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

NVIDIA Powered MacBooks on October 14th?

The line up should be

Macbook Air $699 (position as an EeePC competitor), no video card
Macbook $1299, video card
Macbook Pro $1699, video card
 
Ventro, I disagree. I don't know if Apple needs a particularly inexpensive offering, and if they did, I think it should be a much smaller subnotebook, but that there's still a place for the Macbook Air. I'd rather see:

MacBook $999 (cd drive etc, much like it is now)
MacBook Air $999 (Much like it is now, but smaller, thinner, and lighter... not necessarily a smaller screen)
MacBook Pro $1699
 
Digital Skunk said:
The MacBook Air should never be stripped down enough to be an EeePC competitor.

Apple should make a new notebook model for that.
Click to expand...

itll be a eeepc competitor in a couple of years thats how it is with tech look at the iphone new tech found, 1 year later lowered price down, sames gonna happen with the mba
 
Chaszmyr said:
Ventro, I disagree. I don't know if Apple needs a particularly inexpensive offering, and if they did, I think it should be a much smaller subnotebook, but that there's still a place for the Macbook Air. I'd rather see:

MacBook $999 (cd drive etc, much like it is now)
MacBook Air $999 (Much like it is now, but smaller, thinner, and lighter... not necessarily a smaller screen)
MacBook Pro $1699
Click to expand...

Agreed with that!
 
MacBook08 said:
When they're working, they look great and they improve battery life. Look, the MacBook Pro got them in 2007 and the MacBook Air got them in January. With time comes improvements. LED screens are part of Apple's promise to become a Greener Apple and eventually ALL computers will use them or a similar technology. I expect to see them.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but for the expense and inconvenience the operative word is "when".
 
RHD said:
Possibly, but for the expense and inconvenience the operative word is "when".
Click to expand...

Apple has pledged to move all notebooks to LED backlights by 2009. They have about 3 months to do that. This refresh seems likely for LED backlit screens.
 
chickenninja said:
well its nice to know that the people at apple are taking measures to improve the graphics of their low end machines. Today i tip my glass to them, for it is now tempting to buy a mac mini once again. But i think il hold out for star-craft 2 which should come out Dec 13th.
Click to expand...


Yeah, I just wish they'd improve the graphics of their high end machines. Pro laptops where you don't get a choice anyway.
 
Jack Flash said:
Apple has pledged to move all notebooks to LED backlights by 2009. They have about 3 months to do that. This refresh seems likely for LED backlit screens.
Click to expand...

The quality and failure rate for LED laptops is unacceptable. That's what I'm saying. A mission to downgrade at higher prices, not what I look for in an expensive pro product.
 
RHD said:
Yeah, I just wish they'd improve the graphics of their high end machines. Pro laptops where you don't get a choice anyway.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see some MAJOR graphics improvements in both their high-end and lower-end machines. It's not currently possible to get a high-end graphics card in a Mac notebook. And a $1400 top-of-the-line MB is not what I would call a low-end machine, and yet it has worse graphics than most $600 notebooks.

And to reiterate what I have said before, I would like to see all Apple notebooks (except of course the MBA) thicker. The current thinness accomplishes nothing except generate a LOT of extra heat, increase the cost of components, and decrease the potential performance of the notebooks. What about iBook G4 thickness for Apple notebooks? Thickness really isn't important. Is there any time you really needed your notebook to be 0.3 inches thinner than others in its class? Apple needs to cut out the "thinness" and work on making its notebooks perform better and have less heat. Remember, thicker = more performance. And the notebooks only have to be 0.3 inches thicker to have the capability of cramming a lot more in, including a better cooling system.
 
Chaszmyr said:
Ventro, I disagree. I don't know if Apple needs a particularly inexpensive offering, and if they did, I think it should be a much smaller subnotebook, but that there's still a place for the Macbook Air. I'd rather see:

MacBook $999 (cd drive etc, much like it is now)
MacBook Air $999 (Much like it is now, but smaller, thinner, and lighter... not necessarily a smaller screen)
MacBook Pro $1699
Click to expand...

In the long run, due to the revolutionary manufacturing technique, the MacBook will drop down to the price of the EEEPC. We should see a price drop at the event, clearing the way for more price drops over the next couple of years.
 
Just my point of view as a deloper:

Look at OpenGL Info for OSX 10.5:

http://homepage.mac.com/arekkusu/bugs/GLInfo.html

Everything Apple uses today supports OpenGL 2.0. Starting with NVidia GF6 series and even the older Radeon 9600. Only GMA950 and GMA X3100 still only support OpenGL 1.2!

Yes, I know GMA X3100 supports DirectX 10 and shader 4.0 - at least in theory, in reality anything that uses shader 4 hardly reaches one frame per second on that chip. But Intel does not offer OpenGL 2.0 support - even on windows. Since OpenGL is the primary 3D api on OSX this is a strong reason to look somewhere else for Apple. For any games development there is a simple rule: Mac has OpenGL 2.0 - if you forget about Intel GMA.....

