Intel iBooks with Front Row?

[Meemoo]

What is to keep Apple from using the L2300 (2M L2 cache 1.50 GHz 667 MHz FSB 65nm)? I know that it's only a 167MHz difference from the bottom of the line MBP, but in a 13" Laptop you have a lot that can justify the price difference between a $2,000 MBP and a $1299 iBook(assuming that will be the new price point, even though there were previous rumors of Apple introducing a $799 laptop).

Okay so right there you have a $700 price difference between the two. Buy spending the extra $700 you'll get a better GPU(I'm hoping Apple uses a lower end ATI chip with 64MB of VRAM, I forsee the MBP getting a 256 option in it's next update), extra screen real estate the "Mag Safe Connector", the illuminated keyboard, Gigabit Ethernet, Dual Link DVI(the iBook will use standard DVI), and lastly the ability to have 2GB of Ram versus 1.5GB.
Those luxary features will be enough to justify the extra $700 bones for professionals.

However I think the MBP is a bit of a rip off. It should feature 1GB of RAM and a 7200 RPM drive standard for it's price point, and I think these are features you will see in Rev B.

The iBooks and Powerbooks have never been more than a few hundered MHz apart either way(Look at todays 14" iBook and the 15" Powerbook, the powerbook is only 20% faster).

I think Apple does have themselves in a bit of a jam, they need the core duo but that would result in an imbalance between MPB and iBook sales. Unfortunately I have a gut feeling we may see way overdue updated G4 iBooks.

 

[Spock]

You know, this isn't even that far-fetched an idea... lucky me for already having the remote (IR Universal dock for my iPod).

Its too bad it wasnt his idea. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/174918/

iSight and IR but sell the remote seperate to keep costs down.

And the Apple Remote is only $27 at Wal-Mart

 

[rhsgolfer33]

What is to keep Apple from using the L2300 (2M L2 cache 1.50 GHz 667 MHz FSB 65nm)? I know that it's only a 167MHz difference from the bottom of the line MBP, but in a 13" Laptop you have a lot that can justify the price difference between a $2,000 MBP and a $1299 iBook(assuming that will be the new price point, even though there were previous rumors of Apple introducing a $799 laptop).

Thats what I was thinking, or they could up the MacBook Pros to 1.83 and 2.0 and then put the Low voltage CoreDuo 1.67 in the iBook(MacBook, whatever). The price points on the processors may have gone down a little bit especially if there is any speedbumps from intel. There has never really been that much of a speed difference(processor wise) between the iBook 14" and the Powerbooks. Right now the fastest iBook is at 1.42ghz and the Powerbook is at 1.67ghz, only a 250mhz difference. Powerbook has always been single core and so has the iBook, so I doubt if theyll try to differentiate the lines that way. Theyll prolly use a small difference in processor speed and other added "pro" features to differentiate as they have in the past.

 

[Meemoo]

they could up the MacBook Pros to 1.83 and 2.0 and then put the Low voltage CoreDuo 1.67 in the iBook(MacBook, whatever).

At the same time, speed bumps like this seem untraditional for Apple. Apple usually updates their products what like every 200 days? A 30 days later "hey now we bumped a little bit" is unheard of for apple.

Then again, the Apple intel deal is going to introduce a whole new era for Apple.

 

[d.f]

i agree, but...

The new iBook (MacBook) will almost certainly have a Core Solo processor, otherwise it will cannibalize MacBook Pro sales. Furthermore, the recent article which I believe was in Forbes about how much Apple is paying for the Core Duo implies that it is a very expensive chip (Probably more than twice as much as the G4 in the iBook), and putting it in an iBook would cut profit margins dramatically.

isn't the Core Solo chip just a fraction cheaper. i do agree that it will get the Solo chip, but using the cost as an excuse isn't right. i'll do a search, but there have been threads with the actual costs of each Yonah chip (before Apple discount) and it was something like:

Core Duo = $260

Core Solo = £230

i think the reason is the chips have to be manufactured exactly the same and near the 'end stage' one of the cores are disabled. it's clearly not that simple, but the chips are exactly the same so the costs aren't any cheaper.

