Apple Releases Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro

[raleigh1208]

I find the discussion of the glossy screen vs. the standard screen amazing, how some can say the glare is terrible and others can saw there is absolutely no glare. I guess the truth is somewhere in between.

I've been waiting for several months now for this day to come so I could order a new MBP. As I waited I visited my local Apple store many times. Each time I loved the glossy screen in terms of the clarity and color. If you set them side by side and compare a glossy screen vs the matte screen the glossy wins hands down in terms of the quality of the picture and colors. BUT, each time I've visited the Apple store I came back convinced that despite the benefits of the glossy screen, the glare issue would be a problem for me, and how I use my laptop, in that I either use it in my family room or kitchen, with banks of windows behind me.

I couldn't get past the glare issue. Don't let anyone here say there is NO glare; there is glare. The question is how it will affect you, and how you use your MBP. I think I could get used to the glare, but given how I use it, I think it would bother me.

So today, my first inclination was to order my new MBP with the matte screen. But I decided to wait, and go to the Apple store one more time to review the options. When I first walked up to the MBPs, the first thing I saw as I walked up to a glossy screen was the reflections from the lights of the store. I thought that sealed it for me, and it might, but I still liked the colors from that glossy screen!

So do I go with my head or my heart?!? We'll see. My Dell laptop still works well, at least as well as a PC works! So I'm not in dire needs for the MBP right away. So I'll ponder a little while longer, see what comments we get from folks that should be getting their new MBPs over the next few weeks, and then decide what to order.

So I'm still pondering, for now, but my trigger finger is getting very itchy!!

 

[digitalbiker]

I have to disagree with this. I currently own and have owned various notebooks with the 100GB 5400rpm, 100GB 7200rpm, 120GB 5400rpm and now 160GB in my current MBP, Not including the new MBP I just ordered. Anyway, in any of my own tests/benchmarks, as well as most of what I've seen online, the 160GB drive is a good bit faster than the 100GB 7200rpm models. The 7200rpm drives can outpace the 160GB units in seek times, especially when reading from the outter extremeties of the platters, but for consistant usage and general tasks, even fairly randomized access, the 60% more data density really does the trick. I would rank the 100GB 7200rpm and the 120GB 5400rpm about dead even in overall performance. Randomized access of lots of small files is still a bit faster on the 100GB drive vs the 120GB, but that's not the typical scenario for most applications.

So what are you disagreeing with. This is my oppinon as well.

The poster above was talking about the 4200 RPM 200 GB drive. My advice was to upgrade to the high quality 160GB 5400RPM dirive rather than the 200 MB 4200 Drive.

I simply stated that the 100 GB 7200 RPM drive had better specs but I wouldn't recommend it over the 160GB drive because you give up 60 GB and don't get that much of a performance boost. I think if you double check those online sites, the 7200 does beat the 160GB 5400 at sustained reads or sustained writes which would improve performance for people who do a lot of video work. But seek and short read, writes the 160GB 5400 drive wins by quite a margin.

 

[br0adband]

HardMac did a swap for the 160GB drive in an MBP of recent. They got the same conclusions in testing: the 160GB drive was faster, even at 5400 rpm, than the 7200 rpm drive they were replacing. The inevitable conclusion was: the perpendicular recording on the 160GB made all the difference in transfer speeds off the media.

bb

 

[Andrew F]

I find the discussion of the glossy screen vs. the standard screen amazing, how some can say the glare is terrible and others can saw there is absolutely no glare. I guess the truth is somewhere in between.

I've been waiting for several months now for this day to come so I could order a new MBP. As I waited I visited my local Apple store many times. Each time I loved the glossy screen in terms of the clarity and color. If you set them side by side and compare a glossy screen vs the matte screen the glossy wins hands down in terms of the quality of the picture and colors. BUT, each time I've visited the Apple store I came back convinced that despite the benefits of the glossy screen, the glare issue would be a problem for me, and how I use my laptop, in that I either use it in my family room or kitchen, with banks of windows behind me.

I couldn't get past the glare issue. Don't let anyone here say there is NO glare; there is glare. The question is how it will affect you, and how you use your MBP. I think I could get used to the glare, but given how I use it, I think it would bother me.

