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.
Apple Releases New MacBooks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Now I'm not a fanboy, just a lazy arse who wants an easy life...but well said, that man.
I remember seeing a benchmark for X3000 and the 8 unified shaders ended up being 2-3 dedicated pixel/vertex shaders in the end.
And you know this how?
Well the 2.16Ghz C2D is more expensive than the 2.0 (and the 2.0 more expensive than the 1.8).
By sticking with 2.0 and 1.8 Merom processors (which are the same price as the Napa ones) they would have gotten a CPU bump in performance from the better FSB without increasing their CPU costs at all. So even if SR is more expensive than Napa this using cheaper CPUs would make up the difference, at least mostly.
And SR would bring more improvements than just the CPU. Faster I/O, far better power management (and battery life which is important for the MB) and better graphics (including better video for movies etc).
But Apple are probably sitting on a big pile of Napa C2Ds right now so it wouldn't actually be that cheap for them since they need to get rid of the stock somehow (maybe the mini could have gotten them?)
And as Eidorian says, the engineering cost is irrelevant since it has to be done at some point anyway.
EDIT: And it appears SR isn't that more expensive anyway. So a SR update wouldn't have been (much?) more expensive and would have brought far more wide-ranging benefits. Thus, disappointment.
The internet disagrees with you. Just look at the rating on the article.
The opinion of the mob is probably worth listening to but taking seriously?
Crap? They got cheaper and faster in one fell swoop. What more can they do? (bearing in mind their obvious hierarchy of machines).
Or Intel are. Apple may have got these cheap and passed on the saving (rare for apple but y'know). Maybe they wanted to use up MBP parts (that 2.16 comes from the MBP right?) so that they can get on with the big MBP updates in June.
I know it's nice to look forward to latest tech all the time and on that level I'm a little disappointed too but there's nothing stopping Apple from updating in Sept/October to Santa Rosa. Until then the macbook is at least not randomly shutting down, mooing, etc etc (my c2d machine is solid as you like, as these updated machines will be).
Meanwhile, in June, the MBP gets a bump to latest tech and even a rad new design and gets time to be dominant over it's cheaper relative to boost sales.
Level heads people please.
I know, and agree. I was just kinda pissed off yesterday.
And the opinion of the mob counts when you're trying to sell them computers, absolutely it does.
Nice. You wouldn't happen to have a link handy do you? I still find it strange that the whitepaper includes that information when the data sheet doesn't. Although I did find the vertex shader reference but no claim as to how many were present.
I'd say it is relevant, especially if we knew more about Apple's capital forecasting. But we don't. So, it behooves us to try not to speculate on these things.
ah...ok. all good then
Yes, but which mob? Is this the mob that actually buys low end mac laptops or the mob that hangs on every news item on a mac rumors site. The two are not mutually exclusive but they are also not the same thing.
And yes. I am one of those nerds that hangs on every post on here before anyone sees this as criticism
Heres the thing
Here's the thing people.
I have never run mac osX before, but I want to be. Im waiting for Leopard. All I can speak towards is my informed opinion about the state of desktop operating systems (im a Linux geek).
The trend in Desktop Operating Systems these days is towards 3d desktops. Both Vista and Linux are moving this way (linux via Compiz/Beryl). As I use Compiz on my PC, I can tell you the experience is MUCH better. 3D desktops dont make me more productive, but they certainly make the experience richer.
I expect Leopard to have substancial 3d desktop features, because if it doesn't, its behind the times.
So whats my point... my point is that I expect that users will be quite frustrated with a 3d desktop on the 950 graphics. Meaning that the current bunch of Macbooks being sold will have a poor Leopard experience.
This is just my best guess
Here's the thing people.
I have never run mac osX before, but I want to be. Im waiting for Leopard. All I can speak towards is my informed opinion about the state of desktop operating systems (im a Linux geek).
The trend in Desktop Operating Systems these days is towards 3d desktops. Both Vista and Linux are moving this way (linux via Compiz/Beryl). As I use Compiz on my PC, I can tell you the experience is MUCH better. 3D desktops dont make me more productive, but they certainly make the experience richer.
I expect Leopard to have substancial 3d desktop features, because if it doesn't, its behind the times.
So whats my point... my point is that I expect that users will be quite frustrated with a 3d desktop on the 950 graphics. Meaning that the current bunch of Macbooks being sold will have a poor Leopard experience.
