Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Macbook Update in progress (2.4Ghz)

c2d ftw!

Personally, I think that the Aluminum enclosure is much sexier than the plastic.

Before the plastic went unibody they had the cracking problem, but it may be resolved now.

Apple needs to do a better job differentiating the MB and the 13" MBP or just get rid of one of them. Preferably the plastic. IMO the only reason they are selling the MBP 13" at $1200 USD is that the MP is in the game. A C2D at >$1000 is a joke in 2010. I don't care if it can run OS X or not. A complete joke.
 
Scottsdale said:
Agreed. It should be an "Aluminum MB" vs. the white "Plastic MB." Apple really overhypes the capability of the 13" MBP as a "PRO" Mac. I think it's a ridiculous joke. What sort of "Pro" computer is labeled "Pro" simply for its aluminum case and single FireWire port?

At a minimum, I would label the 13" MBP over the WhiteBook a "Pro" if the display on the 13" MBP went to 1440x900 over the MB 1280x800, the GPU was discrete ATI/Nvidia over the MB integrated GPU, and there was a significant performance boost from a higher quality CPU in this case 13" MBP should have Core i3 while MB has C2D. All of that would make a "fair" upgrade of the 13" MBP's title to a "PRO" Mac. I believe Pros would need this and I believe it would really make the consumer WhiteBook feel like a consumer Mac in comparison... right now there's no point in comparing as they're damned near identical.
Click to expand...

Scottsdale, from the look of your post I can tell that you know zilch about the 12" Powerbook, or should I say, "Glorified iBook". The 12" Powerbook had so little in common with the 15" and 17" Powerbooks. There was nothing "Power" about the 12" Powerbook. You guys are trashing the 13" MBP, but in fact it's much more inline with the 15" and 17" MBP then the 12" Powerbook ever was with the rest of the Power line.
The 13" MBP is FAR from a glorified Macbook.
 
reezer said:
Personally, I think that the Aluminum enclosure is much sexier than the plastic.

Before the plastic went unibody they had the cracking problem, but it may be resolved now.

Apple needs to do a better job differentiating the MB and the 13" MBP or just get rid of one of them. Preferably the plastic. IMO the only reason they are selling the MBP 13" at $1200 USD is that the MP is in the game. A C2D at >$1000 is a joke in 2010. I don't care if it can run OS X or not. A complete joke.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%
 
My first mac was a late 2008 13" Aluminum MB (the first unibodies). It had the illuminated keyboard and a 2.4GHz C2D. Granted it was $1500 (w/ student discount) at the time vs. a $1200 price now, but they really haven't upgraded the CPU since they introduced it. ... maybe a couple of MHz here or there. This is ridiculous.... on with the i3 & i5's in the 13" MBP already. When they introduced the unibody aluminum MacBooks, Apple was the only game in town offering DDR3 and a 1066 FSB. Now, they are behind the times....

Aside: The 13" was a champ. I upgraded the RAM to 4GB and installed 10.6 and it purred. Too bad it was stolen. weak.
 
The 13" models continue a trend of lackluster processor updates with yet another Core 2. I'll be waiting for a Sandy Bridge based notebook at this rate.

I wonder what this means for the iMac. Apple is just barely staying ahead of EOL on Core 2.
 
I do like how everybody is bashing the C2D for no good reason other than the fact that it has been around a while.

A 2.4Ghz C2D is perfectly good at doing everything the average user would need, an i3 would drain battery life, and if you look at benchmarks it doesn't actually give any massive gains over the C2D.

Stop bashing without reason !
 
miicah said:
Yep, I don't see why anyone with any idea of what they were buying (and even then the people who don't understand will read PRO) would get the base level macbook any more.
Click to expand...

