nVidia is coming on tougher times lately. I'm sure they love the free advertising they're getting from selling Apple the chipset package with a GT216 based IGP and I/O controller.
It is delaying the inevitable logic board redesign.
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.
Inside Apple's New MacBook Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It is delaying the inevitable logic board redesign.
you know, even if Apple were in the habit of slapping prospective customers around (which they aren't, since no one said you had to buy a Mac), I find it humorous that you'd actually subject yourself to being slapped around just so you could whine/moan about it on a forum... seriously, go buy a PC, since it's pretty obvious from your post that Apple will never quite deliver an update that measures up to your (rather lofty) expectations.
as for this latest refresh, I am going to wait until my next paycheck comes in, then put my current u-MB for sale and buy the top-specced 15" model... between the matte (and finally higher-res!) screen option, the much-improved processors, and almost double the battery life of what I'm used to getting with my MB, I see no reason to wait. though I guess that'd also leave me without a reason to complain using the "the computer I just bought from Apple is now older-generation than the models they just released" excuse (which seems to be a common one for a large number of posters on MR).
That only goes so far - I am sorry to say. You can only charge so much for such relative little on the hardware front. I am an Apple user and your arrogant comments show how little you actual listen to others arguments. I am sorry about 'that'.
D
So you think that Apple is NOT pulling people from the MBP to work on the iPad and iPhone? You realize many reports claim just the opposite. The fact that Apple does not even offer options like 1080P and HDMI show what little actual effort Apple is putting into the consumer computer market. They have shifted effort to iPad and iPhone and even iPod development and even that is falling behind users wishes and competition. Sad - but true.
This is a smack in the face as far as updates go - no HDMI, no full 1080P and no BlueRay - let alone larger 15.6" displays and the like. My comparison to Dell was to show that even the lowest-end computer companies are offering things that Apple refuses to offer and at a MUCH lower cost. Take it for what it is - Apple is not focusing on the users anymore or they would offer HDMI out, BlueRay and full 1080P. Silly.
D
Can you clarify, how specifically does the Core i3 blow the C2D's in the refreshed 13" MBP out of the water? I've seen plenty of merit in the i5 and i7, but I haven't seen anything mindblowing in the typical $600-800 machines that feature Core i3 processors.
HDD replace
Replaced the HDD and added RAM (6GB using the kludge published elsewhere) on my C2D MBP and it was very easy, even for my limited technical capability. Never have cracked open a case on the unibody, though. People talk about replacing HDD with SSD *later* and adding more RAM *later* but is it really that easy? Has anyone actually done it with a unibody MBP and was it straight forward?
Thx!
Replaced the HDD and added RAM (6GB using the kludge published elsewhere) on my C2D MBP and it was very easy, even for my limited technical capability. Never have cracked open a case on the unibody, though. People talk about replacing HDD with SSD *later* and adding more RAM *later* but is it really that easy? Has anyone actually done it with a unibody MBP and was it straight forward?
Thx!
The only point I'm making is that none of this is NEW for Apple - they haven't offered options like you are suggesting for years. I am simply arguing that it has little to do with any issues of them focusing more on the iPhone or iPad.
-Zadillo
This is what real apple fanboys believe. I built a PC desktop and saved up money hoping Apple will deliver on Arrandale. Since you know, the current core2duos are coming on their two year anniversary. i come to bitch and moan when apple fails to live up to even the slightest expectations. you're seriously backwards if you think it's lofty to want something newer than a core2duo.
You're buliding up bitching on a mac forum to be something that takes up a lot of my time and energy, it isn't. in the end it's an internet forum and a purchase decision is wholly my own. i just like coming here and showing you guys how apple has changed you as a consumer for a laptop. you no longer can hope for the best, you can't even hope for something similar to waht other people are offering. you can set your sights on low and than bitch at people who think otherwise.
A look at the new 13-inch models
Am I reading this right? $300 more for a 70GB larger hard drive and 260 extra MHz? You can upgrade the base hard drive to 320 GB for around $50, so that means $250 for the minor processor upgrade. In my view, not worth it.
Based on this, the old refurbs will drop in price by at least $100.
Am I reading this right? $300 more for a 70GB larger hard drive and 260 extra MHz? You can upgrade the base hard drive to 320 GB for around $50, so that means $250 for the minor processor upgrade. In my view, not worth it.
Based on this, the old refurbs will drop in price by at least $100.
The 17" has 1080p, and trust me, I had a 15.4" laptop with 1680x1050 (in 2003), and the pixels are small enough, not to mention 16:10 is more useful than 16:9 when you're doing actual work.
Still, no blu-ray is fail. For HDMI, if only they route audio through mini-DP, all you need is a monoprice mini-dp to hdmi cable for $10 and you're good to go. I use that cable for now, but having to use another cable for audio sucks.
I am pretty sure that audio through mini displayport is supported.
There is an NEW [optional] mini displayport to hdmi.
