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

March 1st as Possible Date for New MacBook Pros?

aiqw9182 said:
I've used 13" Sony laptops that have a resolution of 1920x1080. They were perfectly fine.

I don't think you guys realize how minuscule a difference in 10 DPI is.



So what makes you think you won't get used to one that's only 10 DPI higher? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I don't care about DPI as much as I care that it isn't tall enough for comfortable web browsing or even 16:9 video editing. 16:10 is awesome because you can edit 16:9 and have video editing tools on it. Ergo MacBook Pro.
 
beebler said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148a)

This March release is NOT a redesign. The one after it will be a full redesign. Guaranteed.
Click to expand...

why do you think so?
 
appleguy123 said:
I don't care about DPI as much as I care that it isn't tall enough for comfortable web browsing or even 16:9 video editing. 16:10 is awesome because you can edit 16:9 and have video editing tools on it. Ergo MacBook Pro.
Click to expand...

Holy hell, now I'm going to have to repeat myself again because you still don't get it:

1600x900 - 13" (same height as before, more width)
1920x1080 - 15" (more height by 30 pixels and more width)
2048x1152 - 17" (more width, loss of height by 48 pixels still higher than 1080p)

I'd love to see how you edit your full screen 1080p videos on a 1920x1200 display. You'll have about 120 vertical pixels left that will likely be used by the dock and menubar and absolutely zero room for any video controls. The only part of the video you will be seeing is in a corner of your screen if you are using anything like Final Cut or Premiere.
 
aiqw9182 said:
Holy hell, now I'm going to have to repeat myself again because you still don't get it:

1600x900 - 13" (same height as before, more width)
1920x1080 - 15" (more height by 30 pixels and more width)
2048x1152 - 17" (more width, loss of height by 48 pixels still higher than 1080p)

I'd love to see how you edit your full screen 1080p videos on a 1920x1200 display. You'll have about 120 vertical pixels left that will likely be used by the dock and menubar and absolutely zero room for any video controls. The only part of the video you will be seeing is in a corner of your screen if you are using anything like Final Cut or Premiere.
Click to expand...

Can't I just like 16:10? I think it's a superior aspect ratio, and Apple does too for portables. Everything I do is simply more enjoyable on 16:10. Especially webbrowsing and photos.
 
aiqw9182 said:
Holy hell, now I'm going to have to repeat myself again because you still don't get it:

1600x900 - 13" (same height as before, more width)
1920x1080 - 15" (more height by 30 pixels and more width)
2048x1152 - 17" (more width, loss of height by 48 pixels still higher than 1080p)

I'd love to see how you edit your full screen 1080p videos on a 1920x1200 display. You'll have about 120 vertical pixels left that will likely be used by the dock and menubar and absolutely zero room for any video controls. The only part of the video you will be seeing is in a corner of your screen if you are using anything like Final Cut or Premiere.
Click to expand...

Yes, but were talking about ASPECT RATIOS. Jeebus!!
 
Optical-Free

Please, please, please drop the damn optical drive. Apple was once a leader in this regard, being first to drop floppy drives. Please be a leader again and drop the optical drive. With the App Store open, the time has come.
 
appleguy123 said:
Can't I just like 16:10? I think it's a superior aspect ratio, and Apple does too for portables. Everything I do is simply more enjoyable on 16:10. Especially webbrowsing and photos.
Click to expand...

Apple 27" Cinema Display - 16:9
iMacs - 16:9
11" Air - 16:9

You keep on saying everything is more enjoyable on a 16:10 display but all of your reasons are irrelevant in to what resolution Apple would move to if they went to 16:9 on the MacBook Pro's.

jjahshik32 said:
Yes, but were talking about ASPECT RATIOS. Jeebus!!
Click to expand...
They both coincide. :rolleyes:

All of your reasons for liking 16:10 over 16:9 are irrelevant in relation to the MacBook Pro's. I'll agree that 1920x1200 on a 24" display is better than a 1920x1080 24" display BECAUSE of the added resolution. But the same can't be said for going from 1680x1050 to 1920x1080 on a 15" display because they will be gaining resolution by going to 16:9.
 
mcarling said:
Please, please, please drop the damn optical drive. Apple was once a leader in this regard, being first to drop floppy drives. Please be a leader again and drop the optical drive. With the App Store open, the time has come.
Click to expand...

Yes, for the love of god, please drop the optical drive so that I can be encouraged to rent all of my content, low-rez, from now on.
 
It all depends on whether there's a press event

If Apple hosts a media event for the MBP release, there will be a change to the form factor -- probably slimmer, lighter, new ports, etc. They'll want to be on stage touting how cool the new shape and features are.

But if March 1st comes without a press event, it'll just be a minor update with new processors and SSD options.
 
This means I better order at least 20 more 15" i7s before the end of the month if I want to actually have machines to deploy. Hooray...
 
Maclver said:
I highly doubt they remove the optical drive from the Macbook Pro... All of Apple's "pro" applications are CD based and can't see coming to the Mac App Store
Click to expand...

Well, Apple sells external ODDs. How about getting one of those if you need them. Or even better - get one that burns BD disc in addition.
 
