Inside Apple's New MacBook Pro

[lowbatteries]

please take your low intelligence arguments elsewhere.

Man, so serious! It's a computer upgrade. Take a step back, breath, watch some Youtube kittens ... feel better now?

I'm disappointed with the specs as well, but I was just pointing out that there may have been some very real reasons Apple made the engineering decisions they did. What, you think they kept the C2D just to piss you off?

 

[harmonica01]

Not in MBP

1- BLU-RAY
2- USB 3
3- option for matte finish which isn't a pricey add on option.
4- no expresscard slot for 15" Models

1. bummer
2. oh well dont have any peripherals in mass for it anyways
3. i got matte finish on mine which I just ordered...are you not looking at it correctly
4. yes this sucks, but atleast fw 800 has returned

Just ordered 15" i7 2.66 top of the line with hi res screen and matte finish, going to put in my spare 7200rpm hitachi 500 when it comes in. Can't wait, I am so glad I didn't buy the ipad and waste the money then, I've been wanting a 15' mbp for 3 years

 

[Zadillo]

I am sorry, this round of updates is nothing but a slap in the face to Apple users. Apple is to damned busy working on iPhone this and iPad that to worry about actual COMPUTER users. I was given a Dell for work - I am by no means a fan of Dell and I would rather use no computer at all than a Windows notebook, with that said the Dell offer full 1080P display on a 15.6" matte screen (or glossy, your choice - I like matte), a 500GB HD, HDMI out and much, much more - for only $1099! That was mid-last year when I ordered it! The new version of this exact computer has the new i5 processor and a new 6 or 8-cell battery for 6-9-hours of battery life - complete with full 1080P output and HDMI out for LESS that last years model! Is it as smooth or integrated as Apple? No - but the hardware kicks ass all over the place and it costs less. No full HD out? No HDMI? No i5 or i7 in the 13" MBP? The 13" is far from a PRO model when they cripple it and basically charge you the same for a bit more RAM and a larger HD - in comparison to other vendors this would be panned left and right as being behind the times and egregiously over-priced. I am disappointed in Apple over this update - flame away if you would like

The issue I'd have with this post is that you seem to start off with the assumption that this has to do with Apple focusing on the iPhone/iPad, etc. - but the points you make about the limited nature of Apple hardware options vs. manufacturers like Dell who offer a much wider variety.

Apple has always offered much more limited choices compared to a Dell - to act like this is something new in the past couple of years seems unrealistic.

 

[odoyle1711]

Benchmark comparison

Looking at the difference between the core i5's in the 15 Inch, I am not seeing much difference:

Passmark CPU benchmarks
(higher is better)



Intel Core i5 M 520 @ 2.40GHz - 2492

Intel Core i5 M 540 @ 2.53GHz - 2566

Huge bump when it comes to the i7

Intel Core i7 920 @ 2.67GHz - 5589

Not so hot with the 13 incher, but not horrible.

Intel Core2 Duo P9600 @ 2.66GHz - 1976
(not sure which core 2 duo they are using, this is the fastest one out there)


I am guessing if they put a core i3 in there it would have been one of these two:
Intel Core i3 M 330 @ 2.13GHz - 2039
Intel Core i3 M 350 @ 2.27GHz - 2084


for the small performance boost over the core 2 duo that the i3 would have given, it doesnt seem worthwhile for the trade off in gpu...


Got the numbers from here: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

 

[peter2]

SSD specs

Hard Drive
Apple is offering up to 500 GB, 5400-rpm SATA hard drives across all three sizes, with the 15" and 17" models also offering the option of up to 500 GB, 7200-rpm drives. Solid-state drive capacities have increased with the addition of a 512 GB option, although it carries a hefty price premium of $1300-$1450 depending on which base hard drive the customer is upgrading from.