And according to Apple's standards it will be with audio!!!
I agree with all your arguments.
But couldn't Apple offer something better than a 2.4-2.66 in C2D
And if heat etc was an issue why not reduce the price.
13" top model is a STUPID buy right now. Period.
15" MBP Displays
Do we know if they are LED backlit?
Are they IPS? (probably not, since previous models were not)
I see nothing about LED backlighting on the new models.
Re: SSD...
What good is an SSD if OS X does not support TRIM? I'd love to throw in an Intel X-25M but don't want to suffer from degraded performance as the drive is used up.
And whoever suggested OCZ or other brands for SSDs:
They may have faster sequential write/read times than the Intel drives, but their performance suffers in random write/reads and also both sequential AND random write/reads AFTER the drive has been "used." At least, I'm 99% sure that's what I read in the latest Anandtech article on SSD performance.
I think I'll wait until USB 3.0 or Intel Lightpeak to upgrade my 15" SR MBP.
Do we know if they are LED backlit?
Are they IPS? (probably not, since previous models were not)
I see nothing about LED backlighting on the new models.
Re: SSD...
What good is an SSD if OS X does not support TRIM? I'd love to throw in an Intel X-25M but don't want to suffer from degraded performance as the drive is used up.
And whoever suggested OCZ or other brands for SSDs:
They may have faster sequential write/read times than the Intel drives, but their performance suffers in random write/reads and also both sequential AND random write/reads AFTER the drive has been "used." At least, I'm 99% sure that's what I read in the latest Anandtech article on SSD performance.
I think I'll wait until USB 3.0 or Intel Lightpeak to upgrade my 15" SR MBP.
This is exciting! Just in time for me to start college in the fall!
The 15" Core i7 is looking mighty attractive.
Would it be worth it to go with the high res (1680x1050) screen? My desktop's 22" monitor runs that resolution so I don't know how that would look on a 15". Too tiny?
The 15" Core i7 is looking mighty attractive.
Would it be worth it to go with the high res (1680x1050) screen? My desktop's 22" monitor runs that resolution so I don't know how that would look on a 15". Too tiny?
So, like many, I'm debating between the standard glossy screen on the 15" and the high-res matte screen. (I don't really think I need the high res, but to get matte this is the only option). This is an interesting bit of info from the Apple Store: When choosing the matte screen as a BTO, there is a note if you click on learn more - "The antiglare display has a silver frame (border) around the display." Why is this? They couldn't just use the regular black frame? Is this a new thing, or has it always been like this? If it's been around for a while, can someone provide pictures?
Speaking of pictures, and back to the glossy vs. matte debate, can anyone link to a good source to see side by side comparisons of the two in various lighting conditions showing the glare and color reproduction? I've always used matte screens and am hesitant to switch to glossy. Thanks for your help!
Speaking of pictures, and back to the glossy vs. matte debate, can anyone link to a good source to see side by side comparisons of the two in various lighting conditions showing the glare and color reproduction? I've always used matte screens and am hesitant to switch to glossy. Thanks for your help!
The battery life on the 13" is great.
I'm glad Apple stuck with Core 2 Duo + nvidia for it. Core i3 is the modern day Celeron thanks to the forced use of Intel graphics. I'll take Core 2 Duo and nvidia graphics over Core i3 with Intel graphics any day. Even if it does mean waiting an extra two seconds for a video to encode or an extra millisecond for a website to open.
The prices are still outrageous though. $2,200 for the 15" MBP with no 16x9 screen, Core i7, no blu-ray, and the bottom of the battery mid-range GPU? Sorry Apple, but good battery life doesn't put you in a position to charge $1,000 more than a better spec'ed PC.
I'm glad Apple stuck with Core 2 Duo + nvidia for it. Core i3 is the modern day Celeron thanks to the forced use of Intel graphics. I'll take Core 2 Duo and nvidia graphics over Core i3 with Intel graphics any day. Even if it does mean waiting an extra two seconds for a video to encode or an extra millisecond for a website to open.
The prices are still outrageous though. $2,200 for the 15" MBP with no 16x9 screen, Core i7, no blu-ray, and the bottom of the battery mid-range GPU? Sorry Apple, but good battery life doesn't put you in a position to charge $1,000 more than a better spec'ed PC.
This is a begrudging, late-in-the-day update that only rabid fanboys will be impressed by. i5? i7? Yeah, great. The competition had this a long time ago, and at much lower prices.
Apple has offered a mediocre update to it's most profitable line of notebooks, and continues to ignore the Mac Pro, Macbook and Macbook Air (clearly not enough profit in those).
''We're a mobile device company now'' - Steve Jobs.
Better believe it, guys. OSX is becoming more and more irrelevant by the day as Apple's focus moves towards iPhone OS, iPad, iPhone and iPod Touch.
The fanboys, will of course, disagree until the bitter end. In the meantime, those level-headed people looking for a well-designed, powerful and full featured notebook would do worse than to check out a Vaio.
