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 Supplies Tightening Ahead of Potential Refresh
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I am at a college prep now and everyone has MacBook pros specifically the 13". One kid out of 1000 I have seen has a MacBook plastic unibody. I have seen a few kids with 15" and one with a 17". I think the MacBook could go and have the mabp 13 be the entry but at the same price.
Specs Fantasy League
Hey MacRumours, implement some sort of Specs Fantasy League. All registered users get to select their predictions from a list of possible updates. Points will be assigned to each item. + if u get it right, - if u get it wrong. See who gets top billing when the refresh is actually announced. It'll be fun. Call it the MacBook Fantasy Refresh League 2011. Lol
Hey MacRumours, implement some sort of Specs Fantasy League. All registered users get to select their predictions from a list of possible updates. Points will be assigned to each item. + if u get it right, - if u get it wrong. See who gets top billing when the refresh is actually announced. It'll be fun. Call it the MacBook Fantasy Refresh League 2011. Lol
Spec-wise, on paper, it is "slower", but I don't feel it slower at all. The flash drive actually makes it feel faster than my 13" MBP.
So no, it's completely logical. Because it loads faster than a computer thats $200 more expensive.
Edit: and before you say that the comparison is unfair because you can still add an SSD to a MBP, don't forget that's an additional $200 on top of the MBP.
You also loose $200 in functionality: optical drive, more storage, firewire SD card slot, 5hrs more battery, 2GB or RAM backlit KB. Don't forget you can get the 13in MBP for $999 at Microcenter.
Or you can look at the 13in MB, and say you lost: Optical, 5hrs of battery and storage. You can get the MB for $949 on Amazon.
So for $949(MB) + $129(cheapest SandForce I could find) You can get a Faster SSD, faster CPU, batter battery and an optical drive for $1,078 total. Or get a MBP and spend $1,128 total.
Or $999 + $79(optical drive) you can get a lower CPU, and 5hrs less battery.
Hmm same price for less of a machine + a 2nd piece you have to carry around, or $50 more for an aluminum casing and a firewire port, 2GB RAM and SD card reader and backlit KB.
No matter how you look at it. I see no way to justify the 11in Air for the cost. At maybe $899 I could, but at $999, even Apples other 13in laptops kick it's ass.
Over my university's winter break my desktop died and my laptop is dying (barely able to be charged). I've been anxious to switch to Mac ever since my parents switched and now it's becoming more and more of a pressing issue for me...I really hope this means a February refresh since the April rumors really weren't making me happy.
No matter how you look at it. I see no way to justify the 11in Air for the cost. At maybe $899 I could, but at $999, even Apples other 13in laptops kick it's ass.[/QUOTE]
How much does flash storage cost?
If in fact they are going to flash storage for all their MacBook Pro line, do you think the iOS devices will get more flash set inside them?
How much does flash storage cost?
If in fact they are going to flash storage for all their MacBook Pro line, do you think the iOS devices will get more flash set inside them?
I dont know what Apples cost for it is, but their retail price for their smallest SSD for their 13in MBP is $200 more and almost 30% slower than what you can get at newegg.
So a mid to late feb refresh seems likely now. It also matches with Apple's avg. 8-9 month gap between MBP updates.
As far as design is concerned, I would love if Apple drops the glass screen and black bezel in favour of MacBook air-esque display. It looks way better and there's much less glare. It also might help MBPs lose some weight, I think.
As far as design is concerned, I would love if Apple drops the glass screen and black bezel in favour of MacBook air-esque display. It looks way better and there's much less glare. It also might help MBPs lose some weight, I think.
They do that I'll either be buying from refurb or looking else where for a new laptop.
I know, I didn't believe it either. Makes no sense. I guess they were able to push more out of the CPU per clock cycle.
Makes absolute sense to me, and this is actually what I would like to believe will eventually happen.
Now if you want to argue specs between the two, number by number, then it's pointless to debate about it.
Average consumers are not tech savvy, nor do they spend their hours on forums such as MR, quibbling over rumors and random speculation of core iX processor this, or SSD that.
