+1
i3
1440x900
better GPU
scrap ODD for all i care
SSD for OS woulda been nice. next yr.
even so, i guess 15" it is.
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.
The new MBP 13'' is a total fail.
- Thread starter Sarngate
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
+1
i3
1440x900
better GPU
scrap ODD for all i care
SSD for OS woulda been nice. next yr.
even so, i guess 15" it is.
Don't know about that, but I would agree that some of us here appear to have self-esteem issues.
I wonder: what's the point of a super top-end processor that's surrounded by a gimp GPU, a gimp screen resolution and a gimp 5400 rpm hard drive? Yuuupiiii so now you got an 2011 processor but you're still accessing your data through a 2006-dated hard drive, to say nothing about viewing your work on a 2006-dated screen. Jesus Christ, this is supposed to be a $1000+ premium machine!!!
I mean it. Dont you reckon that's like buying a Ferrari and putting squared tires on it?
Last edited:
This begs the question: what are they going to do when it's time to update the Air? If the Intel chip really can't push that many pixels, then they're stuck leaving that machine with C2D until they literally run out of chips (IIRC Intel has stopped production on C2Ds...). Which also means the Air won't be getting Thunderbolt anytime soon.
Right now I see no reason to go for the 13" Pro (new or 2010) over the Air. For me, it would come to portability (Air) or power (15" Pro). The new 13" is just in a weird middle ground where it doesn't do either thing well enough to make it a real consideration...
And I've always loved the 13" Pro, so that's disappointing to me. :/
Exactly what I am thinking. Like your status slogan too
I don't think so. There are many people, like myself, that really have trouble with high resolution screens. Those people represent a segment of the market which no company can afford to alienate. Keep in mind that the 13" MBP has been their best selling model. Offering both regular and HD makes 'cents' but not offering regular deters some - that is why I was never able to consider the 17".
Anyway, for those that disagree today, you may agree once you get over 40 or 50 years old and understand how eyes can get physically tired
that still doesn't force you to get a 1440x900, a CTO option would be the best of both worlds. I would opt for a 13" if that were the case since the 15" base graphics is so terrible, not worth the upgrade over the HD3000.
Wow...glad I never listed 2009 on ebay or craigs. For the average user this is no real improvement. Dont get me wrong....nice bump but nothing that will be noticeable on the everyday side.
I know the GPU has been talked to death but I really agree on the HD.
What was the point of going 5400? A few more minutes of battery? The price points are so close it scarcely matters. Perhaps a deal to keep hard drive factories running while SSDs slowly take over because everyone will buy an upgraded disk and have a spare 5400 drive to put in an enclosure for backups.
Cheers,
Even if the native is 1400 x 900, You can view the screen at whatever resolution you like.
Yes and No. Yes, you can. But viewing fixed pixel stuff like web images at something other than the native resolution means that the image gets a bit soft because it has to interpolate the actual data. I went through this with a 27" iMac.
People were saying the 13" MBP was a joke last year. And I bet they'll say the same next year. As much as I would love them remove the ODD and put in a dedicated graphics chip, I bet more people would complain about the loss of an ODD than switching from NVidia Integrated Graphics to Intel Integrated Graphics.
This is literally a joke. I can't believe I'm going to be paying $300 to DOWNGRADE.
I sold my 2010 13" for $900.
Now its either $1200 for a 13" MBP with worse battery and the same crap resolution, or $1200 for a 13" MBA with a slower processor, less RAM, but a better display.
FML.
I sold my 2010 13" for $900.
Now its either $1200 for a 13" MBP with worse battery and the same crap resolution, or $1200 for a 13" MBA with a slower processor, less RAM, but a better display.
FML.
I've thought about this as well.
I have a 2.26 GHz C2D, 4GB, 500GB... I was thinking to sell it and buy a 15"
How much do you think I can sell it for?
Interesting you say this...I am PLANNING to sell my 2010 13" and spending 250/300 to UPGRADE.
for me i5>C2D.
I dont do anything graphic intensive...at most skype/hulu/youtube.
I can live with the display size
Battery is prolly the same, I couldnt get 10 hrs actually doing work, could you?
I have my own ssd, just gonna pop it right in.
No this refresh really is, I hate Intel integrated GPU's that is why I stopped buying Windows Laptops, also the battery life went down, the resolution is Meh, I don't care about the FT Camera in HD, HDD is not a big deal because you can replace them on your own, just a minor update with the i series CPU's IMO.
They should have stuck with the core 2 (SP9600, 6MB L2, 2.53GHZ and max TDP of 25w), upgrade to a newer Nvidia graphics card put a SSD and update the screen res. The Core 2s in the 2010 had a max TDP of 25w. The core i3 and i5 have a max tdp of 35w (less battery life). The interesting thing is you can get an i7-2649M (4mb L2, 2C/4T, 2.3Ghz) with max tdp of 25w. So to me the best processor for the 13" that would keep the same battery life would be the i7-2649m or core2 SP9600.
Last edited:
"fml"
I can't believe what i'm reading. Fair enough be peed off but you guys sound like your children have just died. All of you are in a position where you can spare thousands to buy a computer, and just because the update isnt to your taste your all crying like a baby. The funny thing is, you will all probably go and actually buy one after all the moaning.
I can't believe what i'm reading. Fair enough be peed off but you guys sound like your children have just died. All of you are in a position where you can spare thousands to buy a computer, and just because the update isnt to your taste your all crying like a baby. The funny thing is, you will all probably go and actually buy one after all the moaning.
You hated them before, because they really sucked. But everything I've read about Intel HD 3000 is that it is comparable to the 320M. I mean, it's not like the NVidia 320M was some graphical beast.
Oh yeah, terrific stuff... so we get to pay premium price ($1200-$1500) on an underspec'ed 13" laptop just so I get to mess around shopping for new parts and changing them myself... yeah, that makes total sense...
Yes, but you fail to mention that TWO YEARS have passed, so you upgrade to have equal performance as in 2009, with the same hard drive, the same screen, same design, less battery... and all you have to show for is a faster processor and a thunderbolt (WTF) plug no-one will use in at least half a year?!?
oh yeah, sorry, I forgot... now we get facetime...
/sigh
Those of you looking at the 13" should seriously consider the 13" MBA as an alternative in certain situations.
- Higher Res Screen
- SSD
- Nvidia Graphics.
- Excellent Battery Life
It's great everyday machine if you can sacrifice the ports and the i5 cpu's. Obviously this recommendation is only relevant with certain sacrifices.
- Higher Res Screen
- SSD
- Nvidia Graphics.
- Excellent Battery Life
It's great everyday machine if you can sacrifice the ports and the i5 cpu's. Obviously this recommendation is only relevant with certain sacrifices.