 

[Laser47]

You know, as I think about it more. I think they might keep the name of the ibook, or call it a iMacbook.
That way they it will be easier for the 'Halo Effect' to work. People think wow this 'i'Pod is easy to use maybe we should get a i'Book or 'Macbook. And I dont think the 'i' stands for internet anymore because the ipod certainly does not have a lot to do with the internet

 

[ebow]

I'm anticipating a notebook lineup that mimics the desktop lineup by having three tiers of product. The iMac was the original "i" product and has been Apple's best selling computer (series) ever (as far as I recall) so that name is safe. From the precedent of MacBook Pro we can expect the PowerMac to become the Mac Pro or something similar. So... why not look to the Mac mini for the new low end notebook: the MacBook mini. Neither "mini" product would have an integrated camera, and both would be as compact as possible. The MacBook mini could resemble some of the low-end iBooks that others in this thread have been speculating about, with a 12" screen and cost about $899. The MacBook as speculated by AppleInsider would fit nicely in the middle at $1099 and $1299, and the MacBook pro would be the already-announced 15" and a matching 17".

And good grief--if they put anything less than a "pretty good" graphics card with 64MB dedicated video RAM in the MacBook, they're idiots. I could see the MacBook mini using Intel integrated graphics though I really hope they could still have dedicated video RAM (I'm not clear on all the implications of integrated video).

edit: okay, so reviewing this I see my points aren't very convincing. Still, I see Apple making a MacBook mini of some sort.

 

[MacQuest]

Hopefully, Apple will...have a... MacBook Pro 12 inch.

How can anyone doubt this? I'm not putting you on blast in anyway kcmac, I'm just pointing out that with the 15" MacBook Pro price points being $1999 and $2499, and with the replacement 13" widescreen iBooks [MacBooks?] supposedly being priced at $999 with a SuperDrive and possibly $799[?] without a SuperDrive, there is a $1000 price gap between the high end MacBook and the low end MacBook Pro.

There HAS to be a $1500[ish] 13" widescreen MBP at the same price point as the former 12" Powerbook to bridge that gap.

Also, it's worth noting that the high end 15" MBP is now priced at $2499, the same price as the former 17" PB G4...

Anyone else think that there may be enough room in the 17" MBP to put 2 Intel Dual's inside and make it the first QuadCore notebook? I see it at $2,999 - $3,299.

How about a sub-compact 11" widescreen iBook like the TONY's [Tiny Sony's] out there? Maybe there will be 2 widescreen MacBooks, 11" @ $699-$799 and 13" @ $999.

 

[Natron]

I'm anticipating a notebook lineup that mimics the desktop lineup by having three tiers of product. The iMac was the original "i" product and has been Apple's best selling computer (series) ever (as far as I recall) so that name is safe. From the precedent of MacBook Pro we can expect the PowerMac to become the Mac Pro or something similar. So... why not look to the Mac mini for the new low end notebook: the MacBook mini. Neither "mini" product would have an integrated camera, and both would be as compact as possible. The MacBook mini could resemble some of the low-end iBooks that others in this thread have been speculating about, with a 12" screen and cost about $899. The MacBook as speculated by AppleInsider would fit nicely in the middle at $1099 and $1299, and the MacBook pro would be the already-announced 15" and a matching 17".

And good grief--if they put anything less than a "pretty good" graphics card with 64MB dedicated video RAM in the MacBook, they're idiots. I could see the MacBook mini using Intel integrated graphics though I really hope they could still have dedicated video RAM (I'm not clear on all the implications of integrated video).

edit: okay, so reviewing this I see my points aren't very convincing. Still, I see Apple making a MacBook mini of some sort.

I have been thinking about a 3 tiered approach in laptops, as well as desktop. One of the problems with the mac mini is you still need a display, keyboard, and mouse. While this allows for greater customization, the mac mini it is definitely targeted at people who already have a display. I think there are still a lot of people getting their first computer, especially children that are about to get their own computer, and a low-end iBook (around $700) would be perfect. It would definitely solve the "need a display" problem.

 

[Liquidog]

exactly.

