Agree on the no refresh, this year. As far as the "minor refresh", don't worry about; you already called it a "minor refresh".
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 MBP could be next month already
- Thread starter mark28
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Agree on the no refresh, this year. As far as the "minor refresh", don't worry about; you already called it a "minor refresh".
Macs are unlikely to adopt USB 3.0, for a simple reason, Apple (and Intel) wants to get Thunderbolt out.
Likely, as someone above said, it might be a silent BTO update just like last year. We will see a 2x60QM in 15" and 17" as a higher BTO option and in-store AG model, possibly 2760QM (2.3GHz, versus 2720QM 2.2GHz) replacing 2820QM (2.3GHz), then a higher option 2860QM (2.5GHz). It is unlikely that Apple will adopt 2920XM (which is, essentially, an unlocked 2860QM after the new CPUs) or 2960XM though, as those have 10W higher TDPs, and extreme edition CPUs cost as much as half a MacBook Pro.
Though, Apple did a really good job pushing Quads into our MBPs. Sure, might not be good for heat, but this will allow us to ignore next generation CPU upgrades for a while. SNB i7 to Ivy Bridge i7? Unless 50% faster, not upgrading. ;D
Now, wishful thinking here....
"Supercharge your MacBook Pro."
"In-Store Upgrade to Faster Processors. Only for $x99."
;D
Likely, as someone above said, it might be a silent BTO update just like last year. We will see a 2x60QM in 15" and 17" as a higher BTO option and in-store AG model, possibly 2760QM (2.3GHz, versus 2720QM 2.2GHz) replacing 2820QM (2.3GHz), then a higher option 2860QM (2.5GHz). It is unlikely that Apple will adopt 2920XM (which is, essentially, an unlocked 2860QM after the new CPUs) or 2960XM though, as those have 10W higher TDPs, and extreme edition CPUs cost as much as half a MacBook Pro.
Though, Apple did a really good job pushing Quads into our MBPs. Sure, might not be good for heat, but this will allow us to ignore next generation CPU upgrades for a while. SNB i7 to Ivy Bridge i7? Unless 50% faster, not upgrading. ;D
Now, wishful thinking here....
"Supercharge your MacBook Pro."
"In-Store Upgrade to Faster Processors. Only for $x99."
;D
Semantics aside, I'd be a wee bit peeved were I to pay a few hundred more to customise my order for a higher end model, only for that to become the standard a few weeks after with a refresh. I appreciate technology is constantly evolving and that there'll always be something better round the corner, I'm just wondering whether we're more like to reach that corner in one month or five.
From what I've read IB will be about 25% faster than SB.
Macs are unlikely to adopt USB 3.0, for a simple reason, Apple (and Intel) wants to get Thunderbolt out.
Likely, as someone above said, it might be a silent BTO update just like last year. We will see a 2x60QM in 15" and 17" as a higher BTO option and in-store AG model, possibly 2760QM (2.3GHz, versus 2720QM 2.2GHz) replacing 2820QM (2.3GHz), then a higher option 2860QM (2.5GHz). It is unlikely that Apple will adopt 2920XM (which is, essentially, an unlocked 2860QM after the new CPUs) or 2960XM though, as those have 10W higher TDPs, and extreme edition CPUs cost as much as half a MacBook Pro.
Though, Apple did a really good job pushing Quads into our MBPs. Sure, might not be good for heat, but this will allow us to ignore next generation CPU upgrades for a while. SNB i7 to Ivy Bridge i7? Unless 50% faster, not upgrading. ;D
Now, wishful thinking here....
"Supercharge your MacBook Pro."
"In-Store Upgrade to Faster Processors. Only for $x99."
;D
This is wishful thinking, and that's one of the things that's always annoyed me about Apple. Upgrades are always MUCH more expensive than at a place like Alienware. Just spec them out for the 17" ... Apple is charging $25-$200 more for the exact same items. And these are upgrades, so after the "OS X usage charge" that we all pay to own Macs.
