Apple Releases New MacBook Pros with Santa Rosa

[Digital Skunk]

Glad to be on the same level then. I'm not one to brush off comments. I apologize if I did.

The only desktop component in the iMac is the hard drive.

Which is why I was asking about MBP. Vs. iMac. Expect some flak for that comment.

No problem man.. I do enjoy reading your posts on other topics, so I thought is was a bit out of your nature when I read some of the current ones... but whatever.

You are correct about the HDD. I am no hardware master, so I can't tell you and specifics other than the iMac's size is its advantage. The fans are much larger, and the components don't have to work in such a tight spot, even though it is still pretty cramped in there.

I jumped the gun by claiming the performance on the iMac was better, but anyone that wants to do heavy lifting in graphics, video, photo, or audio is still better off spending $2000 on the iMac, then on the MBP. You still get a better machine for the price.

This may have been covered already, and trust me I have tried to keep up with all these posts today but, if you buy a new mbp today will you get leoperd free in the fall?

If you beg hard enough...

Seriously though, no you won't.

 

[localoid]

... And when it comes to video editing, the two most important things to consider are the HDD you are dumping the video to, and the RAM for rendering and playback. Since the RAM is the same on both machines, the HDD will be the kicker for the iMac... bigger, cheaper, faster HDD. Not to mention a bigger, sharper, clearer, screen. Combine that with the fact that the iMac has more usable space for other components like FW and USB ports, and speakers (the cute stuff) you will have a better machine, for less money, that can hands down out perform a laptop of any kind. Maybe not a Lieberman, but who wants to pay $10,000 for a laptop?

Whether it be Windows, Linux, or MacOS X, Dell, HP, or Apple... the desktop is just built stronger and for more expansion than the laptop ever will be. Even if you stick the same components in both machines and change only the HDD, the desktop will be the winner in video editing when it comes for specs, price, and expansion.

You do know what you are talking about with this stuff... I am finding it hard to believe that we are even arguing this point.

It's not worth wasting time trying to explain how things work in the real world with some of the people here. These folks seem to believe they know something about the theory of how things work and they will refuse to accept the advice of anyone who's actually put these great sounding theories to work in the real world.

 

[zioxide]

Never said you did treat me like a college student, but you don't have to brush comments off like you are above them because you work in the industry. Plenty of other folks round here do to.

The iMac has better hardware period. What else needs to be said. It is a desktop built from half desktop and half laptop parts with much bigger fans that keep it running a lot cooler.

And when it comes to video editing, the two most important things to consider are the HDD you are dumping the video to, and the RAM for rendering and playback. Since the RAM is the same on both machines, the HDD will be the kicker for the iMac... bigger, cheaper, faster HDD. Not to mention a bigger, sharper, clearer, screen. Combine that with the fact that the iMac has more usable space for other components like FW and USB ports, and speakers (the cute stuff) you will have a better machine, for less money, that can hands down out perform a laptop of any kind. Maybe not a Lieberman, but who wants to pay $10,000 for a laptop?

Whether it be Windows, Linux, or MacOS X, Dell, HP, or Apple... the desktop is just built stronger and for more expansion than the laptop ever will be. Even if you stick the same components in both machines and change only the HDD, the desktop will be the winner in video editing when it comes for specs, price, and expansion.

You do know what you are talking about with this stuff... I am finding it hard to believe that we are even arguing this point.

First of all, the iMac runs on laptop hardware (currently the Napa platform). Therefore, the new Macbook Pro has a newer platform with a faster cpu, faster FSB, and more ram. And you can hook up a firewire 800 or eSata (through expresscard) RAID array, you're getting as much performance as the iMac.

Additionally, the new Macbook Pro has a way better graphics card than the iMacs, so if you're working in Motion or any other 3D app, you're going to get better performance.

The iMac doesn't have any more expandability than the Macbook Pro. It's all in one design limits what you can do to only switching ram and hard drives. If you want expandability, you need a Mac Pro, and then you're going to spend $3000+. You say you're a video teacher, then you should know that you shouldn't be using your internal system drive for a capture disk. And since the iMac has only one internal drive, you can't have a capture drive inside. So on both the iMac and the MBP, you'll have to use an external drive for capture drive.

In one of your other posts, you said that college students who are studying film should get an iMac instead of a Macbook Pro because it has more hard drive space. First of all, you're going to use an external drive anyways. Secondly, desktops are no longer practical for college students. Some colleges now require students to have a laptop (mine does). Additionally, a laptop lets you take it to a class/lecture and take notes on it or bring it in to do a presentation. You can also take it to the library when you're doing research or take it to a friend's room when you're hanging out to listen to music or whatever.