Does anyone know what SSD's Apple is using? Current SSDs' read performance is within the range of 30 - 270 MB/s depending on brand, model, etc. Apple does not specify any single parameter of the SSDs used, even though the SSD speed is much more important than e.g. the processor speed. Probably Apple thinks that not publishing very important performance facts makes their products essentially simpler .

 

[MacGiver]

I wanted to get a 13" but no way with a EOL C2D...Shame on Apple! They are not upgrading the 13" simply because they don't want to canabalize right now some iPad sales...I will wait for the next 13" revision and no way to buy a first generation iPad. 2011 will be the year of my next Apple investment.

And when in the hell is Apple going to have HDMI ports on his laptops!!!

 

[OllyW]

BORING. Core 2 Duo ? That's all they are offering on the 13" ? That's dismal.
I'll stick with my first gen 13" Unibody Macbook thanks (yeah, the one they hadnt really finished designing - you know - the one they updated 6 months later and gave the "pro" moniker, firewire AND the new battery tech. Basically, the fastest depreciating Apple laptop in history. Cheers Apple.

Isn't your MacBook supposed to be a collectors item?

 

[JoePike]

This update SUCKS! Once again Apple, you've failed us all. You think we want to buy something that's behind in hardware and ahead in price? No way. You should give us 1TB Hard Drive, 6Gb Ram, 10 Hour Battery, Quad Core i7, 1080p resolution, Bluray, USB3 and EVERYTHING ELSE OTHER COMPANIES OFFER FOR LESS. Screw Apple. Thats it. I'm buying a Dell.

What planet are you from?

If you wouldn't mind, could you please post a link to a laptop with all of the specs you listed above (QC i7, 1080p, 1TB drive, 6 GB RAM, Bluray, USB3) for less than $2300?

Or less than $4000 for that matter?

If you can even FIND a laptop with all those specs period, I'd love to know the price.

 

[SMELTN]

So my question is, are you able to purchase the older model macbook pro which used to sell for $1199 at a lower price now? Or does Apple just get rid of those and just sell these new models?

 

[rme]

Does anyone know what SSD's Apple is using? Current SSDs' read performance is within the range of 30 - 270 MB/s depending on brand, model, etc. Apple does not specify any single parameter of the SSDs used, even though the SSD speed is much more important than e.g. the processor speed. Probably Apple thinks that not publishing very important performance facts makes their products essentially simpler .

I wouldn't buy a SSD from Apple.
Just order it with the cheapest harddrive and buy a SSD elsewhere.

 

[Maximus434]

Looking at the difference between the core i5's in the 15 Inch, I am not seeing much difference:

Passmark CPU benchmarks
(higher is better)



Intel Core i5 M 520 @ 2.40GHz - 2492

Intel Core i5 M 540 @ 2.53GHz - 2566

Huge bump when it comes to the i7

Intel Core i7 920 @ 2.67GHz - 5589

Not so hot with the 13 incher, but not horrible.

Intel Core2 Duo P9600 @ 2.66GHz - 1976
(not sure which core 2 duo they are using, this is the fastest one out there)


I am guessing if they put a core i3 in there it would have been one of these two:
Intel Core i3 M 330 @ 2.13GHz - 2039
Intel Core i3 M 350 @ 2.27GHz - 2084


for the small performance boost over the core 2 duo that the i3 would have given, it doesnt seem worthwhile for the trade off in gpu...


Got the numbers from here: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

That's the desktop processor you're looking at.

The Core i7 in the MBPs is the 620M - (2892)

 

[Eidorian]

Let me argue with somebody while offering really no argument at all. this is typical apple fanboyism. Good job.

This is core i3:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i3-350M-Notebook-Processor.23752.0.html

these are the processors apple is using:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-2-Duo-P8600-Notebook-Processor.23026.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-2-Duo-P9600-Notebook-Processor.25510.0.html

the core i3 350 closely matches the higher end in performance. I realize there is a higher thermal envelope and I have got to wonder why they couldnt' design the 13" logic board to support nvidia's optimus with a higher end configuration on the 13" have an i5 which will blow the current processors out of the water.

