Hm, then I guess I'm going to buy an iMac now after all. Since I don't wanna wait July for my Mac. 
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.
iMac and MacBook Pro Upgrades in First Half of 2011?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hm, then I guess I'm going to buy an iMac now after all. Since I don't wanna wait July for my Mac.
Realistically, you'd be waiting until either April or May, not July. I'd say it's worth the wait unless you need something NOW.
I will wait for the imac refresh this year whether its in April May June or July .....
I am hoping the imac will have sandy bridge -- i want the core i7-2600k .. 27inch screen .. mac osx lion ... 8gb ram .. maybe 16gb ... if the refresh doesnt have sandy bridge i will wait further ... because i dont want to buy something in may and then see an update to the range in oct or something with sandy bridge processors
wooh
I am hoping the imac will have sandy bridge -- i want the core i7-2600k .. 27inch screen .. mac osx lion ... 8gb ram .. maybe 16gb ... if the refresh doesnt have sandy bridge i will wait further ... because i dont want to buy something in may and then see an update to the range in oct or something with sandy bridge processors
wooh
This late in the release cycle, I'd say that's a pretty sound plan, especially if you're planning on spending more than the base $1200 for one.
And you'll probably not get it.
The K series is an (expensive) unlocked version for builders/overclockers. Apple will use standard models up to the Core i7-2600 (4C/8T 3.40GHz 95W $294) in the 27" model. In any case the Core ix-2000 series will offer huge performance improvements over the current series for the same price/cost.
For Lion, you'll probably have to wait till late Summer (if not Fall).
Apple is sometimes early with their OS releases. Snow Leopard was on the early side. Though, as was the case with Leopard, they can also be super late. I have a feeling they'll have at least one more event on it before we know anything more; devs haven't even been given early beta copies yet.
As fore the K series, I'll have to second that; plus how the hell do you overclock a Mac's CPU anyway? It's not like the standard Core i7-2600 won't kick major ass on its own anyway.
I'm pretty sure the 13" MBP is the least exclusive laptop on the market. At least over here, everyone -and I do mean everyone has a 13" MBP. If I take a look around a lecture theatre, I would be safe to assume at least 50% are 13" MBP's.
It's a pretty popular laptop; though were it to disappear, I'd bet the cost of one that the white MacBook would simply take its place as the most-popular/best-selling/yadayada.
The best you'll get is a 68xx. I will be very (pleasantly) surprised if they do better.
The cards they have now are quite a joke at native res.
My MacBook Pro died on the weekend: I guess that my kids dropped it on the floor one too many times. T be fair it wasn't just their fault as I used to slide it across the floor to its home under the TV cabinet and miss quite frequently. Anyway that's not the issue, just an explanation I gave my wife when she bemoaned the build quality of our 3 yo laptop.
I bought an iMac today. It's a landmark event for me as it is the first Apple desktop I have ever had. I decided to get it over the MacBook Pro as I have the iPad. To cut an unnecessarily long story short, I decided not to worry about whether they upgrade them next week as I am happy with what it does for the money I paid. I'll hard ever use it to an extent where I desperately need the extra power and so why stress. To me the only people that should hold out are the top end users. Other than that, buy and enjoy and stop worrying about whether or not it represents the most recent Apple product available..
I bought an iMac today. It's a landmark event for me as it is the first Apple desktop I have ever had. I decided to get it over the MacBook Pro as I have the iPad. To cut an unnecessarily long story short, I decided not to worry about whether they upgrade them next week as I am happy with what it does for the money I paid. I'll hard ever use it to an extent where I desperately need the extra power and so why stress. To me the only people that should hold out are the top end users. Other than that, buy and enjoy and stop worrying about whether or not it represents the most recent Apple product available..
The best you'll get will be the 6850 as anything better than that draws way too much power and the iMacs are already pressed for power and heat generation as is.