 

[Jimmdean]

With a thinner, brushed metal model? Which rumors?

I hit a texture quality wall long before I hit a resolution one.

It only stands to reason that if you're going to redesign at all, you'd look at where you can cuts costs. The only reason to stick with laptop parts is power and heat - if those are no longer an issue you go with what's cheapest and desktop components are definitely cheaper. And since the move to Core, power and heat aren't all that different anymore either...

 

[shigzeo]

what is that application that tests the speed of the gpu? i would like to know if it is same mhz as pc notebook models. if it is underclocked - ill wait another half year

 

[msharpmu]

If you beg hard enough...

Seriously though, no you won't.

Then why doesn't everybody just wait 6 more days until WWDC when they announce Leoperd?

 

[sturmnacht]

So why did Apple decided not to make the 15" lid thinner with the LED backlit display? Is it because of the durability issue?

 

[digitalbiker]

MacBook Pro, 17-inch, 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Teilenummer: Z0ED
250GB Serial ATA-Laufwerk (4200U/Min.) 065-7223
MacBook Pro 17-inch Hi-Resolution Widescreen Display 065-7028
SuperDrive 8x (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW) 065-6998
2GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB 065-6992
2,4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo 065-6991

- Basically the question is
- Hi-Res - GOOD IDEA ??
- 250 gig drive - good idea??

main question for me is the display

PLS HELP!

Hi-Res => GOOD!

250 GB 4200RPM => BAD!

Leopard will make you glad you chose the hi-res display with more display realistate, since it will be resolution independant and scalable.

Paying extra for a 4200 rpm drive is ridiculous. Either upgrade to the larger 7200 rpm drive or buy a better 250 GB drive third party and install it yourself.

 

[Eidorian]

No problem man.. I do enjoy reading your posts on other topics, so I thought is was a bit out of your nature when I read some of the current ones... but whatever.

You are correct about the HDD. I am no hardware master, so I can't tell you and specifics other than the iMac's size is its advantage. The fans are much larger, and the components don't have to work in such a tight spot, even though it is still pretty cramped in there.

I jumped the gun by claiming the performance on the iMac was better, but anyone that wants to do heavy lifting in graphics, video, photo, or audio is still better off spending $2000 on the iMac, then on the MBP. You still get a better machine for the price.

It's then down to a $1,799 MBP Vs. a 24" iMac for just 256 MB of video RAM? Kinda silly...

Read the other replies to your comment.

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/3710797/

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/3710798/

It only stands to reason that if you're going to redesign at all, you'd look at where you can cuts costs. The only reason to stick with laptop parts is power and heat - if those are no longer an issue you go with what's cheapest and desktop components are definitely cheaper. And since the move to Core, power and heat aren't all that different anymore either...

Apple has been sticking with mobile parts in the iMac to keep it thin and sleek. I don't see why they'd change that now even to cut costs moving to desktop parts.

We went over this last year before Conroe.

 

[steve_hill4]

34 pages so for what is a minor spec update we all saw coming, (albeit a better update we have been used to on this machine). Just imagine if next week at WWDC we do that new iMac with striking new industrial design or the MBP ultraportable.

Who am I kidding, after the Leopard preview, it will be up to about 50 pages within the hour. It's just getting a nightmare to read through new news stories these days unless you're there from minute one and keep checking back every few minutes for the next 5 hours.

 

[blindzero]

Hey everyone. Been reading this board all day but I might have missed this talk. What's your advice?

I need to run Final Cut Studio 2.

I currently have a Dual 2.5 G5 Tower that I use for rendering color correction but I need a mobile solution to help me do quick rough cuts etc.

Is the lowend 15" enough to run Final Cut Studio 2 and its included programs effeciently? I would do rough video and sound cuts and maybe even rough color corrections. I can't seem to find the specs that say if the new graphics card will work with it completley although I'm sure it will at least run some of the Studio.

If I could take it around with me I would lug a Mac Pro around but alas...

Is there any way to upgrade the graphics card in the 15? Why don't they offer that?

 

[morespce54]

I am ready to upgrade to the new MBP, but would appreciate some advice from anyone who is more knowledgable on the subject than I...

I am in the design profession, and will be doing alot of heavy photo editing/rendering within Photoshop as well as other general design work with Adobe CS3, as well as working in programs such as Archicad within OSX. I will also be running Windows/bootcamp to run Autodesk architectural software. While basic AutoCAD is not an issue at all, I will be running heavier 3D rendering software such as Revit, but more importantly VIZ and Maya, and so I will need as much speed as I can afford.