Also, I don't know why some keep thinking that the ibook would be better off at 799. These prices haven't happened in the past and won't happen in the future. Apple doesn't get into price wars with PC laptop manufacturers because they don't have/need to. Also, they aren't gonna release some super-low budget laptop with nothing customizable or intergrated graphics.

People are thinking the ibook would be better off at 799 because some people are convinced that with Apple using Intel cpus, all of a sudden Apple will be forced to compete directly with other computer manufacturers, spec for spec. The logic is that since the G4 was not directly comparable in terms of clock speed to the x86 side of things, Apple could get away with not having the most cutting edge hardware and still charging a pretty penny for their machines. Well I hate to say it, but just because Apple is using Intel doesn't mean they're going to try to compete on price with every laptop that uses the same cpu. Apple isn't worried about people putting a macbook pro next to a Sony whatever and then choosing the sony because it's using a cpu that's ___mhz faster. Apple knows that the design and the OS are STILL what's going to get people to switch, and with the money that they spend on R & D and design, they can continue to expect to have the edge there. The fact that they are now using Intel cpus doesn't mean that they have to get into price wars with other computer companies. It means that the argument of "mac laptops aren't as fast" is pretty much dead and gone, so that people can focus on what really matters: design and OS. That's Apple's strength and that's what they want everyone to focus on. The speed and power are there because people expect that too, as well they should.

 

[Natron]

People are thinking the ibook would be better off at 799 because some people are convinced that with Apple using Intel cpus, all of a sudden Apple will be forced to compete directly with other computer manufacturers, spec for spec.

That's not it at all.

 

[sikkinixx]

this is all well and good but if they use an 13" ibook as their ultraportable and ditch the pro series 12" I will be totally choked. Apple is already tearing me by using Intel (although I realize this makes for a better product for the enduser but still.....intel......ugh...) and if they get rid of the mini pb size I seriously question if I will continue to buy Apple laptops...

 

[KindredMAC]

My biggest fears...

• Processors: IF Apple uses the Core Solo Intels, that Rosetta would be such a dog that it would put it in the same catagory of performance as my current 900MHz G3 iBook that is 3 years old.

• Prices: Should Apple only make a 13" Widescreen iBook, I hope that they take the opportunity to lower the prices even by as little as $100. An $899 iBook, in my opinion, would be all Apple needs to help make it a power house in the laptop market and scoop up even more percentage points. If they have only one model and offer it at anything over $1099, they are just screaming for failure to occur.

• Name: Do not call it a MacBook........... yet. Save the name change for a brand new design. People are used to the white looks of Apple having the "i" in front of their products names. The iMac did not become the MacHome or the MacMoneyMaker, it stayed the iMac. Granted the Mac mini could become the MacHome, but that's another thread. The average PC person out there knows what the "iBook" is. Use that to your advantage Apple.

• Hardware Specs: AT LEAST a 64MB Video Card, 128 preferred though. SuperDrives in ALL models. 2GB of Ram capabilities but staying 1.5 would still be acceptable. The rumored Built-in iSight is a must. I know people have been down on it, but how else do you make iChat the sought after application that it really is? Well, you include the camera that shows off iChats strengths! I bought the iSight when it first came out and actually had to replace the screen on my iBook. All because I happened to knock the screen with the iSight's mount and had a couple dead pixels as the result of the clumsy tap.

 

[guffman]

this is all well and good but if they use an 13" ibook as their ultraportable and ditch the pro series 12" I will be totally choked. Apple is already tearing me by using Intel (although I realize this makes for a better product for the enduser but still.....intel......ugh...) and if they get rid of the mini pb size I seriously question if I will continue to buy Apple laptops...

I don't understand why the name "Intel" is such a big deal. Just because it's an Intel brand, that makes it "ugh"? So what if intel sold their chips to PC companies. That doesn't have anything to do with Windows, which is the real problem with PCs.

As far as a 12" MacBook? I'm not sure but I doubt it. The 15" model is for pro users looking to do high end stuff, and I just don't think having all that in a 12" model is really nessasary. I think that most people interested in a 12" will be more than fine with Apple's new iBook model.