+1
Well, no. If you're spending that much money, it's something that should last you as long as it possibly can, and while a Mac is still a currently shipping Mac, it hasn't yet started the 4-6 year process of slowly becoming slow and obsolete. Get more time out of your money, I say. Were it a low-end PC, I'd agree with you, but Macs aren't cheap.
That's why the current 13" MB(P) should be renamed simply "MacBook" and priced at $999/1199 (with a few tweaks to maintain margins), and a new (and real) 13" MBP be released with features like: hirez display (1440*900, like the MBA), Core ix cpu + dedicated graphics (like the other MBPs), possibly SSD-blade standard (like the MBA) even if that means removing the ODD (like the MBA) and pricing it at $1499. If Light Peak was really ready, I would offer a single bidirectional port on the right side, in the meantime an Expresscard slot would make the job.
Same with the 15" model: one "classic" (current enclosure and features, ODD/HDD) at $1799, and one SSD-blade/no ODD model with hirez display starting at $1999. The 17" can stay the same for now.
Here are your 4 rumored MBPs:
$1499 13" MBP (new enclosure) 1440*900 2.50 Core i5, dGPU, 128GB SSD blade, 2.5" bay, no ODD
$1799 15" MBP (classic enclosure) 1440*900 2.50 Core i5, dGPU, 500GB HDD, ODD
$1999 15" MBP (new enclosure) 1680*1050 2.50 Core i5, dGPU, 128GB SSD blade, 2.5" bay, no ODD
$2199 17" MBP (classic enclosure) 1920*1200 2.50 Core i5, dGPU, 500GB HDD, ODD
Optional 2.60 Core i5, 2.70 Core i7, 256GB SSD blade on selected models, 2.5" 128/256/512GB SSD, additional 2.5" 500GB HDD on selected models...
- People who don't want to spend much on a notebook would get a better model
$999 13" alu MacBook 1280*800 2.40 C2D, 320M
$1199 13" alu MacBook 1280*800 2.66 C2D, 320M
- People who need an integrated ODD would still have 3 choices: 13/15/17"
- People who are ready to go forward, are performance focused, and can leave the ODD at "home" would have a couple of very fast models.
The 6950 and the 6850 are within 1 degree under full load from each other.
At idle the 6950 is 3 degrees cooler than the 6850.
1 watt difference at idle. 36w difference during gaming.
That's for the desktop cards. I don't know if the new imac would use mobility versions or not.
Now if you compare the 5850 to the 6950 the 5850 runs 15w lower under load and 8 degrees cooler.
Last edited:
Touch is great but fingerprints all over your main screen aren't so great. I have mixed feelings and don't know that Uncle Steve likes fingerprints all over his pristine products either
They are within 1 degree under full load because the heatsink/fan is more robust on the 6950. Apple can't afford that same heatsink and fan in the enclosure they have, not to mention the larger integrated PSU.
Listen I love my Aluminum MBPs however...
when I travel I leave that beautiful slab of aluminum at home and bring my little plastic Acer Timeline... cheap and durable and I sleep better not worrying about scuffs, scratches or theft of my MBP.
I recently sold a beautiful sportscar I adored... always worried about paint chips and other useless nonsense took a lot of the fun out of owning it...bought a 6 year old Bimmer that I can scuff around without grief and been happier since.
Only that for most people a Mac will still be fast enough in 3 to 5 years. My MBP was still outperforming most of my friends windows machines - although over the years they are mostly switching to macs. It was no longer high end, but it was fast at everything I did. In my experience a Mac will require a handful of upgrades in its lifetime (RAM, HDD) to keep it in the running. A slightly faster processor and GPU just aren't aren't going to be factors in the longevity of my Mac.
that line up doestnmake much sense to me. The macbook airs which are sans OD and all have a lower sticker price than similarly sized cousins. The CPU is lower clock of course though.
With this list the "new body design" merits a price bump even though you have less storage capacity and no optical?