So today, my first inclination was to order my new MBP with the matte screen. But I decided to wait, and go to the Apple store one more time to review the options. When I first walked up to the MBPs, the first thing I saw as I walked up to a glossy screen was the reflections from the lights of the store. I thought that sealed it for me, and it might, but I still liked the colors from that glossy screen!

So do I go with my head or my heart?!? We'll see. My Dell laptop still works well, at least as well as a PC works! So I'm not in dire needs for the MBP right away. So I'll ponder a little while longer, see what comments we get from folks that should be getting their new MBPs over the next few weeks, and then decide what to order.

So I'm still pondering, for now, but my trigger finger is getting very itchy!!

I just ordered my 2.33 GHz MBP a few minutes ago. I upgraded to the 160gb hard drive. I choose the matte screen. I thought about glossy, but decided that I would probably be outside too much for it. I will be doing photography work with it and I want to be able to see the screen at all times. But, by photography work, I mean I will simply be taking pictures for recording purposes only, so the color difference really won't affect me. I also hear that the matte screen better depicts colors, although they are not as vivid. I will be using the laptop a lot in school, and I don't want the nasty lights reflecting on the screen. They have advantages and disadvantages. I choose the matte for diversity reasons. It can be used more places without trouble.

 

[digitalbiker]

So do I go with my head or my heart?!?

Go with your heart, Man!

Don't let the negative vibes from this site about glare, distort what appeals to your eye. Most likely you'll be able to tilt or turn the laptop in such a way that any strong lighting from windows can be mitigated.

Besides if it really bothers you, buy a matte finished polymer screen film to cover the display. It will protect the screen and you'll eliminate glare. Then when strong ligting isn't a factor remove the anti-glare film and enjoy your more appealing display.

If you are worried about accurate color depiction, don't. The glossy screens have the same color corection capabilities. You can calibrate and correct the color to match printing just as accurately as the matte screens.

 

[AppliedVisual]

4 gigs being a midrange machine? as in standard or maximum amount?

Doubtful on the standard... if that is what you mean.

When the Crestline/i965 mobile chipset replaces the current Napa/i945 chipset, then it will allow for the installation and full use of up to 8GB of RAM. Most likely the next revision of MBP will still keep 2 DIMM sockets for the 15", but could conceivably have 4 DIMM sockets on the 17" model. So make of that what you will... I find 2GB to be too restrictive for a lot of the graphics and video work. 3GB would probably work just fine on a notebook, but the 2GB modules are too expensive right now, so I can continue with some work-arounds (and just putting up with running out of memory) as I have been until prices drop. If I could have 4GB, that would be excellent... I would agree though, by this time next year, I could still see 1GB being the base offering on the low end MBP with 2GB standard on the top 15" with 3 and 4 GB options. And 4GB standard with 6 and 8 GB options on the 17". Actually, they probably won't do that next year. A lot of people will still be just fine with 2GB and will buy the 17" simply for the larger screen. But expect options up to 8GB on the 17" by the end of next year... It's coming.

 

[Triplenickle]

Good update but...

I suspect the next MBP update will be in the March/April timeframe...
what significant feature(s), etc would the next update yield that would make someone to forgo this update for the April one? Any solid guesses? Just curious.

I have a 1.5 yr old PB G4 1.5 Ghz that I would like to replace with a 17" MBP sometime.

 

[akadmon]

you really think so? i called a couple stores in my area and one said "a few days" and the other said it could be as quick as tomorrow or the day after. i'm prolly going to wait and pick it up at a store. anyone know how long it took for the stores to get the C2D iMacs?

Yep, the Salem NH store confirmed the new 15" MBPs should be in by Friday, Saturday at the latest.

 

[milozauckerman]

How long does it take for refurb prices to trickle down? I was hoping to see 15" 1.83 MBPs drop down a couple hundred more.

 

[akadmon]

Because some people aren't that frugal and have been either wanting or needing not only this upgrade but more importantly an Intel Mac.

