I just hope they'll remove the disc drive some day... it'd be lighter and thinner and not as expensive or underpowered as the air...
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.
MacBook Pro Refresh Seeing Only Minor Delays Due to Intel Problems?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why is there a Mac rumour on a Verizon iPhone website?
What are you talking about? It's clearly an iPad website. The front page proves it.
Macbook Air 15 and 17"?
Apple's Macbook Air's are selling like hotcakes. Be on the lookout for 15" and 17" versions. No one has entered the ultra thin large screen space yet. These will compliment updated Macbook Pros at 13", 15", 17", all retaining the optical drive and ports.
Apple's Macbook Air's are selling like hotcakes. Be on the lookout for 15" and 17" versions. No one has entered the ultra thin large screen space yet. These will compliment updated Macbook Pros at 13", 15", 17", all retaining the optical drive and ports.
I think the new MacBook Pros with the fixed Cougar Point chipsets will probably come out mid to late April 2011, since Apple probably now may not have finalized the hardware on the new MacBook Pros.
I thought about that as well before posting however I'd imagine the fix would be as simple as having that the disk entry point be part of what's swapped out. Think the old airport card slots only on a larger scale and without the flap. It's side is sealed for HDD/SDD's but on the ODD version you'd have the entry point.
The optical drive adds minimal weight and even if they axed it, it's the same size as a laptop hard drive, so it couldn't be thicker for that reason alone. Also, the 13" Air beats the 13" Pro in benchmarks. Look it up. Not to, y'know, disprove your illogical desires or nothin'.
+1
Apple's Macbook Air's are selling like hotcakes. Be on the lookout for 15" and 17" versions. No one has entered the ultra thin large screen space yet. These will compliment updated Macbook Pros at 13", 15", 17", all retaining the optical drive and ports.
Y'know, that's really not a terrible idea, and I could totally picture it happening. If the MacBook Air is Apple's vision of the "future notebook computer", then it is unlikely to happen overnight or even over the course of five years, it'll be gradual, and what better of a way to start that transition. Plus, the idea of having a 15" MacBook Pro meant for heavier tasks like video editing and gaming (or rather running the games that are out for Mac) and a 17" MacBook Air to just have on flights or to take places would be rad as a 17" MacBook Air wouldn't be anywhere near as unweildy as a 17" MacBook Pro by sheer volume and weight alone. I'd be sooo down with that combo. Though if it were to happen, I couldn't see it happening for at least a year or two.
Average Joe here...
I am literally an average Joe (my name is Joe) and I just recently held off buying a MBP as I heard a refresh was imminent.
I am completely computer illiterate and I need some advice. I always seem to buy laptops that simply run out of memory too quickly, I go for the cheapest one and it always bites me. This time I want to go mac, but I want some power, I never want to see the 'virtual memory running low' message. I will use my mac to edit photos (probably raw files taken with a Canon D80) using lightroom, I will also record music and will probably use a decent programme for that. On top of that I will probably play a game which requires a LOT of memory (football manager 2011+).
Which Mac is best for my needs? Lets say I have enough £££'s saved for a MBP 15" high res screen etc.
Also, on the ODD argument, I started believing I NEED the disc drive but having read the posts on the matter I think I could do without, I have a 52" TV for watching Blu rays on!
Finally, any news on a release date in the UK? Would the glitches effect what I want it for, and would apple care cover it if/when they go wrong?
Ta muchly,
Average Joe.
I am literally an average Joe (my name is Joe) and I just recently held off buying a MBP as I heard a refresh was imminent.
I am completely computer illiterate and I need some advice. I always seem to buy laptops that simply run out of memory too quickly, I go for the cheapest one and it always bites me. This time I want to go mac, but I want some power, I never want to see the 'virtual memory running low' message. I will use my mac to edit photos (probably raw files taken with a Canon D80) using lightroom, I will also record music and will probably use a decent programme for that. On top of that I will probably play a game which requires a LOT of memory (football manager 2011+).
Which Mac is best for my needs? Lets say I have enough £££'s saved for a MBP 15" high res screen etc.
Also, on the ODD argument, I started believing I NEED the disc drive but having read the posts on the matter I think I could do without, I have a 52" TV for watching Blu rays on!
Finally, any news on a release date in the UK? Would the glitches effect what I want it for, and would apple care cover it if/when they go wrong?
Ta muchly,
Average Joe.
Oh God, please don't let this be some BS update that still uses the Core2Duos. Do it right the first time Apple, those CPU's are way too old at this point.