Someone like me who got the Late 09 MacBook from MicroCenter for $799. Besides, I liked the white way better than the aluminum. Matter of choice, plus I have no need for firwire or and sd slot.....Illimuniated keyboard? I have lights for that in my house! To each his own man, power to the consumers....:)
 
Sarngate said:
I do like how everybody is bashing the C2D for no good reason other than the fact that it has been around a while.

A 2.4Ghz C2D is perfectly good at doing everything the average user would need, an i3 would drain battery life, and if you look at benchmarks it doesn't actually give any massive gains over the C2D.

Stop bashing without reason !
Click to expand...

They are not bashing without reason. The price does not reflect what you get anymore!
 
Boston007 said:
They are not bashing without reason. The price does not reflect what you get anymore!
Click to expand...

I personally don't think that price has reflected what you get tech wise for a while now. You always pay a premium with Apple products, and most of the time this isn't so that you get the fastest machine on the market.
 
hayesk said:
The economy is why the MacBook is more expensive in the UK. It's still $999 in the US. And back when you claim "The MacBook was a really interesting machine" it cost as much as the 13" MacBook Pro, which is a really interesting machine for the reasons you mentioned.
Click to expand...

But at the same time, things have been taken away from the machine. I wouldn't mind so much the price increase if it offered more value over my current machine, but it doesn't.
 
Sarngate said:
I personally don't think that price has reflected what you get tech wise for a while now. You always pay a premium with Apple products, and most of the time this isn't so that you get the fastest machine on the market.
Click to expand...
Back in 2007 it was a showdown between the MacBook and the XPS Studio 13. The difference being a about a hundred US dollars and a GMA X3100 or ATI Mobility X1300.
 
I'm not saying the 2.4GHz C2D is a bad processor, because it's not. It can run SL very well with 4GB of RAM and the perceived quickness of my 15" i5 @ 2.4GHz isn't much better than my old 2.4 GHz C2D. The C2D is a bit slower when running MATLAB, Mathematica, etc. Compile times for mpicc aren't much different for both models either.

A non-savvy consumer will just look and see that Dell has an i3,i5,i7 and that Apple doesn't at ≈$1000 and will wonder why.

Agreed, I would suspect that the 2.4GHz would give any of the i3's a run for their money.
 
reezer said:
I'm not saying the 2.4GHz C2D is a bad processor, because it's not. It can run SL very well with 4GB of RAM and the perceived quickness of my 15" i5 @ 2.4GHz isn't much better than my old 2.4 GHz C2D. The C2D is a bit slower when running MATLAB, Mathematica, etc. Compile times for mpicc aren't much different for both models either.

A non-savvy consumer will just look and see that Dell has an i3,i5,i7 and that Apple doesn't at ≈$1000 and will wonder why.

Agreed, I would suspect that the 2.4GHz would give any of the i3's a run for their money.
Click to expand...
I've had 4 GB of RAM and a Western Digital 320 GB hard drive since 2007. You expect changes after almost 3 years.

I'll probably be installing a SSD since 5400 RPM is still too painfully slow.
 
Eidorian said:
Back in 2007 it was a showdown between the MacBook and the XPS Studio 13. The difference being a about a hundred US dollars and a GMA X3100 or ATI Mobility X1300.
Click to expand...

That was the second time in my Apple history that they had competitive prices. The first being the original Power PC G5 processor introduction. And that was just with the G5 . . . the G4 in the laptops was far behind the Celeron.

It's hard to not buy used Macbooks and Macbook Pros nowadays.
 
Digital Skunk said:
That was the second time in my Apple history that they had competitive prices. The first being the original Power PC G5 processor introduction. And that was just with the G5 . . . the G4 in the laptops was far behind the Celeron.

It's hard to not buy used Macbooks and Macbook Pros nowadays.
Click to expand...
On a lighter note it was the Dell notebook that was the more expensive one.

Apple held its own very well with the Core 2 + 9400M G but even so that's late 2008 at best. The greatest value being in the Macbook (Mid 2009). We're almost into the H2 2010 now.
 
