Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
just wondering... whom actually needs i5/i7 on a "notebook"?!
Who needs really powerful machines, well, get a desktop or something similar!
:rolleyes:

Me.

I'm a pro musician / producer, and I spend lots of time on the road. I stopped using desktop machines for this reason; with a powerful laptop, Logic Studio and my Firewire audio interface, I can record, produce, mix and master anytime, anywhere in the world I might be. I know literally hundreds of pro music and video guys who work this way. Mobility is the future of the audio / video industry, and we need all the power we can get.

A MacBook Pro with either an i5 or i7 processor would be a godsend for guys like me.
 
heheh

That's the first thing in the owner's manual that comes with your new Mac: When Steve announces a new model, this model needs replacement.

That's the funniest thing i've heard. So true.

I'm just waiting for my 3.06GHz MacBook Pro to arrive - I wonder if I should simply return it and wait for the new one?
 
Most expect that Apple's next major notebook update will include these next-generation processors that have already found their way into the Mac Pro and iMac product lines. Traditionally, the MacBook Pro and iMac lines have been very closely linked in capabilities due to their similarly slim designs.

But the iMac now has desktop class processors, how on earth could the MacBook Pro also get desktop class processors??
 
Very true. I'm finding machines have gotten fast enough that you really don't need to upgrade as often. I used to upgrade in PowerPC days almost every revision trying to get a bit more power, but the current intel Machines really run nicely.

I agree.
I have a comparatively old 2.33 MBP 17" and the only thing I feel a need for is a larger HD which will be on my shopping list this holiday.
This thing seems fast enough for me.
Especially given that when the new 17's come out....and i'm not believing it will happen before Feb......it will cost over $3000.
Even though I'm sure they will be mouthwateringly good.
I just can't come up with a good reason right now.
Which on reflection is a really great thing and a testament to Apple's computers staying power.
 
If apple wasn't so stubborn they could have announced/released i7 based notebooks at the intel event featuring them.. but it would have have had to share the limelight with Dell and HP, and we can't be having that can we ;)

I doubt apple wants to be behind the curve on this one given that their major rivals already have them out, I say December at the latest.

And heres hoping the imac range get a quiet bump to the i5 or i7 mobiles come january ;)
 
They did, in June.

I always say to people that buying the Spring revision of Apple laptops is a bad idea, because in a few months there will be another. History backs me up here.

MacBook Revisions:

May 2007, November 2007. May and November aren't THAT far apart, as opposed from November to May.

May 2009, October 2009. Same as above

May 2006, November 2006.

There are more examples of this.

Did you even try using your fingers to count before you told people that the spring revisions were stupid buys??
 
Did you even try using your fingers to count before you told people that the spring revisions were stupid buys??

Very funny. Maybe they are referring to time seeming to go slower during the winter months...
 
You know it's a slow news day when there are ten pages of comments about a couple reference lines of unreleased machines in a beta update. Yawners. Let me know when actual product is released. I'm champing at the bit to dump my 2008 C2D MPB w/ annoying mirror screen for an i5 w/ an anti-glare screen.
 
I still have my early 2006 first gen Macbook Pro - it has more memory and a bigger HD now, but it still runs great. I'm sure that there are plenty of users on MR that still use the Ti or the old 12" G4.

I still use my iBook G3 every day. 10.2.8 (dual boot with System 9), 640 MB of RAM, 30 GB hard drive, 32 MB of video memory. 90 minutes of charge on the original battery. Four years since my APP expired and still ticking. I get really miffed when there are people around here who complain that they don't have the newest Mac because a new one comes out. The more updates that come out while you have your current computer, the better computer you'll end up with when you choose your next one, people.

That said, it'll probably be getting replaced by one of the next two 13" Pro updates. That'll be a real update.
 
Historically, Apple does have a fall notebook refresh, but with so many notebook refreshes this year, I'm wouldn't be surprised if we don't see one. Certainly, it'd seem in Apple's best interest to wait for Arrandale which is due next year, although it's possible they'll split the product line with Core 2 Duo and Core i7 like they did in the iMac although that is a lot of extra design work unlike Arrandale and Clarksfield which can share chipsets.

Seeing the LCD manufacturers are pushing toward 16:9 displays, even if I hate it, I think there's not that much Apple can do to stem the tide without having to pay more for 16:10 displays as volume production moves toward 16:9. As such it wouldn't surprise me to see Apple move to 14" 1366x768, 15.6" 1600x900, and 17.3" 2048x1152 displays. Still with this change, maybe they can bring back the ExpressCard slot for the 15" model.