Christian
 
Beric said:
I'd like to see some MAJOR graphics improvements in both their high-end and lower-end machines. It's not currently possible to get a high-end graphics card in a Mac notebook. And a $1400 top-of-the-line MB is not what I would call a low-end machine, and yet it has worse graphics than most $600 notebooks.

And to reiterate what I have said before, I would like to see all Apple notebooks (except of course the MBA) thicker. The current thinness accomplishes nothing except generate a LOT of extra heat, increase the cost of components, and decrease the potential performance of the notebooks. What about iBook G4 thickness for Apple notebooks? Thickness really isn't important. Is there any time you really needed your notebook to be 0.3 inches thinner than others in its class? Apple needs to cut out the "thinness" and work on making its notebooks perform better and have less heat. Remember, thicker = more performance. And the notebooks only have to be 0.3 inches thicker to have the capability of cramming a lot more in, including a better cooling system.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY. Previous MacBook Pros have been 1.3" thick, only Apple enforced their absurd, superficial thinness obsession on what was supposed to be their high end notebook line and the result is a $2000 machine with a measily mid-range graphics card that still overheats, where literally gaining 0.3" would make possible cards more than twice as powerful than the current offering, we're talking high end here.

Keep the current MacBook Semi-Pro models at their anorexic 1" for those that are planning on sliding their laptops through exactly 1" or less thick solid holes, and give the rest of us an actual MacBook Pro with a high end card that happens to be a fraction of an inch thicker.

You don't even have to worry about producing new laptop backs, any bag designed for a 1" thick notebook will fit a 1.3" one no problem at all.

I can get this in the PC world for hundreds less than a MBP, but I am willing to pay goddamn £1500 if Apple can freaking DELIVER on pro notebooks for once. The MacBook Pros are some of the worst value for money notebooks on the market right now and have been for years.
 
ventro said:
The line up should be

Macbook Air $699 (position as an EeePC competitor), no video card
Macbook $1299, video card
Macbook Pro $1699, video card
Click to expand...

are you joking???


mb : 999$
mba : 1499$
mbp : 1799$
 
deriko100 said:
itll be a eeepc competitor in a couple of years thats how it is with tech look at the iphone new tech found, 1 year later lowered price down, sames gonna happen with the mba
Click to expand...

lowered price yes, EeePC competitor no.

And the iPhone's price wasn't really lowered, it was subsidized. If you aren't eligible for the upgrade price you pay $399 for the 8GB model and $499 for the 16.

jojo13 said:
are you joking???


mb : 999$
mba : 1499$
mbp : 1799$
Click to expand...

This is more realistic. And in keeping with the models' purpose. Not that I wouldn't love to see a $700 MBA, but not in the next revision. And definitely not a stripped down netbook.
 
Yeah, the MBA should not be made to compete with netbooks, its meant to compete with other ultraportables although 13" usually is not categorized under ultraportables.
I don't know I prefer Apple to stay out from netbooks because I never like its idea to begin with :p

"Upcoming Macbooks within the next ten years will have a different screen, touchpad, keyboard, etc..."
Click to expand...
;)
 
christian_k said:
Just my point of view as a deloper:

Look at Apple's OpenGL Info for OSX 10.5:

http://homepage.mac.com/arekkusu/bugs/GLInfo.html

Everything Apple uses today supports OpenGL 2.0. Starting with NVidia GF6 series and even the older Radeon 9600. Only GMA950 and GMA X3100 still only support OpenGL 1.2!

Yes, I know GMA X3100 supports DirectX 10 and shader 4.0 - at least in theory, in reality anything that uses shader 4 hardly reaches one frame per second on that chip. But Intel does not offer OpenGL 2.0 support - even on windows. Since OpenGL is the primary 3D api on OSX is a stron reason to look somewhere else for Apple. For any games development there is a simple rule: Mac has OpenGL 2.0 - if you forget about Intel GMA.....

Christian
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure it's completely Apple's fault that the GMA only supports OpenGL 1.2. The GMA950 has hardware support for OpenGL 1.4 and the GMA X3100 has hardware support for OpenGL 1.5. And the drivers on the Windows side have now enabled OpenGL 1.5 support, although it did take a while. It's just a matter of whether Apple will bother releasing Intel drivers that fully take advantage of the hardware. Just like Apple advertised Leopard as having OpenGL 2.1 support yet the Radeon HD2000 series and nVidia 8000 series still do not have OpenGL 2.1 drivers. Apple may not be using fast GPU hardware, but they certainly aren't helping things with driver support.
 
Beric said:
Posting an article that is a year old on upcoming Macbooks when we expect revisions in a couple of weeks is a pretty major mistake. Check your own links before you post them, please. ;)
Click to expand...

Srsly. I almost died when I read that. Now I have to cope with the disappointment.
 
I wonder if the added space a 16" would have over a 15" would allow for better cooling and a better GPU?

Probably not I suppose, Apple can't even fit a high end GPU into it's 17" models -_-

I feel so sorry for any 17" owners...
 
If we get a new video card it needs to support HDMI output. For Blu-Ray we need it eventually anyway. This should bring on some new Apple Displays sooner than later. Those seem a little long in the tooth as well.
 
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