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 Specs, LightPeak Known As ThunderBolt?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well they were the ones who developed and funded Intel's foray into Thunderbolt technology.
I don't know about you, but everyone I know with a MBP (all professors including me) have no use for BR and USB3 in a notebook. Maybe, we're not professional enough to meet your criteria
+1
My low end 13" MBP that I bought last April is better than any VAIO/HP/Compaq/Dell laptop I have ever owned. I bought top of the line back then on all those and they all ended up being pure garbage. My low end MBP with C2D processor is one solid machine.
I highly doubt the legitimacy of this, mainly because of the screen resolution.
They put 1440x900 in the 13" MBA but stay the same in the new MBP? I highly doubt that.
1280x800 is
The only reason I ordered the new 13" MacBook Air last year was because Apple finally offered a usable resolution for me in an ultraportable. It sounds crazy but those extra pixels really do make a difference for me.
Actually it is based on my experience of reading MacRumors for the last 7 years and when they confirm information with sources rather than just post the rumor without confirmation.
There's a big difference. If you want to address the credibility of the MacRumors news team and their sources you could start a new thread here and address it to Arn and DoctorQ
https://forums.macrumors.com/forums/site-and-forum-feedback.66/
The rumors are reaching critical mass. Won't be long now till it blows and the interwebs get all sticky.
Could we at least have an after release review post of which rumors were the most accurate?
Could we at least have an after release review post of which rumors were the most accurate?
Thunderbolts are fast and carry a lot of power. For the Marketing its clearly a good name. The product does power displays and transports data faster then USB 3.0. So as the Thunderbolt , "ThunderBolt / Light Peak" has two atributes. They probably testet this name in focus-groups.
I for myself think Thunderbolt is a good name.
The only problem I see is the logo. You could mistake it for the general power logo. So I am not sure if that pick was the best idea.
I'm sorry, but I cannot accept that these specs are real. I've posted a somewhat longwinded explanation why on my blog. I'll post the main reason here.
The specs list dual-core Intel Core i5 processor; 3MB shared level 3 cache. This doesnt conform to the wording of the iMac Tech-Specs, which does not feel the need to mention that it is Dual-Core. The only model which lists the number of cores is the Quad-Core i7 iMac. In my opinion, it makes sense to mention that fact here, as Dual-Core has become common and people expect it now-a-days. Quad-Core, not so much, and its a good idea to draw attention to that fact. Also; the 3MB Cache strikes me as strange. None of Intels i5 processors with a 3MB Cache run at 2.3GHz. In fact, the only i5 processor that runs at that speed is the Quad-Core Sandy Bridge processor with a 6MB cache.
The specs list dual-core Intel Core i5 processor; 3MB shared level 3 cache. This doesnt conform to the wording of the iMac Tech-Specs, which does not feel the need to mention that it is Dual-Core. The only model which lists the number of cores is the Quad-Core i7 iMac. In my opinion, it makes sense to mention that fact here, as Dual-Core has become common and people expect it now-a-days. Quad-Core, not so much, and its a good idea to draw attention to that fact. Also; the 3MB Cache strikes me as strange. None of Intels i5 processors with a 3MB Cache run at 2.3GHz. In fact, the only i5 processor that runs at that speed is the Quad-Core Sandy Bridge processor with a 6MB cache.
$1000+ for this crap?
No wonder Apple has been stuck at ~10% market share for so long. Given the inferior computers the keep putting out, they shouldn't expect a big jump in those numbers.
No wonder Apple has been stuck at ~10% market share for so long. Given the inferior computers the keep putting out, they shouldn't expect a big jump in those numbers.
1280x800 is
it is a big difference: over 1/4 more pixels in fact...
if this rumor it's true, plus the one about slashing the white macbook, then it's probable that they'll drop the "pro" branding on the 13".
Again, it is believable if you consider this leak to be the $999-replacement of the white Macbook. If it's supposed to be the $1199-entry level MBP, it's a huge rip-off.
Interesting how you choose the only powerful component in there
Obviously this is a big CPU bump
As much as I am bitching, call me crazy but I am still considering buying one with my student discount and sticking an SSD in there.
I'm not denying that the MBP is still an awesome computer all around (though it doesn't have much to do with specs), I'm just saying I clearly won't be getting a good deal there, which is probably why I'm so whiny now
Yeah so what you are you complaining about then?
Heres an easier picture to compare the slimmer design. Looks a lot more MacBook Air like.
That's just the larger ports at the back and the thinner ports at the front giving the illusion that the body is tapering.
What else are they going to do? Stick with C2D? That was ridiculous last year, let alone in 2011.
This needs to somehow replace the whitebook or something. 1280x800 is a joke, along with every "update" other than the i5. I'm praying for something better with the 15" or Apple lost me and I'm sure quite a few other customers, especially because I can't even use lightpeak most of the time since I have my Cinema Display plugged in. Ridiculous.