Given that benchmarks on the Air models have proven to be suprsingly close to that of the 13" MBP (thanks in part due to the flash drive), the average consumer won't have a care in the world that his/her machine is using an age old processor thats 1000 Mhz less than it was before, as long as the machine functions perfectly and adequately.
I also have first hand experience on the whole ordeal. I own a new 11.6" Air, which replaced a 13" MBP with 8GB RAM before it, and performance flies, thanks again to the flash drive. I honestly don't feel any performance hit at all. Not enough at least to care about it. It does what I need it to do and for average consumers, that's going to be the only thing they need to care about.
Why convolute the lineup with machines at the same price point? This is the only two Mac products that conflict with each other in terms of pricing, so one of these has to go. Apple may just combine the two, axe the "Air" suffix, but retain the specs of the Air in a new era in the Macbook line. But who knows?
Anyone who sees both computers for the same price side by side who is not overly obsessed with portability or looks and has a modicum of common sense will buy the more featured computer. If they already have a 13" or 15" Mac, and that 11" Air is a secondary laptop, then I can understand that. But the notion of the 11" Air replacing the white MacBook in the line-up because they happen to have the same price isn't founded with any sort of logic whatsoever.
+1
Spec-wise, on paper, it is "slower", but I don't feel it slower at all. The flash drive actually makes it feel faster than my 13" MBP.
So no, it's completely logical. Because it loads faster than a computer thats $200 more expensive.
Edit: and before you say that the comparison is unfair because you can still add an SSD to a MBP, don't forget that's an additional $200 on top of the MBP.
Right, and you get so much more computer along with it. From a marketing perspective, how does that not make sense?
You're early on the whole Lightpeak party. It's still not ready for prime time yet. Otherwise, I agree with everything else you've said.
You go to a PREP school where most kids can afford to spend more on the 13" Pro solely based on its looks and most do. I'll bet very few of the people you've seen with a 13" MacBook Pro even know what sets it apart from a White MacBook, and frankly, if they removed the 13" Pro, those who would've bought a 13" Pro based on looks would just buy the White MacBook instead. Even if they merge the two so we essentially have the return of the Aluminum MacBook (which was the precursor to the 13" Pro anyway), those people would buy that and not care about the "Pro" moniker. All I'm saying is that there won't be a computer in the MacBook Pro line with a screen size of 13". What happens to the non-Pro 13" MacBook is anyone's guess.
Or at least limit those who can't predict new models from posting their nonsense predictions.
(Though I may very well be just as guilty of that.)February or March is my guess. If the 13" MacBook Pro is a goner like I'm predicting it is, then it'll be as soon as there are Sandy Bridge processors out for the 15" and 17" models, it's not like we're waiting on anything else, and we're coming up on the natural end of the refresh cycle anyway.
Even better, buy a white MacBook refurbished on Apple's site for $850, buy the same $129 2.5" SSD and you're still under $1000 before taxes for a WAY better computer.
Frankly, I'd almost rather the glass because that way, the panel is at least protected by something. That and when friends want to be idiots and actually tap the screen when pointing to something, it won't hurt the panel.
I'm not sure I'd go that far, though I'd be pissed for the same reason
Amen to that. It's so nice to hear about actual computer-related stuff (even OS/program stuff is nice). Anything that isn't iPhone/iOS related.
It's true, though I'm getting tired of all of the MacBook Pro centric stories and all of the same arguments that go along with it (that tend to largely be fueled by zealous MacBook Air fanboys). I'm more pumped for Mac mini and MacBook news for the opposite reason, and I'm not in the market for either!
Like I said, I'm not here to argue specs. Based on my experience, my 11.6" Air is faster than my 13" MBP.
But if you put these two machines side by side, both priced at $999, do you honestly think consumers are going to go through that entire thought process you just laid out for me in comparing the two? I mean seriously, please try explaining all that to a walk-in customer. I think by the time you get to what a Sandforce SSD is, you will have completely lost them by then.
There's a few things that many customers will care most about about: internet, email, photos, and music. Without even getting into specs, the Air can do all these things, easily.