My question is whether it is better to go with the 2.2 GHz Processor with an upgrade to 4gb of memory, or go with the 2.4 GHz Processor and stay with the 2gb of memory... Those two combinations are roughly comparable in price. Thanks in advance for any input!

more RAM... that's (always) my choice for photos editing

 

[wHo_tHe]

Just picked up my MBP/2.4 glossy at the Apple Store in San Francisco. They had a bunch at 10:30 this morning. LED screen is amazingly bright and even. The brightness adjustment is phenomenal; the dim settings are very dim yet readable. I wonder how much power is saved at the lowest brightness setting. I'm transferring over info from a 2.16 MBP and will benchmark the new guy shortly.

I haven't had time to read every post in this monster thread, but the posts I saw that said the machines weren't in stock are clearly poppycock.

 

[cycocelica]

Looks like I just got reason to upgrade.

 

[MagicWok]

Then why doesn't everybody just wait 6 more days until WWDC when they announce Leoperd?

If I remember correctly, WWDC will announce new features etc, and give out near complete versions to dev attending.

But the WWDC will not co-incide with Leopard's release - so that's why. If they need hardware now, they'll buy now - there's nothing wrong with Tiger anyway

I'm sorry to say, but the early hardware releases will give Apple time to weed out any Rev A problems the MacBook and MBP may have tested by the early adopters/smaller enthusiast market (us), in time for a problem free hardware and software launch when Leopard comes to the larger mainstream market which by then we'll probably see an iMac refresh which is their main desktop line at the same time.

 

[zioxide]

Hey everyone. Been reading this board all day but I might have missed this talk. What's your advice?

I need to run Final Cut Studio 2.

I currently have a Dual 2.5 G5 Tower that I use for rendering color correction but I need a mobile solution to help me do quick rough cuts etc.

Is the lowend 15" enough to run Final Cut Studio 2 and its included programs effeciently? I would do rough video and sound cuts and maybe even rough color corrections. I can't seem to find the specs that say if the new graphics card will work with it completley although I'm sure it will at least run some of the Studio.

If I could take it around with me I would lug a Mac Pro around but alas...

Is there any way to upgrade the graphics card in the 15? Why don't they offer that?

Absolutely it will run fine.

However, if you're going to be using Motion and stuff a lot, you might want to get the high end because it has more graphics memory.

As for upgrading the graphics card, you wouldn't be able to upgrade anything. The 8600 is the top of the line.

 

[johnee]

.... Just imagine if next week at WWDC we do that new iMac with striking new industrial design or the MBP ultraportable.

I'm going to rub my ****** all over them!

Who am I kidding, after the Leopard preview, it will be up to about 50 pages within the hour. It's just getting a nightmare to read through new news stories these days unless you're there from minute one and keep checking back every few minutes for the next 5 hours.

That's the fun part

 

[Yaboze]

Someone with the new 17" HD screen please post comments on it compared to the previous 17". Color, brightness, etc.

I am hearing consistent reports that the 15.4" LED is fantastic.
I'm not hearing anything on the new 17" LCD.

 

[Digital Skunk]

First of all, the iMac runs on laptop hardware (currently the Napa platform). Therefore, the new Macbook Pro has a newer platform with a faster cpu, faster FSB, and more ram. And you can hook up a firewire 800 or eSata (through expresscard) RAID array, you're getting as much performance as the iMac.

Additionally, the new Macbook Pro has a way better graphics card than the iMacs, so if you're working in Motion or any other 3D app, you're going to get better performance.

The iMac doesn't have any more expandability than the Macbook Pro. You say you're a video teacher, then you should know that you shouldn't be using your internal system drive for a capture disk. And since the iMac has only one internal drive, you can't have a capture drive inside. So on both the iMac and the MBP, you'll have to use an external drive for capture drive.

In one of your other posts, you said that college students who are studying film should get an iMac instead of a Macbook Pro because it has more hard drive space. First of all, you're going to use an external drive anyways. Secondly, desktops are no longer practical for college students. Some colleges now require students to have a laptop (mine does). Additionally, a laptop lets you take it to a class/lecture and take notes on it or bring it in to do a presentation. You can also take it to the library when you're doing research or take it to a friend's room when you're hanging out to listen to music or whatever.

New MBP just came out... I was referring to the previous model... in particular the low end which is the same price as the high end consumer 24" iMac. Some pros use it instead of the MacPro because of its size and built in 24" monitor, or as a second system. Desktops are still the best option for college students.

Laptops WALK... and fast... get one stolen and see. All those places you said you will bring you laptop are prime places to get one stolen. Not every college has a requirement to have a laptop, if your school does then you must be rich and going to a private school. Most schools won't provide the student with a laptop that they will have stolen, they will give them desktops, that cost less and are much heavier. Some guy running down the street with a 20" iMac is very conspicious. But the same guy can slip a MBP into his bag and walk off.