 

[guffman]

• Name: Do not call it a MacBook........... yet. Save the name change for a brand new design. People are used to the white looks of Apple having the "i" in front of their products names. The iMac did not become the MacHome or the MacMoneyMaker, it stayed the iMac. Granted the Mac mini could become the MacHome, but that's another thread. The average PC person out there knows what the "iBook" is. Use that to your advantage Apple.

Again, "iMac" didn't change because it already has "Mac" in it's title. It's not the "i" that Apple is worried about, its the lack of the word "Mac". They will also steer clear of "power". I think that Job's comments during his Keynote pretty much cleared this up.

 

[rhsgolfer33]

this is all well and good but if they use an 13" ibook as their ultraportable and ditch the pro series 12" I will be totally choked. Apple is already tearing me by using Intel (although I realize this makes for a better product for the enduser but still.....intel......ugh...) and if they get rid of the mini pb size I seriously question if I will continue to buy Apple laptops...

What other laptop are you going to buy? Most everything else has Intel in it anyways. Either way youll be getting an Intel box, one will just have OS X on it. AMDs laptop chips arent that great and are only in a few computers right now, and their Athlon 64 is the route to 2 hour battery life, so your pretty much stuck with an intel laptop chip.

 

[amateurmacfreak]

Hopefully it wont have a dual core processor, only 64mb vram, w/ 512 ram, 13.3 widescreen, superdrive allowing it to be still a fantastic machine but a clear cut down from the macbook pro. I will be surprised if it isnt, however expect the possibility of a pro version aswell in silver with the specs youl hoping for. That will be a very nice book.

Yeah, but what I think may happen.... the Intel iBooks get nice with a really good processor (dare I say, Core Duo?) and then they will be close to the MacBook Pro, but then it will get the newest Intel laptop processor a few months after. Now, I don't keep up too well with Intel, so when is the next good Intel laptop processor coming out??
Oh, also I think a lower than iBook line is a definite possibility.

 

[amateurmacfreak]

If this is true, it suggests that the laptop lines will be consolidated (kinda). 13" will be iBook or MacBook, 15 "and 17" will be MacBook Pro?

That would also suggest two models, a low-end 13" for $999 and a high-end 13" for $1499. I agree with others that at least the high-end model will get a 1.67GHz Core Duo processor and that the 15" MacBook Pro will be bumped from 1.67 and 1.83GHz to 1.83 and 2GHz.

I really don't want the little 12" laptops to be eliminated. I think they're the cutest size, and they're the ones I love going around town w/. For more work-oriented stuff that I need a stronger comp and a bigger screen for I'd use a larger laptop. Only then.

 

[amateurmacfreak]

And the Apple Remote is only $27 at Wal-Mart

WALMART?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!? YOU WOULD SHOP FOR PURE LITTLE APPLE PRODUCTS AT WAL-MART?
No, but seriously, Wal-Mart's an absolutely horrible corporation.
Look it up on-line.

 

[steve_hill4]

How can anyone doubt this? I'm not putting you on blast in anyway kcmac, I'm just pointing out that with the 15" MacBook Pro price points being $1999 and $2499, and with the replacement 13" widescreen iBooks [MacBooks?] supposedly being priced at $999 with a SuperDrive and possibly $799[?] without a SuperDrive, there is a $1000 price gap between the high end MacBook and the low end MacBook Pro.

There HAS to be a $1500[ish] 13" widescreen MBP at the same price point as the former 12" Powerbook to bridge that gap.

Also, it's worth noting that the high end 15" MBP is now priced at $2499, the same price as the former 17" PB G4...

Anyone else think that there may be enough room in the 17" MBP to put 2 Intel Dual's inside and make it the first QuadCore notebook? I see it at $2,999 - $3,299.

How about a sub-compact 11" widescreen iBook like the TONY's [Tiny Sony's] out there? Maybe there will be 2 widescreen MacBooks, 11" @ $699-$799 and 13" @ $999.

While most of this is accurate enough to get me to agree with you, I think I will point out where I think reality is more likely to differ.

1. I can see the 17" coming in two specs as with the 15" model. One which isn't too far off the current 17" PowerBook, the other being a much higher spec, (possibly 512MB graphics, two SATA drives if there's enough room).

2. The iBooks will go to 13" WS, as will the smaller MBP. However I see there also being another size, (possibly 15" to capture more of the consumer market after a larger screen, but nominal performance), and all MacBook being shipped with Superdrives, (except the higher 17" which may even dare to go Bluperdrive)

3. IF Apple decide to go to a sub notebook, it will more likely be a smaller MBP or even a seperate series name. Most after these are willing to pay a premium for a high-ish performing system in a small frame. Stick similar specs in one of these to the 13" MBP, but keep the processor to the lowest voltage, (i.e wait for Core Duo ULV), to maximise battery life, shrink down the HDD form facter used, decrease expandability options, choose a small, but efficient graphics card and put all this in something with a 10.1" screen. If Sony can do this reasonably well, so can Apple with their ex-Sony engineers on board. They might even choose to resurrect the Duo style with minimal hardware inside, but dock it and let it become a full featured notebook again.

 

[beatle888]

Why would you be using an ir remote when it is sitting in your lap, touching your hands

i know! i was like...uh....wait.....huh?

I belive that iSight and Front Row will be on every mac from now on

and again....uh wait...huh? you seemed to have joined ranks with the person stating that he wants to use the remote while the laptop is sitting on his belly. do you really think that the iSight will be built in to every mac? including the desktop units? if so and apple agrees with you, than a lot of ball sacks are going to be the main focus of all video conferences, meaning that a lot of desktop users have their macs below their desks.

still that guy stating that he wanted to use the remote while the laptop was on his belly was hilarious. im lazy but not THAT lazy

 

[MacQuest]

Again, "iMac" didn't change because it already has "Mac" in it's title. It's not the "i" that Apple is worried about, its the lack of the word "Mac". They will also steer clear of "power". I think that Job's comments during his Keynote pretty much cleared this up.

THANK YOU!!!

I was about to have an aneurism posting this same response to "KindredMAC". iBook is meaningless compared to MacBook, and Power has NO more relevance over Pro without PowerPC being used. As for the part he posted about "people knowing what an iBook is and using that as their advantage"... WRONG!

It's time to start focusing on the OS as a major differentiating factor, THAT is the advantage.

Is it so hard to comprehend that a Macintosh Notebook would be best called a MacBook, and that the Professional level Macintosh Notebook would be called the MacBook Pro?!

Remember the business marketing philosophy of "K.I.S.S." = Keep It Simple Stupid.

 

[Cinch]

THANK YOU!!!

I was about to have an aneurism posting this same response to "guffman". iBook is meaningless compared to MacBook, and Power has NO more relevance over Pro without PowerPC being used. As for the part he posted about "people knowing what an iBook is and using that as their advantage"... WRONG!

It's time to start focusing on the OS as a major differentiating factor, THAT is the advantage.

Is it so hard to comprehend that a Macintosh Notebook would be best called a MacBook, and that the Professional level Macintosh Notebook would be called the MacBook Pro?!

Remember the business marketing philosophy of "K.I.S.S." = Keep It Simple Stupid.

It could be worst. HP desktop line name is torturous e.g. d4100y series

Cinch

 

[Stella]

I think its a dead certainty that iBook will be renamed MacBook...

What ever the processor used it'll be a lot faster than the G4.

I hope that:

- it remains cheap ( i doubt very much it'll go under $1K Canadian.. those Duo chips aren't cheap in any configuration ( single or dual ).

- Good graphics card

- Dual screen spanning.

- Not girlie white!

 

[asherman13]

I have been thinking about a 3 tiered approach in laptops, as well as desktop. One of the problems with the mac mini is you still need a display, keyboard, and mouse. While this allows for greater customization, the mac mini it is definitely targeted at people who already have a display. I think there are still a lot of people getting their first computer, especially children that are about to get their own computer, and a low-end iBook (around $700) would be perfect. It would definitely solve the "need a display" problem.

Perhaps a TabletPC-like computer? Bluetooth and perhaps an integrated stand (both for desktop-ing and watching DVD's on the go) would give you the possibility to have a mix of an eMate, Newton, MacMini, and iBook.

At the MWSF keynote, SJ did mention that the next iPod screen's going to be 8"...perhaps he was talking about something other than an iPod?