Good for you though, for seeing value in specs. I see value in smaller size and portability with just the right balance of performance, and I honestly don't need more than the specs of the Air. Why would I care so much about more CPU speed if I'm not going to push it? So that's a win-win for me.
Likewise, consumers not in the know are going to have a tough time deciding between two products when they are priced exactly the same, and Apple is all about simplicity, even in the eco system of their pricing structure of their Mac line. The way the Mac line up is structured, everything is laid out nicely in their own price point, so I just expect changes.
My wants for the New Macbook Pro
1- BLU-RAY w/ HMDI out. (w/ option to upgrade to BD-R to burn the discs it is professional, and it needs a HD Superdrive)
2- Better speakers, audio is pitiful on the 15" Make it compete with HP Beats. better audio D/A converter and speakers with maybe even a mini sub.
3- USB 3, this is hitting the market so its time.
4- Matte screen
5- newer dedicated Graphics chip - 1 GB ddr ram for it.
well... had to do a wish list.
1- BLU-RAY w/ HMDI out. (w/ option to upgrade to BD-R to burn the discs it is professional, and it needs a HD Superdrive)
2- Better speakers, audio is pitiful on the 15" Make it compete with HP Beats. better audio D/A converter and speakers with maybe even a mini sub.
3- USB 3, this is hitting the market so its time.
4- Matte screen
5- newer dedicated Graphics chip - 1 GB ddr ram for it.
well... had to do a wish list.
I love how people get their knickers in a twist because they bought an MBP that Apple may update in a few months.
If your MBP works for you now, Apple's refresh won't change that. I mean come on if you bought an i5 or i7 model, and it's fast enough to suit your needs, what's all the gnashing of teeth becuase it's being updated? That's the way technology works. If you tried to keep up, you'd either a) never buy anything whie waiting for the next great thing, or b) be perpetually broke (and make Apple shareholders richer).
I have a 2009 17" model, Core 2 duo running at 3.06 GHz with 8 Gb RAM. As a present to myself, I bought the late 2010 refresh 17" model: Core i7 at 2.8 GHz, 8 Gb RAM, and the 512GB SSD. The biggest performance difference I see is with disk activity, because of the SSD. Boot time is ridiculously fast, application launch is too but that's kind of independent of processor. Comparatively, the 2009 model is right up there with the late 2010 model in terms of day-to-day tasks. So much so that I started using the 2009 for work, and leave the 2010 at home connected to my 27" Cinema Display.
Based on this rumour, I have no plans on upgrading. I've always used this rule in deciding whether to buy a new model: if the refresh significantly updates 3 or more components, I consider it based on my current computing needs. My late 2010 filled 2 of those: new processor, and new graphics. The SSD options is what cinched it: despite adding another $1000+ to the price, the combined performance increases made it worthwhile. (Oh yeah and there was a bit of gratuitous indulgence involved )
From what I can see, Sandy Bridge doesn't offer significant performance increases over either of my current models to justify an new purchase, especially considering the SSD is the biggest performance delta (and I don't quite fancy spending another $1200 on an SSD).
If your MBP works for you now, Apple's refresh won't change that. I mean come on if you bought an i5 or i7 model, and it's fast enough to suit your needs, what's all the gnashing of teeth becuase it's being updated? That's the way technology works. If you tried to keep up, you'd either a) never buy anything whie waiting for the next great thing, or b) be perpetually broke (and make Apple shareholders richer).
I have a 2009 17" model, Core 2 duo running at 3.06 GHz with 8 Gb RAM. As a present to myself, I bought the late 2010 refresh 17" model: Core i7 at 2.8 GHz, 8 Gb RAM, and the 512GB SSD. The biggest performance difference I see is with disk activity, because of the SSD. Boot time is ridiculously fast, application launch is too but that's kind of independent of processor. Comparatively, the 2009 model is right up there with the late 2010 model in terms of day-to-day tasks. So much so that I started using the 2009 for work, and leave the 2010 at home connected to my 27" Cinema Display.