I would think they would bump up the monitor res. I often find even my 15" cramped. What with losing so much vertical space to menu bars, address bars etc.
Of course it doesn't.
Are the MBAs really less expensive than their similarly sized cousins?
Let's see...
13" MBA $1299/1599, 13" MB/MBP $999/1199/1499...
No.
Maybe it's because they have more expensive cpus ($262/316 vs $209/241), hirez displays and more expensive SSD storage...?
The new 13" MBP would be price at $1499 which is the price of the current 2.66GHz model, even if you loose the ODD, you'd get hirez display, faster SSD storage and expanson capabilities, faster core ix cpu and dedicated graphics (in my book, that's what makes a better computer). The current 13" MBP with a 128GB SSD costs $1549.
A similar argument for the 15" model, the current 15" MBP with a 128GB SSD costs $2099, $2199 with the hirez display, the "new" one without ODD would only cost $1999, but would have and 2.5" HDD/SSD bay for more storage.
FWIW, if you value more storage and an integrated ODD over fast storage and fast processing, then I believe you're a customer for the "classic" line-up: you still can get 13/15/17" models with ODD and up to 500GB HDD at the current or lower prices. The SSD/no ODD models are for different customers, but that probably still doesn't make sense to you.
I'm going to second the notion that your line-up doesn't make much sense. If they're going to kill the optical drive at any time, they'll do it all at once, and they won't try to ease people into it with a transition line-up. Secondly, it's not the optical drive that they're gonna kill, if they're really gonna kill anything, it'll be the 2.5" bay as the SSD blades (at least when they come down in price) are the proper replacement and while the Internet is cool and all, it's not yet ready as a replacement to the optical drive, regardless of how infrequently you may use it.
The 6850 requires one 6-pin connector, the 6870, the 6950, and the 6970 all require two. For that much of a power requirement, you won't ever see those in an iMac, unless Apple beefs up the power supply.
Well, there's that too.
You're completely wrong there. What's the one piece of software that you need to run on your Mac above all others? The OS. And what determines whether you can run the OS? Hardware specs! If you don't have an up to snuff CPU or GPU, you can't run either the entire OS or specific features of the OS that'll be important later on. Sure, your brand new MacBook Pro runs Snow Leopard like a champ, and will probably be able to take on Lion nicely, but what about 10.8? What about 10.9? If you buy a new Mac, then the longer it is a current shipping Mac, the longer you have before Apple, or anyone else for that matter, releases a piece of software that your machine won't run. It's a grace period before your computer becomes naturally obsolete. The more of that you have, the better of an investment your computer will be. For Microsoft Office, you're right, it's a moot point. For other software, including the OS itself, not so much. And sure, you can be one version of Mac OS X behind just fine and still be privy to most of the things that those running the newest are, but you can't be two behind, otherwise you lose out on things like being able to sync up that new iPhone or iPod touch or running the latest version of iTunes or Safari.
if my 7 year old HP desktop at work with a P4 Prescott heater and intel graphics can run Windows 7 very nicely, i'm sure current apple computers will run OS X a few versions from now
Unless you have a decent video card and 4GB of RAM, I'm skeptical that your machine can run Windows 7 "very nicely", let alone passably.
The point wasn't that current Macs won't be able to run OS X a few versions from now, the point was that you will maximize the life of your computer if you buy at the earlier end of the release cycle rather than the end. Macs bought at the end of their release cycle have that much less time before they are unable to run things such as whatever the next OS is at that time. Case in point, if I had bought my Early 2006 iMac in September right before they introduced the Late 2006 iMac instead of in February, I'd have 7 months less time with the computer before I am unable to run things like Lion, StarCraft II (at medium or higher resolution), Bioshock, the newest Final Cut Studio, etc.
This argument that I'm making is pretty much the basis for this site's "Buyer's Guide" in case you haven't been there yet or couldn't figure that out on your own.