The graphics may be better on the new one but the screen still tops off at 17" for $2600. You can get a 24" screen with the same graphics for $600 less, then get a G-Tech G-Raid 2 640GB and still have money left over for a FCP certification book.

I understand that internal disks aren't used for capture, so why get a laptop with a 5400 rpm disk and a portable 5400 rpm disk. OR you could get a portable 7200rpm disk for twice the price, OR you could get a 3.5" disk and have to carry around a heavy drive and power supply that wasn't built to be comfortable to carry. Just get the desktop.

 

[wHo_tHe]

I don't know about some things you talked about, but how much faster could you want the boot/sleep wake times to be? They boot in 20 seconds or less and sleep to wake is almost instant (with that little drag afterwards for a few seconds).

Wake from sleep has gotten noticably slower with the Intel chips. My G4 PowerBook is ready to use by the time the screen is upright and viewable; my MBP, though fast, ain't that fast.

And yes, if you're in a business where you work on deadline, like me, a few seconds can make a difference.

 

[Digital Skunk]

It's then down to a $1,799 MBP Vs. a 24" iMac for just 256 MB of video RAM? Kinda silly...

Read the other replies to your comment.

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/3710797/

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/3710798/

Apple has been sticking with mobile parts in the iMac to keep it thin and sleek. I don't see why they'd change that now even to cut costs moving to desktop parts.

We went over this last year before Conroe.

Not to mention a 24" screen vs. a 15" for only $100 more. And if you opt for the lower powered ATI card in the 20" you still get a better screen and save $100.

Agree with you on the switching components part. Keep the iMac thin and small. I do agree that laptop parts are getting faster can cheaper, so why not put them into a consumer desktop to make them smaller and more like a fashionable home appliance instead of a big black box with six thick cable coming out of the back drawing a lot of heat and dust.

 

[Evangelion]

Then why doesn't everybody just wait 6 more days until WWDC when they announce Leoperd?

How would that change anything? Do you believe that if you buy your computer after WWDC, you get Leopard for free? Uh, it doesn't quite work that way. Besides, Leopard has already been announced, remember?

 

[digitalbiker]

If I remember correctly, WWDC will announce new features etc, and give out near complete versions to dev attending.

But the WWDC will not co-incide with Leopard's release - so that's why.

True. But the odds are good that after the official Steve note send off of Leopard. All new macs purchased after WWDC will contain free or low cost upgrade coupons for Leopard when it is released.

So it only makes sense to wait until after WWDC before buying the MBP. I can't see where the 6 day wait could matter much to anyone and it could mean a free upgrade coupon.

 

[MagicWok]

Just picked up my MBP/2.4 glossy at the Apple Store in San Francisco. They had a bunch at 10:30 this morning. LED screen is amazingly bright and even. The brightness adjustment is phenomenal; the dim settings are very dim yet readable. I wonder how much power is saved at the lowest brightness setting. I'm transferring over info from a 2.16 MBP and will benchmark the new guy shortly.

I haven't had time to read every post in this monster thread, but the posts I saw that said the machines weren't in stock are clearly poppycock.

Did you manage to compare the new LCD screen on the 15" MBP, to that of the HD 17" non-lcd panel?

 

[Eidorian]

New MBP just came out... I was referring to the previous model... in particular the low end which is the same price as the high end consumer 24" iMac. Some pros use it instead of the MacPro because of its size and built in 24" monitor, or as a second system. Desktops are still the best option for college students.

Even considering the Napa MBP and iMac they're using the exact same components short of the 3.5" hard drive in the iMac. Laptops are becoming increasing popular in college.

Laptops WALK... and fast... get one stolen and see. All those places you said you will bring you laptop are prime places to get one stolen. Not every college has a requirement to have a laptop, if your school does then you must be rich and going to a private school. Most schools won't provide the student with a laptop that they will have stolen, they will give them desktops, that cost less and are much heavier. Some guy running down the street with a 20" iMac is very conspicious. But the same guy can slip a MBP into his bag and walk off.

An obvious point but not relevant.

I understand that internal disks aren't used for capture, so why get a laptop with a 5400 rpm disk and a portable 5400 rpm disk. OR you could get a portable 7200rpm disk for twice the price, OR you could get a 3.5" disk and have to carry around a heavy drive and power supply that wasn't built to be comfortable to carry. Just get the desktop.

But you can upgrade any model to the 7200 RPM hard drive.

Not to mention a 24" screen vs. a 15" for only $100 more. And if you opt for the lower powered ATI card in the 20" you still get a better screen and save $100.

I'm sure to lug my iMac around when I want a laptop then. What's the point of bring the desktop into play? It's always going to be cheaper.