Steve Jobs on 13-Inch MacBook Pro's Use of Intel Core 2 Duo Processors

[sportsfan]

Get over it people

All of you complaining about not having the "latest" i3 CPU are falling into the MHZ myth. Apple has proved time and again (most recently with the iPAD and it's "outdated" CPU) that good software also plays a part in performance. Apple has good software.

 

[diamond.g]

All of you complaining about not having the "latest" i3 CPU are falling into the MHZ myth. Apple has proved time and again (most recently with the iPAD and it's "outdated" CPU) that good software also plays a part in performance. Apple has good software.

Actually the i3 would be going against the Mhz myth. Notice the clockspeeds on the new i5 and i7 are actually lower than the c2d's they replace.

 

[lanlife]

Yeah, but the 15" gets a minimum of 8 hours of battery life with the discrete graphics on. You would think they would have similar luck with the 13" model if they so chose to.

I wouldn't be surprised if the 13" get updated in 6 months (to match the rest of the Pro line) much like the Aluminum MacBook did.

Oops.. It's look like the waiting are start all over again..

 

[tblrsa]

Can´t wait until reviews of the new 13" Macbook Pro become available. It´s a good product in my mind, its not always about having the latest tech. I especially love the 10 hour battery life.

 

[CaptainJeff]

I just ordered a 2.4ghz 13" mbp after spending literally 6 hours debating things. If I was going to get the 15", I wanted the i7 and high-res screen. After tax, I was looking at about $2,600, compared to $1,300 for the 13".

In my opinion, the $1,199 2.4ghz 13" is a great value, especially when compared to the $999 macbook. You get a unibody design, double the memory, much better graphics, backlit keyboard, a slight speed bump, and almost 50% more battery life for an extra $200.

I did the exact same thing, for the exact same reasons. That and the 15" is just a little too big for my intended uses.

 

[tblrsa]

Originally Posted by BlindGoldfish View Post
I just ordered a 2.4ghz 13" mbp after spending literally 6 hours debating things. If I was going to get the 15", I wanted the i7 and high-res screen. After tax, I was looking at about $2,600, compared to $1,300 for the 13".

In my opinion, the $1,199 2.4ghz 13" is a great value, especially when compared to the $999 macbook. You get a unibody design, double the memory, much better graphics, backlit keyboard, a slight speed bump, and almost 50% more battery life for an extra $200.

Well spoken, sir.

 

[saschke]

Well spoken, sir.

Yes indeed, well spoken. I will hook my new 13" up to the 24" LED Cinema Display. I don't really need the extra screen real estate of the 15.4" anymore

If even the graphics are nearly as strong as the 9600M GT256 then I'll be a happy camper

 

[jragosta]

There's been a lot of disappointment regarding these MBP updates. Does anyone read anything into this? Is the other shoe going to drop? Maybe there are more updates imminent. Hopefully Mac Pros. Or is this just wishful thinking? Would Apple release updates on consecutive days?

There's not that much disappointment. Most reports are fairly positive. What you're seeing is the MacRumors effect - no matter what Apple does, there are a group of people here who would complain.

How small is a "small increase" in performance if they had gone with the quad core instead of two?

Not possible. There is no quad core processor that fits the TDP that the MBP can handle. To use a quad core (desktop) i7, Apple would have to completely redesign the system. It would be larger, heavier, and have a reduced battery life.

The battery is nice, but it's 2010 and this thing still has a 1280x800 resolution, a processor tech from 2006 and there's no 3G option.

It's a 13" laptop. How many 13" laptops with 1900x1200 resolution do you know of? It will support higher resolution if you attach it to an external monitor, but it's just not practical on a smaller screen - with current technology.

Yeah, but the 15" gets a minimum of 8 hours of battery life with the discrete graphics on. You would think they would have similar luck with the 13" model if they so chose to.

Except that the 13" has a significantly smaller battery and lower baseline energy consumption. So if they add 10W to the 13", it will have a greater impact on battery life than on a 15". Not to mention that there could also be cooling problems.

Does someone know:
- when to expect the first reviews of the new 13" MBP!?
(I imagine that apple delivered them yesterday to some reviewers, and that we should see the first reviews today or tomorrow!? What do you think?)

www.macsurfer.com. If you're really so eager that you can't wait a day or two, check Macsurfer every hour.

Yeah, the 13" is still very cool but I just can't part with that much money for a C2D. I'll have to weigh the Thinkpad when it comes it because of course they don't tell you after all the upgrades. No doubt the Macbook Pro is a better designed computer. However after all this nail biting and using a Chinese brand "TCL LIFE3" computer for months I have to put my mind at ease.

