Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I've been waiting for a new 13" model only about a month now so no 6 month nailbiting for me. I currently own a desktop AMD 3800+ X2 with 1024mb DDR 400mhz ram (ancient). I think the basemodel will do great for me, ok it's not an i5 processor but do I really need a 15" model which costs €550 ($750) more only to surf the internet, watch an occasional movie and work with Ableton live and other music apps?
Also, the €550 will buy me a very decent 24" screen on the side with money to spare.

Yes the new 13's will be fast enough for you! I ran the latest version of Logic Studio and Live on my Oct 2008 entry level unibody with no problems! So you should be fine!
 
10 hours is impressive, but what's the point? We live in a world where there are plugs everywhere: offices, homes, airplanes, trains, libraries, etc..
Granted, PCs that die-off in 2 hours don't cut it. That barely lasts you a class or a conference, but once your up at 5/6 hours there is no difference.

There's both real and psychological differences which play into each other. First, there's the simple "double-digit" battery life. Then, when you do a whole day's work and still have 30% at the end of the day, that means you never see a low power warning. You stop worrying about the battery. You never ask yourself whether you should use the computer now because you might need to use it later. Charging just becomes an end-of-day ritual.

This is already happening with iPad.
 
Makes sense. The 13" MBP is supposed to be primarily about mobility, so the focus on a decent performance and an excellent battery life is the way to go.
 
Killer graphics on a 13" display that is not even capable of displaying full 1080P like sub $800 Dell XPS notebooks from over 1-year ago? Really? The i3, i5 and i7 all have similar battery performance yet Mr. Jobs made the choice for us when it comes to performance. Who wants to play a game on a 13" display when it is not even able to show full 1080P? This was a way to milk even more money from users who want an Apple product but cannot afford the 15" or simply do not want the larger form-factor - yet still need/want an upgrade. This is silly - and insulting to think that users and bloggers cannot see through this line of junk. I am ashamed and disappointed with Apple on this update. The hurbris of Apple continues to grow and grow.

You may agree with Mr. Jobs on this one but many others do not. I want the latest CPU and best performance from my new $1300 MBP. I realize you cannot compare other brands of computers to Apple but you can compare raw hardware and when a 1-year old Dell XPS has a C2D at 2.66GHz, full 1080P, 4GB RAM and a 320GB HD with HDMI out, loads more inputs and outputs with Express and PCMCI for $1099 1-year ago - and less today with even faster core i5's and a better full 1080P display - it is a shame what Apple did to the customer. I am sorry you cannot see that.

D

Wait, are you saying you want 1080p on the 13" with an i3? You know that means Intel integrated graphics, right? I'm not sure they can do 720p (sarcasm). Unless of course you also want a discrete graphics card. But then do you want it to cost the same, or be the same thickness, or have a modicum of thermal management?

And maybe I'm crazy, but why is everyone so fixated with 1080p on small laptop screens. You do realize that desktop monitors don't come in at that resolution (actually the equivalent 16:10 aspect) below 24"? And you want twice the pixel density? Do you guys wear these laptops like hats with the screen right in front of your eyes (again, sarcasm)?

Ultimately, I don't understand why everyone has bought into this 1080p thing anyway, when that isn't even the normal aspect ratio for a computer. Has TV marketing really had that big an effect on everybody that they feel the need to just spout off numbers in order to find a gripe?
 
A great thing about this update, that nearly no one seems to mention, is that the standard 13" MacBook Pro finally comes with 4 GB of memory (up from 2 GB). Not spectacular perhaps - but much needed.
 
I like the people whining that these Macbooks Pros aren't for gamers.

If you go by the numbers, PCs in general aren't for gamers: gamers buy consoles.

The percentage of people who
a) are gamers
b) don't do their gaming on consoles
c) don't exclusively play PC games like Farmville and WoW (which have very minimal requirements) ...

...is completely miniscule. If Apple's shooting for, you know, making computers that actual people will buy, aiming anything at the gaming market is pointless. Why would Apple make computers for < 1% of the market. Battery life and other factors are infinitely more important to your average Macbook Pro 13" buyer.

That, and the current Macbook Pros play games just fine (just not bleeding edge fast).
 
Maybe the question you should ask is why anybody would by a netbook (beside the fact that it's cheaper) when they can get a 13" MBP.

Because if you only want to check email and write the occasional document and maybe a bit of Hulu or Fancast - and even NetFlix a $249 NetBook from Walmart would be great. I bought one for just that purpose and owned it for a while until I found a used 2.2GHz C2D white MB for $400 on Craigslist. Otherwise I would have kept the NetBook for light use/limited productivity and while on the road. A $249 NetBook or a $1200 MBP? It all depends on what you are using it for and to what your financial situation is.

D
 
I want the latest CPU and best performance from my new $1300 MBP.

I want a dinner date with Halle Berry. I don't need a dinner date with Halle Berry.

If your MBP is paying for itself through your professional work then if you need XXX performance then you pay YYYYY money to match up to that need. If Apple's products don't match then you have a mismatch in valuations.

I would like to have a 15" MBP that didn't cost $150 more not to have a super glossy screen (even more so if didn't make the pixels smaller and not provide builtin scaling). However, if I that's a requirement for me and pays for itself then will make that tradeoff.

