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
Some additional reference:
http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/2771/awesomesauce.png
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/237322
Hardware:
MSI X58 Pro-E board
Intel Core i7-920 cpu @ 4.11 GHz
G.skill 4GB DDR3-1333 ram
OCZ Vertex 30GB
Cost ~$730 USD (Newegg)
Whaaa? Good luck with your 1920x1200 16:9 display from Dell! I bet there's a Linux driver to make that work, huh?
Many ppl where hoping for more on the 13" MBP Unibody's ~ myself included (even though I'm not, at present, in the market to purchase one).
Apple is still target marketing their laptop lineup in the sense that it appeals to the Mac faithful (not the recent switchers like myself needing a new machine and still focus' on spec's not REAL world & daily use of those specs).
The Target Market for 13" MBP:
* Digital Camera students/pro's looking for a performance "MOBILE" solution to their Mac OS X experience.
* Students needing an upgrade to again PowerBook or first gen MBP non-unibody's.
* New programmers to Objective-C for the iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch products; that will warm to be full-time OS X users.
etc.
Following this above example the 13" uMBP for early 2010 does VERY well. Should we consider the GT320M chipset; and slightly better battery capacity & performance ... those that expected to get all their work done in 4hrs (real world) but left with no battery power to edit new shots/light video or coding while completely being mobile can NOW have 5-6hrs to do so and still have another 1-2hrs (real world, again) able to email & surf.
Another Target market is aspiring DJ's with great skills that need the mobility and light weight that the 13" allows for, while still getting better performance that previous models. I currently own the 2008 AL_uMB and although the performance is GREAT having 3-4hrs on a battery with only 290charge cycles has me wondering about spending a full day away from my 'hood.
Some things that the entire MBP lineup SHOULD have that would NOT decrease battery performance significantly:
* USB 3.0 on ALL ports
- This allows for upcoming storage, network and wireless projection of video. not abundant yet so I understand Apple's choice NOT to implement it yet.
* E-Sata port
- at least 1 in combination with the new USB 3.0 standard would help for better external HDD expansion. YES there are those of us that just don't have a TimeCapsule or Airport Extreme with MyBook World Edition.
Now all told by ALL of us ... I think this is indeed stop gate solution, as Eidorian stated. I got a feeling this Late August, in recent MB update tradition by Apple, will have USB 3.0 or move onto a specific Core_i branded solution.
For now the Unibody Aluminums run VERY hot when intensive work is being done - 75 degrees is NOT fun on your laptop, especially in the summer time.
I'll skip this update, UNLESS Apple's update to OS X is a significant performance bump that thrive's on the newer nVidia GT320M as a base solution.
Cheers.
Apple is still target marketing their laptop lineup in the sense that it appeals to the Mac faithful (not the recent switchers like myself needing a new machine and still focus' on spec's not REAL world & daily use of those specs).
The Target Market for 13" MBP:
* Digital Camera students/pro's looking for a performance "MOBILE" solution to their Mac OS X experience.
* Students needing an upgrade to again PowerBook or first gen MBP non-unibody's.
* New programmers to Objective-C for the iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch products; that will warm to be full-time OS X users.
etc.
Following this above example the 13" uMBP for early 2010 does VERY well. Should we consider the GT320M chipset; and slightly better battery capacity & performance ... those that expected to get all their work done in 4hrs (real world) but left with no battery power to edit new shots/light video or coding while completely being mobile can NOW have 5-6hrs to do so and still have another 1-2hrs (real world, again) able to email & surf.
Another Target market is aspiring DJ's with great skills that need the mobility and light weight that the 13" allows for, while still getting better performance that previous models. I currently own the 2008 AL_uMB and although the performance is GREAT having 3-4hrs on a battery with only 290charge cycles has me wondering about spending a full day away from my 'hood.
