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

New MacBook, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air Models Scheduled for Launch This Month?

excalibur313 said:
Yup, that's exactly my plan too. I can't wait! I might partition the drive so I can do bootcamp too.
Click to expand...

I was using Boot Camp for a while with Windows 7 x64. I found the performance under VMWare 3.x to be really poor. I have 4 gigs of RAM and tried allocating between 1-2 GB to VMWare to no effect. I read reports of other users not having issues, and reports of some users who had my problem. In exploring VMWare's forums, I couldn't find an explanation or solution. Anyway, long story short, I created a regular image and the performance is radically improved. I nuked my Boot Camp image shortly thereafter.

mdavis said:
...and the cache is the only thing that's changed in this new architecture...

No, it's a trade-off. Cache is very expensive, so given other performance improvements in the chip Intel is cutting back on the cache, because they can. I'd assume this trade-off is made possible by the additional performance of main memory in this chip.

I wouldn't be surprised if we see increased cache levels for later iterations of this architecture.

Anyway not trying to be a dick, just nit-picking. :)
Click to expand...

No, lots has changed, but the nice thing about benchmarks is that it lets you make a (quasi) real world apples-to-apples comparison. There's no need to estimate the theoretical impact of adding X or subtracting Y when you can test the real world impact. It's sort of the same principle as, say, thinking about throughput on drives: no system ever fills up the theoretical bandwidth. Anyway, the benchmarks cited (see Anand's tests) have given the Core iX an average 11% improvement over Core 2 Duo given clock-for-clock equal processors. Some things are >30%; others are single digit. Anyway, my point is that in practice, the impact of more cache isn't as great as we would theoretically like for it to be. Don't get me wrong-- I'd love to have more cache all things being equal, but I'm not sure there's quite enough evidence right now to choose between a faster i5 versus a slower (clock-wise) i7.

laela said:
Where did you buy the $6 SATA enclosure? Thanks!
Click to expand...

It was a deal on shop4tech.com a few weeks ago. Admittedly, it was a steal. I follow dealnews.com, which is where I saw it. I'd subscribe to their email alerts (and dealmac.com, too). I've gotten lots of great deals just by seeing junk there. I have to avoid the temptation to buy things just because they're a good deal. :)
 
I think an extremely reasonable feature request to fulfill is a higher resolution 15" screen. 1680x1050 15" screens have been shipping on laptops for years, and I can't understand why Apple has forgone this at least as a BTO.
 
That's all well and good, but will the new MacBook Pros be MAGICAL?
jony-ive-091020_0.jpg
 
john123 said:
It was a deal on shop4tech.com a few weeks ago. Admittedly, it was a steal. I follow dealnews.com, which is where I saw it. I'd subscribe to their email alerts (and dealmac.com, too). I've gotten lots of great deals just by seeing junk there. I have to avoid the temptation to buy things just because they're a good deal. :)
Click to expand...

Great sites, thanks!!
 
I'll be cool if it's released within the next week or so. Otherwise I hope it gets pushed back for like 6 months. :p
 
Digital Skunk said:
Remember that the MBA is "super thin" (not so much anymore) because Apple removed the optical drive, and put in ULV processors as well.

We don't want to pay $2000+ for a laptop that has half the processing power of a $500 one simply because we want it to be thin.

The trade-offs we make now are acceptable.



Ouch! I can understand your pain!

You'll definitely love the 17" MBP, and yes the display is worth the extra cash, and NO it's not heavy unless you're comparing it to the 13" MBA or a netbook or iPad. It's really only about a pound heavier which makes it the no-brainer choice for many content creators.

I am by no means "In the Industry" I freelance for newspapers and companies in my area and it's a one man shop. But of all of the editors, photogs, graphic designers, etc. I know NONE of them have the 15" and their main reason for it is the 1440x1200 (or whatever) screen resolution.

I had a choice between a 15" and 17" when I first had the cash to buy my own laptop. . . I picked the 15" and regretted it after a few months. A year later, I traded up to the 17.
Click to expand...

Crazy! I've been a motion graphics designer for over 10 years and have yet to run into anyone that DOES use a 17". In fact, I probably know as many badasses who use MacBooks as 15" MacBook Pros. The 15 is by FAR the most popular in my neck of the post-ptoduction woods.
 
u6crash said:
I see quite a few people want the MBP to drop the superdrive. What's with that? You're wanting it to be replaced with a supplemental SSD or what? If I get one it will be my only computer and I'd prefer not to have a bunch of external devices.
Click to expand...

I am one of those people - basically the idea of dropping the superdrive, (or at least having the option to, in a similar way to the mini Server machine), is a good one if the said MBP is not your main machine.

For example, I have an iMac which is more than capable of handling most of my (very rare these days) optical needs; the drive can be easily shared through software developed for the MBA.
 
I think it's safe to say another Tuesday is in the books... Haha, why must you torture us Apple!
 
How trusty this rumor can be? Seriously, I'm tired of getting disappointed every week. The only reason I keep waiting is because I don't need the computer desperately, yet I would like to make the switch to Apple already and forget about windows ¬¬
 
So Apple delayed the refresh cause of the shortage of Intel Chips? Common who should belive this? I doubt we see a refresh before June.
 
Santabean2000 said:
I am one of those people - basically the idea of dropping the superdrive, (or at least having the option to, in a similar way to the mini Server machine), is a good one if the said MBP is not your main machine.

For example, I have an iMac which is more than capable of handling most of my (very rare these days) optical needs; the drive can be easily shared through software developed for the MBA.
Click to expand...

The Combo drive in my MacBook (mid 2006) has been broken for 3 years now and the last time I needed it for anything was about a year ago. This computer is my main and only machine so it really makes me feel that the space inside a MBP can be spent more profitably on a secondary SDD or a larger battery then on an optical drive. At least for those who would opt for it.
 
smeagolsz said:
The Combo drive in my MacBook (mid 2006) has been broken for 3 years now and the last time I needed it for anything was about a year ago. This computer is my main and only machine so it really makes me feel that the space inside a MBP can be spent more profitably on a secondary SDD or a larger battery then on an optical drive. At least for those who would opt for it.
Click to expand...

Usually when I use an Optical drive, its for reinstalling windows or burning a Linux disc to install over windows...

True Facts.
 
Best Buy is down since a couple of hours... I'm wondering why they have to update their website on a Tuesday. I'm pissed enough!
 
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