Looks old in comparison to what? If you want a "cool" or "fresh" design because you think this one is flawed, get a PC; that's not what professional Macs are about.
An old post of mine is relevant here. I'll repost it:
Design is absolutely one of Apple's top priorities. Occasionally, power takes a backseat to a product's design. Case (no pun intended) in point: the iMac. It's a desktop that uses laptop parts because the case is too small to proffer adequate cooling. I'm not saying that Apple doesn't care about the design of their professional computers; heavens, no. All that I am trying to say is that when it comes to personal computers, function follows form, and when it comes to professional computers, form follows function.
Put another way, Apple compromises potential power in the MacBooks and iMacs in exchange for kick-awesome cases. For the MacBook, that means no dedicated graphics, and for the iMac that means laptop parts.
With their professional machines, Apple has been shown to care less about updating their designs, as looking good is not their main purpose. Certainly, the shells of both the Mac Pro and the MacBook Pro are impeccably designed, and as they have worked so well for every technology that has been thrown at them, Apple has not seen fit to change them. This is why the MacBook Pro still uses what is arguably the exact case as the aluminum PowerBook G4 from six and a half years ago, and the Mac Pro uses a case that is almost six years old. The primary goal of Apple's professional machines is to provide enormous amounts of power while fulfilling the secondary goal of looking good.
This is the distinction that I am trying to make in the argument for the necessity of a MacBook Pro case redesign. I am very open to little enhancements, but do not want to see large amounts of R&D spent on a total redesign of a case that has stood the test of time for years.
I hope that this clarifies my reasoning why a case redesign for redesign's sake is not the purpose of the MacBook Pro.