Some things that the entire MBP lineup SHOULD have that would NOT decrease battery performance significantly:
* USB 3.0 on ALL ports
- This allows for upcoming storage, network and wireless projection of video. not abundant yet so I understand Apple's choice NOT to implement it yet.
* E-Sata port
- at least 1 in combination with the new USB 3.0 standard would help for better external HDD expansion. YES there are those of us that just don't have a TimeCapsule or Airport Extreme with MyBook World Edition.
Now all told by ALL of us ... I think this is indeed stop gate solution, as Eidorian stated. I got a feeling this Late August, in recent MB update tradition by Apple, will have USB 3.0 or move onto a specific Core_i branded solution.
For now the Unibody Aluminums run VERY hot when intensive work is being done - 75 degrees is NOT fun on your laptop, especially in the summer time.
I'll skip this update, UNLESS Apple's update to OS X is a significant performance bump that thrive's on the newer nVidia GT320M as a base solution.
Cheers.
Hey guys. I have a couple questions here.
- Is there any significant difference in performance between the 2.4GHz 13"MBP and the 2.66GHz 13"MBP ?
- Is it convenient to travel around with the 15" MBP ?
Btw, I'm a student that looking for my first mac.
Thank you.
- Is there any significant difference in performance between the 2.4GHz 13"MBP and the 2.66GHz 13"MBP ?
- Is it convenient to travel around with the 15" MBP ?
Btw, I'm a student that looking for my first mac.
Thank you.
Works Well For Me
I've been operating my consulting business on a 4-yr old 17" MBP (2.16 GHz), which of late has been limping along (bad screen). I've been limping along with it for 6 months, waiting to purchase a replacement computer. Within hours of Apple's release, I ordered a 17" at 2.66 GHz, 8 GB ram, antiglare screen. Yummy. This leap from my old machine will be wonderful!
And for all the folks that are complaining about the lack of a Core i5 in the 13", go get a job, make some money, and purchase a 15". I get the sense that there a bunch of people in here who are under-employed and have adequate time to complain, and inadequate funds to purchase. If you can't afford it, deal.
I've been operating my consulting business on a 4-yr old 17" MBP (2.16 GHz), which of late has been limping along (bad screen). I've been limping along with it for 6 months, waiting to purchase a replacement computer. Within hours of Apple's release, I ordered a 17" at 2.66 GHz, 8 GB ram, antiglare screen. Yummy. This leap from my old machine will be wonderful!
And for all the folks that are complaining about the lack of a Core i5 in the 13", go get a job, make some money, and purchase a 15". I get the sense that there a bunch of people in here who are under-employed and have adequate time to complain, and inadequate funds to purchase. If you can't afford it, deal.
Your argument holds no water. There is the upgraded battery, along with the upgraded graphics, and the upgraded RAM.
RAM itself is worth around 100, considering you have to buy 2x2. Battery, perhaps another 50, graphics card is easily worth 100.
The panel is definitely LED backlit. No way IPS.
It's technically quad core with hyper threading. I don't see any native quad core notebooks out there.
But you conveniently forget that as technology evolves even better parts cost less not more.
All PC manufacturers (DELL, HP etc.) sell laptops with quad core i7 chips
Far superior larger resolution? 1440x900 is somehow "far superior"? How?
Yes they are cheaper to make. Because theres no sense in making non-standard screens that only a small number of people like, while everyone else would rather have 16x9.
Considering the industry, except Apple, moved away from 16x10 virtually overnight, I'd say everyone wants 16x9.
I have a 1920x1080 display right now. No 1920x1200 please. I don't want the black bars on my movies to look like they used to on CRT TVs.
Have you taken apart an aluminum unibody system? The bottom casing IS hair thin. It's about as thin as the aluminum face on the iPod classic. The casing on my iPad is thicker than the bottom pieces of my 13.3" aluminum MacBook.