I've been saying this in forums now for awhile, and I strongly believe that apple will remove the 17" macbook pro from the lineup. Either this revision, or next. They already have an 11.6" macbook air now. People want smaller and more portable computers nowadays, so I think apple will move in that direction.

a 15" macbook pro with 1920x1200 would be perfect. Remove the optical drive, add SSD and you already saved yourself enough space for a decent i7, a better dedicated GPU and more battery life.

I have a 17" MBP, and while it is good for a desktop replacement, it's not something you want to carry around campus 8 hours a day, and I strongly think people would be much better carrying around a 13" and plugging it into a 27" at home.

And who cares about all this 1600x900 and 2048x1536 screen resolution crap. All resolutions these days suck. I want a 13" Macbook Air with 2560x1600 and a 30" Cinema display with 7680x4800. I could just imagine that...

Introducing, the new 30" Apple Cinema Display.

Starting at a fantastic price of just $15,999 inc GST.
With the new 30" Apple Cinema Display, you can see retina detail in a display that offers so many pixels, not only will you require 20/20 vision at 1/2 inch from the screen just to read standard webpage text, but you will also require not one, but FOUR $1999 each Nvidia Quadro FX5800 GPU's in SLI to enjoy this incredible display in it's full native resolution of 7680x4800.

The new 30" Retina Cinema Display. Only from Apple.

Think different!
 
I'm happy with the processor speed and graphics of my i5 MBP.

Anybody got recommendations on Intel SSDs? I'd rather grab a 120GB at <$250 for a performance boost.
 
Guys there is no MBP redesign coming. Upgraded processor and graphics you can be sure of, and maybe 1 or 2 other things. I agree with the poster above when he said that lately if there is some kind of redesign for products that there are leaks out the ...... We haven't heard of any kind of redesigned cases for these mbp's from china. Drop it. Apple is at the height of their profit making scheme and nothing in sight is going to stop that. Consider yourselves lucky if you get sandy bridge this year.
 
DickKnowsBest said:
I've been saying this in forums now for awhile, and I strongly believe that apple will remove the 17" macbook pro from the lineup. Either this revision, or next. They already have an 11.6" macbook air now. People want smaller and more portable computers nowadays, so I think apple will move in that direction.

a 15" macbook pro with 1920x1200 would be perfect. Remove the optical drive, add SSD and you already saved yourself enough space for a decent i7, a better dedicated GPU and more battery life.

I have a 17" MBP, and while it is good for a desktop replacement, it's not something you want to carry around campus 8 hours a day, and I strongly think people would be much better carrying around a 13" and plugging it into a 27" at home.
Click to expand...

The 17" MacBook Pro isn't going anywhere.
 
Not that I'm in the market for one but it is always interesting to see where Apple is leading the industry. Will they exclude the optical and hard drive in one move from their pro lines? That would be more bold than the iMac when it debuted with no floppy drive and USB. :eek:

I hope they do it. That would leave SSD and SD as the only storage mediums for the Macbook Pro line-up. In the future though Apple will even remove those and Google envisions the future where our lives are stored in the cloud. Apple believes that too. Soon they will release the beginnings of their spin on it with the release of OSX 10.7 and their updated cloud version of iWork. :cool:
 
Resolution

All this talk of ultra-high resolution is wishful thinking -- a wish that I share. However, until 10.7 Lion makes UI changes to take advantage of the gradual shift from about 100dpi to about 130dpi, Apple will not release any Macs with resolution substantially above 130dpi. That's all the 10.6 Snow Leopard UI can reasonably handle in the absence of Resolution Independence.

In my opinion, it's very, very likely that the next round of MacBooks Pro will standardize on the ~130dpi resolution that Apple have been gradually moving to over the last few years. I expect the 13" MacBook Pro will get the 1440x900 resolution of the 13" MacBook Air. The currently optional 1680x1050 resolution available for the 15" MacBook Pro will become standard. The 1920x1200 resolution of the 17" MacBook Pro will remain unchanged. If I'm right, all new MacBooks Pro will have approximately 130dpi resolution.

Anything substantially higher than 130dpi will have to wait until sometime after the release of 10.7 Lion. To rephrase it, the 10.6 Snow Leopard UI is optimized for the range of resolutions from 100dpi to 130dpi. I expect 10.7 Lion to revise the UI to be optimized for a resolution of 130dpi, or perhaps 130dpi and higher. This would make 10.7 more usable with displays of 150dpi and higher than 10.6 would be.

My guess is that Apple's next resolution target for Macs will be 167dpi, really a range from about 165dpi to 170dpi. However, I don't expect we'll see Apple release such hardware until 2012.
 
I'm curious if anyone knows a rough estimate when OS Lion is going to be release?
 
appleguy123 said:
Me too. If Apple goes 16:9, I think I'll have to keep my mid 2009 for a long time.
Click to expand...

They won't. If Apple was going 16:9 in all it's notebooks then the 13" Air would have gained this too.

Apple realizes that although people may watch HD movies on an iMac, there is no real advantage putting this into the physically smaller notebooks; notebooks ate primarily for work.

The only reason the 11" Air gained the wider ratio screen was due to Apple's insistence of keeping a full sized keyboard, which by default shaped a naturally wider screen than will be found on the larger models.
 
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