Assuming Apple convinces Intel to give them Arrandale early for a November MacBook Pro refresh, my guess on a lineup would be as follows:

14.0" 1366x768 Low-End MacBook Pro
~2.26GHz Core i5 Arrandale with 3MB L2 cache (OEM model like current 2.26GHz Core 2 Duo)
2GB DDR3 1333MHz
250GB HDD
Intel GMA + nVidia GT210M with 256MB GDDR3

14.0" 1366x768 High-End MacBook Pro
2.4GHz Core i5-520M Arrandale with 3MB L2 cache
4GB DDR3 1333MHz
320GB HDD
Intel GMA + nVidia GT210M with 256MB GDDR3

15.6" 1600x900 Low-End MacBook Pro
2.4GHz Core i5-520M Arrandale with 3MB L2 cache
4GB DDR3 1333MHz
320GB HDD
Intel GMA + nVidia GT210M with 256MB GDDR3
ExpressCard Slot

15.6" 1600x900 Mid-End MacBook Pro
2.53GHz Core i5-540M Arrandale with 3MB L2 cache
4GB DDR3 1333MHz
320GB HDD
Intel GMA + ATI 4830 with 512MB GDDR3
ExpressCard Slot

15.6" 1600x900 High-End MacBook Pro
2.66GHz Core i7-620M Arrandale with 4MB L2 cache
4GB DDR3 1333MHz
500GB HDD
Intel GMA + ATI 4830 with 1GB GDDR3
ExpressCard Slot

17.3" 2048x1152 MacBook Pro
2.66GHz Core i7-620M Arrandale with 4MB L2 cache
4GB DDR3 1333MHz
500GB HDD
Intel GMA + ATI 4830 with 1GB GDDR3
ExpressCard Slot

Both the High-end 15" and the 17" MacBook Pro can have the 1.73GHz Core i7-820QM as a BTO. Given the low clock speeds of the 1.6GHz Core i7-720QM especially in dual core mode where it can only Turbo to 2.4GHz, I can't see Apple being very enthused with using it, since you could actually lose performance in the average dual core application compared to current 2.66GHz+ Core 2 Duos in MacBook Pros. So I didn't include the Core i7-720QM Clarksfield as a regular configuration even though it's priced similar to the Core i7-620M Arrandale.

I don't see USB 3.0 since there is no chipsets with integrated support and I don't see Apple devoting motherboard space for dedicated chips. It's still early for fibreoptic connections. I'm hoping for Firewire 3200 and Bluetooth 3.0 though. The 15" MacBook Pro would hopefully see the return of the ExpressCard slot and all models would still have SD slots including the 17" MacBook Pro which currently doesn't. It'd be interesting to have bi-directional Displayport support too, although it would be kind of a niche feature. Apple could also use the presumably extra width of a 16:9 transition to put in 4 SODIMM slots like in the iMacs. That would better allow 8GB configurations in a 4x2GB configuration to avoid paying the high prices for 4GB SODIMMs. Although I don't think many laptops have 4 SODIMM slots.

For graphics, I figured that combining Intel GMAs with at least a dedicated low-end GPU is a good compromise for OpenCL support. Intel GMAs do support dynamic GPU switching. AppleInsider reports references to the Mobility Radeon 4500 series which would be a disaster as the replacement for the 9600M GT since it's actually slower and meant as a low end GPU. An alternate GPU arrangement to what I proposed to incorporate this rumour would be to replace the nVidia GT210M with the HD4530, which would be slower, knowing Apple that makes it more likely, but still an improvement over the 9400M. The HD4830 is an aggressive choice being 40nm for mid-range GPU power consumption for the 15"/17" models and not very likely since it's so rare, so I'd settle for a nVidia GT240M (still DX10.1 compliant) or the faster Mobility Radeon HD4600 series. It wouldn't surprise me either if Apple stuck with 256MB and 512MB VRAM configurations.

A lot of these are wishful thinking
 
A lot of these are wishful thinking

I always just assume the new lower-end Pro will be roughly the same as the old higher-end Pro, and that all of the new technology will go into the new higher-end Pro. So I guess the new lower-end 13" will be:

2.53 GHz Core2Duo
250 GB hard drive @5400 rpm
possibly still only 2 GB of RAM standard, same as the MacBook
the 9400/9600 set from the current 15" so that there's at least a fair graphics upgrade (and need to go to the higher-end 13" to get the new chips)
and maybe FireWire back out again in an attempt to push people up (ugh.)

and I'm guessing that will come in February.
 
Put a quad-core MacBook Pro in my hands for under $2k and I'll gladly send back my Mac Pro.
 
The 10C531 build was first seeded to developers just a few days ago, and appears to include references to MacBook Pro 6,1 and MacBook Pro 6,2 models that have not yet been released.
Why only two (the 5,x has five)? Only two Core ix models next update (the rest still with Core 2)? Although the 4,x and 3,x has one each so one model number may stand for multiple actual models.

EDIT:
AppleInsider said:
According to the report, all indications point to two new MacBook Pros with Quad Core Mobile processors and ATI series 4500 GPUs.

Also, who besides me expects to see some 16:9 macbooks in the near future?
I kinda do.
 
But the iMac now has desktop class processors, how on earth could the MacBook Pro also get desktop class processors??

well not the exact same processor (Lynnfield or Gainestown) - rather one from the same family, i.e., Nehalem. the MBP could get Clarksfield (quad core) or Arrandale (dual core), which are the mobile versions of Nehalem.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.