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

Apple Launches MacBook Pros with Thunderbolt, Quad Core CPUs, AMD GPUs

Cabbit said:
No expresscard is too slow to support lightpeak.
Click to expand...

So, a useless interface provided by MBP's a few years old is to slow to support a new interface for which compatible devices aren't available, and for which compatible devices will carry a hefty price premium if/when they ever do become available?

I'm not crying.
 
leman said:
Sorry to dissapoint you, but your 13' now officially has 7 hours battery as well ;)

I guess the old tests (with 10 hours as result) were very restrictive, with w-lan, bluetooth and other things turned off. The new 7 hours are a more realistic estimate on a laptop under constant usage.

Anyway, it is still better than most other notebooks. If they advertise 7 hours, the real value is more like 3-4.
Click to expand...

this statement is true for most pc manufacturers but not Apple. it should last 8-9 hours of Wireless Web. and about 6 hours of playing videogames
 
skmiller22 said:
They may make mention of Thunderbolt on Tuesday if its incorporated into the Ipad 2, but otherwise I doubt they mention this refresh at all. Otherwise they would have waited until Tuesday to release these.

So I'm thinking its safe to assume this will be the MBP line until next February with the only other laptop refresh in 2011 to be the Mac Book Air. Anyone else disagree?
Click to expand...

well it will be dissapointing knowing that there will be a huge refresh a year after u get my firts mac but ill survive

ps:doesnt it only cost 200 to upgrade with an older mac?
 
anthony11 said:
Yes: supply context when asking such a question.
Click to expand...

I've been waiting for this since september,I've pretty much made up my mind on buying one of these. I just wanted to know if there was any significant difference between 5400rpm and 7200rpm (performance-wise), I'll most likely run programs like photoshop, lightroom, dj software, video/audio editing, and the basic web surfing, fb etc etc... Obviously, I would assume 7200 would use more power and get worn out faster/overheat? Suggestions?
 
Wow, just doesn't seem right to have LP (Thunderbolt) and a 5400rpm drive reside in the same machine...:confused:
 
Please help...

...I am beyond confused.

I totally understand the disappointment of many. I'd wait until 2012, except who knows what that will bring, and the kind folks here convinced me that since I need a new computer (and made the decision to go Mac, though I'm beginning to rethink that reading some comments), to just pull the trigger.

I very much prefer a 13" for portability, and configured a high-end model (with warranty and a few add-ons) for about the same price as a low-end 15", which would have a quad core, what I presume are better graphics and I'd have the option to get an anti-glare (is that so much better?)

I will be using it for business applications and some creative pursuits (no gaming or movie-making), and ideally want the machine to last me a while.

What do you gurus think? And also, in the case of the 15" (again, not preferred because of the size - and I'm spoiled from a 3 pound Vaio, but if it's more powerful for as much as the 13???) is it worth to get 8 RAM? 750 HDD? Anti-glare?

Any advice would be so appreciated. I am feeling paralyzed at this point :) Would love to buy it online this weekend.

Thanks so much!!
 
Evan_11 said:
Pretty crappy that they are not offering the higher res screen on the 13". I'm sure it has to do with taking away sales of the 13" mba and 15" mbp. The processor bump is ok but I would of been happy with i3 and 1440x900. Could care less about lightpeak/thunderbolt-- this is just marketing for intel. Overall not that impressive an update except for the quad core on the 15" and 17" models. The 15" starts at $1800 so it's a terrible value compared to competitive PC laptops. Apple figures that the 13" will sell no matter what so that's why the update is pretty bad.
Click to expand...

This is a very annoying situation. There is no good option for people who want a high-end machine in the smaller 13" form factor.

The new 13" MPB has fine specs under the hood, but a relatively low-res screen -- and screen resolution makes a much bigger difference to the user experience for most people than, say, a processor spec bump. The 13" MBAs sport a beautiful screen, but still have the old Core 2 Duos and top out at 4GB RAM.
 
no no

Bad update (13") - crap display resolution and to heavy!

Apple should look at the sony vaios z series!!
Very light, Full HD, ok just windows but who cares...

Very funny - usually all people here are defending apple, but after this "update" a lot of people wont buy this stuff!!
 
iPad 2?

So i believe light peak will be in the ipad 2, but while you would think a small number of people would give a $h!t. As we saw today light peak doubles as mini display port!! So iPad 2 could have video output. :)
 
troller said:
Most of this crap is produced for less than half of the price in asian countries and shipped to the US....so this makes no sense, sorry! They are overpriced like ****!
Click to expand...

Do you have some special magic status that causes other vendors to sell you stuff at or below cost? It's called profit margin. Kinda hard to stay in business without it.

As for display pixels (still not the same as "resolution"): folks, THINK rather than react, just for once. Most customers don't even understand what pixels are, and 1440x900 means nothing more to them than DOSXQQ. Increasing the pixel pitch would mean that software would have to scale up what it draws accordingly -- no matter how marginally more crisp it is, most users aren't going to want a laptop display that they have to poke their nose up to in order to read.
 
xxjudgmentxx said:
If one more person posts about the battery life being "lower" I'm going to stab myself.
Click to expand...

im happy with it..i mean the average pc gives you 3-4 and why would you need over 7 hours anyway?? i mean what will you be doing for so long that you wouldnt have a charger
 
anthony11 said:
As for display pixels (still not the same as "resolution"): folks, THINK rather than react, just for once. Most customers don't even understand what pixels are, and 1440x900 means nothing more to them than DOSXQQ. Increasing the pixel pitch would mean that software would have to scale up what it draws accordingly -- no matter how marginally more crisp it is, most users aren't going to want a laptop display that they have to poke their nose up to in order to read.
Click to expand...

I don't know -- my wife got an iPhone 4 with the retina display, and it is significantly more crisp and readable than my 3GS, especially for text. More pixels-per-inch makes a big difference.
 
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