I am going to use my 25% employee discount through my retail store and use it as soon as I get it with Final Cut Studio, Boot Camp, DVD Ripping/Proccessing, and H.264 misc. stuff

25% discount?!! Is there a limit on many machines are you can by per year?
Shiite -- if there isn't, I'm quitting my day job to become a certified Apple reseller

 

[markw10]

I just ordered my MBP today:
15"
2.33 Ghz
256 Graphics Memory
2 Gigs Ram
160 gig HD
Airplane Adapter
USB Modem
Applecare

I can't wait to get it. I purchased my first Mac around 2 months ago, well just as soon as the C2D imacs came out but it was mostly for my son who uses Mac's in college. Ever since he got that for his birthday I've wanted a Mac so bad and have decided to make the switch from Windows so this will truly be my first Mac! I hope I get it soon. The airplane adapter shipped today but the rest hasn't yet. It shows Oct. 31st as the ship date. I am going to order a few accessories elsewhere like a good case (any suggestions?), usb hub, usb memory card reader, etc.

 

[azzurri000]

I did a happy dance early this morning when I noticed the updates! It was at school... let's just say I may have freaked some people out.

I'm a bit disappointed that the GPU wasn't updated and that the latch is the same, but I don't want to wait any longer than I already have. I've already purchased the ADC membership and I shall have my MMBP soon!

 

[digitalbiker]

I suspect the next MBP update will be in the March/April timeframe...
what significant feature(s), etc would the next update yield that would make someone to forgo this update for the April one? Any solid guesses? Just curious.

I have a 1.5 yr old PB G4 1.5 Ghz that I would like to replace with a 17" MBP sometime.

It is possible that by next April, Apple could submit a completely redesigned MacBook Pro. After all the basic aluminum PB design hasn't changed in years.

They also will most likely implement the Santa Rosa Chip spec of Merom CPU, 800 MHZ Dynamic FSB, Robson NAND memory support, and 802.11n WiFi.

Also by then, there may be some better 45nm GPU cards available that have better performance than the X1600.

Of all of these things, the only real reason I might hold off buying is due to the NAND memory support. This might actually be very neat.

It not only would allow instant boot start times but could also be used for dramatic power savings. You could allow your HDD to sleep while the NAND memory acted as a huge cache for your HDD. Then when access outside of cache was needed the HDD would instantly wake-up. Battery life might be dramatically better. As in an extra hour or two instead of the current 3 or 4.

Then again. I doubt if I'll wait. It maybe quite awhile before we see this update and who knows if it will actually be as beneficial as it appears to be on paper.

 

[AppliedVisual]

I suspect the next MBP update will be in the March/April timeframe...
what significant feature(s), etc would the next update yield that would make someone to forgo this update for the April one? Any solid guesses? Just curious.

I have a 1.5 yr old PB G4 1.5 Ghz that I would like to replace with a 17" MBP sometime.

Just based on the known info of Santa Rosa and the Crestline chipset, as well as other hardware that is available and will become more practical over the next several months, we can probably assume the following is guaranteed:

1. Being able to install a full 4GB of RAM and be able to use all of it!
2. 802.11n WiFi
3. 800MHz FSB options with faster Merom C2D CPUs and memory

...And these are possible:

1. NAND FLASH/CACHE
2. Blu-Ray Superdrive
3. Higher resolution screens
4. Updated GPU
5. eSATA
6. Magnetic latch
7. HD resolution iSight
8. Redesigned form factor w/ accessible HD bay and better cooling
9. Alternative WiFi/WiMax or cellular broadband support.

 

[Triplenickle]

Just based on the known info of Santa Rosa and the Crestline chipset, as well as other hardware that is available and will become more practical over the next several months, we can probably assume the following is guaranteed:

1. Being able to install a full 4GB of RAM and be able to use all of it!
2. 802.11n WiFi
3. 800MHz FSB options with faster Merom C2D CPUs and memory

...And these are possible:

1. NAND FLASH/CACHE
2. Blu-Ray Superdrive
3. Higher resolution screens
4. Updated GPU
5. eSATA
6. Magnetic latch
7. HD resolution iSight
8. Redesigned form factor w/ accessible HD bay and better cooling
9. Alternative WiFi/WiMax or cellular broadband support.

and the price stays at $2799.00 ?

 

[digitalbiker]

and the price stays at $2799.00 ?

Typically, Yes.

Apple usually maintains the price point but improves the hardware. As do a lot of other computer companies.

 

[AppliedVisual]

and the price stays at $2799.00 ?