If their OpenGL version and ancient GPUs are any indication, I would say I'm surprised they ever made it past the Core single or even came over from PPC. For the prices they charge, they should be STATE-OF-THE-ART. Just look through any Best Buy ad these days. You'll see some HP notebook with 8GB of ram, a 750GB hard drive and an i7 CPU and 15" screen for $1100. Then you'll look over and see a Macbook 'Pro' 13" screen with 320GB drive, 4GB ram and a Core2Duo selling for $1500 right next to the Dell. Other than for OSX (of which several parst like OpenGL are horribly out-of-date just the same), who in their friggin' right mind would buy the MBP hardware? It's a RIP-OFF.
A few years ago (2008), a 15" MBP was state-of-the-art and even ran Vista faster than most PCs did and for what you got, it was almost reasonable. Today, it's just a joke with all the "pro" features tossed aside (dropped a FW port, dropped the expansion port, dropped real matte screens, let the CPU and GPUs lag behind, never updated to USB3, etc. etc.). Apple has clearly been spending too much time with iOS. Iphone V4.0 came out just last year and they're already talking about 5.0. I thought this was the "year of the Mac". I don't think so. "Lion" (if it ever even comes out) is jut a few iOS things (we already got the "App store" for Mac as an update) slapped on Snow Leopard with no changes to OpenGL or anything that matters. (SNORE). I was proud of my MBP back in 2008 and early 2009, but now it's just not even funny how far behind Apple has fallen due to a total lack of interest in actual computers anymore.
Core 2 Duo has left the metaphorical 15" and 17" MacBook Pro building. As for the 13", it really doesn't matter as a Sandy Bridge i3, while being unarguably faster than even the fastest 2.66 GHz Core 2 Duo currently shipping in the high-end 13" MacBook Pro, is not fast enough to really make that huge of a difference, especially since the CPU isn't the bottleneck anymore. Frankly, graphics are a much more important issue for that machine and it'd be almost worse to go with an Intel IGP (as would be forced on 13" Pro users if they went the Sandy Bridge route) than it would to stick with a Core 2 Duo and the GeForce 320M chipset/IGP combo. No matter what they do with that machine, it won't be optimal. They really ought to just drop "Pro" from it and make it the next "MacBook", make whitey an education only or special orders only model for those that specifically demand it (as they do exist), or just simply have the "MacBook" line contain both types of "MacBooks", that way whatever they do remains semi-justifiable. NVIDIA IGPs a Pro do not make, but Intel IGPs are unarguably very un-Pro, whether it's Core 2 Duo, Core i3 or Core i5, Sandy Bridge or not.
Any of the MacBook Pro line would suit you, just make sure you slap in 8GB of RAM as that'll surely last you for a good while to come. 13" is cheaper, certainly, and the 15" is certainly more powerful, but I really don't think that extra power is necessary for what you're doing, either of the two 13" MacBook Pro models should suffice and not break the bank too much. Though I'd say that the higher-end of the two, being not much faster and $300 pricier is a rip-off as going $300 up from that takes you to the low-end 15" which is a drastic improvement.
Thanks
Thats great advice yebubbleman, thanks. I think I'll go for a 15" with 8Mb.
I'm assuming it's best to wait for the refresh even though my needs aren't particularly 'pro'? Also, if there are problems with the new chip, would applecare not protect you/me against any problems that might arise?
I'm very impatient, waiting is a nightmare! This will be my first mac by the way (apart from my phone). Both my bro's have imacs and swear by them (and they are actually professional!)
Cheers.
Thats great advice yebubbleman, thanks. I think I'll go for a 15" with 8Mb.
I'm assuming it's best to wait for the refresh even though my needs aren't particularly 'pro'? Also, if there are problems with the new chip, would applecare not protect you/me against any problems that might arise?
I'm very impatient, waiting is a nightmare! This will be my first mac by the way (apart from my phone). Both my bro's have imacs and swear by them (and they are actually professional!)
Cheers.
Heh heh. I'm in the exact same position KumaYama - i'm completely new to Mac. I haven't used them since i was in school 15 years ago, but i remember them being very reliable and simplistic.
My brothers all use OSX and have been nagging me for the past few years about switching over. So, i too, will be switching over to the mac!
It will also comfort you that i work in Software testing and the amount of issues we've had on Windows systems outweigh those on Unix Distributions
Cross platform testing can be a nightmare at times!
goodluck!
Yes and yes. If the new chip has significant problems, you can expect Apple to give out free extended warranties for problems caused by that particular defect, as they have in the past with GPUs.
Totally agree with Magnus. I can argue for the terrific trackpad and screens and I prefer Osx the other hardware currently is just weak. I know I'll be getting a SB machine next but this time I'm leaving my options open for a windows laptop if MacBook pros specs disappoint me. I love Osx but I cannot stand feeling like I need to upgrade constantly because I'm behind the curve. We'll see I guess.