I had two original plastic MacBooks (one I bought, second was a replacement), and that replacement system was replaced with the original aluminum unibody MacBook. Why two replacements? Poor case design on Apple's part. The aluminum unibody design is leaps and bounds better than their previous designs, but its still years behind what PC manufacturers can offer.
Well, then you haven't looked. Mobile Core 2 Quad showed up a long time ago. In 2008 actually http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_2_microprocessors#Quad-Core_Notebook_processors
True quad core mobile Core i7 have been around for about 6 months now http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i7_microprocessors#Quad-Core_Mobile_processors
Heres a nice little Core i7 quad system http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834114803 $899. $1300 less than the dual core Core i7 MBP.
Also, all of those quad core Core i7 mobile processors offer hyper threading as well, so you have 8 logical cores.
My point is, I would gladly pay the $250 extra for these new features.
Saying that technology evolves supports the fact that the prices on the old 13" MacBook Pro's are dropping downwards.
Yes, Dell and HP do sell quad-core chips, but at the cost of processing speed. From what I see, the only two quad-core i7s are the 720/820, with respective clock speeds of 1.6 GHZ, and 1.73 GHZ. Real world usage, these guys are going to be 10-20% slower, while burning battery life approximtely 3x as fast. Most tasks are not optimized for quad-core yet, much, much, less octo-core, like the quad-core i7 720/820s.
8 Logical Cores, at the deep cost of raw gigahertz. Something I wouldn't be willing to trade, considering that most everyday tasks I do do not involve 8 cores.
16:10 is still preferred for gaming. For watching movies, definitely 16:9. But you can't make a display both ways.
If you say that the Aluminum case design is awful, I suggest you go look at other plastic offerings. I've stress tested them, dropped them, and they break. The MacBook's? Maybe a crack on the screen.
Most people like the unibody design, compared to PCs. Look at any decent review site. (Engadget/Gizmodo/LaptopReview...)
I'm going for a 17". The only question is if it should be with a matte or glossy display. I'll be using it mostly for writing on and doing development, so I think it must be matte.
And if I should opt for the 256 SSD. My last MB suddenly started to become very noisy. I suppose the SDD would cut down on the noise and extend the battery. But it is rather expensive. So I don't know if it is worth the money.
And if I should opt for the 256 SSD. My last MB suddenly started to become very noisy. I suppose the SDD would cut down on the noise and extend the battery. But it is rather expensive. So I don't know if it is worth the money.
Missing the woods for the trees are we. It just amazes me how all the apple fans continue to ignore the simple facts.
I'm not talking about the improvements in the 13" MBP. I was talking about the price difference between the base MBP13 and hte higher model.
The only difference between them is a 266mhz speed bump and 70gb worth of hdrive space.
Good luck paying 300$ for that!!!
All im saying is how can apple expect people to buy the high end 13". Even jobs cannot pull that off. They will ahve to make some more changes.
It's not just you. Every sane person is missing (will be missing shortly) not only USB3 but also
- esata (which can be combined with a USB slot, hence no extra slot is needed)
- express card slot with 13" and 15" inch models (put an express card SD reader in it, if you wish to use that. If you don't wish that, put in something else you need - a hard drive, 3G modem, ...)
- bluray
- how about upgrading FW800 to FW3200 (the standard exists from 12/2006) (by the way, there is an FW version that uses rj45 (i.e. ethernet) connectors, thus could be used as a combined ethernet/FW port e.g. for MBAir)
- well, I guess that would be enough for the start
Dunno why people were expecting USB3 - Intel won't support it at the chipset level until 2011, so unless Apple is going to go with another manufacturer, it won't get bootable USB3 slots.
As for the other suggestions, those will require additional chips on the logic board, space for which is lacking until Apple ditches the optical drive. I don't see the point of bluray on a 1280x800 screen until DVDs stop being made. If you are going to run your films on a larger screen at home, then you would be better off with a dedicated Bluray player, which would be cheaper to buy than whatever extra Apple would add to the already overly high costs of its notebooks.