If not, I'm wondering why Apple can't hardware shut off the intel integrated graphics? Is this something that is clearly impossible?

"oh, because it'd blur with the 15" well 15" blurs with 17" i don't see anybody complaining.

I'm not an engineer and i realize this is a minor speed bump, but disappointing nevertheless and i realize nothing in your mind can ever taint apple's image

This asus laptop sports an ideal macbook set up:
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=5591&p=2

and it has low heat and 7.5 hours of battery life. ASUS is known for ATROCIOUS batteries so I can't fathom why Apple won't be able to add another hour or two onto ther.e

anyway enough from me, i'm arguing with a wall.

I'd be willing to give up the Core i3 on lower end models to get the GeForce 320M in that form factor at that price.

So I am still confused on this whole graphics thing on the 13". Is the reason that they can't do a dedicated graphics solution due to Apple's design not having enough room for it? It seems as though it is not a limitation of the i3, but I am clearly not sure.

The 13" notebooks have a tiny PCB. You'd be able to have a Core i3 + PCH but you'd be limited to Intel's GMA HD for graphics.

I do kind of wish Apple didn't have to use the price points as differentiating factors between their various models. I imagine some people would love a cheaper 17" model, for example. While I also wouldn't mind payingSony Vaio Z prices for a 13" MBP with a GT330M and a Core i5 (something which Sony sells for around $1899, although on sale for $1699 at MicroCenter right now).

Many other vendors have rather affordable 15/17" models.

It's a tough choice for me as well. I was very interested in the M11x but now the base 13" Macbook Pro or even a possible Macbook 2010 are much more desirable.

I'd rather have one notebook than two as well.

 

[Zadillo]

Let me argue with somebody while offering really no argument at all. this is typical apple fanboyism. Good job.

This is core i3:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i3-350M-Notebook-Processor.23752.0.html

these are the processors apple is using:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-2-Duo-P8600-Notebook-Processor.23026.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-2-Duo-P9600-Notebook-Processor.25510.0.html

the core i3 350 closely matches the higher end in performance. I realize there is a higher thermal envelope and I have got to wonder why they couldnt' design the 13" logic board to support nvidia's optimus with a higher end configuration on the 13" have an i5 which will blow the current processors out of the water.

If not, I'm wondering why Apple can't hardware shut off the intel integrated graphics? Is this something that is clearly impossible?

"oh, because it'd blur with the 15" well 15" blurs with 17" i don't see anybody complaining.

I'm not an engineer and i realize this is a minor speed bump, but disappointing nevertheless and i realize nothing in your mind can ever taint apple's image

This asus laptop sports an ideal macbook set up:
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=5591&p=2

and it has low heat and 7.5 hours of battery life. ASUS is known for ATROCIOUS batteries so I can't fathom why Apple won't be able to add another hour or two onto ther.e

anyway enough from me, i'm arguing with a wall.

They probably could, but for whatever reason Apple has decided to not offer dedicated graphics of any type in their 13" models.

However, I am not sure just how well the GT310M dedicated part compares to this custom GT320M integrated part. And for that matter how the Core i3 compares to the C2D's Apple is using.

I suspect that the actual performance difference between the two isn't all that great. But would definitely be curious to see some real world benchmarks and results.

I'll also just point out, from having checked out the U30's at MicroCenter, they are some pretty flimsy machines with really crummy screens compared to the 13" unibody MBP. Unless the U30 was a significantly better performer I don't think I'd ever choose it over the MBP.

