steve jobs will show up and his thin borderline wasting-away presence will be a performance-art/silent endorsement of the "thinner is better" ethos as he promotes the new laptops.
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.
New MacBook Pro to probably be thinner..
- Thread starter Yixian
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You're officially the best ever.
Ah man.. if they only put a 9600M GT in the MacBook Pro.. I might actually switch to PCThat card is already out of date
9650M GS at LEAST, I mean come on!
And just think, if it was .5" thicker we'd be looking at an 8800M GTX.. MacBook Extreme seems like a perfectly sensible product to introduce..
Uh, the 9M series is the most recent mobile series from Nvidia. It's no more "outdated" than the HD 4 series.
Please go buy an Alienware, you've made 15+ threads essentially saying you want one.
Or even better, check out Killer Notebooks. they use desktop cards. In laptops.
Apple should put in a high-end graphics chipset (nVidia x800GT or GTS or ATi 48x0) since they will be pushing OpenCL (GPGPU API) as a standard. Also, GPU performance >> CPU performance in certain tasks like encoding and folding. It would help if they had a suitable machine to demonstrate what they could do…just having the code without a powerful machine is…well…dumb…
Can we all stop complaining...you all are forgetting that the last MBP revision was in February. Stop comparing the current MBP to newer PCs because at this point its unfair. Just wait to see what Apple will throw at us on Tuesday. I bet that they will keep the current size (1") and I think that the GPU will still be medium/high end. The new CPU and LB will use less power, so they might be able to put a better GPU in without it creating too much heat.
Why do YOU think everyone should share your exact needs? Some us aren't planning on using this as a gaming machine. Some of us want a machine that can easily be carried with us anywhere, yet is still capable of doing some heavy lifting. The current "1in thin" design does that perfectly. You might want the thing 1.5in thick and 8 pounds with 1 and half hours of battery life, but I'd really rather it didn't. I like the machine as it is, and I hope it stays that way, merely getting a sexier case and newer versions of the current hardware.
I really don't get these stupid 13"3 MBP wishes. It is totally pointless. If you buy a Macbook Pro...your probably going to be using Photoshop. Photoshop does not work on a 13.3" screen. Its just totally pointless. Anything you do that requires a pro machine will not work good with a 13.3" screen. Period.
unless the 13" screen has a 1440x900 (same as current MBP's) or 1600x900 resolution.
Who does serious work of that kind (especially CAD) on a laptop? It's simply not cost effective for almost everyone. Apple is not going to waste it's time and money catering to the few who need to make an architectural drawing at the building site, or the person who feels the need to do all their photo editing at the photo shoot (on a TN display, no less)
I don't; I don't know why, but some people just do. However, I do wish to dabble with CUDA/OpenCL and stream processing.
I'm asking for another line of high end Apple notebooks, and for the price you pay for a MBP you should get a high end card thrown in anyway so you wouldn't be losing out even if Apple did turn the MBP into a high end machine, unless ofc it is critical that you can carve your xmas turkey with your laptop... not to mention fry and egg on it.
Because people will most likely hook it up to an external display for use with Photoshop and alike.
I'd love a small, compact MacBook Pro. 13" screen, ideal for on the go and packed full of power, then when I'm at my desk, hook it up to my external display.
And anyway, the current 15" screen only has 1440x900 resolution, so don't start saying that that is good for Photoshop..
I do all my architecure studies work on the MBP and its fine. So I would be glad if there was a Quadro in it and a higher res. monitor!
Everybody prepare for a low-end GPU in the 15" and a lower-midrange GPU in the 17". Anything more is a bonus.
Leave thinness to the MacBook Air and to a lesser extent, the MacBook. Make the MacBook Pro a true "Pro" notebook. And with the speculation of the MacBook moving up the range (like better graphics), maybe those who don't need more power (than the current MacBook Pro) may be better served by the new MacBook.
Maybe the new MacBook too will be crippled.
Nehalem's TDPs are the same as Penryn's. And that just means the gap between the MacBook Pro and Nehalem PC notebooks will just get wider.
Forget about quad-cores until Q2/mid-2010 (or so, with Westmere), unless the MacBook Pro gets thicker and Apple allows low-clocked quad-cores to coexist with higher-clocked dual-cores.
1" is NOT a perfect size for a 15" PRO computer.
The only "best" the 8600M GT gets is the best mobile GPU for the MacBook "Pro," and that was only until the 9500M GS.If you knew the first thing about modern GPUs you'd be in tears of laughter over someone claiming the 8600M GT was "one of the best" mobile GPUs around, ahaha
Oh yeah, and cooler components are more expensive than an equivalently-performing hotter component. So those who don't need more performance can save on money.
For very similar clock speeds. There are other CPUs for the same TDP that run faster, and that is what the MacBook PRO should have.
If Apple switches to 25 W CPUs, there will be a downgrade in GHz (2.6»2.53). But I'm sure the fanboys will defend it, as they seem to believe that the thinness (which won't be much anyway) makes the 2.53 GHz better than the 2.6 GHz.
I was excited about gaming a while ago...then I realized I'm in school and haven't even plugged in my television. I haven't watched TV in months, why do I need a computer for games (which I haven't played since high school).
I'd love it to run CATIA well, anything else is just bonus. I might just get a macbook for audio recording and use powerful desktops for 3d CAD work. It will probably be .1" thinner. Big deal. Steve Jobs has a thin wiener. Excited about Tuesday.
I'd love it to run CATIA well, anything else is just bonus. I might just get a macbook for audio recording and use powerful desktops for 3d CAD work. It will probably be .1" thinner. Big deal. Steve Jobs has a thin wiener. Excited about Tuesday.
The sad thing is that ".1" thinner" might mean the loss of a midrange GPU or the usage of 25 W CPUs instead of 35 W ones.
As you've said, "Big deal" (on the thickness, not the loss of specs).
No, it means shaving a bit off the screen thickness, this has been made rather clear.
considering most 3D apps and CAD aren't even available on the mac - why would you consider getting a MacBook Pro to run the high end stuff if you can't run the software?
some college kids don't want another machine and prefer mac, so they use their high-end stuff in Windows.
I contacted the author of the latest article at AI that points to a "9600M" being in the new MacBook Pros, asking if it was specifically the 9600M GT he believed to be in the new MacBook Pros and if so why Apple would opt for such a low end card when more powerful ones are available at the same power draw, and he replied with the following:
"You are more likely right - some derivative refresh of the 9600 GT based on a slightly updated G92-based part. Probably a 55nm GPU as well.
The 9650M GT is 55nm, the 9600M GT is 65nm..
It makes sense, there is no reason to put a 9600M GT in the MBP when you could put a 9650M GT with no extra heat or batter drain, and a lot more power.
Maybe we'll even see a new card? Another refresh of some kind, 9675M GT lmao? Prob not..
"You are more likely right - some derivative refresh of the 9600 GT based on a slightly updated G92-based part. Probably a 55nm GPU as well.
The 9650M GT is 55nm, the 9600M GT is 65nm..
It makes sense, there is no reason to put a 9600M GT in the MBP when you could put a 9650M GT with no extra heat or batter drain, and a lot more power.
Maybe we'll even see a new card? Another refresh of some kind, 9675M GT lmao? Prob not..
...why does everyone assume that the thinner laptops will be hotter?
Its not like apple is using the same exact components and stuffing them into a thinner case. There will be new components. Things like CPUs are updated to more current tech, meaning more computing power that takes lower voltages. I can see the heat levels remaining similar to the current systems, but up? why make that assumption before we even know what we are being offered
Its not like apple is using the same exact components and stuffing them into a thinner case. There will be new components. Things like CPUs are updated to more current tech, meaning more computing power that takes lower voltages. I can see the heat levels remaining similar to the current systems, but up? why make that assumption before we even know what we are being offered
Because we've lived through the iterations of the MacBook Pro, and although the Core Duo ones were really hot, the heat issues have remained throughout the updates with newer components.
There is nothing to suggest that even if they kept the same thickness as the current generation, the heat wouldn't be as bad. And if they made it thinner, then we're just going back a step in regard to heat control.