MacBook, MacBook Pro and Ultra-Portable Updates

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
49,563
10,871
https://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png

ThinkSecret updates with claims that both MacBook and MacBook Pro updates are coming sooner than expected.

The rumor side had previously pegged MacBook Pro updates for WWDC, but now expects an announcement "as early as Tuesday". The new MacBook Pro is expected to utilize features from Intel's recently introduced Santa Rosa chipset.

Appleinsider concurs with this report with their own claim that the MacBook Pro will see features such as "faster front-side bus speeds of 800MHz, and second-generation Core 2 Duo mobile processors that scale up to 2.4GHz." They also believe the new MacBook Pro will house the new LED backlit displays. Appleinsider, however, gives no time frame for the revised Pro laptop.

Meanwhile, based on dwindling supplies of the consumer MacBook, ThinkSecret believes we will see a MacBook update in the near future, but they can only speculate that the MacBook may utilize the Santa Rosa chipset. However, they do not believe that the new MacBook will incorporate LED screens. Appleinsider is more confident that the next MacBook revision will not introduce any new features (such as Santa Rosa) and instead be a very modest update.

Finally, Appleinsider posts details of the rumored "ultra-portable" MacBook. They believe that this upcoming 13" laptop model (and not the MacBook revision) will ship with the rumored 13" LED Panels that Apple has been investigating. The rumor site summarizes the features they believe this "ultra-portable" will have:

Ultra-Portable MacBook

• 13-inch ultra-thin, LED-back lit display
• No optical disc drive
• On-board NAND flash for faster application launching and boot times
• Built-in iSight webcam
• Thinner and lighter than existing MacBook offerings
• AirPort Extreme 802.11n enabled
• MagSafe power adapter
• Target launch late '07, early '08
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,409
11,689
UK
Boo, if they aren't gonna update the Macbook, it being good was what made it sell so well when it went Intel :rolleyes:.
 

dcv

macrumors G3
May 24, 2005
8,021
1
I'd love an ultra-portable notebook but 13" doesn't sound particularly "ultra" portable to me :confused:
 

MacSA

macrumors 68000
Jun 4, 2003
1,803
5
UK
I hope Appleinsider are wrong here... bad news for all those holding out for a MacBook if it's true. :eek:

They can at least upgrade the RAM to 1GB on all models and finally get rid of that ******* Combo Drive !!!!!!!!!!!!
 

siurpeeman

macrumors 603
Dec 2, 2006
6,311
18
the OC
I'd love an ultra-portable notebook but 13" doesn't sound particularly "ultra" portable to me :confused:
i don't know. if it has a super-thin bezel and is made with lightweight materials, i can see 13" being the right size. under 3 lbs would be nice.

How does one live without an optical drive?

If you need to re-install OSX, what do you do? (Considering you do not have an external drive)
external super drive. apple did something similar with the duo 2400 (external floppy).
 

the vj

macrumors 6502a
Nov 23, 2006
654
0
Ultra portable need a cd-rom at least.

I wish Apple release the 12" aspect again. Is teh best of both worlds between the 13" and the ultra portable.

I have 3 12" for my VJ set and they work soooo good. They are the Stratoscaster of the VJ world.
 

dcv

macrumors G3
May 24, 2005
8,021
1
How does one live without an optical drive?

If you need to re-install OSX, what do you do? (Considering you do not have an external drive)
Maybe there is an external drive. My ancient 12" Sony Vaio laptop had a separate external optical drive, which was plugged in via a PCMCIA-type of connector.

Ideally an "ultra" portable would be super-slim, have an external optical drive but have something like an 11" screen. So I can fit it into a largeish handbag :)
 

sushi

Moderator emeritus
Jul 19, 2002
15,651
3
キャンプスワ&#
I'd love an ultra-portable notebook but 13" doesn't sound particularly "ultra" portable to me :confused:
Agree that the 13 inch is too big.

Sony's new ultra-portable has a 11.1 inch display.

Maybe Apple will use the 11.1 inch display in their ultra-portable laptop.
 

Spanky Deluxe

macrumors 601
Mar 17, 2005
4,899
462
London, UK
13" is way too big. Personally I don't want a thin MacBook, I want a laptop that compares to the Powerbook 12" in portability. I wouldn't want an 'ultra portable' if its just as much smaller than the MacBook as the Powerbook 12" was smaller than the iBook 12". 13" is too big and I'd rather have an optical drive.
A 12" Powerbook sized model that's been squished together a little more so as to use a 12" widescreen instead of 4:3 ratio would be perfect. 12", 1280x800 resolution, iSight, dual core and optical drive. All the other specs are by the by imo.
 

tortoise

macrumors regular
Nov 12, 2003
106
0
Ultra portable need a cd-rom at least.

Why? Nobody (at least around here) ever seems to use them. An external drive would easily suffice for those incredibly rare occasions one might want one. Optical media is pretty much unnecessary baggage for most portable users.

The only time I use the optical drive is to load retail box software, which happens maybe once every year or two. A good portion of the software I use (even commercial) is downloaded, and I suspect that is a trend that is not going away.
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,409
11,689
UK
The Macbook keyboard itself is only 27cm (ie under 11 inches) wide, so even if they didn't shrink the keyboard width they should be able to make the screen 16.9cm high, which would give a 12.5" screen with no bevel or an 11.5" screen with a bevel.
 

lookmark

macrumors member
Apr 23, 2002
37
0
Brooklyn
Interesting.

I wonder if they'll cut the MB price by $100 instead of moving to Santa Rosa. I find it a little puzzling though.

Meanwhile, an ultrathin 13" MB under 3lb for $1700+ would sell like hotcakes. Hotcakes.
 

dcv

macrumors G3
May 24, 2005
8,021
1
13" is way too big. Personally I don't want a thin MacBook, I want a laptop that compares to the Powerbook 12" in portability. I wouldn't want an 'ultra portable' if its just as much smaller than the MacBook as the Powerbook 12" was smaller than the iBook 12". 13" is too big and I'd rather have an optical drive.
A 12" Powerbook sized model that's been squished together a little more so as to use a 12" widescreen instead of 4:3 ratio would be perfect. 12", 1280x800 resolution, iSight, dual core and optical drive. All the other specs are by the by imo.
Yep, I'm with you on that. I don't mind an external optical drive option though if it makes it smaller/thinner.
 

FF_productions

macrumors 68030
Apr 16, 2005
2,822
0
Mt. Prospect, Illinois
I see the ultrathin portable priced between the Black MacBook and the regular MacBook Pro. Its a safe assumption.

I agree with the idea of an external drive being included.

I rarely need my drive unless I need to burn a DVD every once in a while or install some apps.
 

CrazyWingman

macrumors member
Dec 14, 2005
38
0
Crikey :eek: I hope it's no where near $2k. I'm thinking more in line with the Macbook's price range.
Not a chance. My bet is that if it's under $2k, it will be $1999. I doubt Apple would target an ultra-portable at anything other that the pro/business market. As we've seen with the iPhone, they're more than willing to base their pricing on that segment's budget.

And there's no question about this if it includes both flash and an LED display. So much new tech, there's no way they'd sell it cheap.
 

sushi

Moderator emeritus
Jul 19, 2002
15,651
3
キャンプスワ&#
The Sony VAIO VGN-TXN29N/L has some interesting specs:
- 11.1 inch display
- Built in optical drive (dual layer)
- 2GB RAM
- 100GB HD

Price is around $2,600.

I don't see Apple introducing a ultra-portable much cheaper than $2,000. Maybe $1,600, but not anything close to $1,000.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.