I agree with you. It kinda sucks because I want something that's portable and reasonably powerful (and upgradeable) but has a good screen resolution.Oh we have been talking about ditching the optical drive, adding discrete graphics, and a "mSATA" SSD in addition to the mechanical disk for ages now.
The 13" MacBook Pro also needs a resolution bump to 1440 x 900 like its Macbook Air sibling. I would like to get a 13" model but the display and graphics solutions are lackluster for me. Also, my experience with Apple's Windows driver support has been nothing but miserable. I might as well save my money at that point.
I am stuck in the same boat. I at least have my 4 year old Macbook. It works so why complain?I agree with you. It kinda sucks because I want something that's portable and reasonably powerful (and upgradeable) but has a good screen resolution.
As it is, Apple doesn't offer one device that has all of the above. I can get the Air but miss out on customization. I can get the 13" MBP but the resolution sucks. I can get the best of both in a 15" but I lose portability.
You can't win.
They did. TRIM is supported with Apple's BTO SSDs.Would be nice if they finally updated OS X Snow Leopard and Lion to include TRIM support seeing how theyve been selling SSD drives in macbooks for a number of years now.
NO EXCUSE at this point for omitting this.
They did. TRIM is supported with Apple's BTO SSDs.
ope
I couldn't find reference to the chip they used, how'd you find out?
thumbs down if you think specs still stink 4 price.
No 8GB Standard,
No SS standard at near 2k.
No better bluetooth
No better display's
8 GB is chump change in DIMMs. On a good day it is $50 or less.1. No one needs 8GB unless they are Photoshopping/Video Editing etc..
2. Yes, an SSD for at least the OS could be nice. Maybe in the next model.
3. What wrong with the bluetooth?
4. They have some of the best notebook Displays on the market.
Beside the fact I'm almost sure that the current dual core i7 options in the macbook pro, with Intel 3000 or not, will smoke all around a old 2008 Macbook Core 2 2.2-2.4 with Nvidia graphics esp an Nvidia 9400M
A dual core i7 1.8ghz will smoke a 2.8+ghz core 2 duo
1. No one needs 8GB unless they are Photoshopping/Video Editing etc..
I am stuck in the same boat. I at least have my 4 year old Macbook. It works so why complain?![]()
It's conceivable that we might lose the superdrive. SSD as standard isn't going to happen. Look at what they're asking for it.
Last time I checked their profit margins were closer to 1%. Granted, that was years ago and things may have changed a little. But 30%? That's not even laughable... it's just stupid. Given that they sell what, 20 million macs a year (altogether), with an average price of around, let's say $1700, that would be $500 per mac times 20 million, at 10 billion dollars a year. Obviously that isn't happening, or they wouldn't have "only" 83 billion in the bank. Please find a brain and use it.
----------
8 GB of RAM I'll give you.
But what are you going to do with 1 GB of VRAM?
And for the love of God, quit whining about SSDs. They're too expensive. A 512 GB SSD runs you $1,000, which is more than half the price of most of those machines. Most MBP users aren't going to be happy with only 256 GB of storage (...or less). I know I wouldn't. External storage can get annoying, especially if it becomes your main method of storage and not just backup.
"SSD or Flash storage"? You realize that's... well I'm not sure if I can call it redundant, but it's a bit stupid. SSD *IS* flash. Flash is solid-state. Why don't you learn a bit about technology before you complain about it on a forum where people are going to know you're just talking out of your [hat]?
If the graphics card matters to you (i.e more VRAM for apps like Aperature, or more power for games), you want the refreshed MBP, as it replaced the 6490 (horribly slow) with the much faster 6750 with twice the VRAM. Other than that.... I'd save the money for mics and um.. borrow Logic Express.
But what are you going to do with 1 GB of VRAM?