This is just my best guess
I'm looking for the integrated graphic showdown.
http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2007q2/intel-g965/index.x?pg=1
Edit: It took a lot of my Google-fu to find this one again.
Then again you can take into account that OEMs have the specifications on the MacBook's internals. Apple doesn't need to spend a penny if they need to retool something for Santa Rosa. The Dell hardware is being made right next to the Apple hardware in the end.
Unless Apple decides to make changes to the MacBook then the cost shouldn't even exist to switch to Santa Rosa.
ah...ok. all good then
Yes, but which mob? Is this the mob that actually buys low end mac laptops or the mob that hangs on every news item on a mac rumors site. The two are not mutually exclusive but they are also not the same thing.
And yes. I am one of those nerds that hangs on every post on here before anyone sees this as criticism
Probably not. But who will those looking to buy a new laptop ask? They'll say "should I get a MacBook" to the kind of people that trawl these places.
With HE discount the low end MB is £600. Which, surprisingly, is now tempting me if I can manage to sell my current lappy. It should tide me over until the MB gets a more substantial update.
Yes, in fact, Steve Jobs is sitting in California with his fantastically-shod feed up on the desk, cackling over your helplessness. Knows he's got you right where he wants you. Look, he's just called Ives in to have a laff at you, too!
They're all laughing. They're pissing themselves silly. Now somebody's burning an effigy. It's got a little sign on it: "That whining dude who wanted better MB hardware." Now somebody's calling his banker and the banker's laughing, too, and he's going to call his wife and she's going to tell all her friends and they'll be in stitches, too.
Meanwhile at Apple they're going to take the money you spend on your MB and fan the bills out before a diamond-studded Zippo and light fabulously huge Cuban cigars with those hundreds, take one puff, and toss the glowing stogies in the ocean. There's more where those came from!
Wake up, laddie buck. Apple's MB isn't for you.
Now, you can spend all day online complaining about the lack of high end components in what everyone knows is just an entry level laptop with commodity parts and a slightly prettier finish than some.
Or you could buy a laptop that will do what you want. You might have to work a little harder, get a better job, etc. But you can do it. We all believe in you!
Dell and Acer sell truck loads of laptops to someone. No one off a rumour site recommended them.
Of course I get your point though but I wouldn't recommend any of my non-nerd mates to wait right now. I'd be telling them to buy. It's a stable, cheap, fast update.
I'd have loved it to be bleeding edge but I've seen people bitten with the rev a CD macbooks and mbps. I wouldn't want to go through that or have a non-nerd mate go through that. Extra-especially on my recommendation.
See, this update does make sense on a lot of levels.
It doesn't get me excited but it's hardly something for some of us to start rolling out the 30 pt red fonts is it?
But doesn't adoption of the Santa Rosa platform inherently require changes to the MacBook, like a motherboard redesign? That was my understanding.
wut?
GMA X3100, Geforce 7300/7400, or Radeon X1300/1400?
A SuperDrive that honestly costs maybe $10 more to buy from an OEM?
Not the MacBook and not paying $1,999 for a MacBook Pro?
The only change would be to a Santa Rosa motherboard which is designed to fit where Napa hardware was. Intel isn't going to radically change the physical specifications of a new platform. The specifications are known by the OEMs Apple buys hardware from.
I was just hoping for more, and have been waiting a long time specifically for Santa Rosa. It does make sense, in some aspects, especially if Apple are looking to get rid of their Napa C2Ds. In others it doesn't really, since SR wouldn't have cost much more than the better CPUs and would have brought wide-ranging benefits. Unless Apple plan to use SR to differentiate Pro and Consumer, which would be a shame.
Yes indeed and will/could do when Leopard is released.
We have no idea how much the components cost to Apple themselves, that's business senstive info. We know Intels public prices but that's it.
That would get me posting in 30pt red text
Thing is, now that they have 2.0/2.16 CPUs in the MB they'll have to go 2.0/2.2 when the change to SR which will end up costing more than had they gone straight to SR with 2.0/1.8 now.
Which is exactly why I say this update would have been better two weeks ago. Same things would be accomplished, minus the extremely let-down base of waiters (who would only be a little let-down).
Anyone want to speculate on the re-introduction of a macbook pro in a smaller size 12 or 13? This gap may have been intentional for a yet to be released product.
But there's a cost to Apple to redesign the motherboard, yes? And don't say that cost is irrelevant since they'd have to do it eventually. They may have already planned for such a thing to happen but, perhaps, later on, affecting their capital forecast plan. Hence, my earlier comment.