Apple's 17" MacBook Pro Delayed Until Feb 19th

[freebooter]

Maybe it's the rioting in China causing the delay. They have China-size civil unrest happening these days.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article5627687.ece

Welcome to the New World "Order"

 

[Digital Skunk]

Thats all true, but if your just checking your mail, its not going to make things faster, infact increased heat would mean it clocks slower making things take longer. Its only going to speed up multi core aware apps.

It can also speed things up when running multiple apps, even if they're not multi-core aware.

That, and a user that's going to be maxing their computer out with Mail and or Firefox/Safari won't be spending the extra cash for a quad core machine. I try to insist that Mac gamers get the quad core Mac Pro and not the 8 core version because they won't benefit directly from 8 cores when gaming. They need GPUs more than anything.

The same thing goes for any user that may be using a machine for basic home use, where the most advanced task would be encoding a home DVD. They don't need to purchase a 17" or 15" computer at $3100/$2700 with quad core.

 

[Chortos-2]

Background tasks might be owned by different users, but not the session.

That depends on the definition of ‘session’, right? For the background tasks it is all one whether their user is the one whose stuff is being displayed on the screen at the moment or not; the environment acts as if it was. As for a single screen/keyboard/mouse set being unable to be used by several users simultaneously, such an issue is quite usual for any system, is it not?

When you try to create the second remote desktop session, you'll get a popup saying that the computer is busy and asking if you want to log off the other user.

Now this is something I did not know. Thank you. So I have to admit that indeed this trick is impossible, but I still disagree with calling the system single-user.

Besides, your original point was still somewhat fishy:

Like in XP.... running a lot of apps or users simultaneously will definitely improve performance on a quad core but only marginally... the full power wont be utilized...

By the way, XP is a single user system, so you won't be adding multiple users to it.

Since it is possible to have processes and environments owned by multiple users running at the same time, there is nothing wrong with what Apple Ink wrote, is there?

 

[daelin]

Please explain this - XP has pretty good SMP scheduling. It's using the same scheduler as Windows server. Vista's scheduler is even better - it's based on Server 2003 with NUMA and other support.

These schedulers are supporting 32 CPU and 64 CPU systems today, so please show some supporting evidence that only marginal improvements will be seen in the embarrassingly parallel case of running multiple apps. Here's what I found in a few seconds about the harder case of single multi-threaded apps:

And to be fair, shouldn't we be talking about the Vista scheduler and not XP? Or we should compare XP to OSX 10.0...

By the way, XP is a single user system, so you won't be adding multiple users to it.

First off, Windows XP is explicitly multiuser, based on the Windows NT family. I think you're confusing it with its labeling as a consumer-level targeted system, since Windows XP replaced Windows ME and the 9x family.

I'm not sure how you qualify multiple running apps as "embarrassingly parallel" except in the trivial sense. A single app without multithreading cannot take advantage of additional cores. Embarrassingly parallel would be something like a renderer that fires off a new sub-process for every discrete computation. Symmetric multiprocessing has nothing to do with the kind of performance boost you're talking about with multiple applications.

Also, the XP scheduler isn't so smart. It took until SP3 to be able to reassign processor affinity without crashing the program. The fact is, if you want to get good parallel process performance out of XP, you have to manually assign processor affinity. For instance, you'll get much better performance out of games like NWN2 or Doom3 if you run a server on core 0 and a client on core 1 (or vice versa) than if you let XP schedule it. You'll of course get better performance this way than running a single process "listen client". And, before SP3, if you wanted to assign affinity you HAD to do it at execution time; now you can thankfully do it with right-click in Task Manager without crashing the process.

Once upon a time, you had to do this sort of thing for pedestrian processes in Linux and Unixen too. Linux got smarter than this almost a decade ago; FreeBSD and Solaris got there first. I haven't bothered to look at Vista. I bet it's even better, but still at the rear of the pack.

 

[lftrghtparadigm]

Clearly this means a new 17" MBP will be announced this week.