Macbook Pro 15" High-Resolution Display
Hi
I'm a little confused with the option of having high-res on the 15" model. Is the resolution dictated by hardware or software?
If it's hardware, do they have a different display panel on high-res models? (since the GPU remains the same)
If it's software, then, is it a driver issue or system code that "unlocks" the choice of resolutions? (remember under both configurations, the GPU is the same)
Thanks
G
Hi
I'm a little confused with the option of having high-res on the 15" model. Is the resolution dictated by hardware or software?
If it's hardware, do they have a different display panel on high-res models? (since the GPU remains the same)
If it's software, then, is it a driver issue or system code that "unlocks" the choice of resolutions? (remember under both configurations, the GPU is the same)
Thanks
G
GOD!! That 17" looks WIIIIIIIDE!! That keyboard is miles away from anywhere!!! Couldn't they get an extended numberpad on there as well? I'd trade that off against massive speakers any day!
Then I'd buy one in a heartbeat!
Actually, no. No I wouldn't.
Then I'd buy one in a heartbeat!
Actually, no. No I wouldn't.
GOD!! That 17" looks WIIIIIIIDE!! That keyboard is miles away from anywhere!!! Couldn't they get an extended numberpad on there as well? I'd trade that off against massive speakers any day!
Then I'd buy one in a heartbeat!
Actually, no. No I wouldn't.
Is this the antiglare version? The edge of the LCD screen seems to be in silver, rather than black, color.
specs the same as last 17". its not that bad. the photo lens makes it uber deepGOD!! That 17" looks WIIIIIIIDE!! That keyboard is miles away from anywhere!!! Couldn't they get an extended numberpad on there as well? I'd trade that off against massive speakers any day!
Then I'd buy one in a heartbeat!
Actually, no. No I wouldn't.
and for those that want 16:9, get a dedicated player. I for one need 16:10. I use mine for creativity so more desktop the better. black bar at hrz edges? same argument as old folks complaining bout' black vert edges LOL!
No. No no no no no no no! Just because it says "mobile" doesn't mean "really portable." There's a huge difference.
The quad core Core i7s draw significantly more power. You CAN jam them in a laptop, but you SHOULDN'T if you care about heat and battery, which of course Apple does. Aside from that, the clock speeds are much lower. If you really need four real cores for your work, get a bloody desktop workstation. Any pro who needs that kind of power at their fingertips has one for that reason.
No one can answer that question for you except you.
Chipset, big changes and no one is surprised by that?
Yes, this is interesting. Now we have this situation:
Macbook -> Logic Board with nVidia integrated chipset + Video.
Macbook Pro 13 -> Logic Board with nVidia integrated chipset + Video.
What about the 15 and 17?
They did switch to the Intel "crappy" chipset (the one from nVidia was ABSOLUTELY working better in terms of speed and reliability) for the Logic Board?????
Possible that no one didn't point this out?
I'll forget about simultaneous file transfers on external usb 2.0 at max throughput while working with no performance decrease at all?
I recall the intel chipset on the previous macbook/macbook pro generation were giving so much troubles...
May someone confirms the capability of the new chipset to handle hassle-free all the I/Os?
thanks
Yes, this is interesting. Now we have this situation:
Macbook -> Logic Board with nVidia integrated chipset + Video.
Macbook Pro 13 -> Logic Board with nVidia integrated chipset + Video.
What about the 15 and 17?
They did switch to the Intel "crappy" chipset (the one from nVidia was ABSOLUTELY working better in terms of speed and reliability) for the Logic Board?????
Possible that no one didn't point this out?
I'll forget about simultaneous file transfers on external usb 2.0 at max throughput while working with no performance decrease at all?
I recall the intel chipset on the previous macbook/macbook pro generation were giving so much troubles...
May someone confirms the capability of the new chipset to handle hassle-free all the I/Os?
thanks