Based on this rumour, I have no plans on upgrading. I've always used this rule in deciding whether to buy a new model: if the refresh significantly updates 3 or more components, I consider it based on my current computing needs. My late 2010 filled 2 of those: new processor, and new graphics. The SSD options is what cinched it: despite adding another $1000+ to the price, the combined performance increases made it worthwhile. (Oh yeah and there was a bit of gratuitous indulgence involved )
From what I can see, Sandy Bridge doesn't offer significant performance increases over either of my current models to justify an new purchase, especially considering the SSD is the biggest performance delta (and I don't quite fancy spending another $1200 on an SSD).
If your 13" MacBook Pro predates the Mid 2010 refresh, that is why. The 320M is a way better chipset, let alone IGP, than the 9400M. Specs is science.
You don't need to explain SSDs to the average customer. All you have to do is say "this one has a larger screen and is faster and does more" and the consumer, unless a complete idiot (as you are describing the average walk-in customer to be) or already owning a regular MacBook or MacBook Pro, will gravitate toward the white MacBook.
Most customers, in this economy, will care about the longevity of their purchase, and with the specs of the white MacBook, it'll last longer before failing to meet a minimum system requirement for something basic than the 11" Air will, which is why paying the same for less makes no sense even to the average consumer.
Because it'll last you longer and because it costs the same amount of money? Though you also have a 13" Pro, so I guess there's not much point to owning a second 13" computer.
Then explain why there are three 13" computers under each line that perform similarly? One of them will getting axed in either this refresh or the next, and it's neither the white MacBook nor the 13" Air.
BD: not gunna happen, Steve Seems to have a problem with it (But I'd like to see it)
HDMI: REALLY not gunna happen, Apple loves their display port so go buy an adaptor (plus HDMI is apparently a licensing nightmare)
Speakers: use headphones, there is not enough room for good speakers unless you want a laptop that's the thickness of a Mac Pro
USB3: I hope not, it'll be dead before it's out the door
Screen: that's personal preference so hopefully there'll be an option
GFX: amen
Lower or not for the TDP, considering the Geforce 5XXM are very new I just can't see them putting in the new MBPs...
Though I have heard the newer i7 mobile quads don't play too friendly with the 4XXM series
The Mac mini already has an HDMI port, so it wouldn't be far fetched to see it on another Mac line. Also the reason we don't have USB 3 yet (or rather the reason why Steve Jobs thinks it's silly to have it now) is because Intel isn't natively supporting it in its chipsets, meaning that to add USB 3.0 on anything, currently, you need a separate USB 3.0 controller chip. Since space is limited, I highly doubt we'll see USB 3.0 on anything until Intel starts integrating it into their chipsets. Otherwise, I agree with everything else.
Lower or not for the TDP, considering the Geforce 5XXM are very new I just can't see them putting in the new MBPs...
Though I have heard the newer i7 mobile quads don't play too friendly with the 4XXM series
If there's a GeForce GT 5XXM series chip that is cool (thermally speaking) enough for a MacBook Pro and is available, then there's no reason why we might not see it in the next MacBook Pro.
Although I agree with everything else you said, I don't agree with this. I can't imagine USB 3 not being a widely used standard very soon. You can already buy USB 3 devices, and Apple should support it.
Light Peak will not replace USB 3. If it replaces anything, it will be Ethernet and min display port. Optical Light Peak will be too expensive to be used on thumb sticks, and copper Light Peak doesn't provide the compatibility of USB.
Sandy Bridge CPUs are a given so the only really interesting news would be if Apple drops the optical drive from all of the MacBook Pros. I can actually see that happening given that Apple seems to have made a pretty big push to get the Mac App Store up and running. Now with the iTunes Store for movies/TV and music and the Mac App Store for software and an included thumb drive for system restore do you really need a big, slow, mechanically complex optical drive?
Furthermore, which would you prefer, an internal optical drive or a somewhat smaller MacBook that might even have an extra hour or two of battery life given by the removal of said optical drive. Frankly, I think I would take the extra battery life.
Here is my take on what Apple may say about this change, "People are flocking to our MacBook Airs and the new Mac App Store has been a huge hit. Our customers have spoken and it's apparent that optical drives are no longer required as standard equipment. By removing the optical drive we've given our entire line of MacBook Pros greater battery life in an even smaller package."
Of course, they could also use some of that space for a discrete GPU on the 13" MacBook Pro and offer optional hybrid (dual) HD/SSD systems where you could use the SSD for a fast boot drive and the HD for greater storage and backup (from the SSD).
So here is what I see for the Pro hardware:
1.) Sandy Bridge across the entire line of MacBook Pros.
2.) No internal optical drives (external optical drive option).
3.) Discrete GPU added to the 13" MacBook Pro.
4.) Extra space gained from removal of the optical drive used (in part) for a larger battery with longer life.
5.) Hybrid/dual HD/SSD option for the 15" and 17" MacBook Pros.
Other notes:
1.) No Light Peak (probably never), but Firewire 800 may be retained until USB 3 appears in 2012.
2.) Possible quad-core option in the 17" MacBook Pro.
3.) SSDs become standard configuration in 2012 (but probably not until then).
4.) One configuration of the white MacBook (largely unchanged from the current offering) will be retained with a possible price drop to $899.
5.) White MacBook will be discontinued within the next year.
Furthermore, which would you prefer, an internal optical drive or a somewhat smaller MacBook that might even have an extra hour or two of battery life given by the removal of said optical drive. Frankly, I think I would take the extra battery life.
Here is my take on what Apple may say about this change, "People are flocking to our MacBook Airs and the new Mac App Store has been a huge hit. Our customers have spoken and it's apparent that optical drives are no longer required as standard equipment. By removing the optical drive we've given our entire line of MacBook Pros greater battery life in an even smaller package."
Of course, they could also use some of that space for a discrete GPU on the 13" MacBook Pro and offer optional hybrid (dual) HD/SSD systems where you could use the SSD for a fast boot drive and the HD for greater storage and backup (from the SSD).
So here is what I see for the Pro hardware:
1.) Sandy Bridge across the entire line of MacBook Pros.
2.) No internal optical drives (external optical drive option).
3.) Discrete GPU added to the 13" MacBook Pro.
4.) Extra space gained from removal of the optical drive used (in part) for a larger battery with longer life.
5.) Hybrid/dual HD/SSD option for the 15" and 17" MacBook Pros.
Other notes:
1.) No Light Peak (probably never), but Firewire 800 may be retained until USB 3 appears in 2012.
2.) Possible quad-core option in the 17" MacBook Pro.
3.) SSDs become standard configuration in 2012 (but probably not until then).
4.) One configuration of the white MacBook (largely unchanged from the current offering) will be retained with a possible price drop to $899.
5.) White MacBook will be discontinued within the next year.
Last edited:
In my opinion, the main reason Apple shouldn't use the NVIDIA 5M series, is the AMD 6M series, which are just so much better in performance per watt.
I'm expecting a 6670M, but hoping for a 6830M.
I know the Mac Mini has an HDMI port but that's because Apple realised a lot of people were using them as HTPC's (as opposed to the old Apple TV)
but also have you seen the USB3 plugs they are chunky-as, I don't even know it the plug would fit on the side of a MBP, and I doubt intel will support USB3 natively when they will be trying to push light peak which will likely kill USB3 before it becomes main stream
personally I'm hoping for AMD gfx but that's mostly 'cause I've come to trust it in my gaming PC
I never mentioned gaming. I'm talking day to day usage. Flash drives make a huge difference, but you know that already.
Good simplification.
Hmm, there is some merit in your point with longetivity, but the way Apple designs their laptops with non-replaceable batteries, I believe they are betting that customers will rather purchase a new machine than go in to get a new battery. SJ (or Schiller I think) even mentioned this in one of their keynote speeches.
Unless you have sales data proving the white macbook consistently outsells the 13" MBP, then how can you be so sure? I had thought, that prior to the new Air models, the 13" MBP was currently the best selling portable computer?
Last edited: