Nothing. It just depends on your needs and preferences. Personally for me 13" is the perfect size for lugging around all day. I wouldn't consider a larger laptop.
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.
Steve Jobs on 13-Inch MacBook Pro's Use of Intel Core 2 Duo Processors
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nothing. It just depends on your needs and preferences. Personally for me 13" is the perfect size for lugging around all day. I wouldn't consider a larger laptop.
It's a good thing I've got good lung capacity, because I'm still holding my breath for openCL to be implemented in anything that affects my daily use.
Where are all these OpenCL apps that you're talking about? For an average user who doesn't play 3D games, the 320M is not needed and they'd be better served with an i5+intel GPU that would properly run the horrible flash plugin on OSX as well as other things. I would prefer an i5 or i7 13" with the intel IGP, since I never play games with my 13" anyway. I was on the market for a new 13" but I'll stick with my trusty 2Ghz Aluminum macbook until they put a decent cpu in it.
Money is not the issue here and I'd gladly buy a 15" version, however the point of a laptop is that it's easily portable and I am uncomfrotable with laptops larger than 13". Maybe they'll release an MBA with Intel IGP and low voltage i5....I can only dream.
+1
Really wanted this to be a no-brainer upgrade for me, but it isn't. Basically they gave us better battery life and better graphics, but I would have preferred a faster processor (i5/i7) and an option for matte in the 13" form factor.
I guess Steve Jobs figured people that bought the 13" are not people that use heavy video editing or such programs nor do they heavy game on a 13" screen. I'm thinking he thinks that the 13" is for the average user, that can do some gaming, some editing and the normal stuff and as usual Apple loves making choices for people I would love to see 1 more options for the 13" with an i5 without any discrete and everyone would be happy.
People seem to be talking a lot about #s and specs when it comes to the price, but for me the design, batterylife, build quality, technology and trackpad is worth more than half the price. take that away and you got your windows computer for 7-800 dollars..
People seem to be talking a lot about #s and specs when it comes to the price, but for me the design, batterylife, build quality, technology and trackpad is worth more than half the price. take that away and you got your windows computer for 7-800 dollars..
Not necessarily true. It's possible that Apple has excess in supply and needs to use them up before moving onto something else.
yeah thats true too. its probably not going to happen. I just can't see myself buying a computer with a c2d that costs that much and i can't find a rational reason to drop 1800 on the 15" laptop right now. I still will probably get it though, they are well built machines beyond just the specs.
Just make it 2mm or 3mm thicker - no tradeoffs needed.
"Thin" cripples the 13".
Note that the PowerBook G4 12", widely regarded as a nearly ideal size for a compact laptop, was 5.9 mm thicker than the 13" MBP.
Please show us the benchmark reports on "ALL apps" that show the improvement with OpenCL.
Depending on Apple for drivers for Windows always "smells like trouble".
Most people, though, say that the standard Windows drivers work fine - and Nvidia has a good record with "universal" drivers. I would be surprised if the standard Nvidia 300M drivers did not work.
I went to Best Buy to see if there were any new models in yet. There weren't but I did have a chance to start playing around with the older 13" Macbook Pro.
I want to like the Aluminium cases but they're so uncomfortably warm and some models still have noticeable hard drive vibrations. I find that I like the plastic Macbook more.
So you know more about computer design than Apple, too? Gee, all they need to do is fire the 1,000 computer engineers they have on staff and ask you for your expert opinion on MacRumors.
Amazing the amount of arrogance you Apple-bashers have.
So you're accusing Apple of publicly lying about why they chose to stick with Core2Duo? And your evidence is.....
They're coming. Mac OS X already supports OpenCL. A few other samples:
http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=58513
One audio task was reduced from 492 seconds to 14 seconds on an 8 core Mac Pro.
Folding@Home was sped up 30 times.
An OpenCL benchmark reduced elapsed time by 80% with just a 9600m
https://www.macrumors.com/2009/08/30/opencl-benchmarks-and-support-for-both-macbook-pro-gpus/
Not a whole lot of examples yet, but it hasn't been out long, so it will probably start appearing in the next round of updates. As I said, it doesn't add much now, but it will benefit users significantly as time goes on.
I do know that if a given form factor is too cramped, making it slightly larger might help.
The whole C2D in the 13" mess is only due to Apple painting themselves into a corner with "thin" and "battery life" as the primary goals.
Make it slightly thicker, or less battery life, or jettison the optical - problem solved, you can use a current CPU.
Not evidence per se, but Apple/Steve Jobs publicly lying is pretty well documented on many occasions.
I'm pleased that you are withdrawing your claim "OpenCL which means that ALL apps will benefit".
Nothing for the average user I see...
Where is the openCL accelerated Flash (OSX needs it BADLY), Quicktime with 1080p mkv support, Photoshop?
OpenCL is a pipe dream, if it ever becomes widespread, there will be 5 new generations of Intel CPU's by then. Right now and within the rest of this year, there will be no advantages of a 320M GPU for those who don't play 3D games on their laptops.
No need for any of that, just use the Intel IGP and problem solved. Want a discrete GPU? get the 15" version. CPU is used far more often than GPU for all tasks besides gaming, which is not an OSX strong point to begin with.
Debating if I should return 15in i7 MBP at Best Buy.
I originally got my Gateway FX 7811 junked out. They gave me store credit. I finally decided to purchase a Mac. I kinda would like the 13 in due to portability and for the fact that I have a desktop PC and another Windows Notebook.
I purchased the 15in i7, but I am in debate if I should return it and either exchange it for new "new" MBP....*dual core* cough...or play the waiting game for an i3-5 to eventually come out.
I originally got my Gateway FX 7811 junked out. They gave me store credit. I finally decided to purchase a Mac. I kinda would like the 13 in due to portability and for the fact that I have a desktop PC and another Windows Notebook.
I purchased the 15in i7, but I am in debate if I should return it and either exchange it for new "new" MBP....*dual core* cough...or play the waiting game for an i3-5 to eventually come out.
Apple's invested a lot of ad dollars in saying the Intel graphics suck. I'm sure the fans here would instantly turn around and say that Intel graphics is wonderful if Cupertino says that.
But, someone will have to code the OpenCL wrapper for the Intel graphics - but all the OSX developers have been reassigned to coding for Igadgets.
Rock. Hard place.
note that i used the word possible. likewise, what proof do you have that they are not lying? idiot.
okay everyone, i need your help
i am going to buy a MBP for back to school but im not sure which one i will need. I am using it for nothing more than notes, email, internet and some movie watching. Nothing intense. I like the size of the 13", but i just figured the i5/i7 is something i would need.
however, for the huge price difference from the high end 13" to the i7 15" (about 700 with AppleCare) is it really worth it. If im not doing anything intense, will i really notice a difference in speed? or will i really need the additional discrete GPU.
Things like the HD screen, 7200 rpm HDD, i7 processor and discrete GPU all look really attractive on paper, but it it really worth 700$?
I am not really a computer guy, just have been reading alot of MacRumors in anticipation of the upgrade, so i could really use your opinions. Thanks alot.
i am going to buy a MBP for back to school but im not sure which one i will need. I am using it for nothing more than notes, email, internet and some movie watching. Nothing intense. I like the size of the 13", but i just figured the i5/i7 is something i would need.
however, for the huge price difference from the high end 13" to the i7 15" (about 700 with AppleCare) is it really worth it. If im not doing anything intense, will i really notice a difference in speed? or will i really need the additional discrete GPU.
Things like the HD screen, 7200 rpm HDD, i7 processor and discrete GPU all look really attractive on paper, but it it really worth 700$?
I am not really a computer guy, just have been reading alot of MacRumors in anticipation of the upgrade, so i could really use your opinions. Thanks alot.
You won't need an i5 or i7 for the tasks you describe, and the discrete graphics is only used to accelerate movies if they are in certain formats. However, a 13" screen is not very big for watching movies. It would depend on how badly you wanted an "HD" experience. Even a plain Macbook would do what you want, or even an iPad. But an iPad doesn't have a DVD drive if that's how you intend to watch, or any way to add other codecs than the ones Apple provides.
If only my iBook ran Snow Leopard, I wouldn't have bothered with my Macbook at all. Closest thing to a netbook Apple has, but it runs flash pretty poorly.
I was in the same boat as you. However, i went with the 13", bought it on tuesday and i love it. Its fast (despite what people say about the c2d), runs iwork/ms word well, its light and extremely portable, and the battery lasts forever!! I use it for evrything you stated and it keeps up just fine. Better than fine, actually. Do yourself a favor and save some cash, the 13" is plenty for you.