You also forgot to mention that the Alienware weighs 10 pounds, is twice as thick as the MBP and gets worse battery life.
Believe it not but you can upgrade the RAM and SSD yourself aftermarket if you don't like Apple's prices.
Last edited:
There have already been rumors about a 15" and 17" Macbook AIR coming this year around X-mas.
With these new Sandy Bridge CPU's coming soon, it's the perfect time to introduce them.
----------
if you look at the frequency Apple has been updating their Macbook Pro, it's a pretty bold statement that the next update will be with Ivy Bridge ( which will be around summer 2012 )
( Apple upgrades their Macbook Pro at a frequency that is less than 1 year )
----------
1. All MBP updates has been at a time span that is less than a year.
2. Apple has upgraded MBP in the same year before.
So statistically speaking, those claims are not in your favor.
The statistics do not support the view that the next upgrade will be in the summer of 2012 when Ivy Bridge hits, but much sooner.
Still, I don't see Apple updating the entire series just for the 2x60 CPUs.
A new BTO option, maybe, but it sure doesn't warrant a new series.
Unless we get a new GPU. 13" could get a Discrete, 15" low 6490M might go to a higher-end one (6650M, like the Mac Mini), 15" high 6750M could go for 6770M, or even a 6970M like iMac.
That might be enough for a decent new series. But just decent. Not good.
And anyway, MacBook Air 15" and 17", maybe, but they certainly won't have the same thermal envelope as our MacBook Pro Chassis. Result?
We get Ultra-Low-Voltage CPUs for that then. And the best Intel Sandy Bridge ULV CPU we have is the one in the ultimate Air. 1.8GHz.
Yes, there's a rumored 2.1GHz ULV, but...
2.1GHz Dual-Core < 2.0GHz Quad-Core
Obviously. ;D
A new BTO option, maybe, but it sure doesn't warrant a new series.
Unless we get a new GPU. 13" could get a Discrete, 15" low 6490M might go to a higher-end one (6650M, like the Mac Mini), 15" high 6750M could go for 6770M, or even a 6970M like iMac.
That might be enough for a decent new series. But just decent. Not good.
And anyway, MacBook Air 15" and 17", maybe, but they certainly won't have the same thermal envelope as our MacBook Pro Chassis. Result?
We get Ultra-Low-Voltage CPUs for that then. And the best Intel Sandy Bridge ULV CPU we have is the one in the ultimate Air. 1.8GHz.
Yes, there's a rumored 2.1GHz ULV, but...
2.1GHz Dual-Core < 2.0GHz Quad-Core
Obviously. ;D
15" high 6750M could go for 6770M, or even a 6970M like iMac.
Uhm, right... And a can of Unicorn tears to go with it.
Do you have any idea how much heat 6970M generates? Look at Alienware laptops. They are monstrous and yet 17" is the smallest that has 6970 option.
In fact MBP pretty much already has 6770M GPU; the only difference is gpu/mem clock speed. Look around the forums -- you can undervolt and overclock to get the same performance as 6770M and lower temperatures than stock (undervolting reduces heat).
As for CPU bump: that's pointless really.
The biggest benefit of choosing the faster CPU in the current BTO options is not few extra Mhz, but larger cache (6MB -> 8MB). Any CPU Intel could introduce will have the same cache size as current top of the line.
Correct on all counts! Also, it won't run Snow Leopard! That's the trade-off, but for people considering switching, do you think a nicer & lighter form-factor is enough to warrant that kind of equipment loss PLUS much higher price tag?
For everyday users, maybe. People like things simple. For many "power users" or gamers or what not, it's just not worth it mid-cycle like this. Typically, right at the time of a refresh/redesign the specs are far more competitive. The MBP I'd really like right now tips in at $600 more than the Alienware above, which is much better equipped.