This is more of the same silly spec games. If the 13" meets your needs, who cares what processor is in it? It's a very high quality machine supported by the best customer service in the industry. The 13" with C2D is going to be faster at many tasks than an i3 would have been - for the reasons Jobs gave. Even in the tasks where the C2D is slower, the difference would be about 10% - which would be imperceptible.

Your argument is akin to saying "that Ferrari is a great car, but I can't believe they only put 19" tires on it. I won't buy it until it comes with 20" tires.

If you made a copy of Apple's previous price list, this is what you would find: The cheapest MacBook today is $1199. The cheapest MacBook last week was $1199. The difference is 4GB instead of 2GB (add $50), 250GB drive instead of 160GB (add $50), a much improved graphics card (add ??? dollars), 2.4 GHz instead of 2.26 (you used to pay $150 more for 2.53 GHz, so we can say 2.4 would cost $75), 10 hours battery life instead of 7. A comparable MacBook last week would have cost at least $1500.

Exactly. In spite of what all the whiners are saying, it's a pretty significant jump from the version you could have bought last week.

No, it doesn't come with a fusion generator. It won't do your laundry or give you a back rub. It doesn't have a 64 core 7 GHz processor and 128 GB of RAM. But it's still a nice step up from what Apple was selling previously.

For all of you who disagree with Steve, you can now voice your discontent through a show of numbers by becoming part of the Facebook group

No crap2duo on the 13 inch Macbook Pro!

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=114132048604514

Cheers,

Marc

I guess it's a good thing that juvenile delinquents can now do silly Facebook pages instead of spending their time putting graffiti on walls, but it's still sad that they have so little concept of what it takes to design a computer that they think they can do it better than Apple.

 

[Steve121178]

Stick an i3 in there and the battery life will still be better than before.

They'll do that in the next update and claim >10 hour battery life

 

[montecarloss919]

They'll do that in the next update and claim >10 hour battery life

Yes and then it will obviously be dubbed "the greatest '13 MBP Ever!" lol

 

[arkmannj]

I miss user replaceable batteries, you know battery-life wouldn't be as big of a problems if they still allowed user replaceable batteries cuz I could buy an extra battery and just swap it on the go.

 

[RazHyena]

Those games are old.....are the newest games on the market too much fir the MBP's to handle?

Core2 duo STILL??? It's 2010, Steve.....

 

[Jack Lithian]

In terms of reliability, is a C2D better then a i3 CPU?

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

Killer graphics?
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

Funniest comment ever!

You made my day man, thanks

 

[Eidorian]

In terms of reliability, is a C2D better then a i3 CPU?

Why are you concerned about reliability?

 

[fkntotalkaos]

Yes indeed, well spoken. I will hook my new 13" up to the 24" LED Cinema Display. I don't really need the extra screen real estate of the 15.4" anymore

If even the graphics are nearly as strong as the 9600M GT256 then I'll be a happy camper

Shouldn't the 13 inch be better than the 9600M GT256? or 512?

 

[Jack Lithian]

Why are you concerned about reliability?

Cause like many other people, I don't want my computer to break down. I'm not familiar with the core i3.

 

[jragosta]

I miss user replaceable batteries, you know battery-life wouldn't be as big of a problems if they still allowed user replaceable batteries cuz I could buy an extra battery and just swap it on the go.

Even with 3-5 hour batteries, Apple's experience was that few people actually swapped batteries. With a 10 hour battery, it should be very rare. If you really need extra battery life, you can get an external battery pack. Using that wouldn't really be any less convenient than swapping batteries (maybe better in some respects).

Shouldn't the 13 inch be better than the 9600M GT256? or 512?

Should be. It's certainly better than the 9400M in the previous 13" MBP - as shown by the game benchmarks on Apple's site.

 

[hayesk]

They have done this in 12'' iBooks and PowerBooks for a long time! It can be done...

The 12" iBooks were thicker, slower, and had worse battery life.

 

[hayesk]

some of u where discussing about 1080p...

am i right if i assume that a 2010 13" macbook pro base model can play back a 1080p video file on a 24" 1920x1080 external monitor without any problems?

anyone knows sth about that?

Yes, you will be able to do that with no problem what soever. After all, the first Core Duo Mac Mini (~1.8GHz) with the onboard intel 950 (or whatever it was called) graphics could output 1080p QuickTime movies just fine.

 

[hayesk]

I miss user replaceable batteries, you know battery-life wouldn't be as big of a problems if they still allowed user replaceable batteries cuz I could buy an extra battery and just swap it on the go.