Given the system constraints the 13" is under (lack of space) you aren't going to get the best performance if they use a i3 or i5 chip because not going to get a discrete graphics chip. Unless your needs are for GPU performance that is about 15-25% below a 9400M that would work. However, you don't seem likely to be one of those people since you seem to be hooked on Spec sheet checklists rather than actual workflow computational needs.
 
A great thing about this update, that no one seems to mention, is that the standard 13" MacBook Pro finally comes with 4 GB of memory (up from 2 GB).

It doesn't matter to those who are having a fit by this update. They're too busy complaining about the 10% loss in CPU power by not having an i5 (even an i3 lol)
 
"Beyond all that I can't figure out why anyone would want a 13" laptop in the first place. It is like the worst size possible.[/QUOTE]

Best comment I have seen today. I don't want an 13" anything, well humm, Ok let me say that.......
 
Killer graphics on a 13" display that is not even capable of displaying full 1080P like sub $800 Dell XPS notebooks from over 1-year ago? Really? The i3, i5 and i7 all have similar battery performance yet Mr. Jobs made the choice for us when it comes to performance. Who wants to play a game on a 13" display when it is not even able to show full 1080P? This was a way to milk even more money from users who want an Apple product but cannot afford the 15" or simply do not want the larger form-factor - yet still need/want an upgrade. This is silly - and insulting to think that users and bloggers cannot see through this line of junk. I am ashamed and disappointed with Apple on this update. The hurbris of Apple continues to grow and grow.

You may agree with Mr. Jobs on this one but many others do not. I want the latest CPU and best performance from my new $1300 MBP. I realize you cannot compare other brands of computers to Apple but you can compare raw hardware and when a 1-year old Dell XPS has a C2D at 2.66GHz, full 1080P, 4GB RAM and a 320GB HD with HDMI out, loads more inputs and outputs with Express and PCMCI for $1099 1-year ago - and less today with even faster core i5's and a better full 1080P display - it is a shame what Apple did to the customer. I am sorry you cannot see that.

D

http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/p...ps-13?c=fr&l=fr&s=gen&~tab=specstab&~lt=popup???????????
Are you sure you are speaking about the xps 13?
 
There's both real and psychological differences which play into each other. First, there's the simple "double-digit" battery life. Then, when you do a whole day's work and still have 30% at the end of the day, that means you never see a low power warning. You stop worrying about the battery. You never ask yourself whether you should use the computer now because you might need to use it later. Charging just becomes an end-of-day ritual.

This is already happening with iPad.

Keeping the screen entire day at 30% brightness is not called "stop worrying about the battery". Only Apple idiots will be sitting next to a power outlet the whole day keeping the screen brightness at 30% and laugh at those poor PC users. :D
 
Help Needed!!!

I JUST bought my MBP on March 16, which places me in the 30 day exchange policy that Apple here in San Jose, CA had promised me. However, since I have obviously been using my MBP since then, there will be a 139.90 restocking fee charge if I were to do an exchange. So, given the updates on the 13'', should I exchange it for the refreshed 13''? Is it worth the 139.90?!

BTW, I purchased the highest end 2.53ghz model of the 13'' MBP.

I need advice from the experts here. I only have 2 days to decide whether or not the updates are worth another $140.
 
god this pisses me off. I want a mac badly but i don't want to pay 1800 minimum for a core i5.

So don't!
What is with you people that want just what you want.
Bloody hell what a bunch.
Hey I want a MBP 17" for ..... let's see.... $99. Waaaaaaaaaa!!!!
 
Reason for C2D on 13" MacBook is probably they have it in stock and want to use all. When they run short they will just quietly up specs on MacBook /MacBook Pro 13"/MacMini

That or supply

People realize taht this "Supply" issue is a rumor right? lesser computer manufactures have healthy supply of i3s, samsung, fujitsu, toshiba, they all have i3s in their systems. tis' not a supply issue, the only reason is because to add discrete, apple has to redesign their logic board and they didn't want to.
 
Is that how you see yourself? :D Some people call it sophistication others just think it's dumb.

I literally lol'ed when I read his post. Guys like who equate sophistication with a computer brand must be a marketers dream. :D
 
Would the new MBP 13" far better in terms of performance vs. my late 2007 C2D MBP 15"? is it worth the exchange?
Experts can you please answer me?
 

Attachments

  • Capture d’écran 2010-04-13 à 23.50.58.png
    Capture d’écran 2010-04-13 à 23.50.58.png
    21.4 KB · Views: 1,144
  • Capture d’écran 2010-04-13 à 23.54.29.png
    Capture d’écran 2010-04-13 à 23.54.29.png
    35.6 KB · Views: 76
Keeping the screen entire day at 30% brightness is not called "stop worrying about the battery". Only Apple idiots will be sitting next to a power outlet the whole day keeping the screen brightness at 30% and laugh at those poor PC users. :D

In the post you quoted, where did he mention keeping the screen at 30% brightness?
 
Reason for C2D on 13" MacBook is probably they have it in stock and want to use all. When they run short they will just quietly up specs on MacBook /MacBook Pro 13"/MacMini

That or supply

That or maybe Steve was telling us the truth.
So I guess you work in Apple's supply chain :rolleyes:
 
Look, Apple sells a pleasant experience. If you want to have that experience you need their device. Period.
Same does BMW. Love 'em both!
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.