 

[detz]

I was so pissed when I got an email response back this morning I decided to file my complaint. Wont do much but it makes me feel better.

http://getsatisfaction.com/apple/to...t_the_lack_of_customer_support_if_disgraceful

 

[zabbadu]

quick q..

Anyone know if the macbook air delay last year affected 3rd party resellers?

I ordered mine from macmall, so I didn't get an email directly from Apple, so I'm curious to know if there will be a delay from them as well..

- geo

 

[Digital Skunk]

Anyone know if the macbook air delay last year affected 3rd party resellers?

I ordered mine from macmall, so I didn't get an email directly from Apple, so I'm curious to know if there will be a delay from them as well..

- geo

Most likely. I ordered my 17" MBP a week after release, and Apple said shipping would take 14 days, I didn't get mine from my local retailer for about 4 weeks after placing the order.

 

[kboy385]

This couldn't have come at a worse time for me. My first gen 17" mbp needed a new logic board repair for the second time after the first one was replaced and miscellaneous other problems so I called apple customer relations and they signed me up for a new MBP 17" (Sweet, right!?!) They told me they were on back order and it would be a week or so. (This was on Friday) My ship date is still telling me 7-10 business days. I have a custom order (2.66ghz, 320gig 7200 hdd, glossy, 4gig) For now I'm stuck on my old 05 hp

What exactly were the symptoms that lead to them concluding a faulty logic board??

 

[iNtrigued]

No way; however, would be nice. I am pretty sure, however, that they will come with the new iLIfe09 and potentially less bugs due to more QC resulting in the delayed shipping.

Def. less bugs.....that's a plus.....HOPEFULLY iLife'09...but I still wonder.......why delay shipping date? Not enough number of MBP made to supply demand? (i really doubt it) maybe APPLE got something up their sleeves. I guess we'll have to wait and see till the shipping date FEB. 19 to see if APPLE releases anything else at the same time they ship out MBP.

 

[AidenShaw]

That depends on the definition of ‘session’, right?

I was using the Windows definition of session, (see "session manager" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Session_Manager_Subsystem) which corresponds to a desktop (video/keyboard/mouse session).

But yes, it's a semantic distinction - if you want to call background tasks "users" then fine, it's multi-user.

I'm not sure how you qualify multiple running apps as "embarrassingly parallel" except in the trivial sense. A single app without multithreading cannot take advantage of additional cores. Embarrassingly parallel would be something like a renderer that fires off a new sub-process for every discrete computation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embarrassingly_parallel

Running multiple copies of the same program, or running multiple programs as part of the same workflow, is embarrassingly parallel. It can also refer to multi-threaded apps where there is little or no synchonization or sharing between the threads.

Sharing/synchronization are where many scaling problems originate.

Symmetric multiprocessing has nothing to do with the kind of performance boost you're talking about with multiple applications..

I don't understand this comment. Without [A]SMP, you have only a single core, and any question about parallelism is moot.

Also, the XP scheduler isn't so smart..

Then lets talk about Vista and Windows 7.

It took until SP3 to be able to reassign processor affinity without crashing the program. The fact is, if you want to get good parallel process performance out of XP, you have to manually assign processor affinity. For instance, you'll get much better performance out of games like NWN2 or Doom3 if you run a server on core 0 and a client on core 1 (or vice versa) than if you let XP schedule it. You'll of course get better performance this way than running a single process "listen client". And, before SP3, if you wanted to assign affinity you HAD to do it at execution time; now you can thankfully do it with right-click in Task Manager without crashing the process.

I've been using the affinity APIs and task manager for about 15 years, and haven't seen those issues.

I also haven't seen any examples on low-order SMP (dual/quad) where manually setting affinity made a big difference. I'm sure there are some examples, but in general manual affinity wasn't worth the bother to gain a few percent in performance.

 

[Theophany]

Looks like we'll be getting a new Mac mini before people who've actually paid for their new MBPs get theirs

 

[alphaod]

Typical Apple.

 

[kastenbrust]

Looks like we'll be getting a new Mac mini before people who've actually paid for their new MBPs get theirs

Does anyone else see the failed logic in that?