No problem, I'm happy to be of use, especially to someone about to make the switch over. I want that grass to be as green as can possibly be compared to the other side.
AppleCare would protect you and if it ended up being as high volume of an issue (which I'm strongly doubting it would be) they'd set up what's called a "Repair Extension Program" in which the problem would be fixed by Apple or an Apple Authorized Repair Center in the same manner as Pre-Late-2009 MacBook top cases, Mid-2007-to-Mid-2008 MacBook Pro GPU/Logic Boards, and Pre-2010 MacBook Air display clamshells all are.
Get it right on the first try. You'll be happy you did.
That's ridiculous logic. If you buy a MacBook Pro now, whether it's the lowest-end 13" or the highest end 17", it'll serve for a while before not being able to run things. Behind the curve compared to the rest of the industry, sure. Blame that on the obsession with thinness. Otherwise, it's a fine machine and it'll be fast enough to run many versions of OS X (and your software) to come. "Feeling like you're behind the curve" is a poor reason to buy a new computer. If it does what you want it to and as fast as you'd like it to and is able to run the software you want it to acceptibly, it shouldn't matter how "ahead of the curve you are". Also, if you are a Mac user, then in terms of specs, you will almost always be a step or two behind the curve in some way. Luckily the OS makes up for that by being awesome.
Sure it'll be fast enough to run many versions of OSX but not ALL my software. My MB's have been behind the curve, for MY uses, I've just kind of put up with that. Who are you to say what my uses are? I like to GAME on my Macbooks. Then one could say, well you're on the wrong machine if you want to game. I really like OSX which is why I'm on the right machine. But seeing as how fast the laptop industry is going, the SB cpus are amazing and with ATI/nVidia pumping out faster gpu's at lower wattage, I feel like I may be able to give up what I love about the MB (trackpad, OSX) to go for a Windows machine. What's so ridiculous about that logic.
You're gaming on a Mac, which if you are playing StarCraft II, any of the Valve Source-based games, or BioShock, will run fine whether you go with the 13" or the 15". Obviously the GeForce GT 330M handily beats the GeForce 320M, but both are capable for light gaming. Any heavier than that and it's pointless for you to be using a Mac to game.
That said, it makes far more sense to buy a Mac laptop of some sort and use it for the purposes of using Mac OS X and to build a PC desktop for gaming as PC desktops are unrivaled for gaming. That's the winning solution as best as I can tell. But do what you want. Macs are always a bit behind the curve, but it doesn't ever matter too much in terms of practicality because the hardware tends to be useful for 5-6 years before the software becomes too new and most things that you want to do at the time of purchase will be speedy enough. So what if Apple isn't using the latest mobile Core i chips and the fastest NVIDIA mobile GPU in their laptops, it's not like what they have is slow as all hell, it's just slower than is worth paying for, but that's Apple for you.
and I think that's the problem I am having at the moment. I've been a Mac user for just three years and before that was a desktop gamer (before grad school). My current living situation does not exactly fit well for me in having a laptop + a desktop rig so I am making sacrifices. It's just at this point in time, I've begun to debate whether it has become "worth" paying for what I love about the current line of Macbooks and OSX and my desires in gaming. I really do believe that my uses for productivity and school will win out over the upcoming gaming releases, but before I did not debate it as much as this generation of new computing hardware. Of course this can all be forgotten if Apple ends up releasing a fair GPU and putting the SB's into their next line up.
I felt the 330m was already behind the competition of discrete gpus upon it's release, while the 320m was "ahead" of the integrated options available.
That sounds fair. I take it you don't have a desk at home or is it about financially affording a new Mac and a PC tower? If it's about finances, I'd say just eat the GT 330M or whatever discrete is in the next round of 15" and 17" models if not the GT 330M and then Boot Camp with Windows 7. Best gaming performance? Not at all, but you'll at least have as close as you can to the best of both worlds. If it's about space, you can get creative, especially with wireless keyboard/mouse combos and monitor wall mounts.
Intel started shipping the fixed chipsets today and they have been shipping the "faulty" chipsets for OEMs who will only use two SATA ports.
I'm not in disbelief of this, but do you have a link to your source? I'm just interested and want to read the article in my downtime at work today.
I'm not in disbelief of this, but do you have a link to your source? I'm just interested and want to read the article in my downtime at work today.
http://www.techpowerup.com/140250/I...ng-Cougar-Point-Chipset-from-February-14.html
http://newsroom.intel.com/community...rt-chip-design-issue?cid=rss-258152-c1-264281
Gruml needs better search function, I hate it when I need to search for an old piece of news