-Zadillo

 

[vincebio]

this is why anybody who gives a **** about computers don't buy mac.

hahahahahah..sure

 

[paradox00]

BORING. Core 2 Duo ? That's all they are offering on the 13" ? That's dismal.
I'll stick with my first gen 13" Unibody Macbook thanks (yeah, the one they hadnt really finished designing - you know - the one they updated 6 months later and gave the "pro" moniker, firewire AND the new battery tech. Basically, the fastest depreciating Apple laptop in history. Cheers Apple.

better processor, lesser graphics (possibly worse than the previous generation)
lesser processor, better graphics
better processor, even better graphics, increased cost

Those were Apples options. They took the second one. They choose the third option for the base 15" mbp that also came with only integrated graphics before this update. People are complaining about that choice too.

 

[BlindGoldfish]

For the high-res display in the 15" model, would that affect watching movies and hulu or anything? Would it be more pixelated? I don't do much finite graphics stuff so I'm not sure I need high-res, but it's only $90 more and seems like it helps "future-proof" the machine...

 

[applemax]

What planet are you from?

If you wouldn't mind, could you please post a link to a laptop with all of the specs you listed above (QC i7, 1080p, 1TB drive, 6 GB RAM, Bluray, USB3) for less than $2300?

Or less than $4000 for that matter?

If you can even FIND a laptop with all those specs period, I'd love to know the price.

Here it is

 

[odoyle1711]

That's the desktop processor you're looking at.

The Core i7 in the MBPs is the 620M - (2892)

Oops sorry.

 

[Eidorian]

They probably could, but for whatever reason Apple has decided to not offer dedicated graphics of any type in their 13" models.

However, I am not sure just how well the GT310M dedicated part compares to this custom GT320M integrated part. And for that matter how the Core i3 compares to the C2D's Apple is using.

I suspect that the actual performance difference between the two isn't all that great. But would definitely be curious to see some real world benchmarks and results.

I'll also just point out, from having checked out the U30's at MicroCenter, they are some pretty flimsy machines with really crummy screens compared to the 13" unibody MBP. Unless the U30 was a significantly better performer I don't think I'd ever choose it over the MBP.

-Zadillo

The G310M is simply a barely higher clocked G210M (16:8:4) part. I strongly believe that the GeForce 320M (48:16:8) is a superior GPU even with its shared VRAM.

 

[Zadillo]

What planet are you from?

If you wouldn't mind, could you please post a link to a laptop with all of the specs you listed above (QC i7, 1080p, 1TB drive, 6 GB RAM, Bluray, USB3) for less than $2300?

Or less than $4000 for that matter?

If you can even FIND a laptop with all those specs period, I'd love to know the price.

Personally I wouldn't be shocked to find a laptop with those specs for less than $2300 (although the 1TB drive and USB3 would limit things).... it's certainly feasible, especially if you cut corners with questionable build quality, a heavy chassis and a low quality yet high-res screen.

Something like the Sony Vaio F11 is a good close example.

 

[solidMac]

Very dissapointed in the 13" update...I want that i3!!!

It isn't a new thing that Apple's specs are lower than current competitors and THAT IS EXACTLY THE PROBLEM!!!

For me...its only cuz of the OSX

 

[MacintoshMan]

I truly wonder why apple didn't go core i3 straight across the board for the cheaper 13" model. I think allot of people would have been happier. Ceist La Vie, 15" much nicer anyways, im glad they're offering a core i7 in it.

Glad to see that they finaly released them, now I can shop for a core i7 laptop from a competitor and do a OS X x86 install.

15" 2.53 i5
500gb 7200rpm
Hi res anti glare
Apple care
$2548

GREAT GOOGLY MOOGLY that is pricy

 

[r.wild]

Inertial Scrolling can be added to your mbp using smart scroll http://marcmoini.com/sx_en.html no need to purchase a new mbp. Its ridiculous they don't push that out as a update to the previous gen mpb's

 

[OddHead]

Notably, an anti-glare option for the lower-resolution display does not appear to be available.

...and that's what I need. 129 dpi are too much. But I need a new Mac as soon as i can.
The saddest thing is that maybe Apple will reintroduce it next time. F**k.

 

[lanlife]

stuck between 13" MBP and Sony Vaio Z...