New MBPs in October?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by hadassah77, Sep 3, 2010.

  1. hadassah77 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    #1
    Hi there! I know that in the past, Apple has had refreshes of MBPs in October and in April....have any of you heard anything about an upcoming October refresh on MBPs? Thanks! :)
     
  2. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #2
    In the recent past, it's been 8-10 months between the updates so I wouldn't expect an update before early 2011
     
  3. TopHatPlus macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2010
    Location:
    Southern Ontario
    #3
    well the buying guide will give you a good idea, but i expect the april-may next year, there is supposed to be some significant new processors coming out so theres no point in apple rushing the refresh
     
  4. hadassah77 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    #4
    OK. Thank you, HellHammer and TopHatPlus! I think I will go ahead and buy now then.
     
  5. mulo macrumors 68020

    mulo

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Location:
    Behind you
    #5
    sandy bridge?
     
  6. Iphone3gs macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    #6
    Buy now

    Yes buy now...I'm ordering mine tomorw with the iPod touch and printer...
     
  7. elpmas macrumors 68000

    elpmas

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Location:
    Where the fresh snow don't go.
  8. inertiat macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2008
    #8
    Me too :D Minus the printer. I bought a Canon PIXMA MP490 for £40 from Currys the other day and it's a great printer, just one to check out.
     
  9. Frosties macrumors 6502a

    Frosties

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    Sweden
    #9
    I expect a speedbump soon and as speculation we can perhaps get the 512MB VRAM in the higher 15" i5. Right now it's used as an incentive to go for the i7 and the 2.4i5 is even recommended over the 2.53i5 on the phone from apple store. That would be all I think until next year. But really don't play the waiting game as that will give you smurfs on the brain.
     

    Attached Files:

  10. L0s7man macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2009
    #10
    What about an update for 13"?

    Sure 15" were updated, but 13" is still C2D. Don't think there needs to be an event for that. Just wake up one Tuesday and its i5 13" MBP. Hopefully a better screen too.
     
  11. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #11
    Apple would have done that in April if that was what they wanted. Steve clearly said Apple chose better graphics and battery life instead of the new CPUs. Any update before Sandy Bridge is useless
     
  12. millertime021 macrumors 6502a

    millertime021

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Location:
    AZ
    #12
    I wouldn't expect a refresh before 2011. If there is one, it's probably just a minor speed bump you won't notice in day to day use; at least for most people.


    But I don't know.
     
  13. L0s7man macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2009
    #13
    Huh? 13" MBP is not an ultraportable. Shd have the same specs as 15"; 330M and i5. Seriously, how can you defend C2D? And don't use Sandy Bridge as an excuse to everything.

    You can go C2D -> i5 -> Sandy Bridge or whatever; there is no reason so skip i5 entirely. Doesn't i5 have better battery life than C2D anyway?
     
  14. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #14
    Apple uses 25W C2Ds in 13" and 35W i5/7 in 15" and 17". There are 640LM and 620LM that are 25W but they cost as much as the 620M which is used in high-end so there is no point with that unless you want to pay 2000$ for 13". If Apple used the 35W variant, then you would be stuck with Intel IGP. Also, it would be ridiculous if 13" used the same CPUs as 15" and 17" as then people would not fork out the extra $ for more expensive models which is exactly what Apple wants you to do, to pay more. i3 wouldn't even be an upgrade due lack of Turbo.

    C2D was a compromise. Seriously, it was the best solution. You don't want i3 and Intel IGP, they suck. i5 and discrete GPU is way too expensive and then you would get nasty battery life. Honestly, people are too fussed about these iX CPUs. Yes, they are better but not that much. For an average Joe, it doesn't make any difference
     
  15. inertiat macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2008
    #15
    THANK YOU
    So many people don't get why C2D was actually necessary. Apple would have been crazy to go with an i series and use Intels integrated graphics.
    And besides, who uses a 13" screen actually needs it for anything that intensive?? a C2D can run every game out then and coming up, can run iMovie and Word and a whole host of other apps. What really needs an i series is heavy video work, but anyone doing that would never work on a pewny 13" screen - or would be mad to try. With the resolution on that thing you'd be lucky just to get all the windows you'll need in FCP, let alone actually enlarging any.
    C2D definitely was the best option - you get a decent processor, plus a decent dedicated graphics chip = multi functionality and games.
    Better than a great processor and an awful integrated graphics chip = good at number crunching, can't go anywhere near graphics or HD video.

    This does make me wonder what's going to happen with Sandy Bridge, seeing as everything is on the die. Would there be any way to use a dedicated graphics card?
     
  16. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #16
    The IGP in Sandy Bridge will be a huge improvement, easily 2-4 times better than the current IGP. If drivers are not screwed up, the IGP should be enough as only GPU.
     
  17. L0s7man macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2009
    #17
    Vaio Z starts at $1900, has i5, 2x64GB SSD and a screen that is light years ahead of what you can get in MBP 13", with awesome 1600x900; 13" MBP with 1x128GB SSD (which is slower then those used in Vaio and not Raid 0) costs $1800.

    Vaio Z is praised as being the best 13" money can buy.

    "You want power, buy 15 inch" argument is rubbish. Choose the size, choose the components and pay whatever it costs. I'm a freaking customer.

    I don't understand you crazy folks either defending Apple for ripping people off, or defending them for not offering any configuration options (hello? option for i5, so you cheap people could get stuck with C2D); probably you'd be defending apple for not offering higher resolution screen ("but... but... but... who would ever need 1600x900/1440x1050 in a 13" laptop).

    Oh, and the magic of Sandy Bridge. Will fix all the problems that laptops had since the down of time. It will run faster, be cooler and you'd be able to play Crisis on ultra... Thank you very much, I'd rather have some ATI/Nvidia GPU.

    Bottom line: if I don't get a good screen in the package I would like to have at least good GPU/CPU; if I don't get good GPU/CPU, I'd like at least a very good screen. With MBP 13" you get neither. With MBA 13" you get neither.

    I want to keep working on OS X, but since Apple moved to making toys, it might be good time to jump ship and go back to good old Linux. (with OS X on a virtual machine perhaps?)
     

Share This Page