Thunderhawks said:
Agreed, at least not to get worse.

Dropping Firewire 800 is too soon. And if they did that another USB could have been there.

Disappointing, which is why it was done quietly?
Click to expand...
The new MacBooks are effectively using the same Unibody MacBook 2008 logicboard lacking FireWire. There's no need to create a new design and they can cram in more battery cells.

FireWire 400/800 is very relevant give the performance of USB 2.0. An eSATA/USB combo port would be killer with the lack of FireWire. It's a very noticeable difference going from USB 2.0 to eSATA.

An update this silent is welcome for those that know but the masses wouldn't be any wiser.
 
Sarngate said:
I do like how everybody is bashing the C2D for no good reason other than the fact that it has been around a while.

A 2.4Ghz C2D is perfectly good at doing everything the average user would need, an i3 would drain battery life, and if you look at benchmarks it doesn't actually give any massive gains over the C2D.

Stop bashing without reason !
Click to expand...

Boston007 said:
They are not bashing without reason. The price does not reflect what you get anymore!
Click to expand...

I somewhat agree, but honestly the real problem is Intel for screwing over Apple and NVIDIA! :(
 
Eidorian said:
On a lighter note it was the Dell notebook that was the more expensive one.

Apple held its own very well with the Core 2 + 9400M G but even so that's late 2008 at best. The greatest value being in the Macbook (Mid 2009). We're almost into the H2 2010 now.
Click to expand...

I disagree. It is very difficult, if not impossible to find any laptops which match the Macbook's overall performance and quality for a similar price.

Are there laptops with better performance for cheaper ? Of course.
Are there laptops with equal battery life for cheaper ? Of course.
Are there laptops with a combination of both for cheaper ? Possibly.

The closest match i have found to this is Acer's new Timeline X series. The 3820t contains an i3 and Intel HD on a 13.3'' screen, 4GB of RAM and 8 hour advertised battery life.

It is the same thickness, and slightly lighter than the Macbook, has a weaker GPU and a slightly more powerful CPU, for around £660. The build quality will most likely be inferior, as will the island style keyboard. The trackpad has 2 finger multi-touch.

So for around £200 less you get:

- Windows
+ More RAM
- Much weaker GPU
+ Slightly stronger CPU
- Shorter Battery life
- Mediocre screen
- No optical drive (That's another £25)
- Limited multi-touch and average keyboard.
- No bluetooth.

Is it worth paying £200 for OS X and all the other extras ? That is certainly debatable, and i would say without a doubt that the extra £100 and Free 3 year warranty is certainly worth it with the Education Discount.
 
I think the price is okay given that you are buying the form factor, not top end performance.

They should've bumped the RAM to 4GB with the last revision though, 2GB is weak since it cannot be upgraded.

miniroll32 said:
It's the MacBook Air that still bugs me.

How can a laptop that is less powerful than the 'entry level' model (MacBook) be valued more expensive? Given that, just like the Mac Mini, its a compact product, it should be placed before the standard white MacBook in the product paradigm. Just because it has such a slim form factor doesn't make it any more expensive to produce/valuable - it should be considered more appropriate for those in education or situations where the notebook isn't a powerhouse, but rather a slate to in-frequently work on.
Click to expand...
 
Warbrain said:
The 13" MacBook Pro has always been a bit unusual, trying to bridge a gap that has been narrow since the Intel change. The MB and MBP specs have always been close.

It's when you get the 15" MBP when the moniker starts to show.
Click to expand...

Well if it is like two years ago when I got my nephew's black Mac Book (over the white one). It even had a firewire port and expandable RAM . I feel that one just became the 13 inch MBP.
 
madmaxmedia said:
I think the price is okay given that you are buying the form factor, not top end performance.

They should've bumped the RAM to 4GB with the last revision though, 2GB is weak since it cannot be upgraded.
Click to expand...

It can be upgraded dude.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back