Apple has offered a mediocre update to it's most profitable line of notebooks, and continues to ignore the Mac Pro, Macbook and Macbook Air (clearly not enough profit in those).
''We're a mobile device company now'' - Steve Jobs.
Better believe it, guys. OSX is becoming more and more irrelevant by the day as Apple's focus moves towards iPhone OS, iPad, iPhone and iPod Touch.
The fanboys, will of course, disagree until the bitter end. In the meantime, those level-headed people looking for a well-designed, powerful and full featured notebook would do worse than to check out a Vaio.
+1000 Rightly Put. Saved me the effort of writing this exact thing.
I quoted the exact same thing a few hours ago
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/9650162/
Guess no one wants to talk about it. That how is apple going to justify that
strictly speaking about the updates to the 13" MBP, I can see what you're saying... I'm not really sure of Apple's reasoning for sticking with the C2D other than that it would allow them to keep the integrated Nvidia graphics solution while also boosting battery life, but I don't see how you could honestly tell me that the updates they made to the remainder of the MBP's aren't substantial. sure, they're months behind every other PC manufacturer from a hardware standpoint, but at least we have new notebooks to work with now.
and I don't feel that I'm making your comments out to be anything other than what they are- whining that Apple's products don't meet your expectations... and this in spite of the fact that the majority of people who will buy either 13" MBP model will probably never use a fraction of the performance that you'd get out of an i3/i5 (since I think it's safe to assume that most pro users will avoid the small screen size of the 13" MBP and go with either the 15" or 17" model- which did receive substantial updates). and that's why it was so important for them to update the remainder of their lineup to Core ix-based processors, since it really would have been a slap in the face to their pro/pro-sumer users if they had stuck with C2D processors in their highest-specced notebooks.
Eh.. I knew that would be said ....
I don't disagree with you either, except I also realize this seems to be Apple's latest trend. They take the lowest-end model of a given product line and skip upgrading it as much as the others in the series - at least for a few months.
I like Apple products a lot, but I don't think I'm a "fanboy" (especially considering my day job is supporting an all Windows environment, and I still own a Windows PC at home along with my Macs). Like anything, it's foolish to buy ONLY based on a brand name. Plenty of companies out there generally make great products, but also have a few "poor buys" in the product lineup.
Right now, I'd pass on the 13" Macbook Pro, but then, I would have passed on it from the start. Truthfully, it didn't offer enough advantage over a nicely configured Macbook. People buying it were paying for the looks (aluminum case and so forth), and possibly for the extra "status" of being able to say they had a "Pro" model. Micro Center stores have been selling the regular Macbooks for $799 all day long for months now. That's the smarter buy.....
I don't disagree with you either, except I also realize this seems to be Apple's latest trend. They take the lowest-end model of a given product line and skip upgrading it as much as the others in the series - at least for a few months.
I like Apple products a lot, but I don't think I'm a "fanboy" (especially considering my day job is supporting an all Windows environment, and I still own a Windows PC at home along with my Macs). Like anything, it's foolish to buy ONLY based on a brand name. Plenty of companies out there generally make great products, but also have a few "poor buys" in the product lineup.
Right now, I'd pass on the 13" Macbook Pro, but then, I would have passed on it from the start. Truthfully, it didn't offer enough advantage over a nicely configured Macbook. People buying it were paying for the looks (aluminum case and so forth), and possibly for the extra "status" of being able to say they had a "Pro" model. Micro Center stores have been selling the regular Macbooks for $799 all day long for months now. That's the smarter buy.....
You say no matter which way you cut it, but you cut it the same way every time. Once again, they could have included an i3 with a discreet graphics processor, but that would have increased the cost to the consumer. An i3 with integrated intel graphics would be a downgrade on graphics performance and only a slight boost in the CPU. They couldn't have a custom integrated graphics chip with the i3 like they did with the c2d because that is exactly what intel is prohibiting.
You even provided benchmarks showing that the i3 wasn't that much better than the chips they are using, so the integrated video debate is very relevant. Take it off that pedestal, it isn't the greatest just because it has "i" in the name. i3/5 and discreet graphics would have been a nice, more expensive option to have available though. If of course they could fit it (it isn't as simple as just saying "redesign it").
If you're already using a 15" then do you ever feel frustrated that you can't fit more on the screen?
The flip side is smaller text and icons. If you're unsure it's probably best to see one before ordering, though a poster in another thread gave the sensible advice that since the 17" has slightly higher pixel density, if you can cope with the that screen you'll be OK with the hi-res 15.
Of course if you want matte, it's this or the refurb store now - the UK refurb store has a number of C2D antiglare configurations in it at the moment.
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/performance.html
Wow. Dual core Core i7 in the MBP. That's pretty funny. That makes that $2200 price tag look even worse.
Wow. Dual core Core i7 in the MBP. That's pretty funny. That makes that $2200 price tag look even worse.