We will have to wait ages for our 17" MBP's

Then your Mini's will be announced

Then you'll have to wait even longer to get them than we've been waiting!

Ha epic fail.

If they announced a new Mac Mini today I think noone would have it before May realistically.

 

[seedster2]

Typical Apple.

Indeed

 

[queshy]

another reason why Apple dropped out of mwsf.

 

[rhyx]

They will likely come before Feb 19th. You always overshoot rather than undershoot on delivery times.

 

[Theophany]

Does anyone else see the failed logic in that?

We will have to wait ages for our 17" MBP's

Then your Mini's will be announced

Then you'll have to wait even longer to get them than we've been waiting!

Ha epic fail.

If they announced a new Mac Mini today I think noone would have it before May realistically.

It was a joke.

The polls are in, you're an idiot.

 

[AidenShaw]

They will likely come before Feb 19th. You always overshoot rather than undershoot on delivery times.

...but you may need to move the delivery date a couple of times in order to do that!

 

[shivermetimbers]

I am about ready to order my 17" mbp:

MacBook Pro, 17-inch, Aluminium
320GB Serial ATA Drive @ 7200 rpm
Accessory Kit
iWork '09 preinstalled
2.93GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Backlit Keyboard (English) / User's Guide
4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
MacBook Pro 17-inch Hi-Resolution Glossy Widescreen
AppleCare Protection......

While I do find it a bit worrisome that they pushed back their shipping dates. I can handle the wait, not going to kill me. I did call Apple and told them my concerns. I deploy "soon" to Kuwait and the mbp is going with me. It will be my outlet home and to talk to my wife and kids. The lady I talked with was quite nice and sincere. I feel that they will stick with the current dates. It would be a major flop on their part to push it back, yet again and without an explanation....even worse!

I have an iMac, iPhone and iPod. There is no room for a PC in my house. I'll stick it out and wait.

Oh yeah, I think I mentioned I am in the military. Its "good" business to ALWAYS give yourself more time than needed to complete a task/project. More times than any, its completed before the deadline = everyone happy.

 

[jjrtiger]

What exactly were the symptoms that lead to them concluding a faulty logic board??

First it was the video card (getting lines on the screen while watching video) second I'm not really sure what the problem was but the computer was inoperable.

 

[kastenbrust]

That, and a user that's going to be maxing their computer out with Mail and or Firefox/Safari won't be spending the extra cash for a quad core machine. I try to insist that Mac gamers get the quad core Mac Pro and not the 8 core version because they won't benefit directly from 8 cores when gaming. They need GPUs more than anything.

The same thing goes for any user that may be using a machine for basic home use, where the most advanced task would be encoding a home DVD. They don't need to purchase a 17" or 15" computer at $3100/$2700 with quad core.

But thats the whole point, its mainly those people who are coming here and asking when quad cores coming, and if they should wait for a notebook with one, if you really need quad cores, you'll have done you research beforehand. We shouldn't be advising those people to wait for one or get their hopes up.

It was a joke.

The polls are in, you're an idiot.

No, i think you just got caught out being an idiot and now you feel stupid.

 

[barkomatic]

I think there's an extra "Delays" in the title.

But more to the point...good things come to those who wait. Better that Apple fix up any last-minute bugs than ship out an unfinished product that they have to recall/scramble to code a software fix for.

That would be my guess--but don't count on them actually being fully worked out. Perhaps the new battery is causing problems. I'm eager to see how this Rev A prodcut fares in the real world.

 

[CharlesX]

Apples known for doing this kind of thing for customers regardless of the product they have.

How does this show those with laptops are helped out more than those with desktops?

It means that Apple would rather announce a product and suffer the consequences of delayed shipment for their laptop customers than announce anything for their desktop customers.

 

[Digital Skunk]

But thats the whole point, its mainly those people who are coming here and asking when quad cores coming, and if they should wait for a notebook with one, if you really need quad cores, you'll have done you research beforehand. We shouldn't be advising those people to wait for one or get their hopes up.

Point well taken. I do forget that many that ask those questions, especially the "which machine should I get" and the "buy now or wait", fit into that category.