So let me get this straight. In the past batteries were lucky to get 5 hours out of them on a MacBook, and less on a MacBook Pro. You would rather carry an extra battery and have to swap (which meant shutting down) swap, just to equal the life of today's 10 hour battery?

And if you didn't carry one around and instead bought one when you needed it, you'd still have to find somewhere to charge it. Why not just charge up the MacBook instead?

Sorry, but I don't understand the advantage here. Maybe if the older swappable batteries gave you 10 hours, I might understand, but they didn't. Not even close.

 

[Maserati7200]

Hold on. Did I say all 13" MBP users or did I say the average 13" MBP user? I acknowledge that there are people who would like higher specs in a smaller package, but most of the people buying 13" MBP's are how I described. They want a cheap Mac laptop made of Aluminum to go on facebook and write papers. Go to a college, highschool, a starbucks, or an Apple Store and I think you'll agree with me.

In what way is the size of the computer correlated to the average intelligence of its user?

If you want to talk about an average user, the Pro model rarely factors in due to price. The consumer Macbook is the target device, where the size just happens to be set at only one option.

Your point tries to jam two unrelated topics together, but fails horribly.

Again, read my post more carefully. I am not saying the bigger laptop you get, the more you know about computers. I have a 13" MBP, I know a lot about computers. The key factor is price and styling. The 13" MacBook Pro has the Aluminum and glass which a lot of consumers like Suzy the college student like (and Ironically a lot of the pros don't like the glass, but that's a different issue). The 13" MacBook Pro offers them the cheapest gateway into the new unibody design, which is mainly what they want. You seem to think that I'm saying that if you have a 13" MBP, you automatically don't know about computers. No. I'm saying that the 13" MBP attracts people who don't know about computers because it's cheap, has the unibody design, and quite frankly, most Mac users aren't tech oriented to begin with. And some of these people buy 15" MBP's too. I have friends who have 15" MBP's who don't have a damn clue how computers work. They mainly have it for more screen space, which even a non-tech can appreciate. However those people are willing to spend more, and have a heavier computer. But they aren't the core market for the 15" MBP, prosumers are. Size doesn't matter (that's what she said), price, styling and connivence does. And with the 13" MBP is most attractive to those buyers because it is cheap, relatively light and small, and has a unibody design.

I would think that something like video editing is often done at a desk, and in that case you can buy any monitor up to 1920 x 1200 or 2048 x 1152 pixels and plug it into any MacBook and use that.

Yeah, but I was talking about using Word documents, not editing. And I doubt it's feasible to bring an external display to class. And your also assuming she has the money or is willing to pay for an external display.

 

[saschke]

Shouldn't the 13 inch be better than the 9600M GT256? or 512?

Depends. Missing the dedicated memory, the 320M could be worse at higher resolutions, while the 48 shader pipes give a nice boost for FPS on games utilizing newer shader technologies.

I predict the performance will level out. I don't plan on playing MW2 or PES2010 on resolutions higher than 1280*xxx

 

[tblrsa]

Does anyone know why there is no option to configure a 7200 rpm hard drive for the 13" MBP? The option is available only for the 15" and 17" models.

 

[fingernagel]

Answer-God

Originally Posted by jragosta
I guess it's a good thing that juvenile delinquents can now do silly Facebook pages instead of spending their time putting graffiti on walls, but it's still sad that they have so little concept of what it takes to design a computer that they think they can do it better than Apple.

It seems you know a lot about Apple and computers, but nothing about life. Your statement is so much out of place and your life is probably just about computing. Graffiti is an art form and represent the real life, represents culture, represents emotions and creative expressions. It seems you don't understand essential parts of culture (or sub-cultures) otherwise you wouldn't public such statements. The world would be a better place without facebook (and I use it too), but not without Graffiti.

It's sad that you have so little concept of what it takes to express themselves through art in a society of control, consumption and social loneliness. I thought you could do better.

Now, as far about the new Macbook Pro Line: I also would've liked to see more powerful machines like the Toshiba or the Sony ones. But still I do like the update a lot. I am stacked with my Powerbook G4 from 2005 and can't to my daily work anymore. I will buy a i7 2.66Ghz 17" with 8gb of RAM and will be very happy with it. The only thing I am worried about right now, is the high price that is a lot about what I expected,... and yes, it hurts to see pricing by Toshiba or Sony which are more than 1 thousand dollar cheaper.

Anyone know, how much time it takes to see the first refurbished i7 MacBook Pro's?

And is it possible to put some more RAM, antiglare display and a Spanish display in it? (I didn't see any option for that in the current refurbished products...)

Thanks for reading and thanks (finally) for the update!