MBP Udpate for Snow Leopard Release...

[Tamarindo]

I think and really hope to see, an update of the MBP line in october, after the relase of Snow Leopard. I´m paciently waiting for a new uMBP 17" with antiglare screen, Nehalem i7 Clarksfield, 1 TB HDD, and GTX 260 or 280 1GB Video RAM to replace my 4 year old MBP.

Don´t you believe it would be a wonderful MBP that would allow us to work on the road editing video, manipulating images in the way that we deserve?

I think a MBP with these characteristics and according to what we know about Snow Leopard, will give us a performance that Apple owes us as we are faithful users.

The problem is that for some reason, we the loyal Apple users, get always the same thing, we have a beautiful design, an impressive OS and laptops well built, but in terms of technical details regarding the processor and video cards, we usually are relegate with respect to the supply available on PC market.

 

[spinnerlys]

The current uMBP, even the 17-inch one, can do all those things right now.
It is even used right now to do all those things.

Also use MRoogle for current threads on that topic, as it is already discussed in the Arrandale/Clarksfield threads.

PS: Why do "we" deserve it anyway? No flame, just curiosity.

 

[Tamarindo]

The current uMBP, even the 17-inch one, can do all those things right now.
It is even used right now to do all those things.

Also use MRoogle for current threads on that topic, as it is already discussed in the Arrandale/Clarksfield threads.

PS: Why do "we" deserve it anyway? No flame, just curiosity.

I know, you can do "all those things right now", but with grand central we will be able to take advantage of a Quad core processor as i7.

Also I think we deserve the top of the line hardware available, we are paying good money for it.not the always mid class Graphic card we always get even with the MBP line.

 

[cluthz]

.... and GTX 260 or 280 1GB Video RAM to replace my 4 year old MBP.

As much as I'd like it to be true, it will never happen!
Those cards draws two to four times more power than current cards

In MBPs before and now:
9600M GT =23watt
8600M GT = 20watt

280M (N10E-GTX) = 100+(?) watt, can't find info about power consumption on this yet.
260M (N10E-GT)= 75 watt <- no way
260M (N10E-GS)= 38 watt <- too much power required
250M (N10E-GE)= 28 watt <- possible
240M (N10P-GS)= 24 watt <- likely to be next card

 

[Sneakz]

Half the stuff you asked for isn't even possible, much less actually going to happen. The will be no Clarksfield in a MacBook Pro (at least not yet, Arrandale for sure), definitely no GTX 260 or higher. Its hardware like that that gets you an hour of battery life and 10lbs+ laptops.

 

[MacModMachine]

Half the stuff you asked for isn't even possible, much less actually going to happen. The will be no Clarksfield in a MacBook Pro (at least not yet, Arrandale for sure), definitely no GTX 260 or higher. Its hardware like that that gets you an hour of battery life and 10lbs+ laptops.

i agree, people post these all the time....its getting tiring...

if those video cards were included into the mbp i would never buy one again...they run hot and are useless in a notebook.

antiglare screens can be included in the 17" now.

 

[Tamarindo]

Half the stuff you asked for isn't even possible, much less actually going to happen. The will be no Clarksfield in a MacBook Pro (at least not yet, Arrandale for sure), definitely no GTX 260 or higher. Its hardware like that that gets you an hour of battery life and 10lbs+ laptops.

Thanks for the reply, and for the clarifing facts, about the power consuption of the Graphic card in that case 240M with 1TB, can be possible rigth?,
About the CPU I´m just asking for 10WAtts more of power consuption with clarksfield, and the 1TB HDD weights almost the same as seagate momentus 7200RPM, so not 10lbs+.

 

[Tamarindo]

As much as I'd like it to be true, it will never happen!
Those cards draws two to four times more power than current cards

In MBPs before and now:
9600M GT =23watt
8600M GT = 20watt

280M (N10E-GTX) = 100+(?) watt, can't find info about power consumption on this yet.
260M (N10E-GT)= 75 watt <- no way
260M (N10E-GS)= 38 watt <- too much power required
250M (N10E-GE)= 28 watt <- possible
240M (N10P-GS)= 24 watt <- likely to be next card

Tks for this info, I thought it was just about 30Watts or so more power consumption.

 

[Tamarindo]

i agree, people post these all the time....its getting tiring...

if those video cards were included into the mbp i would never buy one again...they run hot and are useless in a notebook.

antiglare screens can be included in the 17" now.

Yes I know about the antiglare screen.
I was just dreaming about my ideal MBP.
I know some user just buy a MBP so they can feel they have a Pro Laptop.
At least for me the pwerful graphics card is not useless for me, sometimes I need that extra power for video edition and image rendering, but of course I know some users don´t really use the MBP for Pro functions on the road, so I can understand that way of thinking.

Of course I have two Mac Pro´s nehalem one at home and one at the office, I just think it doesn´t hurt to dream about it.

 

[MacModMachine]

Yes I know about the antiglare screen.
I was just dreaming about my ideal MBP.
I know some user just buy a MBP so they can feel they have a Pro Laptop.
At least for me the pwerful graphics card is not useless for me, sometimes I need that extra power for video edition and image rendering, but of course I know some users don´t really use the MBP for Pro functions on the road, so I can understand that way of thinking.

Of course I have two Mac Pro´s nehalem one at home and one at the office, I just think it doesn´t hurt to dream about it.

either of those video cards would you would not see a big difference in from a 9600gt in video rendering....

 

[cluthz]

The Macbook Pro is a compromise between performance and portability.
I think apple have hit spot on mostly.
Most pro users want top CPU performance and are not too concerned about GPU power.

If you want more GPU power the computer will be alot bigger and for most image and video tasks you will get a 50% heavier/bulkier computer with 10% performance gain.

When it comes to cpu apple always have used the best available in both Mac Pros and Macbook Pros.

If i go to the nearby computer store and look at their current lineup of computers, and compare them to my Macbook Pro (which is 26 months old!) I really can't find much of an upgrade. The 2.2Ghz was even the lowend Macbook Pro back then! (Well Macbook Pro lineup have much more computers now, so I guess the current 2.66Ghz with 256MB 9600 would be the closest to what the 2.2GHz was back then)

 

[Tamarindo]

The Macbook Pro is a compromise between performance and portability.
I think apple have hit spot on mostly.
Most pro users want top CPU performance and are not too concerned about GPU power.

If you want more GPU power the computer will be alot bigger and for most image and video tasks you will get a 50% heavier/bulkier computer with 10% performance gain.

When it comes to cpu apple always have used the best available in both Mac Pros and Macbook Pros.

If i go to the nearby computer store and look at their current lineup of computers, and compare them to my Macbook Pro (which is 26 months old!) I really can't find much of an upgrade. The 2.2Ghz was even the lowend Macbook Pro back then! (Well Macbook Pro lineup have much more computers now, so I guess the current 2.66Ghz with 256MB 9600 would be the closest to what the 2.2GHz was back then)

Tks...