Again, people like things simple. Of course with any computer you can swap out many components. The point is that Apple is charging more (sometimes a lot more) for the exact same stuff, which I think is lousy. Apple needs to get more competitive on price.
----------
I think a "quiet refresh" like switching to just the new processors like this is much more likely than Apple waiting until Ivy Bridge. IB is supposedly not that much faster than the new SB will be anyway (25%? is that worth waiting 6 months or more for?).
I personally would love to see a refresh that upped the processor & GPU, sometime between October and January. If the reason for the wait is getting a new GPU, then that's justified, imvho. Maybe they'll do this at the same time the rumored larger MBAs come out. If that's the case, I'll probably jump on the upgrade from my 2009.
Alright, let's spec them out.
Here's an Alienware MX17 laptop configured as close as I can get to a 17" MacBook Pro.
Remember, MacBook Pro's have had 3x3 antennas since the last refresh (February). Be sure to pick Windows 7 Ultimate, too, so that you can get whole disk encryption (you know, that thing that's built in on Lion?).
Of course, you also have to make sure that you pick the high-resolution screen (which, for the record, still isn't as high-res as a 17" MacBook Pro screen). Finally, don't forget to get your 15 month subscription to McAfee to protect your data from viruses and malware.
Now, let's compare that to a 17" MacBook Pro:
Oh. Well. Hmm. I see a difference of $120 (that's including the $50 upgrade to the anti-glare display that I did on the 17" MacBook Pro). And you have to run Windows to save that $120. By year 3 of owning your laptop, you'll have paid more than that in Antivirus fees.
Also, that laptop weighs 9 1/2 pounds. The 17" MacBook Pro is 6.5. Furthermore, your brick of an Alienware laptop only manages 3 1/2 hours of battery life while browsing the web via WiFi. The MacBook Pro gets 7.
So...did I win the game?
Last edited:
Alright, troll. I'll play your game.
Here's an Alienware MX17 laptop configured as close as I can get to a 17" MacBook Pro.
Remember, MacBook Pro's have had 3x3 antennas since the last refresh (February). Be sure to pick Windows 7 Ultimate, too, so that you can get whole disk encryption (you know, that thing that's built in on Lion?).
Of course, you also have to make sure that you pick the high-resolution screen (which, for the record, still isn't as high-res as a 17" MacBook Pro screen). Finally, don't forget to get your 15 month subscription to McAfee to protect your data from viruses and malware.
Now, let's compare that to a 17" MacBook Pro:
Oh. Well. Hmm. I see a difference of $120 (that's including the $50 upgrade to the anti-glare display that I did on the 17" MacBook Pro). And you have to run Windows to save that $120. By year 3 of owning your laptop, you'll have paid more than that in Antivirus fees.
Also, that laptop weighs 9 1/2 pounds. The 17" MacBook Pro is 6.5. Furthermore, your brick of an Alienware laptop only manages 3 1/2 hours of battery life while browsing the web via WiFi. The MacBook Pro gets 7.
So...did I win the game?
TL;DR --> Alienware troll got owned.
lol, not a troll, but thanks for your condescension. I'm just an annoyed Mac user. But you're right that I didn't factor in the antivirus software (haven't used Windows in a while, lol) plus fees.
With my build that still leaves the PC at $400 cheaper, plus the 3D display, better graphics card, and Blu-ray drive. That must be weighed against form factor, battery life, and OS.
My point is that Apple's rigid refresh schedule dissuades many users by
1) charging more for upgrades of the exact same hardware items
2) not offering more frequent small upgrade options
Right after a refresh, the MBP is usually pretty competitive as far as hardware (though usually higher cost still). The problem is that when the wait so long to offer upgrade options (and charge more for the same items), by the middle of a cycle they are no longer competitive. This makes it very difficult to get friends to want to switch from Windows to Snow Leopard (I'm refusing to acknowledge Lion at this point).
When I switched in 2007 (right after a refresh), the price came out to about $200 more for my MBP vs the same specs on good PCs. $200 was well worth it to me (still is).