Probably... With the Blu-Ray and WiMax (if offered) being upgrades from there. Then again, if I would have told you 10 months ago when the MBP was released that in 10 months, $2499 would buy you a 2.33GHz C2D 15" w/256MB VRAM, 2GB RAM, a 120GB HDD, FW800 and a 6X DL Superdrive, would you have believed me? The next iteration of Merom is 800Mhz FSB w/800Mhz DDR2. 802.11n will be everywhere for cheap in new systems, the only real unknown is the NAND flash, but I don't know if Apple will jump on that right away or if they will wait for the technology to mature a bit. So far most of the demos I've seen are involving quick boot-ups and then low power operations where the system can run for hours and hours just using what's in the cache RAM as a media/music player using a 3" to 5" exterior LCD and directional control.

We shall see I guess... For all we know, the world could end tomorrow and none of this matters.

 

[zipper1022]

Santa rosa platform is where it's at

whats santa rosa?

 

[countach]

I think the best time to purchase a MB/MBP would be after the release of Leopard because I don't know how they will make Time Machine work with the current hard drives. Will these hard drives be partitioned equally? The 200 gig HD might mean 100 gig for general usage, and the other 100 gig is set aside for Time Machine. I'm no computer guy, but to me, that would be the only way to make that work.

Whoa NO!!!!!

Yes, setting up a separate partition will make time machine work. But that is lunacy! The whole point of backing up, is at a bare minimum it has to be a different disk. Even better if it is a disk you don't take with you (and thus lose at the same time).

All the time people back up to the same disk and then guess what happens when you lose the disk!

 

[giovanni.apd]

finally, what i relief.
Just placed my order for a stock 15" 2.33GHz MBP
This finally ends my waiting, which is what I've been doing since mid/late july when rumors were that the merom MBP would be annouced at the keynote at the WWDC... on August 7th!!!
wow
In the next two weeks I'll be able to say goodbye to the 400Mhz, 256MB RAM PowerBook G4 I've been loaning from a friend... what an upgrade, haha.

 

[countach]

I don't get the fascination in these forums with HD space? What are you doing with your computer that you NEED a local disk with 160GB of storage at 7200rpm?

100GB is MORE than enough to run any number of Pro Apps you might use, and if you store a lot of large video or audio files, etc, you should be using an external firewire drive anyway.

One word: iTunes. Who wants to lug along a separate disk? What's the point of a nice slim laptop if you're dangling an external disk?

Yes, it's true that iTunes lets you add stuff and let it stay in its original location, but that eventually leads to chaos. Eventually you end up having to do a "consolidate library" for various reasons, and then you are screwed unless your library is in one place. It would be nice if iTunes had options to say keep videos or various criteria to split the library, but it is not so.

 

[countach]

Pick one 2.16GHz/160GB HDD or 2.33GHz/120GB HDD. If you had to choose...?

I'd go for the HD space. The .17 Ghz is irrelevant. The 256MB video in the higher model is only worth it if you're doing high end graphics stuff, or maybe games.

 

[countach]

I'm planning on buying the base MBP model with the 128mb video card. Will that work fine with my 20in widescreen monitor? Or, do I need to get the 256mb video card version instead?

Should be ok, but look at the tech specs on the monitors page, which shows compatibility/

 

[countach]

Why would anyone spend $2,000 +, when you can hold off for a few months and get Leopard pre-installed, or wait a bit longer and get Leopard pre-installed WITH the Santa Rosa, flash-booting chip.

There's no way I'm buying a MBP for that much money so close to a new OS launch that will cost an extra couple hundred... not to mention the promise of the Santa Rosa... HOLD OFF!

Santa Rosa is 9 months away if you're lucky. And who knows when they'll finalize the 802.11n spec. Wait for that! No!

 

[giovanni.apd]

I'd go for the HD space. The .17 Ghz is irrelevant. The 256MB video in the higher model is only worth it if you're doing high end graphics stuff, or maybe games.

why do people always say that the 0.17Ghz is irrelevant??
If that were true, why would intel even release the 2.33GHz version? Some may be able to back up their point by saying that the average consumer won't notice the small percentage of a speed bump, but defending the sacrifice of the 256MB video card AND the 0.17Ghz processing speed is a more difficult task.