soon. Apple uses one lineup for all five of these devices (including 13" MBP).
The real problem is what does Apple do when it can no longer buy Core 2 Duo CPUs from Intel in early 2011? Move to AMD/ATI? Or finally give the PRO users a real graphics card? What about the other four Macs that use the same tech? I believe this is all about margins... and not about not being able to give users a dedicated graphics solution due to space.
Until the new OS comes out in the next 1 or 2 versions and suddenly they drop support or some features on Core 2 Duo processors. It's not just speed, there's a lot of architecture changes that could affect compatibility with future software technology.
looks like im in real shiats now...which one should i get.....13" or 15" x_x
this is not a fun choice...
$1500 vs $1700...!!
this is not a fun choice...
$1500 vs $1700...!!
Oh no, this computer is only 440% faster than my computer...I really wanted one that was 520% faster!
Ok, dude. I'm glad you like your PowerBook.
But what's wrong with saying "I just really like my PowerBook"? At a certain point you just look foolish saying that a 5-year newer chip just isn't good enough when the 6-year newer chip is what you REALLY wanted.You can just say you like your PowerBook and leave it at that. You don't have to make up reasons to impress us.
Thats what I though, but I spoke to someone in a reseller store and they said yes... So thought I'd check...
The Mid 2009 MacBook Pro 13" to 2010 MacBook Pro 13"
Low end differences:
2.26 to 2.4 GHz
2 GB of RAM to 4 GB of RAM
160 GB HDD to 250 GB HDD
9400m to 320m
7 hour battery life to 10 hour battery life
High end differences:
2.53 to 2.66
250 GB HDD to 320 GB HDD
9400m to 320m
7 hour battery life to 10 hour battery life
All those explainations for the Core2Duo... BS!
This was a 100% business decision. If they want to put iX plus dedicated graphics into they 13" - they can do it! But they know that for the next refresh (new MBP generation) they have to redesign the MBPs so or so... They got a killer deal for a huge pile of C2Ds and are now making a nice profit margin.
Yes, the C2D is still ok for most people, but it is years old technology. Period!
This was a 100% business decision. If they want to put iX plus dedicated graphics into they 13" - they can do it! But they know that for the next refresh (new MBP generation) they have to redesign the MBPs so or so... They got a killer deal for a huge pile of C2Ds and are now making a nice profit margin.
Yes, the C2D is still ok for most people, but it is years old technology. Period!
does Apple ever plan to add a matte screen option to the 13"?
I spent a few hours with the new 13" MBP this weekend, and even without an i3 processor, it runs circles around my (now ancient) Santa Rosa 15" MBP. But I'm still clinging to the old 15" because of the matte screen, even though I'd much prefer a smaller, lighter machine.
A 13" with a matte screen would be so useful to me that I've even looked at the Sony VaioZ, but I can't stand the idea of running Windows on my laptop. Does anyone have a clue as to whether Apple ever intends to put out a 13" with a matte screen option, or am I dreaming????
I spent a few hours with the new 13" MBP this weekend, and even without an i3 processor, it runs circles around my (now ancient) Santa Rosa 15" MBP. But I'm still clinging to the old 15" because of the matte screen, even though I'd much prefer a smaller, lighter machine.
A 13" with a matte screen would be so useful to me that I've even looked at the Sony VaioZ, but I can't stand the idea of running Windows on my laptop. Does anyone have a clue as to whether Apple ever intends to put out a 13" with a matte screen option, or am I dreaming????
Well what are you looking to do with an Apple notebook?
That's really the first question you should be asking yourself.
I would have done the same thing if I were Apple. However, as a consumer the choice for me is easy 15" now.
I'd say remove the DVD drive and use the MBA's external one. This story was based on a ArsTechnica article and the only question that hasn't been answered is:
What happens on the next update? Intel is stopping C2D production this year.