Last edited:
What exactly are you hoping for from ranting on a forum? If you don't want an Apple computer, then sell yours and get the amazing alienware and join the dell forums. It's pretty simple, I think. Imagine how much more productive you could be if you could upgrade to the newer processor every 5 months and you would not have to waste time on complaining on forums as well.
Huh, and here I thought an Apple forum was a place to discuss Apple products. I guess it's this is a place where you can only praise them and not criticize?
So you're saying Apple is going to wait 1.5 years for the next MBP? This has never happened before so I highly doubt it.
Between Ivy Bridge and this current MBP, expect an other upgrade to happen. Apple won't wait 1.5 years for the next refresh.
If you're looking for a GPU + CPU bump, wait for Ivy Bridge.Ivy Bridge will offer many more things than just speed. It's cooler, faster, USB 3.0. The Integrated GPU is 2 times faster than the Sandy Bridge GPU which is very important for the 13" MBP also. And ATI is coming with 40 nm GPU which is going to be huge upgrade for descrete GPU's.
I think a redesign is coming, based on the rumors of the 15 and 17 inch Macbook Air's
Just the opposite. I think we'll see a refresh (perhaps only a "quiet refresh") by January if not before. In regards to seeing a GPU upgrade by then, that was wishful thinking, as was commented before. I think it's likely we'll see a full redesign for Ivy Bridge (which would be smart, if they can only boast a 25-50% speed increase, having a full redesign will still encourage upgraders).
for an uncompetitive computer, it seems to be selling awfully well. i don't understand how the upgrade schedule dissuades people. i switched a few months ago from windows, so there is some anecdotal evidence. do you have anything more than anecdotal evidence that apple's mbp model is dissuading people from switching?
yes. apple charges more for things. but, it isn't a deal breaker.
yes. apple sometimes goes a little too long before an update or refresh. again, it isn't a deal breaker, especially if you consider the lackluster competition. windows is fine. i've got to use it every day at some point. but, i don't like it much. and, i haven't found any laptops that compare to apple's in terms of design. the current unibody is simply the best on the market (in my opinion).
as for price, you can quibble over a few hundred dollars, and i will grant that apple is more expensive than comparable windows computers. but, it is also more fun, and that is worth paying for.
i like lion, and i look forward to upgrading in a few months
Alright, troll. I'll play your game.
Here's an Alienware MX17 laptop configured as close as I can get to a 17" MacBook Pro.
Remember, MacBook Pro's have had 3x3 antennas since the last refresh (February). Be sure to pick Windows 7 Ultimate, too, so that you can get whole disk encryption (you know, that thing that's built in on Lion?).
Of course, you also have to make sure that you pick the high-resolution screen (which, for the record, still isn't as high-res as a 17" MacBook Pro screen). Finally, don't forget to get your 15 month subscription to McAfee to protect your data from viruses and malware.
Now, let's compare that to a 17" MacBook Pro:
Oh. Well. Hmm. I see a difference of $120 (that's including the $50 upgrade to the anti-glare display that I did on the 17" MacBook Pro). And you have to run Windows to save that $120. By year 3 of owning your laptop, you'll have paid more than that in Antivirus fees.
Also, that laptop weighs 9 1/2 pounds. The 17" MacBook Pro is 6.5. Furthermore, your brick of an Alienware laptop only manages 3 1/2 hours of battery life while browsing the web via WiFi. The MacBook Pro gets 7.
So...did I win the game?
TL;DR --> Alienware troll got owned.
HP DV6t with 2720QM, 6770m, 6GB RAM, 750GB 7200 RPM, 1080p screen for ~$1050.
Macbook Pro? Starts at $2000. Excluding RAM upgrade, excluding HDD upgrade, with student discount.
NP8150 with 95% gamut 1080p, 6990m, 750 GB 7200 RPM, 8 GB RAM, for ~$1600.
I don't think pricing is really an area where we should be comparing ourselves to PCs.
Also, I'd probably pay another $200 to go from my 6750m to the 6870m.
PC vendors all have haggling room, discounts, what have you. No one pays retail for PCs. A m18x with 2720QM and crossfire 6990ms can be had for ~$2000-$2200, depending on the sales rep.
Ivy will probably be a tad bit faster, but not really fast enough to really draw any attention to it, about 20%. Think of it this way, Sandy Bridge was about 25% faster per clock, AND you get 100% more cores.
Of course it's a place to discuss and learn, but I am still not sure what your style of post is going to achieve and it certainly does not welcome discussion. You have your mind made up and I don't think that anyone could say anything so it seems a bit pointless to me and I am not sure what we would be discussing.
Your signature also tells me a lot and discourages me from engaging in a discussion with you. I completely disagree with you, by the way.
But you aren't comparing Apples to Apples (I hate that stupid pun). The MacBook Pro doesn't have a Blu-ray Drive, so I removed it. Nor does it have a 3D display, so I took that off as well. All of those things *lower* the price of the Alienware, so if anything the price could be even more than a 17" MacBook Pro.
Troll was a strong word, I just get tired of the "Apple is more expensive, look at this PC that I built!" arguments. It's not even close to being true anymore, and when it is true, the difference is typically <$200.
Seriously? Let's do this again.
I used the HP ENVY series, as that's the closest comparison in build quality to a MacBook Pro. Same processor as an MBP, it has a slightly larger SSD (no 256GB option), but has worse battery life, weighs over a pound more and has a lower screen resolution. The difference is about $300, but it's not a completely even match up.
I really wish that people would research before they post this misconception. I'm honestly debating making a website that just does this for every computer that Apple makes. It drives me nuts.
Seriously? Let's do this again.
I used the HP ENVY series, as that's the closest comparison in build quality to a MacBook Pro. Same processor as an MBP, it has a slightly larger SSD (no 256GB option), but has worse battery life, weighs over a pound more and has a lower screen resolution. The difference is about $300, but it's not a completely even match up.
I really wish that people would research before they post this misconception. I'm honestly debating making a website that just does this for every computer that Apple makes. It drives me nuts.
No one pays retail for PCs. Envy line blows, there's a reason no one buys it. Check notebookreview.
Anyway, yes, let's play.
And that's with a 1080p antiglare. Blu ray. And a more powerful 6770m. And 6 GB RAM.
Specs have never been a Mac's strong point. Design/form/styling has.
A great keyboard and a godsend trackpad. Those are strong points. The world renown spot-from-half-way-across-the-room half bitten Apple moniker. Yes.
Specs? No. Bang for buck? No.
alright, let's spec them out.
Here's an alienware mx17 laptop configured as close as i can get to a 17" macbook pro.
remember, macbook pro's have had 3x3 antennas since the last refresh (february). Be sure to pick windows 7 ultimate, too, so that you can get whole disk encryption (you know, that thing that's built in on lion?).
Of course, you also have to make sure that you pick the high-resolution screen (which, for the record, still isn't as high-res as a 17" macbook pro screen). Finally, don't forget to get your 15 month subscription to mcafee to protect your data from viruses and malware.
Now, let's compare that to a 17" macbook pro:
oh. Well. Hmm. I see a difference of $120 (that's including the $50 upgrade to the anti-glare display that i did on the 17" macbook pro). And you have to run windows to save that $120. By year 3 of owning your laptop, you'll have paid more than that in antivirus fees.
Also, that laptop weighs 9 1/2 pounds. The 17" macbook pro is 6.5. Furthermore, your brick of an alienware laptop only manages 3 1/2 hours of battery life while browsing the web via wifi. The macbook pro gets 7.
So...did i win the game?
+1
So you think comparing a 15", plastic HP with a slower processor and crappy screen quality is a more fair comparison?
Try again.
Last edited: